
Posted : 14 years, 5 months ago on 14 October 2010 10:38
(A review of
Sahara)
Even if it was a flop, it was still curious to see this flick. Honestly, I don't think McConaughey is a bad actor, as a matter of fact, he is now making an interesting come-back (2011-2012) but I have to admit he made some poor choices during the last decade. Anyway, it is pretty obvious that they hoped so bad with this flick that they would get the new Indiana Jones with this... No way ! How dare they compare Matthew McConaughey with the Great Harrison Ford ?!? A sequel was planned but was canceled due to poor box office sales. Indeed, it was a huge (deserved) flop with a reported $100 million dollars loss. Even though there was a nice cast (Matthew McConaughey, Steve Zahn, Penélope Cruz, William H. Macy, Rainn Wilson, Delroy Lindo, Lambert Wilson, I thought the whole thing was really average and not really entertaining. I mean, I'm a huge fan of Indiana Jones, I love these kind of adventure flicks but there is a very difficult balance that you have to find between the action stuff, the humor, the romance and the cheesiness and they obviously they didn't manage to make it work here. To conclude, even though this project had some potential, the whole thing was rather disappointing and it is not really worth a look.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 14 years, 5 months ago on 14 October 2010 10:38
(A review of
The Punisher)
Honestly, I’m not really familiar with the comic-books concerning this character but he sure seems pretty badass. But like many minor comic-book character (yes, I think he is not really famous compared to the likes of Superman, Batman, Spider-man or the X-men), he never managed to reach much success in the film world. For the 2nd time around, they tried to start a franchise around The Punisher, and again, they failed gloriously ! Actually, this one did better than the 1st one. It was released in the US and made nearly four times what it cost. Eventually, a sequel was planned (well done !), but Thomas Jane eventually bowed out as it was taking too long to produce (too bad...). Personally, I couldn't care less about this movie. No loss for me ! In my opinion, Thomas Jane was not bad and John Travolta is always enjoyable when playing the bad guy but, a part from that, it was a rather average action flick. To conclude, I have seen worse comic-book movie adaptations but this one is still a disappointment and it is not really worth a look, even if you like the genre.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 14 years, 5 months ago on 14 October 2010 10:37
(A review of
Daredevil)
In my opinion, Daredevil was always one of the best super-heros, even though he was not as famous as Superman, Batman or Spider-man so I was really eager to check this flick. Eventually, honestly, in spite of what everybody say and think about this flick, I don't think it was that bad. Actually, like I said before, I think Daredevil is a pretty cool character and it would have been nice to see more of him. But this movie failed badly and Ben Affleck won't problably ever come back as a super-hero following his statement "Wearing a costume was a source of humiliation for me and something I wouldn't want to do again soon." I have to admit it though, the story was pretty weak and the villains were not really impressive. At least, you have to agree that Elektra was pretty awesome, even if the spin-off around her character was downright awful. Of course, the whole thing was flawed but I still think it is a rather fascinating character and the movie was not bad at all (If there is a character which needs a reboot, it is absolutely this one and not Spider-Man). To conclude, I think it is actually a decent super-hero flick and it is definitely worth a look though, especially if you like the genre.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 14 years, 5 months ago on 14 October 2010 10:36
(A review of
Hulk)
Even though this movie has a rather lame reputation (it is even considered by many as one of the worst super-hero features), I always had a weak spot for the damned thing and, in fact, I would even go as far as saying that it is one of my favorite movies in this genre. Indeed, even though Marvel has been incredibly successful with its MCU, most of the movies in this franchise always follow the same generic and rather boring template and Ang Lee followed a different path which was, in my opinion, much more interesting. Basically, he went for some kind of Greek tragedy as Bruce Banner got his powers from birth after his father did some experiments on himself and, to amplify the drama, his father killed by accident his mother in front of Bruce who became highly traumatized in the process. That was some heavy stuff and Marvel would afterwards always focus on some much ligther material staying away from such dark tales in the future which was just too bad. Furthermore, Eric Bana was actually pretty decent playing this conflicted character and, at least, he was physically not such a huge stretch from the Hulk, especially compared to Edward Norton who looked nothing like the green monster. Eventually, the only major issue with this movie and the major reason why this movie was widely dismissed was the fact that Ang Lee clearly didn't care much about the action scenes. Indeed, there were only a few of them, they were not really convincing at all and, to make things worse, the Hulk looked very often pretty ugly which was considered like a major offense for all the fans of the comic-book. Well, like Ang Lee, I didn't care much about these action scenes, I thought he gave a really interesting portrayal of this character and, in my opinion, this flick must be the most underrated super-hero feature made so far.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 14 years, 5 months ago on 14 October 2010 10:34
(A review of
Wild Wild West)
This movie shows that not everything that Will Smith touches changes in gold... This one didn't work out too good for him. Indeed, the critics were very negative and it was rather a disappointment at the box office (even though it still made some dough and even reached $50 million in its opening weekend). I wonder, if the next movie starring Johnny Depp, 'The Lone Ranger', will have the same fate or will it become the new 'Pirates of the Carribean'? (eventually, it turned out to be a major flop showing once again that blockbusters and Westerns don’t go well together). Anyway, back to our main subject, even though Will Smith and Kevin Kline were actually quite charming, they didn't manage here to make this flick really entertaining. Apparently, Will Smith turned down the lead role in 'The Matrix' to star in this movie because he was a fan of the television series but he later admitted that it was the worst decision he made in his career. To be honest, I don't think it is actually really so bad (many consider it as one of the worst movies ever made), I think it is actually watchable but it is and remains a really average blockbuster, a major blunder in Will Smith's career, and it is probably not really worth a look.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 14 years, 5 months ago on 14 October 2010 10:34
(A review of
Godzilla)
This year, the Americans are coming up with a new remake of the famous Japanese monster and, so far, the buzz is pretty good so it should be an improvement on Emmerich's version but, on the other hand, it won’t be difficult. Indeed, this first US remake was big and it was bad... Big budget doesn't always mean big success and they originally planned to have two sequels to be produced but these plans were scrapped due to the poor reception of this film. Still, despite the disappointing box office performance, it still made a lot of money, in fact, more money worldwide than any other American movie based on a foreign film. Even though I haven’t seen any original Godzilla features, this one was utterly disrespectful with the material which is not really surprising since Roland Emmerich admitted that he did not like the original Godzilla movies and, apparently, he only agreed to do this project after being promised to be able to do what ever he wanted with the series. I remembered when I watched this flick and how I was surprised how bad the whole thing looked. To conclude, it is really a terrible flick, you should avoid it and hope that the new version directed by Gareth Edwards will finally deliver something decent.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 14 years, 5 months ago on 14 October 2010 10:33
(A review of
Supergirl )
In the 80's, following the success of Superman, they tried to launch another super-hero franchise in the same spirit. It did seem to be a good idea but the movie was really lame and flopped terribly... Obviously, this flick was intended to be the first in a series but since it wasn’t a box office success, they skipped those plans. Basically, the whole thing was just boring and cheesy. When I was a kid, I watched most of the Superman movies and, of course, I had to watch this one as well. You might want to check this out though, just to have a good laugh. It is rather interesting that, even 30 years later, they haven’t managed to make one single barely decent super-hero feature with a female character. I mean, the other more recent attempts like ‘Elektra’ or ‘Catwoman’ were pretty horrendous as well, even some of the most worst movies in this genre, and it might explain why they haven’t done yet a Wonder Woman movie, even she is one of the most famous super-heros ever created. I don’t know, maybe it is because those characters are over-sexualized in the comic-books which makes them difficult to adapt to the silver screen. Anyway, this is a pretty bad movie and it is not really worth a look, I’m afraid.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 14 years, 5 months ago on 14 October 2010 10:30
(A review of
Gran Torino)
To be honest, from all the recent directing efforts by Clint Eastwood, it must be easily the most overrated one. I mean, it is not that it was a bad movie, it was actually pretty good but I seriously failed to see what was so great about it. I know everybody says this flick is awesome and it is even in the IMDB Top 250 but, personally, I thought it was actually seriously overrated. The only reason I can think of is that it is because Clint Eastwood was in it and that's why everybody was raving about it. I'll give you that, Eastwood was really good and displayed the same charisma he used to have in those Spaghetti Westerns he used to make in the good old days. Unfortunately, the movie didn't have much else to offer, in my opinion. Indeed, the other characters were barely developed and the story would have been more interesting if Eastwood's character would have been a really awful racist *sshole. The guy basically pretends all the way to be a dick but he is in fact actually a rather nice fellow deep inside (rather mushy if you ask me). To conclude, I have to admit, I did like this flick, absolutely, but considering it as one of the best movies directed by and starring Eastwood? no way. Still, it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Clint Eastwood's work.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 14 years, 5 months ago on 14 October 2010 09:58
(A review of
Jumper)
I remember it quite well when this movie was released. Indeed, even though it wasn’t really a box-office failure, it was seriously destroyed by the critics. With this in mind, I wasn’t really expecting much from the damned thing but I thought I might as well give it a try. Well, first of all, to be honest, I really liked the concept and the whole thing definitely had some potential. Furthermore, I also really liked the fact that the main character was rather selfish and egocentric. Indeed, his behavior was far from being really heroic which was quite refreshing but this idea was not developed at all in the movie. On top of that, the whole story was eventually rather lame and the dialogues were even worse, I’m afraid. As usual, everybody blamed Hayden Christensen but, in fact, I thought he was not bad at all in this movie. On the other hand, Rachel Bilson was not convincing at all but it was not entirely her fault. The main issue was more the fact that the whole romance between their characters was not interesting at all. Seriously, they could have looked for something more thrilling than that. Instead, you end up with a rather lame love story and this battle with the Paladins which was just really not developed enough and not really interesting either. To conclude, I don’t think it was not as bad as everyone seemed to think, there were actually some great ideas, the end result was just quite average but I still think is worth a look, in spite of its flaws.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry

Posted : 14 years, 5 months ago on 13 October 2010 07:23
(A review of
Che: Part Two)
I had already watched 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. Well, once again, I was quite impressed by the directing which was really solid and by Benecio del Toro who gave an amazing performance. Still, if the only flaw of the first part was that Che Guevara seemed rather flawless and the whole thing looked sometimes like a propaganda movie, this second part was actually too neutral in my opinion. Indeed, was it too bad that Guevara didn't manage to bring his revolution somewhere else or did he actually get what he deserved because he was maybe just lucky the first time around? Indeed, the whole thing never took side. Instead, it only focused on the facts and, as a result, in 2 hours, I still don't think that I have learn so much about the guy after all. Still, it was pretty neat how this second movie actually mirrored the first movie, showing how Guevara followed pretty much the same process and while it seemed to go rather well for a while, the outcome turned out to be dramatically different, especially for him. Anyway, in spite of its flaws, since I'm a sucker for (leftist) political movies, I thought it was still a really fascinating story and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested by this subject.

0 comments,
Reply to this entry