A Complete Review of Peter Jackson's work

What was it about?
Documentary about the music group The Beatles featuring in-studio footage that was shot in early 1969 for the 1970 feature film 'Let It Be.'

My two cents:
To be honest, since I'm not a huge fan of the Beatles, this documentary series was never a high priority for me. If it would have been a movie, I would have probably watch it much sooner but the fact that it was almost 8 hrs long definitely made me push this aside for a while. However, since I kept hearing some really good things about the damned thing, I thought I should finally watch it after all. Well, I wasn’t disappointed, that’s for sure, in fact, it was probably one of the best things I have seen in a very long time, no less than that. Indeed, basically, it felt like watching ‘Big Brother’ but if this TV-show would have been focusing on some of the best musicians that ever lived instead of some really vapid and uninspiring individuals. Indeed, you get such an in-depth and intimate look on the most famous band that ever existed. Of course, back then, it wasn’t exactly the happiest time for them as a band but, as a result, you get to see all of them going through so many feelings and behaviors, it was just so fascinating to behold. I still can’t say I really love their music but it was just awesome to see them at work and I have to admit that this ‘Get Back’ tune is so damned catchy.

My rating: 09/10

What was it about?
A documentary about World War I with never-before-seen footage to commemorate the centennial of the end of the war.

My two cents:
First of all, there is no denying that this movie was and still is a technical marvel. Indeed, when you hear these veterans, it felt as if they had recorded their testimony just a week ago but, even if the Great War didn’t kill them, they are all certainly dead by now and they had been recorded decades ago. And, of course, there was this awe-inspiring moment during which you smoothly switch from a black-and-while little square to a full colour panoramic screen which was probably one of the most exhilarating things I have seen on a screen. Even though it might seem like a useless gimmick, I thought it was actually terribly effective and it felt like a time machine brought you back 100 years ago directly in these damned trenches. And yet, even if this movie was technically pretty much flawless, I was somehow not completely sold. Indeed, even though the title was pretty much spot-on and might suggest that it would be a rather dark and depressing movie displaying the horror of the so-called ‘Great’ war, I thought that the tone turned out to be rather light, even almost cheerful at some points. Seriously, for the 1st half hour, we had these veterans claiming that they basically had a great time there or, at least, that there was nothing wrong about doing your duty. As a result, it felt pretty much like watching some propaganda piece. Of course, towards the end, suddenly, they all claimed that it was horrible and that it should be the last war but, in my opinion, they should have toned down the ‘enthusiasm’ at the beginning and spend more time on the dreadful impact this war eventually had on all these British soldiers. Anyway, even if I didn’t really care for the approach they chose, it was still a very interesting movie.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

Cast: Ian McKellen, Martin Freeman, James Nesbitt, Orlando Bloom, Evangeline Lilly, Lee Pace, Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving, Christopher Lee, Ian Holm, Luke Evans, Stephen Fry, Benedict Cumberbatch

What was it about?
Bilbo and Company are forced to engage in a war against an array of combatants and keep the Lone Mountain from falling into the hands of a rising darkness.

My two cents:
At last, we are done with Middle-Earth. I know, it might sound as if I didn't like the damned thing but the point is I definitely had some mixed feelings about it. Indeed, 2 years ago, when I went to see the first installment of this new trilogy, I was really excited. Unfortunately, it became clear at some point that this new tale would never reach the same level of awesomness. The main issue is that this story was never meant to be so epic, it was supposed to be a cute children tale, a warm-up, before the massive 'The Lord of the Rings' but Peter Jackson really insisted that these prequels would reach the same level so he stretched them as much as possible. And yet, I still really enjoyed the damned thing. Indeed, I thought it really looked gorgeous and even though many complained about the 3D HFR, I thought it worked really well and I think it actually enhanced the fairy tale quality of this flick.

My rating: 08/10

Check the full review

Cast: Ian McKellen, Martin Freeman, James Nesbitt, Orlando Bloom, Evangeline Lilly, Lee Pace, Cate Blanchett, Benedict Cumberbatch, Luke Evans, Stephen Fry

What was it about?
The dwarves, along with Bilbo Baggins and Gandalf the Grey, continue their quest to reclaim Erebor, their homeland, from Smaug. Bilbo Baggins is in possession of a mysterious and magical ring.

My two cents:
Honestly, I was rather skeptical about this flick for a while. Indeed, the more I thought about the first installment, the more I thought that my rating was a little bit too generous. However, after 5 minutes, I have to admit it, I was sold again. Indeed, what a spectacle! The first positive thing is that I really enjoyed the 3D 48 fps version (in IMAX again). Last year, I wasn’t sure about this technique but, this time, it looked just gorgeous . Concerning the story, it was really solid and entertaining but, by now, it is becoming quite obvious that this trilogy will never reach the epicness of the LOTR. The first weakness is that everything has a feeling of déjà vu, most of what they come across (the spiders, the hidden door, the elf city,…) was already displayed in the previous trilogy. Still, it was pretty cool to see good old Legolas and Middle Earth remains a fascinating world, I’m a huge fan.

My rating: 08/10

Check the full review

Cast: Ian McKellen, Martin Freeman, Ian Holm, Elijah Wood, Hugo Weaving, Cate Blanchett, Christopher Lee, Andy Serkis, James Nesbitt, Lee Pace, Benedict Cumberbatch

What was it about?
A younger and more reluctant Hobbit, Bilbo Baggins, sets out on a "unexpected journey" to the Lonely Mountain with a spirited group of Dwarves to reclaim a their stolen mountain home from a dragon named Smaug.

My two cents:
After 10 years, we were finally allowed to go back to Middle Earth and I personally thoroughly enjoyed it. I find it rather funny to read some lackluster reviews about this movie. I mean, when 'The Fellowship' was released, it was exactly the same. But how can you judge a story when you have seen only 1/3 of it?!? Anyway, I thought it was just awesome to join Gandalf in a new adventure and there were some quite amazing action scenes. Personally, I saw it in IMAX 3D 48 fps and it was quite overwhelming in a positive but also negative way. I mean, it looked really impressive but it took me at least 30 minutes to get used to it and 3 hours later, I still had a huge headache. Anyway, I really had a great time (I saw it with my wife and two step-children which made it even cooler) and I can't wait to see the following installment next year.

My rating: 08/10

Check the full review

Cast: Saoirse Ronan, Mark Wahlberg, Rachel Weisz, Susan Sarandon, Stanley Tucci, Michael Imperioli

What was it about?
Centers on a young girl who has been murdered and watches over her family - and her killer - from purgatory. She must weigh her desire for vengeance against her desire for her family to heal.

My two cents:
After the fairly disappointing 'King Kong', Peter Jackson came back 4 years later with an even more disappointing feature. Indeed, at first, while still in production, it generated some Oscar buzz but, as soon as it was released, it gathered some mixed reviews and performed poorly at the box-office. Personally, I can't say it didn't deserve it, I'm afraid. I mean, it's not that the movie is actually really bad. As you can see, I gave it a positive rating because I thought it was visually really appealing and the actors all gave some very strong performances. In my opinion, it is pretty obvious that Peter Jackson wanted to recreate the same success he had with 'Heavenly Creatures', mixing drama and fantasy, but this time it was just a failure. Indeed, the tone is never really convincing and the fantasy scenes which should enhance the whole story actually dragged it down constantly. In spite of its flaws, it remains an intriguing feature but don’t expect anything remotely mind-blowing.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

Cast: Naomi Watts, Jack Black, Adrien Brody, Thomas Kretschmann, Colin Hanks, Andy Serkis, Jamie Bell

What was it about?
In 1933 New York, an overly ambitious movie producer coerces his cast and hired ship crew to travel to mysterious Skull Island, where they encounter Kong, a giant ape who is immediately smitten with leading lady Ann Darrow.

My two cents:
Following his tremendous success with the LOTR trilogy, Peter Jackson joined the club of the very few directors (including James Cameron, George Lucas, Steven Spielberg and Christopher Nolan) who can do whatever they want and spend as much money as they want. For Jackson, it was the opportunity to fulfill his life long dream of remaking 'King Kong'. And that was probably the main issue with this movie. I mean, except for Peter Jackson, were there really so many people expecting a new 3 hour long version of this story? I'm not so sure and eventually, in spite of the huge buzz around this movie, it wasn't really a huge success. Personally, I thought it was pretty good and, above all, it looked really awesome with some pretty amazing set pieces but that's something we have been accustomed to with Peter Jackson. I guess I'll need to check it out once again to make up my mind for good.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

Cast: Elijah Wood, Ian McKellen, Viggo Mortensen, Andy Serkis, Sean Astin, Orlando Bloom, John Rhys-Davies, Cate Blanchett, Dominic Monaghan, Billy Boyd, Bernard Hill, Ian Holm, Miranda Otto, Liv Tyler, Karl Urban, Hugo Weaving, David Wenham

What was it about?
Aragorn leads the World of Men against Sauron's army to draw the dark lord's gaze from Frodo and Sam who are on the doorstep of Mount Doom with the One Ring.

My two cents:
Like every year, I went back from Holland to France on Christmas holiday and I went to see this movie with my best buddy and some other friends. Personally, I really liked 'The Fellowship', I liked even more 'The Two Towers' and I thought this one was the best of them. Even though some complain that there were too many endings (and indeed I think that all those multiple endings took at least 30 minutes), I thought it was such a great conclusion. I mean, the action scenes were awesome but there were also many memorable bits. For example, each time I see the scene where Sam carries Frodo on top of Mount Doom, it just breaks my heart completely ('I can't carry it for you... but I can carry you!'). In my opinion, this whole trilogy is based on a great built-up and this final installment is just a huge and mighty climax, ending one of the greatest tales put on the silver screen.

My rating: 09/10

Check the full review

Cast: Elijah Wood, Ian McKellen, Sean Astin, Dominic Monaghan, Billy Boyd, Viggo Mortensen, Orlando Bloom, John Rhys-Davies, Andy Serkis, Cate Blanchett, Christopher Lee, Liv Tyler, Karl Urban, Bernard Hill, Miranda Otto, Hugo Weaving, Brad Dourif, David Wenham

What was it about?
While Frodo and Sam edge closer to Mordor with the help of the shifty Gollum, the divided fellowship makes a stand against Sauron's new ally, Saruman, and his hordes of Isengard.

My two cents:
Back then, I was just living in the Netherlands and I came back to France for the Christmas Holidays. This time, my best buddy was just dying to watch it, we planned to watch this one and we went once again with a group of friends. This time, I was really starting to feel the epicness of the whole thing and, in my opinion, it was better than 'The Fellowship'. Indeed, this time, there was no need to introduce the characters and most of the movie was filled with some amazing battle scenes. There was still one major character who was finally properly introduced and it was Gollum. It was the first time that such a 3 dimensional and compelling character was created through motion capture and CGI and it was trully mind-blowing. It was totally revolutionary and we should give credit to both Jackson and Serkis for this amazing work. So, it was better than the previous installment but, of course, those 3 movies should be seen as one big huge epic story and, as such, it is quite incredible.

My rating: 08/10

Check the full review

Cast: Peter Jackson

What was it about?
It is a mockumentary which details the prodigious life of "lost" filmmaker Colin McKenzie and his incredible advances that were lost to history...until now.

My two cents:
I thought this flick was a decent mockumentary. It is pretty obvious from the start that it is a fake and I can’t believe that some people would fall for it. Still, I thought it was pretty enjoyable and there were some hilarious bits here and there. I thought also that the Black and White footage was pretty awesome and really convincing and it was also pretty neat to see Peter Jackson so often not only behind the camera but also in front of it. So, it is nothing really mind-blowing but it remains a pretty cool mockumentary.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

Cast: Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, Sean Bean, Cate Blanchett, Orlando Bloom, Billy Boyd, Ian Holm, Christopher Lee, Andy Serkis, Ian McKellen, Dominic Monaghan, Viggo Mortensen, John Rhys-Davies, Liv Tyler, Hugo Weaving

What was it about?
When Gandalf discovers the Ring is in fact the One Ring of the Dark Lord Sauron, Frodo must make an epic quest to the Cracks of Doom in order to destroy it! However he does not go alone. He is joined by Gandalf, Legolas the elf, Gimli the Dwarf, Aragorn, Boromir and his three Hobbit friends Merry, Pippin and Samwise.

My two cents:
Back then I was still living in France and I managed to convince my friends to watch it when it was released. And it was f*cking priceless, at the end, my best buddy who knew nothing about this trilogy looked at me, kind of desperate, 'is it the end? Come on! Are you telling me I have to wait a whole year to know the rest?!? I want to see where it goes from there!!!'. Anyway, I must admit, the first time I watched it, I wasn't exactly blown away. I mean, it looked awesome and I was entertained during the whole thing, that's for sure, but, basically, I thought it was a very long introduction before the real thing started. After re-watching it many times, I tend to appreciate it more but I still think the other 2 installments are better. That's also the skill of Peter Jackson who managed to make each installment bigger than its predecessor. Anyway, as a stand alone movie, it is really good but as one third of a great epic tale, it is really awesome, definitely.

My rating: 08/10

Check the full review

Cast: Michael J. Fox

What was it about?
When you go through a traumatic experience, it kind of alters your attitude.

My two cents:
If I remember correctly, I saw this movie when it came out in the movie theater. For Peter Jackson, it was his first movie oriented towards the mainstream audience but he still retained his dark humor and it was much appreciated. Furthermore, if for Peter Jackson, it was his last movie before reaching the VIP section in Hollywood, on the other hand, for Michael J. For, it was his swan song since it would be his last leading part. Basically, it is a rather standard ghost story reminiscent of 'Ghostbusters' but it was pretty funny and entertaining enough. I remember, back then, I was quite blown away by the special effects and, 16 years later, they still look pretty awesome. To conclude, it is rather forgotten nowadays but it is actually pretty good.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

What was it about?
The film deals with the career of a supposedly forgotten pioneer of international cinema, Colin McKenzie, who was allegedly born in rural New Zealand in 1888.

My two cents:
Peter Jackson made this movie more than 5 years before making ‘The Lord of the Rings’ , just after ‘ Heavenly Creatures’ and just before ‘ The Frighteners’ . Back then, he wasn’t yet a huge Hollywood mogul such as Steven Spielberg, Georges Lucas or James Cameron. He was just an exciting upcoming director from New Zealand making his small movies and most of the mainstream audience had never heard of him. Of course, in the 2000’s, this all changed, for good or bad. Anyway, I thought this flick was a decent mockumentary, even if it was pretty obvious from the start that it was a fake and I can’t believe that some people would fall for it. Still, I thought it was pretty enjoyable and there were some hilarious bits here and there. I thought also that the Black and White footage was pretty awesome and really convincing. It was also pretty neat to see Peter Jackson so often not only behind the camera but also in front of it.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

Cast : Kate Winslet, Melanie Lynskey

What was it about?
Two girls have an intense fantasy life; their parents, concerned the fantasy is too intense, separate them, and the girls take revenge.

My two cents:
This movie seriously came out of nowhere. Indeed, before that, Peter Jackson was the King of the Nasties, making some crude but hilarious horror comedies. However, with this feature, he suddenly shifted gears and made a very compelling and original fantastic thriller/drama. Who could have imagine that a director expert in vomit feasts could make such a sensitive portrait of female adolescence?!? At this point, it was pretty obvious that Jackson was a really skilled director that we should reckon with in the future. Not only the directing was impressive but we shouldn't forget about the tremendous acting as well. Indeed, even though Melanie Lynskey never managed to breakthrough, she was actually really good in this, and, of course, for the great Kate Winslet, it was a really amazing acting debut and the beginning of a great career full of many other amazing performances.

My rating: 08/10

Check the full review

What was it about?
A young man's mother is bitten by a Sumatran rat-monkey. She gets sick and dies, at which time she comes back to life, killing and eating dogs, nurses, friends, and neighbors.

My two cents:
It was the first movie directed by Peter Jackson which I had the pleasure to see and I really loved it. The first time I watched it, I must have been 13-14 years old and I had definitely never seen something similar before. I mean, such a combination of horror and comedy was quite unknown to me at that point. Above all, the nastiness, the over-the-topness of the whole thing was just really impressive. I remember watching this thinking 'How could they get away with this?!?' but, then, a scene even worse would show up and it kept going on and on... Back then, I watched it many times and it became a huge cult-classic for us. It was the last time Peter Jackson made something in this genre and I wonder if he'll ever do again something similar in the future but I highly doubt it. Too bad...

My rating: 08/10

Check the full review

What was it about?
Heidi, the star of the "Meet The Feebles Variety Hour" discovers her lover Bletch, The Walrus, is cheating on her, and with all the world waiting for the show the assorted co-stars must contend with their own problems.

My two cents:
It was the last movie directed by Peter Jackson which I hadn’t seen and it is easily the weirdest, most messed up movie he has made so far. Basically, it is pretty much like the Muppets on acids. Indeed, those puppets smoke, drink, take drugs, urinate, vomit, have sex and even shoot some porn. Honestly, I never really cared about the Muppets but I thought those were pretty awesome. I mean, they did look pretty ugly but they were quite hilarious. On the downside, I must admit that the whole thing was pretty random as some weird and outrageous scenes take place the one after the other without much continuity but I still thought it was actually pretty neat.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

Cast : Peter Jackson

What was it about?
The population of a small town disappears and is replaced by aliens that chase human flesh for their intergalactic fast-food chain.

My two cents:
When I was a kid back in France, when I used to go to the videostore to rent some videos, I would always get petrified by the VHS cover of this movie. I was just 10 years old or something like that and I thought there was something really unsettling about it. Eventually, it took me about 8 more years to finally get the nerves to watch it and, eventually, it was not as hardcore as I thought it would be. Anyway, for Peter Jackson, it was the start of a very interesting career. Basically, like some other directors like Christopher Nolan, David Lynch or Kevin Smith, he made it on the week-ends with his friends and a micro-budget but he still managed to get enough attention and his film career was launched. Personally, I thought it was pretty good, especially considering that it was his directing debut but it was still a little too random and messy for my taste. Still, it remains a fun movie.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review