Posted : 14 years ago on 31 March 2011 11:24
(A review of
Taboo)
I remember it very well, I actually saw the damned thing in the movie theater when it was released. Indeed, back then, I had never seen something similar before and I was quite blown away by the whole thing. First of all, I thought it was a really gorgeous movie and all the members of the cast gave some very good performances. Above all, I thought that the story was just fascinating. Indeed, by now, I have seen my share of samurai features but the whole homosexual angle was just so unexpected but also really refreshing. The only minor critic I might have is that the whole thing was rather sluggish towards the end but that was something rather minor. By now, it is only the 3rd movie directed by Oshima that I have seen so far (including also ‘Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence’ and ‘Ai no corrida’) and it’s too bad that I haven’t seen more movies from this Japanese master. Unfortunately, Oshima got a severe stroke in the 90’s, a stroke from which he never fully recovered and this movie would be his last directing effort. Anyway, to conclude, I thought it was quite mesmerizing and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Asian movies.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 14 years ago on 30 March 2011 12:46
(A review of
W.)
Honestly, I wasn't sure what to expect from this flick but it sounded intriguing and I always had a weak spot for Oliver Stone's work so I was really eager to check it out. Eventually, I really liked the damned thing. First of all, I have to make something clear, I'm really a sucker for movies about politics so the main subject was really interesting to me. However, the first thing that stroke me was Josh Brolin who gave here a great performance. Only for him, it is really worth watching this movie. What was also very interesting is that they managed to give some nuances about W. Bush and even though you can see that he is not really bright, you can't avoid feel sympathy for the guy and I think it shows how well done this movie was. It's too bad the movie didn't keep its edge and lost focus later on. For example, they show his whole journey from Yale student to Texas governor but, then, they abruptly stopped. Why not showing his first very controversial presidential election? or 09/11? So, it was flawed but Oliver Stone definitely succeeded in creating a rather fascinating portrait of someone who pretty much looked like an incompetent moron to me. To conclude, even though it is indeed not entirely successful, I do think it is actually underrated and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 14 years ago on 30 March 2011 12:38
(A review of
Free Money)
I wasn’t really expecting much from this flick but since there was a pretty cool cast involved, I thought I might as well check it out. Indeed, with such a cast (Marlon Brando, Donald Sutherland, Charlie Sheen, Thomas Haden Church, Mira Sorvino, Martin Sheen, David Arquette,...), there was definitely some potential to deliver something pretty neat but unfortunately, the end-result turned out to pretty disappointing, I’m afraid. I mean, sure, there were , here and there a few good jokes but the whole thing was eventually rather lame. The saddest thing was to see the great Brando in yet another turkey. Indeed, after almost 10 years, he finally made a come-back with ‘A Dry White Season’ (which I still haven’t watched at this point) and, after this movie, he would make 7 other movies before passing away but almost all these movies turned out to be terribly weak. Indeed, this movie was probably the weakest one he made towards the end of his career, just behind ‘The Island of Dr. Moreau’ which was arguably the worst movie ever made by this great actor. Anyway, to conclude, this movie was really weak and I think you should just avoid it, even if you are a big fan of Brando’s work.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 14 years ago on 29 March 2011 08:00
(A review of
Winged Creatures)
Since this movie had some rather poor ratings, I wasn’t expecting much from the damned thing but since there was a pretty cool cast involved, I thought I might as well give it a try. Well, to be honest, I was actually positively surprised and I thought it was pretty good. Indeed, this movie was basically some typical hyperlink tale, mixing several tales making sure that all these tales are coming together at the end. Personally, I always had a weak spot for this genre and I thought that this story was rather intense and quite heartbreaking. As I mentioned, there is a very interesting cast ([Link removed - login to see][Link removed - login to see][Link removed - login to see]Forest Whitaker, Guy Pearce, Dakota Fanning, Jeanne Tripplehorn, Embeth Davidtz, Jackie Earle Haley, Jennifer Hudson, ...) and they all gave some good performances. In fact, concerning Kate Beckinsale, even though she has always been lovely to look at, she also always ends up in some rather underwhelming movies but this feature was definitely an exception. Concerning the director Rowan Woods, after ‘Little Fish’, it was another decent directing effort but, unfortunately, he would spend the rest of his career working on some rather obscure TV-shows. Anyway, to conclude, even though this movie wasn’t really a masterpiece, I thought it was a decent drama and I think it is actually definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 14 years ago on 28 March 2011 04:53
(A review of
Brute Force)
Honestly, I wonder how I actually ended up watching this flick. I guess I was mostly interested because Burt Lancaster was involved. Indeed, it is a rather old movie (almot 70 years old as a matter of fact) that Burt Lancaster made just at the beginning of his career. If I’m not mistaken, it was in fact his 2nd movie and it is in fact rather rare that an actor, especially back in those days, would start right away with a lead part. On the other hand, if you are awesome like Burt Lancaster, why shouldn’t you? Anyway, coming back to our main feature, I thought it was a decent film noir (Jules Dassin made several of them during the postwar period) bu even though it was certainly entertaining, I can’t say I was really blown away by the whole thing. Indeed, it must have seemed pretty badass when it was released at the end of the 40’s but, in the last 70 years, they have made many jail dramas who has left a bigger impression on me. To conclude, I think it was not bad at all and I still think it is worth a look, especially if you're interested in the old classics.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 14 years ago on 28 March 2011 04:46
(A review of
History of the World: Part I (1981))
Mel Brooks is basically one of these directors I was really interested in at first but after watching most of his movies (I think by now I'm only missing 3 of his movies), I came to the conclusion that I'm not really a huge fan of his work, except for 'The Producers'. Still, since I really loved the concept for this movie, my expectations were pretty high on this one. Unfortunately, once again I was rather disappointed and the whole thing really felt like a missed opportunity. I mean, sure, there were a here and there a few good jokes but the whole thing was too messy and, to be honest, I thought it was sometimes even rather lame. It was just too bad because this movie had some potential. 6 years later, Mel Brooks would come back with ‘Spaceballs’ which would turn out ot be a massive cult-classic but, to be honest, I liked it even less than this flick so I guess Mel Brooks is just not for me. Still, coming back to our main feature, even though I thought it was disappointing, I have to admit it that it was still a decent watch and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are a fan of Mel Brooks’s work.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 14 years ago on 28 March 2011 04:29
(A review of
The Libertine (2004))
At the time of its release, it seemed to be a rather minor effort for Johnny Depp but if you compare it to what he has been making during the last 4 years, it was actually not bad at all which is actually rather sad. Anyway, since I was still a huge Johnny Depp fan, I had to watch this movie at some point. So, sure, it was not one of his best movies but there were some pretty good things though. For example, the whole thing looked quite gorgeous and Depp was, as usual, very good. But, eventually, to be honest, I wasn't really captivated by the story. I mean, I do have a weak spot for dark characters who happens to be a little bit perverted but, after the Marquis de Sade, it all seems like a déjà-vu. Still, it is obvious that Johnny Depp had some fun playing such a dark and immoral character (Captain Jack Sparrow seems pretty much like an innocent creature compared to the Earl of Rochester). To conclude, even though it is rather obscure and not really an amazing feature, I still think worth a look though, especially if you are interested in Johnny Depp’s work.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 14 years ago on 28 March 2011 04:08
(A review of
Disturbia)
Honestly, I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but since the buzz around it was rather intriguing, I was quite eager to check it out. Apparently, many viewers were bothered that the whole thing was basically a remake of ‘Rear Window’ (a movie I finally watched in the mean time) but I didn’t really mind. Anyway, the story wasn't bad and I thought that Shia Labeouf was pretty good. Basically, LaBeouf was hand-picked by Steven Spielberg himself since he was impressed by his performance in ‘Holes’. This movie, in turn, convinced Spielberg that LaBeouf could handle the action starring roles in ‘Transformers’ and ‘Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull’. Fast forward 7 years later, and Shia LaBeouf has now gone from box-office darling to weird insecure nutjob (some might even call him an attention whore). Anyway, coming back to our main feature, I thought that the concept was great as it was a real interesting idea to have your main character being a teenager under house-arrest. Unfortunately, the end was a real let down and it pretty much ruined the movie for me. Still, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, I think it was quite enjoyable and it is definitely worth a look.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 14 years ago on 28 March 2011 03:58
(A review of
O)
The late Roger Ebert was my all-time favorite movie critic and 95% of the time, I agreed with him or I was able see from where he was coming from but, sometimes, for some of his reviews, we really had some different opinions. This movie is pretty good example. I mean, I really wanted to like this movie but I wasn’t able to connect with this flick at all. Indeed, back in the 90’s, there was this fad of making some modern adaptations of some plays written by Shakespeare (see also ‘Romeo + Juliet’ or ‘Hamlet’ from 2000) and, to be honest, I never cared for this phenomenom and since none of these movies became really succesfull, I guess I wasn’t the only one to feel that way. Anyway, coming back to our main feature, the whole thing just seemed way too convoluted and, in my opinion, the dialogs and the situations just didn't fit the setting at all. At least, I have to admit that Josh Harnett gave a pretty good performance but, a part from that, there was nothing much interesting to see here. To conclude, even though the whole thing had some potential, I didn’t really like it and I don’t think it is really worth a look.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 14 years ago on 28 March 2011 03:51
(A review of
Rush Hour 2)
It was a while since I saw this movie so I thought I should give it another shot. Well, I can't say I really enjoyed those 'Rush Hour' movies, that's for sure. I mean, I have to admit it, the first one was not bad but it was still definitely nothing great either. Eventually, since the first movie had some success, they basically repeated exactly the same formula without adding anything original at all. Even though it was rather predictable, they moved the action this time to Hong-Kong, which was actually a good idea, but, for some reasons, only half of it was shot there and, then, they moved back to the US which was rather disappointing. The other thing that bothered me was the fact that there was absolutely no consistency whatsoever concerning the Chinese characters. Indeed, sometimes, they would speak Chinese together (which made more sense) but, then, for some reasons, they would suddenly speak English to one another for no reason. At least, they finally added some nice ladies to the story (Roselyn Sanchez and Ziyi Zhang) and they were both quite charming but their characters were both seriously underwhelming. Eventually, aside from the boring story, I thought that there was also barely any chemistry between Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker this time around and I'm really amazed that this movie was such a box-office success when it was released.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Login
Home
585 Lists
7793 Reviews
Collections