Addicted to Love

What a strange little film! I’m not even sure what it’s supposed to be. To give you an idea, it’s kind of a cross between “Cape Fear” and “When Harry Met Sally”! Boy, what a mix, eh! Maybe the filmmakers wanted to make a romantic comedy with an edge, but the more the movie advances, the more perverse it becomes, until the usual happy end. Hence, you don’t know how to respond to the movie. When you watch “Cape Fear”, you’re terrified by De Niro: it’s at thriller. When you see “When Harry…”, you get all sweet and you want them to end up together. But “Addicted to Love”?

Sam (Matthew Broderick) and Linda (Kelly Preston) seem to be a happy couple. They’ve known each other since they were kids, and they’re in love. Sam’s an astronomer, nice and unthreatening, who likes his life simple and comfortable. Linda’s a teacher, and she has dreams of her own. She would actually enjoy change, and when she meets someone during a trip to New York, she decides to break up with Sam and move there. But our little space boy ain’t ready to let her go. You could even say that he’s obsessed. He leaves everything behind to follow her to the Big Apple, where he settles in the abandoned loft in front of the apartment of Anton (Tcheky Karyo), the French cook who stole Linda’s heart. And then Sam meets Anton’s ex Maggie (Meg Ryan), and since they both want to break this couple, they decide to work together at stalking and messing with the lives of those they’re supposed to love. And while they’re doing that twisted stuff, they find love again… with each other. How romantic…

Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t see how destroying the life of some innocent French guy with inventive cruelty and breaking the heart of his girl can make two people fall in love. It’s just sick! Sam and Maggie are nothing short of stalkers. De Niro has played this kind of character, but it was obvious that he was the bad guy and that you should be disgusted by his behavior. But this is supposed to be a romantic comedy, so we should feel love between the characters, not resentment. If at least Anton was a jerk and Linda was a bitch, maybe we would find it justified that the “heroes” are so mean towards them, but they’re just nice people in love. Is that a crime?

Besides that, the movie is rather enjoyable. First-time director Griffin Dunne uses plenty of stunning visual tricks, and his movie is always well crafted and dynamic. The music is particularly enjoyable, with everything from Cake’s Nugget to cool French songs like MC Solaar’s Victime de la Mode. So the movie’s fun for the eyes and the ears, but like I said, it’s really not romantic or much involving. It’s sporadically funny, but it’s mostly confusing.

Take Meg Ryan for instance. In most of her movies, she’s hella sweet, hella cute, hella lovable, hella amusing… But in “Addicted Love”, she plays a biker chick with dark eye shadow who spends the whole film being a bitch to her ex. Talk about odd casting. Matthew Broderick is a little more at his place. Even though we first watched him in 80s high school comedies, he has also been convincing in bleaker movies such as the overlooked but delightful black comedy “The Cable Guy” and in the brilliant satire “Election”. But these movies were supposed to be cynical. “Addicted to Love” might have worked as a black comedy with the necessary script and casting modifications, but under the romantic comedy label, it’s just a weird mess. Entertaing, but still a misfire.

Action Jackson

Oh man! I sure love those macho action films from the eighties! The master of this kind of film is of course Arnold Schwarzenegger. One of his best followers is Carl Weathers, the star of this film. In this kind of film, the plot ain’t important. Here, Jericho Jackson, sergeant for Detroit police, is after a rich auto executive. Of course, he has a sexy girl with him to whom he can talk about his investigation. There are also lots of cool bad guys. What’s great about these films is the machismo; in a film like that, a guy can run faster than a car, he can break a windshield with his fist, and he doesn’t care about pain. And, of course, if he’s in a showdown with his nemesis, he’ll drop his gun and fight that punk mano a mano!

Now, let’s talk about this movie in particular. The direction is very good and the action is fast. The music is excellent: I love 80s pop music ! The theme song is especially powerful. The cast is also brilliant for the genre: Weathers, Bill Duke, that Chinese guy, that big black guy, that Italian fella… The action scenes are very cool. But the best thing about this film is the main character : ACTION JACKSON! He’s almost as cool as John Shaft! He talks fast and he kicks ass, big time! I laugh every time someone says his name. One of the best example of this is when he meets the girl.
“What’s your name?”
“That sounds like a priest’s name… you have a nickname?”
“Yeah… People call me ACTION JACKSON!”

If you like testosterone, don’t miss this film!

À Bout de Souffle

Michel Poiccard’s not a regular guy. He’s French, but he wish he was American. He likes the American way of life, at least the one he sees at the movies. The big cars, the money, the cool look, the careless attitude… With his hat and sunglasses, Michel’s almost unstoppable. Basically, he’s no gangster. He goes from place to place, robbing cars, meeting people, banging girls… One day, he’s back in Paris. A friend of him owes him some cash, but he can’t get a hold of the guy. And the police is after him since he killed a cop who had stopped him on the road. Even worse than all that, Michel is actually… in love. A little American girl named Patricia caught his heart. Their relationship is weird, like Poiccard’s whole life.

And so is the film. There isn’t a real story. We just catch a slice of life of the characters. They wander around, they get together… The screenplay from François Truffaut is far from usual. We spend a lot of time with the couple, not to make the story go forward but just to get to know them. There’s a very long sequence in their bedroom that leads nowhere but is still absolutely fascinating. The dialogue is just so brilliant. Patricia and Michel talk about nothing and everything, exchanging their views on life. Jean-Luc Godard’s direction is really interesting too. His film has a cool feel of anarchy. Many scenes seem improvised. It’s all so natural. But at the same time, the visual style is original, and the loungy music is great. This is the exciting Godard of his debuts, when he was awestruck to can finally make some cinema of his own, in a way even today’s audiences are not quite ready for. The cast is very good. Jean Seberg is cute and very likable as the girlfriend, and Jean-Paul Belmondo is terrific in the lead. He’s a rebel yet a nice guy, a criminal yet a romantic. His performance in this flick is legendary. For all these reasons, I really enjoyed “A Bout de Souffle”. It’s as innovative as it is entertaining. It’s clever, hilarious, amazing… You just can’t miss this!

Freddy got fingered (OFCS)

“Freddy Got Fingered”

It’s been advanced that insanity and genius are two sides of a same reality, two somehow intertwined extremes. Tom Green’s oeuvre is a good example of that. From his original Canadian show to its reinvented MTV version, Green made a name for himself by pulling the most demented stunts, be it humping a dead moose, putting a horse’s head in his parents’ bed à la Godfather or making a one hour special about his real-life removal of a cancer-ridden testicle. Some will dismiss it all as the work of a wacko, but others find it brilliant in an admittedly very quirky way. I fall in the latter category, finding Green to be a fearless performer with an intriguing vision. He made his big screen debut in a bit part in “Superstar”, then stole and ran away with “Road Trip”, and finally with “Freddy Got Fingered” (which he co-wrote and directed in addition to playing the lead role), he’s come up with, in his own words, “the stupidest, most disgusting movie you’ve ever seen.”

Green stars as Gord Brody, a 28 year-old slacker who finally leaves home to go to Hollywood and pursue is dream of working as a cartoon animator. Of course, making it as an artist is not that easy, and Gord finds himself rejected by a studio executive (Anthony Michael Hall) and stuck in a cheese sandwich factory, a dead-end job if there ever was one. So he returns to Portland and moves back in his parents’ basement, much to the disenchantment of his father (Rip Torn). Dad wants him to get a job, but Brody prefers to take it easy drawing his “doodles”, skateboarding with his best buddy (Harland Williams) and hanging with his wheelchair-bound rocket scientist girlfriend (Marisa Coughland). Henceforth begins a war between father and son where no blow is too low, be it destroying Gord’s skateboard ramp or denouncing Daddy as a child molester who fingered younger brother Freddy (Eddie Kaye Thomas) – hence the title.

“We got the idea of writing our own comedy that would be a mockery of conventional comedies.” – Tom Green

The film starts off with a familiar tone, that of many an ’80s teen comedy, with an early scene showing Gord skateboarding through a shopping mall while a security guard chases him. Then his parents wave him goodbye as he leaves home, and then… He stops his car by a farm, runs up to a horse, grabs its erect penis and starts jerking it vigorously! How many ’80s comedies provide such a sight? Right there, you know if this movie is for you. Unsurprisingly, many people aren’t interested in a picture featuring interspecies hand-jobs.

For instance, if you look it up on Rotten Tomatoes, you’ll see that “Freddy Got Fingered” has received nearly nothing but brutally negative reviews. To many a film reviewer, it seems this is the bottom of the barrel and then some. James Berardinelli wrote that he has “gotten better entertainment value from a colonoscopy”. Owen Gleiberman not only panned the movie but went on to write that Green had “a hyperactive computer addict’s stringbean body, a wimp’s receding profile (his goatee seems to be shouting, “I know I’m here to fill out this guy’s loser face!”), and the rabid, staring eyes of a deranged lizard.” It culminated with the film “winning” five Razzie awards, including Worst Picture of 2001.

Well, I beg to differ. Yes, Tom Green’s directorial debut is juvenile, vulgar, generally sloppily crafted, offensive and thoroughly idiotic. Then again, it’s one the most hilarious movies I’ve seen in recent years, and Green is rivetingly grotesque. Critic Roger Ebert loathed the film but accurately described it as a “milestone of neo-surrealism”. Indeed, for every gross-out scene involving a bloody deer carcass or whatnot, we get delightfully absurd moments like Green playing keyboards with strung up sausages or the “backwards man”.

I truly believe writer-director-star Tom Green has done something special here. Even if you don’t find his humor funny, his film is still spectacularly offbeat. There’s all this weird and weirder stuff that keeps happening. But then again, it actually holds itself, there IS a story. A nice story, about a man-child who wants to be an artist but whose ambitions are squashed by his father, who wants him to quit dreaming and get a job. There’s even a love story, and it’s actually sweet how Betty inspires Gordy to not give up. Of course, all this generally degenerates into insanity, but this is a Tom Green movie after all!

“It was vaguely autobiographical and vaguely nonsensical at the same time. The main character is a small-town boy from Oregon, not Canada, who tries to prove himself to his dad by coming to L.A. to make it as an animator, not a comedian.” – Tom Green

Another thing that’s notable is how personal a film this is. On the DVD commentary, Green talks about how he really does love skateboarding and flipping creamers (!) and how he had to move back into his parents’ basement when he was struggling to find a way to get paid to be stupid.

Green is an artist. At least, you can’t deny he has a wild imagination. The things he does with his voice, his body, his face… Or, going back to his screenplay, it’s hard to fathom how he can come up with bits of dialogue like this particularly zesty one, from a scene where Gordy tells his mom she deserves better than his dad: “If I were you, I would show him that I deserve respect. If I were you I would go out, I’d have sex with strange men, I’d have sex with basketball players. I’d have sex with Greeks, men from Greece.”

Here’s a rather classic scene, the son telling his mother she doesn’t have to put up with her abusive husband, yet look how Green goes out on a tangent way into too-much-information territory!

That back and forth between sentimental and bizarre, which goes on through the whole picture, is what does it for me. Like, when Gord delivers a baby, cuts the umbilical cord with his teeth then swings the poor little bastard around in circles, that’s just the set-up. Where it gets hilarious is when it cuts to the heartfelt aftermath, with touchy-feely music on the soundtrack, the mother crying and Gord saying, “I saved the day… I saved the day.”

“I wanted to make something where people walked out of the theatre saying, “What the fuck was that?” – Tom Green

Mission accomplished, sir! The many people who hate the movie and the few, like me, who love it all agree on one thing: this is one hell of a weird flick.

Retrospective — 1998


I’ve always liked movies, for as long as I can remember. Of course, as a kid, I was mostly into Marty McFly, Indiana Jones and John McClane, but soon adolescence broadened my horizons and I got interested in darker silver screen figures such as Travis Bickle, Tony Montana and Mr. Blonde. I became an avid moviegoer as well as a video store staple, and I’ve been taking in movie after movie ever since.

The first seeds of my becoming a film critic were planted in the first days of 1996, when I alternated between watching a “Planet of the” Apes marathon on TV and going through a freshly bought copy of the 1996 Blockbuster Video Guide. That’s when it sort of dawned on me that I had seen so many movies that I was losing track. Hence, I went back to the ‘a’ page with a pen and paper and went through the whole book writing down the titles of movies I had seen. Days later, when I was done, I sat down in front of my computer and typed up the whole list. Next up, I decided to give ratings to the movies, using the 5 star system used in the Blockbuster guide, which looking back was a bad idea since most everyone actually uses 4 stars but what the hell. The next step seemed obvious: I started to write short comments on the films, not proper reviews yet, but in spirit I was becoming a critic.

Gradually, I started writing more, and more, and more, until it got to the point where what I was doing looked, sounded and felt like reviewing movies… except that I had no audience! But it didn’t matter, I loved movies, I loved writing, so writing about movies was a logical thing to do. A year or so passed, I was now in film school, and it had become a habit after watching a movie to sit down and spend a few hours putting my impressions on paper. I had scrapped the original collection of 20 words reviews but, still, it was quite a nice little archive I was gathering, with something like 150 reviews.

Somewhere around June 1998, my best friend Mathieu finished a course in HTML and website design and was aching to put together something on the internet, yet didn’t know what. That’s when we got the idea to combine my always increasing collection of reviews and his programming skills to co-create a website. Thus was born “Nemours @ the Movies”, with its clumsy original look, its clumsy original reviews and its clumsy original location with annoying Geocities pop-up ads.

July 2003 will mark the Fifth Anniversary of my online film critic career. To celebrate this little milestone of mine, I’m taking a look back at those five years of websites, movies and life in general.

The Website
Nemours @ the Movies (Nemours is a fake middle name I gave myself) (defunct)
Pretty lame design, few pictures, all reviews crammed into letter pages (the As, the Bs..), annoying pop-up ads… Hey, gotta start somewhere.

The Movies

We first went online on July 1st, 1998 with a front-page review of Armageddon (not a masterpiece but certainly better than Deep Impact). This was a pretty good year for blockbusters, as Blade, Ronin and Enemy of the State thrilled us while we laughed it up with Adam Sandler in The Wedding Singer and The Waterboy. There was also that “New Geek Cinema” sorta-trend, with such black humor-laced flicks as Very Bad Things and the T&A opus Wild Things, two GREAT Meg Ryan romantic comedies (City of Angels and You’ve Got Mail) and the overrated but occasionally brilliant Saving Private Ryan.

My Top Ten:

06. BUFFALO ’66 91
09. THE BIG LEBOWSKI 93 (yeah, this should have been higher)

Would have been in the Top 5 if I’d seen it earlier: American History X

NEXT: 1999, still the best movie year in recent memory.

Die Hard!

“[Action filmmakers] are the most cinematic directors. They’re taking cinema and making you hard – and making you come, actually!” – Quentin Tarantino

I truly love action movies. There’s nothing that I like more than watching big, macho, muscular, sweaty men kicking each other’s ass, shooting guns and making stuff blow up, while the whole thing is shot like a pumped up MTV video edited to a faux-Wagnerian score. I am, of course, being a tad sarcastic, and that’s a must for an action fan. You gotta love thrills, but you also need a good sense of humor, an ability to swallow the dumbest twists and attitudes with a smile. You gotta believe that one guy can defeat an army, that a bad guy would rather fight his nemesis honorably in hand-to-hand combat than shoot his brains out and that motorized vehicles can defy any law of physics when used properly. You can’t go, “Hey! No way that can happen!” You gotta be, like, “Fuck it, that’s fun to watch!” The next few pages will try to cover most of the various forms of action movies that spun from Hollywood in the last 15 years or so.

First of all, we have to settle on a definition of an action movie. To me, it’s a film that relies on violent confrontations and death-defying ventures more than anything. This essay won’t consider early movies that kinda were action films, but not really. Think of westerns, blaxploitation, cop/gangster movies and war films. In these kinds of films, fights might break out, bullets might be shot, but that wasn’t what these types of movies were really about.

I won’t either extend to some of the brilliant action work that was done outside of Tinseltown, notably Asia’s long tradition in martial arts movies. Other genres, like science-fiction, that sometimes share elements with action will also be pushed aside, even though movies like “Star Wars” or “The Terminator” were action-packed. What I’m trying to do is to get down to the classic definition of a Hollywood action film: the opposition between Good and Evil, violence and fast-paced, flashy filmmaking. Next are what may be the 5 most influential action flicks ever made in Hollywood.

FIRST BLOOD : Political Action (1982)

“After Vietnam there was a need for escapism. Rambo led to the birth of the real uber action film. I was part of that group with Arnold (Schwarzenegger] and Bruce (Willis] and there was a definite theme. It was about one-man armies.” – Sylvester Stallone

The first real action film was definitively “First Blood”. Somehow like “Taxi Driver”, the film follows a Vietnam veteran as he returns to America and realizes that home ain’t all that sweet after all. But while Travis Bickle did take out a few guys, it’s nothing compared to John Rambo’s elaborate decimation of a whole town. The film takes itself seriously, but even its creators must have known that the overwhelming violence was the film’s driving force much more than the political message. What we want is to see Sylvester Stallone beating people every which way but loose, right? A one-man army, more pyrotechnics than dialogue… The modern action movie is born all right. Other movies of this kind of serious “political” action films are the two Rambo sequels and the Chuck Norris vehicles “Missing in Action” and “Delta Force”.

COMMANDO : Action Takes It Easy (1985)

If Stallone was the figure that started the genre, it’s Schwarzenegger who made it so popular. Instead of being frustrated and stiff like Rambo, Ah-nuld seemed to be having fun while he was killing people. More often than not, plots were just excuses for a series of exciting fights and stunts. No message here! Instead, you get one-liners and over-the-top action sequences. The first film to tap into that is also my favorite movie: Mark L. Lester‘s brilliant “Commando”. Arnie made countless other movies with almost as much humor as violence : “Predator”, “Raw Deal”, “Red Heat”, “Last Action Hero”, “True Lies”, “Eraser”… Then there’s the “Lethal Weapon” and “Beverly Hills Cop” series, which are almost comedies but still pack tons of action. Then there are those Schwarzenegger wannabes, Steven Seagal and Jean-Claude Van Damme, who can kick some ass but aren’t all that comfortable with one-liners. Still, they made some fun films.

DIE HARD : Action in a Nutshell (1988)

Whereas Rambo and Matrix wandered around vast places (whole cities, islands…) in order to kill people, John McClane is caught in a skyscraper. And so a new kind of action film is born. Instead of having your hero trying to get to the bad guys, you can now just stick all of them together in the same place and have them play cat-and-mouse. The place ain’t important: it can be an airport (“Die Hard 2”), a plane (“Passenger 57” / “Air Force One”), a ship (“Under Siege”), a train (“Under Siege 2”), a hockey arena (“Sudden Impact”)… These movies are usually about a bunch of foreign terrorists that take over a place in which, luckily, a hyper-trained hero happens to be. An interesting twist is “Road House”, where you got the thing with the hero beating up bad guys in the one location (a bar), except that they’re not terrorists, just a bunch of drunken assholes!

John McTiernan “Die Hard” remains the coolest flick of that kind that was ever made. It stars Bruce Willis, in his first action role, as John McClane, a New York cop who comes to L.A. to spend Christmas with his wife and kids. The couple meets at an office party in a huge business building, and that’s when a gang of European terrorists take over the place. McClane is the only one who can stop Hans and his boys. As you can see, that’s a simple plot, but it’s efficient. It leads to a series of outstanding fights and shoot-outs, as well as many funny scenes. Willis burns the screen with his overwhelming charisma. He’s witty, he’s macho, and he sure kicks ass! This is what I call a classic. I’ve seen this action-packed masterpiece countless times, and I never get tired of it. It’s filled with inventively violent set-ups, and the action never stops. Definitely a must-see. The sequels are also pretty good, especially the third film, an inventive cat-and-mouse game across New York.

SPEED : Action Without Balls (1994)

This is the action film at its weakest, at its most mainstream. In Jan De Bont‘s film, there are almost no fights or violence. He just kept the MTV-style direction, the stunts and the explosions. Yes, there’s still a bad guy, but Dennis Hopper isn’t even face-to-face with the hero more than 10 minutes, and there aren’t even other bad guys. There might be 2 or three deaths in the whole flick! All you get is some dude and a chick on a bus that crashes through stuff. I admit that the film is enjoyable in parts, but I’m still happy that the genre survived this “roller-coaster” phase, which didn’t last all that long. We still had to suffer through Stallone’s “Daylight” and some other wussy action flicks where heroes face natural disasters instead of bloodthirsty terrorists (Sly vs a tunnel!?!).

FACE / OFF : Action As Opera (1997)

If it hadn’t been for this movie, I would probably have decided not to stop myself at Hollywood movies for this retrospective, because I couldn’t have mentioned the absolute best action director in the whole world, Hong Kong’s John Woo. His films reach new levels in action, with shoot-outs orchestrated like apocalyptic ballets and violence poetically used to portray the most passionate feelings of one. Honor becomes the driving force of combat, as charitable gangsters face dirty cops. It’s the fight between good and evil, but the distinction ain’t all that evident. In movies like “The Killer”, even love and true friendship are present. Woo started out in Hollywood with “Hard Target”, which is cool, but his style is overwhelmed by Van Damme’s usual tricks. The director went on to make “Broken Arrow”, another explosive yet impersonal outing. It’s with “Face/Off” that Woo finally shows mainstream America what he is all about. This amazing picture presents the opposition between a determined FBI agent, Sean Archer, and a funky terrorist, Castor Troy, who get their faces switched, forcing them to use the other guy’s allies to fight each other. Besides featuring brilliant direction, spellbinding action scenes and a clever script, the film gets great performances from Nicolas Cage and John Travolta. For all these reasons, “Face/Off” was actually the 6th best reviewed movie of ’97 (after “The Sweet Hereafter”, “Titanic”, “Boogie Nights”, “L.A. Confidential” and “In the Company of Men”). Action never felt so good!

So that’s about it as far as action movies go. Of course, I only went to the essentials, and as I said at the beginning, many other types of action films could have been explored, but I think I went to the heart of it when it comes to action in Hollywood from 1982 to 1997. Would I dare make predictions for the future? As far as I’m concerned, I think that Hong Kong holds the fate of the action film. Action directors like Ringo Lam (“Maximum Risk”), Kirk Wong (“The Big Hit”) and Tsui Hark (“Double Team”) have all joined John Woo in America, as did action stars like Jackie Chan (“Rush Hour”), Jet Li (“Lethal Weapon 4”) and, most of all, Chow Yun-Fat (“The Replacement Killers”). Because, admit it, soon-to-be sixty Schwarzenegger and Stallone and forty-something Bruce Willis might not be on top for long, and Seagal and Van Damme never stood a chance to be more than second bit players. As for Nic Cage, he might be too busy playing beautiful freaks to rule the action world as he did last year with “Con Air” and, of course, “Face/Off”. Is Hollywood getting the message? Very likely, since “Mission: Impossible” star and producer Tom Cruise apparently wants John Woo to direct the next instalment! Whatever happens, I’m sure that we will still be able to see heroes who can shoot whole armies dead for a long, long time.

2002 May-October

(2 May) Savage Messiah (2002, Mario Azzopardi) 48
[ Another powerful, terrifying performance by Luc Picard as a sadistic and perverted guru. Too bad the overall film is rather pedestrian. ]

(3 May) Spider-Man (2002, Sam Raimi) [ review ] 85

(5 May) The Devil’s Advocate (1997, Taylor Hackford) 51
[ I’d call this a guilty pleasure. It’s crass, cheesy, and wrong in so many ways, but it’s fun to watch and Al Pacino is deliciously over the top. ]

(6 May) Le Peuple Migrateur (2002, Jacques Perrin) [ review ] 90

(7 May) Moving (2002, Jonathan Friedman) [ review ] 52

(10 May) Unfaithful (2002, Adrian Lyne) [ review ] 40

(10 May) L.A. Confidential (1997, Curtis Hanson) [ review ] 92

(11 May) Blue Velvet (1986, David Lynch) [ review ] 93

(12 May) City Lights (1930, Charlie Chaplin) 65
[ Most of this “timeless classic” didn’t make much of an impression on me, but I have to say, the ending is absolutely marvelous. ]

(14 May) Tribute (2001, Kris Curry and Rich Fox) 80
[ Reviewed for the Apollo Movie Guide ]

(16 May) Attack of the Clones (2002, George Lucas) [ review ] 61

(19 May) Which Way is Up? (1977, Michael Schultz) 10
[ Reviewed for the Apollo Movie Guide ]

(21 May) The Salton Sea (2002, D.J. Caruso) [ review ] 54

(23 May) Dead in the Water (2001, Gustavo Lipsztein) 35
[ Reviewed for the Apollo Movie Guide ]

(23 May) FUBAR (2002, Michael Dowse) [ review ] 86

(24 May) Insomnia (2002, Christopher Nolan) [ review ] 82

(27 May) Requiem for a Dream (2002, Darren Aronofsky) [ review ] 92

(27 May) Sparkle (1999, Jeff Beesley) 30
[ >Reviewed for the Apollo Movie Guide ]

(30 May) Lenny (1974, Bob Fosse) 82
[ Greatish biopic short on laughs but overflowing with style, sexiness and thought-provoking material. ]

(30 May) Hedwig and the Angry Inch (2001, John Cameron Mitchell) [ review ] 91

(30 May) An American in Paris (1951, Vincente Minnelli) 61
[ The story is paper thin and the romance doesn’t work, but the song and dance numbers are pretty great. ]

(31 May) Undercover Brother (2002, Malcolm D. Lee) [ review ] 4

(31 May) The Sum of All Fears (2002, Phil Alden Robinson) [ review ] 90

(10 Jun) Irréversible (2002, Gaspar Noé) [ review ] 90

(10 Jun) Astérix & Obélix: Mission Cléôpatre (2002, Alain Chabat) [ review ] 70

(14 Jun) In the Shadows (2001, Ric Roman Waugh) 65
[ Reviewed for the Apollo Movie Guide ]

(14 Jun) Windtalkers (2002, John Woo) [ review ] 38

(17 Jun) Vanilla Sky (2001, Cameron Crowe) [ review ] 93

(18 Jun) The Exorcist (1973, William Friedkin) 42
[ I’d never actually watched it, and I guess it’s been too ripped off, referenced, spoofed and talked about for me to experience it as it was meant to be. Sure, I found it gross but other than that? Blah. ]

(19 Jun) Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery (1997, Jay Roach) [ review ] 93

(20 Jun) Singin’ in the Rain (1952, Stanley Donen) [ review ] 100

(21 Jun) Minority Report (2002, Steven Spielberg) [ review ] 93

(25 Jun) Outta Time (2002, Lorena David) 40
[ Reviewed for the Apollo Movie Guide ]

(25 Jun) The Dangerous Lives of Altar Boys (2002, Peter Care) [ review ] 76

(28 Jun) Mr. Deeds (2002, Steven Brill) [ review ] 41

(29 Jun) American Beauty (1999, Sam Mendes) [ review ] 93

(4 Jul) Change of Habit (1969, William A. Graham) [ review ] 65

(4 Jul) Minority Report (2002, Steven Spielberg) [ review ] 93

(8 Jul) Being John Malkhovich (1999, Spike Jonze) [ review ] 93

(9 Jul) K-9: P.I. (2002, Richard J. Lewis) [ review ] 40

(9 Jul) Moulin Rouge! (2001, Baz Luhrmann) [ review ] 98

(12 Jul) Road to Perdition (2002, Sam Mendes) [ review ] 49

(12 Jul) Reign of Fire (2002, Rob Bowman) [ review ] 39

(13 Jul) Dragonfly (2002, Tom Shadyac) [ review ] 6

(17 Jul) Eight Legged Freaks (2002, Ellory Elkayem) [ review ] 23

(22 Jul) Goldmember (2002, Jay Roach) [ review ] 85

(26 Jul) Goldmember (2002, Jay Roach) [ review ] 85

(26 Jul) UHF (1989, Jay Levey) [ review ] 86

(27 Jul) The Desert Rats (1953, Robert Wise) 55
[ Reviewed for the Apollo Movie Guide ]

(1 Aug) Unbreakable (2000, M. Night Shyamalan) [ review ] 92

(2 Aug) Signs (2002, M. Night Shyamalan) [ review ] 94

(3 Aug) Full Frontal (2002, Steven Soderbergh) [ review ] 28

(5 Aug) Cat People (1982, Paul Schrader) [ review ] 32

(6 Aug) The Fellowship of the Ring (2001, Peter Jackson) [ review ] 93

(9 Aug) xXx (2002, Rob Cohen) [ review ] 34

(10 Aug) Strictly Sinatra (2001, Peter Capaldi) [ review ] 53

(10 Aug) To Kill a Mockingbird (1962, Robert Mulligan) 96
[ One of the greats, it conveys an essential message with grace and intelligence. Gregory Peck is the father everyone wishes he had. ]

(11 Aug) Spider-Man (2002, Sam Raimi) [ review ] 85

(14 Aug) Blue Crush (2002, John Stockwell) [ review ] 23

(20 Aug) Fun and Fancy Free (1947, Jack Kinney) 22
[ Disney Masterpiece my ass, this is a botched, dated mess. “Mickey and the Beanstalk” is kinda fun, but the “Bongo” story is plain retarded. Great way to show kids how to express love through spousal abuse! ]

(20 Aug) The Lord of the Rings (1978, Ralph Bakshi) 38
[ At first, I found it not as bad as it’s been accused of being. It’s stylish enough, and the material is so strong that some of the missteps are forgivable. But about halfway through it loses all focus and starts skimming through events almost randomly and then it just stops two thirds into the story! I’ll stick to Peter Jackson’s films etc. ]

(23 Aug) Serving Sara (2002, Reginald Hudlin) [ review ] 35

(23 Aug) The Good Girl (2002, Miguel Arteta) [ review ] 40

(24 Aug) Heaven (2002, Tom Tykwer) [ review ] 90

(28 Aug) The Scorpion King (2002, Chuck Russell) [ review ] 57

(29 Aug) Big Fat Liar (2002, Shawn Levy) [ review ] 36

(29 Aug) The Talented Mr. Ripley (1999, Anthony Minghella) [ review ] 92

(30 Aug) Igby Goes Down (2002, Burr Steers) [ review ] 72

(1 Sept) Minority Report (2002, Steven Spielberg) [ review ] 93

(2 Sept) Jurassic Park III (2001, Joe Johnston) 15
[ Easily one of the worst Hollywood blockbusters I’ve ever seen, the production values (outside of the not even that awe-inspiring anymore dinos) are on a TV level, the acting is obnoxiously bad and the set pieces are more ridiculous than exciting. ]

(2 Sept) America’s Sweethearts (2001, Joe Roth) 26
[ 2 minutes’ worth of biting satire drowned into an ill-conceived, wildly uninvolving romantic comedy. John Cusack and Julia Roberts are on auto-pilot, and Catherine Zeta-Jones and especially Hank Azaria and his pseudo-Spanish accent are insufferable.]

(3 Sept) 8 Femmes (2002, François Ozon) [ review ] 86

(3 Sept) Chasing Amy (1997, Kevin Smith) [ review ] 87

(6 Sept) Le Pacte des Loups (2001, Christophe Gans) [ review ] 90

(6 Sept) Monsoon Wedding (2002, Mira Nair) [ review ] 86

(7 Sept) Blade II (2002, Guillermo Del Toro) [ review ] 44

(8 Sept) Van Wilder (2002, Walt Becker) 8
[ The absolute bottom of the barrel of misogynist, juvenile and disgusting comedies. Ryan Reynolds is pretty cool, but even Miles farking Davis wouldn’t be cool enough to salvage this pile of dog semen. ]

(9 Sept) Magnolia (1999, Paul Thomas Anderson) [ review ] 100

(13 Sept) Stealing Harvard (2002, Bruce McCullough) [ review ] 37

(13 Sept) One Hour Photo (2002, Mark Romanek) [ review ] 80

(15 Sept) The Count of Monte Cristo (2002, Kevin Reynolds) 36
[ This adaptation of the classic Alexandre Dumas revenge drama is nicely set up, effectively showing Jim Caviezel’s Edmond going through extreme pain and despair. But then the film rushes through his retribution to his enemies and ties everything up into a happy little Hollywood resolution. Too bad. ]

(15 Sept) Game of Death (1978, Sammo Hung) 44
[ Cheapie, let’s-pretend-Bruce-Lee-didn’t-die-halfway-into-the-shoot kung fu revenge flick. Watch for countless shots of Lee’s unconvincing double seen from the back, in shadows or in disguise. Still, the climactic succession of fights of the genuine Bruce Lee in an iconic yellow with black stripes jumpsuit (which Uma Thurman will reprise in next year’s “Kill Bill”!) is pretty damn cool, especially when Lee faces 7 foot tall Kareem Abdul Jabbar! ]

(16 Sept) Everyone Says I Love You (1996, Woody Allen) 62
[ An homage to 1950s MGM musicals, but with actors who can’t sing and can’t dance! Instead, we’re rewarded with a sprinkle of Woody Allen’s trademark neurotic wit, and the film has a certain old fashioned charm. ]

(16 Sept) The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997, Steven Spielberg) 60
[ Part of the Directors Series ]

(17 Sept) Signs (2002, M. Night Shyamalan) [ review ] 94

(19 Sept) King Kong (1933, Ernest B. Shoedsack & Merian C. Cooper) 65
[ Foolish white film crew invades primitive black tribe’s island to shoot legendary giant monkey, but serves as dinosaur lunch instead. Meanwhile, Kong gets hot for Fay Wray (who can blame him?) and chases her all the way to New York, and to the beast’s doom. Kick ass, brutal stop-motion action more or less makes up for deadly dull human drama, but I still wouldn’t call this a masterpiece. ]

(20 Sept) Network (1976, Sidney Lumet) 63
[ Peter Finch’s posthumously Oscar-winning turn as a news anchorman turned mad prophet is riveting and the satire of the television world is incisive, but the film is loose, all over the place and uneven. Could have used a good rewrite. ]

(22 Sept) Jackie Brown (1997, Quentin Tarantino) [ review ] 94

(23 Sept) True Romance (1993, Tony Scott) [ review ] 92

(23 Sept) Manhunter (1986, Michael Mann) 26
[ What a stinker! Michael Mann directs this first adaptation of “Red Dragon” like a really bad TV movie devoid of any tension or depth, and Brian Cox’s take on Hannibal Lecter is limp and forgettable at best. ]

(27 Sept) The Tuxedo (2002, Kevin Donovan) [ review ] 17

(28 Sept) Original Sin (2001, Michael Cristofer) 47
[ Gorgeous Cuba, gorgeous Angelina Jolie, gorgeous music… This “cheap melodrama” is hardly subtle or much believable, but it does work as a guilty pleasure. ]

(28 Sept) Gorgeous (1999, Vincent Kok) 53
[ A message in a bottle? A young girl looking for true love? Business meetings? A gay sidekick? Dolphins? That’s a Jackie Chan film? Sort of. There are a few (4) pretty damn cool fight scenes, but most of the running time feels like a Chinese take on Meg Ryan flicks- which is enjoyable, even though I’d never expected Chan to play a straight romantic lead! ]

(28 Sept) Matroni et Moi (1999, Jean-Philippe Duval) 74
[ Scorsese meets Woody Allen in this hilarious, stylish and thought-provoking French Canadian comedy which pits a mobster (played by a delightfully cartoonish Pierre Lebeau) against a dweebish intellectual (Alexis Martin, who also wrote the film) in a frantic discussion of ethics and principles. ]

(29 Sept) Donnie Darko (2001, Richard Kelly) 68
[ Teen angst, hallucinations and time travel cohabit in this bizarre high school drama set in the late 80s. I’m not sure what he’s trying to say, but writer-director Richard Kelly’s vision is intriguing (whatever it is). ]

(2 Oct) The Razor’s Edge
[ Reviewed for the Apollo Movie Guide ]

(4 Oct) Red Dragon (2002, Brett Ratner) [ review ] 36

(4 Oct) Moonlight Mile (2002, Brad Silberling) [ review ] 90

(5 Oct) Tanguy (2001, Étienne Chatiliez) 33
[ This French comedy has an amusing premise (a 28 year old man who still lives at home to the despair of his parents), but after an inspired first half hour it grows tired and repetitive. ]

(7 Oct) Witchbabe
[ Reviewed for the Apollo Movie Guide ]

(10 Oct) Carmen: A Hip Hopera
[ Reviewed for the Apollo Movie Guide ]

(11 Oct) The Rules of Attraction (2002, Roger Avary) [ review ] 63

(11 Oct) Bollywood/Hollywood (2002, Deepa Mehta) 68
[ reviewed in my FCMM coverage ]

(11 Oct) Gambling, Gods and LSD (2002, Peter Mettler) 48
[ reviewed in my FCMM coverage ]

(12 Oct) Good Rockin’ Tonight (2002, Bruce Sinofsky) 44
[ reviewed in my FCMM coverage ]

(12 Oct) The Trials of Henry Kissinger (2002, Eugene Jarecki) 86
[ reviewed in my FCMM coverage ]

(12 Oct) The Ring (2002, Gore Verbinski) [ review ] 38

(13 Oct) Tan de Repente (2002, Diego Lerman) 89
[ reviewed in my FCMM coverage ]

(14 Oct) Jimmy Scott: If You Only Knew (2002, Matthew Buzzell) 40
[ reviewed in my FCMM coverage ]

(14 Oct) Un Homme sans l’Occident (2002, Raymond Depardon) 43
[ reviewed in my FCMM coverage ]

(15 Oct) Waiting for Happiness (2002, Abderrahmane Sissako) 68
[ reviewed in my FCMM coverage ]

(15 Oct) Isabelle Huppert : une vie pour jouer (2002, Serge Toubiana) 62
[ reviewed in my FCMM coverage ]

(15 Oct) This is not a love song (2002, Billie Eltringham) 37
[ reviewed in my FCMM coverage ]

(16 Oct) Ken Park (2002, Larry Clark, Ed Lachman) 0
[ reviewed in my FCMM coverage ]

(16 Oct) The Sea (2002, Baltasar Kormakur) 66
[ reviewed in my FCMM coverage ]

(17 Oct) Punch-Drunk Love (2002, P.T. Anderson) [ review ] 94

(18 Oct) Punch-Drunk Love (2002, P.T. Anderson) [ review ] 94

(18 Oct) Bowling for Columbine (2002, Michael Moore) [ review ] 79

(18 Oct) Far From Heaven (2002, Todd Haynes) 79
[ reviewed in my FCMM coverage ]

(19 Oct) Standing in the Shadows of Motown (2002, Paul Justman) [ review ] 90

(19 Oct) Bowling for Columbine (2002, Michael Moore) [ review ] 79

(19 Oct) 11’09″01 (2002, various filmmakers) 60
[ reviewed in my FCMM coverage ]

(20 Oct) Standing in the Shadows of Motown (2002, Paul Justman) [ review ] 90

(23 Oct) Chelsea Walls 35
[ Reviewed for the Apollo Movie Guide ]

(23 Oct) The Truth About Charlie (2002, Jonathan Demme) [ review ] 5

(25 Oct) Jackass: the Movie (2002, Jeff Tremaine) [ review ] 51

(25 Oct) Secretary (2002, Steven Shainberg) [ review ] 42

(29 Oct) A Hard Day’s Night (2002, Richard Lester) [ review ] 75

(30 Oct) No Such Thing (2001, Hal Hartley) 55
[ Reviewed for the Apollo Movie Guide ]

(31 Oct) Le Nèg’ (2002, Robert Morin) 74
[ Like most of his films, Robert Morin’s latest is both realistic and over the top, powerful and uneven, stylish and crude. It revolves around two SQ cops investigating a rocky night that left an old woman dead, a young black man in a coma and a plaster “lawn nigger” smashed. Each of the witnesses tells a different story, “Rashomon”-style, but what ultimately comes out is a tale of real-life horrors: racism, alcoholism, despair on welfare and wild bursts of violence. Not everything works in “Le Nèg’”, but the nifty use of fantasy sequences in which the characters are seen as little plastic figures and the riveting performances by the actors playing the drunken rednecks make it well worth seeing. ]