J*A*S*M

My cup of tea. Ti West dropped the distinctive look of the 70's and 80's from his previous, and excellent, film The House of the Devil, but The Innkeepers still feels like a manifestation from the "good old days". In a film made and performed with real panache, West sticks to the basic rules of the genre (that only apply to some people, which will result in different ratings) and what you fear the most is what remains unseen, and this is where this film differs from last year’s gem Insidious. West doesn’t show anything unnecessarily (most of the ghosts’ appearances can be seen in the trailer) and doesn’t explain anything unnecessarily, he simply builds a terrifying atmosphere, patiently and slowly (the slow and atmospheric wandering through an empty building can already be considered the director's trademark, the discipline where he’s the master). And that works on me, at least as effectively as the aggressive approach of James Wan in the aforementioned Insidious. And even though the film never strays from the category of “serious horror”, there are still plenty of scenes that made me laugh. They aren’t an attempt at “horror comedy”, though, it’s just that the characters (BTW, Sara Paxton is almost too likeable) sometimes behave funny (the scene with the garbage, for instance). I’m totally satisfied, and I can put The Innkeepers together with The Shining and Psycho among the TOP 3 hotel horror flicks. But not everyone will like it.

Pure emotion. If you’re craving sci-fi action, better go elsewhere. If you’re looking for a ninety-minute video clip piece of eye candy, forget about it... As others have correctly pointed out, Love is an emotional-philosophical-meditative film in the style of Kubrick or Malick (and maybe Tarkovskij’s Stalker), or, rather, an attempt at something like that. Despite all its technical and atmospheric competence, the film feels a little “unfinished”, but I still rate it very positively. The climax (very obviously inspired by 2001) gave me the legendary chills – though, it should be said, mostly thanks to the A&A music.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen such an interesting combination of “fun”, “depressive” and “perverted” thriller. Bornedal has done a perfect job and I can’t find almost anything to reproach. Well, yeah, the plot structure is quite shaky, but it’s still brilliant. 85 %

I will divide Transformers 3 into three parts: 1) the dialogues, 2) the action set pieces (the motorway and the skyscraper), and 3) the remaining filler. Thumbs up for 2), but for 1) and 3) Bay deserves to have his ass kicked. Otherwise, I hope that this third part puts an end to this insult to science fiction (yeah, I know, I don’t have to watch it, but as a sci-fi fan, I was again unable to listen to the warnings that said: “Don’t watch this bullshit!”).

My 2011 Xmas horror film :-) … A very pleasant surprise and as good as the excellent first part. Basically, I’ve reached a stage where I’m slowly losing faith that I’m going to discover a horror film from the 1970s and later that I don’t know and that will thrill me, and the second Amityville has taken taken me out of that error (if only it happened more often). I certainly recommend this sequel.

There are few sub-genres that I hate as much as vulgar teenage comedies, but I surprisingly enjoyed this one. All of the inbetweeners were likeable and I had more fun than I expected. It has charm, it’s funny and it’s nicely self-deprecating… to relax, why not.

One of the most beautiful road movies and one of the most beautiful film endings ever. I wasn’t expecting to be particularly thrilled with a two hour “feminist” ride with Susan Sarandon and Geena Davis, but I was wrong. Beauty, beauty, beauty; I had it clear from the first scene that I will surprisingly like it. Thanks Fixa for bringing this film to my attention :-)

Question: What would a stressed-out and unpleasant university teacher do if he found an Arabian man and a black woman living in his flat? Answer: He will show his good heart and will let them stay there, not caring at all how they got in… Yeah, a “food for thought” movie… (though emotionally it’s quite effective, so I’m giving it at least 60%).

Polanski et al. have the misfortune that I saw Carnage at the theatre. There, it made me almost die in laughter, at the cinema, however, I smirked amusingly here and there (mostly over Christoph Waltz’s smirks) and laughed (reminiscing the theatre play). It’s a good film, no doubt, with good performances and direction, but I can’t avoid being disappointed, even though I’m rationally aware that comparing a theatre play with a film is stupid. Though in this case is not that stupid actually, because you can really see the theatrical origin of the film… Some lines are clearly not uttered by a normal film character, but very “theatrically” by a character in a play.

More relief than pleasure three stars. It might be that I was just not in the mood for this lengthy Asian thriller, or that Park is not my cup of tea (which is more likely). I’m aware that in average I’m more into Asian romances than Asian thrillers, which is quite surprising given my otherwise darker film tastes…