IMDb user comments for
Conspiracy (2008) Plus avec IMDbPro »

Filtre:

Meilleur Chronologique prolific Ils ont aimé Ils ont détesté Cacher les spoilers:

Page 1 sur 5:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Index

41 commentaires au total

---

49 utilisateurs sur 71 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
waste of time, 18 mars 2008

Auteur : pureskills2 de Royaume-Uni

this film was one of the biggest wastes of time ever. The characters were stone cold val kilmer especially. the plot was rubbish the acting was quite rubbish all the way through. the production looks good but the script and acting was some of the worst i have seen.

The story itself had a bit of potential but the follow though just didn't seem 2 happen. It seemed like the Americans pretending they want to save the native Americans. The rednecks characters were so stereotypical for small town America but they just made them the stupidest stereotypes so you would not even believe them. I suggest never seeing this film

---

36 utilisateurs sur 58 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
Think Road House meets Billy Jack...but not in a good way, 9 mars 2008

Auteur : Brian Soto de San Francisco, Etats-Unis

This was pretty abysmal, and all things considered, I probably should have known better when it said written and directed by Adam Marcus. Except that I had no idea who Adam Marcus was. Given his track record, justifiably so. The depressing part isn't so much the plot (which was written by your little brother in crayons), as much as it was watching Val Kilmer sink to new lows in his otherwise mostly storied career. When I tried to rationalize why Val Kilmer would stoop to the level of this ostensibly lost A-Team episode script directed by appointed directors like Marcus, all I could come up with would be his contempt for the real world equivalent to the radical right-wing Minutemen-like goons littering this pseudo-entertaining steaming pile of straight-to-vid. As it turns out, I was at least partially right, Kilmer did this movie for personal/political reasons (according to the related trivia).

I would write a summary, except I'm loath to spending more than the 90 minutes I already wasted watching it. You've seen it before, except this time it isn't Steven Seagal fighting for the rights of Native Americans, or Billy Jack fighting for the hippie commune, it's Val Kilmer fighting against a shoestring budget, and implied Halliburton employees as laughably stereotypical rednecks for the sake of immigrant rights and liberal ideology. A great cause, but ill-conceived and poorly executed here.

But don't take my word for it, no really. I want someone else to have to endure what I did.

---

23 utilisateurs sur 35 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
Unconvincing and boring, 13 mars 2008

Auteur : Jason VanMason de usa

Basic plot: a colorful person finds himself presented with a conspiracy involving the disappearance of a friend. Been done many times and can be very entertaining. But this is not "Bad Day at Black Rock"! First of all, Kilmer is clearly too old to play a crack marine. And he is seriously overweight and stiff. He comes across as grumpy rather than sinister. The setting is just as unconvincing: Supposedly this is a new town being built in the middle of nowhere using cheap Mexican labor. Yet many of the buildings are wild west era in style. Its obviously a generic western movie set, possibly located on Kilmer's own ranch. A 19th century "Dance Hall" is reached by a dirt street with a speed limit sign stuck in the earth, yet its flat as an airport runway. And its not a revitalized ghost town either. Everything is new, as though they just finished shooting an episode of Bonanza. Only the horse trough is missing. The small cast is comprised of stock characters: a young snotty cop who seems to be the entire police department, a beautiful girl running a dollar store with a precious little daughter, naturally terrified of telling the truth. She runs a lending library...with books! No vcrs, no dvds in this town although they have cable TV. Who thinks this stuff up? You are expected to suspend disbelief for dramas but when one anachronism is piled upon another goof on top of a plot hole, its difficult to take the story seriously. And the predictable story grinds on and on like a celluloid glacier. Go to the loo or make coffee, you wont miss anything. I hope this isn't an indication of the direction Kilmers career is taking as he is capable of much better. If you like daffy plots, watch a Steven Segal movie: at least they are entertaining.

---

14 utilisateurs sur 20 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
Seagalesque, 8 août 2008

Auteur : kaeng de Allemagne

This movie sucked. I mean... wow. I surely didn't expect a masterpiece. But the actual level of suckitude left me speechless and almost breathless, as if my body was trying to rescue itself into sweet unconsciousness. It reminded me, and heavily at that, of Steven Seagal. But not the Seagal of "Under Siege" or "On Deadly Ground", who we all came to love. No, I mean the Steven Seagal who brought us straight-to-video suckfests like "Black Dawn".

Val Kilmer, like Seagal, is just a blimp, floating through the foggy remains of a story, while it rains wooden puppets. Who of course are the other actors in my weird little analogy.

Every little thing in this movie is bad and sucks in ways where there are no more words to articulate a warning. So let me just say this: DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE! Thank you for your attention.

---

9 utilisateurs sur 12 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
I enjoyed it ... there, I said it!, 8 mai 2008

Auteur : terence_laoshi-1 de Chine

*** Ce commentaire peut contenir des spoilers ***

I quite enjoyed the film. There, I've said it. But having said that, let me say this ... it's no classic and Val Kilmer needn't dust off his dinner jacket for award ceremonies.

I'm prepared to add a little balance to the scathing comments that precede me and to say: this is not as bad as many people are saying.

Kilmer's performance is precisely what he would have been aiming for, and that was a reasonable choice. The supporting actors were sufficient, unless you're looking for an academy nominee (and you won't get any guarantees of that, anyway). The plot is predictable, but this is Hollywood after all and most movie-goers aren't looking for 90 minutes of cerebral exercise.

Almost all of the comments have cited the obvious shortcomings. It appears to be a relatively low-budget production and, if that is the case, it's a pretty reasonable effort, in my opinion. I can overlook the shallow performances of many of the supporting cast and the disorganized and disoriented extras.

Some comments are quite unfair, in my opinion, and only show that key plot points have been missed. This is quite a few years after Iraq 1. I suspect that some of the viewers think it's Iraq 2. Kilmer's weight and age, for example, are not a simple error of judgment by the Director and casting agent; rather, it's a simple error in the viewing of the movie.

I'm surprised that few people have noticed the very obvious Halliburton message. This is my major gripe. I have no interest in defending the indefensible, but the message delivery is quite infantile. It reached it's zenith with the overly-long speech by the main female character. She outlines how Halliburton ... sorry, Hallicorp or Halco or whatever it's called ... profits from supplying the weaponry to blow up foreign countries, then wins the contracts to build them again, ultimately never spending their ill-gotten gain in America (which is a curious extension of a moral point) ... and on and on it went. It was one of the most tedious and embarrassing 'worthy' speeches I've heard in a movie (and I support the basic concerns in the message). It was a parody of itself and I watched it three times to see if there was a glimmer of embarrassment in the actor's eyes. How do they do it? Method, I guess.

Aspects of the plot are quite a stretch. I can't see Dastardly Dick Cheney retiring to a dusty little town in the middle of nowhere to build an old-west replica as a base from which to live out his power-crazed fantasies. He already has a much better and more comfortable location for that.

---

5 utilisateurs sur 6 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
actually very good, 25 janvier 2009

Auteur : biffertron de Leeds, UK

oh dear, it seems that quite a few gung ho Americans don't like films that point out the way big companies thrive on war and make lots of money out of it by supplying the goods to make war possible and then make even more money by rebuilding the mess they made.

Don't let their innate bias put you off watching this film as it is a actually pretty good (apart from the ending 5 minutes which looked suspiciously like the studio waded in and made the director make a Segal / Van Damme type over the top conclusion). We actually rented the film because we thought it would be good stupid fun like a Segal film with lots of Saturday night 'whizzbangpoppery' but there is a lot more to it than that - I was starting to say that it reminded me a fair bit of a classic Clint Eastwood spaghetti Western when lo and behold! - turns out the name of the town is Lago - the same name as in High Plains Drifter!! Someone with enough intelligence and respect (writer or Director?) to sneakily name check a reference has got much more going on than the people who have dismissed the film cos they don't like the politics.

So my advice is definitely worth renting - if you are a fan of thoughtful action films and like those classic Clint westerns cos this is a modern cousin of them. Enjoy

---

5 utilisateurs sur 7 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
Well, at least people were cut up, 22 mars 2008

Auteur : pageiv de Flint, MI

*** Ce commentaire peut contenir des spoilers ***

I never heard of this movie, and I am a big movie buff, until I saw a pop-up ad of all things. Needless to say they spared promotion money to pay Kilmer his paycheck.

First the good: There was lots of killing, which some was rather unique and bloody. There was a decent backstory in Iraq that could've been a movie itself. Then there was a folksy Western Town that I'd love to spend some time in.

Then the Bad: Okay, Hollywood is good at taking "ripped from the headlines" and making that into a "Law and Order" or cheesy movie, well here you get the movie. The bad guy is the head of a Halliburton type company, he hates Mexicans and likes paying them less than a "decent" wage. Though I don't know why the Mexicans just don't move on to another company.

Then there is a pitiful diatribe about Halliburton starting a war, to sell the Army guns, then making money to rebuild Iraq, to start a war with Mexico to repeat. If not for this absolutely retarded scene I'd give it 8/10.

---

6 utilisateurs sur 9 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
Old West plot serves modern political message, 25 août 2008

Auteur : dredyoung de Austin, Texas, Etats-Unis

Another of America's Dirty Little Corporate Secrets I watched a movie the other night called "Conspiracy" (2008 staring Val Kilmer). It had received somewhat poor reviews. This was justified for a professional movie critic who bases their critique on traditional, Hollywood, Oscar-like standards. However, I saw it as a great 'message movie'. I knew a little about the controversy over Mexican immigrant legislation, a little about the Maquiladores, as well as a little about the worldwide exploitation of underdeveloped countries by US corporations, so I immediately became engrossed in the movie. This movie is a valid dramatization of what American corporations have been doing for many decades now. In the movie, Halliburton and Brown and Root and other such companies are all accurately portrayed by their compression into the movie's one 'fictitious' corporation, Halicorp. The movie also accurately represents the true situation with respect to Mexican 'illegals'. Americans have been employing them to do our dirty, hard work while keeping the death scythe of deportation or arrest over their heads to keep them working for slave wages which they need to save their families in Mexico from starvation. A conveniently opportunistic system has been devised whereby US corporations undermine Mexican corporations and make it impossible for Mexicans to earn a living in Mexico. Consequently, Mexican laborers have to flee to the US and take below subsistence wages. The only other alternative for them has been the Maquiladoras. In the beginning, the Maquiladoras were supposed to help the Mexican cities along the border economically but this turned into a nightmare as the US corporations exploited, virtually raped, the cities and their people who had come in the millions to live along the US-Mexican border and make a decent living. Eventually, these corporations moved on to cheaper slave labor in underdeveloped countries that were even worse off. Those border towns turned into impoverished garbage heaps. Those Mexican workers, therefore, had no choice but to swim across the border river or the climb border fences to find slave-wage work in the US. Those who take the time to inquire and those with eyes and ears to see and to hear with their hearts know, understand, and grieve for these Mexican Maquiladores workers and Mexican immigrant workers and their families who are caught in the tragic trap laid for them by the US corporations. There are those who know much of this and are happy to benefit from such dastardly exploitation. Yet, there are some caring few who create sanctuary churches and cities to care for desperate 'illegals' and their shattered families and often even sequester them from local 'de jure' police who are really serving as 'de facto' henchmen, a kind of recrudescent form of the KKK, for local businesses. On the other hand, there are these unconscionably insensitive, narcissistic, obsessively acquisitive employers who find all sorts of convenient ways to rationalize and blithely transform the plight of their Mexican illegal slave workers so as to make it seem like they are actually providing them with a great blessing, in fact, saving them. The white, well-to-do, ordinary American employers also rationalize this villainous behavior by seeing themselves as superior, a kind of unofficial master race, and their non-white slave workers as somewhat like mongrel dogs that must be kept from citizenship in order to prevent a pollution of our pure genes and true American heritage. The movie drives home a final thrust by revealing the xenophobic bigotry of the Halicorp types like Rhodes, the local head of Halicorp, when Rhodes, attacks and demeans retired Special Ops Marine William, whom he thinks he has beaten, for being half American Indian and half Anglo American. War-hero McPherson is the stranger-newly-come-to-town who successfully defends the town, New Lago, and its 'illegal alien' workers against Rhodes and his puppet Sheriff, deputies, and other complicit locals who were acting as Rhodes' thugs out of fear for their lives,. In the end, the people of New Lago, 'emblematic of the vast majority of ordinary people', finally rise up and turn against Rhodes, "emblematic of corporate American CEOs", demonstrating that, after all is said and done, America is a land of non-xenophobic, non-bigoted, non-exclusionist, multi-colored, multi-racial immigrants. On the other hand, however, in America, we know there are a great many Americans who simply choose to look the other way and let this corrupt and calamitous situation with our decent immigrant workers putrefy. Many are aware that this same type of exploitation by American Corporations is taking place in underdeveloped countries all over the globe and do nothing. Finally, there are the perpetrators who are running these US-legitimized criminal operations and hosts of right-wing political and media lackeys who are aligned with them. For these criminal corporations, Halicorp is the perfect, 'grotesques' symbol!

---

4 utilisateurs sur 6 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
complete disappointment, 25 janvier 2009

Auteur : fiona-272 de Royaume-Uni

Worst movie I have watched in a long time, and I should add that I recently watched Hudson Hawk so that should give you an indication of how bad it is.

Oh Val, what did they do to you.

I'm sure, or at least I hope that Val too feels embarrassment at this movie. I can't find one good thing to say about it other than it did force me to stop working for a bit but then I realised that it would be more fun to stick pins in my eyes than watch another moment of cringe-worthy acting from everyone in the case. Not even full frontal Val nudity could save this.

---

8 utilisateurs sur 14 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
Bringing Hell to God's Land, 11 mai 2008

Auteur : Claudio Carvalho de Rio de Janeiro, Brésil

*** Ce commentaire peut contenir des spoilers ***

During the operation Storm in Desert in Iraq, the tough Marine Sergeant of Special Operations MacPherson (Val Kilmer) and his great pal and family man, the Mexican Corporal Miguel Silva (Greg Serano), are seriously wounded and retired. Later, the veteran and traumatized marine is insistently invited by Miguel to visit him in his lands in New Lago, a location nearby the border with Mexico. When MacPherson arrives in the town, he does not find his friend and he gets no information from the locals about Miguel. Sooner he realizes that the CEO of Halicorp (a branch of Halliburton?) and vigilante, Rhodes (Gary Cole), is buying cheap lands, giving infrastructure, constructing buildings, housing and facilities using slave labor from the needy Mexicans and making lots of money. When MacPherson finds that his family and friend have been executed by Rhodes, he promises to bring hell to God's land.

The first point that calls the attention in "Conspiracy" is the weight of Val Kilmer, almost obese; the former handsome actor is impressively fat. The plot about "friend that visits a missing friend and seeks revenge" has no originality, and a couple of days ago I saw "Missionary Man" that has a very similar story. The only difference is the shallow political connotation and speech in the characters and situations. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): Not Available

---

---

Page 1 sur 5:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Ajouter un autre commentaire

---

Liens liés

Plot summary	Notes	Revues externes
Site Officiel	Plot keywords	Principaux Détails
Your user comments	Your vote history