Reviews by doudouce55

Honestly, when we rented this, it looked like a good comedy for a night to watch as a family. Boy, were we disappointed. Granted, the movie has its funny moments but it wasn't enough to make it as enjoyable as it could have been. Ben Stiller isn't bad, but Robin Williams's talent should have gone elsewhere. My family and I all expected better performances! If you want a real comedy, I'd recommend Mrs Doubtfire with Williams, or Meet the Parents/Fockers with Stiller. THOSE are classics AND hilarious. Night at the Museum is just plain stupid, stupid, stupid.

This was quite a surprise for me, as I'm from Quebec but know practically nothing about hockey, so I don't know how accurate the movie is of Richard's real life. However, I enjoyed this very much. Those times were hard, and life on the ice playing hockey is probably well described and developed. Good Canadian actors, and well directed. A welcome addition to my collection!

Alfonso Cuaron shows us in this film that he is the master of long takes, and few cuts. Brilliantly cinematographed and directed, with a most excellent cast, this is a wonderful film. The bonus feature is something I rarely watch, but everyone will be curious to watch the production of one particular scene involving Kee's character, played by new actress Claire-Hope Ashitey. This is definitely THE film to watch this year - if you haven't already seen it. Simply brilliant.

Alfonso Cuaron shows us in this film that he is the master of long takes, and few cuts. Brilliantly cinematographed and directed, with a most excellent cast, this is a wonderful film. The bonus feature is something I rarely watch, but everyone will be curious to watch the production of one particular scene involving Kee's character, played by new actress Claire-Hope Ashitey. This is definitely THE film to watch this year - if you haven't already seen it. Simply brilliant.

This is clearly a guy movie, so I'm surprised I enjoyed this as much as I did.
The storyline is pretty simple: 5 guys are locked in a place, with very little recollection of what happened, how they got to where they are, and no memory of who they are. Who's the bad guy? the good guy? No one knows. The suspense is there, and is quite successful. Not one boring moment. And not very predictable, even if somewhere down the line, the story that comes out is expected!
Good script, believable story and a nice cast!

The movie/story had potential, but this movie got out of hand when it became too "alien" and gross. I don't mind the aliens, but the gory part was just too much (especially towards the end).
The fact that these people were actually hypnotized seems a little far-fetched and unreal. The story may be based on a "true story" it does not change the fact that this is a cheesy B-Movie, and that there is no real evidence of anything except the lights. The actors are doing the required job, but the dialogue is very adolescent and immature.
Also, I can't help but wonder, why are aliens always pictured the way they are, why can't they human-looking?
Sorry for the fans out there, but this is simply pure stupidity and a horrible (not horror) film - at least to me.

(may be considered spoiler if you haven't seen season 1. you are warned!)

This is clearly one of the best written series ever. Each episode goes by very fast, and the plot is still interesting. I watched the entire season 1 in one day, I was so hooked on it. It is well written, and pretty well directed. Most actors are not that known, other than Mary Louise Parker and Elizabeth Perkins. Hunter Parrish is very good as the eldest son, Shoshannah Stern as his deaf girlfriend is brilliant and Martin Donovan as Nancy's boyfriend is also excellent. The rest of the cast simply fits, and all characters are well acted and actually quite believable. The entire plot of the series is fantastic.
The music of season 1 is particularly charming (the theme song is great), however season 2's theme song as interpreted by different artists, just doesn't appeal to me.
All in all, the best series ever seen in at least 20 years (for me anyway).
Thank you to my friend Jessica for having recommended it!

Everyone knows the story of boy meets girl, boy loses girl. However, there is more to this story here. Set in turn-of-the-century Vienna, Norton is Herr Eisenheim, famous magician (rather, illusionist), whose stage performance has captivated the attention of the Crown Prince, who is to wed Duchess von Deschem (J. Biel), childhood friend of Eisenheim. A crime takes place, but who has done it? Chief Inspector Uhl (P. Giamatti) investigates. -- If you're not into period films, you might actually like this. If you're into such films, you'll hopefully be as captivated by “The Illusionist” as much as I was. The decor makes you feel you are actually in Vienna, the music is excellent (what more to expect from Philip Glass!), the colors and lighting are superb. Several underused actors, and not always at their best in other movies, yet I found them excellent here, and their characters' presentation is fascinating and very well set, from the beginning. Rufus Sewell (Crown Prince) might be considered as overacting, but his character demands this, as he is violent and pompous (to say the least). A wonderful directing work from Neil Burger. In my eyes, this is the most interesting script and the most beautiful film photography (and editing) of a movie picture of this decade.... so far.

Everyone knows the story of boy meets girl, boy loses girl. However, there is more to this story here. Set in turn-of-the-century Vienna, Norton is Herr Eisenheim, famous magician (rather, illusionist), whose stage performance has captivated the attention of the Crown Prince, who is to wed Duchess von Deschem (J. Biel), childhood friend of Eisenheim. A crime takes place, but who has done it? Chief Inspector Uhl (P. Giamatti) investigates. -- If you're not into period films, you might actually like this. If you're into such films, you'll hopefully be as captivated by “The Illusionist” as much as I was. The decor makes you feel you are actually in Vienna, the music is excellent (what more to expect from Philip Glass!), the colors and lighting are superb. Several underused actors, and not always at their best in other movies, yet I found them excellent here, and their characters' presentation is fascinating and very well set, from the beginning. Rufus Sewell (Crown Prince) might be considered as overacting, but his character demands this, as he is violent and pompous (to say the least). A wonderful directing work from Neil Burger. In my eyes, this is the most interesting script and the most beautiful film photography (and editing) of a movie picture of this decade.... so far.

I saw this in the theaters when it came out, and I was deceived, since I had been told it was a direct adaptation from Marc Lévy's novel "If Only It Were True." Definitely NOT an adaptation, but rather, the movie is anything but loosely based on the novel in the question, since many characters in the book differed from the movie (the mother is in the book, there is no sister; her dog, not her niece, "sees" Elizabeth; etc.), or they were added (the guy from the psychic/occult bookstore).
However, this is my second viewing of the film. I have put aside the fact that this is a film based on a book. And I actually enjoyed this comedy, a lot. So put the book's notes and story aside; watch the film for what it is: a good comedy, with lots of laughs and cute moments.
(Too bad there won't be a sequel to the movie [not with the ending the film had], as there was a sequel for the book: book#2 was simply the same thing, with the same characters, but the accident happened to David, oh my! how original.)