Login
Home
585 Lists
7809 Reviews
Collections
johanlefourbe added 1 item to 1001 Movies Chosen By Johanlefourbe list
Notes: Of course, like many other movie buffs, I had been anxiously waiting for this movie. Indeed, after almost 25 years, Martin Scorsese was working again with Robert De Niro on a massive gangster epic involving an impressive cast including the likes of Al Pacino. I mean, this combo Scorsese-De Niro-Pacino sounded already like movie heaven and when the critics turned out to be wild enthusiast, my expectations went sky high. Well, eventually, I find it rather difficult to judge this movie after all and, to be honest, I wasn’t really blown like I was expecting to be. First of all, even though the CGI deaging of the main cast had pretty much doubled the costs of the production, I didn’t feel it was really convincing. Seriously, I was constantly wondering what age their characters were supposed to be and it was pretty obvious through the whole duration that all the actors (Robert de Niro (75), Al Pacino (78) and Joe Pesci (75)) were so much older than their respective characters. Even if ‘Gemini Man’ was a major flop and a rather average action flick, at least, the 20 year old version of Will Smith was just mindblowing to behold. Concerning the character themselves, I thought that Russell Bufalino was actually the most interesting one. Indeed, if Al Pacino delivered a solid performance, to be honest, Jimmy Hoffa felt rather clueless or at least really reckless considering the way he handled the threats from the mob. Concerning Frank Sheeran, De Niro was fine as well but I was missing some kind of drive behind his actions. Still, even if this story might seem to be pretty basic, it was not a simple movie, especially due to the fact that it was Scorsese’s longest movie so far and I think I would need to rewatch it at some point to make up my mind for good about the damned thing.3 years, 9 months ago
johanlefourbe added 1 item to 1001 Movies ... my own version (1980's) list
Notes: Nowadays, Marvel is pretty much ruling the box-office but there was a time when they were nowhere to be found and it was DC who came out with some very successful super-hero features. First, at the end of the 70's, with 'Superman', and then 10 years later with this movie focusing this time on the Dark Knight. I remember it very well when it came out, there was a huge buzz about this movie. Indeed, you could see the famous logo all over the place, there was some Batman merchandising everywhere and me and my little brother even got some Batman sweaters at the time. Basically, it was huge and pretty much the biggest film event at the time. With all this excitement, I just had to see it pretty bad and , back in those days (I was 9-10 years old), I was just really blown away by the whole thing. Indeed, I had never seen anything like this before and I thought it was just awesome. Eventually, I think it is above really enjoyable when you are just a kid and, of course, 20 years later, it does look pretty cheesy, especially when you compare it to Christopher Nolan's trilogy but back in those days, it was really groundbreaking and it still deserve a lot of respect.3 years, 9 months ago
johanlefourbe added 1 item to 1001 Movies ... my own version (1920's) list
Notes: To be honest, I usually have a hard time to watch silent features. Indeed, I think it's pretty tough to sit through a full length feature without any dialogs, especially when it is about 3 hours long. However, I had a good time to watch this one though because it was actually quite fun. Indeed, it is a great adventure, a real escapist feature, and I thought it was more entertaining than all those heavy dramas directed by D.W. Griffith for example. I especially enjoyed the first part when you have Douglas Fairbanks making some trouble in Bagdad’s market. To be honest, as soon as he fell in love with the princess, the whole thing lost some steam and I preferred when he was just a devilish thief. Also, the fact that ‘Aladdin’, one of my favorites Disney animated features, was basically a remake of this old classic, might have played a part in the fact that I didn’t completely enjoy this feature since I already knew most of the plot. Furthermore, the thief, as a character, is actually more fun than Aladdin but you miss the genius and, with a running time around 140 minutes, it was just too long for its own good. Still, it is definitely a fun and entertaining movie.3 years, 9 months ago
3 years, 9 months ago
johanlefourbe added 1 item to 1001 Movies ... my own version (1970's) list
Notes: To be honest, even though I expected it, it still turned out to be a rather challenging movie. I mean, basically, it is about three guys wandering for almost 3 hours in a place called the ‘Zone’ and, even though it does sound like a science-fiction feature, there was nothing really futuristic about this place. Of course, the fans of this movie in particular and in Tarkovsky in general would argue that this movie went just way beyond being a simple SF feature and they would be right. However, I’m afraid I was not smart enough to understand most of the symbolism, philosophical and metaphysical elements developed in this flick and I still think that the damned thing was pretty damned long and slow. Still, even if it was quite minimalistic, it was quite beautiful to look at and the damned thing was quite mesmerizing. Indeed, in spite the lack of plot or character development, the whole thing is such an interesting maelstrom of ideas, theories and assumptions. Anyway, it was probably one of the most difficult movies I have seen and even if I probably didn’t get half of it, I still think it is definitely worth a look.3 years, 9 months ago
johanlefourbe posted a review of The Aftermath
“I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but since I have a weak spot for Keira Knightley, I was quite eager to check it out. Well, to be honest, I was rather surprised by how underwhelming the damned thing actually turned out to be. It’s too bad because it was actually dealing with a” read more
3 years, 9 months ago
johanlefourbe added 1 item to 1001 Movies ... my own version (1940's) list
Notes: Apparently, the film was originally meant to be directed by Orson Welles and starring Charles Chaplin, but Chaplin backed out at the last moment, saying that he had never had anyone direct him before and didn't want to start. Can you imagine this combination?!? Eventually, Chaplin directed the thing himself and regarded the film as the cleverest and most brilliant film of his career. Unfortunately for him, it was a huge flop when it was released which was not really surprising when you think about it. Indeed, Chaplin was beloved for a playing the same character for years and, suddenly, he decided to do something entirely different and, a usual, the ruthless audience wouldn't have it. Personally, even though I didn't enjoy it as much as his previous movies, I still think it was pretty good and it is now highly regarded. You can't deny that it was way ahead of its time, some kind of lugubrious dark comedy. As a result, it is much more cynical and dark than his previous work but I really enjoyed it and I will probably re-watch it some day to make up my mind about it.3 years, 9 months ago
johanlefourbe commented on a review of Michael Moore in TrumpLand
Well, you can say whatever you want about Michael Moore but the guy actually called it. Indeed, Trump did win after all which was something that pretty much everybody, included myself, didn't see comi3 years, 9 months ago
johanlefourbe posted a review of The Mitchells vs. the Machines (2021)
“Following the debacle around ‘America: The Motion Picture’, I thought I might as well check the other animated feature produced by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller also released on Netflix this year. To be honest, when I first heard about this flick, I have to admit that I wasn’t really intere” read more
3 years, 9 months ago
johanlefourbe posted a video
3 years, 9 months ago
