Squeele Reviews

Expedition: Bismarck (2002 TV Movie)

Enjoyable documentary, worth a look despite some flaws

[7/10 · 23 November 2008]

In a nutshell: director James Cameron and his crew (among them his engineer brother Mike, German WWII veterans, DP Vince Pace and a bunch of equally brilliant scientists and historians) join a Russian research ship in order to film the wreckage of battleship Bismarck, a ginormous Nazi cruiser sunk by the British (or was she?) in May 1941 off the coast of France, or as the commentary by Lance Henriksen dubs her: "the Death Star of her time".

This is a docu-fiction type of documentary. Phenomenal archive footage and stunning present-day images are blended (sometimes not flawlessly) with CGI schematics as well as stiff period dramatization. As much as I love Jim Cameron's movies (I truly think he's one of the most important filmmakers working today, even his lesser efforts in the fiction domain being better than 95% of their rivals IMHO) I wasn't introduced yet to his documentary work. Now that I've seen "Expedition: Bismarck" I honestly can recommend it to anyone interested in history, underwater filming, or just documentaries altogether. That being said, some of Cameron's flaws or shortcomings as an artist were more visible here than in his previous work, and it prevented me to completely dive into it.

Cameron's brand of tech-heavy obsession transpires logically more here than in any other film. There is a strong emphasis on engineering aspects and basic underwater physics. As much as it's portrayed efficiently with much pedagogic concern, it might be a bit hard to follow for the younger - or less tutored - audience. The first 30 minutes skip quite bizarrely through the historical facts, the Bismarck being portrayed in such a hammy manner than its sinking in comparison seems like a mere footnote. As much as this choice pays off later on, I still found the intro quite unbalanced and suffering from a poor dramatization that looks like a cheap A&E biography.

Another annoying aspect was the historical theories submitted by the film. Much like another Cameron-produced documentary (you know, that obnoxious movie about the tomb of Jesus?) some established historical theories are being challenged here by the filmmakers. And even if I don't believe in any bias on their end, the way they present their "discoveries" is way too rushed or opaque to be credible. Sometimes James Cameron and his mates sound like smug, arrogant tomb raiders jumping to conclusions while said conclusions are neither really explained nor sustaining their arguments. Nothing in this movie shows a lack of good faith from the filmmakers, but the way they mistake themselves for History detectives is totally out of place.

That being said, these flaws are quite forgettable compared to the astounding undersea filming. This is truly the most breathtaking marine film since Louis Malle and Jacques Yves Cousteau's groundbreaking 50's film "Le monde du silence". And more importantly, the usual criticism toward Cameron's work (a so-called coldness and lack of emotion) is here negated by the very moving story of two 80 year-old men who survived the sinking. The genuine emotion from those two German WWII vets not only humanizes the story, but shows how young spirits could've been brainwashed by the Nazi propaganda. Yesterday's enemies being today's friends gives this movie a well-earned upbeat ending that never feels staged or stolen.

Quantum of Solace (2008)

Good, relentless action film. But still a leap back compared to Casino Royale...

[6/10 · 31 October 2008]

In a nutshell: I, for one, found Bond's latest "Quantum of Solace" quite enjoyable but with some annoying flaws. Almost non-stop action with some sarcastic bits of humor (but never to the point of making the hero look silly or ridicule himself, like a Roger Moore 007, or Downey's Iron Man more recently) and all-around good acting. On the other hand the script is weak and quite messy, uselessly convoluted for the paper-thin story it tells.

Direction-wise this is *not* a cheap Bourne rip-off as some people have claimed here and there. It truly feels like a Bond movie. The action is frenetic, filmed pretty much in the same vein as "Casino Royale", which is a good thing. Sure, there are some bold tracking shots and not-so-steady cam, but never to the point of being too shaky. It's used efficiently, not in a show-off way. A Bond movie has to be spectacular and if clearly not groundbreaking that one hits the mark.

But as far as I'm concerned, the rest wasn't as tight. The direction is somewhat repetitive (especially when establishing one of the countless new locations, when the director abuses of music and multiple cuts to amp up the exposition scenes, as if the action scenes weren't titillating enough). The story is poorly introduced and it gets worse with every new character hitting the screen. As for the usually excellent Mathieu Amalric playing the main baddie, he's given too few too late to really shine. His very last scene with Daniel Craig is really good, the fights are brutal and the guy clearly has the charisma to stand against Bond, but plot-wise he's really wasted.

Now, for the lame mistakes they cleverly avoided: no Michael Bay editing style. No - or at least very few - obnoxious product placement. No annoying or miscast Bond Girl. The movie is not shying away from the violence, with possibly one of the highest body-counts in the whole franchise. This is still the assassin Bond we're given (with another great performance from Daniel Craig), not the caricatured spy. The opening title sequence is being designed by newcomers in the Bond universe and they made a very good job, blending all the ingredients without being too flashy and that actually benefits the song from Jack White and Alicia Keys. I found said song much more enjoyable during the credits than without them - where "Casino Royale" gave me the exact opposite feeling.

Unfortunately, almost everything else was handled more firmly by Martin Campbell and the producers in 2006. Marc Forster does a decent job and took some interesting decisions regarding the tone as well as some specific scenes (without spoiling much, I'd say that his use of Puccini's "Tosca" was quite original) but sometimes too much action is detrimental, even to an action movie.

All in all, a good but flawed Bond movie whose downsides could have been easily avoided. Following "Casino Royale" was doubly harmful; not only because of its inherent quality, but also for the writers' mishandling of its legacy. If the next Bond tries again to tie some loose ends from "Quantum of Solace", I just hope they'll learn from their mistakes and give it a more coherent feel. No one wants to suffer the decreasing quality of the post-GoldenEye Bonds again, right?

JCVD (2008)

Interesting movie, with a terrific performance by Van Damme.

[7/10 · 5 June 2008]

Interesting concept from french director Mabrouk el Mechri: real action star Jean Claude Van Damme is engaged into a bitter legal battle for his daughter's custody. Said daughter is mocked by her classmates for her father's antics, and prefers staying with her mother. Ridiculed by the media and smarty-pants naysayers, condemned to shoot sub-par B-movies in eastern Europe, almost broke and devastated by his little girl's condition, Jean Claude flies back to his native Belgium in order to find solace. After an odd encounter with small time crooks, his life and perception by the public will be changed forever.

From a direction/scriptwriting point of view, the movie is somewhat lacking focus. It's relying a bit too much on inside jokes and heist movie clichés, for better or worse. There are some truly great moments (the opening scene is hilarious - any scene using Baby Huey's "Hard Times" tune cannot be bad anyway; the court scenes are cleverly written and the very last shot finds a perfect balance of emotion without being overblown or tear-jerking) and the whole film deserves praise for being original and clever. However it stretches some scenes way too much, uses an awful bleached color scheme that could turn off some people (it's just a detail, but it annoyed me throughout the whole screening) and uses unnecessary flashbacks instead of sticking to a more tight storytelling, which could've benefited the movie in my humble opinion.

However, these little flaws are nothing compared to the enormous heart this movie displays. Jean Claude Van Damme may not be Daniel Day Lewis or Sean Penn, but he gives an astounding performance in this film. He's very comfortable in the comical scenes, but his acting chops really shine when the movie gets emotional. His long monologue, looking at the camera, and the audience (and perhaps even God) is nothing short of amazing. In his own words, he really begs for a second chance not only in his career, but in life. He's incredibly moving (acting in his native language helps a lot) and above all doesn't try to pretend he's something more than a washed up movie star, with a somewhat limited vocabulary. He just asks for one more chance, and judging by this flick he truly deserves it.

Overall, a nice surprise for those unfamiliar with "the Muscles from Brussels" and a refreshing comedy. Except a few complaints about the pace and the direction it's a highly recommended movie. And hopefully the beginning of a new career for JCVD.

Borsalino (1970)

A good gangster movie with two of the greatest French actors

[6/10 · 5 December 2007]

Borsalino tells the rise and fall of two small-time crooks in 1930 Marseille. Their rivalry soon becomes a strong friendship, allowing them to reach a place in the sun among other gangsters, even threatening the truce between the two ruthless families that control the city.

Jean-Paul Belmondo and Alain Delon shine in this enjoyable recreation of the ever-corrupted French city. The sets and costumes are terrific, and the music by Claude Bolling became an instant classic. So classic in fact that the director Jacques Deray over-uses it in some parts. The secondary characters are interesting somewhat but clearly overshadowed by the two leads. As for the script, it manages many enjoyable moments wandering between funny and tragic bits, however it is too hammy to totally convince and is not helped by a very dated type of editing. I don't know if it was to mimic the style of older gangster movies, but the movie should've been tighter on that point.

All in all, a very decent French movie. Far from flawless, but recommended.

Quelques messieurs trop tranquilles (1973)

An interesting take on the 70's France.

[6/10 · 17 September 2007]

Georges Lautner, famous French director of classic comedies such as "Les tontons flingueurs", "Les barbouzes" or latter, more serious work like Jean-Paul Belmondo dark actioner "Le professionnel" blends laughs, gunshots and pot-smoking hippies into a decent, sometimes even hilarious comedy where French rednecks and free-loving, bare-chested youngsters learn to go beyond their mutual dislike and live in harmony in a deserted village. But some mysterious events raise the awareness of the local police force and murder, gunfights and T&A ensue.

Some of the funny parts are a bit dated, but it's still both an enjoyable comedy with somewhat visionary scenes (like an hilarious criticism of placement product) and Lautner's direction is pretty solid, even 30+ years later. The acting is solid too, with many familiar faces (the late Paul Preboist as well as Andre Pousse, Henri Guybet and the great Michel Galabru) for those who know 70's French cinema... Oh, and did I mention many semi-nude scenes with gorgeous hippie girls? Not a masterpiece, not an exploitation flick either, but an enjoyable movie nonetheless.

Outward Signs of Wealth (1983)

A decent 80's romantic comedy.

[6/10 · 9 August 2007]

This French film is quite different from the movies of its era: mostly French cinema was about comedies (silly or clever, gross or sophisticated) or drama. "Signes extérieurs de richesses" is one of a kind: a romantic comedy with (somewhat) social relevance.

Jean-Jacques - nicknamed Gigi - (the always great Claude Brasseur) is a successful veterinarian. His pet clinic is full of wealthy women, as well as his bed. So, when the IRS sends an average-looking girl (Josiane Balasko) to check his fiscal files, he's not really impressed and even laughs about it, too confident in his accountant Jérôme (the hilarious Jean-Pierre Marielle) who reveals himself to be a crook. Now, Gigi is busy with serious money issues, his clients' pets to care about, and the ugly-but-lovable IRS agent who makes his heart tick...

The characters are really well written, the hero is neither totally an asshole, nor a truly sympathetic guy. Same with the IRS girl shown first-hand as a dragon lady, and who reveals herself a shy, fragile woman seeking love.

Overall, a nice surprise from an otherwise mediocre era for French cinema.

Andalucia (2007)

Too many clichés, not enough heart.

[3/10 · 23 June 2007]

I saw an advance screening of this film and I was literally bored to tears. I haven't seen Alain Gomis' previous works, but that one is a real mess.

This is the story of Yacine, a young social worker trying to leave his past, his low-life friends and his family behind him. He finds a job at a soup kitchen and soon the audience is drifting in his stream of consciousness from a one-night-stand to another, his obsession with a female model, his quest for his roots and odd encounters with homeless folks.

Except for the use of the music, a decent cinematography and a few refreshing funny parts, this film totally misses the mark by awkwardly blending *every single cliché* you could expect from a French independent movie (not only French, as the director quotes - or knocks off - Spike Lee's signature "floating shot"). Between "social realism" and fantasizing, professional actors and "real people" (the latter acting far better than the former - go figure) the movie reeks as much of amateurism and demagogy as it lacks authenticity and heart.

For instance: just as you were thinking the director spared us the sexual identity crisis (the most outrageously unoriginal and overblown cliché of the genre) the main character kisses a guy for no apparent reason. But that's after he tried to beat him up. And lectured him about his origins, his job, his looks...

Of course, the unsympathetic nature of about every character doesn't help. If handled correctly it could be a breeze of fresh air and a clever change from the always nice characters we're accustomed to. But in the end it's not the case. Speaking of which, the ending is so silly it makes Hollywood endings look bold in comparison.

You may give it a try, but at your own risks.

The Count of Monte Cristo (1998)

An awfully directed, terribly adapted version of one of the greatest stories ever.

[2/10 · 18 June 2007]

Every fan of the original novel must cringe while watching this amateurish rendition of Alexandre Dumas' classic tale of vengeance. And every person who hasn't read it yet should avoid it at all costs.

The Count of Monte-Cristo is one of the most adapted novels in the history of Cinema/television. And oddly not a single adaptation was even remotely faithful, if so entertaining. However this French mini-series had the perfect length (6 Hrs) to succeed in putting on screen the innumerable characters, themes and places where so many failed miserably for almost a century.

Well, better luck next time, I guess. As Josee Dayan provides what is arguably one of the worst Monte Cristo ever put on screen. Which is somehow an amazing performance considering the challenge...

You're in for six LONG hours of mediocre performances, lousy direction and terribly cheesy writing. Of course Dumas' style was also very heavy and somewhat ham-fisted, but it never harmed the main plot and even managed to convey the social criticism, as well as contain the over-the-top situations and strengthen the emotion.

This horrible mess has nothing. No social relevance, no engaging "larger than life" drama or adventure. The sets are cheap and the art direction ugly. And above all, the emotion never translates from the book to the screen. Not a single minute out of 360. Nice achievement.

Oh, and did I mention that they *changed* the ending? Turning the amazing, challenging and beautiful conclusion of the novel into a ridiculous piece of garbage the worst Hollywood hack would be ashamed of.

Avoid this thing. Seriously.

Gladiator (2000)

A decent B-grade Peplum turns into an overblown blockbuster.

[4/10 · 16 June 2007]

...and if you think that "overblown blockbuster" is a pleonasm, wait until you see this movie. Even if it's not completely shabby, the amount of self-indulgent, ham fisted dialogue coupled with the sheer stupidity of the script makes one wonder...

Ridley Scott used to be a visionary. Which doesn't really translate in his poor rendition of the ancient Rome. Colors, framework, costumes: the art direction is very weak. The script is so formulaic and falsely clever it's almost insulting. And the editing rarely shines. The action is either boring or gives serious headaches; only one scene really stands out: Maximus (painfully portrayed by a sleepwalking Russel Crowe) leads his enslaved friends to victory by resorting on their old warrior reflexes.

Nothing really shines except that scene; the supporting cast is bland (Connie Nielsen) when not irritating (the usually great Joaquin Phoenix gives a really bad performance as the emperor Commodus).

But the most hilariously bad moment is the climactic battle: Ridley Scott and the hack who wrote this should be ashamed. The whole movie tries to re-write history (I'm not even calling that revisionism) introducing modern, Christian philosophical and moral values in the story through Maximus' perception. If we trusted the movie, Rome was a beacon in a world of barbarians. This ends up giving the hero the upper hand in a duel against Commodus, avenging his family with the sacrifice of his life. This whole ending, not only ridiculous on screen, is truly aimed at the blood-thirsty audience who needs his fix of "eye-for-an-eye" climax to feel satisfied, like in a good ol' "Death Wish" Bronson flick. Not only this is an historical lie (too bad for a movie that tries so hard to feel "realistic"), but it really misses the mark emotionally as the real demise of the emperor showed true poetic justice, as opposed to the self-righteous, overwrought lines Crowe delivers.

As for the "revisionism" complaint, I'm asking you: what if, 2000 years from now, a screenwriter comes up with a WWII epic comic book movie (not unlike a peplum of our times) where Captain America (Maximus) single-handedly defeats Hitler (Commodus)?

Well, it *may* turn out good. If Ridley Scott isn't directing.

RoboCop (1987)

An amazing ride. Spectacular, dark, funny and above all meaningful.

[9/10 · 16 June 2007]

This movie is both a reason not to lose hope in Hollywood, and at the same time painfully reminds us how tame, boring and stupid most of the action genre has become.

Paul Verhoeven never used more efficiently the unparalleled resources Hollywood has to offer. With a decent - but not overblown - budget, he manages to show a spectacular display of action and great special effects that you can still watch today without laughing, unlike many other 80's movies.

The story (a cop working in a corruption-ridden society is brutally murdered and turned into a robotic law enforcer) is fairly simple, and in other hands could've ended like many other childish action movies. But the satiric tone and the full-frontal violence not only validates the humor, but helps the audience to understand the social critic without hammering it down. It's a moral tale, but certainly not a lecture.

The unbelievable boldness of the tone and the nifty execution turns this sci-fi/political pamphlet into a "Clockwork Orange"-like phenomenon. It's not aimed at kids, but if the brutality wasn't so over-the-top it should be shown to the youngest moviegoers, as the REAL action movie. No over-use of CGI. No annoying sidekick. No stupid humor or "satisfactory" ending. No compromise.

The 21st century truly NEEDS a movie like this. Not a remake, or a reboot, or whatever fancy name the studios come up with. Just a new kind of no-nonsense, clever, ambitious big budget movies that doesn't insult the audience's intelligence for a change. To settle the score with subsequent shallow Hollywood flicks whose makers brag about carrying on RoboCop's legacy while reaching for the lowest common denominator ("Iron Man", anyone?). To set a new standard in blockbusters, an alternative to silly, brainwashing and heartless "entertainment". The sooner's the better.

Fantastic Four (I) (2005)

Boring and stupid.

[2/10 · 14 June 2007]

Fantastic Four is probably the worst comic book movie to date. This sub-genre contains a lot of great films (Superman, Burton's and Nolan's Batman, Hellboy...) but this one is a true disgrace, and really gives comic books a bad name. The basic story could be turned into a great sci-fi movie for kids and adults. Think of high-concept movies like Back To The Future, or Lost in Space: whether you like them or not they're great family films, with both great effects, a good cast, and some science fiction themes tailored for the whole family. Fantastic Four got nothing: the cast is mediocre (except maybe Chris Evans and Michael Chiklis), the direction is atrocious, the script is stupid and the practical SFX worthy of a B-grade movie (the Thing costume is truly laughable, which is quite annoying since the character carries most of the dramatic moments...)

If you really want to feed your kids with the dumbest mass-produced Hollywood trash, give it a try. But don't expect your kids to develop good tastes after that.

BUT if you don't wanna dumb down your children with the worst kind of entertainment you could possibly find, AVOID AT ALL COSTS.

My advice: rent Pixar's "The Incredibles" instead. It's smarter, faster and funnier.

Mission: Impossible III (2006)

Poor script, executed even more poorly. A disgrace.

[2/10 · 14 June 2007]

Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) is now retired from the secret services, but he's soon called back by his former employer (Billy Crudup, who used to choose his movies based on the script, not on the hefty paycheck) in order to save a kidnapped agent (Keri Russell, looking for her paycheck too). The mission turns out sour, and Hunt's private life is now on the line as he must protect his wife against a very nasty terrorist (played respectively by Michelle Monaghan and Philip Seymour Hoffmann - I'm sure by now you guessed how such a great cast agreed to star in such an original project...)

This first feature film from TV wonder boy JJ Abrams is a train wreck. How could studios execs be stupid enough to give $150 million to a beginner? This guy knows TV for sure, but he probably didn't understand that with so much money you can film action scenes without awkward zooms and irritating shaky camera - these are common TV techniques to hide the cheap scenery and boost the editing, which a big budget feature doesn't need if handled correctly. You hated M:I-2's slow-motion and doves? You'll hate even more this TV episode badly tailored for the big screen.

So, where did the money go? The answer is simple: since the director has no clue on what makes a good action scene, he relies on the special effects, like any other Hollywood hack. We're talking about Mission Impossible, a franchise whose staples are intricate and bold thefts, with the team breaking in and out enemy strongholds unnoticed. Here, Abrams thought it would be smarter to shoot useless and god awfully expensive action scenes in exotic locations. Like in a bad 90's James Bond. So, when the hero is setting an aforementioned bold theft in a heavily guarded Chinese building, Abrams cuts to a lame, clichéd dialogue between his sidekicks waiting in the minivan! Once Tom Cruise re-appears on screen, a pathetic car chase ensues, while the poor spectator is asking himself "why in HELL did they chose not to film the goddamn hold up???"

Because they were too lazy to write and shoot what is the heart and soul of the series. Because it would have been too great an effort for the so-called writers to write anything original. The movie is such a rip-off of "True Lies" it's not even funny. European break-in: CHECK. Hero forced to collaborate with enemy: CHECK. Bridge attacked by jet fighter: CHECK. Daughter/wife in distress: CHECK. The list goes on and on... And don't expect any teamwork: Tom Cruise IS the star, and he wants everyone to know that. No one can shine except him. They're not allowed to.

Bottom line: avoid it, unless you have a knack for bad movies.

Les patates (1969)

A strange, satirical war drama.

[6/10 · 11 June 2007]

"Les patates" from Claude Autant-Lara is a curious little movie, blending comedy and drama in a historical context.

The story takes place during World War 2, in Occupied France. Clovis (Pierre Perret, a very famous French comedic singer in his convincing screen debut) is trying desperately to cultivate potatoes, despite the restrictions decided by the Nazis, and the jealousy of his neighborhood. Soon, his little garden becomes an obsession, which leads to marital crisis, and beyond...

The film is clearly not as moving and ambitious as Autant-Lara previous work (such as his masterpiece, "La traversée de Paris") but there are many funny parts, and good performances all along.

Overall, a decent satire of Occupied France, with a good balance between comedy and drama.

I, Robot (2004)

Another bland blockbuster, unworthy of Proyas' talent. What a waste.

[4/10 · 11 June 2007]

This could have been so much better. Now that Will Smith got rid of his mannerisms and put himself on the line with "Ali", one could think he'd never consider to lower himself to star in such a terribly written, poorly conceived film. Well, obviously he hasn't learned from his past mistakes.

Smith plays Detective Del Spooner, who works for the Chicago Police Department in the year 2035. Robots are now a part of our everyday life. They are everywhere, can do everything. They're ruled by 3 Robotic Laws preventing them from harming any human and even so, Spooner is doubtful about them. His suspicions seem to be founded when a scientist working on a new type of robots is killed. And all the evidences lead to a robotic murderer, which the aforementioned Laws should never let happen...

It's amazing how visionary Alex Proyas (whose "Dark City" is arguably one of the the best Science-Fiction film ever made) completely missed the mark with "I, Robot". He's not helped by a terrible screenplay from Akiva Goldsman, probably one of the worst screenwriters in activity. Will Smith's attitude, as if he was still on the set of Bad Boys or Wild Wild West, doesn't help either, nor the consistent and highly irritating product placement (think of a Bond movie, but ten times more prominent...). The supporting cast is bland (Bridget Moynagan) when not annoying (Shia LaBeouf) and the action is just visually and emotionally boring.

A real letdown.

The Saviour (1971)

A shocking war movie. Reminds of Verhoeven's Flesh & blood

[7/10 · 11 June 2007]

This strange, bold movie takes place in France during World War 2. A young and innocent girl (Muriel Catala) finds a wounded soldier (Horst Buchholz) and provides him food and help, hiding him in the cellar of her parents' farm. Soon, a strange bond will unite those two, before the soldier reveals his true nature...

The sexual tension between the girl and the soldier may shock some people, but it's just a piece of a bigger picture, as the movie turns out to show the manipulative characters looming to an atrocious ending, one of the most disturbing display of immorality ever put on screen. Not for everyone, but the movie is clearly worth a watch, if only for its rarity.

The Burglars (1971)

A good action film from Henri Verneuil

[7/10 · 10 June 2007]

"Le Casse" is a simple, straightforward story about a crook named Azad (Jean Paul Belmondo), whose gang stole emeralds worth $1 million. While waiting for their boat to leave Athens, they hid the jewels, and try to escape from the schemes of a unscrupulous cop, Zacharias (Omar Sharif).

This movie is another example of the brilliant collaboration between the underrated Henri Verneuil ("Un singe en hiver", "100,000 dollars au soleil", "Peur sur la ville") and Belmondo. They share an honest love for such movie treats as car chases, evil bad guys, anti-heroes, slight eroticism, exotic food, humor and Bond-like misogyny. Which this movie contains galore. And it's also one of the first times when Belmondo performs his famous stunts, without any wires or stunt doubles. One scene in particular shows the "hero" being hidden in a dump-truck, which discharge its payload (including Belmondo) on a slope going down to a mine. You can actually see Belmondo stumble down the slope among debris and rocks and once down the slope stand up, dust off his trousers and walk away. In a single shot. Like Jackie Chan or Colt Seavers. And the movie contains a lot of great 70's milestones, like an almost silent intro showing the theft of the emeralds, or a spectacular car chase in the streets of Athens.

All in all, a very entertaining piece of 70's French cinema.

Quantum Leap (1989–1993)

The greatest TV show ever. Could teach a thing or two to many feature films.

[10/10 · 10 June 2007]

As a moviegoer, I don't have a great esteem for television. Sure, it has spawned many good shows, and cult characters. But I rarely felt the need to watch EVERY SINGLE EPISODE, afraid of missing even one. And believe me, I'm no short-sighted elitist.

But Quantum Leap is an absolute classic. It's got Heart, great characters, ambitious stories, and it's both accessible and clever. It may not be the strongest Sci-fi concept, but it's the most likely to reconcile the fans of Star Trek AND Magnum P.I. Who could've imagined that?

Donald Bellisario created a true gem of a show, centered around Dr. Sam Beckett (Scott Bakula) a scientist whose time-travelling theories are backed up by the military, represented by the retired Navy Admiral Al Calavicci (Dean Stockwell). The experiment goes wrong, and Sam is sent in the past, with most of his scientific knowledge and memories temporarily erased. His body vanished, his mind now trapped in other's bodies, and Sam soon discovers that a "superior authority" can transfer his mind from time to time, only if he manages to "fix what's broken" and give his "host" a better life. Al can communicate with him through holographic form (only noticeable by children, animals - "and blondes, too") in order to help Sam to complete his mission, whether it's to inspire a song to an artist, defend the case of a young Black in a Southern State court during the segregation days, or help a journalist to obtain a Pulitzer Prize while covering the war in Vietnam.

The variety and humanity of the show is what makes it stand above the others. Some episodes are light and humorous, when others are darker, even tragic. Some conclusions are bittersweet, and help the main characters to evolve slightly, but regularly throughout the show. What helps even more is the fantastic chemistry between the two main characters. Scott Bakula and Dean Stockwell have found the role of their lives, delivering touching, funny, overwhelming performances, sometimes in the course of only one episode! They're brilliant, as well as the writing, and art direction who recreates every decade from the 50's to the 80's (and sometimes beyond!) perfectly.

As for the ending... without spoiling it, it's by far the most astounding, bold and emotionally charged episode ever produced in the TV history, as far as I know. So many TV shows end up in disappointment (while so many don't even bother to give us a finale, at all...). "Quantum Leap" ending is rewarding, and intriguing. It's ambitious, happy and sad. It's both on the human scale, and larger than life.

Oh boy, what a show.

Une époque formidable... (1991)

A great 90's dramedy about social issues, still relevant today

[9/10 · 10 June 2007]

Gerard Jugnot is a very famous French actor, writer and director, whose fame and creativity both peaked in the late 80's-early 90's. "Une Epoque Formidable" (litterally: "Wonderful Times") is a very caustic tale of misfortune, midlife crisis, and social issues like homelessness in the France of the 1990's.

The film follows Michel (Jugnot) a forty-something average Joe, living in middle-class suburbs with his wife (Victoria Abril) and children. Hiding the fact that he lost his job and afraid of facing the consequences in an unemployment-ridden society, he ends up rejected by his wife, wandering endlessly in the hoodlums of Paris, hopelessly trying to put himself together in order to win back his former life. Facing humiliations and loneliness, he miraculously finds an helping hand with Toubib (the then great Richard Bohringer), Crayon (the late Ticky Holgado - last seen in "Amelie") and Mimosa (Chick Ortega). Together, they'll find a way to face the wind and even have a few good laughs, despite their condition...

This film is truly a gem among the (mostly) boring and uninspired French cinema of the past 20 years. It has scope, it's ambitious, with wonderful performances from everybody. And above all, it never forgets to be damn funny and witty. Of course there is some gross humour, and the direction is a little bland, but it's nothing compared to the humanity and refreshing lack of cynicism that transpires from this movie.

Rocky Balboa (2006)

The final round of the greatest hero in the history of Cinema.

[9/10 · 9 June 2007]

Let's face it, last time we met him, Balboa was in bad shape. And so was Sly. Now, 16 years later, what could we expect from a last chapter of Rocky's story?

The answer is: the best. Not the best the character had to offer, like in the first two movies. But the very best of Stallone's writing and direction. It may not mean that much to some cynical haters, or to those who grew disappointed by Sly's movies in the past decades. But let's never forget that Stallone created the most heroic, famous, inspiring hero of our time. How many careers in sports or arts were inspired and fueled by this tale of iron will and search for happiness?

You may think it's only "make-believe", that it's sometimes forced, or awkward. It's not totally false, but not totally true either. And it doesn't matter, it's the way Sylvester Stallone does his stuff. It's got Heart. It's somewhat hamfisted. It's Rocky. Coming out of retirement for one last fight. To win back his fans, both in the movie's and the real world.

After the death of his wife Adrian, a 50-something Rocky learnt to live alone again, recounting his fights to the patrons of his restaurant. Unsatisfied by his new life, he stays in shape and regularly tours his old spots with his brother-in-law Paulie (the criminally underrated Burt Young) in order to keep the past alive. But his biggest regret is his son Robert Jr (Milo Ventimiglia) who stays as far from his old father as he can, upset by his father's old glory and the side-effects it has on his life. Incapable to understand his son's grief and lack of self-esteem, Rocky tries to revive his boxing career in small, local events in order to win back the admiration and love of his son, and show him the way to fulfill his dreams. With the help of Marie (Geraldine Hughes, a great addition to the series) Rocky will face an astounding challenge when the actual Heavyweight champion Mason Dixon (real-life boxer Antonio Tarver, whose acting skills are surprisingly strong) wants to challenge him in an exhibition fight, in order to prove his detractors he's made of the stuff of the old champions...

Forget the age, forget the previous mediocre films. Rocky scores big time in this wonderful little movie. It's definitely not a masterpiece like the first one, but it's a touching, flawed, sincere attempt from an almost washed-up boxer (and actor) to shine one last time.

And above all, its the occasion for an artist to show his gratitude to the people around the world who made him what he is today. Rocky owed his fans a great final fight as well as Sly owed us a great finale.

Yo Sly. You DID it. Thank you.

Firefox (1982)

A decent spy-tech movie. Not Eastwood's best...

[6/10 · 7 June 2007]

... but not its worst, either (for that latter category, catch "Absolute Power" or "True Crime" instead).

Clint stars as Mitchell Gant, a former pilot suffering Post Traumatic Stress Disorder following a mission in Vietnam. Years later, he's taken back from retirement for a mission behind the Iron Curtain. He must travel to USSR in order to steal a top-secret stealth fighter, the (fictional) Mig-31 FireFox. On his way through Russia he meets various moles, dissidents and defecting scientists, helping him to escape KGB and reach his goal, an heavily-guarded base...

The movie keeps a very serious tone, far away from the 80's James Bond. Altogether they share some common points (spectacular sequences, silly bad guys) but Eastwood seems to take its material very seriously, through conflicted supporting characters and some gritty, tragic situations. The special effects aged quite well, but Eastwood's strong point has never been action sequences; luckily the locations are mostly stunning. One low point: Maurice Jarre's score is unusually quite mediocre, and neither makes use of the Soviet background (like the great Basil Poledouris did for "The Hunt for Red October") nor pumps up the audience when action scenes fail to take off.

But that's just a detail, overall "Firefox" is a fairly decent action/espionage flick, worth a watch.

True Lies (1994)

Take notes Hollywood: this is how ACTION is made.

[9/10 · 6 June 2007]

Cameron and Schwarzenegger team up for the last time, remaking the French action-comedy "La Totale!" by Claude Zidi. And even if the movie is less ambitious than The Terminator saga, it's still an example of action blockbuster done right.

Harry Tasker (Arnold, in his best role ever) is a spy, working for a top-secret anti-terrorism cell called Omega Sector with his best friend Gib (the hilarious scene-stealer Tom Arnold). He's been married for 17 years to Helen (Jamie Lee Curtis, giving us an amazing performance as well) a quiet, unsuspecting woman aspiring to be more than just a lovable wife/mother. Things got complicated for Harry when a terrorist conspiracy, a red-hot femme fatale and a rival "spy" called Simon (the always great Bill Paxton) threaten the American Way of Life, and put his marriage in jeopardy...

A true classic, the movie raised the bar for every subsequent actioner - that's the least we can expect from James Cameron. But the movie got heart too: great humor and lines from almost every cast member, incredible pace throughout, formidable chemistry between the two main characters... There are too many qualities this movie got and others action movies lack, too busy they are to show gunfights and car chases without care for good characters and plot.

True Lies got both. It's not even a "guilty pleasure", it's a genuine good movie. The best form of entertainment Hollywood has to offer. A must see.

Crime Busters (1977)

Bud & Terence: the rescuers of European B-movies.

[7/10 · 5 June 2007]

The dynamic duo strikes again, in one of their funniest adventures! Matt Kirby (Terence Hill) and Wilbur Walsh (Bud Spencer) are two small-time crooks whose path will cross, and lead them into an unsuspecting Police Academy. Now, armed and driving recklessly Miami's Police vehicles, they'll thwart a gang's plan led by gruesome harbor workers, their evil boss, two stunning and manipulative blondes and their intellectually challenged butler...

Bar fights, bowling fights, open-air fights, all the staples from the great silly Italian comedies are here, with all the heart you can expect from our heroes Spencer & Hill. Not to mention the theme music, which became an instant classic, as well as the whole movie. A must-see in that genre.

Greed in the Sun (1964)

« When 250 lbs. guys are talking, 120 lbs. guys listen!!!"

[8/10 · 4 June 2007]

A classic, comedic chase movie starring the finest french actors from the 60's and a legendary Bond villain, no less !

The movie follows Marec (Lino Ventura), a truck driver sent by his boss (Gert Fröbe) to track down through the Morroccan desert a reckless youngster (Jean-Paul Belmondo) who stole a brand-new truck and its payload. Riddled with bad luck, Marec will face the dangers of the desert, as well as a fishy partner, and a reluctant, misogynist tow-truck helper (the hilarious Bernard Blier) until the climactic fight.

An excellent 60's French action-comedy, complete with great music, perfect direction by Henri Verneuil ("Le Casse", "Un singe en hiver", "La bataille de San Sebastian", "Le corps de mon ennemi") and hilarious dialogues by Michel Audiard. Reminds a lot of Peckinpah's "Convoy" (1978). It doesn't take itself seriously, and however reveals a lot about the times, the misogynistic and somewhat imperialistic nature of the French in Northern Africa during the early 60's. And even if the characters are sometimes real morons, in the end of the day you really root for them.