Le spie vengono dal semifreddo (1966)

	Also Known As: L'espion qui venait du surgelé, Dr Goldfoot and the Girl Bombs
	Year of first release: 1966
	Director: Mario Bava
	Actors: Franco Franchi, Ciccio Ingrassia, Vincent Price, Fabian, Laura Antonelli, Francesco Mulé
	Country: I, USA
	Genre: Comedy, Adventure
	Conditions of visioning: 15.01.2017, arte.tv, Italian version with French subtitle
Synopsis: The mad scientist Dr. Goldfoot (Price) plots to take over the world by creating female robot bombs specifically designed to blow up high-ranking generals of NATO countries. Goldfoot hopes that by doing this he will start a war between Russia and America. It's up to disgraced government agent Bill Dexter (Fabian) to stop Goldfoot. Supported by two newbies in the service secrets, Ciccio (Ingrassia) and Franco (Franchi).
Review: By watching short documentaries on arte.tv I found the playlists and this one cught my eyes! L'art du nanar as monument for bad movies. I read the name of Mario Bava and knew that I would watch this movie, even if it is supposed to be a bad one.  And it is indeed very slapstick, with many fast motion, with many image compositions taken from well-known movies. On the one hand it is really stupid and the gags are often repeated, on the other hand some it is so full of cinematographic references that it becomes to be interesting for that.  Franco and Ciccio are a couple of Italian actors specialised in the parodies and slapstick comedies in the 1960s. The acting of both is therefore very stereotyped and for Franco even very heavy. But ok, it is there style. Not mine. Also Vincent Price did a serie of three Dr Goldfoot movies. The story line mixes music-hall with science fiction and burlesque and slapstick and is therefore quite hard to follow and give a unity to the movie. It looks more like a pot-pourri.  The movie is watchable as reference of a style. Franco and Ciccio did 114 movies including 107 from 1962 to 1972. Price did only three Dr Goldfoot movies. The rythm was crazy! And maybe therefore they had to stick to their stereotypes.
Rating: 4 /10

The fall of the Roman empire (1964)

	Also Known As: La chute de l'empire romain
	Year of first release: 1964
	Director: Anthony Mann
	Actors: Alec Guiness, Sophia Loren, Stephen Boyd, Christopher Plummer, James Mason
	Country: USA
	Genre: Epic, Drama
	Conditions of visioning: 26.12.2016, TV Arte, French version
Synopsis: The death of Marcus Aurelius (Guiness) leads to a succession crisis, in which the deceased emperor's son, Commodus (Plummer), demonstrates that he is unwilling to let anything undermine his claim to the Roman Empire. The other siblings of Marcus Aurelius, Livius (Boyd) and Lucilla (Loren) have his confidence confirmed by his favourite philosopher Timonides (Mason).
Review: The Hollywood Ancient Rome historical epic has been a subgenre in trend in the USA and in Italy (subset of the so-called Peplum subgenre) in the 1950s and 1960s. The fall of the Roman empire focuses on the end of the Marcus Aurelius era supposed to be a good emperor in the Roman history.  Actually the story is more telling about the rivalry of Commodus and Livius than on the big History. As often in Hollywood historical epic, the History is modified. There was no Lucilla. The rivalry may have existed but with thousands kilometers distance. This does not make the story of the movie worse. Actually it transmits better the idea of political rivalry and murders who was typical of the period after Marcus Aurelius.  The acting of Plummer and Mason is quite good. But I have not been impressed by Sophia Loren nor by Stephen Boyd even if they both had good roles. Not impressed neither by the story line.  One scene is remarkable. The pursuit with the horses through the woods! This was impressive for its directing. I find that programming this movie nowadays is perfect. At a time when many politicians try to build walls and defeat people instead of talk and collaborate with them (as in the movie). This can be seen as an artistic warning that needs to be reminded time to time.
Rating: 5 /10

Quo vadis (1951)

	Also Known As: -
	Year of first release: 1951
	Director: Mervyn LeRoy, Anthony Mann
	Actors: Robert Taylor, Deborah Kerr, Peter Ustinov
	Country: USA
	Genre: Epic, Drama, Romance
	Conditions of visioning: 25.12.2016, TV Arte, French version
Synopsis: Returning to Rome after three years of war, General Marcus Vinicius (Taylor) meets Lygia (Kerr) and falls in love with her, though as a Christian she wants nothing to do with a warrior. Though she grew up Roman, the adopted daughter of a retired general, Lygia is technically a hostage of Rome. Marcus gets Emperor Nero (Ustinov) to give her to him for services rendered but starts slowly to reject the ideas of Nero.
Review: I had the opportunity to watch an old North American Epic. I watched many of these as a kid and this awoke my interest to history. But this is a movie, not the reality of the history. Once we know that, we can continue watching.  The story is based on some episodes of the reign of Nero in the Ancient Rome. The contrast between the Roman militaries and the peaceful Christians (some also Romans) is striking. When we see the Christians considered as conspirator while we know that they are supposed to be the good guys in the North America of that time, it makes it dramatic. But also quite funny if we compare the Christians with the communists in North America at the time of the deleterious McCarthyism. There are different kind of message that may have been transported by this movie. Most of the epic genre aims at glorifying one country, one culture or one people. This one is a bit ambiguous to me. Even if I did not like much the acting by Robert Taylor, Deborah Kerr and Peter Ustinov are brilliant. There is a kind of theatrical atmosphere in the acting. That I remember actually for the whole genre of Hollywood epic.
Rating: 7 /10

Lo and Behold, Reveries of the Connected World (2016)

	Also Known As: -
	Year of first release: 2016
	Director: Werner Herzog (Aguirre Wrath of Gods, Nosferatu the Vampyre, Into the Inferno)
	Actors: Elon Musk, Lawrence Krauss, Lucianne Walkowicz
	Country: USA
	Genre: Documentary
	Conditions of visioning: 03.01.2017, VOD, 32" TV.
Synopsis: The story of the Internet, from its creation to the future possibilities it may offer.
Review: This informative documentary starts with historical facts (well illustrated by their actors) but quickly moves on to address specific topics more or less related to the advances made possible by the Internet, or more generally by the digital age and the progresses in communications. It is divided into ten chapters (see their titles at the end of this post) and in fact only the first four ones really are about the Internet, the others make more emphasis on the conquest of Space which is not a related topic. A few connection are made but not enough to make the Documentary look very consistent to me. This structure makes the Documentary more original than a simple linear historical review and is probably a reason why it was nominated for the Oscars. Another reason may be that it was directed by the German Werner Herzog more known to me for his 70-80's movies with Klaus Kinski like Aguirre Wrath of Gods, Nosferatu the Vampyre or Fitzcarraldo. He seems to be pretty much into Documentaries those days, like On Death Row, Into the Abyss, Grizzly Man, Cave of Forgotten Dreams and Into the Inferno that I may watch soon. He is also the narrator and I couldn't help but smile when hearing his accent when describing a possible future in which Artificial Intelligences take control of the Earth, recalling in my mind The Terminator.
Rating: 5 /10

Deepwater Horizon (2016)

	Also Known As: -
	Year of first release: 2016
	Director: Peter Berg (The Rundown, Hancock, Battleship, Lone Survivor)
	Actors: Mark Wahlberg (Transformers 4, Ted), Kurt Russell (Deathproof, Bone Tomahawk), Douglas M. Griffin, John Malkovich (R.E.D., In the Line of Fire)
	Country: USA
	Genre: Action, Drama
	Conditions of visioning: 02.01.2017, in-flight entertainment system 10" screen
Synopsis: Mike Williams (Wahlberg) is on his way to 21 days of work on the research platform Deepwater Horizon. He is accompanied by the station chief Jimmy (Russell) and meets the BP company representative Vidrine (Malkovich). They are under time pressure to move on to the next well.
Review: This kind of movie obviously makes you want to strangle any of the company representative that only work for maximum profit, but that's the capitalist world we live in. As often, in the case of that story inspired by real events it had dramatic consequences on the live of people and on the environment. From the trailer of this movie seen six months ago, I didn't know if I should expect a quasi-documentary or more a long succession of ultra-heroic action performed by the character of Mike. Thankfully it didn't go in that direction but instead spends a good hour introducing the characters, the stakes, the situation and simply building up tension until the anticipated accident occurs. It was informative to learn about the logistics of working on offshore platforms: from transport organization (by helicopter) to long shifts away from family, hard work, socializing with co-workers and standing hierarchy. This all reminds me a lot of my own life in a remote astronomical observatory, with of course less isolation and much less risk. The well-written screenplay is helped by the performances of Wahlberg (quite standard in fact), Russell that I still love to see coming back, and an antipathetic Malkovich that we love to hate. I also liked seeing in a small role the too rare Ethan Suplee that I loved in the TV-series My Name is Earl with Jason Lee. The second part is visually impressive although I didn't even see it in the best conditions, and the bravery moments were probably embellished but are sparse and realistic enough to make a consistent movie.
Rating: 7 /10

The Magnificent Seven (2016)

	Also Known As: -
	Year of first release: 2016
	Director: Antoine Fuqua (Olympus has Fallen, Shooter)
	Actors: Denzel Washington (The Book of Eli, Crimson Tide), Chris Pratt (The Guardians of the Galaxy, Jurassic World), Ethan Hawke (Gattaca), Vincent d'Onofrio (Men in Black, Daredevil TV-series), Byung-hun Lee (I Saw the Devil, G.I.Joe 1-2)
	Country: USA
	Genre: Western
	Conditions of visioning: 02.01.2017, in-flight entertainment system 10" screen
Synopsis: Oppressed villagers hire a bounty hunter (Washington) to help them. On their way home they will gather an eclectic bunch of men willing to join.
Review: This is a remake of the classic 1960 The Magnificent Seven with among others Yul Brunner, Steve McQueen and Charles Bronson, itself a western transposition of the 1954 Seven Samurai by Akira Kurosawa. Unfortunately, as many remake nowadays, a useless one. I feared the worst from director Antoine Fuqua to whom we owe Olympus has Fallen, while in fact the movie is not totally bad, it is quite well shot, the actors are good and the dialogs not stupid, but it can never ever reach the dramatic level of its model. The assortment of characters that tries to be universal makes it in fact totally unbelievable: imagine an afro-American, a native American and an Asian roaming freely the old west! That doesn't make any sense, no more than the character of Will Smith did in Wild Wild West. I also didn't like the gunfights, not very believable either. What's left from the movie? Denzel Washington as good as usual and well assuming the role of leader, Ethan Hawke hard to recognize (although his come-back in the movie is as predictable as weak in emotion) and most of all, Vincent d'Onofrio who after his role of Kingpin in the first season of Daredevil, delivers again an incredible performance in a totally different register. You can say Denzel Washington is good but he plays like the usual Denzel Wachington, while d'Onofrio plays totally differently from the other roles I know him for. Thinking about it, I don't know which other actors give me the same feeling: Johnny Depp, Leonardo di Caprio? The last time I mentioned this feeling was about Colin Farrel in Horrible Bosses, Jim Carrey in Kick-Ass 2 or Brad Pitt in Fight Club. I should definitely see more of Vincent d'Onofrio.
Rating: 4 /10

Les tontons flingueurs (1963)

	Also Known As: Mein Onkel der Gangster
	Year of first release: 1963
	Director: Georges Lautner
	Actors: Lino Ventura, Bernard Blier, Francis Blanche, Sabine Sinjen, Claude Rich
	Country: F, D, I
	Genre: Polar
	Conditions of visioning: 30.12.2016, Bluray, French version
Synopsis: Living quietly on the countryside, Fernand Naudin (Ventura) gets a telegram from Paris. Le Mexicain, an old friend, leaves the guard of his daughter Patricia (Sinjen) and his criminal business to him. The colleagues of the Mexican do not accept it that easily.
Review: I got a pack of blu-rays including Les tontons flingueurs, Ne nous fâchons pas and Les Barbouzes because I wanted to listen to the dialogues of Michel Audiard. I remembered these as very rich, funny and clear.  When the movie was released, all polars were very serious and the goal was to show a suspenseful story (e.g. Hitchcock). It became a great success as Pulp Fiction by Tarantino via bringing the gangsters to be funny without making a slapstick comedy.  We know Lino Ventura more for his classical polar movies. Bernard Blier and Francis Blanche had more acting aspects with respectively secondary and main roles in comedies, polars and drama. Even if they keep their standard roles, these are enriched by the comedy/polar sides of the story and of the dialogues. Actually all secondary roles bring something both fun and serious to this polar. We meet the complete family, the real one and the criminal one, as we would meet a family member, with his emotions, his defects. And this was really innovative.
Rating: 8 /10

Marie Curie (2016)

	Also Known As: -
	Year of first release: 2016
	Director: Marie Noelle
	Actors: Karolina Gruszka, Charles Berling, Arieh Worthalter
	Country: F, D, PL
	Genre: Drama, Romance
	Conditions of visioning: 03.12.2016, Schauburg, German version
Synopsis: Marie Curie (Gruszka) and her husband Pierre Curie (Berling) win in 1903 the Nobel Prize for physics for their work on radioactivity. Her story is then punctuated by discussions and developments with the rest of the scientific community, as well as by the death of Pierre Curie and her affair with Paul Langevin (Worthalter). Until her second Nobel Prize, for Chemistry. She struggled for recognition in the male-dominated science community in early 20th century Europe.
Review: I wanted to watch this movie because of the aura around the image of Marie Curie. An intelligent woman which intelligence could be confronted to men's intelligence. And what is nowadays almost obvious, was quite difficult back then in the 1910s. Unfortunately to me, the movie focuses more on the romances in the life of Marie Curie, first with husband Pierre Curie then with lover Paul Langevin. And several scenes are like in Walt Disney (e.g. Aladin hugging Sherazade) movies with nice abstract images, in this case blue lights of the radiating radium, behind Marie Curie kissing a man. Director Marie Noelle was present and eloquent in discussing about Marie Curie's life and the inspiration given by Marie Curie to her and women in general.Actually, this is what I expected also from the movie and did not find.  The acting of the scientists is nice. We see also internationally known faces, such as Albert Einstein, so that even the large public can get the situation.
Rating: 5 /10

For a few dollars more (1965)

	Also Known As: Et pour quelques dollars de plus
	Year of first release: 1965
	Director: Sergio Leone
	Actors: Clint Eastwood, Lee Van Cleef, Gian Maria Volontè
	Country: I, E, D
	Genre: Western
	Conditions of visioning: 16.11.2016, Bluray, English version
Synopsis: Monco (Eastwood) is a bounty killer chasing El Indio (Voltonè) and his gang. During his hunting, he meets Col. Douglas Mortimer (Van Cleef), another bounty killer, and they decide to make a partnership, chase the bad guys together and split the reward.
Review: As for A Fistful of Dollars Sergio Leone uses a similar style. Several landscape scenes are exactly at the same location as in A Fistful of Dollars. There are again many close-ups on the characters faces, these faces having something to say. Clint Eastwood is again greedy but shows some respect to loyalty and justice. The cast is again similar to the Fistful having Eastwood, Volontè and Mario Brega as brutal bad guy. The music is composed by Ennio Morricone with dedicated themes that are also part of the movie, with the music box as main object of the story. The viewer notices that the story is not only greedy when we learn more about the main characters. SPOILER The final duel is again a kind of fair duel to reach some justice. The cut is again done very well in accordance to the amazing music by Morricone.  If you like western, spectacle and great music, you will enjoy this movie!
Rating: 8 /10

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016)

	Also Known As: -
	Year of first release: 2016
	Director: Gareth Edwards (Monsters, Godzilla)
	Actors: Felicity Jones (The Amazing Spider-man 2), Diego Luna (The Terminal, Elysium), Alan Tudyk (Dodgeball, Firefly TV-series), Forest Whitaker (Platoon, Ghost Dog, Arrival), Mads Mikkelsen (Hannibal TV-series, Pusher)
	Country: USA
	Genre: SF, Adventure, Epic
	Conditions of visioning: 26.12.2016, French version, 2D, Cinéma A L'affiche, Chaumont
Synopsis: The father (Mikkelsen) of Jyn Erso (Jones) abandoned her at a young age to work on a massive new weapon for the Galactic Empire. Once adult she is contacted by the Rebellion to help contact her father.
Review: Forget about Georges Lucas' embarrassing vision in the Episodes 1, 2 and 3 and J. J. Abrams' referential Episode 7: The Force Awakens, Rogue One is the Star Wars movie you have been waiting to see since Return of the Jedi. The concept of a spin-off is not new in this Universe, do you remember the 1984 TV-movie Caravan of Courage: An Ewok Adventure seen on TV or the 1985 Ewoks: The Battle for Endor that I have no memory of? The TV-series The Clone Wars is more of a filling between two movies of the saga using the same main characters. I couldn't have missed watching the movie in theaters (in 2D as intended by the director, not in a useless quickly post-converted 3D) but I was not very optimistic about it for several reasons. First, since Disney bought the franchise, the movies have to obviously be children-friendly. Not that the original trilogy was forbidden to them but that was a limitation I would have preferred didn't exist. Then Episode 7 left me with mixed feelings, and although I like the work from Gareth Edwards, he is known from Monsters and Godzilla to show battles off-screen, which is definitely what I don't want in a Star Wars. I also read that there had been some re-shoots after principal photography of the movie, which could indicate creative differences between the director and the studio. Last but not least I didn't know what to expect from a story with limited stakes and of which we already know the ending, but movies like Titanic have proved me wrong on such a point. And in the end Rogue One did it as well. It took me about half an hour to replace exactly the movie in the saga and overcome the disturbance of watching it dubbed in French (I will watch it again in Original version as soon as possible), but then I started to fully appreciate the stakes which were not as small as I thought. I was also a bit confused with the role of some characters but came to appreciate them all in the end, in particular the "illuminated" played by Donnie Yen. I found Diego Luna at ease in his role, but Felicity Jones less charismatic, in particular less than Daisy Ridley as Rey in Episode 7.  One thing I appreciated a lot in Rogue One are the reference to A New Hope and the original trilogy, usually more subtle than the too obvious revival of the old characters in Episode 7. For example C3PO and R2D2 are only briefly seen and not for a stupid joke (oh the new trilogy...). Names of planets and people and ships can be related to the ones we know, and a few key characters can also be glimpsed for our greatest pleasure (one even linking the movie to the new trilogy). I will not mention them to avoid spoiling, except for Grand Moff Tarkin playing in A New Hope by Peter Cushing and chronologically first mentioned in the Star Wars Universe during the third season of The Clone Wars. This great actor died in 1994 but an agreement was concluded with his Estate to digitally resuscitate him in Rogue One. I find it to be a great idea, given the importance of this characters at this moment in time of the Star Wars story. Unfortunately I found his digital face a bit too stiff, giving away the trick. Contrarily to what I feared, Rogue One does contain fully blown space battles that gave me shivers and reminded me of my favorite one in Return of the Jedi, in a good way and not with the feeling of watching a copy like in Episode 7. And I was pleased with the few touches of humour present in the movie, not in the J.J. Abrams style of "you go first, I go first" I criticized about Episode 7. A quick word about the sets: the original trilogy contains classic landscapes that defined the look of the Universe, and the new trilogy contains impressive ones as well, but for some reason the tropical beach of Rogue One is maybe my second favorite one after the ice planet Hoth. I loved watching the scenes in that setting. Like to eliminate my last critics, the movie increased in intensity to reach a climax that simply made me jump from my seat in exclamation and applause. In fact I am tempted to watch Episodes 3 and 4 to better bracket the time period of Rogue One before seeing it again.
Rating: 8 /10