Reviews written by registered user
larryssa-68-866888

Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]
22 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

New World (2013)
3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
this is not a Korean "Infernal Affairs" and that's a relief, 26 March 2014
8/10

If you choose to look at this movie, it might certainly be for it cast: many of the actors doesn't need, in fact, an introduction! They play their part great despite the evidently stereotypes.

This movie is certainly not the first presenting the manicheism mob/cop; that's why the pitch looks like the Chinese "Infernal Affairs". Furthermore, the Americans and Japanese already made a remake, so why not the Korean? But finally, if half of the movie looks quite like a remake, the second parts is the twisted one and the most interesting: on the technical part, you will love the use of the zoom, the great sound especially in the fights, the use of exterior, rain and lights... ANd, on the scenarist part, you will grow attach to charisma not of one but all characters.

So love it/ hate it but give a chance to this movie because it's worth your time!

Elysium (2013/I)
2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
visual versus plot, 30 October 2013
5/10

Oh yes that movie, as its youngest predecessors such as Oblivion, After Earth... , has some great visuals. But where is, as usual in Science Fiction/ Anticipation movies, the plot, the story good enough just to try to be new and imaginative? This movie is just using the same old plots, schemes and stereotypes, good versus villains, twisted evil, too good altruism or morality... and the same optimist and expired message.

I like the actors but, at some point, can't they just stopped playing the good American heroes to just be regular humans: that would level up the content of most American movies these days...

Well, you have to see it to make yourself an opinion but do not expect something new and a valuable contribution to the 7th art; it's exactly what was prised : a solid entertainment with a huge budget.

Adore (2013)
18 out of 26 people found the following review useful:
might be perceive as provocative but..., 9 October 2013
9/10

I've not yet read the short story so i will not compare.

But i do not understand all the bad critics left by some of the users (but i do respect them). Some are blaming the acting, others the story, the dialogs... But the most important here lays on the film itself and its photography: look at the space occupied by the different characters because from clear barriers it get twisted imperceptibly all along the movie.

The subject of the movie is not young adults who can't face the reality of an outside world or some older women not able to deal with their age (close-ups are still great and really narrative by themselves), it's also not about decorums and society, because it can happen and fate or destiny have nothing to do with it; it's just about a part of a life story, not ordinary but quite unstoppable.

There is more than a parallel to make with Brockeback Mountain with the movie, the characters, the story line, the making, the sound... And it didn't seem to bother years ago...

We do not have to relate to appreciate, enjoy this slice of life that tells everything with its title "Alone" or even "Perfect mothers" and "the grand mothers"...

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
superman and super-blockbuster, 27 June 2013
7/10

Summer is coming at last... and with it a long series of blockbusters.

When it could have been an intelligent one with Nolan and Snyder at its head, it's basically not much more than a visual show. Yes it's a bomb, literally making neighborhood exploded (as "blockbuster" really means) but why can't we, spectators, want more than buildings going down and people looking up hoping for some savior? Acting is good even if, at some point, we have to smile imagining some of them with only a green/blue screen to act on... Special effects are obviously the strong statement of the movie (the only one?) but we know that green and blue colors are now Avatar's one so we irremediably go back to the sunny ones (especially when sun is vital to Kal-El!)but wanted to recreate the fauna of Krypton might have been a bit to much...

About the elliptic narrative writing, it works great but at the end we have a strong impression about a collage more than an actual movie. But the pact is fulfilled: we have action, drama, romance, past, present and futur (n°2 will bring once again Lex Luthor?) all tied up around one man more than one hero as the title suggest. But something is still missing: Snyder and Nolan have given us more in their past production than this demi-teintes long and fierce movie. Stop exploring the doubt, balancing between different possibilities and make a choice, assert: this self exploring period of American cinema has to come to an end by a big break in the spectator confidence as The Dark Knight or Watchmen used to be! Entertainement is not an end, it's a meaning to more: so yes go, enjoy, appreciate but criticize too!

Oblivion (2013/I)
1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
one movie but to much movies!, 15 April 2013
7/10

You want Science Fiction? You have it. You want good (or great) actors? Here they are. In addition, you'll have nice pictures, special effects, and totally futurist design.

But if you want something new? Then you will pass… What is it with American cinema nowadays? You have some Top Gun Tom Cruise playing the hero type like Armageddon/ Bruce Willis, Olga Kurylenko playing the Ripley part, the "jackals" acting like some weirdo from Predators or Star Wars and AI being always questionable in the Terminator way. Have you seen the Star Wars or Matrix pursuits (or even Battlestar Galactica?)? So you've seen them all. Did you look at Neo in Matrix? Then you have some ideas of the costume type. The planet? Some Planet of the Aps...

No it's not spoilers, it's basic knowledge! Where is vision?? Cinema vision?

What is it with this kind of Cinema? I think that America needs enemy, it's part of it identity (and I'm not judging that): that's why they (screenwriters because I haven't read the comics) have to express some common reality because SF always has been about present time. So, what are you trying to say? That you don't know anymore who's your enemy? But it's always about the same basic idea: showing off because 'I have the biggest one' (I'm talking about guns and size obviously!): shoot first and ask question later seems to be the same appropriate response and I'm tired of that monologue.

Yes, there is no dialog anymore in this cinema: it's just a one-way ticket with no substance. Where is optimism or better realism? (light) jokes? Why does it want to appear so serious when it is just empty? You pay for entertainment (and earring you neighbors trying and failing to be discreet to eat!), and you fill yourself with some inappropriate moral because some of us, just being realistic, don't like the "middle thing": choice is about extremity because you act upon your belief for some pointless moment.

Expectation? Stop!!

You can have a good time: just leave your brain and knowledge of SF outside the door! You might even laugh in this American movie for American people (because who cares about Super Bowl and tourism artefacts? Do not forget to preserve art and carpets when this is the end of the world… to blow it off at the first chance maybe?)

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
well... when call call it miserables!, 25 February 2013
5/10

I"m french, i knew the story even before i read the books, i later heard the french musical and i recognize in this movie some of the musical themes (but so few). All that to say that my opinion could have been compromised. But I also love cinema, and i can separate and analyze to forge an opinion, leaving my background behind myself.

But what is this?? This version lacks of every single drop of the original characters, scenes, themes developed... I hardly recognized the speech because it is so empty: this movie in a huge void filed with some acting and songs. Even the cast seems poor and i normally love the actors/actress. The only one that i can't really stand normally (anna Hathaway) is actually the one giving her best, and Javert Crowe seems to save both the original songs and the strong believes of the inspector but appears to be half-in half-out of his performance.

They could have had something great, but it is just an empty shell, a long one not well managed in duration, film making, and shooting. Take the opening scene: OK with quickly learn who is who and why... but what does it mean about the characters and their environment? Just their emptiness before they find their goals in life? Well, the shooting seems to go in that direction. And the close-ups in each songs, what are they supposed to mean? Proximity, extreme feelings? That's not the point: we have to see those miserables and the film gave them up by the filthy decorum and it's just too much. OK it's staged, it's a musical but it's not a cynical comedy as it looks like here...

I'm still glad to have seen it because i can judge and now i really want to go back to the books and some french adaptations. But why Hollywood (and cie) always seems to look for the tragic, exaggerating the drama by some powerful (but just awful) voices and music, some sad eyes, and poor dialog's???? a good story suffices by itself, a great one survives and lasts in memories and does not need to be act upon!!

Just try another recipe at some point, just make cinema with reason and eyes, not only with a strong heart and bad influences...

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
well... when call call it miserables!, 24 February 2013
5/10

I"m french, i knew the story even before i read the books, i later heard the french musical and i recognize in this movie some of the musical themes (but so few). All that to say that my opinion could have been compromised. But I also love cinema, and i can separate and analyze to forge an opinion, leaving my background behind myself.

But what is this?? This version lacks of every single drop of the original characters, scenes, themes developed... I hardly recognized the speech because it is so empty: this movie in a huge void filed with some acting and songs. Even the cast seems poor and i normally love the actors/actress. The only one that i can't really stand normally (anna Hathaway) is actually the one giving her best, and Javert Crowe seems to save both the original songs and the strong believes of the inspector but appears to be half-in half-out of his performance.

They could have had something great, but it is just an empty shell, a long one not well managed in duration, film making, and shooting. Take the opening scene: OK with quickly learn who is who and why... but what does it mean about the characters and their environment? Just their emptiness before they find their goals in life? Well, the shooting seems to go in that direction. And the close-ups in each songs, what are they supposed to mean? Proximity, extreme feelings? That's not the point: we have to see those miserables and the film gave them up by the filthy decorum and it's just too much. OK it's staged, it's a musical but it's not a cynical comedy as it looks like here...

I'm still glad to have seen it because i can judge and now i really want to go back to the books and some french adaptations. But why Hollywood (and cie) always seems to look for the tragic, exaggerating the drama by some powerful (but just awful) voices and music, some sad eyes, and poor dialog's???? a good story suffices by itself, a great one survives and lasts in memories and does not need to be act upon!!

Just try another recipe at some point, just make cinema with reason and eyes, not only with a strong heart and bad influences...

Brothers (2004)
brodre and brothers, 20 January 2013

We all know that American cinema can't help itself to do remake of foreign films... That's why i saw Brothers before this original danish movie. When in this one all appears to be shot in steady cam, the American way tries to put some melodramatic trigger.

This version is about feelings, about situation and personal change: life make us evolve like every decision we take and nothing is good or bad, there is a lot of in between. The chose to accumulate the short shootings, practically no music or just a few notes on one instrument,are trying to bring us along this day to day story really well interpreted. The characters in their flaws or every day basis are believable, there is not so much emphasis like in the good but too much American film. It's in their nature to modify, adjust the deepness of the movie and after seeing this 2004 version, we actually miss something: this authenticity.

In both versions, dialogs, ellipses are exactly the same, but characters turned out to be different. We actually have to exact opposite films and this is a real challenge to see both.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Tarantino is back... and unchained!, 17 January 2013
8/10

Yes, the boy wonder is back, here lays today a new master class on cinema. You, who are fond of Western (THE American genre), you will see, since the initial credit in red scarlet letters, that the 60's and 70's and their "chefs d'oeuvre" have been brought back to life! Shots, films, colors, sets... everything is here for a true "hommage".

Except for the true violence and the blood throwings, you will not think, for 2/3 parts of this movie, that you are in Tarantino. Exit (at least partially) the delicious dialogs, the trashy one and the false philosophical one. After all, this is slavery and Tarantino seems apologetic: no false tears, but amazing and despicable human conduct. Forget the false debate, it's not about truth, not about reality but about condition and every situations, taken as a all, are part of History. But it could not be called a Tarantino session, if the last part of the movie was not his usual "we accelerate it all and it will blow to your face" scenes! Amazing how all his characters seem to culminate and reveal their true potential at the same breaking point.

And there is a lot to say about them: our fellow "devils", Django and his love one, are not only unbreakable but really growing in presence scenes after scenes.Both more human than the White folks, and savagely fierce. The beloved Doctor could be some kind of Doc Holliday, well educated, dentist, nice appearance and... hell of a killer when his fellows "Monsieur" Candy or "Big daddy" are archetypes of their generation. Even the supporting roles are great: you have seen some in Westernish production (like the Moonlight guy from Justified) and you will recognize Tarantino's favorite, Samuel L Jackson ahead, but first go back to see some Kill Bill, Death Proof. There is more than just a touch of the same style in all his movie, with some close-up shots you will enjoy the winks!

Despite the Candy land and the Suggar daddy, life in those areas is nothing sweet and tasty. You have a taste of blood lingering in your body and the editing (amazing) is here to help you remember. When you think that there has to be a bottom to strongly violent inhuman behavior, you will fall in a the rabbit hole... OK, you can feel bored at some point, asking yourself "is that it?" but this kind of cinema has always more to show, more to convince you and feel appreciated. Yes the story has some hole in it, but think of Django unchained as a puzzle with pieces that you can contemplate separately but that, all in, do the trick! The final touch, which makes this movie even better than the last, is absolutely the score: rich, different, well adapt, strong and natural... This score is everything at the same time! This movie is cultural, it has an atmosphere, a scent of wonder, it's the Tarantino.

duplicity as a game..., 15 January 2013
9/10

Why can't we do that kind of movie anymore? ... a lot of tension, many humor, a little violence and great but simple story, a recipe we seem to have lost!

There is a lot of Vertigo tension and some idea of the futur humoristic ton he will use in Marnie, but there is especially one great couple of actors. One of the best acting part for Cary Grant and the villain played by James Manson is actually a nicer guy than the introducing Thornhill. There both majestic and the little blond in the middle is both a woman and a girl, adjusting the tone perfectly. The characters are full of surprises and mysteries, they all played some double game ...in a game for freedom!

The idea is basic -some twisted identities- but the shots and the tense music are still amazing! You can recognize Hithcock work everywhere: he spends as much work on the form and the background of his movie and this is a true lesson of Cinema.

We still enjoy his movies at this point and this is quite a collection of master pieces!


Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]