Posted : 13 years, 5 months ago on 17 December 2011 08:53
(A review of
The Pallbearer)
I didn't know what to expect from this flick but since I have a weak spot for Gwyneth Paltrow, I thought I should check it out. First of all, it is interesting to note that, except for Jennifer Anniston, none of the other lead actors starring in 'Friends' really managed to built up a nice career in feature films. David Schwimmer is not an exception, even though, as a director, he has made some interesting features (indeed, his last movie, 'Trust' was chosen by Roger Ebert as one of the best movies of the year in 2011). This time, Schwimmer stars in a romantic comedy and, of course, it was a flop. I mean, it was not really bad at all actually, Schwimmer was quite funny and Gwyneth Paltrow was really charming as usual but the story was unfortunately really pedestrian and predictable. It is really your standard romantic comedy based on a misunderstanding which has been done 100 times before, which is a gimmick that really annoys me. Still, I'm a sucker for romantic comedies and I must admit this one was, in spite its flaws, rather well well made and entertaining so it is actually worth a look, especially if you like the genre. Another funny fact, this flick was directed by Matt Reeves who would eventually end up directing 'Cloverfield' and 'Let me in'.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 5 months ago on 16 December 2011 08:20
(A review of
The Last Shot)
Honestly, I had no idea what to expect from this flick beforehand. Indeed, I had never heard of this movie before but since there was a rather impressive cast (Matthew Broderick, Alec Baldwin, Toni Collette, Tim Blake Nelson, Joan Cusack, Tony Shalhoub, Ray Liotta and Calista Flockhart), I thought I should check it out. I must say, the material was actually pretty cool as it was based on a rather amazing true story (as a matter of fact, it is actually pretty similar to ‘Argo’ when you think about it for one second). Furthermore, Alec Baldwin is really perfect in such roles and as usual, he delivered the goods. Unfortunately, the always clueless Matthew Broderick was rather worthless, as usual. In my opinion, it would have worked better if they picked out another better actor for this part. Still, it is rather unfair from me to put all the blame on Broderick since the main issue was actually, even though the material had some potential, that the writers didn't exploit it properly and kept going for the easy jokes and, eventually, I didn't care much about the whole thing or the characters involved. To conclude, this true story was pretty awesome and deserved a better movie than this average and boring comedy which is not really worth a look whatsoever. Eventually, almost 10 years later, Ben Affleck would show the proper way to deal with a story like this and would even win an Academy award in the process.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 6 months ago on 15 December 2011 11:49
(A review of
Silent Fall)
Honestly, before watching this flick, I had never heard of it but since it was starring Liv Tyler and since I have a weak spot for her, I thought I should check it out anyway. Basically, it is one of those typical thrillers involving an autist (usually, it is a child). Most of the time, I don't really enjoy those flicks because the plot is always preposterous and the guys writing those stories obviously don't have a clue about autism (since my step-son is autist, I know one thing or two about the subject...). However, this flick was actually pretty decent. I mean, when you think about it, the story was pretty far-fetched as usual, but it didn't bother me much this time and, surprisingly, I was entertained throughout the whole thing. Furthermore, I thought Liv Tyler was pretty good and the boy portraying the younger brother was just downright impressive. So, even though it looked pretty weak, it was actually not bad at all and actually pretty satisfying. To conclude, it was nothing mind-blowing whatsoever but it remains a well made and entertaining thriller and it is definitely worth a look.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 6 months ago on 15 December 2011 10:19
(A review of
Killshot)
Even though the critics were not really good, I still wanted to check this movie, above all because there was a really neat cast involved (Thomas Jane, Diane Lane, Mickey Rourke, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Rosario Dawson). Well, eventually, it was not really bad but I can't say I was impressed by the whole thing. I mean, the characters were quite intriguing, even though I had a hard time buying the fact that Mickey Rourke was potraying an indian, the directing was pretty stylish but, honestly, the story was actually a real mess. For example, why on earth Blackbird chooses to hang out with Richie Nix?!? Because he reminded him of his dead little brother?!? Come on, I thought it was pretty weak and unbelievable. The rest to the movie was not much better, the plot was just really weak and during the whole thing, I never thought it was really spellbinding whatsoever. Later on, I discovered that this flick had been in development hell for years and it figured. To conclude, it was nothing really bad and it could have been pretty awesome, but, at the end of the day, it was just an average thriller and it is not really worth a look.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 6 months ago on 14 December 2011 09:20
(A review of
Jurassic Park III)
Since this movie had a rather bad rep, I had rather low expectations before watching this flick. Furthermore, I thought that the first sequel was really abysmal, especially when you take into account that it was directed by someone like Steven Spielberg. Eventually, I must admit that I was actually positively surprised by this 3rd installment. I mean, of course, it was not a masterpiece whatsoever but, at least, it was better than the preposterous second movie. Obviously, Joe Johnston is no Steven Spielberg but I thought the directing was good enough and it was full of pretty awesome action scenes. Furthermore, the casting composed of Sam Neill, William H. Macy and Téa Leoni did a good job. To be honest, this movie didn´t add much to the whole concept but I think is rather difficult to expand it and, as a result, they pretty much end up repeating basically the same story over and over again (that´s why I don´t really see the point of making a fourth one). To conclude, in spite of the bad word of mouth, I thought it was actually a rather well made and entertaining blockbuster extravaganza and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you enjoyed the previous installments.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 6 months ago on 14 December 2011 08:37
(A review of
Tenderness)
Nowadays, I have Netflix and Popcorn and not only I have since then an endless selection of movies to choose from but, as a result, I have become slightly more picky regarding the movies I watch. Before, I used to watch pretty much anything as long as it was starring one or two actors I was interested in and, as a result, I would sometimes end up watching some really obscure features. This movie was a perfect example and the only reason I watched it was because Russell Crowe was involved. Indeed, between his usual blockbusters, Russell Crowe did this small thriller. Even though it didn’t turn out to be anything really amazing, it still gave an interesting and original perspective on the serial killer genre. Unfortunately, Crowe's characters was not really well developed but since he did all his scenes in only 9 days, that was not surprising. On the other hand, the two main characters were really intriguing and well played by the two young actors. Still, I had some mixed feelings about the whole thing. Indeed, this two screwed up characters were quite fascinating to watch but, many times, I had the feeling that what they did or said was too much plot-driven. And there was also a huge plot-hole. Indeed, during the whole movie, Russell Crowe was chasing them but, eventually, as he tried to trap them, he actually knew exactly where they were going. Seriously, it must have been one of most non-sensical twist I have seen lately. Anyway, to conclude, in spite of these flaws, it was still an intriguing thriller and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 6 months ago on 13 December 2011 12:03
(A review of
The Boondock Saints)
It is typically one of those movies nobody saw when it came out but eventually managed to reach a pretty impressive cult status later on. So, since I kept hearing good things about this flick, I thought I should have a look to see what was all this fuss about. First of all, any movie starring Willem Dafoe should be watched, in my book, and once again, he totally rocked his performance. However, I was not really impressed by Sean Patrick Flanery and Norman Reedus. I mean, they were both all right, I guess, but I wasn't really blown away by their acting skills or their charisma. Furthermore, the action scenes were pretty neat and entertaining but, honestly, the plot was seriously pedestrian and nothing I haven't seen at least 100 times before. What many people don’t know, is that the production for this movie was actually really chaotic. Indeed, the emerging Troy Duffy became suddenly a huge megalomaniac and really messed up his relationship with his producer Harvey Weinstein. Eventually, it would take Duffy another 10 years to come up with another directing effort which would be, unsurprisingly a sequel to his cult classic. Anyway, even though I think it is rather overrated, it remains a well made and entertaining action flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are a fan of this genre.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 6 months ago on 13 December 2011 11:00
(A review of
Looking for Eric)
Back in the 90's, when I was pretty much starting to discover the greatest treasures in motion picture history, Ken Loach was definitely one of my favorite directors but, even though by now I have been following him for about 20 years, I have to admit that it has been a while since he really impressed me. Basically, Loach has always been famous for his heavy social dramas but, this time, he tried some lighter material which might have seemed, at least to him, like a good idea. Unfortunately, even though I really wanted to like this flick, I must admit it was his most unfocused feature I have seen so far. Indeed, they mixed some social drama with some romance, some comedy and even some fantasy and you had some gangsters, some joints, some depression, some football, an ex-wife and of course, Eric Cantona. Honestly, I wasn't convinced by this mix but I still enjoyed the performances (even Eric Cantona was pretty good) and some of the characters were just hilarious. But, as I said before, they just mixed everything together and, in my opinion, the end-result was rather half-baked. Still, a movie directed by Ken Loach is always worth a look and this flick was not an exception.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 6 months ago on 13 December 2011 09:26
(A review of
Shrek Forever After)
It is quite obvious, nowadays, that when Hollywood has found a successful franchise, they will exploit their cash cow forever even if there is nothing more to tell whatsoever. This year (2011), we have seen it with 'Transformers' and 'Pirates of the Carribean'. Here, it was basically the same issue with Shrek. In my opinion, the first installment was pretty good and the second installment was miraculous good as well, maybe even better. But, eventually, the other two installments were just average and they both didn’t have a really interesting plot at all. Before this movie was released, the makers agreed that the previous installment was rather disappointing and they promised that they would provide some improvement but I wasn't really convinced while watching the damned thing. In fact, for the first time, I even started to find Shrek annoying. Indeed, it was already the fourth movie I watched him moaning and whining about his poor life and, this time, it really started to get on my nerves. On the positive side, the animation still looked good, there were some funny jokes and I really enjoyed this new character, Rumpelstiltskin. To conclude, I have to admit it, it was not bad and fairly entertaining so it is still worth a look, but hopefully, they will leave Shrek alone and move on now with something else.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 6 months ago on 12 December 2011 10:46
(A review of
St. Elmo's Fire)
I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but since there was a nice cast, I thought I should check it out. Basically, it is one of those typical Brat pack flicks they made back then in the 80's with an all-star Brat pack cast (Emilio Estevez, Rob Lowe, Andrew McCarthy, Demi Moore, Judd Nelson, Ally Sheedy and even Andie MacDowell). To be honest, I’m not a huge fan of those movies and, in my opinion, they are rather dated. I mean, the characters were certainly likeable and charismatic and it was an interesting time capsule of this time period but a part from that, it was nothing really mind-blowing whatsoever. In typical fashion for this time period, the characters were really self-absorbed and rather shallow and, honestly, I didn't care much about them and their so difficult life. It is interesting to note that Demi Moore had actually a drug problem, much like her character when she was cast in the film. One day, director Joel Schumacher actually demanded that she leave the set because she was so high. Moore eventually had to go through rehab and promise to stay clean in order to play a character with actually had a drug problem. Anyway, to conclude, I have to admit, it remains a rather entertaining flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are nostalgic with this 'golden' decade.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Login
Home
587 Lists
7843 Reviews
Collections