Login
Home
585 Lists
7788 Reviews
CollectionsTo be honest, I had never heard of this flick before so I had no idea what to expect from the damned thing but since there was a nice cast involved, I thought I might check it out anyway. Eventually, I thought it was a weird movie but not really weird in a good way, I’m afraid. In fact, I thought it was really similar to 'American Beauty'. Basically, Paul Rudd and Parker Posey were standing in for Kevin Spacey and Annette Bening. Both couples went through some middle crisis and both couples went through some major changes in their lifes. Like Spacey’s character, Ruud’s character fell for an underaged girl but, this time around, with a really different outcome. However, whereas 'American Beauty' was sharp and thoughftful, this flick was rather unfocused and shallow. Seriously, during the whole thing, I had no clue where the movie was going. Eventually, I think the purpose of the whole thing was only to show some quirky characters involved in some quirky situations. Anyway, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, since all the actors involved were actually pretty good, I still think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
An average movie
Posted : 13 years, 10 months ago on 28 May 2011 08:27
(A review of The Oh in Ohio)
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A classic
Posted : 13 years, 10 months ago on 26 May 2011 12:52
(A review of Dawn of the Dead (1978))I already saw this movie but since it was a while back and since I had it on DVD, I was really eager to check it out again. Well, to be honest, pretty much like with 'Night of the Living Dead', even though I did like the damned thing, I can't say I thought it was really great though. Sure, I did like how it was sharp with a nice combination of horror, humor and satirical critic on our consumerist society. The main issue was that the acting was rather weak and the directing, with all respect to Romero, was nothing really amazing either. In my opinion, both were actually better in the recent remake. As a matter of fact, I can't actually say which one was better between this original version directed by George A. Romero and the remake directed by Zack Snyder. Indeed, the remake did look better but it still turned out to be a rather standard action flick, lacking the wit and originality of this first version. I guess, pretty much like when 'Night of the Living Dead', came out, it must have been quite a shock for the audience because they never had seen anything like this before. However, I’m afraid it has actually lost most of its impact nowadays. Anyway, to conclude, even if I don’t think it is really such a masterpiece, it still a classic and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
PS : I first saw the US original version and, then, many years later, I saw the European version edited by Dario Argento
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A good movie
Posted : 13 years, 10 months ago on 26 May 2011 11:46
(A review of The Shape of Things (2003))Since I always had a weak spot for Neil LaBute's work, I was really eager to check this flick. Ever since he made the really misguided remake of 'The Wicker Man' with Nicolas Cage, his career has been pretty disappointing but it's a real shame because his movies so far were actually pretty good and this one starring Paul Rudd and Rachel Weisz is a fine example. Obviously, you can see right away that it was an adaptation of a play but I didn't mind. I actually really enjoyed the fact that it was solely based on acting, characters and dialogues, instead of CGI, explosions or action scenes. In fact, it reminded me of 'In the company of men', in the sense that he shows how twisted the human mind can be. Eventually, it was not as a good as 'In the company...' because, even though the plot was quite interesting, it was a little too far-fetched for my taste. I mean, this time, if you told me that this story was based on some real people and events, I would be really skeptical and this unrealistic aspect diminished the impact of this movie. Still, in spite of its flaws, it remains an interesting picture and it is definitely worth a look.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A good movie
Posted : 13 years, 10 months ago on 25 May 2011 01:49
(A review of The Prince of Tides)To be honest, I have nothing against Barbra Streisand but I have never been interested in her work, either in the movie industry or in the music industry but since I always had a weak spot for Nick Nolte, I was still curious about this flick. Eventually, it is a rather odd mix between a pedestrian and rather underwhelming romance and a rather spellbinding portrait of a mentally disturbed man. Indeed, I must say I was quite blown away by Nick Nolte. What a perfomance! It was full of anger, frustration, mayhem and psychological turmoil and it was really nothing short of amazing. Unfortunately, like I mentionned before, the rest of movie was not really good and it even seemed to come from a cheap TV movie. Indeed, the whole romance angle about the psychiatrist falling in love with her patient is so overdone and, honestly, I’m pretty sure the movie would have worked fine without the love story. It is as if they didn’t trust their viewers so they added a romance to make sure they could swallow the more psychological stuff. Still, in spite of its flaws, and above all thanks to Nolte, there remains something fascinating about it and the whole thing is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Barbra Streisand’s work.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A very good movie
Posted : 13 years, 10 months ago on 25 May 2011 01:31
(A review of Gods and Monsters)Since I kept hearing some pretty good things about this flick, I was really eager to check this flick. Indeed, even though Ian McKellen is above all famous for his roles in the X-men and Lord of the rings franchises, he is actually much more than that and these movies only focus on his amazing charisma but don’t really display the depth of his acting range. This movie is a fine example. Indeed, McKellen gave here an amazing performance, so full of depth and sensitivity that he fully became the character who was quite a fascinating figure. On the other hand, Brendan Fraser tried again to play something else than his usual morons but he didn't really convince me. I mean, he should be praised for trying something else but I seriously doubt that he was a real asset for this production. Anyway, thankfully, it didn't ruin the movie at all and the story was nothing short of fascinating. To conclude, it’s a shame this movie seems to be a little bit forgotten nowadays because it is a real gem and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you want to see Ian McKellen shinning in something else than your usual blockbusters.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 13 years, 10 months ago on 25 May 2011 01:23
(A review of Ruthless People)Honestly, I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but since I always had a weak spot for Danny DeVito, I thought I might as well give it a try. The interesting thing about this flick is that it was the first ‘straight’ comedy (meaning = not a parody) directed by the trio Jim Abrahams, David Zucker and Jerry Zucker and, if I’m not mistaken, it was quite a success when it was released. Personally, I think that Danny DeVito is a very funny guy, it is always a blast when he is involved in a comedy and it is always pretty neat when the guy is playing the lead for once. This flick is basically a black comedy which goes way over the top, little too much for my taste in fact. Obviously, we shouldn’t except anything subtle coming from the guys responsible for ‘Airplane!’. Still, it is not bad at all and, even though the whole thing was rather pedestrian, it was still quite entertaining. It would be the last time this trio would make a movie together and they had some various amount of success as solo directors afterwards. To conlude, it is actually a decent comedy and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like DeVito like I do.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 13 years, 10 months ago on 25 May 2011 01:09
(A review of Shanghai Knights)By now, I have seen pretty much all the US productions starring Jackie Chan and, honestly, most of them are pretty disappointing. Even the 'Rush Hour' franchise was nothing great in my opinion and the fact that the last installment was quite a flop suggests that I wasn't the only one thinking that way. There is one exception though. Indeed, even though the "Rush hour" movies are more popular and succesfull, I actually enjoyed more the "Shanghai" flicks. Indeed, even though the whole thing sounded quite silly on paper and Westerns are terribly unpopular nowadays, those flicks were actually quite enjoyable, at least I thought that they were quite entertaining. Obviously, this sequel was slightly more underwhelming than the first one, it was still not bad at all and Owen Wilson and Jackie Chan remain a very good combo. To move the action to England was not really a great idea, but, surprisingly, the plot while still being really silly, was still entertaining enough. It is actually quite a shame that Owen Wilson doesn't do more action comedies like this one. Anyway, to conclude, even though it is nothing amazing whatsoever, I still think it is worth a look, especially if you're only looking for some mindless entertainment.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A good movie
Posted : 13 years, 10 months ago on 25 May 2011 01:00
(A review of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory)First of all, I haven't seen the original version, so I can't compare both of them. Some people love this version and some people hate but it was a big success at the box-office anyway. Personally, I did help that this flick was made before we got an overdose of the Burton-Depp mania and I personnaly enjoyed it. Indeed, it was visually impressive and I thought Johnny Depp delivered the goods, as expected. Still, it is not one of their best efforts, that's for sure. I think the issue is that they didn't put much heart and soul in this adaptation and you miss something more challenging. It feels like they went like this 'I'm going to put some weird decors, it will look awesome! And you should look like some weird guy, a little bit like Michael Jackson!' but they didn't really went much further than this. With 'Big Fish', Tim Burton's previous directing effort, I thought I was watching something pretty deep, inspiring, thoughtful and full of imagination, at least, that's what I felt. With this, I thought I was watching an entertaining and well made commercial feature but not much more than that, I'm afraid. To conclude, it is nothing great but it remains an enjoyable blockbuster and I still think it is worth a look, especially if you are interested in Tim Burton's work.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A good movie
Posted : 13 years, 10 months ago on 25 May 2011 12:53
(A review of Stage Fright)Honestly, I wasn't sure what to expect from this flick but since I'm a huge fan of Alfred Hitchock's work, I was really eager to check it this one out. Eventually, it is not among his most famous work (a year later, he would release the much more impressive 'Strangers on a train', a movie that can be really considered as a classic). An interesting aspect of this film wad the fact that it seemed to be one of his older movies because after making many movies in the US (at the time, he had been living and working in America for already a decade), Hitchcok was back in England and the fact that the scale was also rather small made me believed that this movie was much older than it actually was. Anyway, even though we could have expected a little more fireworks between two monsters like Alfred Hitchcock and Marlene Dietrich, the story was still quite entertaining and, as expected with Alfred Hitchcock, the directing was top notch. To conclude, even though it is far from being a a masterpiece, it is still a solid thriller and it is definitely worth a look especially if you're interested in Hitchcock's work.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 13 years, 10 months ago on 25 May 2011 12:46
(A review of The Man with the Golden Gun)Honestly, I always had a hard time with Roger Moore as James Bond. Indeed, in my opinion, even though the guy had a good run as the most famous spy that was ever created, I always thought he gave the weakest interpretation. Basically, even though he should be praised for managing in creating his own version of the character, the whole thing always seemed like a big joke with him and I never thought I was watching a lethal spy. On the other hand, I have to admit it, this was probably one of the coolest titles in this franchise so I was quite eager to check it out. Eventually, it was pretty much your typical James Bond flick with the usual gadgets, action scenes and the usual bimbos (oh sorry! James Bond girls is the official term...). I must admit that this flick was one of the best with Roger Moore, probably thanks to the involvement of Christopher Lee who was always awesome when portraying some vilain. To conclude, I don't think it is anything amazing, it is not even near the best James Bond flicks but neverthless, it remains a solid installment and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry