Posted : 13 years, 11 months ago on 29 January 2011 07:08
(A review of
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly)
I know, sometimes, my ratings are rather harsh but after watching more than 5000 movies, it is not very often that Iām truly amazed by something new. And, yet, sometimes, it does happen and, as a result, I keep watching movies after movies hoping to get again this great feelings I got when I was a teenager discovering the classics. Well, this movie was basically one of those extroardinary gems and I would go as far as saying that it is one of the very best movies I have seen during the last decade. To be honest, I'm usually not so found of those ātrue storyā movies but this one was just simply amazing. The best thing, in my opinion, was the directing. I mean, Julian Schnabelās previous movies (āBasquiatā and āBefore Night Fallsā also some real life tales about some famous figures) were decent but, here, he seriously reached another leverl and really succeeded in giving an idea of what it could be like to be in such predicament. Of course, Mathieu Amalric gave a powerhouse perfomance and the story was just fascinating to behold. To conclude, I think it is a great achievement and simply one of the best movies ever made.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 11 months ago on 29 January 2011 03:53
(A review of
There Will Be Blood)
I already saw this movie, back then when it was released in the movie theaters, but, since it was such a long time ago, I was really eager to check it out again. 2007 was actually an exceptional year for the movies and many would argue that it was even one of the best years ever. Eventually, two contenders rose above the rest, this movie and 'No Country for old men' and, at the end, 'No Country for old men' got slightly more credit but, personally, I preferred this amazing flick. In my opinion, 'No Country...' was a fine picture but this flick went way deeper and was more fascinating. Anyway, Paul Thomas Anderson showed us again that he is one of the most inspired directors at work right now and, working with one of the best actors ever, Daniel Day-Lewis, they created a great masterpiece together. Day-Lewis provided one hell of a one-man show being in almost every single scene for almost 3 hours long (however, the young Paul Dano shouldn't be forgotten as he gave an impressive performance as well). Furthermore, The story was really fascinating, probably the best one tackled by Paul-Thomas Anderson so far. While rewatching this movie, I discovered that this movie was about a man who was not only an oilman but also a massive con artist and, apparently, there was nothing else that would trigger him even more, in a negative way, than meeting a fellow con man trying to hustle him. And these were the two only trademarks of Daniel Plainview, a brilliant and also awful man, and possibly the loneliest man I have ever seen in a movie. Anyway, to conclude, I do believe it is an awesome movie and it is definitely worth a look, especillay if you are interested in Anderson's and/or Days-Lewis' work.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 11 months ago on 29 January 2011 03:39
(A review of
Arthur 3: The War of the Two Worlds)
At some point, after āThe Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arcā, Luc Besson decided to focus on producing and writing some (rather boring) action flicks instead of directing. Finally, at some point, he made a come-back with an animated feature called ā[Link removed - login to see][Link removed - login to see]ā and I thought it was actually pretty neat. I mean, sure, the story was barely decent and seriously generic and pedestrian but, on the other hand, the animation was just really gorgeous. Honestly, I thought it was pretty neat to see a French guy like Luc Besson doing his own thing which resulted in a really amazing animated feature (at least, visually speaking). However, for some reasons, Besson thought that this concept was so great that he should make a whole trilogy but this idea was just seriously misguided. Indeed, as I mentioned before, it barely worked for just one movie so there was definitely not enough story for 3 movies... So, as a result, with this 3rd installment, it was still very nice looking , sure, but also seriously boring. To conclude, I think I have been actually generous with my rating here but I think it is still worth a look, especially if you want to see how well made the whole thing was.Ā
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 11 months ago on 29 January 2011 07:52
(A review of
Manderlay)
To be honest, even though I'm very interested in Lars von Trierās work, I can't say I'm a big fan of his movies though. However, I did really love 'Dogville' which turned out to be much better than I expected it to be so I was really eager to check this sequel. Eventually, I must admit that even though this second movie was not as great as its predecessor, it was still very good. Once again, von Trier came up with aĀ story which was just fascinatingĀ Ā was just and his directing was once again quite impressive. I have to admit that it was too bad that Nicole Kidman didn't show up for this sequel (I guess that working for von Trier turned out to slightly more challenging than she expected) but, fortunately, Bryce Dallas Howard was convincing enough. Eventually, even though this movie was supposed to be followed by a 3rd instalment supposed to be called āWasingtonā, it was unfortunately cancelled either because this sequel was deemed not successful enough or simply because the Danish master was already done with this concept. Anyway, to conclude, I really enjoyed this movie and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Lars von Trier's work.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 11 months ago on 29 January 2011 07:51
(A review of
Thank You for Smoking)
This is Jason Reitman's first movie and until now (considering 'Juno', 'Up in the air' and 'Young Adult'), it is his best one, in my opinion. I don't know about 'Juno' but back in 2007 , it was a huge success, the biggest indie feature of the year, nominated for several Academy Awards. For Roger Ebert, it was even the best movie of the year. However, even though I did like it, I didn't think it was that mind-blowing. The main thing that bothered me were the dialogs which were in fact too elaborate in my opinion. I mean, if Juno was so smart, how did she end up being knocked up? Personally, I prefer Jason Reitman's previous directing effort. The story was fascinating, the acting was top-notch and the directing was very competent. Furthermore, there was some impressive black humor but the movie never became shallow whatsoever and there was definitely some food for thought. It is yet another example that Aaron Eckhart is one of the most underrated actors at work nowadays and it is also the example that Katie Holmes, before she met Tom Cruise and became a tabloid phenomenon, had the potential to become a fine actress. Eventually, it is not a movie about the pros and cons of smoking, not at all, it is a movie about lobbyists, people who are basically selling ideas, morals and ethics and they can be pretty ruthless. The juxtaposition between the main character's work as a spokesman and his kid that he is trying to raise was also quite brilliant. To conclude, I really enjoyed this flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 11 months ago on 29 January 2011 07:48
(A review of
The Child)
Back in the 90's, the Dardenne brothers already won the Golden Palm with 'Rosetta' but, to be honest, I thought this movie rather underwhelming, probably the least appealing movie they made so far as a matter of fact. On the other hand, it saw this movie years ago in the movie theatre when it was released and I should probably check it out again at some point. Anyway, the Belgian siblings are one of the few directors who managed to win twice the Golden Palm and I was really curious to see if the second time around, they did actually deserve this prestigious award. And indeed, this time, I thought it was pretty amazing. The story was really heartbreaking and offered no redemption whatsoever. The Dardennes brothers have a very natural directing style and the whole thing almost looked like a documentary. Furthermore, the actors were no well-known stars (at least, back then) but they all gave some very convincing performances. I think I enjoyed more 'Le Fils' but this flick is still one of the best directed by these guys. To conclude, I think it is a great picture, it is maybe not for everyone but it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in the Dardennes' brothers work.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 11 months ago on 29 January 2011 07:47
(A review of
Munich)
I already saw this movie but, since it was a while back, I was quite eager to check it out again. Even though I have seen all his movies, I have to admit that I'm far from being a fan of Steven Spielberg but I didn't expect this one to be so good. In my opinion, it's probably one of the most underrated movies directed by Spielberg and it's a real shame it never got the credit it deserved. I thought it was spellbinding, at least, the first time around. Indeed, after rewatching it, I still think it is one of his most intriguing efforts but I have to admit that the story did feel slightly flat after all. Basically, rather randomly, Avner meets some mysterious French guy who then handed him over pretty much everyone he was looking for and it seemed rather too easy after all. Another thing that bothered me this time around was the fact that the incredible cast included in Avnerās team (Daniel Craig, CiarĆ”n Hinds, Mathieu Kassovitz) was actually given so little to do after all, especially during a movie lasting almost 3hrs. Still, contrary to most of the movies directed by Spielberg, the whole thing was really dark, relentless, never cheesy which is one very annoying trademark in Spielberg's work. 20 years later, it is actually hardly surprising that it was a flop, the film was probably too dark for his fan base, you could also say that Spielbergās days of ruling the box-office were already behind him. Anyway, to conclude, even if it wasnāt as brilliant as I remembered, it is still a very well made and quite fascinating spy movie and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre or if you are interested in Steven Spielbergās work.Ā
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 11 months ago on 29 January 2011 07:43
(A review of
Brokeback Mountain)
I remember it very well, when this movie came out, there was a huge buzz about it and after its release, it kept on going for a while. Indeed, back then, there was a huge controversy because many people thought this flick was a shoe-in for the Best picture academy award but, eventually, the winner was 'Crash'. It was a big blow for Ang Lee who never deserved more to win the big prize and recently, he was snubbed again with 'Life of Pi'. Coming back to our main feature, personally, I think this movie was more deserving than 'Crash' but it doesn't really matter anyway. Indeed, I think it is quite a unique picture and nothing similar had been done before. As usual with Ang Lee, the directing was really solid and the performances provided by Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Legder were really great. For Ledger, it seemed to be the beginning of an amazing career which was abruptly stopped a few years later and for Gyllenhaal, it was quite a breakthrough and he has become one of the most dependable actors of his generation. It was also interesting to see both Anna Faris and Anne Hathaway, two actress with a rather uninspiring resume up to that point, but they both did a pretty good job as well. To conclude, I think it is a very good drama and it is definitely worth a look.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 11 months ago on 29 January 2011 07:41
(A review of
Lord of War)
I already saw this movie but since it was a while back, I was quite eager to check it out again. First of all, I always had a weak spot for Andrew Niccolās work and the fact that he directed this movie was the main reason why I wanted to see it the first time around and,Ā eventually, I wasnāt disappointed. Indeed, after the slightly underwhelming āS1m0neā, Niccol came back with a winner and I really loved this flick, almost as much as his directing debut āGattacaā. This time, I really enjoyed the fact that he was doing something completely different, a dark satire about weapon trafficking. Honestly, Iām rather surprised that this movie didnāt get more credit. There was indeed some critic about this movie above all about the fact that the main character was despicable throughout the whole picture. In fact, I thought it was actually one of the best assets of this movie. Basically, the main character was a real anti-hero and that made the movie much more enjoyable, at least, thatās my opinion. On top of that, it was just very neat to see Nicolas Cage finally in a decent movie, one of the very few he made during that last 2 decades, and it shows that when he is given the right material, he can be really awesome. Anyway, to conclude, I really loved this flick and I think it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Posted : 13 years, 11 months ago on 29 January 2011 07:34
(A review of
Paradise Now)
Since I kept hearing some good things about this flick (it won the Golden Globe of the best foreign movie and was very close to win the Academy award as well and it won the Golden Calf of the best Dutch movie of the year), I was definitely eager to watch this flick. Eventually, I thought it was even better than I thought it would be. Indeed, it was a fascinating and totally heartbreaking story with some really solid directing and some top notch acting. If you think that Palestinian terrorists are all monsters, you should really check this movie. The directing is very effective and the actors were all seriously convincing. As said before, it is really a heartbreaking picture and makes you wonder if they will ever solve their issues in the middle east one day. Probably never, Iām afraid. To be honest, I can't believe that 'Tsotsi', which was in my opinion a decent flick but nothing more that, did eventually won the Academy award for the best foreign movie back then instead of this masterpiece. Anyway, to conclude, it is a great flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in this subject.
0 comments,
Reply to this entry
Login
Home
581 Lists
7722 Reviews
Collections