A Complete Review of Robert Zemeckis' work

Cast : Tom Hanks, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Lorraine Braco, Keegan-Michael Kay, Luke Evans

What was it about?
A puppet is brought to life by a fairy, who assigns him to lead a virtuous life in order to become a real boy.

My two cents:
Of course, like most of Disney’s recent live action adaptations of their classic animated features, the damned thing felt really misguided from the start. Especially in this case, it felt even more pointless since they followed so faithfully the animated version. Sure, they did tweak a few details here and there but these details had so very little added value, you wonder if a shot-by-shot remake wouldn’t have been more efficient. At least, it was visually not bad, even though I wasn’t so sure about the approach they chose for the main character. Sure, Pinocchio is supposed to be a wooden puppet but it felt as if the puppet was not completely finished yet, as if the wood was still raw, and it gave him a rather creepy look. Concerning the story, it has always been one of the weirdest and even more unsettling tales delivered by Disney, something you will never see anytime soon again coming from these guys. Here, with this modern adaptation, they tried to smooth out some of the dark edges somehow but the end-result was rather unsatisfying since they never settled for a specific tone. And, yet, it is still a fascinating tale and I just loved the relationship between Pinocchio and Geppetto, even in this really misguided new version.

My rating: 06/10

Check the full review

Unfortunately, I haven't seen this one yet...

Cast : Steve Carell, Eiza González, Merritt Wever, Gwendoline Christie, Janelle Monáe, Leslie Mann, Diane Kruger

What was it about?
A victim of a brutal attack finds a unique and beautiful therapeutic outlet to help him through his recovery process.

My two cents:
Zemeckis tried here again to adapt an acclaimed documentary into a feature film but, pretty much like with 'The Walk', the whole thing felt seriously misguided. I have to admit that I haven't seen 'Marwencol' yet but this movie definitely made me even more eager to see this weird and really intriguing documentary. Anyway, the whole thing seemed to be another excuse for Zemeckis to show his technical skills with motion-capture, a gimmick he has been trying to sell us for more than 15 years since 'The Polar Express' was released in 2004. However, the recreation of Mark Hogancamp's pictures with some motion-capture CGI was not such a bad idea though, at least, it wasn't the worst idea displayed in this movie. Indeed, the biggest issue was that they tried to turn a complex story with some really dark edges into some kind of whimsical Hollywood tale. I mean, the main reason 'Forrest Gump' did work (I'm not a huge fan though) was because it was actually a fantasy which was obviously not the case here and, yet, Zemeckis still tried to handle this story in a similar fashion. Hell, they even tried to shoehorn Mark Hogancamp into a rather pathetic romance with his new neighbour (obviously, a fictional character) as if to be turned into a trivial romantic comedy what was this amazing tale about Art, trauma and survival actually asked for. And, yet, in spite of Zemeckis completely misguided approach with this material, it remains such a fascinating story.

My rating: 06/10

Check the full review

Cast : Brad Pitt, Marion Cotillard, Lizzy Caplan, Matthew Goode

What was it about?
In 1942, a Canadian intelligence officer in North Africa encounters a female French Resistance fighter on a deadly mission behind enemy lines. When they reunite in London, their relationship is tested by the pressures of war.

My two cents:
Well, to be honest, even though it was a decent watch, I actually had a hard time to really care about the damned thing. I mean, I did like the 1st act in Casablanca but it was unfortunately slightly ruined by the fact that Brad Pitt wasn't convincing at all as a French native speaker. Sure, they tried to explain his poor accent with the fact that his character was Canadian but this explanation rather weak. I mean, a top spy, at this level of the game, should show up with an almost flawless accent. Then, the rest of the movie was not bad but still nothing really amazing. I mean, let's assume that Marianne Beauséjour was indeed a German spy, how the hell did she get her intel? Indeed, at this point, she had become a housewife, without any direct access to some sensitive information, and it was rather unlikely that Max Vartan would bring some classified files at home or discuss the details of his missions at the dinner table. Finally, even though Brad Pitt was fine as an experienced cool top spy, he wasn't really amazing as a man falling deeply in love, ready to risk everything for the love of his life. On the other hand, Marion Cotillard was once again quite impressive and she was pretty much pitch-perfect through the whole thing. Anyway, even if the whole thing didn't really work for me, it was still rather well made and fairly entertaining.

My rating: 06/10

Check the full review

Cast : Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ben Kingsley

What was it about?
In 1974, high-wire artist Philippe Petit recruits a team of people to help him realize his dream: to walk the immense void between the World Trade Center towers.

My two cents:
Since I really loved ‘Man on Wire’, of course, I was really eager to check this new dramatic version, even if I had some doubts. Indeed, the first issue with this movie was that ‘Man on Wire’ was such a flawless feature, it was quite an impossible task to provide something better and even though Robert Zemeckis delivered a decent effort, it never came near the level of this fascinating documentary. They were not helped by the fact they told exactly the same story with some minor details added or modified. The other mistake they made was to hire Joseph Gordon-Levitt to play the main character. Sure, Gordon-Levitt is one of the most interesting actors of his generation but it is obvious that it would have worked better with a young French actor. As a result, even though Gordon-Levitt gave a decent performance, he keeps switching through the whole thing between a decent but still not completely convincing French and a rather weird English with a fake French accent. Still, it remains a fascinating story, in fact it is one of my all-time favorite stories and, thanks to this movie, you get to spend some extra time with Petit on this wire which was just exhilarating, frightening and so awe-inspiring.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

Cast : Denzel Washington, Kelly Reilly, Bruce Greenwood, John Goodman, Don Cheadle, Melissa Leo

What was it about?
An airline pilot saves almost all his passengers on his malfunctioning airliner which eventually crashed, but an investigation into the accident reveals something troubling.

My two cents:
After experimenting for about a decade with motion-capture with some rather mixed results, Robert Zemeckis was back with a good old live action feature and I was therefore really curious about the damned thing. Eventually, I did like it but I don't think that Zemeckis was the right director for this material. I mean, it was quite a strong story and, at the center, you had a really impressive Denzel Washington who gave definitely here one of his best performances but, somehow, it didn’t completely grab me. I mean, it was some very dark material and I don't think that the guy behind such movies like 'Romancing the Stone', 'Back to the Future' and 'Who Framed Roger Rabbit' was really the best choice. Furthermore, the whole sub-plot involving Kelly Reilly was rather weak and she was there only to make sure that the main character had someone to talk to. To conclude, it didn’t really blow me away but even so, it is still a strong drama with a Denzel Washington on top of his game.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

Cast : Jim Carrey, Gary Oldman, Colin Firth, Bob Hoskins, Cary Elwes

What was it about?
An animated retelling of Charles Dickens' classic novel about a Victorian-era miser taken on a journey of self-redemption, courtesy of several mysterious Christmas apparitions.

My two cents:
Personally, I think it was not as good as ‘Beowulf’ which was easily the best of the motion-capture features he has directed but it still managed to be better than the creepy ‘The Polar Express’, and I honestly rather enjoyed this feature. Indeed, the animation was quite awesome (thank God, we didn’t see it in 3D which wasn’t yet compulsory at the time...), it looked really good to me and even the story was pretty entertaining. Jim Carrey also seemed to have fun with Ebenezer Scrooge. Basically, the only real issue I had was the fact that Zemeckis chose not only again another story based on Christmas but also one very old tale with had been told already in so many different versions. Personally, I’m not a huge fan of this classic story and since it was really faithful, there weren’t much surprises during the whole thing. Anyway, since it was already his 3rd underperforming effort using this technology, Robert Zemeckis seems to have dropped this genre (at least for now). Even though it was nothing really amazing, this movie was still pretty impressive visually speaking.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

Cast : Ray Winstone, Crispin Glover, Angelina Jolie, Anthony Hopkins, John Malkovich, Brendan Gleeson, Robin Wright, Alison Lohman

What was it about?
The warrior Beowulf must fight and defeat the monster Grendel who is terrorizing towns, and later, Grendel's mother, who begins killing out of revenge.

My two cents:
Even though it was poorly received, I was actually positively surprised and I thought it was much better than ‘The Polar Express’ and ‘A Christmas Carol’. Indeed, this time, I thought that the story was really cool, intriguing and it was definitely entertaining (at the time, it was the first version of this ancient tale I ever saw). Once again, the animation was very good and really fit the story. Still, I must admit, the human characters still looked pretty creepy sometimes but the technology has been really improved when you compare it to ‘The Polar Express’. Personally, I always thought that it was pretty neat that Zemeckis was experimenting with the motion-capture (even though you could argue that 3 movies might have been a little too much) and if you should watch one of those, you should definitely pick this one. To conclude, I don’t think it was that bad at all and I actually liked the damned thing.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

Cast : Tom Hanks, Josh Hutcherson

What was it about?
On Christmas Eve, a doubting boy boards a magical train that's headed to the North Pole and Santa Claus's home.

My two cents:
Personally, I always had some rather mixed feelings about this flick. Indeed, many people really despised it when it was released and, indeed, all the characters looked pretty spooky which was even more awkward since it was a family feature. Furthermore, I really had a hard time to care about the plot which was way too over-sentimental for my taste. Still, I always find it interesting when a director tries to experiment with something new and I think Zemeckis should be praised for that. Indeed, except for the human characters, the whole thing looked pretty damned impressive and there were some dazzling action pieces. Basically, it was a half-baked experiment but like any experiment, you should respect the people who tried to push the envelop a little more.

My rating: 06/10

Check the full review

Cast : Tom Hanks, Helen Hunt

What was it about?
A FedEx executive must transform himself physically and emotionally to survive a crash landing on a deserted island.

My two cents:
The opinions seem to be rather mixed about this flick nowadays but, before it was released, there was actually a big buzz about it because it was the first time since ‘Forrest Gump’ that Robert Zemeckis and Tom Hanks were working together. Eventually, this time again, Hanks would be nominated for the Best Actor in a Leading Role Academy Award (the guy was really on fire back in those days). Anyway, even though I don’t think it was really amazing, I still liked the damned thing, more than ‘Forrest Gump’ as a matter of fact. Indeed, the first and last sections were pretty weak and the whole thing was not really original but the whole time that Tom Hanks sat alone on this island, only with this volleyball to talk to, was pretty impressive. To conclude, it is basically a rather conventional survivor tale but it is actually very well made and pretty damned entertaining.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

Cast : Harrison Ford, Michelle Pfeiffer, Miranda Otto, Amber Valletta

What was it about?
The wife of a university research scientist believes that her lakeside Vermont home is haunted by a ghost - or that she's losing her mind.

My two cents:
Basically, it is a rather straight-forward thriller which was sometimes compared to Hitchcok's work, even though it never reached that level. Apparently, Zemeckis filmed this while production on 'Cast Away' was shut down. Indeed, Tom Hanks needed to lose some weight for his character. Anyway, I thought it was a pretty good flick with some solid directing. Indeed, Zemeckis managed to create a nice tensed mood. Furthermore, back in those days, Michelle Pfeiffer was a major A list actress and provided a solid performance. Concerning Harrison Ford, I wasn't completely convinced though. I mean, it was really neat to see him in a thriller like this which was something really different than his usual fair and his character was also really interesting and completely different than his typical heroes. Unfortunately, it was pretty obvious that there was something fishy about this guy and that was the main issue with this movie. Indeed, it is all mood and no substance whatsoever and, as a result, even though the whole thing was rather entertaining, it was also highly predictable and not really interesting. Still, it remains a solid thriller.

My rating: 06/10

Check the full review

Cast : Jodie Foster, Jena Malone, Matthew McConaughey, James Woods, Tom Skerritt, William Fichtner, John Hurt, Angela Bassett, David Morse Jake Busey, Rob Lowe

What was it about?
Dr. Ellie Arroway, after years of searching, finds conclusive radio proof of intelligent aliens, who send plans for a mysterious machine.

My two cents:
This is one of those movies I really need to re-watch. Indeed, as you can see with my rating, the first time I watched it, I thought it was not bad but it didn’t really convince me either. But ever since I watched it, it keeps coming back in my mind from time to time so I really need to give it a 2nd shot. Anyway, Jodie Foster was pretty good, as usual, and Robert Zemeckis definitely delivered some decent directing but the main issue, at least from what I remember, is that the whole thing was just a really long built-up (the movie itself was about 150 minutes). Basically, it takes forever before Jodie Foster finally goes on her journey which was, I must admit, pretty impressive. Still, I can’t shake the idea that I missed the point the first time I watched it (the fact that Roger Ebert really loved this movie must be another reason) and I will definitely check this one once again when I get the opportunity.

My rating: 06/10

Check the full review

Cast : Tom Hanks, Robin Wright, Gary Sinise, Sally Field, Haley Joel Osment

What was it about?
Forrest Gump, while not intelligent, has accidentally been present at many historic moments, but his true love, Jenny Curran, eludes him.

My two cents:
It is one of those movies that has created through the years some pretty strong reactions. Indeed, on one hand, some people think that this movie is just great, a timeless classic and one of the best movies ever made while, on the other hand, there is a whole bunch of people who think that this movie is not that great all and that it is actually one of the most overrated features ever made. Personally, I’m afraid I belong to the 2nd group. First of all, the main issue I always had with this movie was with its lead character, the infamous Forrest Gump. I mean, the guy is just so stupid and irritating !!! I know he is supposed to be touching and all but it didn't work for me at all. It is just so bad and pretty offensive towards mentally impaired people… I know many people see this film as some kind of fairytale and I have been told so many times I shouldn't take it so seriously and I dig that but it just doesn't work for me. To conclude, to be honest, it is actually a rather well made feature, it is not bad at all and actually rather entertaining but it is far from being a great movie and it is, in my opinion, terribly overrated.

My rating: 06/10

Check the full review

Cast : Meryl Streep, Goldie Hawn, Bruce Willis, Isabella Rossellini

What was it about?
When a woman learns of an immortality treatment, she sees it as a way to outdo her long-time rival.

My two cents:
When I was a kid, about 12 years old, I saw this flick at the movie theater when it was released. To be honest, I'm not sure if it was really appropriate or anything for me to watch it at that age but I had a good time and I eventually never forgot it. Eventually, I watched it again 20 years later and I thought it was still pretty good. Basically, it is a very dark and sardonic comedy with a pretty cool cast and they all delivered some decent performances. Furthermore, the special effects which were quite awesome when I was a kid still hold up pretty good nowadays (You can say whatever you want about Robert Zemeckis but the guy is and has always been a special effects wizard). I must admit that the story was rather messy and it is not surprising since the film underwent some major re-editing after negative feedback was received during the test screenings. I guess, I like it above all out of nostalgia but I still think it is a nice piece of black comedy.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

Cast : Michael J. Fox, Christopher, Elisabeth Shue

What was it about?
Enjoying a peaceable existence in 1885, Doctor Emmet Brown is about to be killed by Buford "Mad Dog" Tannen. Marty McFly travels back in time to save his friend.

My two cents:
To be honest, I never really cared about the 'Back to the Future' franchise and, with this last installment, it was even more obvious. I mean, I did like those movies, they are absolutely fun and entertaining but I never really understood the cult surrounding them, even when I was a kid. If we had a time-machine, I always thought it would be really neat to see the future but, with these movies, there is always this obsession with the past which I never really understood and always found slightly underwhelming. This time, they went back even further in the past and the whole thing was actually pretty much a goofy Western. Still, Michael J. Fox was really charismatic in those days, Christopher Lloyd was still one of the best crazy professors and Zemeckis as usual delivered some solid directing so, all in all, it remains a decent popcorn feature, no more, no less.

My rating: 06/10

Check the full review

Cast : Michael J. Fox, Christopher Lloyd, Elisabeth Shue, Billy Zane

What was it about?
After visiting 2015, Marty McFly must repeat his visit to 1955 to prevent disastrous changes to 1985... without interfering with his first trip.

My two cents:
Finally, after 4 years, they decided to continue the wacky adventures of Marty McFly and Doctor Emmett Brown and it was once again a big success. At last, those guys were actually travelling to the future and I was expecting a lot from this flick. I remember, when I was a kid, I just loved this scene where Marty McFly gets some futuristic clothes and this cool hoverboard. I thought it looked awesome and I couldn't wait to see what will happen next. Unfortunately, they only spent maybe 15 minutes in 2015 and the rest of the movie was about chasing some sports almanac which was rather underwhelming in my opinion. Apparently, they tried to reduce the scenes in the future to the maximum since they didn't have the budget or technical means to fully display this futuristic world. I have to admit though, it remains a cool and entertaining flick but I was expecting a little bit more from it.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

Cast : Bob Hoskins, Christopher Lloyd, Kathleen Turner

What was it about?
A toon hating detective is a cartoon rabbit's only hope to prove his innocence when he is accused of murder.

My two cents:
As you may have noticed, as a kid, I kind of missed on the whole frenzy about 'Back to the Future' but I sure didn't miss a thing about this flick. Indeed, I was just a little bit older than my own daughter when I watched it in the theater and I just loved the damned thing. Indeed, Zemeckis tried to make a convincing mix of animation and live-action and, at my young age, I thought it was just mind-blowing. Back then, I even had a book about this movie collecting all the stickers. Basically, I was a huge fan. Of course, later in my life, I had to re-watch it with my kids (that's the great thing when you get some kids of your own, you get an excuse to watch again all those childhood classics) and I was still impressed. I must admit, the whole detective story was maybe not that great after all, but visually, after all these years, it remained a great technical achievement. Above all, it is a really fun flick and probably the best thing Zemeckis has made in his whole career.

My rating: 08/10

Check the full review

Cast : Michael J. Fox, Christopher Lloyd, Crispin Glover, Billy Zane

What was it about?
A teenager is accidentally sent 30 years into the past in a time-traveling DeLorean invented by his friend, Dr. Emmett Brown, and must make sure his high-school-age parents unite in order to save his own existence.

My two cents:
When I was a kid, I loved all the basic stuff. You know, Bruce Lee, Clint Eastwood, James Bond, Star Wars, Indiana Jones,... However, somehow, I never really connected with this flick. I mean, I did like it, that's for sure, but I never thought it was really mind-blowing and, I guess, it has probably to do with the story. Basically, you have this kid who finds a time-travelling super car and, instead of discovering the future and some fantastic world, he goes back to the 50's in the USA. I don't know, maybe it was pretty neat for all the American kids watching this flick, but I didn't care much about the time period they picked. Sure, it was entertaining but when I think about time-travelling, my first thought is not really 'I would love to go back 30 years back in time and see my parents when they were my age'. Still, it remains a huge classic and a must-see for any decent movie buff.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

Cast : Michael Douglas, Kathleen Turner, Danny DeVito

What was it about?
A romance writer sets off to Colombia to ransom her kidnapped sister, and soon finds herself in the middle of a dangerous adventure.

My two cents:
In my opinion, 30 years later, this movie still holds up pretty good. I mean, it could have been a lazy Indiana Jones copycat but they succeeded in including enough new elements to make it fun and entertaining to watch. First of all, Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner had some awesome chemistry and they made up a great duo (they would eventually make 2 more movies together). It was also a nice reminder that Michael Douglas is actually a pretty good actor and is actually able to play something else than his usual arrogant rich SOB. I thought that the first half was just hilarious with Turner giving a typical fish-out-of-water performance and Douglas portraying an adventurer who is even less heroic than Indiana Jones. I must say that during the second half it tends to loose steam but the whole thing was still enjoyable to watch.

My rating: 07/10

Check the full review

Cast : Kurt Russell, Jack Warden

What was it about?
When the owner of a struggling used car lot is killed, it's up to the lot's hot-shot salesman to save the property from falling into the hands of the owner's ruthless brother and used-car rival.

My two cents:
Before making all those big blockbusters, very often pushing the envelop visually speaking, Robert Zemeckis made this rather modest comedy. Many consider this flick an underrated and forgotten gem and even though I thought it was a decent effort, I can't say I was really blown away by the whole thing. First of all, I have to admit there were many things to enjoy and I really liked this idea of a 3rd rate user cars lot with some 3rd rather sellers. Furthermore, it was also nice to see Kurt Russell doing something else than his usual tough guys and he gave a very good performances. So, I enjoyed most of it but it's too bad they didn't dare to make it even darker, even more cynical. I mean, the whole thing honestly remains rather harmless and, therefore, never reached its potential. Still, it remains a wild and entertaining comedy.

My rating: 06/10

Check the full review

Cast : Nancy Allen

What was it about?
Six teenagers from New Jersey run off to go to a Beatles concert to meet their idols, despite not having tickets. Along the way, they learn new things about friendship and growing up.

My two cents:
Well, the damned thing definitely had some potential. Indeed, even though I have never been a huge fan of the Beatles, it was a great idea to focus on their 1st broadcast concert in the US as it was a major event in Pop culture history. Unfortunately, the concept had also some serious limitations. Indeed, the biggest issue was to make these hysterical fans interesting and Zemeckis never managed to make them really entertaining. Basically, they gave some rather tedious jokes at their expense and it made the whole experience seem rather ridiculous. The best example would be the scene when Nancy Allen's character ends up in the Beatles's hotel room which was rather creepy and cringe-inducing to behold. I think it would have worked better if one of these kids would have been a more sensible bemused bystander going along to witness this whole circus. Instead, they went for some rather hostile Italian American who turned out to be even more annoying and moronic than the Beatles hardcore fan. Anyway, in spite of its flaws, it was still a decent watch and I think it is worth a look.

My rating: 06/10

Check the full review