
Posted : 13 years, 3 months ago on 2 January 2012 09:34
(A review of
Spanglish)
Since I kept hearing some good things about this flick, I thought I should check it out but I actually hard a hard time to enjoy it, probably due to my personal background. Indeed, my father is Dutch and came to live in France and, of course, is fluent in French. I'm French and went to live in the Netherlands and learn the language within 2 years pretty much on my own (indeed, my father apparently never thought it would be a good idea to teach me his mother-tongue). As a result, it was rather infuriating for me to see this Mexican woman who was living in  the USA for 6 years or more and still didnât speak any word of English. And it was the same issue with her bosses. Indeed, they hired someone who didnât speak any English but they still didn't try AT ALL to learn a few Spanish words so they could communicate with her. Furthermore the whole thing was basically about a boss who wants to f*ck his Mexican maid, no more no less, and TĂ©a Leoni's character was beyond obnoxious and not funny at all. Actually, the only redeeming feature was, surprisingly, Adam Sandler. Indeed, he gave her a very good performance and his character was really believable and likeable. Without him, this flick would have been really terrible. Another thing that really bothered me, except that I couldn't buy the fact that Paz Vega would fall in love with Adam Sandler, was the ending. Flor (the mother) asked Cristina (the daughter) is she really wanted to become someone else than her mother but it was something really stupid and pathetic to say. Indeed, she was born and bread in Mexico whereas her daughter grew up and will probably spend all her life in the US so they WILL be different, it was just inevitable. It was something she should understand and accept, otherwise, she should have stayed in Mexico. Anyway, eventually, I didn't enjoy this movie but I was probably not the right audience for this and if you want to see Adam Sandler eventually shining as an actor, you should actually check this one out.

5 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 3 months ago on 1 January 2012 09:16
(A review of
Duplex (2003) )
Since I always had a weak spot for Danny DeVito, I was quite eager to check this flick. Indeed, even though he is not famous for his directing career, Danny DeVito has actually directed some pretty interesting features. Unfortunately, the last movie he directed was not one of them... Indeed, it is basically a rather standard and predictable comedy with a very boring plot. I mean, Ben Stiller and Drew Barrymore can both be pretty entertaining but their characters were not really likeable, interesting and, above all, not really funny whatsoever. One detail that really bothered me is that, for most of the movie, they make a big deal that they cannot sleep at night because of their neighbor and they make it all sound like an unsolvable issue. Have they never heard of earplugs??! It is actually a pretty good example of the obvious lack of inspiration displayed in this picture. To conclude, the people involved in this flick are actually quite talented but even though, the end result was really disappointing and it is not really worth a look, even if you like the genre.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 3 months ago on 31 December 2011 11:41
(A review of
Blind Horizon (2003))
Even though Val Kilmer is no longer on the A list already for many years, I still have a weak spot for him and I keep watching his flicks when I get the chance. However, pretty often, I really end up watching some major turkeys... This flick is unfortunately a pretty good example. I mean, there was an interesting cast (Val Kilmer, Neve Campbell, Sam Shepard, Amy Smart, Gil Bellows, Giancarlo Esposito, Faye Dunaway) but that's the only really positive thing I can think of. Somehow, the plot did remind me a little bit of The Bourne trilogy expect of course that the directing was really average and that the plot was just preposterous and not in an entertaining way. Basically, it was an average complot theory thriller with some very annoying twists (when will they realize that a twist in itself is just an overused and boring gimmick?!?). To be honest, I thought it was pretty neat to see Neve Campbell (another total has-been by the way) in such a thriller, itâs just too bad that it turned out to be such an underwhelming feature. To conclude, it remains a rather average flick, it is not really worth a look and I hope some day Val Kilmer will make a comeback like Robert Downey Jr. or Mickey Rourke but with such movies, it won't be happening anytime soon and, at this point, it seems to be some wishful thinking...

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 3 months ago on 31 December 2011 11:22
(A review of
Adam's Rib)
Back in those days, Katharine Hepburn was the best actress around and it has always been a pleasure to watch one of her movies (as a matter of fact, I have seen only 6 movies starring this actress and it is a terribly low digit). Since this flick was one of her classics, I was really eager to check it out and it turned out to be an interesting romantic-comedy. I mean, you had the usual slapstick common for this period but it had also some actual serious thoughts about women rights. Actually, I think they tried to deal with a sensitive subject but, to make it more bearable to watch, they did hide it behind an innocent comedy so the viewers back then wouldn't be shocked with what was actually a critic on our modern society. In fact, I wonder if they could make such a comedy nowadays. Eventually, the issue would be that we 'think' that man and woman are equal so it wouldn't work but it could be interesting. Anyway, to conclude, it was still an enjoyable romantic-comedy with some strong chemistry between Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like those good old comedies.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 3 months ago on 31 December 2011 10:49
(A review of
Shine a Light)
To be honest, I have to admit that I'm not a huge fan of the Rolling Stones but since I would watch anything directed by Martin Scorsese, I thought I should check this one out as well. First of all, even though I'm not a fan, I still have the upmost respect for the Rolling Stones and their legacy and I always thought that they are way more interesting than the Beattles who are maybe more popular but ultimately rather boring in my opinion. Anyway, eventually, I thought it was a pretty good concert movie, no more, no less than that. It did help though that Scorsese was calling the shots and thanks to his directing, we got a great intimate visual experience of the Stones live. And even though they are sure getting old, the Rolling Stones are not kidding when they are on stage and I especially enjoyed Mick Jagger who is the ultimate stage performer, in my opinion. Indeed, the guy was constantly in motion, dancing, jumping, shouting to the crowd and it was nothing short of amazing. To conclude, even if it was nothing really amazing, I thought it was still pretty good and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are a fan of the Rolling Stones.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 3 months ago on 30 December 2011 09:46
(A review of
Kicking & Screaming)
To be honest, I wasn't sure what to expect from this flick but since I have a weak spot for Judd Apatow's work, I thought I should give it a try. Indeed, the same year Judd Apatow released his directing début 'The 40 Year Old Virgin' with tremendous success, he also produced this flick which is nowadays pretty much forgotten. Of course, I know Will Ferrell can be pretty obnoxious but I thought he was just really hilarious here,actually I think it is one of his better movies. Basically, it is your typical Apatow flick with loads of raunchiness and swearing but still some sweetness deep underneath. By now, we know the formula but it still worked pretty well here. Of course, it didn't hurt that Robert Duvall showed up in a supporting part and he steals the show, as usual. However, even thought the whole thing was pretty funny, it still remain an unoriginal and very predictable sport movie and they didn't add much to the formula. Still, to conclude, I think it is a funny and entertaining comedy and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you enjoy Apatow's work.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 3 months ago on 30 December 2011 08:50
(A review of
Hachi: A Dog's Tale)
Since this movie seemed to have a really solid reputation (it has an impressive 8.1 rating on IMDB and it is even listed in the IMDB 250 Top Rated movies) and since I always had a weak spot for Lasse Hallstromâs work, I was really eager to check it out. Eventually, I wish I saw the damned thing with my wife. Indeed, since we are together, she has bought 10 dogs and we still have 6 of them right now but I never managed to convince her to watch this movie because she was afraid it would be too emotional for her. Anyway, I must admit that it was a touching story, the directing by Hallstrom was pretty good as usual and Richard Gere gave a decent performance. However, even though the whole thing was touching, Iâm sorry, but I didnât think it was anything really mind-blowing whatsoever. It was also rather annoying to see all these people having some conversations with that dog. At least, they didn't make the dog answer them which would have been pretty awfull but I still thought it was rather ridiculous. I guess without this gimmick there wouldn't have been any dialogues during the whole thing. Anyway, even thoug it didnât really blow me away, I have to admit it, it was a well made drama and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.Â

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 3 months ago on 29 December 2011 12:37
(A review of
Strayed)
Since I have a weak for AndrĂ© TĂ©chinĂ©âs work, I though I should check this flick. TĂ©chinĂ© is actually not really famous here on Listal but he is actually one of the best living French directors. He usually makes some contemporary features but, this time, he has directed an intriguing World War II drama. It stars Emmanuelle BĂ©art, an established French movie star, and Gaspard Ulliel, an upcoming young actor who would eventually end up playing the younger version of Hannibal Lecter in 'Hannibal rising' (Has he done anything else in Hollywood since then? I donât think so. Too bad since he is a pretty talented fellow). Basically, it is one those intimate dramas with a very few characters but thanks to BĂ©art and Ulliel's strong performances, it did work very well. To be honest, the plot was actually not really mind-blowing but it was interesting enough, and, as I said before, they both gave some decent performances and I really enjoyed the sober directing by TĂ©chinĂ© as well. To conclude, it is a rather small scaled drama taking place during WWII but it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in French movies.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 3 months ago on 29 December 2011 11:37
(A review of
The Wizard of Oz)
Since this movie is such a huge classic, of course, I really had to watch it at some point. Eventually, it did really live up to its reputation as it was really a magical movie with a huge budget for that time. Indeed, the decors, the costumes, the special effects, the switch from black and white to colour, it all looked pretty awesome. Even though I have never been a huge of musicals, the songs were decent enough and I was even familiar with some of them, even before watching this flick, which shows of how influential this movie has always been. Still, even if I did admire the work done, I canât say I was really blown away by the damned thing. On one hand, the whole thing was probably slightly too sugercoated for my taste and maybe I would have enjoyed it more if I had watched it back then when I was a kid. On the other hand, I guess it is just a matter of taste and the fact that I always had a hard time to care for this genre might explain that I wasnât really impressed by this movie. Anyway, to conclude, it remains a huge classic and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are a fan of the genre.Â

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 3 months ago on 29 December 2011 10:15
(A review of
Romancing the Stone)
For Robert Zemeckis, this movie is pretty much where it all really started and when I was kid, I always had a weak spot for this flick. Since I hadnât see it for years, I thought it was time for a re-watch, I watched it this time with my step-son and, 30 years later, it actually still holds up pretty good. I mean, it could have been a lazy Indiana Jones copycat but they succeeded in including enough new elements to make it fun and entertaining to watch. First of all, Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner had some awesome chemistry and they made up a great duo (they would eventually make 2 more movies together). It was also a nice reminder that Michael Douglas is actually a pretty good actor and is actually able to play something else than his usual arrogant rich SOB. Personally, I thought that the first half was just hilarious with Turner giving a typical fish-out-of-water performance and Douglas portraying an adventurer who is even less heroic than Indiana Jones. I must say that during the second half the whole tends to lose some steam but the whole thing was still enjoyable to watch. To conclude, it is a real classic from the 80's and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you liked the Indiana Jones flicks like I do.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry