
Posted : 13 years, 4 months ago on 6 December 2011 04:45
(A review of
Eternity and a Day (1998))
I saw this movie so long ago, something like 15 years ago when it was released in the movie theaters, so, to be honest, I don't really remember the whole thing in detail. Back then, I remember that Theo Angelopoulos was ( and he still is) a highly regarded movie director and since this movie won the Golden Palm at the Cannes Film festival, I thought I should check this one out. Indeed, since Angelopoulos had quite a stellar reputation, I was really eager to discover his work and this was his first (and so far only) movie I have seen so far. Unfortunately, I ‘m afraid I was just too young to get all the symbolism involved but, honestly, I thought it was rather disappointing. Indeed, there was not much going on and I thought the whole thing was rather boring to watch. Still, Angelopoulos knows a how to direct a movie and Bruno Ganz is always a fascinating actor to watch. Maybe I'll give it another try in the future. Anyway, even though I didn't really like it, it is definitely not a bad movie at all and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 4 months ago on 6 December 2011 04:35
(A review of
Destiny)
I already saw this movie but, since it was such a long time ago and since it was available on Netflix, I thought i might as well check it out again. The first time around, I didn't know anything about Youssef Chahine at the time but he seemed to be a highly regarded movie director in France and since this movie was nominated for the Golden Palm at the Cannes Film festival, I went to se this movie in the movie theater when it was released. However, to be honest, I guess I was maybe too young back then but I didn't connect with this movie at all. Well, I'm glad I gave it a second chance after all these years. First of all, I have to admit that I didn't remember a single thing about the damned thing which shows how little impact it did have on me at the time. Well, the 2nd time around, I thought it was actually quite fascinating. Indeed, maybe at the time, I wasn’t aware or didn't care about the upcoming threat coming from Muslim fundamentalism but, more than 25 years later as this threat has become so huge, this movie developed such great ideas on this topic and really felt prescient. Basically, this kind of fundamentalism has in fact always existed, pretty much ever since the concept of religion had been invented. As displayed in this movie, it is very often based not really on religion but above all on ignorance and the best weapon against it is knowledge. I also think that it is based on hatred while religion is based on love but this movie didn't focus on that aspect. Anyway, I thought it was a really deep and smart movie, even if the acting was maybe not really impressive. Now, I really feel like rewatching 'Cairo Station' as well since it is considered as Youssef Chahine's magnum opus. Anyway, to conclude, even if I'm not sure if it is really a masterpiece, it is still a really good flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Youssef Chahine's work.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 4 months ago on 6 December 2011 10:34
(A review of
Grbavica)
To be honest, I had never heard of this movie before but since it won the Golden Bear at the Berlin Film festival, I thought I should give it a try. Basically, it is a rather slow but really heartbreaking movie about ex-Yougoslavia after the war. Thanks or because of this movie (depends where you stand in this matter), you get a glimpse on the terrible things that happened out there. Especially from an outsider like me, it remains rather strange that for decades all those different cultures seemed to get along fine but then, with the fall of Communism, they decided to literally slaughter their next door neighbor. Concerning the directing, it was nothing really amazing but I liked that it was really sober and it fit the subject really well so it was really effective and the actors were very good. Basically, there is not much action here or anything else going on but it is not what this movie was about, it was more about the characters and the traumas they have to deal with until the end of their life. To conclude, even though the whole thing was pretty depressing, I still think it was a solid drama and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in this dark part of history.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 4 months ago on 6 December 2011 09:42
(A review of
Other People's Money)
I had no idea what to expect from this movie but since it was directed by Norman Jewison and since I have a weak spot for Danny DeVito, I thought I might as well check it out. First of all, it is always a treat to see DeVito playing the lead. Considering the movie itself, it was basically some kind of light version of 'Wall Street' and, in my opinion, Danny DeVito was just terrific in this movie. Indeed, the guy was just really funny and ruthless but he still managed to make his character also charismatic which was definitely an achievement. Unfortunately, they watered down the whole concept by adding some dreadful sugercoated music, a lame romance and a phony happy ending. Furthermore, even though Penelope Ann Miller was quite charming, I don't think she had the acting chops to pull this off. In my opinion, they should have chosen a smarter and tougher actress. Eventually, it was too bad because if they had gone all the way and made instead a really cynical black comedy, it could have been really awesome. Anyway, in spite of its flaws and thanks to a really strong DeVito, it was still a decent watch and it is definitely worth a look.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 4 months ago on 5 December 2011 12:40
(A review of
Mystery Men)
To be honest, I was at first rather intrigued by this flick. Indeed, with such a concept and, above all, with such a cast (Ben Stiller, Hank Azaria, William H. Macy, Janeane Garofalo, Paul Reubens, Wes Studi, Greg Kinnear, Geoffrey Rush, Lena Olin, Eddie Izzard, Pras, Claire Forlani, Tom Waits), it could have been pretty awesome or, at least, decent. Unfortunately , I thought the whole thing was rather lame. I mean, there were here and there some good ideas and a few funny jokes but, a part from that, there was nothing much going on here. In my opinion, the main issue was that none of the characters were remotely interesting, and were, at best, just slightly funny. As a result, I didn't care about those characters and, to make things even worse, the plot was nothing great either and really generic. Basically, I was pretty much bored during the whole thing. On the positive side, there were some pretty awesome actors at work here but that’s probably the only positive thing I can tell you about this flick. To conclude, there are still worse ways to spend your time but, in my opinion, it remains a rather weak comedy and it is not really worth a look.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 4 months ago on 5 December 2011 10:40
(A review of
Gomorrah)
First of all, I'm really surprised that this movie has such a low rating here on Listal. Indeed, I was actually quite blown away by the damned thing as it was easily the best gangster movie I have seen in many years. I have to admit that I was not really familiar with this Italian crime syndicate, the camorra, but it seemed pretty realistic to me. The biggest difference with such classics like 'Goodfellas' or 'Scarface' was the directing style. Even 'Cidade de Deus' which was rather rauw was still very stylish in its directing compared to this movie. Here, they chose a very realistic documentary approach and it worked very well. The other big difference with those pictures was that there was absolutely no glamor in this life style, none of the characters seemed to be rich, or had a nice car or a big house. It was actually quite depressing and hopeless and the only reason I could think why they would 'choose' this way of life was because there was literally nothing else to do for them. There was also no lead character but several story lines which were all really dreadfull and heartbreaking to watch. It was an interesting approach but not all the stories were easy to follow and you only got to know a little bit of each character. Still, it was a very well made and fascinating movie and it is definitely worth a look.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 4 months ago on 5 December 2011 09:27
(A review of
Moneyball)
I already saw this movie (I even saw it in the movie theater when it was released) but since it was a while back, I thought I might as well check it out again. First of all, I have to admit that, even if I know more or less the rules of baseball, since I'm European, I'm not really familiar with this sport. However, it didn't really matter since this movie was dealing with the business side and, in fact, this story line could have been applied to many other sports. Indeed, they developed here a very interesting theory that sports managers overpay their stars and neglect underrated players who could play for less than half the same price and still are just as effective. So, in Oakland, they bought some undervalued players solely based on their statistics. Unfortunately, they spent very little time actually explaining how it all worked and I wish they did spend more time to explain the whole concept. Honestly, after that, it basically followed the usual pattern of any sport movie (they kept losing and losing and suddenly they kept winning and winning...). Something surprising was that the great Philip Seymour Hoffman showed up in a very thankless role. As usual, he completely disappeared behind his character but he had almost nothing to do during the whole thing except grumbling against this new strategy. On top of that, the real Art Howe was actually supporting the Moneyball concept from the beginning. You had also Jonah Hill who gave a solid performance but I wish they developed his character a little bit more. I mean, he was a geek who could manage statistics pretty well but, aside from that, you pretty much learned nothing about him. What was left was Brad Pitt who basically carried the movie on his shoulders and he did it very well. Indeed, there were so many layers with his character, it was just fascinating to watch. This visionary manager who couldn't stand to lose (the reason why he probably didn't make it as a player) was definitely one of the most convincing performances by Pitt. Anyway, to conclude, it was a very interesting and entertaining sport flick which showed a different side of this world, and, even though I wasn't completely blown away, I really enjoyed it and it is definitely worth a look.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 4 months ago on 3 December 2011 07:56
(A review of
Ae Fond Kiss)
To be honest, I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but since I have a weak spot for Ken Loach, I thought I should give it a try. Indeed, back in the 90's, I was a huge fan of Ken Loach. Nowadays, I don't follow him that much but when I get the chance, I still watch his movies. For example, I really liked this flick. It is actually a very simple story, basically, Loach's version of Romeo and Juliet but I still enjoyed it very much. Here, Loach took a timeless tale and put it in our modern days and fill up the whole thing with social consciousness and it just worked very well for me. As usual, he worked with some actors unknown to me but it helped even more to identify with the characters and I thought the two leads gave some decent and convincing performances. Like in the good old days, the sober directing style still worked like a charm and, in my opinion, made the whole thing really fascinating to watch. To conclude, it may not be one of Loach's most heralded productions but it is actually one of my favorites and it is definitely worth a look.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 4 months ago on 2 December 2011 10:04
(A review of
The Cat Returns)
Since 'Spirited away' is one of my favorite animated movies, whenever I get the opportunity to watch another Studio Ghibli production, I don't miss it. This time, it was not directed by the great Hayao Miyazaki but by Hiroyuki Morita which I had never heard of before but it is understandable since he never directed another movie before or after this feature. Anyway, as usual with Studio Ghibli, the animation was pretty gorgeous but, honestly, I wasn't really blown away by the story. I mean, it was nice, charming and all but, in my opinion, the target audience was, this time, obviously the young children so when I hear people saying that it is great for grown ups, I tend to respectfully disagree with them. Of course, at the end of the day, it remains a matter of taste and some might think it is a great flick but, personally, I thought it was not bad at all but I was still rather bored during the whole thing. To conclude, it is a decent animated movie with some gorgeous animation and an average story but it is still definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 13 years, 4 months ago on 2 December 2011 09:06
(A review of
Daybreakers)
Since 'Nosfertatu' was released in 1922, vampires have always been an endless source of inspiration for movie makers and 90 years later they still come up with some original ideas about the subject which is rather impressive. This movie was a good example. Indeed, the approach was quite original. This time around, it took place in the future and almost everyone had become a vampire so they were dominating our Society and, for once, they didn't have to hide. The humans were actually the one hiding since they were hunted for their blood. Another interesting thing was the shortage of blood which made you wonder how those vampires would survive in the future. All those aspects were really interesting and I really enjoyed the directing and the set dressing which provided a nice vision of this futuristic vampiric world. However, I still can't say that I was blown away by the whole thing. I mean, the main cast (Ethan Hawke, Sam Neill, Willem Dafoe) was pretty good but their characters were not developped enough and they were rather stereotypical (the sensitive doctor vampire, the gready businessman vampire, the hotshot redneck,...). Furthermore, instead of developing the implications of such a world, they decided to throw some well-made but rather pedestrian and boring action scenes. To conclude, even though it was not a masterpiece whatsoever, I have to admit that it was still an original, entertaining and well-made vampire flick and it is definitely worth a look.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry