Login
Home
582 Lists
7751 Reviews
CollectionsAn average movie
Posted : 11 years, 6 months ago on 31 July 2013 09:56
(A review of The Dilemma)You can say whatever you want about Ron Howard but the guy is very versatile and after many years, he is making again a comedy, a genre that really launched his career back then with 'Splash'. Unfortunately, the end-result was really disappointing. Indeed, it has been a while since I have seen such a tedious comedy. Ok, I wasn't really in the right mood, I'll give you that, but it was still pretty weak and not funny whatsoever. Furthermore, there was barely any chemistry between any of the 4 actors involved in those 2 couples and the movie really focused solely on Vince Vaughn (who hasn't made a good comedy since 'Wedding Crashers' released 8 years ago) and the rest of the cast, which had some potential, was pretty much wasted (Kevin James, Jennifer Connelly, Winona Ryder, Channing Tatum, Queen Latifah). Also, it was once again another failed attempt for Winona Ryder to make a come-back. I mean, recently, she keeps popping up in some high-profile projects like this one or 'Black Swan' or 'Star Trek' but she never managed to make it really work for her. Still, there was some interesting stuff in here, some interesting darkness, but the makers never really figured what to do with the whole thing so you end up with one of those underwhelming comedies where one of the characters has some big secret which will be, of course, revealed at the end. To conclude, even though I have seen worse, it is still one of the weakest movies directed by Ron Howard and it is not really worth a look, even if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 11 years, 6 months ago on 31 July 2013 02:52
(A review of Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen)If I recall correctly, I saw this movie way before Lindsay Lohan started to get in trouble. Back in those days, my step-daughter had the perfect age to watch this kind of stuff so I ended up watching it with her. Man, will Lindsay Lohan ever come back? The point is that, for someone like Mickey Rourke or Robert Downey Jr., it doesnāt really matter if their way of life more or less destroyed their looks (especially for Rourke) but, for a woman, it is really a different story. Indeed, they have pretty much to look very young like forever which is of course impossible and, for Lohan, she nowadays looks 10 years older than her real age. Anyway, back in those days, Lindsay Lohan was still (more or less) innocent with a seemingly bright future and this one was one of those Disney features she made back then. To be honest, it was watchable but it still pretty weak though and compare to this, āMean Girlsā was pretty much a masterpiece. The main issue is that, even though Lohan did her best, the main character was not really interesting and seriously rather obnoxious so I had a really hard time to care about her or what she was going through. To conclude, I didnāt care much about this flick and I donāt think it is really worth a look, except maybe if you want to see Lindsay Lohan before she was a total train wreck.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 11 years, 6 months ago on 31 July 2013 02:02
(A review of Windtalkers )When the word came out that John Woo was coming to Hollywood to expand his career, many of us got pretty excited. Indeed, at that time, Woo was probably the most heralded director coming from Hong Kong and to have his kinetic directing style combined with a massive budget for a wide audience was a nice prospect. Eventually, the end-result was not that impressive. I mean, his Hollywood dĆ©but āHard Targetā was not bad, one of the very few watchable movies starring Jean-Claude Van Damme, and āFace/Offā was really cool but it was probably his only Hollywood movie which was really successful (on the other hand, ā Mission: Impossible IIā which always had a bad reputation was actually the highest grossing movie released in 2000). Anyway, this movie is probably the most disappointing one he has made in this period. The worst thing is that the story was actually really intriguing and it was a great idea to make a WWII feature focusing on those Indian code makers. But thatās what went wrong here, somehow, they didnāt focus on them at all and the Indian guy became just merely a sidekick to the typical white hero portrayed by Nicolas Cage. From this point, even though the whole thing was not that bad visually speaking, the story felt like a huge travesty. Of course, as usual, you could blame Nicolas Cage but I think he did what he could with this material. To conclude, even though the whole thing had some potential, it turned out to be one of the most disappointing WWII feature I have seen and it is not really worth a look.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 11 years, 6 months ago on 30 July 2013 08:41
(A review of Spawn)Even though the ratings were pretty weak, I still wanted to check this one out. I mean, come on, the material was actually pretty interesting. Indeed, here you have a cool super-hero , a cool moody poster, a cool lead actor... Wait a minute... Let me see, who is the lead actor...Michael Jai White... Who the f*ck is that ? Ah yeah! I know, he got killed by the Joker in the Dark Knight!! What a performance ! Sorry, I'm just being ironic here... Anyway, Michael (or is it Michael Jai?) didn't have enough star power to pull this movie towards a sequel... To be honest, I'm pretty harsh with Michael Jai White since he was not that bad after all. I was really surprised that Roger Ebert actually liked this movie a lot, above all, because he thought it looked really awesome. I'm sorry, with all due respect, except for a few things like Spawn's costume, it actually looked pretty awful. Furthermore, the acting was pretty abysmal as well, especially Martin Sheen gave one of his worst performances. Concerning John Leguizamo, damned, that clown was annoying but, I guess he was supposed to be annoying. Still, like I said before, even though the end-result was really weak, there was something quite appealing about the main character, it's just too bad he didn't get a better movie (apparently, Jamie Foxx is trying to launch a reboot so who knows?). To conclude, I think I'm being pretty generous with my rating, it is pretty much one of those misguided super-hero flicks they made in the 90's and I don't think it is really worth a look.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 11 years, 6 months ago on 30 July 2013 06:51
(A review of Mickey Blue Eyes)I wasn't sure what to expect from this movie but since I have a weak spot for Hugh Grant, I thought I should give it a try. Nowadays, the guy is pretty much retired (on the other hand, I read a couple of times that he always found film acting pretty tedious so maybe it is all for good) but, when this movie was released, he was pretty much at the heights of his career. Unfortunately, it was not really good, I'm afraid. Basically, it is one of those typical comedies when they throw an average guy (in this case, Hugh Grant) into the mafia world. It is a concept I never liked (except maybe with 'Analyze this' but it was actually the other way around) and even 'The Freshman' which was loved by the great Roger Ebert was pretty tedious in my opinion. Anyway, you get the picture, Hugh Grant plays his typical clueless British fellow, James Caan plays his typical tough guy and hilarity should follow. Well, it never really happened, I'm sorry. To conclude, I have seen worse but I still think it is one of the most underwhelming movies starring Hugh Grant and I don't think it is really worth a look, even if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A good movie
Posted : 11 years, 6 months ago on 29 July 2013 09:41
(A review of The Abyss)I already saw this movie but since it was a while back and since I have it on DVD, I was quite eager to check it out again. Well, this movie is visually quite impressive and was, at the time, rather groundbreaking (It was in fact one of the first films to make proper use of CGI technology). To be honest, the first time I saw the damned thing, I wasn't so sure about the story though. I mean, it was entertaining enough, that's for sure, but it was still rather generic in my opinion. Many years later, I watched the director's cut but I'm not sure if the extra 15 minutes were actually welcome. It seemed that it explained too much what was the deal with those aliens whereas the shorter version kept it mysterious which worked better in my opinion. Furthermore, as usual with James Cameron, the characters were really stereotypical and I especially dreaded the bad guy portrayed by Michael Biehn. It was pretty obvious that they put him there just to create some tension but it didn't work very well. Still, in spite of the poor characterization, both Ed Harris and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio were actually really good, especially during the resurrection scene which was really amazing but, apparently, they both had a dreadful time filming this movie (apparently, Ed Harris even refuses to talk about this movie). It is not really surprising but, for the viewer, there was a lot of fascinating stuff thanks to all those wet scenes and the under water scenes. Back in those days, you could see that James Cameron was already caring a lot about all that underwater stuff and it felt really genuine. Eventually, even though it was really entertaining, I think that there was just too much to deal with (the underwater oil rig, the major world crisis, the romance between Harris and Mastrantonio, Biehn going crazy, the aliens,...). Still, it remains a pretty good flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in James Cameron's work.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 11 years, 6 months ago on 29 July 2013 11:05
(A review of The Da Vinci Code)When the word came out that they were making a movie adaptation, there was a huge buzz about it. Eventually, even though it made some big bucks at the box-office, it wasnāt very well received. Eventually, I saw it a few years later after borrowing the DVD from a colleague and even though I had some rather low expectations, I donāt think it was so bad after all. Indeed, I thought it was actually a fairly entertaining thriller and it was fun to see an American thriller taking place in France for once. Of course, since half of the book (which I have read afterwards) was actually about Robert Langdon giving some historical or mythical background, it didnāt translate well to the silver screen. Furthermore, even though it was indeed a fun book, it was actually not really brilliant in my opinion. I mean, Dan Brown basically deals with historical facts, wild theories, improbable legends and fairy tales in the same way at face value and, as a result, it was difficult for me to take the whole thing seriously. Furthermore, I donāt really get all the fuss against this movie. I mean, as if the book was really brilliant to start with. I have to admit it, even though it was definitely entertaining, it was far from being a masterpiece but the makers did their best with this material and the end-result was not even half as bad as everyone claimed. To conclude, of course, it is not really anything amazing, but I still think the movie is actually a decent blockbuster and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A good movie
Posted : 11 years, 6 months ago on 29 July 2013 08:41
(A review of Cape Fear)After hearing some pretty good things about this flick, I was really eager to check it out. Honestly, even though I enjoyed it, I thought it was slightly disappointing. Thatās actually a rather common problem when you first watch a decent remake like the version directed by Martin Scorsese, when you see later on the original version, there is this feeling of dĆ©jĆ vu and you usually end up enjoying more the recent version, usually just because you saw it first. Another effect is that you spend way too much time comparing the two movies, sometimes for the most trivial details. So, you can imagine that this first viewing was not really optimal and I might give it a 2nd chance in the future. On the other hand, is it such a great movie which requires multiple viewings? Iām not so sure about it. Anyway, it remains a pretty entertaining thriller (way less gloomy and tensed than Scorseseās version) and Gregory Peck and Robert Mitchum were both very good in this (I still preferred Robert de Niro though. You see? Iām still comparingā¦). To conclude, even though I was expecting more, it was still a solid feature and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A disappointing movie
Posted : 11 years, 6 months ago on 29 July 2013 07:01
(A review of Pacific Rim)I already saw this movie when it was released but since it was a while back and since it was available on Netflix, I thought I might as well check it out again. Back then, after 5 long years, during which he dropped out from 'The Hobbit' among other things, Guillermo del Toro was finally back with a new directing effort so the damned thing was definitely promising. On top of that, when Nick, my step-son, saw the trailer with these huge robots and monsters, he got pretty excited too so we went together and both had some high expectations. Unfortunately, it turned to be pretty disappointing. I mean, I have to admit that it was not bad at all and there were indeed some massive action scenes (even though those took place only at night) but everything in between those action scenes was just really underwhelming. Sure, it was a nice touch that del Toro took a more worldwide approach instead of only focusing on the USA but he only partially succeeded (like 'World War Z', they should have taken us around the globe to really achieve this). Furthermore, they introduced this concept called 'drift' which is basically the melting of two minds and while this concept was pretty far out and could have been really interesting, it was never properly developed. Above all, the dialogues and the characters were just really underwhelming and even if I had a weak spot for Mako, she was not really fascinating either. At the end of the day, for his first big budget blockbuster, del Toro didn't really make a home run and, in my opinion, this movie was only slightly better than the Transformers franchise or even 'Battleship'. Anyway, to conclude, even though it turned out to be disappointing, I have to admit that it was still a visually appealing blockbuster though and I guess it is still worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 11 years, 6 months ago on 27 July 2013 10:08
(A review of Cedar Rapids)Even though this movie was not really well received, since there were a couple of interesting actors involved, I thought I should check it out anyway. First of all, making a movie about an insurance sells man convention is a pretty tough sell but, personally, I thought they almost pulled it off. Indeed, I liked the general atmosphere created and it is not hard to believe that, in real life, some of those insurers must go pretty wild. As usual, John C. Reilly was pretty awesome, he stole the show every time he was on the screen and I really liked the fact that, at first, he seemed a real douche-bag but he turned out to be a rather nice fellow. I also liked Anne Heche's character even though she was a little too much underwritten for me and, concerning Sigourney Weave, she had even less to do. Still, I wasn't completely sold. Indeed, Ed Helms was rather underwhelming but it wasn't entirely his fault since his character was not really funny or interesting so I didn't care much about what was happening to him. Furthermore, some scenes didn't work very well (the party with Bree was just way over the top) and the whole scheme concerning the Two Diamonds was just totally uninteresting. Still, I think it remains a decent comedy and I guess it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry