Reviews written by registered user
jlpicard1701E

Send an IMDb private message to this author or view their message board profile.

Page 1 of 5: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

46 reviews in total

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

In one word? Awful. In more words? Terrible, horrible, stupid, dumb, stale, cheese... I could go on forever, but for crying out loud, what were the movie makers thinking? Special effects (CGI) of yesteryear and action scenes that were just ridiculous. Even the "tentacles" were better in "20,000 Leagues under the Sea". This movie takes every cliché' of other filmed material and mashes them together to come up with a completely ridiculous "Navy & Marines" would be action caper. Linda Hamilton must have aged badly, if she has to appear in such a bad "C" class movie. Even John Savage, of all people, appears as the President of the U.S. of A. and despite making an effort to go through the footsteps of other better fit actors in a long line of emulators, falls short and looking out of place here. The rest of the Cast? Well, personally I have seen better acting in the first year acting classes at Strasberg than here. I wonder if these were even actors. They all looked as if they had been dragged in by force, given a hasty script to memorize and then sent out in the frail of battle. This is not even Science Fiction, since Science Fiction, if well made by people who actually understand the meaning of the definition, should be at least based on some scientific sound fact. "Bermuda Tentacles" is nothing of the sort. It is more a mixture of Fantasy and Horror movie knit together, but a very long shot from movies like "Alien" or even "Predator". There's a scene in which our heroes have to rescue the President aboard a super speedy submarine. In order to return to the surface, they go so very fast, that in a real world these people would have imploded, but nothing happens. At the end of the movie a crew takes off with a Huey chopper to destroy the Alien ship that surfaces from the Ocean Bed. After they have done the deed, if someone did notice, the chopper miraculously changes into a Sea Hawk Helicopter, and then again into a Huey... Oo-rah indeed! If I were either a Navy or Marine member, I would be ashamed to be depicted in such a shabby and stupid movie. Those Corps should be honored in a different way.

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Every now and then, amazingly, television can dish up something really worthwhile to watch.

For many years I thought that the best TV productions were those of the past (see "The Twilight Zone", "Star Trek", "Attack", "Bonanza", "Kojak", "Ironside", "M*A*S*H", just to name a few).

Yet, there are, to this day, some shows that really stand out from your usual ones. "The Blacklist" is one of them.

I don't know if it is for the massive presence of James Spader in the leading role (who never ceases to surprise me for his versatility as an actor, ever since he starred in "Stargate", to the more recent effort with William Shatner and Candice Bergen in "Boston Legal"), that impresses me in this latest product, but fact is, that the entire series so far (13 episodes) has started like a rocket and so far maintains its "true grit".

An original premise, interesting stories and a very natural acting makes this very commendable and highly worth watching.

It cannot compare to other shows of this kind, such as, for instance "N.C.I.S." or indeed "The X-Files" and "Fringe" (which are, at least for the last two, more Sci-Fi ventures, rather than being pure Investigative shows).

"The Blacklist" can, if ever, be compared to movies such as "The Bourne Identity", only that instead of the CIA, we have the FBI as the center of attention.

But make no mistake. This is not just a pure Action/Adventure series, although there are some components of this. It is a more subtle treatment, and facts are served in due time, with a dosage worth the best of meals being served in the more refined of restaurants.

In fact, every episode leaves you with a wish for more, like a second or third serving. And the more you "bite" into it, the more you are demanding. The series never disappoint on this point. Every single time it hits a nerve, a different theme and a different threat.

It is like having an Italian meal one day, Chinese the next, and perhaps Mexican the next.

It is very palatable.

According to what IMDb lists on its pages, "The Blacklist" will have another nine episodes to end Season One, followed by a full Second Season.

I really hope so. It is a delight to watch, and not just for James Spader, but also for the rest of the cast that keeps in step with him and works very well as a team.

If the writers keep up the good work, and the Networks will support it to the fullest, I am certain it will develop into something very special.

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I am not, as many movie-goers, a fan of all French movies, especially not these days, when every French movie-maker tends to "ape" the Hollywood stream.

Yet, said that, occasionally, there are some tiny gems that stand out from the rest, and this is just the case with "La Proie" (English - The Prey).

It starts very slowly and at first it seems your common jailbird caper. A prison, two convicts and confined rooms pervaded by harsh conditions, but soon things start to happen which turn everything upside-down.

The question then is, who is the Prey and who the Hunted.

In a very tightly knit thriller, action upon action, cut upon cut, the story unfolds in front of our eyes and keeps us biting our nails to see what happens next.

Suddenly, nothing and nobody is or stays what he or she once was. The innocent is guilty and the guilty is the innocent, but who and when and how they turn to be like that is just a matter of turns in the storyline.

The end of it all is also a surprise. Not your usual Happy Ending a la Hollywood, but rather a "staccato" ending, in which one tends to say, "well, it's a French movie and therefore it has to end tragically", ah... but wait, there is a surprise, an Easter Egg if you want and you leave with a sense of satisfaction after an intense ride on the edge of a razor blade.

Granted, some scenes could remind us to a certain pace in the famed James Bond movies, in which certain characters jump from bridges and land unharmed on a platform, yank themselves out of a window on the third floor only to land unscathed on a minivan's rooftop, but this is just a movie and we can easily forgive such heroics, even if a bit unreal (everyone else would brake a bone, strain a muscle or rip a tendon).

Still harm comes to everyone and no one is really a super-hero here. It is probably the Adrenalin pumping that keeps our characters doing what they do.

Yet, unlike so many other action capers these days, there is even space for some solid good acting by everyone involved. The direction is competent and skillful, but the real secret as always, lies in the excellent editing of this movie.

One suggestion though. If you want to really enjoy the movie, try to watch it in its original French language with perhaps, English subtitles to help you out, because the dialogue is important to fully understand the mind-frame of the characters. A competent dubbing could also do the trick, but alas, in my experience, dubbing depends on the translation and the translator, and one can seldom rely on a faithful transliteration of the original text.

Therefore, since this is one of those rare cases of movie enjoyment, with a solid and interesting story, expert acting and directing and a considerable amount of thrills I have added it to my list of films that have to be seen and perhaps even collected.

For you to judge whether the effort was worthwhile or not, but I can guarantee you that you won't be disappointed. But then again, taste is taste and we all have different parameters for this.

Oh, and by the way, the German title has been changed from "On the Run" to "Traue Niemandem" (Trust No One). In fact there are so many movies called "On the Run" that one could get easily confused. But in view to the fact that the Main character states many times that he doesn't trust anyone, this seems indeed to be the appropriate Title for the movie.

Of all the war movies I have ever seen (some very good, some good, some less good and others, simply awful and preachy), this one, together with all his other "companions" (see "The Big Red One") is simply what one might expect, or better, should expect from a "war" movie. I put quotes around "war" because in reality, Fuller's movies of this genre are all but war movies. If you look deeper, you will see that they are actually anti-war movies at their best and absolutely not pontifying a message of peace, but rather depicting war and the men involved in it, as a total chaos, a slaughterhouse and a total misery for those who live it. Fuller's movies do not glorify war, but rather show the grittiness, the dirt, the shadows and the deepest darkness that surrounds and envelopes people who are in its midst. There are just a few others in his league, such as Peckinpah and John Irvin who managed to send the message home. Yet, sadly, there are still people "glorifying" war as a noble expression of human endeavor. Such people never understood a thing about war, or simply never served on active duty, in order to judge with their own eyes what war is really all about. Usually, such people sit comfortably behind a desk in a wonderfully padded armchair, or simply on a luscious couch, following Baseball or Football events and allow others to do their dirty work for them. "Fixed Bayonets!" is a crude, raw and unforgiving depiction of what common men are put through in a war situation. The Korean War might be just the excuse to do so, since every war, past, present and yes, even future, brings inexorably pain and death to those who fight it, as well as to those who wait back home, for a husband and father (today also a wife and mother), or for a brother, sister, son or daughter... Samuel Fuller's intention was always to bring reality into the game, but evidently, his message never got through to some, especially not to those hyper-thyroideal muscle men who believe that brawns alone will win you a war... In my book, this movie, together with all other Sam Fuller's work of this kind should a must see in schools everywhere. This would finally teach children what war is really like. But, said this, I just remember another movie, called "All quiet on the Western Front", in its two incarnations, one in 1930, and the other more recent, in 1979, which already dealt with the very same argument and what did those movies affect? Nothing. War is still among us. And so is the misery of our human condition. When will humanity listen to people like Fuller, Peckinpah, Irvin, Remarque and many others who lived through war and survived it? Oh sure, they are honored now... now that they are dead and cannot do too much harm to the war and death industry, but will there ever be someone who will actually manage to put the word "The End" to war? I seriously doubt it. In my view, this movie is simply a must for those who are seriously interested in studying war as a phenomenon, not just as a past time.

Assuming just for a moment, and I repeat, just assuming that this is based on solid documentation of facts (which this work of... what? Art? Fiction? Dumbness? Shallowness? For you to judge...), which indeed is by far denied by various very competent and serious critics of the works of Shakespeare throughout the ages (and mind you,... there were many contemporaries who already tackled with this "plagiarism" problem), then it would simply represent a sort of dramatization a la "Amadeus",...

But alas, this work, if one can call it that, just because it was put together by someone with a Name, such as Roland Emmerich, is flawed and boring at best. Those who have deepened the subject already know about these misguided views, and some may even concede that some Sonnets, not the plays, may have "borrowed" bits and pieces from elsewhere. Then the question is: so what? Do these exposed facts make this movie into something special? In my humble view, not really, nor is the highly praised acting in it anything but conventional in my tired eyes.

This movie can only be considered a good movie, by those who know absolutely nothing, or just fragmentary pieces of the actual biography of William Shakespeare.

Besides, drunkenness was the favorite past time of the Brits since Roman times... And while we are at it, Ben Jonson, and even Christopher Marlowe, could beat Will Shakespeare in that past time by a far length... So therefore, in that instance at least, there is really nothing new or scandalous about it.

So now, what really memorable is there to be watched in this movie that catches the eye? Except costumes and settings? Not much. And this should receive praises? I wonder...

Methinks that movie makers these days pass away their time in deconstructing history and the biography of others, considered by many as giants (whether wrong or right, is a matter for others to judge), just to make themselves feel better somehow... Is it a form of psychotherapy they are practicing for themselves? I don't know and I cannot judge this, since I am not a Psychoanalyst, but there must be such a component beneath these efforts of theirs, to drag everything that is of some value (or at least has been until now) through the mud of their contorted and sick minds.

I don't know what these people are smoking or snorting up their noses, but this, always in my own and very personal view, has absolutely nothing to do with true creativity, nor taste.

It just shows us how jaded and ignorant some people, especially high placed people these days, can be, and how pretentious they can become when they reach the top.

A nice dose of humbleness and a bit more wisdom would suit them best, but alas, they keep on coming with these preposterous and ill-fated (apparently not by a vast majority of viewers, naturally) subjects, stating facts that are not grounded in any serious publication, and which may probably be more suited in trash papers like The Sun or other gossip Newspaper of sad present fate...

But then again, my opinion may not count much these days, since everyone is out for a shock-treatment, rather than using their own brains for something useful and truly constructive.

How easy it is these days, to destroy the work of a lifetime of people who really did sweat their daily bread and butter, and how sad it is to see how other less talented (at least in my view) people, struggle to become the "talk of the town", for their own personal satisfaction.

Oscar Wilde and Noel Coward would probably know this phenomenon better than I, and would probably have much more to say in this regard, certainly with a lot more style than I could ever muster, and even be able to add some very poignant notes to what I just described.

Alas, such sublime authors do not exist anymore, and all we are left with are some comic strips and cheap literature that entices just the occasional reader to open a real book. What a loss for us all. How sad...

Let me say, just up front, that when I watched this on television I was almost compelled to switch channels.

I simply don't like romantic or sentimental (tear-jerking) movies.

But it was a slow night, nothing else to watch, except the same-o, same-o cop drama here and there,... so I braced myself for a boring and well-planned travel through sentimental-land, with all the buttons pushed at the right time, to force you to squeeze your tear ducts in your eyes.

Mind you, I like everything that has Alan Rickman, Sigourney Weaver or Carrie-Anne Moss, in it, but I was wondering why these three would congregate to make a "romantic drama".

At first, at the opening of the movie (a bit slow-paced for my taste), nothing new on the western horizon. Nice landscape, a diner and two odd characters meeting (one of them being Alan Rickman). Location? Canada. Season? Well, you may have guessed by the title, that it might be winter. Snow? Yes.

A brief conversation, or better said, monologue of the two characters ensues. So far, so good.

One might think at this point that that's it. Older man meets much younger woman and a pathetic story gets told once again. Wrong!

What happens next, within the ten minute rule of movie-land (if nothing happens within a ten minute span, you can leave the theater or the room and switch off the TV). Well, as I was about to do so, lo and behold, Bang! Big Badda-Bing, Badda-Bang!

A car crash! In a movie like this? Yes. A huge truck rams the man's car and this is the actual beginning of the picture.

The rest unfolds while we accompany the man's ordeal through it all.

Let me just say that if you think to have known Sigourney Weaver as an actress before, well, think again... If you haven't seen her work in this movie, you simply cannot appreciate the great professional talent she has and the true gamut she can span when allowed to do so.

Of course, she already revealed herself as a very skillful comedian in "Galaxy Quest" (also co-starring with Alan Rickman), but here she hits the high note of her entire career, blasting all the crystals in the house.

She portrays and reproduces an autistic woman in every detail. So much so, that at times it becomes disturbing. It must have been the most difficult role she ever played. I am thinking about the research she had to undertake in order to slip in her role. I was astonished and very pleasantly surprised by her.

Carrie-Anne Moss, is the romantic interest of Alan Rickman in this movie and one may believe that this is it... Again wrong! The woman can sparkle with just a few nuances, without ever stealing the show, but just because of this, she becomes an important and integral figure to the plot, without whom the outcome would be difficult to foresee. Her harsh traits, so well known in the "Matrix" movies, can reveal an astonishing feminine beauty, as well as a smile and a laughter that can carry you away to seventh heaven.

Alan Rickman, the face of stone, or is it? I love him in everything he does. His wry, slashing, straight-face humor is simply unique and can be admired in so many movies. In "Snow Cake" he pushes the envelope further, always with very subtle touches, just like a few twitches of the eyes, a dismissing raising of an eyebrow, a touch of disappointment with the corner of the mouth. One has to closely watch the mechanics of his face to understand what a refined actor this man is.

What can I say of Emily Hampshire, except maybe that she will make a terrific career for herself along the years? It is not easy to be the center of a movie without being in it throughout the story. Yet, this is exactly what she manages to do. Her looks, the way she played her role, the entire aura that she manages to broadly paint before our own eyes of who she is and what she does, cannot so simply be forgotten. In fact, her ghost image keeps on coming back in our own minds every time someone mentions her. It's just like saying: "Don't think Elephant!" and keeping seeing the elephant in our minds.

I titled my review "The science of forgiveness... and understanding." and indeed that's the juice of this movie. It is much less a love story, than a human story, a story of human destinies clashing, bumping, crashing, landing, walking and ultimately explaining themselves through the art, or if you will, science of forgiveness and understanding. A lesson and a story we can all identify ourselves with.

OK. Now that I have spent my time spending my Summa Cum Laude to these gifted actors and actresses, as well to all the off-screen personnel, I can only tell you one thing, if you think you know a movie by the title, or because you have read about it, well, think again. One must watch them before being able to judge them. Some may even reveal themselves as gems of movie making.

"Snow Cake" can certainly be considered one of them.

At first I thought it would be another one of those "j'accuse" format movies about the German split between East and West, but while watching it more closely, I finally shifted gears and sat back and decided to be surprised.

Well, surprised I was. And what a surprise! This two-part movie revealed more than I thought.

It is the story of Western German woman traveling back to the GDR (German Democratic Republic), just after the fall of the Berlin wall (mark you, the movie was made in 1990 and tells the story of something that happened just a year earlier - hence the immediacy of the theme), in order to visit her dying mother.

While she does so, and through various stops along the way, memories and remembrances seem to pop up in her mind (which are represented by interpolated Black & White scenes at first, and in period Color later), resuming her entire life, from a "war child" - as the title calls her, Marleneken (from a children poem) -, to a restless adolescent, then to a self-conscious grown woman.

This is at least how the first part of the movie behaves.

The second part begins with her final arrival of the woman at her mother's house and the reunion with her sister and the rest of the family, only to be confronted with a handicapped mother, who seems to have recovered somewhat from a stroke, but whose dementia makes her completely estranged from the actual facts surrounding her.

The memories of "Marleneken" keep on popping up while she's visiting there and show us how much different her adventurous life in the Western part of Germany was, compared to the presumptions and suspicions of her own family, who assume she's just another wealthy "Westerner".

It is a fabulous pictorial of an entire life and despite its length, never boring or tedious. What is also wonderful in this picture, is that it is very human, showing us the inter-dependencies among people, both in the East and in the Western zone of Germany.

It is also a very touching story of an entire family thrown apart by historical events and how they learn to cope with them.

The director, Karin Brandauer, knows how to direct a very complex story and weave in a masterful blend of drama and humor side-by-side, just in the right doses as not to make it an obvious choice, but knows how to grow the interest in the life of the center character in such a way as not to make it either boring or tedious for the beholder.

The entire Cast is worth of Oscar performances and manages to convince us of their individual realities in such a way as to completely forget that we are dealing with actors.

The entire movie is involving and smooth in its development.

Personally, I think this is very well worth a second or even a third watching, but above all, it should royally be treated by being transferred in digital format onto either a set of 2 DVDs or on a Blu-Ray Disc.

Alas, nothing like this is available and I must wonder at the intelligence of some distributors who cannot see such a shiny gem lying around just under their feet.

So far (and we are in 2012), only a few TV stations have shown it. Is it because it was not produced by a major Studio? Your guess is as good as mine.

Fact is, that unless this comes burned onto a DVD or BD, no one will ever be able to really enjoy it around the world. With all the crap that gets a prompt digital commercialization these days, I wonder if there is not a tiny space for true works of creative art like this one? I hope in somebody reading this, being the "right" person for the task and able to appropriately act upon it.

Until then, watch out, the title of this gem is "Marleneken" and it was produced in 1990. Browse your local TV guide and see if someone is intelligent enough as to broadcast it in its entirety.

Good luck,... and good night!

I remember the '70s and another Series which was cut more or less in the same parameters as this one, and that was "Usptairs, Downstairs".

This too was a masterpiece of a social study, of the times at the turn between the 19th and early 20th Century.

The only difference was that it was set in a City based household, while "Downton Abbey" is set in the very elegant English countryside.

Both series display the best of British Theatre and Cinema, in terms of production teams, actors, technicians and general staff.

It is absolutely to be considered high quality movie-making, even though meant for the home screen.

Everyone, but everyone, in this series, knows his business and does portray his own character with honesty and truth.

There is no dull moment, due to a skillful editing of scenes that are almost put together like in an elegant dance sequence.

It is a very intelligent show that explores every facet of Society as it was structured (so far, in season 1 and 2), before, during and right after World War I, and as people behaved and felt back on the Homefront, being so detached, yet totally involved with the destinies of those men sent abroad to fight.

It is no melodrama in the classic sense of the word. It is an honest depiction of what people "downstairs and upstairs" went through during those years. The conventions, the rigid rules, the traditions, all changing just in a ten year period and being uprooted and twisted by the new winds of war.

There is something for everybody here. You want a thrilling story? Check! You've got it. You want love and romance? Check! You've got it. You want a social drama? Check! You've got it. You want a war drama? Check! You've got it too.

It's a very human story of all characters on board of this static ship that is "Downton Abbey". As firm as the Rock of Gibraltar one might say. And yet, not so static after all... Lots is happening here, and this, day by day.

Just think of the nightmare to have a sudden dinner invitation. The kitchen is in uproar, serving hands are missing, the masters are nervous, and everything seems to be doomed from the beginning, but then, somehow, everything comes together beautifully, like by magic... Magic? Let's say blood and a lot of sweat...

I started this saying that it was addictive, and indeed it is. AFter an episode is over you immediately want to jump back in and watch the next to see how it goes on.

I only have Seasons 1 and 2 on DVD and I am already asking for the 3rd Season to appear, just to know what happens next.

I simply can't wait... I hope it pops up soon.

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

There have been so-so Tarzans, then there have been dull Tarzans, and again, there were some very good ones, but this beats them all in being the worst transposition ever.

No wonder that the Rice Burroughs Foundations sued the Production.

Mind you, I always found that Tarzan was somewhat of a cartoon character out of a mediocre literature piece to start with, just like Superman and Batman of yesteryear.

There has only been one good movie about the subject and it was not a Hollywood production, but rather a French one by Francois Truffaut in "The Wild Child" (1970), which connects to Rudyard Kipling's "The Jungle Book" and as here, with the Tarzan saga (in some aspects).

The rest is the fruit of their times and the mentalities of people living in those days. As such, they are all dated and show their age.

The only interesting factor in such movies are the locations (although in many cases just stock footage), which document a world gone by, if not animals that are almost extinct by now.

In John Derek's attempt at making an erotic art movie, all you get to see is bad acting (even by seasoned actors such as Richard Harris who really seems bored with the entire subject), if not truly amateurish romancing by Bo Derek which seems more lost than present throughout the movie.

The beau, the mighty Tarzan himself, in the person of Miles O'Keeffe, is just a bad excuse of the male sex symbol and thus reduced to the animal he seems to be.

It is a simplistic and very primitive view of the world he lives in. It is escapism in the purest form. But this does not excuse the stupidity that pervades the entire movie.

If Caligula has been turned in a soft porn movie by Bob Guccione, disappointing all the cast members that were hired in it, this Tarzan is not even that. It is just a feeble attempt to show off John Derek's wife attributes.

Pure exhibitionism, nothing else.

If a lesson can be learned, it is how not to make movies like these, ever.

It seems that John Derek never learned anything from masters like John Ford, Cecil B. DeMille or Orson Welles. Nor did he even consider going to school with John Gullermin or other directors of the Tarzan Series. He would probably have benefited of their experiences and decided to actually do a good movie.

Vanity was all he was interested in. How empty, how sad and how desperate a man must be to come to such a conclusion.

In my opinion, this in one of the most forgettable movies ever made and even if its traces were lost, it wouldn't be a terrible loss for humanity. Actually, it would be nice if it would disappear completely...

We already have enough good movies to care about, and this is certainly not one of them.

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I like it, but I don't like it...

Funny, but true. As a modern action movie it stands at par with other similar stuff that even Hollywood manages to produce (see "300").

Not so much for special visual effects, of which there are virtually none, except for the occasional battle scene, but rather for the silliness in language and story development.

It is a simple fun movie. One for popcorn chewing moviegoers.

Unpretentious and yet captivating in its silliness.

At times, while watching it, I was reminded of movies of yesteryear, such as Errol Flynn's escapades in "The Black Hawk" or more recently Johnny Depp as Jack Sparrow's shenanigans in "Pirates of the Caribbean".

Costumes and settings are gorgeous though, and even the music is pleasant and appropriate for a movie of this type. But let's face it, it's just another cape and dagger movie, not really Russian history as it pretends to be.

Sure, there are hints to that (and many, but then again distributed freely throughout, without an actual chronology). All we get to know is that after Czar Boris Godunov's demise and that of his entire family (but one surviving Princess), there is a period of anarchy in Russia.

Add to this the ever-lasting "bad" Polish invader, riding in with very fanciful armor which sports applied feather wings (actually an accurate depiction, but just reserved for the Royal Polish Guards of that time and only worn during parades, never in battle - for obvious reasons).

True to history is the fact that after the fall of Czar Boris, Russia had been literally invaded by opportunistic tradesmen from everywhere in Europe. This has been simplified and centered around a central Hispanic figure, represented by a mercenary, and apparently, former Conquistador. The reality though, was different, and the so-called invasion was far less pervasive and intrusive. Europe simply needed new trade routes through Russia and did indeed send out emissaries for this purpose.

Yet then the entire story goes through a mystic development, even involving unicorns and a mysterious Hermit chained on a pole in the midst of a forest. It may be significant for Russians but for a foreign audience who may not know all the symbolic significances of this, it still remains a puzzle to the end of the movie.

As said, as an entertainment movie, not too bad, but as a pretense in historic fact it really leaks all over.

The actors, probably all unknown to the Western world are all competent, especially in secondary roles and do their job quite convincingly. The action scenes (battles, swordplay, fights, etc.) are all very well choreographed and at times, even spectacular.

But does this mishmash stand for something?

Not really.

Not even as other reviewers have stated, as a propaganda movie for the Medvevev / Putin duo.

If it is true that this movie was pushed by the Kremlin itself, then the taste of this entity has considerably diminished since Stalin's times. It has become so very simplistic and populist (mind you, not popular) that I question whether they are still able to read Pushkin, Dostoevsky or even just Tolstoy, or whether they too have slumped into just reading pulp fiction if not bad cartoon strips.

Not wanting the invasion of Western culture in their Country, in that sense at least, is utterly wasted effort, since this movie proves without a doubt that they have already been "contaminated" by this bad taste kind of trendy movie.

What next? Japanese "Animes" to entertain the masses in Russia too?

At least Stalin had Eisenstein to propagate his views, and those movies have become true Classics.

But "1612"? Forgettable at best.

Being of Russian descent myself, I regret this popularization in Russian history. Why can't we have true historic, if not epic movies about the true history of Russia?

The theme alone, Boris Godunov, already made famous by a well-known Opera, should entice any film-maker deserving this definition, to make an extra effort and develop a true biopic around this figure. But not just limited to this period.

All we have are just excerpts from Russian history. We never get the whole picture. What about the first Viking invasion of Russia, when it was still unknown under that name? In fact Russia takes the name from the first Conquerors of the land, which the native population named "Rus" after their reddish scalps and beards.

What ever happened between Boris and Peter the Great. Who were the various successors, what did they do, what have they achieved, how long did they all rule? These are all still unanswered questions that no one ever bothered to tackle with in any serious form.

My simple question is: why?

Russians of today want to be respected from Westerners and be considered as equals. Well, then help us understand your history in its fullness and allow us to penetrate your culture more thoroughly. Not just through literature, or through music, but also producing movies that open a window upon a respectable (or even not so respectable) span of time and allow us to penetrate this world of the past, to better understand your recent past and even the present.

"1612" is not it. It deserves only 5 stars out of ten just (and I have decided to be particularly generous) for the effort of all those involved, who nevertheless did their job. But none of these stars are referred to the story, nor the quality of the picture, which in my own opinion, is below the average level of movie-making, which I know to be otherwise excellent.

Go back to film school and watch some true classics and you will see what I mean...

Page 1 of 5:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]