Reviews by johanlefourbe

To be honest, I wonder how I actually ended up watching the damned thing. Anyway, I always had a weak spot for ‘Groundhog Day’ and it was actually fairly entertaining to see another movie recycling the very same formula. In this case, what they did was to switch the main character with a hot college girl and instead of the comedy genre, they went for a horror-comedy, which was all rather promising. On top of that, Jessica Rothe, an actress I had never noticed before, was really charismatic. However, it was the first issue they made, to still make it a comedy, and maybe it would have worked better as a full-on horror flick since ‘Groundhog Day’ already brilliantly covered most of the humour regarding this story. Another issue was that the whole serial killer angle seriously limited the whole thing and it did create some major plot-holes. I mean, why didn’t she lock herself up in Carter’s room and wait there until the end of the day? In fact, she actually did something similar, she did barricade herself in her room but, somehow, the killer still miraculously managed to get in. In my opinion, it would have been more fun if she kept getting killed completely randomly every single day. Finally, what made ‘Groundhog Day’ so great, beside the fact that it was really entertaining, was the fact that even though nothing was explained, you still understood more or less why the character kept coming back. In this movie, it was however much murkier though. Anyway, to conclude, even though it was nothing really original, I have to admit that it was still a decent watch and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

To be honest, I’m not a huge fan of this franchise but since all the instalments were made available by my TV provider, I thought I might as well check them out. Well, at least, I have to admit that it wasn’t much worse than the previous instalment but it wasn’t much better either. Once again, they managed to bring back John Kramer A.K.A Jigsaw with a few flashback scenes but, at least, it didn’t take half of the running time like it did with ‘Saw V’. However, Mark Hoffman remains such an underwhelming and unconvincing antagonist (and I’m afraid they didn’t manage to really kill him off at the end of this flick). On the other hand, I did like the fact that, with each new sequel, they gave more screentime to Jill Tuck and, even though Betsy Russell is not exactly a great actress, at least, she was way more charismatic than Costas Snooze Mandylor and I wish she was the one who took over Jigsaw’s work. There was another thing that really bothered me though and it was the ridiculous number of victims in the central ‘game’. Indeed, every Saw movie has some kind of game involving several players. Of course, it is always convoluted and pretty much unbelievable that someone could set this up but this movie did reach some new heights of ridiculousness by having around 15 people involved. Seriously, how can you explain that Mark Hoffman, a guy with a full time job as a police officer, would manage to build this up and kidnap a dozen of people apparently all on his own? There is also the fact that everything is supposed to be happening within a few hours. That’s probably the thing that annoys me the most, the fact that they want us to believe that Jigsaw is super smart but everything happening in this franchise is idiotically impossible. Anyway, to conclude, at least, I have to admit that it was still watchable but I’m glad I’m almost done with this franchise.

To be honest I wasn’t expecting much from this flick but it had been a while since I saw a huge bombastic action flick from Roland Emmerich and, since it was available on Netflix, I thought I might as well check it out. I actually already saw another movie about the same battle released in 1976 but it was almost 10 years ago and I have to admit that I didn't remember much about it. Anyway, it was probably the most serious movie ever delivered by Emmerich but while it was definitely a commendable approach, the end-result was not really thrilling. Sure, it all seemed to be more or less historically accurate but, as a result, the movie was basically divided between some really impressive action scenes and some rather tedious history lessons. At least, it was nice that they didn't add any superfluous romantic subplots (which was the main reason why 'Pearl Harbor' had been at the time a major critical flop) or any other subplot for that matter. However, as a result, the whole thing felt rather dry as they only focused on the historical events and not much on the characters themselves. I mean, there was indeed a big cast (Ed Skrein, Patrick Wilson, Woody Harrelson, Luke Evans, Mandy Moore, Dennis Quaid, Aaron Eckhart, Nick Jonas) but none of their characters was developed whatsoever. The only exception was for Ed Skrein who did manage to have slightly more screen time than the rest of his colleagues but I'm afraid he wasn't really up to the task. Indeed, ever since the guy had his breakthrough in 'Games of Thrones' (a job he actually dumped after a few episodes), I can't say he ever really impressed me and to have him carrying such a huge historical blockbuster like this one was probably asking too much. Anyway, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, I think it was a decent watch but, even so, it was still another rather forgettable directing effort from Emmerich.

To kick off 2021, I decided to watch this movie on Netflix since the subject seemed to be pretty interesting, even if it also seemed to be rather bleak and even depressing. Well, even if it turned out to be a solid documentary, to be honest, I didn’t feel I learned anything really new. Furthermore, I was hoping that they would tell us more about the origins of crack. How did they come up with this idea? Where did it all start? Furthermore, it seems that they tried to cover too much ground and the whole thing seemed rather scattered. Finally, I thought there were some contradictions a couple of times. For example, at some point, they were critical about the fact that the cops didn’t do anything to stop the drugs in their community but, then, 30 mins later, they were complaining that the very same communities were flooded with some special police task forces to take care of this issue. In the same fashion, they described in rather colourful details how the American Black women would do pretty much anything to get their crack doses but, later on, they complained that the same women got a bad rep about their drug usage. And, yet, there is no denying that the material was quite powerful though. Indeed, it was still quite revolting to see that the so-called ‘war on drugs’ which was a huge topic throughout the 80’s and the 90’s was actually pretty much used as a PR tool to boost the reputation of all the US presidents in power at the time. In the meantime, the US black community was completely devastated and, basically, nothing was done at the time or nowadays to help them out to recover from this disaster (except putting at least 1 million of black folks in jail) and you could say that they never really recovered from the blow. Anyway, to conclude, even if it was maybe not a masterpiece, it was still an important documentary and it is definitely worth a look.

The main reason I wanted to watch this flick was because it was, at some point, included in the ‘1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die’ list. It has been removed since then but since it has a decent reputation, I thought I might still check it out. To be honest, the whole tale of a young girl forced to marry a much older rich guy in the 19^th century was hardly original (For example, I saw ‘Madame Bovary’ starring Mia Wasikowska only a few months ago). This kind of tale is basically all about loneliness and boredom and the mood was indeed pretty dreary but, at least, the damned thing looked really beautiful to look at. However, the fact that the main character chose a lover who seemed to be only slightly less tedious than her husband didn’t really help to root for her (at least, the guy seemed to have some skills in the bedroom). The fact that she eventually killed a very young boy with her bare hands probably didn’t help either. And yet, I still liked the damned thing though thank to a pitch-perfect performance by Florence Pugh. The first refreshing thing was that, for this kind of parts, they usually take some actresses who are at least 10 years older than their character, but Pugh was not even 20 years old at the time and it’s just staggering that it was only her 2^nd acting part. Indeed, she displayed such acting skills and, even though we don’t learn much about what Katherine Lester might exactly think or feel after all, without any dialogues, Pugh still managed to convey so many emotions. Anyway, to conclude, even if the movie was maybe not great, it was just fascinating to see such a young talent burst into the screen in her breakthrough performance and, only therefore, it is worth watching the damned thing. 

In my opinion, even though ‘The Cabin in the Woods’ has become a cult-classic, I thought it was only a decent watch at best but since I kept hearing some interesting things about this new directing effort from Drew Goddard, I was still eager to check it out. Well, I have to admit that the damned thing definitely had potential. Indeed, while ‘The Cabin in the Woods’ was some kind of meta comment about the horror genre, this time, Goddard was obviously inspired by Tarantino’s work but he could have used some worse inspiration though. Indeed, the hotel himself was a great creation, even if Goddard seems to have stopped (or did he get stuck?) halfway through developing this intriguing location. It was the same issue with the characters. Indeed, even though there was plenty of running time (almost 150 mins), while 2 of them were provided a full background (Father Daniel Flynn A.K.A Dock O'Kelly and Darlene Sweet), all the other characters ended up being only half-developed giving a rather half-baked feeling. It’s not that they should have spent more time on each character though. For example, for Billy Lee, I would have given only the beach scene and then, I would have brought him back only at the hotel, on his own, towards the end. As a result, it would have made the character more intriguing and more menacing. Still, I have to admit that the mood and the unpredictability of the plot were quite enjoyable and, as long as you keep wondering what the hell will happen next, the damned thing was actually quite entertaining. Eventually, for me, the tipping point was when they suddenly turned Miles Miller, easily the least interesting character, into a veteran sniper from the Vietnam war. Seriously, this twist was just lame and it seemed pretty obvious that, at that point, Goddard’s card castle started to fall down under its own weight and it was apparently the only thing he could find to tie everything up (in a similar fashion, it is rather disappointing that Tarantino’s movies often end up with some massive shoot-out scenes). Anyway, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, I have to admit that it was still a decent watch and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

To be honest, I’m not a huge fan of this franchise but since all the instalments were made available by my TV provider, I thought I might as well check them out. Well, this sequel was probably the laziest I have seen so far. Basically, the dilemma faced by the makers was that John Kramer A.K.A Jigsaw had been terminally ill from the very beginning and, by this point, well, the guy was dead so how could they continue this tale without him? One option was to have his sidekick Mark Hoffman continue his work but the character and the actor playing this character were just so uncharismatic, it would have never worked. Eventually, the solution they found was to spend half of the duration showing some flashbacks scenes from the previous movies so, this way, they still managed to keep Jigsaw involved somehow. I have to admit that I do appreciate the links between all the movies, it makes it quite rewarding if you invest yourself in this franchise. However, to have them regurgitate some old scenes from the previous movies, albeit from a different point of view, was such a cheap-ass move though. Of course, this way, you do get an explanation on how Hoffman got involved in Kramer’s demented quest but it didn’t change the fact that this character remained pretty lame though. There was also a major plot-hole. I mean, sure, Jigsaw had nothing else to do then spending the whole day building up his little ‘games’ but, on the other hand, Hoffman did have a full-time job so how did he manage to be on the side a mastermind serial-killer with some vastly convoluted death games? He didn’t sleep at night maybe? By the way, I’m giving Hoffman a lot of sh*t but, to be honest, except for Jigsaw, the other characters not only in this movie but also in this franchise in general, were all weak and uninteresting (the fact that they almost all get killed off at some point is not an excuse). Anyway, to conclude, at least, I have to admit that it wasn’t a step down from the previous instalment but it wasn't a step up either and, therefore, I don’t think it is really worth a look.

Even though this movie was rather poorly received, since I have a weak spot for George Clooney’s work, I was still eager to check it out. Well, unfortunately, even if it was easily Clooney’s most ambitious directing effort so far, the damned thing still turned out to be disappointing. At least, it was visually pretty neat but it was probably the only thing that really worked, I’m afraid. Basically, they tried to cobble two stories together, one about seemingly the last man on Earth and another one about a spaceship crew coming back to Earth, but this mix never really worked and the movie awkwardly switched back and forth between the two tales. To make things worse, none of these stories was particularly interesting, in fact, there were even seriously derivative. I have to admit that have a weak spot for both genres, the apocalyptic minimalistic drama and the space survival thriller, so the damned thing was still watchable but, in my opinion, George Clooney has clearly displayed here his limits as a director, especially if you would compare his work to what Ridley Scott, Alfonso Cuaron or Stanley Kubrick did. At least, Clooney did deliver a solid performance and I wonder how the movie would have turned out to be if they had focused only on him (I would have even dropped the imaginary companion who was obviously a figment of his imagination right from the start). Anyway, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, I have to admit it that it was still a decent watch but, at this point, following this new flop, you might wonder if Clooney shouldn’t drop his dream of being a director and focus only on his career as an actor. 

I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but since I have a weak spot for Michelle Pfeiffer, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, I think it was actually an interesting story and the damned thing definitely had some potential. On top of that, pretty much like with ‘Silver Linings Playbook’, I have a weak spot for such romances involving 2 broken souls falling in love for each other, probably because it’s also how I actually met my wife. Unfortunately, even if the directing was not bad, to be honest, it wasn’t really impressive either. For example, to start with a voice-over telling the thoughts of a deaf teenager was not necessarily a bad idea but the supposedly deep message felt more like some Facebook philosophy. Furthermore, this approach felt even more misguided because of the fact that the movie eventually spent very little time with this character after all. Another issue was that Michelle Pfeiffer was not really good and Ashton Kutcher was in fact even worse. I have to admit that it was a really difficult part, probably the most challenging attempted by Kutcher so far, which required to convey a vast range of emotions without uttering a word. Unfortunately, his performance didn’t go much further than looking constipated through the whole duration. This lack of acting skills was even more obvious during the yard sale scene during which Kathy Bates completely nailed it and displayed a wide scale of shattering emotions within a few minutes. Anyway, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, it was still a decent story and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but since there was a decent cast involved, I thought I might as well check it out. To be honest, I actually had no idea what this movie was about and since there was a big cannabis leaf on all the promotional material, I assumed it would be some kind of wild stoner comedy. Well, this leaf turned out to be terribly misleading as, even if it turned out to be pretty wild, it was definitely not a stoner comedy. Fortunately, the damned thing was still entertaining enough though. Indeed, the whole chronological structure worked fine and all the various storylines were fairly well developed (the only exception would be the couple with Amanda Seyfried and Harry Treadaway which should or could have been easily removed). Concerning the cast, they were all pretty good and they had some rather juicy roles (David Oyelowo, Joel Edgerton, Charlize Theron, Sharlto Copley), except for a few very poorly developed female characters (Thandie Newton, Amanda Seyfried, Melonie Diaz). I was also surprised to see Paris Jackson in a very small and rather insignificant role (She is really charismatic but she doesn’t look like at all like her father which might be a good thing though). Still, even though the story and the characters were not bad, it was still missing something to really blow me away though. Eventually, I did like the approach chosen for the main character, to show him as a honest but also rather naïve and mild-mannered Nigerian man but I think it would have been more fun if the guy would have really lost his sh*t at some point (there were enough reasons to do so after all). Anyway, to conclude, even though it was nothing really amazing, it was still a decent watch and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.