Posted : 13 years, 8 months ago on 11 August 2011 02:38
(A review of
Congo)
Honestly, I wasn't expecting much from this flick. Indeed, since I heard only bad things about this movie, I thought it would be something really bad. Eventually, even though it was indeed pretty average, it was definitely not the worst movie I have ever seen and I was (almost) positively surprised. In my opinion, if you don't take this movie too seriously, it is actually not completely awful and barely enjoyable (even Roger Ebert actually gave it a positive review which would still be a little too generous though). Basically, it is a rather awkward combination of various (better and with a bigger budget) adventure flicks. The main issue is that it came just after ‘Jurassic Park’, another adaptation of a book written by Michael Crichton, which looked really awesome while, here, the special effects were rather ridiculous and pathetic. Eventually, you wonder how Laura Linney's career has been able to recover from this turkey (as a matter of fact, even though it was panned by the critics, it was actually a box-office hit at the time). Anyway, to conclude, it is not one of the worst movies ever made and if you are a fan of B movies, you may actually end up enjoying it but don't expect much from this though.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 8 months ago on 11 August 2011 02:29
(A review of
Forget Paris)
Back in the 80's, Debra Winger was on the A list and she was one of the most wanted actress in the world. But, suddenly, in the mid-90's, she just disappeared which was/is quite a shame. Apparently, it was actually her own choice to stop after making this flick. Honestly, I have my doubts but whatever happened, it definitely managed to kill her career. I mean this was her last flick (she actually appeared in other movies but only 4 in the last 16 years!) and unfortunately it was a flop. Honestly, I think it's too bad because it is actually a pretty good romantic feature. Indeed, I though it was fairly realistic, with some believable 3 dimensional characters and it reminded me of 'When Harry met Sally...' in some way. Even though it was a promising directing debut for Billy Crystal, it was a flop when it was released. A few years later, he would direct the baseball feature ‘61*’ which would be much better received. Anyway, to conclude, even though it is nothing really amazing, it remains a really solid romantic-comedy which should get much more credit and it is is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 8 months ago on 11 August 2011 02:17
(A review of
Thunderball)
Since I always considered Sean Connery to be the best James Bond ever, I was really eager to check this flick. However, in my opinion, it is probably his least impressive Bond flick. I mean, it is rather well made and Sean Connery is awesome as usual but the story was less captivating than the other Bond flicks. Still, apparently, Sean Connery was quite pleased with this flick and it was even his own favorite performance as the most famous spy in the world. Eventually, he will even end up remaking this flick in the 80’s with ‘Never Say Never Again’. Personally, even though I thought it was really neat that Sean Connery decided to play again his most iconic part, I always thought it was a pity that it was a remake and a remake of a rather weak story. Still, it was the most popular Bond movie racking up 140 million ticket sales so those movies were still hugely popular at the time (and with the current revival with Daniel Craig, it will remain so for many years to come). To conclude, even though it is far from being one of the best installments, it remains entertaining and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in the Bond movies.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 8 months ago on 11 August 2011 02:10
(A review of
Sideways)
Since I kept hearing some really good things about this flick, I was really eager to check it out. First of all, following his great performance in 'American Splendor', you can say that with this flick, Paul Giamatti really sealed the deal. From now on, he would be a major actor to reckon with (on the other hand, since then, he hasn’t played many lead parts in fact but he is definitely a highly respected actor). I also thought that Thomas Haden Church was quite amazing (thanks to this movie, he finally had his breakthrough) and together they were just a great duo. To be honest, I don’t think the story was anything really mind-blowing but the whole thing was just very well written and acted. Indeed, Alexander Payne, one of the most intriguing American directors at work nowadays, has once again created some fascinating 3 dimensional characters. If you expect shoot-outs, explosions and chases, you should probably avoid this one but if you are looking for a character driven movie with some great acting, you won’t be disappointed. To conclude, I think it absolutely deserves its reputation and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Alexander Payne’s work.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 8 months ago on 11 August 2011 01:57
(A review of
Jurassic Park)
I must have been 13 or 14 years old when I saw this flick and I had the pleasure to see it in the movie theater when it was released. I must admit it, at the time, I was quite blown away by its visual aspect. I mean, back then, there wasn't such an overdose of CGI like today, back then it was something new and it was just downright impressive. Actually, there were just 6 minutes of CGI and the rest was animatronics, just to give you an idea about the fact that wall-to-wall CGI is absolutely not needed. Anyway, this movie definitely belongs to the biggest classics directed by Spielberg and it was the highest grossing movie ever made until 'Titanic' came out. Still, even though I was completely blown away by the special effects, I still can't say the same thing about the plot and the characters though. I mean, even though the whole thing was very entertaining and definitely kept me on the edge of my seat through most of the duration, it was still nothing extraordinary and all the characters were all really stereotypical and none of them was remotely interesting. But, damned, it was still awe inspiring to see for the very first time ever such realistic dinosaurs on the silver screen. Anyway, to conclude, even though storywise I think it is rather pedestrian, it is still a huge landmark in motion picture history and it is pretty much a must-see.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 8 months ago on 11 August 2011 01:48
(A review of
You Only Live Twice)
Since I always considered Sean Connery to be the best James Bond ever, I was really eager to check this movie. However, in my opinion, it is probably one of his weaker Bond flicks. I mean, it was rather well made and Sean Connery was awesome as usual but the story was less captivating than his other Bond flicks but, at least, it was sligthly better than ‘Thunderball’ which is, in my opinion, the weakest Bond flick starring Sean Connery. At the time, it was already the fifth movie featuring Sean Connery as James Bond and you wonder if he was still enjoying himself. Still, this flick delivered the goods with some cool action scenes and exotic destinations (I especially enjoyed the fact that most of the action was taking place in Japan for once) but it unfortunately they didn’t add much to the James Bond world. I was rather surprised to find out that Roald Dahl, of all people, did write the screenplay and Roald Dahl himself apparently later said that of all the filmed adaptations of his written works, this one was the only one where he liked the end result. Anyway, to conclude, Connery kicks ass as usual and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are a fan of those Bond movies.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 8 months ago on 11 August 2011 12:18
(A review of
The Spirit (2008))
When I first heard about this flick, I was rather excited since I really loved 'Sin City' but later on I heard all the lukewarm critics so I wasn't dying anymore to watch it but still, I thought I should give it a shot. And indeed, the end result was really disappointing. I mean, sure, the movie had some rather visually impressive sequences but then, some other scenes just looked downright embarassing and ridiculous. The story was also really weak, it was nothing original whatsoever and the dialogues were just laughable throughout the whole thing. On the positive side, the cast was pretty good, except for Gabriel Macht and Paz Vega. Indeed, Gabriel Macht didn't have the charisma to pull this off and he gave a rather poor performance. And why on Earth did they pick a Spanish actress to portray a French character?!? Vega didn't look or sound French at all. Anyway, it is quite obvious that they wanted to get the same success they had with 'Sin City' but it didn't really work out, I'm afraid. To conclude, it's a pity because the whole thing really had some potential and even though it was not a total disaster, it was still a major failure so I don't think it is really worth a look.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 8 months ago on 11 August 2011 09:39
(A review of
Booty Call)
I know, it might seem surprising to you, but I really have a weak spot for this flick and it is definitely a guilty pleasure of mine. Of course, before watching the damned thing, I wasn't expecting much but since Jamie Foxx was involved, I thought I should give it a try anyway but I was pretty sure it would be pretty bad. Indeed, the title was lame, the poster was lame and the ratings on Listal and IMDb were just terribly low so it was pretty obvious that the whole thing was going to be a huge waste of time. Well, eventually, completely against my expectations, I was actually pleasantly surprised by this flick and I have to admit that I actually enjoyed the damned thing. I mean, sure, it was nothing really mind-blowing whatsoever but I thought it was actually quite funny and, above all, I was really surprised by the fact that all the characters were actually 3 dimensional and they all felt quite genuine. Obviously, none of them had actually anything really interesting to say but they were really believable and I understood their motivations which were not solely plot-driven like in the other gross-out comedies in the same genre. Anyway, to conclude, it was definitely not a masterpiece and it was really vulgar but I think it was still a decent comedy and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 8 months ago on 10 August 2011 07:09
(A review of
A Cinderella Story)
Nowadays, I have Netflix and Popcorn and not only I have since then an endless selection of movies to chose from but, as a result, I have became slightly more picky regarding the movies I watched. Before, I used to watch pretty much anything as long as it was starring one of two actors I was interested in, sometimes, I would end up watching some really obscure. This movie was a perfect. In this case, I have to admit that I always had a weak spot for Hilary Duff. I mean, sure, she is far from being a great actress but I always thought that she was quite charming. Anyway, by now, I have seen already almost all her movies many flicks and, to honest, she always hows up some very average even very bad movies and a few of them have already ended on my Top 50 worst movies ever made... This movie was a good example. I mean, the story was lame, the acting wa really weak and I was just bored throughout the whole thing. The only positive thing I think of is that it might be enjoyable for young girls between 9 and 14 years old, otherwise you'd better pass on this one.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 8 months ago on 9 August 2011 11:21
(A review of
Hard Eight)
Since I’m huge fan of Paul Thomas Anderson, of course, I had to watch this movie at some point. Apparently, this directing debut was not exactly a pleasant experience for Anderson as he had not much control over it (something that would change from his next movie) and he had to fight really hard to make sure that it wasn’t completely butchered before it was released. Anyway, even if it wasn’t one of his best movies, I still turned out to be a pretty decent watch. Indeed, in spite of a very limited budget, the whole thing was visually pretty neat and there were still some really neat shots which was quite impressive since it was a directing debut. Instead of the usual big stars, the cast was composed of some very good character actors and they all delivered some really strong performances. I must say I was a little bit underwhelmed by the plot or the lack of it but the version I saw was rather short (about 95 minutes) and a longer director's cut might be a better watch. Anyway, to conclude, even though it is a rather obscure feature, I thought it was pretty good and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in PT Anderson’s work.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Login
Home
585 Lists
7803 Reviews
Collections