Change Your Image
FilmFanDaveB
Reviews
Playtime (1967)
A beautiful film with occasional humour
I understand Playtime was an expensive flop which has really only been critically acclaimed in the decades following. I can understand that: it's visually appealing with some very clever setups that obviously took huge amounts of preparation and expense.... but I felt the setups then often don't deliver the goods - a small joke, or a slight dig at the petty annoyances of modern life. There are a few quick sight gags to keep the interest (e.g. Two nuns with intriguing headgear) but long stretches of not-much-at-all-really.
Bit of a disappointment after Jour de Fete and M Hulot's Holiday... obviously mine is a minority view!
10 jours en or (2012)
Heartwarming French comedy - doesn't overdo the Christmas elements
At time of writing this is 5.9 overall on IMDb, it's much better than that. If you like feel-good French movies this is for you. If not, avoid. No complex philosophising but some very moving scenes. Mathis Touré is excellent as the little boy who finds himself relying on a Smartly Dressed Gentleman who is barely an acquaintance of his mother's.
Night Without Stars (1951)
A surprise around every dark corner
Watched this because of the director, glad I did because this is a beautifully filmed British thriller.
The opening scenes had me wondering if I was wasting my time: a stiff Englishman is uncomfortable in an unconvincing French location that looks like a badly painted Pinewood set. However the pace very soon picks up, and a visit to a shoe shop leads to romance and drama. There are continual surprises, the disappearing cafe being noteworthy.
The Midnight Man (2016)
Well-filmed timewaster. Avoid.
Acting, plot, dialogue: all very poor.
Even in a stupid horror film, people's actions have to be understandable in the context of the nonsense setup. Not here.
Pour la peau d'un flic (1981)
Not one of his best
I do enjoy a good Alain Delon thriller, unfortunately this is not a good Alain Delon thriller. It would be slightly better without the accompanying music - a couple of songs that are just annoying. Like bad Tom Waits.
The plot is ludicrous, the acting perfunctory. There is predictable romance and nudity as you'd expect from a 1981 flic movie.
Disappointed really.
South Seas Adventure (1958)
not quite as good as it might've been
I see a reviewer in 2005 questioned a missing print and lamented that this hasn't been shown at Pictureville in Bradford, UK. Well, I'm delighted to report that I saw a digital Cinerama print at Pictureville today, so I guess lots of people have worked hard to achieve this in the meantime.
An enjoyable film but not up there with some of the others - seven wonders of the world springs to mind, and the one with USA and Swiss couples on exchange visits...
One thing that seemed odd and striking.... the Australian segment had no aboriginal people shown. Everyone in Australia in 1958 seems to be white!
Fantastic Four (2015)
Oh dear. You can't make up for a poor plot with special effects.
I saw this on TV and after 40 minutes I was thinking "this is slow to get going", after an hour I thought it would surely improve soon, after 90 minutes I realized I'd just wasted 90 minutes of my life but I still kept watching...
Rubbish plot, poor dialogue, so-so acting.
Best avoided.
Trance (2013)
poor movie, waste of talent
I saw this was going to be on TV, great names involved. Vincent Cassell! Danny Boyle! how can it go wrong?
Unfortunately, in many ways.
It started well but halfway through I just wanted it to be over. Confusing plot, waste of talent, style over content.
I was going to say that at least it is visually impressive. It has the gloss and pace of an ad for a shiny new car. 100 minutes of fast moving colourful camera work. 100 minutes too much.
Very poor. Watch Crimson Rivers instead.
The VVitch: A New-England Folktale (2015)
Dull movie. Visually and dramatically dull. Spectacularly dull..
After reading reviews here I was looking for forward to this film. I was disappointed.
I like a film with strong visuals, tensions, shocks and drama. This has none of those. It appears to have been filmed through a grey/sepia filter. Suspense is weakened by early scenes which make sure you're not left wondering whether or not there are malign forces at work. The acting is patchy: the main male lead is Way Over The Top imo, just does "rage" throughout without much subtlety.
Apparently the dialogue is based on historical records. It may be, but it doesn't make good drama. If you want a history lesson, read a book. It didn't work for me.
Dull movie.
The Girl on the Train (2016)
Good. Different. Intriguing.
This film was gripping from the very start. It had some great unexpected twists. The acting was solidly good throughout - not sure about Emily Blunt's accent, which was English 95% of the time: didn't really bother me though. Good film, fast- paced, intriguing... So why are there so many negative reviews? "read the book" - maybe I will - a film can be different to the book, doesn't make it a bad film (remember The Shining?) "politically correct" - omg, drunk woman, total loser, how is that PC? you really wonder about people sometimes My advice would be - if you're a misogynist or other type of total dick (can I say that?) then avoid this movie.
Triangle (2009)
Good. Different. Intriguing.
The movie wastes no time in getting to the action, and it quickly becomes clear that this is going to be a bit different.
I've seen Creep, which was OK: bit too much style over substance. Triangle is nothing like Creep.
There are some really interesting ideas involved, and halfway through I started to doubt the film would resolve satisfactorily: I thought it would go off the boil.
It didn't. I was initially unsure about the ending, but I found myself thinking about it for hours afterwards, gradually realising it was a pretty damn neat finish.
Silent House (2011)
solid, scary shocker - what's up with you people?
I don't usually write reviews here - but I was surprised at the number of negative comments about this film. I allowed the low rating to affect my judgement, and it was about 30 minutes into the film before I realised it was pretty good.
"The technique is poor / excessive". Hmmm. The technique allows full- on jump-out-of-your-seat moments, and long periods of almost dreamlike tension. Don't you like that?
"You don't know enough about the people beforehand". No, it's a film. You find out about the characters by watching it.
"It's predictable". Wow, really? I didn't see what was coming. As the story progressed, I was wondering about the nature of the attacker - real? imaginary? supernatural? - it was reminiscent of the French film "Ils".
IMHO - the acting is good, there are bits that made me jump, and the film makes some serious points; and I was left wondering what some of the reviewers on here are looking for in a "scary movie".