Reviews

13 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
Boring and not historically accurate
19 April 2007
The sets and costumes are beautiful, there are some good background actors, but overall we found this movie very dull. There's no rhythm, not enough story, the acting is not what it should be. Was it an attempt to follow the fashion of history biopics of these last years? Fouquet, Molière, and now La Fontaine. But if his writings are forever famous, does his life deserves a movie? Judging from this one, I'd say not. Plus there are some annoying literary omissions. For instance, in this movie Jean de la Fontaine seems to discover the idea of talking animals, he gets inspiration by looking at animals and insects... Yet everybody knows, and he himself never denied it, that he was mostly inspired by the classic stories of Esope. He merely (yet brilliantly) modernized them.
7 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Amazing !
5 February 2004
I'm seen this documentary in its feature-form, in a movie theatre. And... wouah! The pictures are astonishing, one really wonder how by Jove did they manage to film those waves, those animals, those... is that a plant ? a predator ? a creature from the movie Abbyss ? Anyway, it's remarkable. Sure we've seen a lot of such documentary on TV, with weird animals and so on, but none with such a beauty, a precision, a deep emotion. The only downside is the commentary. In French it's narrated by François Perrin, usually good and familiar with beautiful documentaries, but the text is not good at all. Not enough informative of too much, innapropriatly anthropoid...
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
RRRrrrr!!! (2004)
1/10
Sooo disappointing
3 February 2004
I went to see this thinking that it was some Alain Chabat's work. If not always very subtle, his movies or shows are always funny. But RRRrrrr!!! is by the Robin des Bois, who count among the worst "humorists" of today, Chabat only has a small part and I really wonder what has gotten into him to make this film... In this movie, the few guests stars (Depardieu, Rochefort) really seem bored to death, there is one gag every ten minutes and it's not even funny, or it is the first time but not after having been overexploited over and over again. It might have been a funny short movie, there is enough material for an half and hour short, certainly not for a full-lenght feature.
17 out of 57 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Taxi 3 (2003)
6/10
Not SO bad
30 January 2003
To be honest, I was expecting a lot worse from the third movie based on a story barely enough for one. But the actors and jokes are still OK, and even if this can't be called a good movie, it is not such a bad "3", and it even can be fun if you take a great care not to think too much. Relax, fasten your seat belt, and you may enjoy it. Let's just hope they won't try to make "Taxi 4"...
0 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Brocéliande (2003)
3/10
How can it be possible to make such a movie nowadays ?
17 January 2003
The actresses are cute and the sets, while simple, quite OK. Apart from this, there is nothing to save from this movie. Incredibly bad acted, dumb to tears dialogues, all-too-expected plot, a lot of goofs and inconsistencies (for instance, a pretty young girl gets hits in the head by a morning star and not only she survives, but barely with a scratch !)... To make it short because it does not worth more, even the fans of the genre can avoid it.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Pretty good, but...
12 January 2003
I may be called a language extremist, but I was very disturbed by the fact that they were all speaking English. Yes, Malkovich speaks English, as most of his potential public. But still, there is no reason for Spanish-speaking actors in a Spanish-speaking story set in a Spanish-speaking country to do so !!! Apart from this, the film itself was good, well played and with an interesting construction.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ghost Ship (2002)
7/10
Better than expected
1 January 2003
I'm not a big fan of this kind of movies, but this one was better than most of the others I've seen. It's pretty well done, and even if the story is not that original and coherent, it's enjoyable and gives a little thrill.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dinotopia (II) (2002)
3/10
That is a massacre !
29 December 2002
This is a shame compared to the marvelous books ! How dare they turn this wonderful story in such a stupid, badly played and (although the blame is not on the makers) terribly French-dubbed ? The special effects are quite OK, after all I do not think they had the budget of a movie, but it is not enough to make something good. Especially being a long-time big fan of the books, I am VERY disappointed.
0 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Disappointing
14 August 2002
I've quite enjoyed the first opus, but found this one disappointing, although there are some good things (and some good girls ;-) The F/x, especially for the big worm and the two-headed guy, where poor, and it hasn't the fun of the first one. So... Ok, it's a "2". There where some worst sequels, but some really better.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Not bad at all, but could have been even better
8 August 2002
All the actors are very good and the cut is original, a little strange at first but intelligent. More than a movie, it's more a gallery of characters who interact in a very every-day-like life. Enjoyable, yet after having seen the trailer I was expecting for something more.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Moulin Rouge! (2001)
6/10
Very strange...
2 August 2002
The note I gave (6) was mostly for the photography, the lights and the digital effects, which were stunning, something never seen before. Some points for the music and the costumes, too. But I was quite disappointed by the movie itself. A lot of people told me it was great, but I did not like it as must as they did. I found it confusing, I didn't like the actors nor the acting... Actually, I don't really know why I didn't like, but it is so.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Could have been worst... Could have been much better.
19 July 2002
I only went to this movie because I don't pay for it thanks to an unlimited pass, I had some free time and that was almost the only one I haven't seen yet. Some things are pretty funny, but the overall impression is that they've wanted to copy series like Buffy, but it's not better and doesn't deserve the big screen. F/x are quite poor, sets stinks... I thought it would have been a parody, but the biggest problem of this movie is that it's taking itself way too seriously.
2 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Good and refreshing movie
19 July 2002
I liked this film very much, as I liked before the other movies by Cedric Klapish. All the actors, coming from all over Europe, are very good and funny. One can really feel the influence of "Amelie", like in many other recent movies, but it's ok.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed