1001 Movies ... my own version (1980's)

Notes: Basically, it is some kind of homage to Alfred Hitchcock’s work, and even though Hitchcock himself was apparently not impressed, I think it was pretty neat. I especially loved the first act focusing on Angie Dickison and, in my opinion, it was some of the best work delivered by Brian De Palma. Of course, you might argue that it was rather sleazy and exploitative but I thought that it was just spellbinding to behold and Angie Dickinson was quite fascinating. Obviously as a homage to 'Psycho', De Palma got rid off her at the beginning which was a really bold move but, unfortunately, the rest of the movie turned out to be decent enough but not much more than that, I'm afraid. At least, Nancy Allen did play a convincing escort-girl but her character never became really interesting, at least, not as much as Dickinson's character. To make things worse, the first victim's son was even less compelling to behold and the way he joined forces with this escort-girl was just rather preposterous. Anyway, even if the damned thing was not flawless, it was still a really entertaining erotic thriller.

Notes: In my opinion, one of the interesting things about this movie is that it is a great test to know if you actually enjoy the parody genre. Indeed, even if it might not be the first one, it was and is the best one ever made. So, if you watch this flick and you think it stinks, you can skip directly everything in this genre because nothing else that came after was remotely better than this. For me, this test worked pretty well and I know where I stand now. Indeed, I thought it was pretty good and there were so many good jokes ('a smoking ticket, please!', just awesome...) but that was it, I'm afraid. Indeed, in my opinion, even though it is supposed to be that way, it was still all pretty stupid and stupid humor is not really my thing, I'm afraid. After this, the directing trio (Jim Abrahams, David Zucker and Jerry Zucker) spent much of their career milking dry this genre and I didn't care much for it. Indeed, 'The Naked Gun' trilogy was actually pretty lame, in my opinion... Anyway, even though I'm not a huge fan of this movie, it is definitely a classic.

Notes: Somehow, it took me many years to watch this classic and, considering its impressive reputation, I had some rather high expectations. Eventually, even though I did enjoy it, I can’t say I was really blown away by the whole thing though. I guess, it is one of those cases that you keep hearing about a classic for many years but when you finally watch it, there is no way it will fulfill all your wild dreams. I mean, it is definitely a fun flick, no doubt about it, but somehow, I never really cared about the characters. It is like John Belushi, a guy who has become a legend since then, when in fact he made only 7 movies before dying and only 2 of them (‘Animal House’ and this movie included) were actually good. Well, I don't think that ‘Animal House’ was really that great either so I don’t really get all the fuss about this guy. Anyway, in my opinion, even though this movie tries to be wild and all, basically, it is pure and simply a musical with some pretty cool music and some rather chaotic scenes but not much more than that, I’m afraid. I don’t know, maybe I was in the wrong mood when I watched it and maybe I should give it another shot at some point. Still, even though it didn’t really blow me away, it is a classic.

Notes: It is usually considered as the best installment of this whole saga and, after re-watching the damned thing once again, I believe it really deserves this status. Indeed, even though it still remains a seminal piece of popcorn entertainment, this time, it was quite darker than its predecessor and towards the end, it almost became some kind of Greek tragedy. Indeed, the climax with the duel between Skywalker and Vader has become pretty much the stuff of legends, it is still thrilling after all these years and I would be really surprised if they would ever manage to top that in the upcoming sequels (obviously, they didn't). Sure, 40 years later, it might seem pretty cheesy to discover the truth about Luke's father but it is because it has been copied and parodied so many times afterwards and, in fact, it was terribly effective. The good stuff didn’t stop there though. Indeed, you also had the enigmatic Boba Fett whose backstory would be really messed up in the prequels and, of course, the all mighty Yoda who would become one of the most beloved characters in this franchise.

Notes: It has been a while since I have seen this flick and I should probably re-watch it at some point. Honestly, I always found it rather difficult to judge this movie. Indeed, back in those days, the best movie released at that time was obviously ‘Raging Bull’ so the fact that this movie eventually won the Best Picture Academy Award was always quite controversial. And, yet, I still think it is actually a really good drama though. Indeed, for various reasons, I always thought that psychology is a rather fascinating subject but not only you don’t get many movies dealing with this topic but most of them give a rather unrealistic and colorful image of such patients (see for example ‘One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest’ or ‘Girl, Interrupted’). Well, this movie gave one of the most convincing and compelling depictions of depression that I have ever seen. Indeed, the directing was solid without being too flashy and there was a really good cast. At the time, it launched the career of Timothy Hutton who became one of the youngest winners of an Academy Award ever but this guy never really fulfilled those great expectations.

Notes: Well, pretty much like anything else coming from Stanley Kubrick, it is basically another huge classic but, to be honest, it doesn't really belong to my favorites. But even so, it is seriously entertaining, I think it is probably the most accessible movie directed by Stanley Kubrick and, once again, the directing was just amazing. On top of that, Jack Nicholson gave one of his best performances and the whole thing was quite spellbinding to watch. And, yet, somehow, it was still missing something to become truly amazing, at least, that’s my opinion. Eventually, the main issue was probably the fact that this movie is and remains a Stephen King story and, to be honest, I have never been a real fan of his work. Still, I have always been amazed by how Kubrick has managed to lift up this material to such heights and among all these Stephen King books that has been adapted to the silver screen, it is easily one of the very best ones, even if King himself didn't like it at all.

Notes: I have to admit it, it has been a while since I saw this one but I will definitely re-watch it as soon I get the opportunity. When talking about Lynch's career, it seems that this movie has been a little bit forgotten. Indeed, if you compare it to the movies more faithful to his directing style such as 'Blue Velvet' or 'Mulholland Dr.', it seems to be like a rather straightforward drama. Indeed, it is rather straightforward but still quite fascinating to watch in my opinion and after directing only 2 movies, David Lynch was already regarded as one of the most promising American directors at work. The best thing in this movie was that even though the story was rather predictable, Lynch preserved his own rather dark directing style and it made the whole thing quite sinister but so spellbinding to watch. Another thing that I appreciated is that, for once, he allowed us to get acquainted with the characters, to get to know them and eventually to care about them. Eventually, even if it might be a really atypical Lynch feature, it is actually pretty awesome.

Notes: It has been a while since I have seen this movie and I would really like to watch it again at some point. In fact, I do have a DVD of this movie but it’s only dubbed in Dutch and I would rather re-watch it in the original French language. Anyway, it’s a movie I watched so many times as a kid and, back then, I thought it was just spellbinding to behold but it’s a movie that I can be appreciated by children and grown-ups alike. It was made when there was still no CGI animation and I do believe it’s a shame that the hand-drawn animation has been dropped by most studios because such movies were also quite gorgeous to look at. On top of that, in this case, there was also some humour and adventure and it was probably the most poetic animated feature I have seen so far. It’s such a pity that Paul Grimault never managed to release another full length feature afterwards because I do believe that the guy was probably one of the best animation directors that ever lived.

Notes: When I was younger, 'Goodfellas' was definitely my favorite Scorsese feature but, nowadays, it is a toss up between this flick and 'Taxi Driver' and it is easily one of the best movies produced by De Niro and Scorsese. Basically, it is a really spellbinding story and easily the best movie dealing with an athlete. I mean, even though 'Ordinary People' was a very good flick, this masterpiece was just from another level and should have won the best picture academy award back in those days. In my opinion, if there is a time when Scoresese should have won the big prize, it was at that moment and not with 'The Departed' which was the only way the Academy could possibly apologize to this great master. Anyway, this movie is the stuff of legends. Indeed, In 1978, when Martin Scorsese was at an all-time low resulting from an addiction to cocaine, Robert De Niro visited him and told him that he had to clean himself up and make this movie. Thanks to De Niro, Scorsese was back in the game and directed one of the best movies ever made and continued to make incredible movies for the next 4 decades. Of course, we shouldn't forget De Niro who gave one of the best performances which has been a reference for many actors afterwards.

Notes: To be honest, I had a rather hard time to get into the whole thing. I mean, the first 10 minutes were almost impossible to follow and then the rest of the movie was still rather hard to decipher. I mean, even the characters had no clue about what was going on and it started to grow thin after a while. Of course, in the last 10-20 minutes, you finally find out what was going on and, in retrospective, it was actually rather obvious. So, in my opinion, even though the plot was entertaining, it wasn’t really amazing though. Still, it doesn’t mean it was a bad movie, far from it. Indeed, the directing was solid, the music was not bad (which is quite remarkable since you are dealing with a 80’s feature) and, of course, Bob Hoskins was downright impressive. Indeed, the little guy delivered one hell of a kinetic performance and it would give him his breakthrough. Helen Mirren was also pretty good but, even though she did fight to expand her character, I though her character was still rather limited. Anyway, even if I don’t think it was great, it was still a really good flick.

Notes: Rainer Werner Fassbinder gave such a bleak view on Germany around 10 years after WWII. Basically, sure, the Nazis were all gone, in fact, they were barely mentioned, but, if you believe Fassbinder, the German society was still deeply corrupt, decadent and depraved back then. Obviously, I'm not sure if he wanted to give a realistic portrait but there was still something terribly rotten about all these characters. Even the only seemingly good character, the naive von Bohm basically gave up at the end and gave in to his carnal desire by marrying Lola and turned a blind eye towards all the corruption in this city. Some other characters were also rather bewildering. Indeed, what was the deal with Esslin who was working for the city council, politically active and yet also playing drums in the evening at a brothel?!?! Another intriguing character was Lola's mother who suddenly completely disappeared at some point. At least, there is no denying that Barbara Sukowa was just so charismatic and mesmerizing playing the title character, even though I still don't get what was exactly her goal with von Bohm. In fact, if Germany was doing economically so well, how come did she have to work as a prostitute? However, once again, Fassbinder never tried here to deliver a sensical tale, his focus was to show what he felt about Germany in general and, well, it wasn't really pretty, I'm afraid.

Notes: Back in the 80’s, not only Lawrence Kasdan had some major success as a screenwriter (he wrote ’The Empire Strikes back’ , ’Return of the Jedi’ and ’Raiders of the Lost Ark’ , not too shabby, ain’t it?), he developed also a solid career as a director and all his movies were acclaimed. However, in the 90’s, his directing efforts were not that impressive and, in my opinion, it all started to go wrong with ‘I Love You to Death’ which was pretty lame. Anyway, his directing debut was a definitely critical and financial success. Indeed, it is a pretty solid néo-noir, almost a remake of ‘Double Indemnity’ and not only did it launch Kasdan’s directing career but also William Hurt and Kathleen Turner (this movie was also her acting debut). So, it was a pretty steamy affair and, personally, I really enjoyed the mood provided by the competent directing. Hurt and Turner were really good as well, they had some great chemistry and after this movie, they would both become some major players in Hollywood in the 80’s. Unfortunately, I was still not completely blown away by the whole thing. Indeed, like in most of the néo-noir features I am familiar with, the plot was pretty pedestrian and all the characters were really stereotypical. I know, it is something inherent to the genre but I always find it rather frustrating. Anyway, even if I don’t think it is really a masterpiece, it is still a really solid erotic thriller.

Notes: We don't hear much from John Landis nowadays but, back in the 80's, he was quite a successful director and one of his biggest success was this werewolf flick which has now reached a cult status. First of all, to mix comedy and horror is a tricky challenge and most movies usually fail miserably but Landis did a good job here and sometimes you might wonder if you should be laughing or be horrified by the whole thing. Still, I must say, like most of the movies in this genre, it did take forever until the main character finally became a werewolf. However, I have to admit that the end result was really impressive though. Indeed, back in those days, they didn't have any CGI but only some awesome make-up and it still stands up fine 40 years later. Unfortunately, it was also an issue with this flick. Indeed, basically, the make-up was so impressive that it did upstage the whole story as a result. Furthermore, considering the story itself, sure, it was entertaining enough but, to be honest, it was nothing really amazing. On top of that, it was rather silly that the doctor would run her own investigation and, even though Jenny Agutter was really lovely, I thought it was hardly believable that a nurse would bring home a patient to have some hot sex with him. Anyway, even if I think it is in fact slighly overrated, it is still a classic though.

Notes: Nowadays, Brian de Palma is pretty much forgotten but back in the 70's and the 80's, he was a major movie director. Anyway, I always had a weak spot for this director and, in my opinion, this movie is easily one of his best. Apparently, Quentin Tarantino even said that this film is his favorite Brian De Palma movie and Tarantino cast John Travolta in ‘Pulp Fiction’ because he liked his performance in this movie so much. Basically, it is a typical de Palma thriller, the style where he had the best results and it was obviously also an homage to 'Blowup', the great flick directed by Antonioni. However, even though the plot follows the same structure, the directing style was quite different. As a result, I thought that the mood was just great and the story was quite spellbinding. Back in those days, Travolta, before disappearing into oblivion in a few years later, delivered here a solid performance. Of course, since you are dealing with an American thriller, at the end, you had some rather preposterous twist(s) and action scenes but, for once, it didn’t bother me much.

Notes: I don't know abroad, but in France, it is a classic and it was a huge success back then when it was released. Anyway, it is such a bold and inspiring picture, I thought it was pretty amazing. Of course, there is no way to know how accurate the whole thing is but I thought it was very believable. Also, they didn't make any concession such as making the characters talk French or English, there wasn't even any subtitles but I thought it made the whole thing even more spellbinding to watch. The scene which personally really blew me away was the one when the guy sees how to make fire. The look on his face, the impact of this event, it was just amazing. In those few minutes, they managed to give the very essence of being human (the consciousness, the thinking process). Just amazing. Of course, the whole thing is not completely flawless. For example, to add something to the thin story, they had to throw in a romantic plot which was nicely handled but it was not as believable as the rest. Furthermore, the main character made too many huge jumps into evolution in just a couple of days. Still, the damned thing is just unique and pretty much a must-see in my opinion.

Notes: Since I'm a huge fan of Indiana Jones, of course, I just love this flick. Even though it is not my favorite one in this franchise (that would be the 3rd installment), it is still quite awesome. Indeed, when I was a kid, I saw it so many times with my father but after so many years later, I keep watching it from time to time and it is still so damned entertaining. Basically, with this movie, Steven Spielberg set up the golden rules for this mighty franchise and he introduced to us one of the greatest most iconic characters in motion picture history. Indeed, even though Harrison Ford was not even their first choice, he completely nailed this part and managed to create a character who was even more awesome than Han Solo which was quite an achievement. By the way, the big difference with this movie and 'Star Wars' is that, when I watch again nowadays this other classic, I find it slightly childish while it is not the case at all with this great flick. Anyway, not only it is technically pretty much flawless, it is also just such a fun movie and it is completely entertaining from the very first minute until the very last seconds.

Notes: It is nowadays a rather forgotten movie but I thought it was actually fascinating. In my opinion, it is one of the darkest dramas ever made about WWII I have ever seen and I thought that there was a really impressive amount of depth put in the characters, especially the main one who was quite fascinating. Indeed, the directing was very well done and, above all, Klaus Maria Brandauer gave probably the best performance of his career. Since then I have seen some other movies starring this guy but none of them really impressed me like this one. Anyway, he was really mesmerizing here, giving life to a fascinating but also flawed character. On top of that, this movie was also a very interesting meditation about Art and while watching this you might wonder, when you are dealing with Art in general, where does it start and where does it end and how far should you go in order to reach your artistic goals?

Notes: Eventually, even though it is one of Michael Mann's more obscure movies, I was actually impressed by the damned thing and, in my opinion, it is easily one of his best directing efforts. Indeed, I always had a weak spot for heist features and this flick is, by far, one of the best I have ever seen in this genre. Indeed, right from the start, you get an amazing opening scene during which you have one of the most realistic heist I have ever seen in a movie. Apparently, the burglary tools used throughout the film were not props, but actual tools which were supplied by actual thieves who served as technical consultants on the film. Therefore, the whole thing felt really raw and pretty realistic and it was just spellbinding to watch. On top of that, James Caan was really on the top of his game and he gave easily one of the best performances of his career (apparently, Caan shares this opinion and after ‘The Godfather’, it is his favorite film he has made). Eventually, even though the story was actually rather pedestrian, it is so well made, so well directed and I really loved the damned thing.

Notes: Eventually, I thought it was quite amazing and it was much better than anything directed before or after by Wolfgang Petersen. Anyhow, I always thought that there was something fascinating about movies dealing with submarines and this one is by far the best one. Indeed, since then, it has been imitated numerous times but this feature remains the reference in its genre and I will remain so a for a long time. Basically, the directing was amazing and, like I said before, you could argue that Wolfgang Petersen never reached these heights again in his career. In my opinion, the mood was intense, there was a completely nail-biting tension and I was on the edge of my seat from the beginning until the last seconds. At the end of the day, it is not only a great submarine movie, it is basically one of the best war features ever made.

Notes: This movie started out with a very typical ominous score which, for once, was not written by John Carpenter but by the great Ennio Morricone. From there, it became a chilling horror flick with some rather gruesome special effects. Even though it was actually never really scary, there were still loads of tension since you never knew for sure, except for MacReady, who could be infected or not. I also appreciated the downbeat ending with no survivors, even the last 2 guys were left alone in the snow to die without a rescue team. I was rather amazed to read that this movie was a flop and was critically panned when it was released. Anyway, nowadays, it is rightfully considered by many as the best movie directed by John Carpenter and it is another great example that you can take an old movie, give it a fresh look and modify the story to fit our modern world with some tremendous results.

Notes: Even though I grew up watching many movies, this flick was not one of those that I saw thousand times like many other people from my generation. I mean, I did see it back then when I was very young and even though I thought it was pretty neat, it didn't really blow me away like some other movies I saw back then. Eventually, I saw it again not so long ago and it remains a pretty good flick, no more no less. In my opinion, it is a rather typical Spielberg picture, with its positive and negative aspects. The positive aspects are that it was very well done with some great shots and special effects and even though it is now almost 40 years old, it is still entertaining from the beginning to the end. Some of those scenes or the score have become just really iconic. On the other hand, the negative aspect is that it tends to be overly sentimental in my opinion, it is a very moral tale and it has a rather black and white psychology about the good guys and the bad guys. To be honest, I actually think it is more enjoyable if you watch it very young, between 8 and 13 years old, then it is definitely a great watch.

Notes: I watched again this movie recently and I was surprised by how little I actually remembered this movie which wasn’t really a good sign. It’s interesting that the only thing I did remember was when Alexander, Fanny and their mother went to live with Edvard Vergerus but, somehow, I think it does make sense. Indeed, even if Vergerus was pretty much a dreadful guy, he was however the only fully developed character in this whole story and, therefore, the only one who made an impression on me. For example, at some point. Emilie made the decision to marry with Edvard but they never gave us any explanation why and, then, 5 mins later, she was complaining about her marriage and wanted out. As a result, it was rather difficult to root for her but it’s something that could be said about all the characters in this movie. Indeed, you spend more than 3 hours with them but you don’t really get to know any of them. At least, even he still remained an enigma, I was more able to appreciate the mysterious scenes involving Alexander who was an intriguing young boy. However, I still don’t get why his sister was mentioned in the title since she did so very little and had so little impact on everything happening around her. Anyway, this movie is obviously considered as a massive masterpiece, and, I guess, as far I’m concerned, it belongs to the category 'misunderstood masterpiece’. What I mean by that is that I was able to see all the craft behind it, I could see it was obviously a work of Art but I'm afraid I didn't really get it. Basically, there was a lot of symbolism that went just way over my head. I mean, during the whole thing I was scratching my head thinking 'What did he mean with all this?' and, honestly, at the end of the movie, I didn't get many answers. Still, such a challenging movie should always be praised when you see how simplistic and moronic are the movies produced by Hollywood and I will not a blame a movie because I just didn't get it.

Notes: Well, even though it is a visually rather ugly movie, the material turned out to be however really unique and quite fascinating to behold. Indeed, I think it was the most feminist movie I have ever seen and it was clearly made by a woman, about women, for the women. Of course, you might argue that what happened in this movie was rather far-fetched but, what was more interesting, was the underlying message. Basically, it boils down to that, in this man dominated world, women have always been, oppressed might too strong, but at least undermined, undervalued, vastly misunderstood and definitely not treated as equal. The downside of this approach was that, while all the women were quite complex and interesting to behold, the male characters were on the other hand barely developed whatsoever and were reduced to pretty much some clueless sexist morons. On top of that, I was not really sure about the beehive behaviour displayed by all these women. Indeed, to be honest, I have some doubts that the female community is so harmonious and that they have such a great understanding of each other with some seemingly telepathic powers. Finally, we are obviously supposed to be rooting for these 3 women but imagine if 3 men would kill a woman so randomly and so violently? I’m pretty sure that they would be considered as ‘monsters’. On the other hand, you might argue that white straight men will probably never have a reason to lose their sh*t like that. Anyway, it has been a while since I have seen something so original and so thought-provoking.

Notes: Eventually, I really did like this movie a lot but, somehow, it didn’t really blew me away though. First of all, on a technical level, it was indeed a really impressive feature. Indeed, those puppets and the sets just looked great and I really enjoyed the creatures, the characters and, basically, the whole fantasy world they managed to create which was just fascinating. Frankly, I had never seen something like this before, a Fantasy Adventure only with some puppets, and the makers should be credited for trying to create something so original. On the downside, since you are dealing only with some puppets here, the whole thing tended to be really static and the action scenes were not really successful. Basically, half of the movie, you have the puppets talking to each other without doing much else which is quite understandable since you can’t constantly move them but then, in this case, you wonder if this medium was just not too much limited to tell a story on this scale. Still, in spite of these flaws, if only to see this amazing world, it is definitely worth a look.

Notes: Nowadays, we don’t hear much about him but there was a time when Costa-Gavras was one of the most highly regarded directors in the world. Personally, there was a time when I was quite a fan of his politically charged thrillers and it is with a great pleasure that I finally managed to watch ‘Z’ which is pretty much his magnum-opus and is even considered by many as one of the finest movies ever made. More than a decade after ‘Z’ and many other acclaimed features, Costa-Gavras finally got the opportunity to work in the USA and it was once again another spellbinding political thriller which even managed to won the prestigious Golden Palm at the Cannes Film Festival. Back then when it was released, it was pretty controversial since it was dealing with the Chilean coup of 1973 which was backed by the US government. I mean, sure, the whole structure was rather straightforward and this feature didn’t reach the heights of ‘Z’ but I though it was still a really solid, entertaining and very interesting movie.

Notes: I think it was the first Turkish movie I have ever seen and only therefore it was a really interesting watch. The other thing that impressed me was how much Turkey must have changed in the last 40 years (on the other hand, I have never been there so I might be completely mistaken). Concerning the movie itself, it was actually quite strong and I don't think it has lost much of its impact after all these years. In my opinion, this movie was about the fact that the Turkish people was and maybe still are too much focused on punishment and vengeance when they should try to be more compassionate and forgiving towards other people and it's an universal message that is still topical nowadays for everyone. Concerning the fact that they chose to tell the stories of 5 different inmates, to be honest, I'm not so sure if it was such a great idea. Sure, on one hand, they were then able to be more diverse and show more ways to handle such a situation but, on the other hand, if they would have gone for just one or two characters, they could have expanded their tales and go much deeper. It is still a really strong movie though.

Notes: Since it is one of the most highly regarded movies starring Meryl Streep (she even got an academy award for her performance), and I was really eager to watch this flick so I had some rather high expectations. Eventually, I had some rather mixed feelings about the whole thing. Indeed, I really had a hard time caring about the whole thing. Still, Meryl Streep was indeed really terrific and if only for her performance, you should definitely check this movie. On the other hand, I thought that Kevin Kline was rather annoying and, honestly, not really convincing. I know, he plays someone with some psychological issues but I thought he was way too hysterical and he got on my nerves pretty bad. Furthermore, I was wondering where the story was going during the whole thing until the shattering ending. Indeed, the way they ended it was completely heartbreaking but also very powerful. So, I went from being indifferent to being quite fascinated. Eventually, I guess I should re-watch it to make up my mind for good.

Notes: It is definitely my favorite Science Fiction flick and even one of my favorite movies of all time. Furthermore, by now, I have seen all the movies directed by Ridley Scott and it is easily his best one. Basically, the look and the mood were great, the story was just plain fascinating and the cast was also pretty awesome. Back then, Harrison Ford was in the zone, and everything he touched turned into gold and it is hard to believe that, when this movie was released, it was actually a flop. You could blame the marketing but I'd rather believe that it was just way ahead of its time and nowadays it has reached a huge cult status which is totally deserved in my opinon. I guess it is/was maybe too slow for some viewers but it didn't bother me, in the contrary. Eventually, after 35 years, they will finally come up with a sequel and even though you might wonder if this movie really needed a sequel, since it was directed by Denis Villeneuve, one of the best directors at work nowadays, it was still a smashing critical success (and still another box-office flop). Anyway, coming back to our main feature, even if you don't like it, you would have to at least recognize the fact that it has influenced all the SF movies that came afterwards.

Notes: Obviously, it has become since then a major cult-classic but, to be honest, even though I did like it, I have never been a really huge fan, even after rewatching the damned thing recently. I mean, sure, I have to admit it, it is definitely a fun horror-comedy, no doubt about it, but, at the end of the day, I think it was above all a cheap flick that Sam Raimi made at the time to start up his career. Eventually, after all these years, if you look back at his legacy, it still is pretty much his most acclaimed directing effort which is, at the same time, pretty neat but also pretty sad, when you think about it. Since then, they have recently released a remake which was approved by Sam Raimi and since it was fairly well received, I was really eager to check it out but, eventually, I was amazed by how underwhelming this remake turned out to be after all. Anyway, coming back to our main feature, I have to admit it, after more then 30 years after its release, it still holds up pretty well and it is still really entertaining.

Notes: To be honest, I wonder how I actually ended up watching this movie but I think it was because the critic in the TV mag was pretty good. Anyway, even though I didn’t really expect it, it turned out to be a major milestone in my movie watching. Indeed, back then, I was much younger, I had never seen anything like this before and I was seriously blown away by the whole thing. I think that the first thing that impressed me with this movie was its visual aspect. Basically, it deals with art and painting and it is probably the movie which made the best connection with the painting art I have ever seen. Furthermore, there was also a mesmerizing surrealist vibe with this movie and even though the plot and the characters were rather murky, it was one of the most spellbinding movies I have ever seen. Concerning Peter Greenaway, it was his breakthrough feature film, it would be also his first movie I managed to watch and I became right away a big fan of his work.

Notes: By now, I have seen all the movies involving the Monty Python and while I was wildly enthousiast at first, I must admit it that I was a little bit disappointed. I mean, I more or less enjoyed all their movies but I didn’t find them really excellent and I came to the conclusion that their humor is not really my cup of tea. For example, I had some big expectations for this flick but, to be honest, I thought it was a little bit disappointing. I know this is a huge classic but I didn't think it was that great. Don't misunderstand me! I enjoyed it and I though it was pretty good but it was not a masterpiece in my opinion. I mean, the concept sounded awesome on paper but it was just too random. Indeed, for me, it is was too anarchic and incoherent and the whole thing was just a collection of sketches. Sure, there were many funny moments but I preferred the struture that they used for 'The Life of Brian' which had more or less a plot. In spite of all this, after all, it is still a very funny and entertaining flick though.

Notes: Even though Eddie Murphy does have a rather lousy reputation, when he did get some solid material, the guy was just hilarious and this movie was a fine example. Dan Aykroyd was pretty good as well. Furthermore, I really enjoyed how they handled the stock-exchange making it all look like ruthless, worthless and also quite ridiculous. Still, even though I definitely enjoyed it, it was still not really mindblowing in my opinion. I mean, of course it was quite funny but, eventually, it still remained rather harmless and innocent. For example, when Dan Aykroyd ends up on the street, within the very first minutes, somehow, he managed to be helped by some good-hearted hooker. I mean, come on, was it really realistic? Not really. Maybe they should have pushed it even further in the cynical dark humor. Furthermore, the whole 3rd act when they finally get together to get even with the Dukes was rather disappointing. In my opinion, it was a rather sappy and uninteresting happy ending. Anyway, it is honestly nothing really great but it is still a funny and entertaining comedy.

Notes: Even though it is pretty much a classic from the 80’s that managed at the time to win 5 Academy Awards including the Best Picture Academy Award, to be honest, I don't think the whole thing did grow old very well, I’m afraid. Above all, something that really prevented this movie from getting a higher rating from me was this terrible cheesy 80's soundtrack. Another thing that bothered me was how they added a lethal disease in the 3rd act just to add some extra drama. Seriously, it is just such a cheap gimmick. Still, I have to admit that it is a decent watch, above all, because pretty much all the characters involved were so flawed and messed-up and thanks to some really solid performances from the whole cast involved. On top of that, I have to admit that the scene when you get to see Shirley MacLaine bursting at the reception of the hospital shouting ‘Give my daughter the shot!’ was amazing and probably one of the most powerful scenes I have ever seen.

Notes: Honestly, it has been a while since I have seen this flick and I should definitely re-watch it at some point. Anyway, it is definitely a typical Cronenberg feature and I thought it was pretty good. At the time, Cronenberg was still transitioning to some more commercial features easier to digest for the mainstream audience but there were still many of his famous trademarks that you could find in his rather gross horror features he made at the end of the 70’s. As a result, even though the whole thing was quite accessible , it was still pretty weird and sometimes a little bit hard to follow but there was definitely something quite spellbinding about the whole thing and there was no denying that it was visually quite impressive. James Woods, one of the most underrated actors that ever lived, was a perfect choice and he delivered one of his typical hysterical and over-the-top performances which did fit really well in Cronenberg’s demented world.

Notes: To be honest, for some reasons, I have never been really attracted by this movie. It probably had to do with its title. Indeed, on one hand, it was annoyingly patriotic and, on the other hand, it is simply plain lame. Still, this movie seemed to have such a decent reputation. Well, eventually, I thought it was actually a rather weird movie. The beginning, focusing on Yeager, was actually quite awesome and uplifiting thanks to a fine performance by Sam Shephard. But, for some reason, this awesome character was somehow dropped after 45 minutes and the movie focused above all on the first American astronauts. The story, at the same time, became some tribute to these American heroes but it also made fun of the whole endeavour and the whole thing pretty much looked like a circus. So, you had some action, drama and also some satirical comedy but this mix didn’t always work in my opinion. Anyway, even if I don't think it was great, I have to admit that the whole thing was sometimes quite spellbinding to behold.

Notes: Obviously, I have seen this movie many times when I was a kid but I still wanted to check it again. After all these years, it is still usually considered as the weakest installment of the original trilogy. Even though you could blame the Ewoks, I thought they were actually pretty cool but they were definitely another piece of evidence that this trilogy is actually pretty childish. It is not necessarily a bad thing but I just believe the whole thing is much more enjoyable when you watch it the first time when you are around 10-12 years old. No, the main issue in my opinion is that this sequel is almost a remake of the first movie. Indeed, the main plot is basically to destroy another death star against all odds. Sure, it was handled differently but the goal and outcome were pretty much the same. Still, it doesn't mean it was not a really entertaining flick though. Indeed, in my opinion, the Ewoks were childish but pretty cool, the whole extended intro with Jabba the Hutt was just really awesome and I really liked the way they developed the complex relationship between Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader. Eventually, even if it might not be the best movie in this trilogy, it is still a fine blockbuster.

Notes: I’m not sure if Eric Rohmer was really well known abroad, but in France, he was always considered a major director. To be honest, I don’t think I’m really an expert in his work but I have still managed to watch some of his movies. Anyway, this flick is probably my favorite so far. Indeed, basically, it is a rather typical romantic tale, almost a soap opera, but the characters were very well written and actually quite fascinating to behold. I also enjoyed a lot the understated directing style by Rhomer who gave a lot of room to the actors to give life to their characters and the absence of additional background music was a nice touch as you have to make up your mind on your own about what you should feel or think. This movie was also starring Amanda Langlet who was just 16 years old at the time and she would work again with Eric Rohmer in ‘Conte d’été’ which was the very first movie directed by Rohmer that I saw. ‘Conte d’été’ had been a great introduction to Rohmer’s work and it was just really neat to see again this very charming actress.

Notes: To be honest, it has been years since I have seen this movie and I should definitely re-watch it at some point. Anyway, I always thought it was just a fascinating picture. I mean, first of all, the people involved were just really interesting. Indeed, even though it was directed by Nagisa Ôshima, it wasn’t really a Japanese production, more an international project. Same for the lead characters, they were played by two rocks stars, David Bowie and Ryûichi Sakamoto. It seems that Bowie could have been an amazing actor if he chose this direction. Finally, years before becoming an amazing film director, Takeshi Kitano also appeared in this movie in a smaller role. So, all these ingredients were really unexpected but really interesting and, all together, they made for a mesmerising and quite unique war feature. The most important idea is that you get a massive culture clash between Japanese and British culture but also between Japanese and British acting styles and, in spite of there differences, there is some kind of attraction between the two worlds.

Notes: Even though this movie seems to be rather forgotten nowadays, especially outside the Netherlands, I really liked it a lot and I should defnitely re-watch it at some point. Basically, this movie was the last one directed by Paul Verhoeven before he left the Netherlands and it is my favorite one from this period just behind 'Turks Fruit'. Above all, I thought that the story was just fascinating and, in my opinion, I believe it was in fact a better version of 'Basic Instinct'. Indeed, to be honest, I always had some mixed feelings about 'Basic Instinct' because, even though the set-up was great, the plot was after all really far-fetched and rather half-baked. Here, Verhoeven gave us another erotic thriller about a man falling in love with a seemingly dangerous woman but the end-result was this time much more rewarding, at least, that’s my opinion. Instead of Rutger Hauer, the lead was played this time by Jeroen Krabbbé and he gave a really solid performance. Above all, Paul Verhoeven was just at the top of his game at the time and delivered a steamy dark and spellbinding thriller.

Notes: When I was a teenager, I started to watch many classics but some of them didn’t really blow me away and this movie is a good example. I don’t know, back then, I thought it was entertaining but the operatic over-the-top feeling didn’t really appeal to me at that point. Eventually, I had to watch this movie a second time to really appreciate it. Basically, it is pretty much the story of a loser from Cuba who tries to make it big in America but ends up still a loser. To start with , the makers were pretty prestigious as it was actually directed by Brian De Palma and Oliver Stone wrote the screenplay. Indeed, many tend to forget it, but before launching his own directing career, Stone did write this massive classic. In the same genre, it is definitely really different than 'The Godfather' or 'Goodfellas' but I thought it was really awesome. Even though Al Pacino plays again a gangster, his Tony Montana was completely different than his Michael Corleone and the guy was just spellbinding to watch.

Notes: Even though there has been countless movies about the Vietnam war, the conflict in Cambodia has been criminally forgotten whereas there was there a massive genocide which was still taking place even when this movie was released. Only therefore, it is already a really important feature. Like many other movies dealing with foreign conflicts like ‘Cry Freedom’ or ‘Shooting Dogs’, it uses the gimmick of having a white main character so we can easier focus and identify with what’s going on but, for once, this gimmick didn’t bother me. Furthermore, even though it was Roland Joffé’s directing debut, the directing was really efficient and this depiction of war was really relentless and quite heartbreaking. Eventually, the ultimate masterstroke was to give a good chunk of the story to Dith Pran, amazingly played by a non-professional actor called Haing S. Nor who was himself a survivor from the Khmer Rouge. It made the whole thing much more compelling to watch and it is hard to imagine what it must have been to play this character after what he has been through.

Notes: To be honest, it has been a while since I have seen this movie and I should definitely re-watch it at some point. First of all, I’m pretty sure that most people would think that ‘One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest’ has been the best movie directed by Milos Forman but, the more I think about it, the more I believe that this movie might be actually slightly overrated (in fact, I need to re-watch this movie as well). In fact, in my opinion, this classic, which was released almost 10 years after ‘One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest’ and which also managed to win the Best Picture Academy Award, was even better and I believe it is in fact the Magnum Opus of this director. Indeed, it is easily one of the most fascinating and original biopics ever made and, even though Forman would be making almost only biopics during the rest of his career (‘The People vs. Larry Flynt’, ‘Man on the Moon’, ‘Goya's Ghosts’), none of them would manage to reach the level of this masterpiece though.

Notes: Even though this movie has quite an impressive reputation, to be honest, I always had a hard time to connect with the damned thing. I mean, as usual with Studio Ghibli, the animation was really neat and this story dealing with a post-apocalyptic world had a nice dark edge but it was still missing something. In my opinion, the biggest issue was actually with the main character. Indeed, Nausicaa was a bright kind and courageous princess but that was exactly the problem. Basically, she must be the most flawless character ever created by Hayao Miyazaki but she was so flawless that, as a result, she became in fact rather boring, I'm afraid. The other characters were even less interesting which didn't help either. I undestand that, in this dark and chaotic world, she was supposed to be some kind of beacon of light but this approach actually really backfired in my opinon and I really had a hard time to care about what she was going through. Anyway, even if I wasn't not really blown away by the damned thing, I still enjoyed it since there was so much creativity and imagination displayed.

Notes: When this movie came out, I was just a kid and, I remember it very well, it was just huge. Back then, it was a real event and it was just everywhere. I mean, you had the hit song, the awesome logo, all the merchandise, there was even two different cartoon shows if I recall it correctly. Basically, it was inevitable, except maybe if you lived in a dark cave, and I really loved the whole phenomenon. Back then, I thought it was just awesome, to see those funny guys with their weird gadgets and those ghosts were still kind of spooky (give me a break… I was maybe 5 years back in those days). Anyway, after all these years, I thought it was time to re-watch the damned thing. Filled up with all these childhood memories, I had some rather huge expectations but I was actually rather disappointed. Indeed, to be honest, I had a rather hard time to care about the damned thing. I mean, I still could see that the whole thing was quite original and I was fairly entertained throughout the beginning until the end but I also thought that it was actually pretty cheesy. When I was a kid, I thought the whole thing was just awesome and fascinating but, as a grown-up, I thought it was at best amusing but I never thought it was really hilarious whatsoever. Anyway, even if it is still a classic, I’m afraid I have outgrown this flick.

Notes: To be honest, even though I respect this movie and I believe it deserves its reputation, I can't say I'm really a big fan though. Even so, I still thoroughly enjoyed it and it is definitely a must see for any decent horror fan. Indeed, it is absolutely the biggest classic directed by the great master of horror, Wes Craven and, on top of that, it was also the acting debut for Johnny Depp. Above all, this flick really had a great concept. Indeed, this time, the big guy was not real but came in your sleep to kill you which was really neat. And of course, Freddy Krueger turned out to be one of the best bad guys ever created even if, later in the future, he became some kind of parody of himself. I guess, it didn't blow me away because I think the whole thing didn't grow old very well and some bits look nowadays pretty cheesy even if some of the creepy stuff is still pretty effective after all these years. Furthermore, the performance delivered by Heather Langenkamp was sometimes decent but sometimes also seriously weak. Still, the concept remains pretty awesome and this flick has been highly influential on all the slasher features that came afterwards.

Notes: Eventually, it was basically one of those cases when I heard about the movie for years, I got such huge expectations and this movie reached an almost mythical status in my mind. However, did the movie really live up to those expectations? Not really, I’m afraid. I mean, it was a good movie and it is definitely original (I think it was actually the very first mockumentary, a genre which has flourished since then but I think only this movie has really become a classic but I might be mistaken). So, I have to admit it, it was very well done and quite clever but, to be honest, I never thought it was really hilarious. Sure, I did smile a couple of times, yes, but did I actually laugh my ass off ? Never. Still, it was the beginning of a very prolific directing career for Rob Reiner who would be responsible for some major classics in the 80’s.

Notes: When you rewatch this movie, it is rather funny to see that even before he got those monster budgets, James Cameron was already able to make some pretty awesome action scenes. I mean, 30 years later, the whole thing still holds up pretty good whereas most of the 80's movies look nowadays terribly cheesy. Of course, the story was rather preposterous but they still managed to create a fascinating mythology and a dreary vision of the future. On the other hand, there managed to provide many funny scenes and some great one liners along the way. Another masterstroke was that even though Schwarzenegger couldn't act whatsoever, since he was portraying an emotionless cyborg, it was just perfect. They even managed to fill in a romantic intrigue which wasn't annoying at all. Eventually, back then, action movies were R rated with a huge capital R and they weren't skirmish about those. To conclude, even though I'm usually not a great fan of action movies, I really loved this one and it is a great mix of action and SF.

Notes: I think I had with this flick one of the best movie experiences in my whole life. Indeed, I must have been 15-16 years old the first I watched it and it completely blew me away. Back when it was released, it was a critical success and this movie won the prestigious Golden Palm at the Cannes film festival. Nowadays, it seems to be a little bit forgotten but it's actually a real shame. Indeed, it has one of the best soundtrack ever and the story, the directing, the acting, everything was just plain amazing. Basically, it was just a really mesmerizing picture to watch. In my opinion, it is also a really poectic picture with a hypnotising slow tempo which could bother impatient viewers but it did work for me, absolutely. Since then, I have been following Wim Wenders’s career and even though he has made many interesting features, no one of them really touched me like this one (even his following directing effort, ‘Der himmel über Berlin’, which is supposedly a masterpiece didn’t impress me that much).

Notes: I kept hearing about it for many years and, finally, I got my hands on it and I was mesmerized from the beginning until the end. Basically, I think it is one of the best gangster movies ever made, no more, no less. Seriously, it's a shame that Leone couldn't make anymore movies after this one but, on the other hand, I'd rather have a director like him who made a handful of amazing features than someone like Woody Allen who has basically become a factory making one disappointing flick after another every single year. So, indeed, the directing was just awesome and back then, Robert de Niro was at the top of his game and gave one of his best performances. Not only Leone didn't make another movie afterwards but the story behind the making of this masterpiece was just heartbreaking. Indeed, the poor fellow spent more than a decade working on this and when it was released, it was butchered by the studio, destroyed by the critics and a huge flop at the box-office. Eventually, Sergio Leone would die 5 years later and I'm not sure if he was still alive when the whole thing was restored to its original format.

Notes: Since it was David Lean's last directing effort, I was really eager to check it out. Well, even though it was pretty good, I can't say it reached the level of other Lean's masterpieces such as 'Lawrence of Arabia' and, to be honest, I was rather surprised that Roger Ebert loved it so much. I suspect that Ebert eventually loved this movie more than I did mostly because he had read the classic novel written by E.M. Forster. Obviously, I didn't read the book and, quite often, I was quite struggling to understand what this movie was getting at and the whole thing felt rather messy and confusing to me. I mean, was there actually a main character? There was more or less a plot but it was still rather murky to me. It doesn't mean that I didn't like this movie though. Indeed, Judy Davis, who apparently didn't get along at all with David Lean, was really good and it gave a good idea on why the English and the Indian didn't manage to get along during the time that India was still a colony and why it didn't work. It displayed also that India, which I have never visited, seems to be a country which is equally fascinating but also so disturbing for us coming from the West.