Login
Home
585 Lists
7772 Reviews
CollectionsAn average movie
Posted : 10 years, 4 months ago on 12 November 2014 12:42
(A review of Tequila Sunrise)I donât know why exactly but I always thought that this movie (especially its title) sounded really cool. On top of that, there was a really nice cast (Mel Gibson, Kurt Russell, Michelle Pfeiffer) and I always had a weak spot about movies dealing about 2 best friends on both sides of the law, even though it is actually a rather far-fetched premise. So, you had here all the ingredients for a very nice neo-noir feature and it was indeed fairly enjoyable but I canât say I was really blown away by the whole thing. Basically, they paid a lot of attention towards the details and the mood which were fine but I thought that the story was just a little too convoluted for its own good. At the end of the day, Iâm not really sure I really cared about the characters involved and what they were going through. Anyway, it was quite successful at the box-office and it is rather surprising that it took Robert Towne 10 years to finally come up with a directing follow-up (âWithout Limitsâ which I havenât seen yet). Anyway, even though I wasnât completely impressed by the whole thing, it is still a decent flick and I think it is definitely worth a look.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 10 years, 4 months ago on 12 November 2014 09:32
(A review of Tess)Honestly, it has been a while since I have seen this flick and I should probably re-watch it at some point to make up my mind for good about the damned thing. Anyway, back then, it was Polanski's first film since his arrest for rape in 1977 and it is actually rather surprising that he managed to make another movie so soon after such a huge scandal. At the time, it was the most expensive movie made in France and it turned out to be a financial success and it was well received by both critics and the public. As a result, Polanski even won the CĂ©sar Awards for Best Picture and Best Director and the movie was even nominated for the Best picture Academy Award. Personally, I have to admit it, I didn't really like this flick very much though. I mean, sure, it was well made and the whole thing looked really terrific, that's for sure, but, to be honest, I never really cared about the main character or what she was going through. To conclude, even though I didnât really connect with this movie, I still believe it is worth a look though, especially if you are interested in Roman Polanskiâs work.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 10 years, 4 months ago on 11 November 2014 09:49
(A review of Sa majestĂ© Minor)To be honest, it is a really obscure movie (I'm only the 3rd user who has rated this movie on this website) but since I always had a weak spot for  Jean-Jacques Annaud's work, I was quite eager to check it out. Indeed, Annaud is one of the very few French directors who has managed to have quite an impressive career abroad and, with this movie, it was the first time in 20 years that he made a movie in French. The thing I always enjoyed about this director is that he has always been willing to take some risks and, once again, he made something really original here. Unfortunately, it's such a pity that the end-result was so underwhelming. Indeed, he tackled a time period (ancient Greece just after the prehistory but way before the Romans of Ancient Greece) which we actually never see but, even though he managed to reach something really mesmerizing with 'La Guerre du Feu', here, you really wonder what he was trying to achieve. Basically, he spent way too much time on some pigs and the only scenes which really worked were the ones involving Vincent Cassell has a satyre. Anyway, to conclude, even though the whole thing had some potential, it was eventually rather misguided and even seriously boring to watch and I donât think it is really worth a look.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A good movie
Posted : 10 years, 4 months ago on 11 November 2014 01:41
(A review of Shoot the Piano Player)Since I was a huge fan of âLes quatre cents coupsâ, I was really eager to check François Truffautâs following directing effort. To be honest, it is not one of his most prestigious work and it definitely belongs to his more obscure work but I still think it was quite enjoyable. Basically, the tone was more frivolous and the whole thing was actually rather unfocused. Indeed, even though it is supposed to be a thriller/film noir, it is obvious that Truffaut didnât really care much about the plot and he wanted to rather focus on the colorful characters and there was also some fixation towards women, a trademark in François Truffautâs work. It was also rather fun to see Charles Aznavour, a very famous singer in France, playing the main character. Anyway, eventually, even though it was rather well received by the critics, it was actually a box-office flop and, following this failure, Truffaut decided to drop the New Wave directing style based mostly on improvisation to some more traditionally structured dramas. To conclude, even though it is not really a masterpiece, it is still a pretty good flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in François Truffautâs work.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A bad movie
Posted : 10 years, 4 months ago on 10 November 2014 10:14
(A review of Breakfast of Champions)Even though this movie had received some really pathetic reviews, since I always had a weak spot for Bruce Willis, I was still eager to check it out. Eventually, it turned out to be a really weird, even completely insane flick. I know, it might sound appealling when you read it like this, I myself enjoy a really far-out movie from time to time, but watching this movie was like having a very bad dream, like a nasty nightmare and when you finally wake up, you're just glad it is finally over. How could I describe this flick? Well, you could say that it was like 'American Beauty' running on acids. I mean, there was so much weird and unpleasant stuff going on here, I wouldnât know where to start. I can imagine that all the interesting actors involved (Bruce Willis, Albert Finney, Nick Nolte, Barbara Hershey, Lukas Haas, Omar Epps, Owen Wilson, Michael Clarke Ducan) thought they would be involved in something really artistic but it seriously got out of hand here. Sure, it doesnât really matter that there was no plot but the fact that none of the characters was either likeable or interesting made it nearly impossible to root for the whole thing. To conclude, I thought it was pretty bad and I don't think it is really worth a look whatsoever.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A classic
Posted : 10 years, 4 months ago on 10 November 2014 01:24
(A review of Touch of Evil)Even though he did manage to direct arguably the greatest movie ever made, Orson Welles did have one very tumultuous career but some of his other directing efforts were still pretty damned amazing and this flick was definitely one of them. Like many other movies directed by the great master, he had once again some major issues with the studio producing this picture and they tempered with the end-results without consulting Welles who was fired during the post-production. Fortunately, at the end of the 90âs , the movie was re-cut following his wishes with some tremendous results. To be honest, Iâm not so sure the story was really amazing, it was pretty much a dark and murky film noir but it was definitely entertaining and, above all, the directing was really impressive. Indeed, it has one of the best openings ever, a legendary 10 minutes take, something only a director like Welles could pull off. Seriously, if only to see this marvelous scene, it is already worth watching the damned thing. On top of that, you have Charlton Heston playing a Hispanic character which was a rather weird but interesting choice. To conclude, it is a really entertaining and a very well made flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Orson Wellesâs work.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A good movie
Posted : 10 years, 4 months ago on 10 November 2014 10:34
(A review of Treasure Planet)I already saw this movie but since it was a while back and since it was available on Disney+, I thought I might as well check it out again. First of all, through Disneyâs illustrious history, they did have some rather dark periods (the 80âs were especially disappointing) and this movie was one massive flop for them (in fact, it is often listed as one of the most expensive box office flops of all time). Back then, the CGI animation was already pretty much ruling the market (above all thanks to Pixar also owned by Disney) and, for them, it was pretty much their last attempt to deliver a massive epic hand-drawn feature and since it was a failure, they dropped the technique all-together which is a terrible shame (the underperforming âBrother Bearâ and âHome on the Rangeâ only confirmed this trend). Basically, this movie was not only really expensive, it was also probably their most experimental project so far, some kind of weird mix of âTreasure Islandâ with âStar Warsâ. Even though trying anything new was pretty neat from a studio which has been stuck following the same formula over and over again, you could argue that the whole translation of this classic story to a Science-Fiction environment was rather misguided. Indeed, what did it really add to the plot? Not much in fact and a more traditional adaptation might have been more popular. Still, this movie was actually not bad at all and the whole thing certainly looked terrific. Furthermore, Jim Hawkins was a charismatic but still insecure main character. On top of that, I was actually quite amazed by his complex relationship with the bad guy who actually became some kind of surrogate father to him. As a result, even though he is nowadays pretty much forgotten, John Silver turned out to be one of the most interesting and complex villains ever delivered by Disney. Anyway, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, I actually liked the damned thing and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 10 years, 4 months ago on 9 November 2014 10:39
(A review of The Colossus of Rhodes)Since I had seen all the movies directed by Sergio Leone, except for this one, of course, I was really eager to check it out. It is actually a really obscure feature and since it was Leoneâs directing debut, you would assume that it should get at least a little bit of interest. Anyway, I bumped into this dvd while I was on holiday in France so I got lucky, even though, to be honest, it wasn't really good, I'm afraid. Indeed, if you compare it to the other work of Leone, almost all of them masterpieces, the whole thing was just rather messy while his Westerns were usually really focused and minimaslitic. Here, you will have a rather hard time to recognize his great touch. I mean, there might have been a good story there, hidden somewhere, but it was just too ambitious with too many characters and too many intrigues and sub-plots. On top of that, the acting was rather poor and the dialogues were terribly cheesy. At least, the production value was not bad at all with some nice costumes and some awesomely decadent decors. To conclude, even though it wasnât completely terrible, it was still rather disappointing and I'm not sure if it is really worth a look, except maybe if you are a die-hard fan of Sergio Leoneâs work.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 10 years, 4 months ago on 7 November 2014 10:21
(A review of Angel)I wasn't sure what to expect from this flick but since I have always been interested in François Ozon's work, I was really eager to check it out. Basically, like most of Ozon's features, it was rather difficult to make out what he was trying to achieve here and I had rather to judge the whole thing. This time, he went to direct something really different, a romantic costume drama and his first and only English speaking feature so far on top of that. Honestly, you are never really sure if the whole thing was actually straightforward or an actual satire of the genre. The fact that the main character was actually rather annoying didn't help either but we should give Romola Garai some credit as she still managed to make this woman still interesting to follow. Another interesting aspect was to see the always watchable Michael Fassbender at the beginning of his career and, from the moment he was on the screen, the whole thing became much more intriguing. Unfortunately, his character went from dark and brooding to become a seriously obnoxious douchebag. To conclude, in spite of its flaws, I still think it is an interesting watch and I think it is actually worth a look, especially if you are interested in François Ozon's work.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A classic
Posted : 10 years, 4 months ago on 7 November 2014 11:13
(A review of True Romance)It is probably the most popular movie directed by Tony Scott and it has generated a huge cult following ever since it has been released (like everything else involving Quentin Tarantino as a matter of fact). To be honest, it is actually rather sad that Tony Scottâs most heralded work would be mostly remembered as a Tarantino feature. Anyway, personally, I always had some rather mixed feelings about the whole thing. I mean, sure, I did like it, it is and remains a fun flick, very well made with an impressive cast (Christian Slater, Patricia Arquette, Dennis Hopper, Val Kilmer, Gary Oldman, Brad Pitt, Christopher Walken, Samuel L. Jackson, Michael Rapaport, James Gandolfini, Chris Penn) but, honestly, I never thought that there was anything really mind-blowing about the story, at least, that's my opinion. At the time, Christian Slater and Patricia Arquette were both really in demand and, 20 years ago, nobody would have expected that Slaterâs career would turn out to be a let-down. Anyway, to conclude, even though I donât think it is really amazing, it is still a classic from the 90âs, it is one of the best movies directed by Tony Scott, and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry