Login
Home
586 Lists
7821 Reviews
CollectionsA good movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 4 May 2011 02:32
(A review of The Fourth Protocol (1987))Honestly, I had no idea what to expect from this flick but since I have a weak spot for Michael Caine, I thought I might as well give it a try. To be honest, it is basically one of his many obscure flicks (the guy has made about 120 movies over 7 decades already) but I was actually positively surprised by this feature. Indeed, Michael Caine is definitely an amazing and usually underrated actor and this movie was basically a good old spy flick and Caine gave a really solid performance. On top of that, the directing was decent and the story was really entertaining. In fact, I discovered later on that it was an adaptation of a book written by Frederick Forsyth and the guy also wrote âThe Day of the Jackalâ which turned out to be one of the best thrillers I have ever seen. To be honest, this movie never reaches the level of awesomness displayed by âThe Day of the Jackalâ but it was still a fairly realistic thriller and it was definitely entertaining. To conclude, even though it is not really a masterpiece, it is still a really solid thriller and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 4 May 2011 02:27
(A review of Never Say Never Again)For me, Sean Connery will always remain the ultimate and best James Bond ever. I mean, sure, Daniel Craig is a very good actor (actually better than Connery) but his version of Mr Bond would never beat the original one, at least, that's my opinion. Anyway, all in all, thanks to this movie, it was definitely quite awesome to see Sean Connery back in his iconic role. Obviously, the story, which has always been a weak point in this franchise, was not really impressive. Indeed, even though there were plenty of entertaining scenes, it was also a little bit too long and tended to drag sometimes. Above all, it was a real pity that it had to be a remake, especially of 'Thunderball' which was absolutely not one of the best James Bond installments. Apparently, Kevin McClory, the producer of this movie, was also producer and co-writer of 'Thunderball'. Later, he would win a legal battle against Ian Fleming to make his own Bond movie and the settlement stipulated that it had to be a remake of 'Thunderball'. Still, above all thanks to Sean Connery, I enjoyed most of it and I think it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 4 May 2011 02:19
(A review of Hannibal Rising)Honestly, I wasnât sure what to expect from this flick. I mean, on one hand, the whole thing definitely had some potential but, on the other hand, it seemed also like a rather pathetic attempt to make some quick money from a famous brand like Hannibal Lecter. Eventually, even though it was definitely not a masterpiece, I have to admit it that, to my surprise, it was much better than I expected. Indeed, I thought that Gaspard Ulliel was a very interesting choice to play the infamous killer and the guy gave a decent performance. It was the same thing with Gong Li, she is such a a fascinating actress and she really raised the level of the whole thing. Furthermore, I thought that the directing was pretty good and the story was actually rather entertaining. Eventually, the main issue is that, this time, Lecter was the main character so they didnât really dare to show him solely as a total psycho so, therefore, there was this awkward attempt to make the viewers sympathize with what he was going through but it wasnât the best approach, Iâm afraid. Anyway, to conclude, I still think it is actually a decent prequel and it is definitely worth a look especially if you loved the previous movies about Hannibal Lecter.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A good movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 4 May 2011 02:16
(A review of Flesh & Blood)I already saw this movie but since it was a while back and since I have it on DVD, I thought I might as well check it out again. For Paul Verhoeven, this movie was definitely a milestone since it was the first movie he made outside the Netherlands and it was just before he went to Hollywood directing such movies like 'Robocop', 'Total Recall' or 'Basic Instinct'. Basically, it was quite an ambitious international production and you had the usual Verhoeven trademarks : Sex, Violence and good old Rutger Hauer. This time, the setting was the Medieval age and I thought it was a great idea to mix this time period with the style of this particular director. Sure, I have to admit it, the story was actually pretty thin and the whole thing was actually nothing great whatsoever but I thought it was still fairly entertaining. In my opinion, the biggest issue was that all the characters were barely developed, even if Rutger Hauer and Jennifer Jason Leigh managed to make the most of this material. Apparently, Paul Verhoeven and Rutger Hauer were constantly arguing while making this movie and, as a result, they would never make another movie together which is quite a shame since they had made some terrific features together. Anyway, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, it was still a solid medieval flick and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre or if you are interested in Paul Verhoeven's work.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A good movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 4 May 2011 02:10
(A review of The Big Easy)I wasnât really sure what to expect from this movie but since Roger Ebert really loved it (he even chose it as one of the best movies of 1986), I was really eager to check it out. Eventually, I thought it was pretty good, even though, to be honest, I wasn't as enthousiast as Roger Ebert. Something I quite enjoyed was the fact that Dennis Quaid was trying something else with this flick and he definitely provided a good and refreshing performance. At the time, Ellen Barkin was more of less specialized in this kind of sexy femmes fatales and I thought she had some great chemistry with Dennis Quaid. On top of that, the directing was pretty solid, above all, the mood was very well done and New Orleans was in fact an actual protagonist in this story. Eventually, to be honest, I didn't think the story was really amazing, it was a little bit too pedestrian and predictable for my taste but it was still entertaining enough. To conclude, even though I donât think it was really a masterpiece, it was still a really solid film noir and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 4 May 2011 02:06
(A review of Polish Wedding (1998))Since it is a rather obscure feature, I wasnât sure what to expect from this flick but since there was a nice cast, I was quite eager to check it out. Unfortunately, it turned out to be rather disappointing. I mean, sure, there was an interesting cast (Claire Danes, Gabriel Byrne, Lena Olin) and Claire Danes was really charming as usual but it was certainly not enough to save this movie. Eventually, I thought that the directing was rather average and the story was not really entertaining. In my opinion, the biggest mistake they made was to try to create some quirky characters but those characters turned out to be eventually rather obnoxious. Eventually, this movie would be the only directing effort from Theresa Connelly. Apparently, she has a Polish background and she might have thought that she would give a charming portrait of the Polish culture with this movie. Unfortunately, this was pretty much a failure as the Polish (or American Polish) and their supposedly whimsical way of life and thinking either bored or annoyed me. To conclude, even though the whole thing actually had some potential, it was eventually rather underwhelming and I donât think it is really worth a look.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 4 May 2011 02:02
(A review of Octopussy)The other day, I noticed something funny. Indeed, even though I always considered Roger Moore the weakest James Bond, or at least, the least interesting one, I came to realize that I actually didn't really dislike any James Bond installments involving this guy (on the other hand, none of them are among my favorites either). Anyway, coming back to our main feature, to be honest, the best thing about this movie was the title. Iâm just kidding, in fact, for a James Bond flick, it was not bad and I thought that it was a decent James Bond flick with the usual tricks and treats. Indeed, there are the usual effects and gimmicks and if you don't expect much before watching it, it is rather entertaining. Back then, Roger Moore was not supposed to come back as James Bond but, the very same year, a competing studio was releasing âNever Say Never Againâ starring Sean Connery, the original James Bond performer and they didnât want to gamble with a new actor so Moore still came back after all. Personally, I preferred âNever Say Never Againâ because Sean Connery was just so awesome but their plan did work as âOctopussyâ did slightly better at the box-office. Anyway, to conclude, I thought it was a decent installment and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 4 May 2011 01:55
(A review of The Sentinel)I wasnât really sure what to expect from this flick but since there was a pretty cool cast, I was quite eager to check it out. Eventually, there were indeed some good things and some other things which were not so great. The good stuff : the whole thing looked good and I thought it was rather well directed. There was also a nice and competent cast (Michael Douglas, Kiefer Sutherland, Kim Basinger), I especially enjoyed to see Michael Douglas and Kiefer Sutherland together and I thought they made a really interesting duo. Kim Basinger was also a neat choice to play a very charming First Lady. On the other hand, even though it was a nice surprise to see Eva Longoria in a thriller (she just had her breakthrough at the time thanks to âDesperate Housewivesâ), and even though she did her best, I thought that her character was rather poorly developed and Iâm not sure if she was really a good choice for this part. On top of that, the story was not really impressive and it was actually rather far-fetched. Still, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, I think it is a rather entertaining thriller and I believe it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A very good movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 4 May 2011 01:48
(A review of Notes on a Scandal)I wasnât really sure what to expect from this flick but since I always had a weak spot for Cate Blanchett, I was really eager to check it out. Cate Blanchett is definitely one of the best actresses at work nowadays and if you're not convinced yet, you should definitely watch this feature. Indeed, she gave a rather impressive performance and she managed to give her character some very interesting layers. Concerning Judi Dench, I wasnât completely sure, to be honest. I mean, she also delivered a fine performance, no doubt about it and with Blanchett, they provided a very interesting duo on the screen. Itâs just that the main character was already going through a lot in this movie and to add this old spinster with some lesbian feelings was a little bit too much to deal with. I mean, you already have to deal with one flawed but very interesting woman so to add another one also with some major issues was maybe too much to handle for a drama like this one. To conclude, in spite of its flaws, it was still a fascinating character study going pretty deep into the human pyschology and I think it is definitely worth a look.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 4 May 2011 01:42
(A review of The Witches (1990))I wasnât really sure what to expect from this flick but since it has a pretty good reputation, I thought I might as well check it out. To be honest, I have never been a huge fan of Roald Dahl's work and I never really enjoyed the movies adapted from his books. I mean, some of them were pretty good but none of them really blew me away (except 'The Fantastic Mr Fox) and this feature was not an exception. I mean, sure, it's not bad at all and there was indeed an interesting creepy mood, something you wouldnât expect in a family feature like this one. However, to be honest, I didn't think the story was really entertaining whatsoever and like most of Roald Dahl's stories, I was rather bored during the whole thing. I donât know, I always had a hard time to connect with his tales but, at least, Nicolas Roeg had an interesting directing style and Angelica Huston was perfectly cast (in fact, Roald Dahl himself was really pleased because she had always been a personal favorite for the role). To conclude, even though I didnât like it much, it was still an interesting watch and it is worth a look especially if you enjoy Roald Dhal's books more than I do.
0 comments, Reply to this entry