
Posted : 13 years, 2 months ago on 7 February 2012 12:51
(A review of
Red Eye)
Ever since 'Scream' came out, Wes Craven was popular again and, therefore, I was really curious to check this flick. The fact that Cillian Murphy and Rachel McAdams were playing the leads made it even more attractive. They are two actors who both seemed really talented but still didn't manage to breakthrough in a really a big way, especially McAdams who keeps showing up in supporting parts in some rather average flicks. Anyway, they worked this time with Wes Craven in the last good movie he directed. Indeed, I thought it was pretty good. McAdams delivered a decent performance but I was above all impressed by Cillian Murphy who was obviously born to play such parts. Of course, the story is rather preposterous and you can look for the plot holes as long you want but, for once, it didn't bother me. Indeed, thanks to Murphy and above all the expert directing by Wes Craven, I thought it was a gripping thriller and I remained entertained throughout the whole thing. Of course, at the end, you have the usual annoying twists but I'm afraid it is inherent to the genre. To conclude, I thought it was a very well made and entertaining thriller and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Wes Craven's work.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 2 months ago on 7 February 2012 12:19
(A review of
The Book of Eli)
Back in the 90's, the Hughes Brothers impressed with their amazing directing début, 'Menace II society', which is, in my opinion, the best movie in this genre, even better than the acclaimed 'Boyz'n the Hood'. Unfortunately, in the next 20 years following this promising flick, they never really lived up to those expectations. However, after all these years, they finally managed to direct a big budget production starring no less than Denzel Washington. First of all, I must say it was, visually speaking, easily their most impressive movie so far. It was not really black and white but there were barely any color and it was a perfect fit for this futuristic world and they were some very nice shots throughout the whole movie. Furthermore, Denzel Washington and Gary Oldman were both delivered some decent performances. Unfortunately, the whole thing still turned out to be rather disappointing. I mean, I do have a weak spot for such post-apocalyptic movies but I have seen so many of them and if they really want to impress me, they should really bring something new to the formula. And that was the main issue here, the plot was nothing I haven't seen before so even if I wasn't really bored, I can’t say that I was seriously entertained either. They did try to add some religious angle but it was never really convincing. I mean, that Carnegie wanted to manipulate people with religion sounded like a good plan but did he really need a bible? Indeed, you can find enough gurus who founded their own cult, with their own rules and their own 'books'. Anyway, to conclude, even though it was nothing original whatsoever, it was still a well made post-apocalyptic flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 2 months ago on 6 February 2012 11:04
(A review of
Playing by Heart)
Even though it is a rather forgotten flick, I was rather eager to watch it. I mean, check this cast ! Angelina Jolie, Sean Connery, Gena Rowlands, Gillian Anderson, Madeleine Stowe, Ryan Phillippe, Dennis Quaid, Anthony Edwards, Ellen Burstyn, Jay Mohr , Jon Stewart, Patricia Clarkson, Amanda Peet, Hilary Duff, Nastassja Kinski, Jeremy Sisto.... I mean, it was enough for me to just have a look and eventually, I thought it was pretty good. Basically, it is one of those romantic movies with multiple storylines. It is nothing really original but I thought the whole thing was rather well done and they managed to create some genuine and believable relationships. Personally, my favorite couples would be Sean Connery-Gena Rowlands and Angelina Jolie-Ryan Phillippe. It is actually one of the best performances by Jolie and if you think she is a worthless actress, you should definitely check this movie. To conclude, I think it is a pretty good and entertaining romantic flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like this genre.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 2 months ago on 6 February 2012 10:13
(A review of
Open Hearts)
Even though the Dogme 95 is now rather out of fashion, I always had a weak spot for this genre and it had been a while since I saw a Dogme 95 feature. What I love about this filming style was that it set the focus on the actors and the story, instead of the special effects, the music, the sets, the stunts, the costumes,... Especially here, the acting was really strong and all the 4 actors (Mads Mikkelsen, Sonja Richter, Nikolaj Lie Kaas, Paprika Steen) gave some solid performances. Eventually, the only issue was probably the fact that they were too many storylines (Paprika Steen's guilt for causing the accident, Nikolaj Lie Kaas's anger about his condition, Sonja Richter's sorrow about Kaas and, of course, her love affair with Mikkelsen). I understand that the love affair was actually the main storyline but I didn't think that it was actually the most interesting subject. Furthermore, I can understand that Sonja Richter would start a new relationship since her whole life was just shattered but the main reason why Mads Mikkelsen would do such a thing was, in my opinion, only to provide some extra drama. Still, I really liked this emotional and heavy movie and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Scandinavian movies.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 2 months ago on 5 February 2012 09:18
(A review of
The Big Bounce)
Elmore Leonard is behind some pretty cool stories ('Jackie Brown', 'Get shorty',...) so I thought I should check this one out. Plus, there is a very nice cast (Owen Wilson, Morgan Freeman, Gary Sinise, Charlie Sheen, Vinnie Jones, Harry Dean Stanton). Unfortunately, the end result was rather disappointing. I mean, Owen Wilson was born to play this kind of part and the rest of the cast was pretty good as well but the story was not really original, not really funny and above all, not really entertaining. You can feel there was some potential here but the plot was just too weak. The fact that it is a remake of an already weak movie doesn't help much either, I guess. To conclude, it is not really bad but I have seen much better heist movies and this one is not really worth a look.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 2 months ago on 4 February 2012 10:32
(A review of
Carnage)
Since I'm a huge fan of Roman Polanski, I was really eager to watch this flick and when I heard about the cast, I became even more excited. Eventually, I wasn't disappointed and I’m so amazed that this movie doesn’t get more credit. Indeed, the whole thing was just so funny and it has been a while since I laughed so much at the movie theater. Seriously, Roman Polanski always impressed me in the past but I didn't expect him to make such a hilarious dark comedy. Of course, the casting was pretty much perfect and they all gave some strong performances. I have to admit that I had my doubts when Kate Winslet was drunk as I thought that she wasn't really convincing but it wasn’t a big issue. I'm usually really critical about comedies because most of them go for the easy stupid jokes but, here, it was dealing with some recognizable human beings with a wide range of emotions. There was no trick, just 4 actors stuck in a a room with their dialogues. Fortunately, those dialogues were terrific and after 15 minutes, I couldn't wait to see what would happen next. All these characters were imperfect and rather annoying, self-righteous and arrogant but that's what made them so damned interesting. To conclude, I really loved this movie and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Polanski's work.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 2 months ago on 4 February 2012 09:37
(A review of
The Invention of Lying)
To be honest, I'm rather amazed that this movie has such a low rating on this website. Of course, the whole concept sounded like a lame gimmick for yet another comedy starring Jim Carrey or, even worse, Eddie Murphy. However, the man behind this was Ricky Gervais and he managed to turn this ridiculous idea into an interesting reflection on human kind and also religion. Basically, Gervais seems to share my belief that religion is a (rather ridiculous) concept that many people need because they want some simple answers to some impossible questions like what is the meaning of life and what will happen when we die. Furthermore, we are always told that lying is very bad but this movie shows that lying is something that we can’t possibly live without and it was such a fascinating thought.They also managed to get an impressive supporting cast, even though most of them had just some cameos. Still, I have to admit that not everything worked though. For example, I didn't get why Ricky Gervais’s character was so crazy about Jennifer Garner's character who was eventually just a rather dull pretty face. Anyway, to conclude, even if it was maybe not a masterpiece, I really enjoyed the damned thing, it was really funny and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Ricky Gervais's work.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 2 months ago on 4 February 2012 08:25
(A review of
Christopher Columbus: The Discovery)
Back then in 1992, 2 movies celebrating the discovery of America were released. Even though '1492' didn't get the best critics, compared to this mess, it was a real masterpiece. Indeed, this other version was directed by John Glenn who was mostly famous for making a few decent James Bond flicks in the past but this time his directing was not inspired at all. The title role was portrayed by a total unknown, Georges Corraface, who didn't look bad but gave a really weak performance. The rest of the cast was actually interesting (Marlon Brando, Tom Selleck, Rachel Ward, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Benicio del Toro), even though it was pretty ridiculous and unconvincing to have Tom Selleck portraying a king. The biggest mistake they made is that you never get the feeling that you are actually witnessing one of the greatest adventures of humankind and this movie follows the trend of the all the other dreadful movies Marlon Brando did at the end of his illustrious career. To conclude, the whole thing is pretty bad and patheric, it is just plain boring and not worth a look whatsoever.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 2 months ago on 3 February 2012 10:04
(A review of
Imagine That)
Do you know what is even worse than a movie starring Eddie Murphy? A family feature starring Eddie Murphy... Seriously, this movie was just so lame. Of course, it turned ou to be again a huge flop for Murphy when it was released and it was not a surprise, I'm afraid. I mean, the whole thing was just so embarrassing to watch and I barely laughed while watching this movie. To make things worse, was it really supposed to be fun for kids? I don't think so. I mean, during the whole thing, he played some rather mean and unpleasant guy who only started to take interest in his little daughter when he saw that it could benefit his work. Furthermore, there was nothing fun or appealing concerning the stock-market for a young audience. I mean, it could have worked if it would have been a drama about a stock-broker actually losing his mind when he starts to listen to his little daughter for advice. At least, Thomas Haden Church was not really bad but even his character became rather obnoxious after a while. Anyway, to conclude, I really didn't like the damned thing, I was bored during the whole duration and it is definitely not worth a look, even for your kids.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 2 months ago on 3 February 2012 10:55
(A review of
Executive Decision)
This is easily one of the most surprising and underrated action movies I have ever seen. I mean, it was surprising in the sense that I didn't expect much from it but it ended up being really entertaining. The first masterstroke was to give Steven Seagal a supporting part (after 7 starring roles in a row, it was actually his very first supporting part) and, of course, to kill him within the first 30 minutes. I mean, after this shocking scene, you know you are watching something else than the usual action flicks. The 2nd masterstroke was to have Kurt Russell playing an analist, instead of his usual tough guys. Of course, it is a rather standard action movie with a standard plot but the movie is very well made and there are many bigger or smaller details like the one I mentionned before that make the whole thing really entertaining to watch. The best way to watch this is when you know nothing about it. Anyway, to conclude, in my opinion, it is one of the most underrated action movies ever made and it is definitely worth a look.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry