Reviews

Because of the MPAA rating, I heard that Matt Stone and Trey Parker had to cut scenes of the movie. We'll see it in september in france. I just hope we'll have, as for "eyes wide shut", the uncut version, as written in the title : longer, bigger and UNCUT. If not, we'll have to cry in front of that king of childish attitude from that organisation. But we do not usually have censorship problems there. We may see what Stone and Parker really wanted. Ouf.

If Djamel Bensalah reads it, he can write me because I have many things to tell him, positive things. If the screenplay is not very tough, we see with the way of directing of that new director that there is something very new, with many ideas of directing, as the scene where the heroes are in the nightclub, in order to show that they're boring, he did a reference to IAM's videoclip "je danse le mia" or the reference to old movies, when Hollywood movies were good movies (except this year with "The mask of Zorro", very honest) like "Casablanca". But sometimes, when it's filmed with hand camera, the result is sometimes under the average quality of the movie and some people may find it exhausting. Then the acting is quite correct, but we also see Jamel Debbouze, but different than in his weekly prestations in "H" and "NPA1", but there are new actors that we ought to watch out for the future.

First, this movie is not a comedy about concentration camps, it's a movies made by a comic about concentration camps, it's not the same thing. And those comments that take it as a foreign movie are just fake, it's a human movie, it does not have to be american, italian or french, don't think yopu're on a cinematographic island, all movies are not only made in the USA.

This movie was just great and touching, we feel on the edge with Guido, Giosuè, Dora and Eliseo during the movie, will they stay alive ? And such behavior really existed during the war, there prisoners telling people about great meals while enduring their situation but it helped them.

It was a FABLE about concentration camps, it wasn't realistic on every points, but it shows us that there are unknown people who did great things for the others during WW2 and it reminds me the end of that french book calles "La condition humaine" (aka "the human condition") written by André Malraux.

Snake is back, and they shouldn't have tried to f*** with him. This movie is one of the best sci-fi movies these years, because first it's not serious at all, we see that John Carpenter is one of the most creative directors in the world in general and in USA in particular, that's why this movie didn't work, he doesn't have limits to his purpose, to the characters, he dose what he wants, and that's why he's not appreciated as he ought to be. That's also why he's appreciated here in France, we appreciated the character, Snake Plissken, very independent, not like those fake heroes as in ID4 or "Armageddon", Snake Plissken is a kind of anarchist, nobody can make him do what he doesn't want to except if his life depends on it. He's called to save the world, he says f*** off. The end of the movie is one of the best ends of a movie in these last years. The cast is really good, with of course Kurt Russell, Steve Buscemi and Pam Grier (wow!) in a different role than "Jackie Brown" but the end is why I loved this movie, I didn't know that there were still free men as Carpenter in art creation in the USA.

This movie is one of the most amazing I ever see. I didn't expect so much from it and I was really surprised by that movie, which is totally different from what we usually in american cinema. Here we are with the story of these men, Chad and Howard who have to spend 6 weeks far from their home sent there by their "firm". They decide to have a revenge on women and will both seduce one, they will expect her to fall in love with one of them and they will give her up. We spend our time asking why they really decide to do that, do they really want to hurt someone like that for such reasons ? we try to find a concrete reason to their evilness, but we can't, we want to leave our seat because that's too disturbing but the questions we're asking ourselves can't let us leave it. The conclusion is very hard, but we've got there a reflection about power in general, not only about men and women,about those who have power (like Chad and Howard) and those who don't have the sanme power (Christine and Kif). we're also amazed to see this kind of men, the white collars, be shown that way while they usually are shown as example for the american dream of the individualism and economical liberalism. I told many people to watch it, they all liked it, I even watched it with a feminist, who loved it, but it provides you a big big headache. That's a movie which dares to show things. Neil LaBute is a director to follow.

This movie must be one of the best movies Carpenter directed, with "Halloween" and "In the mouth of madness". With a small budget, he did a remarkable remake of "Rio Bravo". He's the only american director able to direct remakes, he's got a personality so huge that he can give a personal touch to a movie he did not invent. Carpenter is one of today's masters, this movie proves it, we stay on the edge during all the movie, there is suspense, we don't know who will stay alive at the end of the movie, who will take a lost bullet and he gives a certain kind of mystery to the characters : who is the man whose daughter was shot, why is Napoleon Wilson called like that, why does the gang attack the precinct. There are several questions for which we're expecting an answer, that's why we can't leave our seat, it's physical, usually, the brains makes you leave your seat, there, your body fixes you on it, and when I feel something like that when I'm watching a movie, it means that it is a very very good movie, the greatest action movie I've ever seen.

This movie is one of the most scary I've ever seen about the future. The way direcor Fletcher sees our future is one of the most pessimistic I've ever seen. We feel that hot, warmy atmosphere, with this kind of fog during all the movie. The story is not as important as the general atmosphere. Charlton Heston is better than in his average roles, better than in "Ben Hur", but the real star of the movie is Edward G. Robinson, he's perfect in his role, he has a strong character and there is emotion when he cooks real food to detective Thorn, there is something we can't define at this moment. this movie is made to warn us about the danger of industry and pollution and even if you don't see the end, it is worth it for that.

This movie is the most honest Hollywood sent us since many time. There is a good screenplay who doesn't take us as fools and does not want to make us think that the new Zorro is better than the older, we see that Zorro is a human being, not a superhero like superman or Bruce Willis. The actors are simply great, Anthony Hopkins remembers Guy Williams, the actor of the serial when we were little children, Antonio Banderas is playing Zorro, we see that in his eye, under his mask, and Catherine Zeta-Jones is more than beautiful, she's perfect. That's simply enjoying, in the old hollywoodian tradition, when ther were still more than 3 good directors, when special effects were not a pretext to make movies. Martin Campbell is a good director and we can be amazed that he does not direct movies like that more often. Hollywood is still able to enjoy us.

This movie shows that "Plan 9 from outer space" had a serious reason to be made : it lead us to this movie. It's a radical critic of the "american way of life". The government, the army, the pacifists, everybody! Maybe that's why it didn't work in USA. It's the anti-"independance day". the strength american doesn't saves the world, it's its biggest weakness : the country music. Everything that sucks in USA saves the world. But this movie is overall a Tim Burton's movie, with the shiny colors, the characters are typically burtonian. we progress in his strange universe of freaks (martians experiments on their spatial ships) and strange characters (after Edward Scissorhands, Jack, PeeWee...). He doesn't like the total strength, the total ugly, the total bads, he prefers human beings, but in another and personal vision, his vision.

"Snake eyes" makes you feel clever. Very clever. Brian DePalma is the most underrated director today. This movie proves it. The opening scene is among the most impressive lessons of directing a film in the last few years or decade. The first 14 minutes shows that you're going to have a lesson of cinema. The scene (ATLANTIC CITY), the atmosphere (corruption, calmlessness), the environnment (tropical twister) and among all this : Nicolas Cage (Rick Santoro). The non-failure of the movie is not just due to the director Brian DePalma but also to Nicolas Cage. We can see him among this crowd with his clothes (check the shirt) and his golden phone. After these 14 minutes, a crime is made and Santoro's best friend, Kevin Dunne (Gary Sinise) is responsible of it. Santoro will have to deal with 14,000 witnesses, the FBI and his reputation. Brain DePalma gives details in the opening scene that will help us to understand what happened, what should happen, and what can't happen. And all these details are related to Rick Santoro and the opening scene. Brain DePalma will play with these elements, as an artist, showing the different point of view of the characters, (subjectives) and the cameras (objectives). Brain DePalma shows the key elements but he doesn't underline them as if he wanted to make the spectator think by himself. A contrario, he gives little elements to help to see the good and the bad, which you only remark when you're out of the theatre. The colors shows what can be trusted or not. The blue is the good : Blue eye, ring, the "7" woman. The red is the bad : a ring, blood on the bill, the gloves of the boxer... "snake eyes" is a masterpiece that you have to watch several times to appreciate the construction, which records "Rashomon" (Akira Kurosawa) or Quentin Tarantino in another way. Advice : stay till the end.

10 on 10.

"La vie rêvée des anges" is what has been done the best in France this year.

The casting is quite perfect with 2 actresses that are flying. You can't doubt that they are Isa and Marie. There are no words to explain how they are acting. Their play makes them seem very cute. Director Erick Zonca is a newcomer of 42 years. It's his first film (he made shorts before) and shows he's an adult when he directs actors. He knows how to film his actors, how to show the way they behave, where they live, what they can expect. He doesn't put music even if he could have, he's an adult, unlike Michael Bay. You can believe in the characters, you know they can be living at this moment. You think you know them, you can trust them.

Among giants.

10 on 10

This movie is one of the toughest critics of Reagan-era. It must be noticed during these years of intellectual poorness in american movies. It's not to say that there have been no clever movies but the most noticed movies were not. In France we keep overall movies like "Rocky IV" or "Rambo" where the hero is the stronger, he never dies and saves the world (what could we do without Americans ?). The point of view of Carpenter is very courageous, he shows what consumption society makes (consume, obey) and has that few people awares of it. It was an era where money and economical liberalism were ruling human relationship. Carpenter couldn't stand this and showed it by the way of the seventh art. That's what movies should be made for : engagement in the author's mind by the work. There are not a lot of movies today having surprised the viewer like this, by its cleverness. The last american one is "In the company of men" by Neil LaBute. There are scenes which will stay in the memory of the person who watches, like the fight. You think it's going to end but it continues, and continues. In a typical movie it ends after one or two minutes, but there, no way. John Carpenter breaks the rules and this nihilism (see the name of the hero : Nada) was not the "american way of life". By breaking the rules of movies he broke the rules of american society. There has been two other heroes, created also by Carpenter : Snake Plissken and Jack Crow. They are not perfect, they have weaknesses, they are just humans. They don't really make dream the spectator but they're more similar to him than "Armaggedon" or "Independance day"'s characters. The perfection is a notion that carpenter doesn't like, in his different movies ("village of damned", "Vampire$") the heroes lose sometimes, they're not more clever, they get f***** (the motel's scene in Vampire$). "They live" is a film about the human, the perfection and freedom. Carpenter broke rules of American society (and way of making films)in order to promode a typical American value : the freedom. Carpenter was free when he made this movie. This idea sweats from the screen and you would like to feel as free as him, with no limits. 10 on 10

with this movie we can see that there is still creativity in movies today, if enough time is given to them. What did Hunter Thompson's book look like ? I looked like that. Terry Gilliam gave to this story his creativity and his "former Monty Python"'s spirit. How is bat-country like ? Just like in johnny Depp's glasses. That's the first time I'm not disappointed by a Terry Gilliam film (in Monty Pythons movies he was not alone). I liked "Brazil" but I didn't love it (I thought it was too cold). There the madness of the movie can't let you still, you learn new words of vocabulary (mescaline overall), and you're amazed by the actors. Johnny Depp is more than perfect. He shows that taking risks in american movies can make improve a way of acting and allow an actor to be put into the "top 5 of american actors" (with Harvey Keitel, John Travolta -think about "She's so lovely-, Robert DeNiro, Sean Penn and William H macy). He proves he's no longer an idol for young girls (think about it, Will Smith). Benicio Del Toro can't be recognized in the street after this movie, he took the risk to break his repution of "latino actor" with a nice face as "The Usual suspects" or "the funeral" may have "done" (I don't have enough vocabulary to say how this movie is great). "Fear and loathing in Las Vegas" is a movie that can't let you still, with more-than-perfect actors, and an inspired director who forgot some bad usual he had with "Brazil" or "Munchausen".

This movie, as I read it, is loved by everybody. And I cannot say I'm not because it's one of the best Carpenter's movies (I did not see "Dark Star", "Assault on the precinct 13" and "The thing" yet. I still don't know what was reality, what was not. It's the only movie where the physical fear (quite tough) is weaker than mental fear. It's a masterpiece. Really scary (just forget about "I know what you did last summer", b*******t for tourists as Mister Brown would say). Carpenter is the only director where the titles say exactly what is gonna be shown in the movie. That's why we're never disappointed. If he had been called for "Armageddon", for example, the world would have been destroyed, "Godzilla", there would have been a scary monster and not a tiny saurian. Carpenter wants people to spend time watching a movie for something, that's what he does with his movies. This is a movie whose pictures can't be forgotten. You can't forget the cyclist, Sutter Cane's "house", the corridor, the bleed tears... As I said, it's a masterpiece of fantastic genre.

"Starman" was not really a movie BY John Carpenter because he was called to direct it, that's why the end is not "typically Carpenterian", but he did a very good job from a conventional screenplay even if there are still little shots against society. Jeff Bridges is really amazing, that's why he was an academy awrad nominee for this movie, which is very rare for this kind of sci-fi movie. as we see in other Carpenter's movies, he doesn't believe in childhood's innocence but there he seems to. He's lee pessimistic about the future than into all of his other movies. It's not Crapenter's best film but it's over a lot of major movies of pseudo-directors like Roland Emmerich and Michael Bay. In fact, it's more entertaining and less arrogant than today's big blockbusters. Carpenter is a genious, we mustn't see it after he dies.

I can't see why everybody says this film is good. I admit that it is well written but it is the only interest to see in this movie because the acting is so bad that it makes you look at your the hour. We don't know where Rohmer took his actresses. The only playing correct is Didier Sandre. But it's not too difficult for him to be better than the others. The young girl always smiling, we can that she would seem to be the same if she learned she has AIDS or a leg cut off.

"Snake eyes" makes you feel clever. Very clever. Brian DePalma is the most underrated director today. This movie proves it. The opening scene is among the most impressive lessons of directing a film in the last few years or decade. The first 14 minutes shows that you're going to have a lesson of cinema. The scene (ATLANTIC CITY), the atmosphere (corruption, calmlessness), the environnment (tropical twister) and among all this : Nicolas Cage (Rick Santoro). The non-failure of the movie is not just due to the director Brian DePalma but also to Nicolas Cage. We can see him among this crowd with his clothes (check the shirt) and his golden phone. After these 14 minutes, a crime is made and Santoro's best friend, Kevin Dunne (Gary Sinise) is responsible of it. Santoro will have to deal with 14,000 witnesses, the FBI and his reputation. Brain DePalma gives details in the opening scene that will help us to understand what happened, what should happen, and what can't happen. And all these details are related to Rick Santoro and the opening scene. Brain DePalma will play with these elements, as an artist, showing the different point of view of the characters, (subjectives) and the cameras (objectives). Brain DePalma shows the key elements but he doesn't underline them as if he wanted to make the spectator think by himself. A contrario, he gives little elements to help to see the good and the bad, which you only remark when you're out of the theatre. The colors shows what can be trusted or not. The blue is the good : Blue eye, ring, the "7" woman. The red is the bad : a ring, blood on the bill, the gloves of the boxer... "snake eyes" is a masterpiece that you have to watch several times to appreciate the construction, which records "Rashomon" (Akira Kurosawa) or Quentin Tarantino in another way. Advice : stay till the end.

10 on 10.

After an half hour quite good, fun. The film goes in the recurrent default of American blockbusters today : we can't do anything without Americans. They're here to save the world. The beginning was quite cool. You see about ten guys all unable mentally to behave, fat, bad shaved, smelly. And they're going to save us.

After that, they go in the space, Bruce Willis sacrifices himself and Ben Affleck gets married with Liv Tyler. The end. It's too short to make a film. Michael Bay gives us his personnal vision of the rest of the world. Just stereotypes, postcards of China, India, France...Who expects USA to save the World. There are no surprises. You know at the beginning everything what will happen. Bruce Willis saves the world but Steve Buscemi saves the film with his sense of humour and way of acting. He's the only surprise. You spend your time to ask yourslef why Michael Bay films like that. The views are very ugly. he tores the camera, he puts tear-panda-music and he thinks it can make a film. Michael Bay can thank Steve Buscemi without this "thing" would have been worse than "Godzilla", "Independance day" and "Stargate" reunited.

This movie sucks.

2 on 10

"La vie rêvée des anges" is what has been done the best in France this year.

The casting is quite perfect with 2 actresses that are flying. You can't doubt that they are Isa and Marie. There are no words to explain how they are acting. Their play makes them seem very cute. Director Erick Zonca is a newcomer of 42 years. It's his first film (he made shorts before) and shows he's an adult when he directs actors. He knows how to film his actors, how to show the way they behave, where they live, what they can expect. He doesn't put music even if he could have, he's an adult, unlike Michael Bay. You can believe in the characters, you know they can be living at this moment. You think you know them, you can trust them.

Among giants.

10 on 10

With this movie america proves that all movies made over the Atlantic ocean are not all similar (difference between 'Independance day", "Men in Black", "Stargate" ?) This movie is a kind of lesson of making a movie. There must be dialogues, screenplay, actors, director, music. The movie begins with dialogues came directly from a Sacha Guitry's screenplay; Who had seen "Like a virgin" like a pornocrat ? Who had really reasons not to give a tip ? You got them. The story is well-built, with those flashbacks and "coups de theatre". Sending few guys in outer space can't make a screeplay. The actors are all perfect. Tim Roth shows that he can play every kind of role (Joshua Shapira, Van Gogh, Pumpkin, Charles Ferry), idem for Harvey Keitel who plays in every kind of film, for every generation ("The piano", "From dusk till dawn", "Pulp Fiction", "Le regard d'Ulysse"), or Steve Buscemi, the actor with the most eclective filmography ("Con air", "Fargo", "The real blonde", "Armaggedon", "The big Lebowski"). Michael Madsen shows that the word of maniac or psycho is very often usurpated. Mr Blonde is the new Norman Bates. Q Tarantino the director always knows where to put the camera, to see the "little differences" that make the differences between the different characters. Try to listen to "Stuck in the middle with you" without thinking about this scene of torture. When the right song is used at the right scene, the fact is that you can't hear the music without thinking about this scene. Martin Scorsese said that "Resevoir dogs" is the film where the music is used by the best way. I think it sounds very good. By using the music this way you can also add "Halloween" and "Sonatine" (Takeshi Kitano). "Reservoir dogs" is a lesson to the new directors who try to make films. Putting music or telling "f***" in every sentence is not enough to make a film. This is a message to Michael Bay and Rolland Emmerich.

10 on 10

This movie is one of the toughest critics of Reagan-era. It must be noticed during these years of intellectual poorness in american movies. It's not to say that there have been no clever movies but the most noticed movies were not. In France we keep overall movies like "Rocky IV" or "Rambo" where the hero is the stronger, he never dies and saves the world (what could we do without Americans ?). The point of view of Carpenter is very courageous, he shows what consumption society makes (consume, obey) and has that few people awares of it. It was an era where money and economical liberalism were ruling human relationnship. Carpenter couldn't stand this and showed it by the way of th seventh art. That's what movies should be made for : engadgement in the author's mind by the work. There are not a lot of movies today having surprised the viewer like this, by its cleaverness. The last american one is "In the company of men" by Neil LaBute. There are scenes which will stay in the memory of the person who watches, like the fight. You think it's going to end but it continues, and continues. In a typical movie it ends after one or two minutes, but there, no way. John Carpenter breaks the rules and this nihilism (see the name of the hero : Nada) was not the "american way of life". By breaking the rules of movies he broke the rules of american society. There has been two other heroes, created also by Carpenter : Snake Plissken and Jack Crow. They are not perfect, they have weaknesses, they are just humans. They don't really make dream the spectator but they're more similar to him than "Armaggedon" or "Independance day"'s characters. The perfection is a notion that carpenter doesn't like, in his different movies ("village of damned", "Vampire$") the heroes lose sometimes, they're not more clever, they get f***** (the motel's scene in Vampire$). "They live" is a film about the human, the perfection and freedom. Carpenter broke rules of American society (and way of making films)in order to promode a typical American value : the freedom. Carpenter was free when he made this movie. This idea sweats from the screen and you would like to feel as free as him, with no limits. 10 on 10