Change Your Image
RadiSadek
My favorite kind of films are science-fiction, movies from around the world (especially Japanese, Danish and indie American), film-noirs from the 40s and 50s, silent, and Italian from the 50s and 60s.
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
El ángel exterminador (1962)
What Was Called Incoherent Is Now Called Surreal
To keep this review short, I found that this movie is chaotic, boring, messy and most of all, uninteresting. All of this is fine, you come across amateurish movies like this once in a while, you turn off your T. V. and move to something else. After all, not all movies can be perfect.
However, what led me to watch this movie was other comments here on this site. What people called boring movie is now called "surreal". Sorry, but why do "surreal" movies have to have a messy, amateurish, and above all, an incoherent scenario and dialogues? Can't we have interesting and realistic discussions, with occasionally some surreal moments? In this way, the surrealism can be emphasized.
And no, this movie is not creative nor intellectual. It is incoherent from the beginning. In the first 15 minutes, the dialogues were so messy and unrealistic that I didn't understand anything. Therefore, I cannot remember them, and consequently, they are meaningless. Incoherent is not artistic, nor creative. Not everyone can be David Lynch.
Twin Peaks: The Return (2017)
Twin Peaks: More Boring, You Die
Every now and then, I feel the urge to review a movie or a series. This urge does not follow a certain logic, it is only due to the fact that I want to convey a message to somebody, anybody in the world.
Concerning the third season of Twin Peaks, my message is the following. I simply cannot believe that, at the time of writing this review, nearly 60% of all users have voted 10/10. This is incredible, it is highly improbable. I think that it is impossible, but hey, let's assume, for the sake of the argument, that it is somehow true.
If it is true, then IMDb ratings mean nothing at all, and they have never meant anything. How can 60% of people vote 10/10 for this crap?
I am a big fan of Indie, European and Japanese movies, where the action takes a lot more time to develop, with emphasis on the creation of the proper tone and mood for the film. They are usually much slower, as compared to your standard Hollywood flicks, where you don't need to think because you usually don't have the time as you are bombarded with action (think of the shallowness of movies like Inception, the Dark Knight, Interstellar, i.e. Hollywood flicks loaded with action).
In good Indie movies, the scenes are slower for a reason: you have to be able to take time to FEEL something. This is paramount, you have to feel something. But there is a time limit I personally can take, let's say 10 minutes, for a scene with not much happening to it: this is it, 10 minutes. Even in the slowest indie movie, 10 minutes is the maximum I can stand without something really happening.
Now in Twin Peaks Season 3 (TP3), 10 minutes would be a blessing, it would be a miracle. In TP3, some useless scenes carry on for hours (as it is a Series).
What is the meaning of a talking tree? What is the meaning of watching a guy sweep the floor? What is the meaning of watching a dream sequence for 45 minutes? It cannot have any meaning at all because these scenes are pretty forgettable, and TP3 is a series: it stretches for hours and hours, and you cannot remember all those details. They are useless.
The first season of TP was interesting because of the subtle conversations, the character development, the proper setting of the tone and atmosphere (you could really feel that you are in a small remote town with all of its little secrets, heartwarming but devious inhabitants : this made the series great). On the other hand, TP3 is just boring, violent, and cold, and presents no character development at all.
Now, let's go back to the ratings: if you look more carefully at the stats, you will see that Males Aged 18-29 have rated, on average, 9.3. These are probably the same which have rated movies like Inception and the Dark Knight Rises 10/10. Really?? To me, there is something highly illogical here. How can these action-oriented would-be-intellectual average movie-goers endure so much non-action scenes? And even more incredible, is it possible that they have rated TP3 10/10?
10/10 ?? Everything is perfect in TP3, really?? No flaws whatsoever ??
Either the ratings are rigged, or most of the Males Aged 18-29 are sheep, following the recent trend like sheep, nodding their heads whenever they don't understand something because of society pressure or because of fear of appearing stupid (if you didn't get it, then you must be stupid).
This series deserves 4/10. It is simply too boring to endure: more than 20 hours of boredom is too much, life is too short. Way too short.
As the famous song of Queen goes: "you don't fool me, you don't fool me, pa pa pa pa papapapap". Twin Peaks Season 3 is crap.
Life Stinks (1991)
Horrible! What was Mel Brooks thinking?
Among the movies that I have seen so far, and I have seen quite a few , this movie represents Hollywood the best. Unfortunately, not the best of Hollywood, but its worse.
Art, in its absolute definition, comes from within the person, through a complex yet mandatory process, mainly deemed as "inspiration". An artist must be inspired in order to achieve any kind of work of art, be it a painting, a building, or anything creative.
Movies are mainly a product of art and artists.
However, I have developed, through my 1400 movies that I have watched, a certain ability to detect uninspired movie directors, and boy Mel Brooks is one.
This is my explanation of why this movie is so unfunny, distasteful, and even offending in its jokes: a director forced to continue to produce "comedies", at any cost. He is completely uninspired here, and as we saw it, art, and especially jokes, must come from within. They cannot be forced. If they are, then movies like this spurt out inexorably, like snakes in the desert.
For the record, I have never considered Mel Brooks, nor his films, funny.
How many times did you laugh while watching Life Stinks? I bet it is not more than 3 or 4 times, and probably a mild chuckle. And this is supposed to be a comedy...
4/10, and I am giving 4 because at least he TRIED to make us laugh, which is much harder than it sounds.
The Godfather (1972)
Overrated action movie, nothing more...
OK so The Godfather is an entertaining movie. OK, so it has some nice music, decent acting, and a gripping plot. All in all, I'm secure enough to state that it is an OK movie.
However, the fact that it is rated 9.2 out of 10, and on #2 spot in the top IMDb movie list requires some analysis. Deep analysis on this simple question: is this movie really better than the 100,000 or so other movies in IMDb? Better yet, is there something wrong with humanity if a movie about sick, violent, greedy, vengeful, hateful people gets a #2 spot?
My answer to this last question is, sadly, yes. Well, at least for the bulk of humanity: individually, there is no problem to rate this movie 10/10 (in fact, there is but hey, I'm putting it into perspective here), because it is fairly entertaining. But the fact that statistically it has been rated so high shows you about the sad and devious nature of people.
I, for one, have rated at least 200 movies higher than The Godfather, and I am proud of it, because I cannot convince myself that a film which tells you the story of people with the lowest possible moral can be one of the best I've seen. Main characters have to have at least a very small ray of humanity and decency in them for the movie to be really good (character depth), or else, it is just an average action movie, nothing more...
8/10
The Incredible Shrinking Man (1957)
Complex Film-noir
No spoilers here. No need.
The Incredible Shrinkin Man (TISM) is way more complex than I originally imagined, which was a fresh surprise, given the slump in the quality of movies nowadays.
Recent action movies tend to make the story as complex as possible simply by confusing the viewer by tricky storytelling. The best example which immediately comes to mind is Inception, but there a tons of other examples. Inception is a really shallow movie, but the chances that Christopher Nolan fans will agree with me are the same as those of a teenager agreeing that most recent pop or rap songs are trash. Can't happen, right?
Coming back to TISM, which is almost the opposite of Inception, its power relies on the fact that the story is very simple: a man shrinks inexorably to the infinitely small. This simple idea can give way to the most complex questions: how can we live/survive if we are, say, a foot tall, an inch or less, etc. Now, the movie is pure Film-noir genius, as we are entirely immersed into the daily complications of living such an ordeal. Consequently, it is very entertaining just for that, and I was kept at the edge of my seat during the entire movie.
I highly recommend TISM to anyone who's into movies that rely on a combination of deep psychological and philosophical storytelling while at the same time being mysterious and funny.
9.5/10
The Tree of Life (2011)
Pefect Depiction of Childhood.
This is one movie which is truly puzzling. How in the world somebody got the courage to make it is really beyond me.
Now, The Tree of Life is clearly not aimed at this new wave of pseudo-intellectual Christopher Nolan fans of Inception or Interstellar or any of these turkeys like Drive, which actually make 18-35 year old average movie goers think that they have seen a good movie because they are more cleverly tricked than, say, older movies like Terminator.
It is not a typical so-called artsy movie neither, which gets automatically some kind of price and praise at film festivals longing to get known recognition because it has been slowed down to a point where you cannot take it anymore (think about Uncle Boonme).
I really do not know how this movie got made.
But this is only one side of the brilliance of The Tree of Life. Actually, it is much more than a movie: it is a breathtaking and honest experience about the loss of innocence during childhood. While watching the TTOL, I felt like experiencing a collection of memories from a really ordinary person, events which may seem insignificant at first but really shape our identity (e.g. the scene where the father asks his son to give him the ligther). It is also shot in a way that is very emotional and original.
But that make the TTOL so powerful is the complexity of its characters. You could sympathize with any of the main characters, even with the father because even if he is cruel at times, we all know that he acted in this way for the good of his sons. I am not saying if he is good or bad, I am only saying that he is more complex than that, and people are very complex. I think this is the hardest thing to for a director, and this is what lacks nowadays in most movies.
Truly mesmerizing experience which reminded of how insignificant we are (think about our tiny place in the enormity of the universe and our non-existent effect on its evolution, hence the first part of the movie), yet at the same how precious a human life can be.
10/10 for such emotion and depth in a movie.
Les triplettes de Belleville (2003)
Typical French Emotionless Movie
The more I think of this movie, the more I hate it.
Why is that? Because as time passes, I forget its shiny looks and nicely done drawings, and see it more as it really is: an empty shell of a movie, with no lovable character, and a very lame, unoriginal and clichéd story. And especially boring.
I believe that it is 1000 times more difficult to make somebody laugh and marvel at something beautiful, than to create ugly works (much easier actually). That is why modern art is most of times about ugly stuff. Yes, I am comparing this movie to modern art, because that is what I was thinking of during the entire movie. Ugliness disguised as satire.
This movie is also devoid of any emotional feelings. This is what you get when you try to make something original just for the sake of it, while not being inspired at all. The french have a long lasting hatred against the Americans, mainly because their greatness has been utterly reduced to practically nothing. So, in a desperate effort to prove that they still exist and still capable of reaching the high level of American Movies like Rattatouile Toy Story, etc., they said to themselves why not make a satire on these movies. Except that I, for one, saw right through it as it really is: a lame movie. Period.
Next time, try to make us laugh, or cry, or happy or sad, anything but try to make us feel something. And then we'll talk about your views on fat Americans and Disney movies.
4/10 only for the graphics.
The Adventures of Tintin (2011)
Awful! Just Plain Awful Hollywood Crap or How To Make Money With Any Story You Get
This movie should be considered the symbol of Hollywood stupidity, lack of inspiration and greed. Please let me explain why.
I have been an avid reader of Tintin since I was a small kid. I have read all of the Tintin comics several times(in french). Enough to know them by heart, actually! My favorite one is "Tintin au tibet". My favorite character is Haddock by far! I have even read books and commentaries about Tintin.
In my opinion, Spielberg's Tintin resembles Hergé's Tintin on the surface, hence in nothing. This proves that Spielberg is either not telling the truth by saying that he is a big Tintin fan, or that he made this movie for the masses. In either case, it is a bad movie. Here are the facts proving my point:
-Hergé's Haddock is a true depiction of human error and weaknesses: alcoholic, selfish, choleric, but in the same time so kind, funny and lovable. In other words, human. On the other hand, Tintin is the perfect hero: always trying to do good, never hesitating, very strong, etc.
-Spielberg's Haddock is unfunny, unkind and actually not lovable AT ALL! But the best comes in the end: when Tintin was hesitating and Haddock was so sure about doing the right thing and going for adventure and blabla. No!!!!! You cannot do that, Mr. Spielberg. This single thing proved to me that this director hasn't understood anything about Tintin.
It's all about the money honey! That's it and that's why the quality of movies sucks these days! Examples are numerous.
I don't want to debate anymore, but I would like to add that the movie is boring. Only the graphics are OK, but personally I don't go to the movies for the quality of the special effects.
And what about Haddock and his sheep-lover joke? Is this supposed to be funny?
The General (1926)
OK comedy for the 1920s, but not for now
I went to see this movie on the big screen in my hometown, with the idea that it was a very nice comedy .
Actually, I only laughed once or twice during the entire 1h15 or so. The jokes were Charlie Chaplin like, with very simple humour. Most of the time , the main hero was behaving like a clown. This doesn't make me laugh at all. If you want to see really funny jokes about someone being clumsy, watch Tim Allen in Home Improvement! That's funny and clever. This film was just stupid.
I guess people were a lot simpler back then, and jokes were cheaper. I couldn't connect to the film and the jokes because I have seen far better comedies.
As for the story, it was interesting at first, but it dragged a lot in the train chase scenes.
All in all, this movie is no masterpiece. It is pretty average, has not dated well, and is pretty forgettable.
6/10 only for the entertainment.
The Night of the Hunter (1955)
Bad movie, completely over-rated
This is actually not the worst movie I have seen, but it is certainly a very bad one. It is simply uninteresting. It is one of those movies you watch and forget once you have turned off your DVD. Nothing special here except the bad acting and the completely unrealistic story. Saying that this is very good movie is like saying that an entirely blue painting is a work of art.
When it first came out in 1955, I heard it was a big flop back then and Charles Laughton even stopped directing movies after this one. I understand him and I think the guy made the right choice. I surely agree with most of the people who watched the movie at that time.
So I ask myself: why is it rated 8.2 on IMDb and on top #188 today? Why was it a big failure in the 50s and a success now? What has changed? Personally, I think the answer lies in the fact that we are beginning to over-analyze movies. Food for thought.
I stopped believing in IMDb rating after seeing this movie, The Dark Knight and Inception in the top 250 movies.