Reviews

I recently saw this film and I have only positive things to say. The title "Lost in Translation" is very fitting, no matter how you look at it. I felt that there was a parallel between the communication of the two protagonists, as well as their lives in Japan.

Two Americans go to Japan, whose culture is completely different from their country and they feel out of place, they get culture shock. They cannot be adjusted easily. Mainly the female protagonist, as she's more sensitive. At the same time, the two have a big age difference and again there is this gap in communication. They get "lost in translation" both in their mindsets as Americans in Japan, and with each other.

One is middle-aged and going through an age crisis and the other is a woman who lives in a country she can't adapt to and is neglected by her husband, who works all the time. They find "comfort" in each other's face. He, seemingly depressed, seems to live through her again. Through her youth. She, among strangers, finds an "ally", a "companion", a person who understands her and possibly teaches her some things from his point of view, being more mature.

A typical example is that after Bob lives for a short time carefree with Charlotte, he begins to feel that not everything is over and that he has the right to live carefree, without thinking and overthinking situations. So when he talks to his wife on the phone and tells her what he did in those days, she, in addition to a cold attitude, also shows an icy indifference, something that makes him come back to "reality".

He, mostly rational, depressed, thinker and lonely. She, mainly emotional, needs to find herself. Even if they had no age difference, they would still be "lost in translation". However, oxymoronic it may sound, one complements the other. One finds meaning in the other.

Another typical example that shows both their age difference and the maturity of their thinking is when Charlotte seems to be jealous of Bob and being ironic to him, and he gives her the answer "Wasn't there anyone else there to lavish you with attention?" This scene shows that they have a different way of perceiving situations. Their relationship is not based on the sexual part. Their relationship is primarily spiritual. Romantic too. But it is presented in a very innocent way.

Some things I liked about the movie are as follows.

1) The first and last scene. The first scene, because it is a physical representation of a painting by John Kacere. It was a very original move by Sofia Coppola. The last scene, because it makes us wonder what Bob might have whispered to Charlotte. Instead, Bob makes a cliché, more impulsive and not for his age move, which is beyond even him, showing us that in order to go through with this move, he has quality and pure feelings for Charlotte.

2) Louise the owl. Need I say more?

3) The atmosphere of the film is not like typical mainstream American films. It's more artistic, with an aura of an independent film. I would venture to say that it is closer to European cinema than to American cinema. This particular film is a purely artistic intervention with romantic elements in a purely minimalist context.

It is a film that, if nothing else, makes you think. It does not present anything obscene and the result is perfect.

The film "Bella Martha" is a German romantic comedy-drama (or at least that's how it wants to be identified), which is about a lonely, strong woman, Martha, who works as a chef in a restaurant and after a tragedy, takes guardianship of her niece. In addition, she is forced to work with an Italian sous chef, Mario, who is the exact opposite of her, enthusiastic, happy and creates a very pleasant atmosphere in the otherwise stressful kitchen.

My thoughts on this particular film are mixed to bad.

I should mention that I love the minimalism and simplicity of this film. It has the ultimate European essence and I really appreciate it. The protagonist's performance is very good. She plays a lonely, workaholic woman, who's trying her best to live peacefully with her niece, but doesn't make the expected impact.

Furthermore, her relationship with Mario is not good at first. Supposedly the trope of this film is "enemies to lovers", but of course in my opinion, this particular love story is incomplete.

The film is 90 minutes long and very little happens, so it seems to go on much longer than it should. At some points I dare say I got bored.

I should mention the fact that it bothered me that the actual voice of the actor Sergio Castellitto (Mario) is not heard and they just dubbed it, precisely because his German was not good. But that's the thing, Mario isn't German, so it would be perfectly normal for him to have a strong accent. It would be much more realistic. Also the dubbing actor makes it even worse because he has "no life" at all and I got tired just listening to him.

Also, the film is being promoted as a romantic comedy/drama. You will allow me to say that it is simply a romantic drama. I didn't find anything comedic at all. I didn't laugh anywhere. I think it's misinformation. Before I wrote my review, I read a few others to see if anyone agreed with me and although few reviews mentioned it, I was relieved I wasn't the only one who noticed it.

Now I will mention the most basic part. The love story. I think that although both actors are very good. Having seen Gedeck's performance in the film "Das Leben der Anderen", I was sure that I would like her performance here as well, and I was not denied.

But in the case of Castellitto I can't say the same, because although I've seen his movies and he was admittedly very good, in this particular movie his acting skills don't stand out at all, as they gave him this awful dubbing. It didn't feel alive and above all it didn't feel like there was a real performance. A real shame.

Also, the two actors, although very good, had no chemistry at all in my opinion. I didn't feel like their flames matched. And that's too bad, because we're supposed to be talking about a mostly romantic film.

Some other things I didn't like were the following. Martha decided to look for her niece's biological father and eventually found him. Throughout the film we didn't see the process at all. Just out of the blue, the girl's biological father appeared. Very steep. Also, the character played by the Danish actor Ulrich Thomsen (whom I adore) I think was unnecessary. I think he was added simply to serve the script. Only then did he appear. At least let him do something! This particular actor speaks fluent German (having a Danish accent of course) and they didn't overdub him and it was really fine.

Also the film tries to tell us that "love goes through the stomach", but only two small scenes showed this. I didn't feel so much that the film is about the food. Also I didn't feel the romance. It felt like everything unfolded so quickly and so slowly at the same time.

In closing this review, I would like to mention that I appreciated some things in the film, such as the fact that Martha is German and Mario is Italian, this I guess symbolises the fact that based on stereotypes, Germans are more cold people and Italians are very warm and friendly. Like also the fact that Martha, having lived all her life alone, doesn't know how to manage a child at all and cooks gourmet meals for her, because that's how she learnt, while Mario cooks to the girl simple, but very tasty meals and then she likes him straight away. Simplicity wins.

In short, I can say that I was disappointed by the film. I expected something different, because the actors were very good and also from the trailer I expected to see a special European film, which will combine romance with comedy and food. Unfortunately I felt none of the three. And of course I won't see the American remake, because I don't like that they remake everything.

The film was short in duration and fast paced. I don't think anyone would get bored easily, because there was something going on all the time.

Then, for fans of action and violence, it is a very good choice, as it has plenty of them, also gore.

Some viewers may want more dialogue, which is reasonable, but I believe that the whole concept of the film was planned. That is, they wanted to create a film based on violence and gore. A real horror film, to the point where it can make you disturbed.

After all, the film belongs to the "New French Extremity" film movement, which is about films that are quite extreme, unconventional, with the aim of shocking. Therefore, I believe that the creator of the film did not want to emphasise Oscar-winning performances, nor to develop a horror film and at the same time touch on the social factor. Instead, he wanted to make a horror film with lots of action and lots of violence and gore.

In my opinion, the effects were very good and I believe that the violence was very realistic. Of course they made a big waste of cans of fake blood.

I have to give an honourable mention to the soundtrack of the film and in particular to the song "New Born" by "Muse". It was a great fit and made me nostalgic for those times when good, quality music was released.

In short, it was a fast-paced film that doesn't promise things it doesn't deliver. It does exactly what it was supposed to do. It's short-lived and from start to finish, it gives you that "hypertension" (since that's what the title means). It does exactly what it was created to do. Although they have hired very well-known and skilled actors, their acting skills are not highlighted, since the plot is comprehensive and clear and the dialogue is meagre and quite laconic.

Therefore it emphasizes the facial expression and the violence that accompanies it. It also had a very good twist, which I don't think many will notice a priori, although I did suspected something.

If I were to change something, it would definitely be the first scene in the mental hospital, because that kind of foreshadows what's to come.

I really enjoyed watching this film. French cinema never disappoints me.

The title of my review is very clear. But let's talk about every aspect of the film.

First of all, I liked the plot and since I love cult films, I decided to watch it. I wasn't disappointed. The plot was very catchy, the actors' performances were very good and convincing. This film can be easily watched today by people that only like watching new films, and the reason is simple. It's classic and future-prood. The topic is "a man and a woman can't be friends". This topic is menacing us since forever.

Then, the most important thing for me that made me love this film, is Billy Crystal. Yes. I think objectively, not many people would find Billy Crystal a charming man. But I don't care. I really find him. As an actor and as a man. Maybe his performance in this film, made me watch him in this way. A popular comedian, that can act also dramatic and sensitive. He had great chemistry with Meg Ryan, I have to admit it. And the way he looked at his love interest... I felt that it was so real. I felt like I wasn't watching a film. I have to admit that I never cried in "Titanic" or in "The Notebook", but I cried in "When Harry Met Sally..." . Yes. I cried. In the last scene, when Harry confessed his love to Sally. This scene got me.

I rarely see actors that can transmit me so good sensitive feelings, with only using their face expression. Only their eyes. Billy Crystal did this. I almost fell in love. I know it sounds very romantic, bit this film, mostly because of this actor (how he performed) made me fall in love with the character and the film by itself.

In other news, the scenes with the couple's that were interviewed about their first meet, was quite cute, funny and original. Also, the secondary characters (Jess and Marie) were also very good. It's so sad that both of them died very young. Rest in peace. Also, if someone loves Christmas, this film is very good option, because it contains Christmas and New Year's Eve.

To be honest, the only thing that I didn't liked, was the montage of the film. I found that they were cutting one scene, but the transition to the next scene wasn't smooth. But that's just my personal opinion. The positive aspects about this film are many more.

One thing is for sure. I can't forget easily this film. I can't forget the glance of Billy Crystal's character. I just can't. And also the fact of how Harry and Sally met, and many years past and then they were so close, really got me in tears. I find this film so beautiful that I can't not cry. One of my favourite films for sure.

I understand why many people don't like this film, but that's my review, my own perspective and I can say that I liked it.

"House of Wax" is a film from my childhood. One of the first horror films I ever watched. Nostalgia strikes.

This review will be mostly about the positive aspects. Just a warning.

First of all, I have to say that it is said that this film is kind of a loose remake of the other remake of the same name, which released in 1953. In my opinion, no, it's not at all. Not even loose. They just took (kind of) half of the main concept and they said that it is a loose remake, just for not accuse them of plagiarism. This is what I believe. It's an almost completely different film.

Then, let's say that I've watched this when I was younger and now I made a repeat and I liked it the same.

Pros:

* The plot was quite nice I might say. Creepy enough. Catchy. This film is a slasher, but not the typical slasher. It has many things that make it different.

* Most of the characters were quite likeable and not that cliché, like in other slasher films. For example "Friday the 13th" (reboot).

* So much gore. If you're a fan of gore and blood in slasher films, you're going to see plenty of those in good amount. And it looks so real.

* This film uses mostly CGI effects, but in this case they made great use of those. In my opinion, they looked very realistic. I've watched the "behind the scenes footage" and I liked how they all worked. I saw in their faces that they were very happy with the result and in general with all the progress.

* The direction and the photography was just great. I really enjoyed watching it.

Cons:

* The plot is okay and creepy. Although I've found some over the top details. Like, who's accepting a ride of a completely creepy and pervy stranger? You're going to watch a match and we all see that the road is full of cars. How you manage to be just right back in time (In this case the slay time of course)? The petrol station man tells you to come to his place so he can give you the belt and you believe him? After seeing a completely weird and empty town? What an idiot... And of course, you see "closed" and you go inside? Okay... Why you hire Paris Hilton as an "actress"? She can't act. Of course, the last question is rhetoric, since we all know why Hilton was cast. Money, success, marketing, but have a little respect to your creation.

* Although I liked Elisha Cuthbert as a final girl and as an actress, her laughing was so bad and fake. I'm sorry, but it was annoying and not convincing.

* I've found the relationship of the two siblings a little bit weird. It's not actually a con, but I was like "uhm, okay, well..." Fun fact, when I first watched this film and I was very young (like 12), I thought they were kind of dating, lol.

In general, I really enjoyed watching this film and I've would watch it as many times I could. It's not boring at all and it is fast paced. Beautiful direction and photography, cool effects. What else do you want? I personally, recommend it. Especially if you're a horror (or particularly slasher) fan. I know it's not the best you'll ever watch, but it's okay to have a good time watching it.

I remember that I once watched this film when I was less than 10 years old and I really enjoyed it. Some years later I was trying really hard to find the film and now, since I've found it, I got really excited because was eventually the time that I've would watch this film. I, personally, like watching films from my childhood, because they bring me back all the good memories.

Now, I've watched again the film, so I can write a full review and of course my thoughts over this film.

First of all I have to say that since I'm older, I can see things differently.

Film's humour was quiet childish I might say. I didn't really found myself laughing in the supposedly funny scenes. I was feeling a little bit cringy at some point. The acting wasn't the best unfortunately, but the overall concept was nice. Is about a goofy police officer that keeps trying to catch a robber for about 10 years, and something is happening and they are the only two people in Paris. Alone.

I've found the cop more goofier than my expectations and I can compare it with the other goofy policeman in the also French film "Taxi". I'm talking about Emilien. When I compare these two goofy characters I can see the difference very well. The one is hilarious in a clever way (Emilien) and the one that we have here (Gervais) is so goofy that tries hard to be funny. I'm sorry. I couldn't find him funny at most. That makes me sad because I remember that I used to love this film.

Then, we have the robber (Curtis), he was quiet good at most, although some scenes were over the top.

Some other actors, in my opinion always, didn't act as I was expecting. Frankly.

The concept, as I said, was nice and catchy and is about the friendship that can develop these two different characters and enemies. Frenemies I might say. That was pretty good. Although I found the beginning a little bit slow. Funny, because film's duration by itself is small. Is about 90 minutes.

The fact that I didn't enjoyed the film that much makes me really sad, since I tried for many years to find this, and when I did, I couldn't watch it because I didn't spoke French. Now, after many years I watched it, all of excitement and with the best expectations, but it didn't went well, as I thought would be. Frankly, again.

That doesn't mean that I wouldn't recommend it to other people. Maybe it's me the problem. Maybe my taste has changed. Maybe not. I'm not sure.

One day I'm going to watch again this film for sure, because, you know, childhood, nostalgia, and all these beautiful things.

"Basic Instinct" is a classic erotic thriller, which I enjoyed very much. It has a very catchy plot and a strong cast. I think if other actors would involve it would look really cheap and I think its IMDb rating would be around 4 or 4.5. Luckily, though, it was the right choice of actors since Michael Douglas and Sharon Stone are masters of the subgenre (erotic thriller).

This film has many things that made it enjoyable to watch. In addition to the above (strong cast, catchy plot), it contains violent and particularly gruesome, bloody kills, in an original way and an original weapon. We have not seen the icepick as a murder weapon in many films. Especially as the mark of the killer. There are many erotic scenes that some might enjoy. Personally I would prefer it to be a little less, but when I decided to watch the film, I knew what I was going to see, so I didn't consider it so bad, but if somebody feels uncomfortable with such things, then this movie is not for this person, because it offers a huge amount of nudity.

The plot is as catchy as I mentioned, but definitely not more than that. Theoretically, It's not such a special film, just because this particular genre (erotic thriller) blossomed in the 80's and started disappearing in the early 90's, they weren't released so many erotic thrillers, so it was not difficult for "Basic Instinct" to stand out, since out of all this range, this one is without a doubt one of the best of its kind. After all, it's no coincidence that the scene with the Sharon Stone cross legs became legendary.

This film is for sure inspired by Italian gialli. The photography is very beautiful and the direction is meticulous. The score is also nice, not only for the film, but also for its time. This movie has a strong 80's aura. Very intense. This may be a negative element for some, as they may not consider it as timeless, but I believe the exact opposite. I find it to be of its era, from the score to the hairstyle and clothing of the actors, but equally timeless. I personally like its aura.

The main negative to me, is that there was no twist. Personally, at least, it was obvious from the beginning who the killer was and that all the rest were just red herrings for the viewer. It was all premeditated by the killer, who was a genius I can tell. I would like the protagonist (Nick Curran) to be a little more dynamic and independent and not so "easy".

Overall I liked the movie a lot. Of course there are flaws, but we are talking about a very good job, especially for this subgenre, because they tend to exploit many things, but the particular one "exploits" in a seductive way and has an interesting plot. It doesn't rely solely on the nudity, though the bad thing is that the erotic scenes are the ones that will stand out and not the plot. Still, I recommend it for lovers of this genre!

"Sleepless" ("Non ho sonno") is an Italian giallo film directed by Dario Argento, whose '90s films weren't that representative. This one, was released in 2001 and many believed that the beloved director returned with a more fair film. I also identify this opinion. The reasons will be mentioned.

Let's start by the plot. The film is about a retired detective and a young man who had a close relationship with one of the victims of a murderer who hit Italy, after 17 years of absence. The two of them are trying to solve the case and to unravel the mystery veil in general.

As for the plot, it sounds very simple, classic and safe for this particular subgenre (giallo). I partly agree, but I think if you go into the process of watching this film, it'll be quite interesting. It's not flawless in any way, but it's dignified and the beloved subgenre was shortly revived.

PROS:

* Charming protagonist. Nice choice.

* Decent direction by the master Dario Argento.

* While the photography doesn't resemble heavily a giallo film, just because we are used to it quite stylistically, aesthetically, with vivid and vibrant colors. This film, is more "realistic" in these parts, making it more accessible. Personally, I prefer the classic stylistic version of giallo films, without saying that I didn't enjoyed the film the way it was. So it's not a flaw, I just expressed my personal preference.

* I think that the selection of the cast was quiet good (I'll explain the in the "CONS" sectiom why I use the word "think").

* Catchy, simple and straightforward classic giallo plot.

* I would say that the violence in this film is quite high. The presence of blood is frequent and clear. The kills are brutal, not as creative as we are used to in other Argento films, but decent. But they definitely correspond to giallo films. All the stalking scenes shortly before the murder were creepy and scary. There were no annoying jumpscares.

CONS:

* One of the things I write about, in all my reviews on giallo films is the dubbing. I can't figure out why you get some foreign actors and turn the whole movie into English and then dub it with (lots of) miserable voices that disorient you. Hire some Italian actors and turn your movie into Italian. Don't make it harder. I would definitely prefer it. The Italian language is wonderful and I am sure this country has many great actors. As far as I know, most of Argento's films, all of which are now considered classic and superb, at the time of their release, they were quite controversial, because of the violence they represented and were not screened for long. So, if he had hired foreign actors to make his films more successful and saw that it has never worked, why did he keep doing this? It would be more honorable, if he would made his films in his mother tongue.

* I personally suspected who the killer was pretty soon, without being 100% sure, so I think they could have hidden it better.

* The character of 'Gloria' was so unnecessary. They probably added her just to be exisiting a romantic interest for the protagonist. Something extra. There's no other reason. At least let her do something. She was not even a suspect.

Neutrals:

* The film is not so authentic, as I personally found some parts, that resemble the film "Profondo Rosso" (1975), if you watch it, you will find it yourself.

* An inspector has the surname "Manny". Not coincidentally, as in an earlier Argento film, "Tenebre" (1982), the first victim is named 'Elsa Manny'.

Generally, the film is very enjoyable to watch. I don't think fans of this subgenre will be disappointed, especially Dario Argento's fans, since it was a very dynamic return.

I recommend it!

"L'appartement" is a romantic French film and was released in 1996. For those who are concerned with the genre itself, I must say that it contains a great deal of mystery and drama, of course. The film deals with the life of Max, who is a successful young man and he's occupied in the informatics field. Max was about to marry his beloved, until he "thinks" he sees his old love (Lisa), who mysteriously disappeared two years ago. He does his best to meet her again (as he once did when he met her) in an infatuated way, but the circumstances (and the so-called serendipity) do not allow him to. Instead, he meets another mysterious girl in Lisa's old apartment, but the coincidences are surprisingly too many.

The truth is, I would not like to reveal more about the film because it contains a lot of mystery and many twists that you might not expect.

The question I will ask is this: Do we fall in love with people or with love itself? Simpler. Do we fall in love with love? This question besides being philosophical, I think it has something to do with film.

I have to point out the excellent background music, which I can say it reminds me of 80s similar themed films, but even better. The song heard several times, Charles Aznavour's "Les Temps" is just magical.

Needless to say, the film has great directing and photography, as the director is also an architect by profession.

The film has many similarities to Shakespeare's theatrical "A Midsummer's Night Dream".

The performances are amazing, as the selection of the actors (Vincent Cassel, Romane Bohringer, Monica Bellucci, Jean-Philippe Écoffey) appear to have been very careful.

In 2006, an American remake, "Wicker Park" was released, which I intend to watch at some point, mainly out of curiosity, since when Americans decide to remake a European film, many things go wrong. I doubt whether it is as good as the original film, but at least I hope it is fair and decent.

I highly recommend the movie!

I believe we need to give European cinema more attention as it hides beautiful diamonds and it is not accident that Hollywood chooses to revive them. We must support European cinema therefore!

Such a nice film full of plot twists, which I didn't saw them coming. At least, not all of them.

Sam Lombardo, a naïve counsellor, is accused of raping two girls, but something other is lurking. A policeman tries to bring into the surface all the "dirt". Or not?

This film contains a very powerful cast (Bacon, Dillon, Campbell, Richards, Murray). All of the performances were great, but Bacon's one, was just perfect! He's an incredible actor! I liked the comedic Murray's character. It was very nice.

The cinematography was very beautiful. Very stylish. I also liked the directing and the montage.

The soundtrack was so magnetic. Very mysterious and aggressive at the same time.

I loved the fact that it had many plot twists, because it had me absorbed by it. But, at the same time I thought that too many plot twists was not very realistic. Almost impossible to happen. But it's okay.

This film came out in 1998, and this is very visible. The aura, the vibes, the music. All these are very 90s. Some people might like this, because of the nostalgia and because they're old fashioned. Some might not, because they like mostly recent releases. I belong to the first category. I'm very old fashioned and also nostalgic, so I don't mind that its aura is not diachronic. I love it.

In conclusion, this is a great film, with very good cast, beautiful cinematography, strong plot, seductive soundtrack, many plot twists, fast paced and clever.

Be aware of the post credit scenes.

Highly recommended!

I can see that there is influence of the italian giallo in this film, but it's not the best representation. I can fantasise the main plot in an original giallo, but only the plot. In addition to other reviews that I've read, I personally didn't find this film to be stylish. And in general the aura was different. Which is not bad. The director never said that this film is actually a giallo, but for some viewers that are really into this subgenre, its influence in this film is quiet obvious.

So the plot is about a photographer that can see through the eyes of a killer during the murder that he/she commits. Simple things.

(+) Pros

* When I saw the poster and read the main plot I was really surprised, because it was very interesting. So, we have a very nice and creepy poster, as well an intriguing plot.

* Nice performances.

* Some creepy moments. Some.

* Nice monologue by the killer.

(-) Cons

* Very boring at the beginning.

* I predicted who the killer was and also the red herring.

* I predicted who was going to die.

* Awful photography.

* I would've preferred for it to be more stylish.

In general, we talk about an underrated film, that it was quiet fun to watch, mostly for the huge fans of this genre (giallo, slasher, mystery). It's a hidden little gem. I personally watched this film, because I've watched the rest of these genres and I wanted to watch some more underrated. It's a mediocre film, with minimum blood, some creepy scenes, quiet predictable for the huge fans of this genre. For other people might be not that predictable, I'm not sure. With a nice plot and cast (Dunaway, Jones, Dourif). I recommend it under some circumstances. If you're a lover of such films, then give it a try. Otherwise, it might be a little boring (especially at the beginning).

To be honest, I've had such a good time while watching this film.

This film is about the return of a serial killer (and cannibal), Harry Warden, at Valentine's Day, who is starting again his killing spree, after 20 years of hiatus (because he was in a clinic). Meanwhile, there is a love triangle, between two ex best friends (TJ and Axel) and the bone of contention (Sarah).

Pros:

* Nice plot, one of my favourite themed horror films.

* We talk about a very violent film, which includes a good amount of gore, thing that I was personally seeking for such a film. The best part is that the gore and in general the makeup effects were VERY realistic. It contained entirely practical effects, in addition to the remake, which was full of CGIs.

* Scary and thrilling throughout, because of the weapon of choice of course (pickaxe) and the general appearance of the murderer. Plus, the stalking and the moments before each kill.

* I'm very happy to say that (at least to me) the red herrings were successful and it was misleading enough, tho had me kind of shooked in the end.

* The killer's evil laughing was so creepy, that I loved it. And then, we had the ballad of Harry Warden. Really nice.

* Fast paced. I wasn't bored.

* I liked its moody aura (although I felt more autumn than winter). I also liked the industrial place where it was shot.

Cons:

* The acting was mediocre, almost bad in some cases.

* The photography and the editing was kind of bad. I understand that it was a low-budget film, but let's take for example the Italian giallo film "Blood and Black Lace" (6 Donne per l'assassino), which came out in 1964! Its photography is magnetic. So stylish and beautiful! I'm not saying that I would rather this film to be stylish, but a little bit more neat. Just a little bit. Especially in the killing scenes where the photography started being more pinkish or mauvish. Weird.

Overall, I'm very pleased of this Canadian slasher film. I think that it'll be from now on, a personal tradition to watch this every Valentine's Day. And not only. You can also watch the remake, it's a decent one, in my opinion, but not like the original.

I don't have a lot of things to say about this film. I must say that I love Ryan Teynolds, and here he's perfect, so this is a bonus.

This film is about an overweight graduate, who is in love with his best friend, but has put him on a friend zone, and being hurt moves from New Jersey to Los Angeles, he loses the unnecessary weight and becomes a successful manager. For some reason, he returns to his hometown and meets his old love, but he tries to show her that not only his appearance has changed, but also his personality, for example he has become very cool and womanizer, but in reality, the return to his birthplace shows us that he has remained the same person. Generally, in this film, the moral lesson is that we should not pretend that we are anything other than who we really are.

So, definitely there is a moral lesson. But other than that, I think that I've watched a very cliché film. Similar topics have been repeated many times. He was overweight, he loved someone, he was friendzoned, he left, he returned hot as hell, he made such a good impression, he tried to show that he's cool and nothing similar to what he was before, it was a lie, he realised that an also ex-geek has become hot and now is his rival, and then we have Anna Faris. I found her character very unnecessary. We also had some over the top scenes, just like the destruction of the Christmas decoration and the school celebration. But I have to admit that I laughed quiet a bit.

Another thing I didn't liked was the fact that Jamie didn't loved Chris's personality, but his looks, because Chris's character never changed. He had the same personality like back then, but she didn't loved him as a man, but as a friend. But of course, now he's handsome. Kind of hypocrisy?

I loved Chris's brother. Their relationship is hilarious.

We had very good performances though. I liked all the actors. They convinced me for sure.

This film has strong 00s vibes, which I found very positive, since I love nostalgia and I am really nostalgic. I like the older films better than the recent ones.

In conclusion, we talk about a mediocre rom-com that I would recommend it if you didn't have something else to do or in case that you've been watched all the Christmas themed films and you search desperately for another one, or in case that you're seeking of nostalgia, or in case of doing a Ryan Reynolds marathon. Then yes, go watch it, but with not high expectations please.

Great film that proves that for making a horror film, doesn't have to have a big budget, or in this case to not even afford fake blood, because this film, literally had no blood.

This film is about Michael Myers, a mentally unstable young man, stalking Laurie Strode, a young student and babysitter, for a reason that we don't learn until the sequel, and also he kills everyone in his way.

The music that Carpenter wrote make you chill even in todays standards. It's a classic music that some years ago if you would listen at it, you would find it very familiar but you wouldn't know where is it from, but now it think that almost everyone know its roots, so this fact makes me really happy.

Although it's not the first slasher film, I do consider it as the mother of the slashers, because it literally did rocked the subgenre. Without Halloween, we wouldn't have had all the rest slashers of the 80s and 90s, so I'm very grateful for this.

Carpenter was very influenced by gialli films and this is very obvious for a person that have watched many gialli. So definitely it's not the most authentic thing in the world (but what's authentic anyways?).

So as I've said. This film is not gory at all. It has nothing of blood. Although everything is onscreen, blood and gore are not visible.

The music and the general vibes are creepy though. You hear constantly of Michael's breath, which is really disturbing and you also have some first point of view scenes.

I didn't liked that much Jaimie Lee Curtis' acting. I didn't found her convincing enough. Nor the other characters except Pleasence, who was very professional and great at doing eccentric roles. I'm not saying that Curtis is a bad actress. She was kind of convincing in the screaming parts, but in the "relaxed" parts, not so much. Fair enough that she is the ultimate "Scream Queen".

It's kind of slow paced, but I think that it builds tension.

In general, nice idea, nice directing, not so good performances, but realistic enough. Creepy vibes and a classic slasher film that it influenced by gialli films, but it was influence and landmark for later ones horrors.

"Taxi 3" by Luc Besson, is a French action comedy film, that belongs to a franchise, which I really appreciate. To be honest I've watched the 1-4 films, but this one (the third) is easily my favourite!

So the plot is: After all the events, Émilien starting to have nightmares about some Santas-thieves that literally make him under function and don't give the appropriate attention to his wife and work, thing that makes him even more goofier. The thing is that these Santa-thieves are real and literally stole almost all France and he and the police department, along with the help of his friend and fast taxi driver Daniel, try to solve this situation with hilarious results.

Let's start from the fact that I don't have any flaw to cite, so I'm gonna be mentioning all the reasons why I love it.

-Why I loved this film:

* I'm gonna be starting by something -maybe not so important- but there's a point according to me, and this is the fact that it's a French film, European film by extension. I like supporting European films, since I am by myself European and especially when I see such an admirable and meticulous work, I can't hold my excitement.

* Very fast paced, it's not going to waste your time. It's nearly one and a half hour and all this time, things are keep happening.

* Very good acting, especially by Frédéric Diefenthal (who plays Émilien) and Bernard Farcy (who plays Commissaire Gibert). Both of them are the core of the film and sincerely they are such good comedians.

* Sincerely I could easily tell that the whole film is a hilarious scene. Literally, I fund all the scenes hilarious. The screenwriter did a great job, because it's quite hard to write so many funny scenes into a film. And according to my friends, this film is hilarious. I can mention many hilarious scenes, without spoilering anything of course. Such as, the one with pharmacist's daughter, the one with the "black cop", the one with the huge trunk, the one with the pregnant wife of Émilien, the one with Émilien's tortures and I have many many other scenes, but in general, all the film is hilarious. French people are best in comedy.

* It's also a Christmas themed film, but I've watched it in other seasons as well and I didn't mind. With some minor changes, it could have been occurred in a non-wintery period, but I like it more this way, because everything is tied so nice together. All I have to say, it's a classic.

* As I've said before, the actor that plays Émilien, is the best choice they could have taken. Is the reason why I love this film (and in general this franchise). He's actually one with the role and very cute and charming (who am I kidding?).

One of my favourite films of all time that has nothing to be jealous of Hollywood films. Hollywood made a silly remake of this masterpiece though lol.

Highly recommended!

When I watched "Get Out", I had no idea of "The Stepford Wives" (1975) existence. So my first thoughts were "clever, intelligent, alternate representation of racism, authentic, prototypical, unique". One day I wanted to watch a high quality classic film, preferably horror. And this is how I found "The Stepford Wives" (1975). After watching this film, I started to realise that had many similarities with "Get Out". According to the producer of this film, "The Stepford Wives" was a big influence for the making of this film.

So my review had to be changed. One of the main ideas, the brainwashing, was the same, but for the different reasons. I appreciated the fact that they used this specific social problem as the main topic of the film (racism) in combination with science, biology, hypnosis etc.

Let's get in the plot. I really liked the fact that we had a really clever protagonist from the beginning of this film. Unfortunately it lacks in many films. I liked how the mystery was unfolding. "Creepy" is the suitable word.

Very good performances. Especially doctor and the servant's one. The directing was also very good. But the most important thing was the fact that there are many memorable scenes from this film, that are hard to forget. I don't want to forget.

The gore is mediocre, but is visible mostly at the end of the film. It also contains much agony, which I love and of course it contains some comedic scenes by the protagonist's friend. I really enjoyed watching this film.

In conclusion, is this film authentic? Yes and No. Is there parthenogenesis in art? Not at all. Was this film creative? Way more creative than you think, since it blended many topics into one. It still gives me chills.

Highly recommended!

I like the authenticity that characterises the "giallo" genre.

"Opera" is a very important film of the genre, emblematic, enterprising and super imaginative. Dario Argento did a great job as a director.

Pros:

* This film contains powerful plot. I like the cliché that many horror films contain opera or generally classical music. Here, opera is not only the main theme of the film, but also the title.

* Very bloody, gory and imaginative deaths scenes, that I found myself to look away. Also, the one killing was not far from the next one. We almost had nonstop the killing spree of the assailant. The effects and blood were very realistic. More realistic than many of the todays ones.

* Beautiful photography that suits in the story of the genre and of course Dario Argento. He didn't disappointed me. It felt so rich. Many ravens, many actors and extras, huge dark opera house, neoclassical flats, beautiful Swiss valley.

* The idea of the needles under the eyes is so scary and prototypical.

* Some hiding and chasing scenes were really creepy and thrilling. I enjoyed them so much.

Cons:

* I hate the dubbing. Just get some Italian actors to do their job. To speak their own language. You don't have to make it in English, as you already have a very beautiful and influential language. You wouldn't have to hire voice actors too. You would save money too.

* Because of the first flaw, I found the acting really poor and this is very sad, because this film has strong positive elements. Almost every actor wasn't good actor. I don't know if I have to blame the dubbing. I'm not sure at all. But as a result, I found the acting poor.

* Tha "marriage" between classical operatic music and metal (in killing and thrilling scenes) was kind of ruining the agony. This film could be easily be way too scarier because of some specific scenes, but the metal music made the film less scary and weird. Certainly something that I wasn't seeking for.

* The killer was kind of predictable.

Overall, we talk about a very nice representation of the giallo genre, a great work of Argento, that needs more recognition because of the aforementioned reasons, with some not-so-big issues.

It's a little different giallo than its predecessors, since the colours were not so bright (as it is usual), but darker, more gothic and spookier. This is really nice antithesis.

Recommended!!

"Serendipity" is the film that I had really the need to watch. A beautiful magical story about fate. About the right thing at the wrong time. About love.

Jonathan meets the Briton Sara randomly, and although both are in a relationship, they feel a strong connection between them. Sara, who believes in fate, wants to see if they're meant to be together, so they make together some tricky things so they can see in the future.

And here is a very popular and relevant quote from "The Alchemist" by Paulo Coleho: "And when you want something, all the universe conspires in helping you achieve it".

I loved the acting, the story, the directing, the photography. Everything! I liked the jokes so much and there were many memorable scenes. Like the one with the lift. Beautiful music also. I love Jeremy Piven as a comedian. I've seen many of his films in my childhood. As for John Cusack... I've always had a huge crush on him. His height, cute face, voice, everything about him. Just perfect. Kate Beckinsale is such a lovely actress too! The cameo of Eugene Levy (so 00s) was hilarious!

When I finished watching this film, I had weird positive, beautiful vibes. And I'm saying weird, because of its aura. I'm a very nostalgic person, that when I'm watching 00s, 90s and older films (especially 00s) I feel that I just want to cry. I want to live back to those days, back to this world. I'm so happy and so sad at the same time for the fact that there are those films, because they bring back very special memories... and while I'm writing this, I'm about to cry. Such a beautiful movie.

This story could had be happen at any season, not only winter. I think that the Christmas setting was just decorative. This is not flaw at all, because they didn't exploit (in a bad manner) the holidays for making the film. If you ask me to count you 5 beautiful Christmas-themed films, I would definitely tell you this one.

Beautiful nostalgia that I cant feel in todays films...

"Los ojos de Julia" is a very good representation of the cinema of Spain. Spaniards have proven many times that they know really well the object "cinema". As it is part of the category "European cinema", it is already a bonus, because I'm a huge fan of.

Spanish films tend to represent everything very realistically, without any exaggeration, in addition to Hollywood films.

Specifically about the film, at first, without really having read the plot, I thought that it had some supernatural elements, but I was wrong.

The film is about a woman, that tries to solve the mysterious death of her blind sister, while she loses gradually her own eyesight. While trying to solve the mystery, someone is stalking her with deadly consequences.

I have no words for this film. When I finally understood its plot, I was thinking that it couldn't be a horror, but a thriller, and the label was wrong. When I started watching it and when I finished it, I fully understood that the label "horror" was hundred percent accurate.

(+) Pros:

* The blue undertone of the photography is a plus for me, because it could transfer me its mood.

* Extremely good acting.

* The gore, although was infrequent, was quiet strong. Specifically, the last part of the film contained a good amount of gore.

* Very thrilling and scary at times. Especially the part with the "shots".

* Definitely was building tension. The mystery was unfolding methodically, just like Ariadne's Thread.

(-) Cons:

Literally none.

In general, we talk about a great Spanish horror film, with great plot, acting and directing. This film made me to watch many other Spanish non/relatable films. That means something...

Definitely recommended!

I don't really know what to say about this film. It's a really silly continuation of the previous film and I think that it was really rushed. The script is bad, the acting is bad and the general plot is one of the worst I've ever seen.

It's not black comedy horror film. It's a silly comedy of other films and the parody is so unsuccessfully made.

I'll give it a 2/10 because the first scene was really funny (the only scene). I love James Woods.

I didn't really liked this film. It's about a teenage boy and a young porn star and they fall in love each other, but her job is a huge problem and he's trying to help her get out of this.

Okay, I don't really understand how could someone think of this storyline. Its plot is so random, that unfortunately, can't really write a review.

Again, there's a high schooler, that wants to give scholarship to a really genius poor boy, so the school collect some money. Then, the same boy, falls in love with his neighbour, a young porn star by watching her getting undressed. Of course he belongs to a nerd squad and she's out of his league and he's a virgin, but OF COURSE, she falls for him back. The problem is her job and her silly manager. Our protagonist tries really hard to help her getting out of this, but her manager is money-freak, so it's not easy and then we have a non-pormographic amateur film about the value of protection.

See? Is there any point of this film? For me, certainly not! I can't rate it higher. It really gave me nothing.

Protection is really important, scholarships are also, but their presentation is very prosaic. And I don't mean that it should have been a drama, because of these topics, but a comedy with smarter script and storyline.

I paused it many times for really no reason. I started watching it at 15:00, but I finished it at 19:00. I don't know if that means something (wink).

If you want to watch a romantic comedy, then there's a bunch of others, so in my opinion (always), go watch another film.

At first, I want to mention that this film, in my opinion, is a really modern giallo, that almost didn't really reminded me of a giallo. This is not necessarily flaw, because either is good because of the fact that is a progressive giallo and different from the other Argento's works, either is bad because of the simple reason that isn't giallo. It's not a "true" giallo, because it doesn't really have the aesthetic. This is basically my dilemma. Whether this film is a giallo or not.

Let's continue with the things that I liked. I really liked the protagonist. Elio Germano was really great. He was the perfect actor to portray Giulio. I also really liked the actor that portrayed the role of Andrea. He was also great and convincing, in addition with the actress that played Sasha. No, just no.

Then, the plot, although was not original (what is original nowadays?), was quiet catchy and I liked the Easter eggs with the posters of Hitchcock and the previous film of Dario Argento (Il cartaio). It contained very very obvious references of Hitchcock's works (thereof the title).

Now the bad things. Some actors were good, but the rest of the cast was mediocre to bad. The "whodunnit" was very obvious from the beginning, only a part was kind of sudden.

The thing that I didn't liked at all was the fact that it was English-language. Really? I wanted it to be original Italian. I never understood why all the giallo should be in English. I prefer the Italian language. We have so many English-language films. It was not necessary at all.

In general, I believe that it's a nice film to watch. Fast pacing, not boring, with catchy plot, but certainly it's not the typical giallo film. It's closer to a mystery (although very obvious for a mystery) thriller film than a giallo, but it's different, so for me is good.

I recommend it.

Generally, the key word of the plot is "obsession". That's why this film intrigued me. I thought I was about to watch a film about erotic obsession, a topic that was very popular in 80s and 90s and started to look cheap in 00s. A topic that was really reprehensible and often you can see that these type of films (erotic thrillers) have low rating, with some exceptions. Everyone has it's own taste, so I personally like erotic thrillers and especially when they're about erotic obsession, but now things are really complicated.

Let's start by saying that there was so much nudity that I really felt uncomfortable. I've seen so many films with nudity, but this one gave me the impression that I was watching some kind of soft porn. I would prefer the nudity parts were shorter and not that frequent.

Then, the flow of the plot. It was really over the top. How can a diary affect you that much? It's ridiculous. The "tragic" sequence was really silly. They were many cringeworthy moments that made me want to pause the film for a bit.

Some characters were really unnecessary and they're was bad acting throughout the film. Even the dialogues were improvised.

Alyssa Milano was beautiful as always, but unfortunately that isn't always enough.

I had myself laughing at some scenes, because of the cringy aura. Should I give a credit because it made me (at least) laugh (even though it wasn't on purpose)?

I don't know if the director wanted to make a softcore, but it wasn't a nice try. I really think that films like this degrade the "erotic thriller" subgenre and that's why it's not that common nowadays and if there is, it will be strongly criticised.

Thanks to all these aforementioned reasons, this film was quiet fun to watch. I liked the general idea that an artist has an erotic obsession over a young student, but only this thing.

I don't personally recommend it, but if you don't something to do and you want to watch a bad film on purpose, give it a try. I have these moments too sometimes. I just want to watch a bad film, so I can berate it. But always sparingly.

Firstly, I have to say that I've seen only the first three episodes. I couldn't continue watching this series. I really tried. I have been reading mostly positive reviews and I liked the Groundhog Day-like concept, but I was really disappointed while I was watching it.

Let's get into details. Is this even a comedy? Because I've never even smiled! I couldn't relate with its "humour". I can't describe how bad it was. The leading actress tries really hard to be funny, but she's not. Overall, the characters are not sympathetic at all. They are very boring with no personality.

By the way I've seen Natasha Lyonne for the first time in the film "American Pie" (1999) and all I have say is: Whatever happened to her voice (?) Smoking is a very bad habit, especially if you smoke that much. But I don't consider this as a flaw of the series. I'm not judging her real self but the series. I just wanted to mention it.

I really didn't liked that they show so much of drugs and alcohol. Is this all about the drugs? Is this an example of the series that we want to see? Personally I don't like these type of series. They are lame and they pursue a very bad and unhealthy lifestyle. It's very frustrating.

I tried to relate the protagonist, but I couldn't. Because I'm not doing drugs, her acting was bad and she was not funny at all.

Bad acting, bad humour, drugs everywhere, and generally over the top unhealthy lifestyle. Literally. It doesn't deserve its rating.

That's my personal opinion. I don't know if someday I'll give this again a try, but after three episodes of watching, I'm pretty sure that I would have wanted to not know its existence.

2 stars, only because I like the overall concept.