The word “penis” is used appropriately several times in one scene while a caregiver attempts to change a catheter. Nothing is shown other than the camera focusing on the fully clothed area. The entire scene is meant to be comedic. This is mentioned multiple times throughout the movie.
Flashback of having sex with wife. She is seen rocking on top of him and the top part of her breast are seen. Soft moaning present.
Two prostitutes are brought to a room with the two main characters. Nothing explicit is shown.
Two men discuss an erection whilst changing a catheter. During this conversation the man discusses his erogenous zones which cause him to be aroused. A woman walks in and he is quickly covered up but it is apparent as the sheet shows his erection being covered up. No nudity shown. Scene lasts around a minute.


Film review:Translated by www.rabudo-ru.com


Hollywood is no stranger to the remake of European film and television works. Only in the 1990s-00, there were familiar era classics such as true lies, smelling women, vanilla sky and stealing the day. However, with the popularity of sequels / prequels / remakes, American remakes are becoming more and more rare, not to mention excellent American remakes – David finch’s girl with dragon tattoo has become a crown pearl under the comparison of deadly companion, strangers and girl in cobweb.

In the coordinate system of Hollywood remake films since 2000, the American version of “out of reach” only lingered in the middle reaches, not up and down first with “a journey to heaven”.

The original “out of reach” released in 2011 is naturally regarded as a potential stock by overseas producers because of its great success in France. However, in essence, untouchable is similar to other widely spread French films of “washing the soul”, and does not escape the category of “middle-class soul chicken soup”; The world political environment in 2011 is much simpler than a few years later.

But in the eyes of Weinstein, a famous wolf, none of this is a problem: if French is translated into English and Hollywood stars fill their seats, it seems that they can squeeze out another sum of money from this chicken soup story looking for hope and bridging the gap – even thinking about getting a few nominations like smell a woman.

However, this ambitious play was stumbled by Weinstein’s #metoo and easily lost Kevin Hart, Hollywood’s hottest and prolific comedian since 2014.

Unlike most comedians who are anxious for transformation but are of no use, Kevin Hart adopts a strategy similar to that of his fat sister Melissa McCarthy to find the audience’s G-spot through frequent performances on the same types of themes, and then try to break the homogeneous performance inertia. However, the gentle rhythm of “out of reach” is not suitable for Kevin Hart’s chattering and dynamic performance style. The empty reproduction of the original materials did not bring much new ideas.

Neil Berg, the director of the “diverger” series who lacks comedy experience, may be an important reason why the film is difficult to achieve a breakthrough, because although he resets the specific scenes and passages in the original work, when facing talented actors such as Kevin Hart and “old white” Brian Cranston, He has never been able to create the charm like the original “out of reach” – and his “endless” as early as 2011, which also uses the CASS lineup of young and old (Bradley Cooper and Robert De Niro), is also a regrettable waste.

This is no doubt very unsatisfactory for several leading stars whose performance is not bad. Nicole Kidman, as a mediator, is obviously the one who suffers the most. There is almost no space and time to show in the film. Like Michelle Williams in super beauty, she passively becomes a typed symbol and ignores the integrity injected by actors into the role.

As the main narrator, Kevin Hart has not been treated better. Most of the time, he just appears as a simple comic image and lacks consciousness as one of the protagonists – Brian Cranston has really got a complete role arc. This is a distance from similar double lead films, because all the roles around “Lao Bai” in the American version of “out of reach” have been greatly simplified, which seems to be just a tool to reflect the growth of this role.

The chemical reaction between Francois cruse and Omar hee disappeared in the American version in the outdated and stereotyped impression of race relations and rigid roles. The film has no power to excavate in narration, only some standardized and patterned capitalist social classes and economic conflicts, followed by the old and scum lecture hall of life education.

In fact, these problems also exist in the original film, but they are played even bigger in the American film, which lacks inspiration and rigid arrangement.

Compared with the original “out of reach”, the American version is more like a simplified version that relies too much on dog blood plot. It doesn’t want to express complex emotions and interesting ideas on the screen. It’s really disappointing to be complacent about being superficial.

You know, almost in the same schedule, there has been a more in-depth and powerful film in bridging the racial gap, a male version of driving for Miss Daisy: the green book. But for the American film market, in order to get a better box office, too many films have tried their best to create / catch up with topics and undisguised ambition for awards.

However, for “out of reach”, the American version did not bring enough reasons for viewers who like chicken soup not to see the original version.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here