As usual with my film club, I didn’t know anything about it before watching this movie. However, I have to admit that I was actually already familiar with Andrea Arnold’s work and there was a similar vibe to her previous movies ‘American Honey’ and, above all, ‘Fish Tank’. As far I was concerned, I was actually slightly bothered by the lack of context though. I mean, sure, it was taking place nowadays in England but I couldn’t pinpoint where (it was apparently taking place in Kent in the south of England). Anyway, if you ever wondered what was the current state of affairs in England, well, I’m afraid it is pretty bad, that’s for sure. Indeed, apparently, nobody works, nobody goes to school, and all teens are destined to become parents even before they become 15 years old so the present (and the future) is pretty bleak. In spite of the barren environment, it was still a beautiful movie though but, even though you might expect something hyper-realistic, Andrea Arnold did add some fantastic elements but it is really an acquired taste though. Concerning the acting, Barry Keoghan gave here another really solid performance showing that he is slowly becoming one of the most interesting actors at work nowadays. In almost all her movies, Andrea Arnold went for people without any acting experience to play the lead, it is quite incredible what she managed to get from them and this movie was no exception. Indeed, Nykiya Adams (who was really 12 years old when the movie was made) was the one who really had to carry the whole thing and she was quite spellbinding to behold. Anyway, to conclude, even if it didn’t really blow me away, it was still a solid drama and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

To be honest, I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but, since it was directed by Cecil B. DeMille and since it was available in on YouTube, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, the first nice surprise was that it was actually starring Gloria Swanson. Indeed, I’m a huge fan of ‘Sunset Boulevard’ so it was really cool to finally see this legend in a silent feature, even if it was a rather obscure one like this movie. She was actually really good here and it was quite impressive how much she managed to do with a part which was rather thankless after all as she was basically waiting for her husband to get his act together. Concerning the movie itself, it was actually fairly entertaining, even if it did feel rather silly though and you might wonder how they managed to get 2 hrs of running time from this material. Basically, it was all rather disjointed and you get in fact 3 stories involving the main character supposedly helping 3 women in distress. The really fun part was that the guy was actually married with Gloria Swanson’s character from the start and the fact they were married only for a couple of months probably didn’t help their situation either. Except for Gloria Swanson, the other thing I did enjoy with this movie was the tone. Indeed, I thought it was pretty cynical but it was a nice approach and it made the whole thing more enjoyable this way. Indeed, basically, none of the women, except for his own wife actually, was really trustworthy but the main male character was not much better though, he even called himself a ‘boob’ which was actually pretty accurate. Anyway, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, it was still a decent watch and I think it is worth a look, at least, if you really like such vintage silent features. 

To be honest, I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but, since it was directed by David Gordon Green and since it was available on Disney+, I thought I might as well check it out. I remember, at the beginning of his career, Gordon Green was actually hailed by Roger Ebert as one of the most promising directors of his generation, no less than that. Unfortunately, since then, the guy had a prolific career, churning out already 17 directing efforts, but like other workaholics such as Steven Soderbergh or Woody Allen who delivered one movie almost every year during their whole career, it did have a (negative) impact on the quality of his work, I’m afraid. This movie was a perfect example. Indeed, it was such a derivative and predictable story. Basically, it was the story of a rich guy probably focusing too much on his work who suddenly had the custody of 4 young boys. At first, they all hate each other but, of course, they grow closer and, at the end, everything is all peachy between them. Seriously, how many times did we already get this storyline before? The fact that Gordon Green really did nothing new or interesting with the genre certainly didn’t help either. There were some moments during which you could feel his old indie sensibilities but I would be hard pressed to tell you exactly when and I saw the damned thing only yesterday. Concerning Ben Stiller, it was actually his first starring role in 7 years but, eventually, he didn’t really have to flex much his acting skills here. Anyway, to conclude, I think my rating was actually rather generous but the damned thing was rather harmless and I guess it might be worth a look but probably only if you really like the genre. 

I have to admit that I really have a weak spot for ‘Moana’ and I was quite surprised that they would come up with a sequel 8 years later, especially since the first installment didn’t turn out to be such a huge box-office success. Well, it seems that this bet paid off though since this sequel might become one of the most successful movies released this year, no less than that. However, even if I do believe that ‘Moana’ is actually one of the most underappreciated animated features delivered Disney, unfortunately, this sequel was just terribly boring though. Indeed, instead of expanding what was developed in the previous movie, it seemed that they only amplified what actually didn’t work already in the first place. Indeed, Moana might be one of the most charismatic characters delivered by Disney, her journey was not exactly super original and, by giving her another really similar quest, it was even more obvious but, above all, really tedious. Concerning Maui, he is a cool character but, in fact, he is basically some kind of cheap copy of the Genie from ‘Aladdin’ and it was even more obvious the 2nd time around. For this sequel, they also did give Moana a whole crew which wasn’t a bad idea, except that none of them was developed at all and, even worse, none of them was entertaining whatsoever. And who the hell was Matangi? Seriously, she turned out to be one of the most half-baked characters I have seen in a Disney animated feature. At least, the animation was really nice but it was really nothing new compared to the previous installment. Anyway, to conclude, I really had a hard time to care about the damned thing but I have to admit that it was rather harmless and I guess it is worth a look but probably only if you really like the genre. 

I already saw this movie but, since it was ages ago and since it was available on HBO Max, I was quite eager to check it out again. Well, I’m really glad I gave it another shot after all these years because I was much more able to enjoy it. The point is that, I must have watched it when I was maybe 16 years old and, to be honest, I actually had some mixed feelings about this movie. Indeed, in my mind, the whole thing was sugarcoating the whole ordeal of being a patient in a mental institution, back then in the 60’s but also nowadays. However, after rewatching the damned thing, I came to the conclusion that it wasn’t the case after all and the end-result was actually more realistic than I thought it was (except maybe for Chief’s escape at the end). Basically, they displayed that the main goal of this institution was not really to cure these patients but to contain them. McMurphy wasn’t after all some kind of wonder cure that made them whole again but his masterstroke was to treat them as actual fully-fledged human beings. Will they ever be cured? Probably not but it doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t have a life like anyone else instead of being locked up forever in the most depressing place you could possibly imagine. Concerning Jack Nicholson, he really had a stellar career but this could be his all-time best performance. McMurphy was indeed a perfect fit for him and the guy was just spellbinding to behold. Eventually, the only real plot hole in my opinion was that it didn’t make any sense that we would keep McMurphy after evaluating him. I mean, it was obvious that the guy didn’t have any mental illness so why keeping him? It was certainly not helping him, it wasn’t making the job of the employees working there any easier and his erratic behavior certainly didn’t have a soothing influence on the other patients. Anyway, to conclude, even if it might not be flawless, it is still a great classic and it is pretty much a must-see for any decent movie lover. 

To be honest, I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but, since it seemed to have a decent reputation and since it was available on HBO Max, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, I can understand why this movie was very well received and, for a good while, I thought it was going to be really great. Indeed, it finally featured a really good performance from Al Pacino (which unfortunately, doesn’t say much considering how sketchy his recent track-record has been). Furthermore, Jack Kevorkian was a fascinating guy and the whole topic of euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide was really intriguing. And, yet, after a very strong start, I’m afraid the damned thing just kept repeating itself instead of going deeper into this guy and his work. At some point, it became clear that his work of assisting people in ending their life became somehow tolerated, which was already a major milestone, but he pushed it too far by doing the deed himself and, as a result, he ended up for almost 10 years in jail only because he couldn’t accept to compromise his vision. However, the fact that this character was flawed made him actually even more interesting. Unfortunately, I'm afraid the title was actually quite accurate and, at the end, you still don’t know who really Jack Kevorkian was which was slightly frustrating. In fact, for the supporting actors such as John Goodman and Susan Sarandon, it was even worse though as they were barely given anything to do even though there were 2hrs of running time. Anyway, to conclude, even if it didn’t completely blow me away, it was still a super interesting movie with a fascinating subject and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you want to see Al Pacino in something really worthwhile for once. 

To be honest, I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but, since there was a solid cast involved, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, if you are familiar with the John Wick franchise, this movie will really feel like it was some kind of spin-off focusing on the Continental (which did get a mini-series in 2023). So, basically, because of the super famous franchise, this movie did feel rather derivative after all but it doesn’t mean that it wasn’t entertaining though. Indeed, the mood was neat and it was visually not bad at all. However, what really worked in this movie was the cast though (Jodie Foster, Sterling K. Brown, Sofia Boutella, Dave Bautista, Brian Tyree Henry, Charlie Day, Jenny Slate, Zachary Quinto, Jeff Goldblum). Indeed, even though all their characters could have been beter fleshed out (with barely 90 mins of running time, there was simply not much room for that), they were quite game and it was pretty cool what they all managed to do with this material. The only exception might be Jeff Goldblum who was such a pitch-perfect choice to play this character but, with only 5 mins of screen time, he was pretty much wasted here. Above all, it was neat to see Jodie Foster after 5 long years and, contrary to some acting legends like Robert de Niro or Al Pacino, she doesn’t apparently feel the need to piss on her legacy by showing up in dozens of awful features seemingly for an easy paycheck. Anyway, she obviously had some fun here and she was quite entertaining. Anyway, to conclude, it was basically a B feature but the makers never pretended it to be anything else so it actually worked pretty well and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

To be honest, I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but, since it was available on Netflix and since it was starring Nicolas Cage, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, at first, it did seem to be another lame flick like the endless others Cage has been making during the last 20 years. This time, they came up with some kind of mix of ‘American Beauty’ with the Zombie genre and, as far as I was concerned, it was pretty much as half-baked as it might sound. And yet, even though the damned thing did look really cheap and even though the concept was barely interesting at all, I have to admit that some bits were actually entertaining though. First of all, I can’t remember the last time I saw Selma Blair in a movie and she was pretty good here. However, I especially enjoyed Nicolas Cage in this movie and I wish they did focus more on his character. Indeed, the guy gave here one of his typical gonzo performances and he pretty much stole the show each time he was on the screen. Eventually, I’m not surprised that Cage himself said that it was his favorite movie he has made during the last 10 years (I actually checked what he did and, to be honest, most of it was actually pretty weak though…). Still, was there anything else really noteworthy in this movie? To be honest, not really and, for his first movie without his buddy Mark Neveldine, Brian Taylor didn’t really impress me. Anyway, to conclude, my rating was probably too generous here but, compared to the garbage usually starring Nicolas Cage, at least, it was watchable and it’s clear that Cage had a blast here so only therefore, I guess it might still be worth a look. 

I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but since it seemed to have a decent reputation and since it was on YouTube, I thought I might as well check it out. Even though I have seen so many movies dealing with Frankenstein or Dracula, probably too many, it had been a while since I saw a feature focusing on this iconic character and I actually enjoyed this vintage version. Indeed, it was visually pretty neat, especially for a movie produced more than 100 years ago. To be honest, even though Edward Hyde did look pretty hideous, I wish they did develop more this character though. In my opinion, even though Dr Henry Jekyll is described as a righteous man, deep down, he actually wanted to indulge in this dark ‘stuff’ (I wish they did display more specifically what was so depraved about Hyde's behavior) and I do believe that he was using Hyde as an excuse. By the way, I had heard of John Barrymore before (mostly because he was Drew Barrymore’s grandfather) but I have to admit that the guy really impressed me here. Indeed, Henry Jekyll and Edward Hyde were so completely different, I even wondered if they had hired 2 different actors but, as it should be, it was Barrymore who played both parts and he was pretty much pitch-perfect in both cases. Even though I couldn't care less about a new version of ‘Frankenstein’ (both Guillermo del Toro and Maggie Gyllenhaal are coming with some new versions in 2025), it would be pretty cool to see a modern version of this classic tale. Anyway, to conclude, even if I don’t think it is really a masterpiece, it was still a really solid vintage horror feature and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.