Dark River: Recent films

This is by far the worst of the series. There is just way too much for a single movie and it never fits together. Characters and plot lines come and go apparently randomly. The personal problems of Peter Parker are laughable and plain boring. Even worse, the cheesiness of the movie is completely out of place. Better forget this one. Only the character of the Sandman is rather interesting.

Fracture is an entertaining movie but it is not very original. The story is nothing new and the acting is not great. Anthony Hopkins is still captivating on screen but he's just doing the same routine he did in better films. And when Hopkins is not there the movie falls flat.

Two and a half hours of nonsense. The first movie wasn't great but it was an entertaining adventure. The sequel feels like a random succession of events. It would be full of plot holes if there was a plot in the first place. Just stupid. (07.2006)

Fearless is supposed to be Jet Li's last martial arts movie. If it is the case then it is a great way to end his screen-fighter career. Fearless is not without flaws but it is very good in its genre. Historical accuracy is completely ignored and there is a large dose of the usual drama (bad person turns good, with some nonsense in the middle). The fight scenes are just incredible. And this is what this movie is really about. (06.2006)

The squirel-like creature is funny but that's all there is to this movie. It's like they didn't even try. Maybe it is not only the graphics that are computer generated but also the story and dialogs. (05.2006)

The Scary Movie series is entirely based on short references to recent movies, not all of them in the horror genre, and sight gags all linked together by a loose plot. The latest movie is a bit hit and miss with some funny moments and some that are just stupid. It is better than the very first Scary Movie but it is still not that good. Probably a good think that I saw it slightly drunk. (04.2006)

V For Vendetta is a quite faithful adaptation of the Alan Moore comic. The story has its ups and downs and just like in the comic some of it doesn't entirely make sense. But it is always nice to look at and the acting is adequate. Acting from behind a mask Hugo Weaving has to rely exclusively on his distinctive voice and it works fairly well. (04.2006)

Terry Gilliam directed but did not write this film. There is a lot to like but I ultimately found it a bit disapointing. The happy end is probably dictated by the studio and feels out of place. (11.2005)

This is clearly the most accessible of David Cronenberg's films. Nevertheless his trademark is easy to recognise. A History of Violence is a drama with short burst of violence and rather explicit sex scenes. The acting is truly remarquable. (10.2005)

This is a little British horror film that has actual scary moments. There is a lot of flaws in the film though. The style changes twice. The introduction of the different characters is slow and rather boring with bad dialogs. Then the claustrophobic descent into the cave is a real treat. The tension builds up little by little. This part makes it worth seeing the film. Suddenly monsters appear and we're back in known horror-flick territory. It is still well done but a bit of a let down. (07.2005)

The last part of the trilogy is just more of the same. The story that seems so meticulous in the book is rather messy on screen but it is still good fun. The fights are a lot better than in The Two Towers. But the long pointless discussions between Sam and Frodo are boring and the CG-Gollum still annoys me. And the ending drags on forever. (01.2004)

The narrative and the acting might not be the best possible but I found a lot to like in this maritime warfare epic. It was like seeing the Victory come to life in front of my eyes. The battles at sea were also very impressive. At least one gruesome scene was completely unnecessary. (12.2003)

I never thought it would be possible to make a good sequel to The Matrix but I somehow expected that the Wachowski brothers would suprise me. In a way, they surprised me a little: I never thought it would be that bad. The begining of the film is very boring but it gets a bit better after about 45 minutes. The problem here is that the storyline is very very thin. Also the movie doesn't stand on its own. There is too many things that don't make sense and set the expectation that the third film will explain it all. The many long dialogs are awful and boring (and too complicated).
And finally it is a shame that after the original Matrix the special effect are of poor standard. The fight of Neo versus the many Agent Smiths looks like it has been rendered on a PS2.
Soooooo disapointing. (06.2003)

There is a risk in chosing which film to see in front of the cinema without knowing anything about it. The name of Al Pacino is usually associated with good films. Wrong choice! The Recruit is a bad film with no redeeming feature. Until the very end it looks like the story might start to develop. But it never happens. There is nothing of interest here. (04.2003)

I can't find words to properly describe this gem of a film. It has all the trademark qualities of Kaurismaki but more gentle and up-beat. Most of the dialog is delivered in a deadpan fashion with hilarious results. Markku Paltonen is great in the lead role and Kari Outinen is amazing as usual. She is able to carry the emotions of her character without ever seeming to move a muscle! (01.2003)

This second episode of the Lord of the Rings is a lot less entertaining than the first one. As the fellowship is disbanded the story becomes disjointed and despite the nice landscapes I found it to be painfully boring. The massive battles were supposed to be the highlight of the film but their are just a big mess. The narrative is surprisingly faithful to Tolkien's book but in this case the way the story is told is more important than the story itself. I will probably watch The Return of the King next year but after this film I'm not expecting too much. (01.2003)

I sam this one with my five year old nephew. The Treasure Planet is just badly recycled garbage. Everything feels famliar but all the elements put together don't add up. There is no such thing as a coherent story to be found here. Kids couldn't understand it (especially the Stargate-style door through space at the end that as been thrown in as a way to wrap it all up quickly). And it's too boring for the adults accompanying them. Once again the producers thought that if it's for children it's ok if it's bad. (12.2002)

Adapting one of Robert Ludlum's complicated novels is not easy. The Bourne Identity starts very well. The first part is gripping with the elements of the plot being revealed slowly. Unfortunately, once we know everything all there is to do is wait for the end as there is no more surprises. Overall quite enjoyable. (09.2002)

Dogma 95 is not an infallible recipe for a good film but Italian for Beginners uses it succesfully. The script, part drama part romantic comedy, is very well written, full of clever dialogs and subtle humour. All the actors make their characters come to life. The happy end happens as expected but the absence of a final surprise doesn't spoil the film. (04.2002)

K-Pax is yet another story on the model of the charismatic mental patient. Kevin Spacey is great as the man who thinks he comes from another planet and the film is most entertaining when he is on screen. However as the doctor, played by Jeff Bridges, gets more involved it all becomes less interesting. (04.2002)

This film is in great part a documentary about music but it is also a comedy. It is clever, funny and most of the music is excellent. Steve Coogan plays Tony Wilson but although his character is central he is only a kind of narrator. The film is about the music. This is a problem because there is a lot less music in the second half of the movie. Worth seeing for Joy Division! (04.2002)

The masterpiece! Each second of the film is immensely enjoyable. Every detail is just perfect. It is quite a long film but every minute is important: the search for the samurais, the preparations, the conflicts, the battle... (03.2002)

Throne of Blood feels a lot like theater which might not be surprising as it is an adaptation of Shakespeare's Macbeth. The story and the acting are great. I found the strange costumes and the unusually simple sets to be distracting. (03.2002)

Gosford Park is a study of Horrible People (both "upstairs" and "below stairs")! Only after the murder, do some of the characters display a glimpse of humanity. The dialogs are witty and funny in a very mean way at times. The atmosphere is reminiscent of an Agatha Christie novel but the expected revelation at the end never really happens. The end is small and almost insignificant. It is very nicely shot and acted but I felt like something was missing. A story maybe? (02.2001)

The problem with Monsters, Inc is that there isn't much to say about it. The only thing about it is its "cuteness". Not really boring, not really interesting, not really funny. Next, please. (02.2002)

There is a few horror films that are more than just a few clich�s put together. The Devil's Backbone is one of those. It is beautifully shot with carefully designed lightings throughout. The story, set during the Spanish civil war, and the strong characters contribute to create a moody atmosphere. The presence of the ghost only makes it more hauting. (01.2002)

After the simple and moving Straight Story David Lynch goes back to his impossible to understand style! The first part of the film seems to put pieces of a puzzle slowly together, with numerous sub-plots that don't all fit in the general story. And then everything changes! Nothing makes sense anymore but characters and situations from the first part are seen again, creating an unsettling sense of familiarity. While I don't find this film as achieved as The Lost Highway it is a cinematographic gem. (01.2002)

Woody Allen is at his best when he's not taking himself too seriously. The Curse of the Jade Scorpion is nothing more than a comedy, and a good one it is too. It is not very difficult to look imposing next to Woody but Helen Hunt is truly impressive here. (12.2001)

Adapting The Lord of the Rings to the silver screen was always going be a difficult enterprise. Being the first episode of a trilogy, The Fellowship of the Ring has one obvious flaw: it has no ending. Suddenly the film is over but the story is not. Unfortunately the next installment is one year away. The surprise is that the film is extraordinarily true to the book. And this brings the main problem of this movie: I had the feeling of beeing told the story of the Lord of the Rings in a "fast-forward" succession of action scenes. (12.2001)

I have never read the Harry Potter books so I don't know how faithful this adaptation is. The film looks good, even very good. The child actors are not particularly good but are not too annoying. The moralising story on the other hand feels bland and empty. Once again, because the main audience of the film is kids, the producers thought they didn't need a coherent story. Most of the good moments of the film are reminiscent of others movies. At the end the morale of the story is even spelled out to make sure everyone gets it! (12.2001)

The Nine Live of Tomas Katz is the most original film I have seen this year and probably these last few years. The plot is the weirdest take ever about the end of the world. More than a real story there is a succession of related scenes. This is surrealism at its best with some influence from the Monty Pythons. Improvisation gives us here the funniest dialogs. (11.2001)

The Man Who Wasn't There has just everything. The story is really well written, the directing is brilliant and the black and white photography is just gorgeous. But the best of all is the acting. Billy Bob Thornton and Frances McDormand, both regulars in Coen brothers' films, are in inspiring form here. The film is a tribute to the 50's film Noir but with the twisted humour of the Coen brothers. More please. (11.2001)

Battle Royale seems to have been made for one thing only: to shock. The premises of the story are presented in a short voice-over but don't make much sense anyway: for political reasons the students of one class are forced into killing each other. So forget about it and enjoy the slaughter. As usual Takeshi Kitano is great. (09.2001)

Gohatto is a rather unusual samurai film. The cinematography is beautiful, with its slighty sepia tones. Even though there is many dialogs, they are minimalist. Everything is said in few words. The film feel like a staring contest at times as all the characters try to hide their feelings and present an impassible face. But the surprising element of the story is the repressed (homo)sexuality of the samurais. (09.2001)