Franco-23

I gave this film 5 points (out of 10) for the landscapes and the beautiful photography. The characters have charm and are cute looking, but the story doesnt help at all. It consists of one cliche after another. It is extremely predictable from almost the beginning. It COULD have been interesting, had they altered the boring formula.

In my opinion, the performances of both Pryce and Hopkings are excellent! No quesion about it. The story uses some historical facts and constructs a plot that is not entirely true. Good effort. I had a good time watching it, but it is not a factual reference.

Well, there are films for every taste for sure. I've seen several films about weird sects that get into regular people's lives and then perform manipulation and/or strange murders and later vanish, and the film ends. There's no intention to explain or make slightly clear what's behind their actions or their motivations etc. This is one of those twisted stories. My personal approach is to watch these films thoroughly and then focus my attention in the technical aspects of them + the acting + the score etc, knowing that the content of the story itself is really insensate and sickly and that it won't take the viewer somewhere else. It's all fine, then you move over and watch something else. It's an OK style to watch every once in a while.

I had no idea that this film had many nominations at last year's César awards (the french Oscars). I started to see it on cable and immediately got interested in the subject and the way they handle it. It's straight forward but subtle at the same time. It has a good moving pace, there's always something going on. The array of characters is very rich and even though there's no time to get more deeply into their private worlds, you get to understand that they are mere human beings doing their best at their job, which is trying to protect all "minors" from abusive situations. I specially liked the realism of the characters, you end up caring for most of them and wishing them well in their actions.

This is one of those movies that tries -on the side- to make an issue out of racism, but it doesn't succeed in doing so... Therefore it focuses on the main topic "a crazy guy who happens to be black and who doesn't like interracial couples because he suspects his late black wife might have cheated on him with her white boss". The film is not original, there are too many clichés, the characters are not developed at all ... overall it stays very shallow. I think the performers were wasted and so was the story. The Hollywood ending was the last thing this film deserved... at least it could have been smarter. Just OK for renting the DVD when the offer is limited.

We all know the book is fantastic, but since the beginning I thought it was going to be difficult to capture its magic in a film, so I went to see it without too high expectations. There were some details that I found great, for example the music, the scenery, the colors etc. BUT I think the feeling of the story couldn't be reached nor transmitted at all, and the acting was below average. To me, the characters at the film were not interesting at all -anything could have been changed from the book and I wouldn't have cared- they were simply "other people". Shakira's (Colombian singer) songs with amazing tropical shots at the background are the best this film has to offer.

Why mixed opinion? It has good dialogs, fine choice of actors and an interesting intimate subject... what else to ask for? Well, in my opinion, I didn't like the way the four women look. It took some credibility away. Aniston was the one closer to what you'd expect of a woman in her situation; but the other three... McDormand looks unnecessarily dirty and messy (even though she's successful as a fashion designer), Cusack's character is not supposed to be careless but she looks ugly and careless, Keener looks physically just a bit better, but her part of the story lacks authenticity. All in all I had a good time, but if these women had been aesthetically a bit appealing I think the whole film would have been much more interesting.

I wanted to rent a film but decided not to do it because they were showing "Darkly Noon" on Cable TV. What a mistake! Since the beginning I started to dislike most of the characters: LY (Fraser) is mentally retarded and weird; CLAY (Mortensen) is dumb and has nothing heavy to offer to the plot; QUINCY (the black guy who purchases the coffins is like a butterfly trying to be funny and speaking nonsense); ROXY (Grace Zabriskie) is not only crazy, but depressing. You also get to see the dead parents of Ly, they made me sick, their role is so disgusting and meaningless that when I reached this point I started to wonder if I was being punished. The only light of this whole film is Ashley Judd as CALLIE: She is sweet and at the same time sexy and she knows she can be tempting. The other guy, Lauren Dean as JUDE was OK, a normal person! which is rare and valuable in this film. The story is stupid, the conversations are pointless, the scenery is boring ... please beware! I don't like to be so negative to a film, but this one was so tedious... a real waste of time.

I think "Hostel" and "Hostel II" are both very good films in this gender. I congratulate Eli Roth and Tarantino. The shots are impeccable, the locations are well selected, the protagonists are good, as is the sound, etc. There are few little details that I would have used less in the sequel -like the gang of gypsy street kids- but all in all I think the selection of scenes was ideal. I definitely hope we'll have at least "Hostel III", there is plenty of material and the story remains wide open for some new twists: *spoilers* - First, there is Beth -the survivor- who has now committed two crimes herself and is now an ACTIVE member of the club (great psychological material) - Then there is Sasha -the boss- whose role could be extended - Also the guy at the front desk could be offered a more active participation in the sequel -let's say he's been sort of promoted ... - Some Slovakians from part II would make interesting casual victims (like the fat one who hits and delivers Lorna and the other guy that seduced the blonde one) - The main "products" offered through the internet in the new story could perfectly be from several nationalities. (I know there's an American issue going on -specially in Europe- but for these clients' twisted minds there should be more incentives, other than origin and nationality... similar to what happened to Stuart who just wanted somebody who resembled his wife). What about some British paying to get some adrenaline with french or Spanish meat or vice-versa? I could keep going... Count me in for the sequel!

This film was a pleasant surprise. I know nothing about the author or the book, but the story is "cute" and it's told in a nice way. I'm sure there are many episodes that are great in the book but during the adaptation got a little messy (Ex. the guy and the train, the tornado, etc.)... Those parts could have been shot with more accuracy and another tone. Anyway, the film goes on, IMO the performances are very good, specially those of Portman, Judd and Cusack; and the music is fine too. I would recommend it for people who are not interested in digging too deep into the characters, but watching a nice melodrama with some sweet humorist brushes.

I wanted to see this film since 2001, when I read it was nominated to the Goya (Spanish Oscar) as best Spanish film of the year. Generally speaking, I think the film delivers and it has two interesting subplots. A great detail is that even though it takes place at a somber area of Madrid, it never makes you feel bad or depressed; they've made good use of the cameras and the lights; the sawing area is well conceived. In general, the direction was outstanding. Unfortunately the story shows some weaknesses, some people are overexposed without being important and some others would need a couple of extra screen minutes/seconds to be more functional. It was a shame the main plot itself ends up being kind of poor and not really original when you recall it... I gave it a 7/10

I think this comedy is well written, well intentioned and well done. I must say that the most outstanding credit is the performance of Meryl Streep ... once again, she is amazing!. Thurman is also OK. The "kid" could've been more authentic ... I found him somehow "pre-designed". I believe there's nothing wrong, unethical or racist in this movie, as some people have written. It's an adult comedy that everybody can enjoy, specially those of us over 30.

***spoiler section *** Some moments that I found hilarious: When the Dr. covers her son's picture and accidentally gives Rafi a book about lesbians and the cabala. When the Dr. speaks to her doctor about what she considers is fine for her patient, but not "quite all right" if her son is involved... I recommend it!

I am giving this film a three because it has some credits when it comes to the techniques used and the introduction of some "humouristic" sequences... but when it comes to the real content, I believe they have twisted the reality so much that made the argument absurd. Had it been neutral and objective, perhaps I could have really enjoyed it. For example, I think it is offensive to the locals the way they paint pre war Iraq, as if it had been a paradise of harmony and peace. Actually this film has nothing to do with reality... Another tasteless segment deals with this very patriotic American mother who lost her son in Iraq and out of grief starts to hate the president and to condemn the US action. Please... nobody likes wars, but defense is something different.

Given that the film deals with two possible roads that the life of an artist can take -based on his attitude towards the political environment- the possibilities of a great plot were immense... El pianista has interesting characters and could have built them in a deeper and more consistent way, but instead, they spent too much time mounting a parody in Paris or a "Felliniesque" encounter at a roof in Barcelona. These wasted times didn't allow the main plot to fully develop.

Ripley's Game is a film with so many assets. I was specially impressed with the photography and the score. But I also found the cast to be very effective and in general the story moves well. If they had added a smarter twist and make it less predictable towards the end I think this film would have been a classic. All in all this has been a very pleasant surprise!

The portrayal of the two main characters is well achieved... the dominant mother afraid of "losing" her daughter... the talented daughter who is emotionally unfit... and then all the consequences that such personalities could bring. The film turns around and you can't exactly know what the main player (an excellent Isabelle Huppert)is thinking of doing next. It is definitely a non-traditional film that you should see ideally with somebody who wouldn't be easily shocked (or disturbed) and with whom you may spend a while discussing it afterwards.

The three stories move and connect with such natural flow and rhythm that you can relate to all of them as if you were living in each decade. The stories are rich and moving, and the acting is so powerful that you can feel and touch the different emotions of the characters. It is a must-see for the lovers of dramatic movies. (10)

I agree this movie is not intended to satisfy all tastes, but I was amazed at its originality and the sequences they use to get into the story and transform it from a deep reflection into an adventure. Streep is (again) perfect, she always gives a high added value to her films. Cooper is incredibly good too. I also admired the reality that Cage projects to his character. I found the film challenging and smart.

This is a real jewel from Argentina... at a time when some viewers are knowing Latin American film making through tasteless stories, I highly recommend "El hijo de la novia". The story is full of discovery and emotions. It touches the importance of the family and the values, it deals with serious issues with a touch of humor, and a lot of class. The rhythm of the story is well balanced and the characters are very real and likeable. Don't miss it! (9/10)

I went to see "Padre Amaro" yesterday and wanted to identify some quality points in this film. Certainly, Garcia, the young mexican actor, is a good one and most of the cast was OK. The story, nevertheless, is like an old soap opera with the variation that this time the main sinner is the priest and not the politician or the bad rich guy in town. There are definitely better stories with the same subject!!

It's a drama that slowly turns into a sharp comedy. Even though you never forget the seriousness of the situation, you start enjoying the sequence and the slight turns of the plot. It reflects the impacts of faith and some ways to pursue it, and it never fails to deliver a touch of reality in a subtle way, even if some situations are a little overacted ... it was a joy to see it

I don't like to ask too much about films that I have decided to see anyway. This time it was a mistake! I wouldn't say that the film is bad, but to me it was somehow boring, never scary, very few things were appealing. I give 3 points to the film, because it was original, period. I was expecting better shots, better performances, better scenarios, better everything. I've seen much more interesting films of this type (most of them are European, by the way).

Bridges, Robins, Cusack are very well suited to their roles at this thriller. The story is interesting and keeps you tense all the time, it deals with the way some terrorist operate, with a very realistic approach. The film moves well most of the time, the characters are Hitchcock's sort of, don't miss it if you like these psychological thrillers.

The original story "Les Liasons Dangereuses" is a masterpiece; this 1999 adaptation is somehow interesting. The cast is OK, but I think they should have portrayed older characters, like in their mid-twenties or so. The villains are better than the victims. Annette (the blonde) looks a bit too dummy and the main victim (Cecile) overacts too often. But the film moves and delivers, except for the ending: The scene where everybody gets to know "the real Kathryn" is one of the most stupid dramatic scenes I've seen in a while. (6)

To develop a topic such as eternal youth, you have to be very creative, have likeable characters and ideally some visual effects. This film has it all. The way the story builds up is superb, Streep acting is wonderful (Hawn's too). The dialogue between Rossellini and Streep is one of my all time favorites. The FX are a masterpiece. I would have given this film a ten, but some scenes towards the end are a little repetitive. In my opinion this is a must see "noir" film. 9/10