Login
Home
581 Lists
7718 Reviews
CollectionsAn old classic
Posted : 13 years, 9 months ago on 23 March 2011 03:02
(A review of Odd Man Out (1947))To be honest, it is a rather obscure flick and I had no idea what to expect from this flick but since it was on the â1001 Movies You Must See Before You Dieâ list, I was quite eager to check this flick. Eventually, even though I thought it was indeed pretty good, I failed to see what was so great about it. Apparently, I have read somewhere that it is even Roman Polanskiâs favorite movie of all time. Basically, it is a very old movie and the most striking element about this movie is how dark and gloomy the whole thing was. It was still pretty good though , especially if you compare it to the garbage we usually get nowadays. One of the biggest asset in this flick was James Mason who was fine here (Mason himself thought it was the best performance of his career) and it was pretty neat to see him playing the lead for once. The directing by Carol Reed was decent and, eventually, a few years later, Reed would make âThe Third Manâ which would get much more noticed than this flick. Anyway, to conclude, even though I didnât really blow me away, it was still a decent flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 13 years, 9 months ago on 23 March 2011 02:56
(A review of Hidalgo)To be honest, I wasn't expecting much before watching this movie but since I have a weak spot for Viggo Mortensen, I thought I should give it a try. First of all, one of the great things about âThe Lord of the Ringsâ trilogy is that it launched the careers of many of the actors involved and, thanks to those movies, Viggo Mortensen basically became a star overnight. It was even more impressive when you know the fact that Mortensen actually replaced Stuart Townsend after filming began and he didnât have any time to rehearse or to prep himself for the role. Anyway, after the massive success of the LOTR trilogy, Viggo Mortensen became immensely popular, the producers were quick to cash-in on his newfound popularity and released as soon as possible a new blockbuster starring Mortensen on his own this time. Eventually, even though the whole thing was obviously very predictable and pretty generic, I thought it is was actually rather entertaining. On top of that, Viggo Mortensen is always charismatic and the whole thing looked pretty decent. To conclude, even though it is a rather average popcorn flick, I still think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A very good movie
Posted : 13 years, 9 months ago on 23 March 2011 02:52
(A review of Changeling)To be honest, I wasn't so sure what to expect from this flick. I mean, on one hand, it was very well received but, on the other hand, it pretty much sounded like your typical drama based on actual events about a mother looking for her missing son. Still, I expected it to be decent but, to be honest, it was even better than that. Indeed, it was still about a mother looking for her son but Eastwood went way beyond this theme and they ended up with a heartbreaking drama mixed up with a fascinating thriller. Concerning Angelina Jolie, to be honest, I wasn't so sure. I mean, she did a decent job, probably giving one of her best performances, but it was also rather distracting to have this huge star playing this woman because, in my opinion, even though the main character was indeed interesting, I think that what happened around her was even more spellbinding to watch. Eventually, the stars here were actually the very strong script and the expert directing by Eastwood. The same year, he also directed the terribly overrated 'Gran Torino' which would be remembered as the better feature but I think it is a mistake because this movie was easily his best directing effort to come out in 2008. To conclude, don't be fooled by the seemingly pedestrian plot, it is a spellbinding flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested by Clint Eastwood's work.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A good movie
Posted : 13 years, 9 months ago on 23 March 2011 02:45
(A review of Who's That Knocking at My Door?)I already saw this movie but since it was a while back and since I had it on DVD , I was quite eager to check it out again. First of all, Martin Scorsese is regarded as one of the best directors ever, I think he definitely deserves this honor and I always been a big fan of his work. He started his illustrious career with this flick which he made already more than 40 years ago. To be honest, even though I thought it was a decent watch, I don't think it was really a masterpiece, especially if you would compare it to his numerous classics such as 'Raging Bull', 'Taxi driver' and ''Goodfellas'. Eventually, it was slightly boring at times and it is pretty obvious that Scorsese was still learning his skills. I mean, the characters really felt genuine but they were not really fascinating. Still, you could already recognize his touch and the whole thing definitely had some mesmerizing qualities. I wonder if Scorsese had been inspired by the French New Wave and I'm not surprised that John Cassavetes liked this movie. Anyway, to conclude, even though it was honestly nothing really mind-blowing, it was still an interesting directing debut and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you're interested in Scorsese's work.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 13 years, 9 months ago on 23 March 2011 02:32
(A review of Changing Times)Since I have a weak for AndrĂ© TĂ©chinĂ©âs work, I though I should check this flick. TĂ©chinĂ© is actually not really famous here on Listal but he is actually one of the best living French directors. On top of that, you had GĂ©rard Depardieu and Catherine Deneuve, the two of greatest actors that ever lived, so you should be expecting something quite impressive, I sure was. Unfortunately, I thought the whole thing was rather disappointing and I would go as far as saying that it was the least satisfying movie I have seen so far directed by AndrĂ© TĂ©chinĂ©. I mean, in fact, it was far from being a bad movie. Indeed, like everything else done by this director, the whole thing was well done and , with such actors, of course the performances were fine but the story was not really fascinating and I didn't care much about the characters or what they were going through. Above all, I thought that GĂ©rard Depardieu's character was rather pathetic and slighty annoying so it was rather difficult to root for the guy. Anyway, to conclude, even though I thought it was slightly disappointing, it was still a decent drama and I think it is worth a look though, especially if you are interested in French movies.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 13 years, 9 months ago on 23 March 2011 01:51
(A review of Flyboys )Not to be confused with âThe Flyboysâ released in 2008. To be honest, I wasnât really sure what to expect from this flick but since I have a weak spot for James Franco, I thought I might as well check it out. First of all, have you noticed the amound of work done by James Franco?!? Indeed, he has already played in more than 60 movies, directed already a dozen of features, written several books, followed some classes in UCLA and NY, teached as well in NYU, was involved in some art projects,⊠The guy probably doesnât sleep much, I guess. Anyway, as a result, not all his movies are amazing and this movie was a perfect example. Indeed, I really like James Franco and there were some nice aerial action scenes but that was it, Iâm afraid. Indeed, the story and the directing were not really entertaining enough and, on top of that, the characters and the story were just full of clichĂ©s. To conclude, even though it wasnât really awful, I thought it was pretty average and I donât think it is really worth a look, except maybe if you are a die-hard fan of James Francoâs work.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 13 years, 9 months ago on 23 March 2011 11:22
(A review of Psycho)After delivering his most popular movie so far (âGood Will Huntingâ), Gus Van Sant managed to deliver his least popular directing effort. Well, to be honest, I donât think it was really so bad after all. I mean, obviously, when you watch this movie, you wonder if it was really necessary. But, then, you could say the same thing about 99.9% of the remakes out here. If you ever plan to watch the damned thing, my advise would be to just let it go and simply  give it a try. Anyway, even though it might sound surprising, I thought it was actually not bad at all. I have to admit it it, it probably did help that I hadnât watch the original for ages but it is and remains a really entertaining and fascinating story. Of course, Vince Vaughn was not as impressive as Anthony Perkins was but I think he actually delivered a decent job. In this movie, however, the best actor was ultimately William H. Macy who gave a very good performance. Eventually, the only real flaw in my opinion was that you could figure out what was going with Norman Bates way too easily. Indeed, my wife actually never saw the original version but she figured it out after seeing Norman Bates for only 5 minutes on the screen. A part from that, the movie was actually rather enjoyable and even though I am obviously in the minority, I think it was a rather interesting experiment.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 13 years, 9 months ago on 22 March 2011 03:39
(A review of Critters)I remember it very well, when I was a kid, I used to go to the movie rental shop and I would see the poster for this movie. Back then, I thought it looked awesome and I thought it must be really terrifying. Eventually, almost 20 years later, I finally saw the damned thing and, to be honest, I was rather amazed about how underwhelming the whole thing was. I mean, when I was a kid, back in those days, I didnât see this flick but I did watch âGremlinsâ which was pretty awesome but this flick was just a cheap rip-off. Apparently, even though most of us do believe that this flick was inspired by the success of âGremlinsâ, the director Stephen Herek has argued that the script was written long before âGremlinsâ went into production and subsequently underwent rewrites to reduce the apparent similarities between the two films. Eventually, the whole thing had some potential, it was still quite watchable but still rather forgettable. Eventually, the best thing about this flick was and still is the poster, even after all these years. Anyway, if you're into this kind of things, you may enjoy it more than I did but otherwise, you should rather avoid it.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 13 years, 9 months ago on 22 March 2011 03:16
(A review of Critters 2: The Main Course)When I was a kid, without daring watching the damned thing, I thought that âCrittersâ looked awesome and pretty scary. Eventually, it took me about 20 years to finally watch it and I have to admit that it was rather harmless and pretty lame after all. So, you wonder why I would bother watch the sequel in this case? Well, the whole reason I ended up watching this franchise is because I bought a (very cheap) dvd box with all the movies. Anyway, coming back to our main feature, even though the first installment was not exactly a huge box-office success, it was still quite predictable that a sequel would be made but was it really necessary? Anyway, it was really similar to the first one, plotwise, budgetwise and the entertainment provided. In my opinion, it was not really worse but not really better either. This time, they tried to add a space element but it was so cheesy, it turned to be more laughable than anything else. At least, once again, the poster was once again pretty badass and probably by far the best element about the damned thing. Anyway, if you're into this kind of things, you may enjoy it more than I did but otherwise, you should rather avoid it.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 13 years, 9 months ago on 22 March 2011 03:02
(A review of Mad Dog Time)Honestly, it is quite an obscure flick and I had no idea what to expect here but since there was a pretty cool cast, I thought I might as well give it a try. Apparently, not only virtually nobody went to see this flick but it was also a huge critical flop when it was released. Indeed, it was so bad that Roger Ebert really despised the whole thing and he even choose it as the worst movie of the year. To be honest, even though I thought it was indeed pretty weak, I didnât think it was so awful and it didnât even end up in my list of the Top 10 worst movies released in 1996. Even so, there is no doubt that this movie was indeed rather messy. But, at least, there was indeed a nice cast even if they must have regretted to be attached to this project (Ellen Barkin, Gabriel Byrne, Richard Dreyfuss, Jeff Goldblum, Diane Lane, Burt Reynolds, Kyle MacLachlan, Angie Everhart,...). Anyway, the directing was very average and the story was neither really dramatic, funny or entertaining whatsoever. To conclude, even though I have seen worse, the whole thing was pretty weak and I donât think it is worth a look.
0 comments, Reply to this entry