luciencoolness Reviews

The Da Vinci Code (2006)

The critics are dead wrong

[8/10 · 18 May 2006]

This is a review from a person that has NOT read the book. The critics were never more polarized: some said it was the best film ever and some said it was a horrible film. The most disturbing part was that most of these critics uttered these claims without ever having seen the film. Even the "journalists" who saw the first show in Cannes were negative in a way that was almost unheard of. In fact, I have read so many negative reviews (too long, too narrative, boring, predictable, laughable, Tom Hanks ashamed, Ron Howard ashamed, public not amused. etc.) that I was almost tempted not to collect my 2 premiere tickets to the nearby cinema, saving me 20 euro's in the process. My companion (who did read the book, by the way) however insisted and we went. Good, so now I can write about it first hand. Yes, it's a long time to sit with your face directed upwards to the big screen (two and a half hours, plus 15 minutes commercials). Granted, and it contains lots of talking and here and there, some plot movements were indeed incredible and it was quite predictable in certain parts (remember, I did NOT read the book nor did I know the plot), but in whole, it was a fascinating film indeed. Of course, it was a fascinating novel to begin with and personally I found the direction of the film, as well as the parts of most notably Tatou, McKellen and Reno, excellent. I am well aware that, although some points are right on, a considerable part of the story is fiction and some of the facts in the film are dead wrong (unambiguously and easily ascertainable), but most stories, if not all, are. Nothing special about that. Why do many people find exactly this story bad? Simply because of the fact that it is believed to undermine these same people's religious beliefs. But religion itself is based on beliefs, and never the whole truth. This lies within the fundamental definition of what we call religion. Myths are not seldom more true. But that is all irrelevant. Religion itself brings that people will always bend the truth or intermix truth with facts, even facts which are out of place, out of time, or both. Nothing new or spectacular about that. What is spectacular, that this is possibly the most interesting time in recent history in a way that many people start to rethink the whole Christian beliefs. And the fact that the Judas gospel was published also this year, helped tremendously in the process. That process of rethinking belief, that alone is valuable. Many critics wrote from this belief: if you are a fundamentalist Christian, you will most likely hate Brown's book, the film and its message. And if you hate the church, chances are that you love it (I can't think of another reason why over half (616) of the 1176 voters to this instant I write this review, valued this film with a 10 out of 10 (no film in history is worth this)). But both opinions don't count for much, if you ask me, because they are prejudiced ans biased and nothing good ever came from those sentiments. And I can really do without critics who claim you go to hell if you go out and see the film. Hey buddy, I know about hell, I live in The Netherlands... -spoilers after this- Was the a historic person called Jesus the Christ? Probably, but not certainly. Was Jesus the Christ married with Maria Magdalena? Possibly. If yes, did they have children? Possibly. And is Maria Magdalena buried under the Louvre? Unlikely. And is Tatou a direct descendant of Maria Magdalena and Jesus? Very unlikely. Did the Catholic church try to hide Christ's bloodline? I don't think so. Does the church know much more than they say? Certainly. Did the church commit genocide over and over for unholy reasons? Absolutely. Is the new testament complete? Most certainly not - even the translations contain dreadful mistakes. Were there indeed more than 100 gospels instead of 4? Very likely. Is half of Dan Brown's book fantasy? Most likely, yes, but also half is most likely true. but that is again not the issue here. The issue is that if you do have a sufficiently long attention span, if you do have an open mind and if you do have more than half a brain, you may very well enjoy this film. And never stop thinking, no matter who informs you: The Priest, The Politician, The Legislator, The Judge, The Scientist, The Teacher, The Novelist, Mr Gates or the critic. Just never stop thinking...

Under the Tuscan Sun (2003)

just too charming

[7/10 · 30 December 2004]

Loosely based on Frances Mayes' book "Under the Tuscan Sun", Lane stars as the 35-year-old San Francisco writer Frances Mayes. After she loses her house to her philandering husband, thanks to the retarded alimony laws of California, her best friend and pregnant lesbian Patti gives her a ticket to go to Tuscany in Italy, with a tour for homosexual people. Helped by the circumstances and the endearing mr. Martini, she decides to buy an old villa, which is refurbished by a group of Polish workers. She meets lots of interesting people along the way, and romance. All characters in the film are just charming and nice, in fact, too much so to be believable. But it makes for a nice feel-good movie, although your impression will depend very much on your own experiences in life. The message is good, though, albeit surely not for each and every individual on this planet: Life offers you a thousand chances ... all you have to do is take one. That the chance that Frances took worked out absolutely perfectly, why not. It sure is nice for a change to see homosexuals not portrayed as heterohating scum, but as nice, tolerant and charming persons. Overall, a worthwhile and interesting film if you can accept the fact that sometimes everything does come up like roses....

Better Than Chocolate (1999)

Worse than cheap chocolate

[2/10 · 11 November 2004]

This film is certainly not what it's cracked up to be. The film is very boring in fact. The characters are very flat and it seems very much over-directed and unnatural. I got the impression that it's just a weak plot with throw-in-your-face lesbianism that is not erotic at any time. The story is incoherent, forced moralistic and very predictable with lots of stereotypes. I found it very hard to finish watching. I counted just three smiles in this so-called "comedy" and nothing more. At times this film is thoroughly irritating. In short, I can't recommend it at all. I am known to enjoy a good film with a lesbian theme and to me there is no such thing as being "too explicit". But this film is just three smiles short of total crap and therefore worse than cheap chocolate.

You 2 (2003)

thoroughly enjoyable

[9/10 · 4 November 2004]

This feel-good comedy, directed by Pascale Simons and starring Chanella Hodge as Sandra Samson and Esmée de la Bretonière as Yvonne (who aren't lesbian, by the way) play in this wonderful short film by Jenny Mijnhijmer. The Surinam hair salon of Sandra and her mother Louise is a lively meeting place in which the 'women eater' lesbian Sjette is a favorite subject. Sandra, who takes an active part in these discussions, does not dare to tell her mother she's just like her. The chemistry between mother and daughter, the humor, music, interesting people, colorful images and the long french kiss between Sandra and her girlfriend, make this film thoroughly enjoyable and leaves a warm feeling. This short film was shown on filmfestivals all over the world and has won many prizes.

End of the Line (1987)

Interesting feelgood roadmovie

[8/10 · 13 September 2004]

This film is really a roadmovie. In this case, the road is a cargo train track from the fictional town Clifford, Arkansas, to Chicago, a trip of what would be roughly 1000 kilometers or 650 miles. Roadmovies are often interesting. You get to see a lot from what would be seen from the train. This put together with a feelgood story, slapstick humor and drama, makes it really worthwhile to see. It's hardly ever boring. It's not even a predictable story. I'd recommend it. The model track in the owner's office must make people who like toy trains drool. As the user ratings show, some rate it high, some rate it low. I belong to the first category. As far as I am concerned, it's in the top 5 of train movies.