Opisy(1)

Dokładnie po roku od pierwszego spotkania, Tom Solomon (Jason Segel) zaskakuje swoją ukochaną Violet Barnes (Emily Blunt) wręczając jej pierścionek zaręczynowy. Wygląda na to, że przeznaczeniem Toma i Violet jest szczęśliwe wspólne życie. Jako szef kuchni w Birch, Tom jest mistrzem modernistycznej sztuki kulinarnej i jest o krok od awansu. Życiem Violet jest nauka i szansa na studia doktoranckie na Uniwersytecie w Berkeley. Chociaż nic nie przychodzi jej łatwo, decyduje się zająć organizacją ślubu. Znalezienie idealnego miejsca na ślub każdego może przyprawić o ból głowy, ale dla Violet bardziej bolesna okazuje się być odmowa przyjęcia jej na wymarzoną uczelnię. Kiedy okazuje się, że dziewczyna dostaje zielone światło na Uniwersytecie w Michigan, Tom decyduje się schować dumę do kieszeni i zgadza się na wyjazd z Violet. Może przecież przez dwa lata gotować w Michigan, będą tylko musieli przesunąć ślub... (UIP)

(więcej)

Recenzje (2)

Matty 

wszystkie recenzje użytkownika

angielski The Five-Year Engagement has a similar problem as a half-dozen other films produced by Apatow: it is needlessly long and coarse. Like Funny People, for example, it pays a price for the raised expectation of madcap entertainment in which there will be a lot of funny lines and someone will humorously fling themselves down on the ground here and there. However, Nicholas Stoller and (co-screenwriter) Jason Segel had bigger ambitions; perhaps too big, given the barely innovated romantic-comedy format that they chose to work with. They decided to create the ultimate engagement comedy and, before the wedding itself (which, furthermore, is not in any way guaranteed to happen) to summarise not only the pre-wedding problems, but also the problems that come with lifelong cohabitation. Unlike in most mainstream romcoms, it is likable that the two protagonists behave like reasonable adults who think over their relationship problems and choose to talk about them instead of making unbelievably grand gestures (we’re breaking up now!). Stoller exhibits similar patience with his grasp of humour. The jokes are not superficial and are sometimes derived from the – in a certain sense – self-destructive use of montages. The romantic atmosphere in the rather somewhat ordinary scene of rolling in the snow is disrupted by a shot of a deer being killed. The occasional sacrifices to the god of base humour (a disgusting scene with food and other implicit and explicit sexual jokes) are thus doubly surprising. Nevertheless, I was not repelled by that to such a degree that I would lose my desire to watch the film and think about it a bit. What I found particularly interesting was the multiple reversals of “traditional” roles. The choice between career and work is not made by the man, but by a relatively emancipated woman, whose career growth and intellectual maturity her fiancé attempts to face through a total regression, a return to the primal human essence, i.e. hunting, in one of the most critical phases of their life together. Their journey to mutual understanding over the course of several years enables Tom and Violet to explore the countless forms of love and what could fittingly be described as a parody of love. However, the rules of the genre do not allow them to remain with substitute partners who give each of them what she/he has already/not yet received (intellect in her case; somewhat more superficially, beauty and youth in his case). In the end, the woman must, in a somewhat old-fashioned way, come to the realisation that relationships cannot be conceived of as social experiments; at the same time, however, she is the one who takes on the man’s role as the more creative of the two in the end. Some might defend The Five-Year Engagement by pointing out that it is just as clumsy and unfocused as interpersonal relationships, which is as weak an argument as the film’s attempt to encourage us to take a more serious view of the implementation of the “sociological” storyline with university experiments. Despite that, the film’s less defensible flaws do not in any way diminish the sincerity in the depiction of problems faced by people in a long-term engagement. The film carries a lot of ballast, but it contains even more truth. 75% () (mniej) (więcej)

kaylin 

wszystkie recenzje użytkownika

angielski Jason Segel is my favorite. Although he is the most notable Barney Stinson in the series "How I Met Your Mother", it is actually Marshall Eriksen who is the prototype of a great friend and a loving man, whose love is eternal and can overcome anything. In addition to that, he is also a great comedic type. Besides being an excellent comedic actor, Jason Segel is also a great screenwriter. He proved it with the movie "Forgetting Sarah Marshall" and also with his contribution to the screenplay of the film "The Muppets", as well as with the film "The Five-Year Engagement". His jokes are simply good, and he can make the story more interesting, which usually extends the film to two hours. It doesn't matter because the film is so pleasant, so beautiful, so full of interesting moments that you will enjoy it until the end. I thought that if I watched the movie too late, it would put me to sleep. That didn't happen. This alone is proof that the creators succeeded. They made a film that is not an explosive comedy but has funny moments, comedic dialogues, and monologues. Jason Segel demonstrates that he is an actor who can handle more than one role, and he is not unfamiliar with drama, as he showed in the movie "Jeff, Who Lives at Home". The film is not perfect, some people may find it lengthy or even empty, but I think it is a comedy that is comedic, romantic, and can also play a sadder note. That's how romantic movies should be. Just get used to the fact that with Jason Segel, it will always be about relationships and love. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/09/rebelka-perfect-sense-sprosty-holky.html ()