Roger's Watchlist - Movies by the day

August 5, 2025

Joe Kidd marked something of a turning point in Clint Eastwood’s Western career. It would be the last time he allowed himself to be directed by someone else in the genre—after this, he would take the reins himself for High Plains Drifter, The Outlaw Josey Wales, Pale Rider, and Unforgiven. And with hindsight, the decision seems inevitable.

The director of Joe Kidd, John Sturges, was a major name in Hollywood, responsible for genre landmarks like The Magnificent Seven and The Great Escape. But by 1972, many felt that Sturges’ energy had faded, and stories circulated about his increasing reliance on alcohol. It’s not hard to believe that this caused some friction with Eastwood, who was known for being focused, efficient, and increasingly particular about his creative input.

Watching Joe Kidd, you get the impression that Eastwood himself wasn’t all that engaged. His performance feels detached, and while rumors have circulated that he was ill during production, it’s just as likely he was simply fed up with the direction the film was taking. Unlike his earlier Western personas, especially in Sergio Leone’s “Man with No Name” trilogy, the character of Joe Kidd is murkier, less defined. His allegiances shift, and the film doesn’t fully clarify his motivations—something that makes the film feel oddly directionless.

The plot focuses on a land dispute between Mexican farmers and wealthy ranchers, but the political themes are only lightly sketched. John Saxon, playing the rebel leader, starts out as a fiery, committed figure, but his character arc loses all momentum, culminating in a surrender that feels more like a script shortcut than a real development. The ending, featuring a train crashing through a saloon, is visually memorable but lacks genuine buildup—it seems more about wrapping up the film than resolving the narrative in any meaningful way.

Still, the film has its merits. Robert Duvall plays the villain with understated menace, and Don Stroud returns from Coogan’s Bluff to share the screen with Eastwood again. Even Dick Van Patten appears briefly in an unusual bit of casting. It’s a solid cast overall, even if few of them are given much to work with.

Ultimately, Joe Kidd suffers not from incompetence, but from being caught between eras—Sturges’ fading old-school craftsmanship and Eastwood’s emerging modern vision. It’s an above-average Western with a few memorable moments, but it will always live in the shadow of Eastwood’s more iconic Western films.

Ratings:
• Story: 6.41
• Cast: 6.67
• Entertainment: 6.51
• Final Score: 6.53

Joe Kidd isn’t bad—it’s just forgettable in comparison to Eastwood’s classics. Viewed on its own, it holds together well enough, but as part of his Western legacy, it remains a curious footnote rather than a highlight.

August 4, 2025

Of all the French literary classics that have made their way to the screen—Les Misérables, The Three Musketeers, The Count of Monte Cristo—Pierre Choderlos de Laclos’ Les Liaisons dangereuses might seem like an unlikely candidate for mainstream appeal. Yet its themes of power, seduction, betrayal, and emotional cruelty have proven surprisingly adaptable, particularly in the late 20th century.

Among its many film versions, Cruel Intentions stands out as the most commercially successful, though far from the most refined. Released in 1999 and relocated to the world of wealthy Manhattan prep schoolers, this adaptation reimagines the elaborate manipulations of Laclos’ nobles as a game between spoiled, emotionally stunted teenagers. The result is slick, provocative, and, at times, more soap opera than serious drama.

Sarah Michelle Gellar and Ryan Phillippe star as the amoral half-siblings who manipulate everyone around them, including Reese Witherspoon, cast as the chaste target of their bet. The cast also includes Selma Blair, Joshua Jackson, Christine Baranski, and a very brief appearance by Louise Fletcher. It’s a lineup that reflects the film’s teen-marketed ambitions more than any desire to treat the material with depth.

Gellar does offer something different from her well-known Buffy persona, but her performance is stylized to the point of caricature—icy, seductive, and deliberately over the top. While it’s memorable, it’s not exactly subtle. The film’s most talked-about scene—her kiss with Selma Blair—became a media sensation and was even banned in some countries, though it’s more notable for shock value than storytelling.

Rumors at the time about real-life couple Witherspoon and Phillippe filming unsimulated love scenes only fueled the promotional buzz, though those claims were denied. It all feels very much of its time: edgy for the sake of being edgy, more interested in aesthetic and controversy than emotional complexity.

For viewers unfamiliar with the original novel, the level of manipulation and cruelty might come off as jarring—or just empty. The characters’ behavior is extreme, and while the film tries to frame it as seductive, it often feels hollow beneath the surface gloss.

Ratings:
• Story: 6.44
• Cast: 6.83
• Entertainment: 6.17
• Final Score: 6.48

Cruel Intentions is a product of its era—stylish, provocative, and just shallow enough to appeal to a wide audience. It may have borrowed the structure of a literary classic, but it trades depth for glossy scandal, and for many, that won’t be enough.

August 3, 2025

It’s fascinating how The Long Good Friday, now hailed as one of the greatest British crime thrillers of the 20th century, almost didn’t make it to screens. Completed in 1979, the film was shelved for two years due to concerns from authorities about its sensitive subject matter—namely police corruption, political bribery, and IRA involvement. It wasn’t until 1981 that it finally saw the light of day, and it didn’t take long for it to earn its reputation.

At the center of the film is Bob Hoskins, in a career-defining performance as Harold Shand—a gangster turned aspiring businessman who is on the verge of sealing a lucrative deal with American investors. Just as he’s pitching the idea of transforming London Docklands (ironically with reference to a possible 1988 Olympic Games), his empire begins to unravel violently. What follows is a tense and desperate descent into betrayal and paranoia, as Harold lashes out at perceived enemies, only to discover that the real threat is far more dangerous and unseen.

Hoskins delivers an explosive, nuanced performance, one that earned him multiple nominations and accolades. His Harold Shand is brutal, ambitious, and deluded—but also human, complex, and oddly charismatic. The supporting cast includes Helen Mirren, perfectly restrained as his partner Victoria, as well as a slew of familiar faces in the British acting world.

The film has often been compared to American gangster classics—Jimmy Cagney’s volatility, Bogart’s cold edge—but here the violence and desperation are grounded in the political tensions of modern Britain. The storyline around London’s redevelopment even feels eerily prescient, with Canary Wharf and the 2012 Olympics ultimately fulfilling the vision Shand lays out in his pitch.

A couple of pieces of trivia add some fun to the viewing: in one scene, Pierce Brosnan—in his feature film debut—silently stabs to death Paul Freeman, who just a year later would play Belloq in Raiders of the Lost Ark. A future Bond kills a future Indy villain—not bad for a bit of casting trivia.

Ratings:
• Story: 7.11
• Cast: 6.99
• Entertainment: 7.21
• Final Score: 7.10

The Long Good Friday is a hard-edged, politically charged thriller that balances underworld drama with sharp commentary on 1980s Britain. It’s not just a gangster film—it’s a reflection of a nation on the cusp of reinvention. Hoskins is unforgettable, and the film holds up as a landmark of British cinema.

August 2 2025

Prime begins with a premise full of promise: a therapist (Meryl Streep) unknowingly counsels a woman (Uma Thurman) who is dating her 23-year-old son (Bryan Greenberg). It’s clever, funny, and packed with potential — especially during the first half, when Streep delivers her best work reacting in stunned silence as her patient casually describes intimate moments with her son. These therapy scenes are pure gold, with Streep’s restrained, expressive performance doing all the heavy lifting.

Thurman brings warmth and humor to Rafi, and Greenberg, then mostly known for One Tree Hill, tries his best — but lacks the charisma to fully hold the screen opposite two stars. It’s hard not to feel a stronger name might have elevated the central romance.

As the story shifts focus to the age gap and David’s immaturity, the energy sags. The mother-son-patient dynamic takes a backseat to repetitive generational tension. Once the secret is revealed, the film loses its unique identity and drifts toward something more conventional. The bittersweet ending might be emotionally grounded, but it deflates the spark that made the premise so compelling.

Shot entirely in Manhattan, Prime captures the tone of downtown life, but in the end, it’s Streep’s performance — sharp, subtle, and funny — that keeps it all together.

⸻

• Story: 6,52
• Cast: 7.10
• Entertainment: 6.60

Final Note: 6,74

August 1, 2025

Among the many entries in the Charlie Chan series starring Sidney Toler, Charlie Chan at Treasure Island is often singled out as one of the strongest—and rightly so. While several of Toler’s 20th Century-Fox Chan films are competently made, only City in Darkness comes close to the level of atmosphere, intrigue, and polish found in this 1939 entry.

Despite what the title might suggest, this story is not set on a tropical Caribbean isle but rather on Treasure Island, a man-made location developed for the 1939 Golden Gate International Exposition in San Francisco Bay. The backdrop—designed as a futuristic showcase of innovation and entertainment—adds a unique flavor to the mystery, giving it an almost surreal, otherworldly atmosphere.

The plot sends Charlie Chan, the ever-unflappable Hawaiian detective, into the realm of spiritualism and psychic fraud as he investigates a string of murders connected to a sinister figure known as Dr. Zodiac—a blackmailer whose ominous name and eerie presence dominate the film. The theme of fakery in the world of the occult fits well with the Chan formula of logic vs. superstition, and Toler handles the balance with his usual dry wit and steady demeanor.

Adding depth and flair is a memorable supporting performance from Cesar Romero. Best remembered today as the Joker in the 1960s Batman TV series, Romero had a long career in film dating back to the early 1930s. Here, he plays a magician with his own agenda—a role that lets him blend charm, mystery, and a touch of menace. It’s a well-judged performance that gives the film an added layer of intrigue.

There’s an oddly chilling real-world coincidence connected to this film: about 30 years after its release, the Zodiac Killer would terrorize the same Bay Area, choosing a name that eerily echoes this film’s villain. While clearly unrelated, the parallel adds a shadow of historical eeriness to an otherwise stylized mystery.

Ratings:
• Story: 7.47
• Cast: 7.55
• Entertainment: 8.24
• Final Score: 7.75

Charlie Chan at Treasure Island stands out as a moody, well-paced mystery, carried by Toler’s confident performance and bolstered by an atmospheric setting and an effective supporting cast. Among the Chan films of the late 1930s, it remains a highlight—both for fans of classic mysteries and students of vintage Hollywood style.

July 31, 2025

Movies about underdogs overcoming impossible odds have long been a staple of American cinema, and Dreamer fits that mold with full sincerity. This family-friendly drama tells the story of an idealistic horse trainer who saves a badly injured racehorse from euthanasia—not out of ambition, but to spare his young daughter the trauma of seeing the animal put down. From that act of compassion unfolds a tale about resilience, family bonds, and holding on to belief, as the horse improbably recovers and eventually enters a prestigious race.

The film’s strength lies above all in its lead performance. Then 11-year-old Dakota Fanning doesn’t just hold her own—she carries the movie. Her emotional clarity, charm, and conviction breathe life into a role that could have easily been overly sentimental. Kurt Russell, as her loving but world-weary father, is a strong complement, and the supporting cast—Kris Kristofferson, Elizabeth Shue, David Morse, and Oded Fehr—rounds out the story with solid, if secondary, contributions.

Interestingly, the film’s writer and producer, John Gatins, was only granted the green light under one condition: Dakota Fanning had to be cast in the lead. Originally written for a boy, the part was quickly reimagined once Fanning expressed interest. By that time, she had already shown her range in Nine Lives, Hide and Seek (also with Shue), and War of the Worlds—but her portrayal in Dreamer added a new layer to her rising stardom.

Yes, the plot is predictable, and yes, the ending is clearly signposted from the start—but that hardly matters. The film isn’t about surprise; it’s about the emotional journey, the growing trust between father and daughter, and the hope that something broken—be it a horse, a family, or a dream—can be made whole again.

Ratings:
• Story: 7.54
• Cast: 8.23
• Entertainment: 8.09
• Final Score: 7.95

Dreamer may follow a familiar formula, but it does so with heart, sincerity, and a standout performance by a young actress who fully earns the spotlight. A feel-good story that delivers exactly what it promises—no more, no less.

July 30, 2025

When exploring the rich history of Italian cinema, one often focuses on the internationally celebrated giallo thrillers of the 1960s and 70s—stylized blends of crime, horror, and suspense that have come to define an era of Cinecittà filmmaking. Yet another popular genre during that time, often overlooked in critical discourse, was the wave of erotic comedies that followed the trend originally sparked in Germany. Among those, Malizia stands out as one of the most recognizable titles.

Directed by Salvatore Samperi, Malizia (also known as Malicious) became a cultural phenomenon in Italy and beyond, not least because it propelled Laura Antonelli to stardom. While many today might associate her name with Jean-Paul Belmondo, Antonelli’s role in Malizia showed her as more than just a companion to a French star—she was a capable actress who could carry a film, blending sensuality with moments of understated comedic poise.

The film tells the story of a young, beautiful housemaid who is hired by a recent widower to help manage his household and raise his three sons. What follows is a story of sexual awakening, jealousy, and manipulation, especially from the perspective of the two older sons, whose adolescent curiosity gradually turns into barely concealed obsession. The father, meanwhile, is not immune to her charms either, setting the stage for a mixture of frivolity, awkwardness, and power dynamics that walk a delicate line between comedy and provocation.

A particularly bittersweet note surrounds the performance of Alessandro Momo, who plays Nino, the middle son. Not long after filming, Momo tragically died in a motorcycle accident at just 17. One scene in particular—where the father offers him a motorcycle as a bribe for his blessing to marry the housemaid—takes on a chilling layer of unintentional foreshadowing, adding a somber depth to an otherwise cheeky narrative.

Despite being over 50 years old, Malizia retains a level of charm and polish that sets it apart from many other erotic comedies of the era. While certainly dated in its gender politics and tone, it remains a curious cultural artifact of a time when sensuality, repression, and humor collided onscreen in uniquely Italian fashion.

Ratings:
• Story: 6.51
• Cast: 6.62
• Entertainment: 6.21
• Final Score: 6.45

Neither purely comic nor purely erotic, Malizia straddles genres and moods with mixed but often effective results. It’s an oddity of 1970s cinema that still manages to entertain—perhaps more than expected.

July 29, 2025

If you have a general interest in German regional cinema, particularly titles like the Eberhofer films from Bavaria, you might find Die Kirche bleibt im Dorf a passable example of Swabian comedy. Released in 2012, the film is set in rural Swabia and focuses on a long-running feud between two neighboring villages who must share a church and a cemetery—each inconveniently located on the other’s land.

The film plays heavily on local dialect and cultural quirks. The Swabian dialect is so dominant that even fluent German speakers may need to rely on subtitles—which fortunately are included on the Blu-ray version. At its core, the plot is a somewhat absurd rural satire: when an American investor arrives hoping to buy the church and ship it across the Atlantic, the villagers’ hostility escalates in predictable ways.

Despite the petty conflicts, a few low-key romantic subplots and soft emotional turns are introduced, attempting to give the story more warmth. Some relationships between characters gradually shift, but the transitions aren’t particularly subtle or surprising.

The film is carried by a cast of mostly unknown actors, at least internationally, and while they serve the story well enough, there are few stand-out performances. The humor is often broad and slapstick, relying more on situation than on wit, and while it has its moments, it doesn’t leave a strong impression.

That said, the film clearly resonated with domestic audiences. It was popular enough in Germany to inspire a prequel television series and a cinematic sequel five years later, which suggests it found its niche among those with a taste for regional humor.

Ratings:
• Story: 6.54
• Cast: 5.51
• Entertainment: 6.52
• Final Score: 6.19

Die Kirche bleibt im Dorf is a mildly entertaining rural comedy that leans heavily on regional stereotypes and dialect charm. While it has some amusing touches, it remains a fairly modest entry in the genre.

July 28, 2025

Can a romantic comedy fail simply because neither of the leads is remotely sympathetic? That was the unavoidable question running through my mind while watching The Neighbor, starring Michèle Laroque and Matthew Modine.

For Laroque, a well-loved figure in French film, television, and theater, this movie marked her only foray into international cinema—and unfortunately, it stands as a rare misstep in an otherwise strong career. She quickly returned to French-language projects, and one can understand why.

From the very beginning, the film introduces both lead characters in the worst possible light. There’s no charm, no emotional connection, and certainly no romantic tension—just a continuous cycle of bickering and cold detachment. Neither Laroque nor Modine is given material that allows them to win the audience over, and after the first half-hour, it’s genuinely hard to believe that this setup could somehow pivot toward a satisfying romantic resolution.

And yet, the screenplay forces that pivot anyway. In the film’s final stretch, the tone shifts drastically as the writers attempt to undo their own groundwork with a series of implausible and forced reversals—an attempt at emotional redemption that comes across more like a narrative sledgehammer than a genuine arc.

Frankly, it’s difficult even to call this a romantic comedy. There’s very little romance, and what remains is built on a foundation of hostility and incompatibility. Yes, there are a few good situational comedy moments, and some isolated dialogue scenes show glimpses of potential. But those are not enough to keep the ship afloat.

Ratings:
• Story: 5.71
• Cast: 5.25
• Entertainment: 5.52
• Final Score: 5.49

The Neighbor struggles from the start and never really recovers. A romance without romantic leads, and a comedy without warmth—this film is an unfortunate footnote in the careers of its otherwise capable stars.

July 27, 2025

After watching That Thing You Do!, I still find it puzzling that Tom Hanks—who both wrote and directed the film—never pursued more directing projects. Of course, Hanks has long been one of Hollywood’s most in-demand actors, so perhaps he simply never had the time. Still, the film shows a clear affection for storytelling, nostalgia, and character work, and it’s surprising he didn’t follow it up with more directorial efforts.

It’s also worth noting that while That Thing You Do! received positive reviews, it failed to meet expectations at the box office—perhaps another reason why Hanks quietly stepped back from behind the camera.

The story follows a fictional 1960s boy band, The Wonders, who score a sudden hit with a single catchy track and experience a meteoric rise to fame, only to quickly unravel—a fate that mirrors many real-life bands of the era. The narrative is centered on Guy Patterson, the band’s drummer (played by Tom Everett Scott), who dreams of becoming a jazz musician and gradually develops feelings for the lead singer’s girlfriend, played by Liv Tyler.

The film is a sensitive and affectionate look at a bygone era, when groups like The Beatles defined teen culture and music was everything. Hanks beautifully captures the energy, naivety, and fleeting nature of youth and fame. Alongside Tyler, the cast includes Steve Zahn, Giovanni Ribisi, and a young Charlize Theron in only her second feature role. Hanks himself appears in a supporting role as the band’s manager.

Casting Tom Everett Scott as the lead was a bit of a story in itself. His resemblance to a young Tom Hanks (think Splash) was so uncanny that Hanks initially hesitated to give him the part. It was Rita Wilson—Hanks’ wife, who also has a small role in the film—who ultimately convinced him that Scott was the right choice.

Though That Thing You Do! doesn’t break new ground narratively, it’s full of charm, lightness, and bittersweet nostalgia. It’s a film that invites smiles more than gasps, and sometimes that’s exactly what you need.

Ratings:
• Story: 7.17
• Cast: 6.88
• Entertainment: 7.03
• Final Score: 7.03

A warm, tuneful, and gently melancholic homage to fleeting fame and first loves, That Thing You Do! deserves more recognition—not only as a film, but as a directorial debut that hinted at a path Tom Hanks never fully explored.

July 26, 2025

Before watching Boogie Nights, I had already seen four films directed by Paul Thomas Anderson, with only Licorice Pizza leaving a truly positive impression. Phantom Thread struck me as slow and distant, while both The Master and Magnolia failed to connect on any emotional or narrative level. So it’s fair to say I approached Boogie Nights with cautious curiosity.

The film is an expanded version of Anderson’s early short, The Dirk Diggler Story, now stretched into a full-fledged feature about the rise and fall of a young porn star during the 1970s and early 80s. Mark Wahlberg plays Dirk Diggler, a teenager with one very specific asset who becomes a sensation in the adult film world. His journey—from discovery to downfall—is surrounded by a remarkable ensemble cast: Julianne Moore, Heather Graham, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Don Cheadle, William H. Macy, Alfred Molina, and a standout performance by Burt Reynolds.

The first half of the film is undeniably engaging. It offers a vivid, colorful window into the adult film industry at its cultural peak, capturing the charisma and dysfunction of the era. Anderson does a fine job introducing each character and creating a believable sense of community. Burt Reynolds is commanding as the paternalistic director Jack Horner, and Julianne Moore is at her best, adding depth to what could have been a one-note role as the seasoned actress and surrogate mother to Diggler.

However, as the story crosses into the 1980s, the tone shifts. The second half descends into a darker, more chaotic spiral—drugs, betrayal, violence, personal collapse. While the narrative arc makes sense, the emotional payoff doesn’t fully deliver for me. The final act feels uneven, and the drama, while intense, leans toward the melodramatic.

Still, there’s no denying that Boogie Nights is a fascinating, immersive time capsule. It captures a subculture that many viewers only vaguely know, with striking visuals, strong performances, and sharp direction. The subject matter is, of course, sensitive—and it’s not surprising that the film was accompanied by critical voices and post-release regret from some of its stars.

Burt Reynolds famously clashed with Anderson, refused to promote the film, and despite winning a Golden Globe and receiving an Oscar nomination, remained dismissive of it. Heather Graham struggled with typecasting in the years that followed, and Mark Wahlberg, who later embraced a devout Christian lifestyle, distanced himself from the film entirely.

That context makes the film even more intriguing to revisit. Despite its flaws, Boogie Nights gave me a better impression of Anderson as a director—and perhaps even of his potential when working within clearer thematic boundaries.

Ratings:
• Story: 6.83
• Cast: 8.21
• Entertainment: 6.23
• Final Score: 7.09

A bold, provocative dive into a controversial era, Boogie Nights isn’t perfect—but it’s compelling, ambitious, and certainly worth seeing.

July 25, 2025

Watching Mortal Thoughts for the first time, I was oddly reminded of The Usual Suspects. Not just because of its moody tone, but because of its narrative structure: a police interrogation room, a lead character recounting a story, and a series of flashbacks that ultimately prove unreliable. And as I’ve said many times before—I’m not a fan of flashback-based storytelling, especially when the ending reveals that the version we’ve been watching was, at best, a partial truth.

That’s exactly the case here. Demi Moore, coming off her global success in Ghost, plays the lead—interrogated by detectives as she recounts a tangled series of events involving a dead husband, a close friend, and a supposed cover-up. By the end, we learn that much of what we’ve seen has been manipulated or misrepresented. It’s a twist that, for me, undercuts the entire experience.

The story revolves around two women—played by Moore and the excellent Glenne Headly—and the violent, volatile man who disrupts their lives. That man is Bruce Willis, cast against type as an abusive and sleazy husband. Willis—who was married to Moore at the time—delivers a disturbing and convincing performance, a far cry from his heroic Die Hard persona. Interestingly, aside from a brief cameo in Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle, this remains the only film where Moore and Willis share the screen.

Though often labeled a neo-noir, I wouldn’t quite classify Mortal Thoughts that way. It lacks the stylistic edge and existential dread of true noir. Instead, it plays more like a mid-range 90s domestic crime thriller, part of a wave of films exploring fractured relationships, secrets, and blurred moral lines. But compared to other entries in that genre—like Presumed Innocent with Harrison Ford—this one doesn’t leave much of a lasting impression.

That said, it’s not a bad film. The performances are solid, the tone consistent, and there are moments of real tension. But the structure—particularly the misleading flashbacks—left me disappointed. I couldn’t fully invest in a narrative that ultimately turns its back on the viewer.

Ratings:
• Story: 5.43
• Cast: 6.44
• Entertainment: 5.98
• Final Score: 5.95

Well acted but structurally flawed, Mortal Thoughts flirts with deeper meaning but never quite lands. If you’re exploring the darker side of domestic thrillers from the 1990s, this isn’t the worst choice—but it’s far from the best.

July 24, 2025

Sometimes it’s simply a joy to stumble upon a film that offers just the right dose of charm, lightness, and emotional warmth—all wrapped in a story that’s both funny and sensitive. That’s exactly what Ôtez-moi d’un doute delivers: a comforting and gently offbeat French-Belgian co-production that’s easy to like and hard not to smile at.

Set entirely in the picturesque region of Brittany, the story follows Erwan, a middle-aged widower played by François Damiens, who learns by chance that the man he’s always called “Dad” is not his biological father. With the help of a private investigator, Erwan tracks down a man who may be the real one—just as he meets Anna, played by Cécile de France, a woman who intrigues him instantly… until the possibility arises that she may, in fact, be his half-sister.

The premise flirts with discomfort, but the film handles it with a gentle touch, blending light drama, quirky humor, and quiet reflection. While the narrative can feel slightly shallow at times, the performances elevate the material. Damiens and de France have a natural, warm chemistry that makes their scenes together glow, and the veteran actors who play the father figures—Guy Marchand (Erwan’s lifelong father) and André Wilms (the possible biological one)—anchor the story with emotional depth and grace. Both actors have since passed away—Marchand in 2023, Wilms in 2022—which adds an extra layer of poignancy in retrospect.

If there’s a small criticism, it lies in the predictability of the resolution. The film hesitates to fully lean into the emotional suspense of its central question, and as a result, the eventual reveal feels more like a formality than a surprise. But that’s a minor quibble in a film that wears its heart on its sleeve and earns its happy ending with quiet sincerity.

Ratings:
• Story: 6.89
• Cast: 6.72
• Entertainment: 7.44
• Final Score: 7.02

Ôtez-moi d’un doute may not aim high, but it hits its target beautifully—a light, feel-good film that gently explores identity, family, and love, with humor and warmth to spare.

July 23, 2025

The 1980s gave us a treasure trove of films that have aged into cult classics—strange, stylish, and often irresistibly rewatchable. Invasion U.S.A., however, isn’t on that list for me. And I doubt it appears on anyone’s serious favorites ranking. While some might argue its trashy excess earns it a spot in the so-bad-it’s-good hall of fame, even by Chuck Norris standards, this one feels more like a misstep.

The plot—if one can call it that—imagines a strange Cold War nightmare in which Russian agents, aided by Cuban guerrillas, launch a campaign of terrorist attacks across the U.S. Naturally, Chuck steps in as a one-man army, dispensing justice with maximum firepower and minimal dialogue.

To his credit, Norris co-wrote the screenplay, and I won’t fault him for trying to shape his own mythos. But the result is a loud, absurd, and often incoherent barrage of explosions and gunfire. In fact, I’d wager this movie holds some kind of record for sheer bullet volume—it’s non-stop, often to the point of sensory exhaustion.

There is, however, one standout element: Richard Lynch, as the villainous Rostov. Lynch’s scarred face and intense stare made him a go-to villain for decades in film and TV. His tragic backstory—having set himself on fire during a drug-induced hallucination in 1967—is as dramatic as anything in his films. And here, as the psychotic Russian antagonist, he gives the film a strange gravitas it doesn’t deserve. He’s by far the most compelling figure on screen.

Watching Invasion U.S.A. today, I can’t deny that I had a weird kind of fun. But make no mistake: it’s very, very trashy. The story is paper-thin, the characters are caricatures, and the politics are laughably simplistic—even for the 1980s.

Ratings:
• Story: 5.74
• Cast: 6.11
• Entertainment: 6.48
• Final Score: 6.11

A relic of Cold War paranoia wrapped in a hail of bullets, Invasion U.S.A. is outrageous, ridiculous, and oddly watchable—just not for the reasons its creators likely intended.

July 22, 2025

While Les Inconnus remain a beloved fixture in French pop culture thanks to their legendary TV sketches—quoted endlessly and fondly by generations—their transition to cinema has been more uneven. Le Pari, released in 1997, is a good example of how that transition can falter—especially when the group isn’t fully united.

Due to ongoing legal disputes with their agents, this film only stars Didier Bourdon and Bernard Campan, who also co-wrote and co-directed. Pascal Légitimus is absent from the main cast, relegated to a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it cameo in a party scene. The absence of the trio’s full dynamic is immediately felt.

The premise had promise: two brothers-in-law, both heavy smokers, bet they can quit for 15 days. The first act is genuinely amusing, with well-observed jokes about nicotine withdrawal and the kind of neurotic spirals that smokers (and former smokers) will recognize. It sets up a relatable, punchy satire with clear comedic potential.

Unfortunately, everything falls apart after the first 30 minutes. The rest of the film unravels into chaotic, disjointed scenes that try far too hard to be funny—and mostly aren’t. Attempts at surreal humor misfire, the pacing collapses, and what started as clever social comedy ends in a heap of grotesque sight gags, including a now-infamous sequence involving the duo in exaggerated fat suits. It’s a strange and off-putting tonal shift that alienates the viewer.

Making matters worse, Le Pari has aged poorly. The film, filled with constant smoking and very few critical remarks on the habit, feels at odds with today’s anti-smoking awareness. In a world where cigarettes are increasingly stigmatized, a comedy that casually centers around them—without really challenging their use—inevitably seems outdated.

One can’t help but wonder if a full Inconnus reunion might have saved the film from itself. As it stands, Le Pari is a disappointing misstep—a film that starts with promise but quickly loses its way.

Ratings:
• Story: 4.89
• Cast: 5.70
• Entertainment: 5.11
• Final Score: 5.23

Once a minor hit riding on name recognition, Le Pari is now largely forgotten—and perhaps rightly so. It’s a misfire that lacks the sharpness, structure, and spark that made Les Inconnus a national treasure.

July 21, 2025

After watching Jenny’s Wedding, I had to double-check its release date—2015. It felt like a script written in a much earlier, less accepting era. In a time when same-sex marriage is legal throughout most of the Western world and LGBTQ+ individuals are broadly embraced, it’s disheartening to see a film that still frames a woman coming out to her parents as something scandalous, shameful, and nearly catastrophic.

Katherine Heigl plays Jenny, a woman who finally decides to tell her parents that she’s a lesbian and intends to marry her longtime partner, Kitty (played by Gilmore Girls’ Alexis Bledel). The parents—played by Tom Wilkinson and Linda Emond—respond with such conservative, retrograde horror that it’s hard to believe these scenes weren’t drawn from a 1990s after-school special.

Even knowing that the movie will take the predictable arc of initial rejection to reluctant acceptance, the emotional damage is done early. The narrative reinforces outdated stereotypes, and despite its good intentions, it struggles to rise above a tone-deaf premise that feels out of step with the social progress made in recent decades.

What’s most frustrating is that the cast does its best. Wilkinson, Emond, and Heigl all bring a degree of sincerity to their roles. But the material they’re working with is so fundamentally tone-deaf that their efforts can’t quite redeem it. It’s not about a lack of talent—it’s the premise itself that feels off, especially considering the political and cultural setbacks suffered during the years following this film’s release, most notably under an orange-hued administration hostile to LGBTQ+ rights.

Ratings:
• Story: 4.08
• Cast: 6.24
• Entertainment: 5.41
• Final Score: 5.24

Jenny’s Wedding aims to be a story of love and acceptance, but its outdated portrayal of a same-sex relationship and the regressive reactions of its characters make it feel like a missed opportunity—released in the wrong decade, and with the wrong lens.

July 20, 2025

When Bringing Up Baby hit theaters in 1938, it was anything but a success. Katharine Hepburn had just been labeled box office poison, Howard Hawks admitted that audiences struggled to relate to the eccentric characters, and Cary Grant—just 34 at the time—was questioning whether he was already aging out of leading man roles. The critics were unimpressed, and the film flopped.

Fast forward to today, and Bringing Up Baby has undergone a complete reappraisal. It’s now celebrated as one of the funniest films ever made, arguably the best collaboration between Hepburn and Grant, and a cornerstone of Howard Hawks’ career.

Watching it now, it’s hard not to laugh. The absurdity of the story, the impeccable comic timing, and the remarkable chemistry between the leads still feel fresh. Hepburn, in her first full comedy, surprises with a seamless dive into slapstick and farce, redefining what a Hollywood actress could do onscreen.

Hawks famously called his leads screwballs—their behavior was so exaggerated and bizarre that viewers couldn’t possibly see themselves in them. This dynamic helped define the screwball comedy genre that would dominate late 1930s and early 1940s cinema.

Another standout is the film’s technical execution, especially the scenes involving a live leopard. Clever split-screen effects were used to astonishing effect for the time, and while some sequences required real interaction with the animal, only Hepburn had the nerve to engage closely with it.

If there’s a minor flaw, it’s the slightly meandering middle act, where the cast wanders around the garden searching for the escaped animal. But both the opening and the chaotic finale remain cinematic gold, filled with manic energy and inspired nonsense.

Ratings:
• Story: 8.15
• Cast: 8.79
• Entertainment: 8.07
• Final Score: 8.34

Bringing Up Baby may have started as a misunderstood misfire, but it’s now rightfully regarded as a comic masterpiece that changed the trajectory of screwball comedy—and cemented Grant and Hepburn as one of cinema’s most iconic pairs.

July 19, 2025

Alongside Blade and the Resident Evil franchise, Underworld and its sequels have helped cement horror action as a staple genre over the past 25 years. By fusing werewolves, vampires, monsters, and zombies into a whirlwind of shootouts, stylized violence, and dark mythology, these films have consistently appealed to fans of both horror and action.

Underworld introduces a centuries-long war between vampires and werewolves, centered on the stoic and lethal Selene—played by Kate Beckinsale—who discovers a conspiracy that could shift the balance of power between the ancient covens. Set in a brooding, rain-drenched, and unnamed urban world, the film’s style is a mix of Gothic chic and modern grit.

For Beckinsale, this was a bold move away from her “nice girl” image, embracing a more physical, commanding presence that would define her career for years. She’s supported by a solid cast, including Michael Sheen and Bill Nighy, both of whom would go on to greater recognition.

The film delivers breathtaking action, with well-staged fight scenes, immersive special effects, and a slick, kinetic energy. While the intricate vampire-werewolf lore can be a bit dense at times, the atmosphere and pace never let up, making it a thoroughly engaging watch.

And yes, seeing Beckinsale clad in her signature tight leather ensemble adds a completely different kind of visual appeal… wink wink.

Ratings:
• Story: 8.45
• Cast: 8.17
• Entertainment: 9.24
• Final Score: 8.62

Dark, violent, and unapologetically stylish, Underworld is a modern cult favorite that helped redefine the vampire genre for the 21st century.

September 1 2012

One of the best action/horror movies of the last years. The Vampire/Lycan conflict is full of great actors (Kate Beckinsale, Michael Sheen and most of all Bill Nighy) and Kate's leather and latex outfits just makes this really fun to watch 8.1/10

July 18 2025

My Favorite Brunette is a pleasant mid-century comedy that plays as a light parody of film noir, with Bob Hope in his familiar comic persona. Known for his countless movie roles and his long-standing status as a regular Academy Awards host, Hope here plays a timid baby photographer who stumbles into a world of danger and deception, pretending to be a private detective.

The film leans heavily on Hope’s trademark style—rapid-fire one-liners, self-deprecating humor, and mugging to the camera. If you’re familiar with his body of work, it fits neatly into the pattern, offering few surprises but enough charm to hold attention. It’s not among his finest films, but it’s enormously watchable thanks to the brisk pace and familiar tone.

Dorothy Lamour plays her role with grace and competence, bringing a classic presence as the mysterious partner. The movie is further elevated by fun cameos from Alan Ladd and Bing Crosby, the latter being a welcome nod to the Road to… collaborations.

Overall, while the story is thin and the film never fully commits to the noir mood it’s spoofing, the blend of genre and comedy works well enough to entertain. It may not be a standout in Hope’s filmography, but for fans of 1940s comedy and Hollywood in-jokes, it remains worth a watch.

Ratings:
• Story: 6.40
• Cast: 6.71
• Entertainment: 6.32
• Final Score: 6.48

A modest comedy with a solid cast and a few clever touches, My Favorite Brunette delivers just enough to keep you smiling—without ever aiming too high.

July 17, 2025

You can’t really talk about Le prix du danger without drawing a direct line to The Running Man (1987), starring Arnold Schwarzenegger. Both films feature eerily similar premises: a dystopian future where televised manhunts entertain the masses and promise vast fortunes to those who survive. But while The Running Man adapts Stephen King’s novel (written under his Richard Bachman alias) for Hollywood spectacle, Le prix du danger comes from a different literary origin — a 1958 short story by Robert Sheckley — and delivers something far more sober, sharp, and prescient.

Directed by Yves Boisset, the French film strips away the glitz and instead delivers a blistering media satire. What Le prix du danger lacks in futuristic bombast it makes up for with unsettling realism. The media world it portrays — with its moral decay, voyeuristic audiences, and profit-obsessed producers — no longer feels exaggerated. In fact, four decades later, it feels uncomfortably close to home. The film’s target is not just sensationalism, but the corporate machinery that thrives on human degradation for ratings.

Gérard Lanvin plays François, the reluctant everyman contestant, with a grounded vulnerability that invites the viewer’s empathy. Meanwhile, Michel Piccoli is in top form as the manipulative, smiling show host — a performance that remains chilling in its subtlety. Marie-France Pisier adds a layer of cynical finesse as the show’s unbothered executive producer, embodying the media elite’s willingness to cross ethical lines in the name of success.

While The Running Man chooses bombast and action, Le prix du danger aims for dissection. Its low-tech aesthetic might seem retro today, but its critique has only grown sharper with time.

Final Scores
• Story: 7.24
• Cast: 7.11
• Entertainment: 7.68
• Overall Rating: 7.34

July 16, 2025

Surprisingly good. As the 1960s progressed, the long-running series of films based on the works of British author Edgar Wallace — which had captivated German audiences for over a decade — began to show signs of fatigue. Audience numbers declined, and even the shift to color couldn’t fully revive the format. In 1967, producers scrambled to come up with a fresh entry that would appeal to the evolving tastes of the time. So, they returned to their last big success, Der unheimliche Mönch, and figured that a murderous monk wielding a whip might still draw a crowd. A new film was quickly greenlit.

They managed to bring back fan favorite Joachim Fuchsberger, hired veteran director Alfred Vohrer for his tenth Wallace movie, and delivered a surprisingly resourceful, action-packed, and entertaining installment. The final reveal of the killer came as a genuine surprise. Yes, the acting leaned a little corny at times, but overall the movie worked well and left a positive impression.

Rising German star Uschi Glas took on the female lead, and to my dismay, they expanded the role of Scotland Yard chief Sir John (played by Siegfried Schürenberg), pushing him even further into awkward comic relief territory — a move that didn’t do either the actor or the story much good.

That said, Der Mönch mit der Peitsche certainly ranks as one of the better Wallace entries.

Story: 6.38
Cast: 6.44
Entertainment: 6.79
Note: 6.54

July 15, 2025

For the first 30 minutes, I had the distinct feeling that Radiostars was going to annoy me. None of the characters appealed to me — especially Clovis Cornillac’s cynical Arnold, who came across as downright repulsive. The rest of the crew felt like overblown caricatures, not particularly sympathetic either.

But I have to admit, the story gradually won me over. It developed nicely, following a group of radio hosts sent on a nationwide tour across France to promote their morning show, which has lost its top spot in the ratings.

As the road trip unfolds, it becomes easier to connect with the characters. I started to sympathize with the lead, Ben (played by Douglas Attal), as he slowly integrates into the team.

I didn’t recognize any of the other actors besides Cornillac, though there is a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it appearance by a young pizza delivery girl — none other than Pom Klementieff, now known for her roles in the Marvel Universe and Mission: Impossible franchise.

Radiostars takes its time to get going, but in the end, it delivers enough charm and momentum to make you smile and go along for the ride.

Story: 6.41
Cast: 5.77
Entertainment: 6.19
Note: 6.12

July 14, 2025

Ghosts of Mars was the movie that sent John Carpenter into a decade-long hiatus as a director. The legendary filmmaker behind Escape from New York, The Fog, and Halloween would only return for one more feature in 2011, and it seems likely that the box office failure of Ghosts of Mars played a significant role in his semi-retirement.

Now, I do admit — the basic premise sounds pretty far-fetched. In the late 22nd century, a group of miners on Mars becomes possessed by ghostly demons. It’s the kind of plot that invites skepticism from the start. But once you put logic and reasoning aside, what remains is actually a first-class horror action thriller — classic Carpenter in many ways.

I might also be a little biased here. In only his eighth film appearance, Jason Statham shows up in a major supporting role alongside Natasha Henstridge and Ice Cube. Statham would go on to become my favorite action star, and while his performance here isn’t as polished as in later years, he still stands out from a cast that also includes Pam Grier, Clea DuVall, and Joanna Cassidy.

In the years since, Ghosts of Mars has been re-evaluated and is now seen as a cult favorite in the horror-action genre. A bit too late for Mr. Carpenter though, isn’t it?

Story: 6.17
Cast: 6.67
Entertainment: 6.57
Note: 6.47

July 13, 2025

Here got most of its media attention because it reunited director Robert Zemeckis with Tom Hanks and Robin Wright, exactly 30 years after Forrest Gump. That alone was enough to spark curiosity. Some articles also mentioned the film’s unique structure — telling a generational story from a single, fixed camera angle. It’s a bold idea, and technically, it’s done well. The scenery shifts seamlessly through time — from the extinction of the dinosaurs, past Native American civilization, through the 1800s, and into the modern era, with most of the focus landing between 1950 and 1980.

The use of artificial intelligence to de-age Hanks and Wright is also quite impressive — I have to admit the effect works. Kelly Reilly and Paul Bettany appear as Hanks’ parents, rounding out a strong supporting cast.

But even with all these bells and whistles, Zemeckis doesn’t manage to tell a story that really touches the audience. There’s nothing particularly memorable or moving here — this could be any family’s story. The camera may stay in one place, but the film drifts emotionally.

When I find myself focusing more on the technical side of a movie — the A.I., the effects, the novelty — and less on the acting or the story itself, that’s usually a sign something’s off. And this is Tom Hanks, after all. If even he can’t breathe life into the material, then something fundamental is missing.

Story: 6.09
Cast: 6.81
Entertainment: 6.31
Note: 6.40

July 12, 2025

The Usual Suspects has rightfully earned its place as a modern classic, thanks to its unique narrative structure, a stellar cast, and a final twist that is still discussed today, often alongside The Sixth Sense as one of the greatest cinematic reveals.

The story unfolds largely in flashbacks, as Kevin Spacey’s Verbal Kint recounts a convoluted tale of five criminals — Gabriel Byrne, Kevin Pollak, Stephen Baldwin, Benicio del Toro, and himself — brought together seemingly by chance, but eventually tangled in the web of the mythical underworld figure Keyser Söze.

The cast is a dream team of 90s crime film actors. Spacey delivers one of his most memorable performances, and del Toro manages to be iconic with barely a handful of comprehensible lines. The script crackles with intrigue, and director Bryan Singer keeps the tension tight throughout.

And yet — and this is a personal gripe — the twist calls into question everything you’ve seen. The whole structure hinges on possibly fabricated flashbacks, and that’s something I’ve never fully embraced. When a movie builds up its entire plot only to pull the rug out by suggesting much of it may have been a lie, it can feel like the audience has been cheated out of real resolution.

So yes, The Usual Suspects is clever, stylish, gripping, and undeniably influential. But for me, the unreliable narration dampens the impact. A brilliant film on many levels — just not one I return to often.

Story: 6.44
Cast: 8.22
Entertainment: 7.70
Note: 7.45