Reviews by johanlefourbe

I had already seen this movie, even in the movie theater when it was released, but since I had it on DVD, I thought I might as well check it out again. Back then, in the 90’s, when John Woo finally made the move to Hollywood, many expected that he would make some amazing action flicks but, unfortunately, most of them turned out to be seriously disappointing.  This movie is however one of the few exceptions and easily the best movie directed by John Woo at the time. I mean, sure, the premise was completely preposterous but it is just so much fun to see John Travolta and Nicolas Cage switching roles and therefore having the opportunity to play both the good guy and the bad guy. Eventually, both actors delivered some strong performances but I think I had a slight preference for John Travolta but they were both really good in this movie. Eventually, as usual with this director, the action scenes were efficient enough but it was above all because those 2 characters were pretty neat that the whole thing turned out to be quite entertaining in spite of a really ridiculous concept. To conclude, even though it might not be a masterpiece, it is still a strong action flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

To be honest, it is a rather obscure feature and the main reason why I wanted to check it out was because Jude Law was playing the lead. Back in those days, Jude Law just got his breakthrough with ‘Gattaca’ the year before and he seemed to be set to become the next biggest movie star. Eventually, even though Law always had a decent career, he never really fulfilled those expectations. Anyway, coming back to our main feature, it was one of his last really obscure features and even though it was nothing really amazing, I thought it was still a decent watch. Basically, it was yet another vampire feature with a nice mood but it didn’t really bring anything new or really interesting about this very old genre. At least, Jude Law was a perfect choice to play the lead but, eventually, the thing I enjoyed the most was to see Kerry Fox after so many years. Indeed, I thought she was just amazing in ‘An Angel at My Table’, ‘Shallow Grave’ and ‘Intimacy’ but, even though she seemed really talented, I never saw her in anything else and this movie is actually a good example of the kind of work she has been focusing on throughout her career. Anyway, to conclude, I thought it was not bad and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this movie but since the ratings were pretty high and since my wife loves horses, I thought we might check this one together. Well, to be honest, even though it turned out to be a decent watch, I can’t say I really care for the damned thing and I’m rather amazed that Roger Ebert loved this movie so much (he even chose it as one of the best movies released in 2010). Basically, it is a typical Disney feature at his safest and, as a result, there was barely any dramatic events at all during the whole thing. I mean, at some point, I was expecting the main character to divorce and go further as a single-mom, showing to the world what women can do without the help of a husband but this conflict never went that far. It’s like the daughter being involved in the war protest, it was really poorly developed and didn’t add anything to the whole plot. Still, I have to admit it, it was quite an uplifting story. Indeed, Secretariat was definitely an incredible horse, probably the best racehorse that ever lived, and the fact that I didn’t know anything about his story made the whole thing even more entertaining to me. Anyway, to conclude, even though I think it is rather overrated, it was still not bad at all and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

To be honest, even though this movie doesn’t have a really stellar reputation, I always had a weak spot for  the damned thing and it is definitely one of my guilty pleasures. The point is that, when this movie was released, I was just about 12 years old and there was this huge revival around The Doors (in fact, mostly thanks to this flick). Like many other teenagers at the time, my sister and I fell in love with this music and, therefore I thought at the time that this movie was just awesome. Of course, since then I sobered up and I came to realize that this movie was not so amazing. The main issue, in my opinion, is that Oliver Stone never really figured out what he should really do with Jim Morrison. Was he a pitiful drug-addict, a circus act or a misunderstood genius? Still, in spite of its flaws, you can't deny that Val Kilmer was downright amazing in his portrayal of this huge rock-star. Anyway, even though the whole thing might have been rather half-baked, I really like the damned thing, even if it is above all out of sheer nostalgia, and I think it is worth a look, especially if you are a fan of the Doors.

To be honest, it has been years since I have seen this flick but it was really weak, I don’t think I will waste my time again with it. Of course, you might argue that, with such a title, there was no way that this movie could have been worth anything but I really disagree. In fact, I actually loved the concept but, unfortunately, it was just really poorly developed and the result was rather cringe-inducing. The biggest mistake they made was to go for a PG13 rating. Sure, from a financial point of view, it is always smarter to go for this rating to reach a wider audience but this material should have been obviously R rated. Then, the second problem was that they assumed that if these characters are stoners then it means that they should be really stupid as well which is a really poor assumption. On top of that, it’s always a problem when you try to make a comedy about some stupid characters (see also ‘Dumb & Dumber’, a so-called masterpiece in this genre), most of the time, these characters never become fun and entertaining, they just remain annoying to behold. Finally, the last problem was that Ashton Kutcher and Seann William Scott were both seriously underwhelming. To conclude, I won’t go more into details, the whole thing was just really lame and it is not worth a look. 

Nowadays, I have access to such services like HBO, Netflix and even (the illegal) Porcorn but, before that, I was dependent on what would be broadcast on the various TV channels we have.  As a result, I have ended up watching some rather obscure movies for some rather dubious reasons and this movie was a perfect example. Indeed, the main reason I thought I might as well check it out was because I have a weak spot for Malin Akerman. Basically, she made this movie a couple of years before her breakthrough in ‘Watchmen’ but her career turned out to be rather disappointing after all. Anyway, she didn’t have a really big part, in fact, the whole thing was about 2 really boring and obnoxious brothers played by Will Arnett and Will Forte. Later on, I discovered that this movie was actually directed by Bob [Link removed - login to see][Link removed - login to see][Link removed - login to see], the awesome actor playing Saul Goodman in ‘Breaking Bad’, but I’m afraid Odenkirk might be a better actor than director. Seriously, what a lame comedy… It’s always the problem when you try to make a comedy about some cringe-inducing characters (see also ‘Dumb & Dumber’, a so-called masterpiece in this genre), most of the time, these characters never become fun and entertaining, they just remain cringe-inducing to behold. Anyway, to conclude, I think I was generous with my rating here, the whole thing was a waste of time and I don’t think it is worth a look. 

By now, I have seen all the James Bond instalments, sometimes, even several times, but to be honest, most of them are actually rather forgettable and I would have a rather hard time to really recall most of them in details. However, there are a few exceptions and this first instalment is definitely one of them. Indeed, back then, they had their lowest budget so it was probably not the most elaborate instalment but it was understandable since the formula was new at the time. They still managed to already introduce many elements that they still use more than 50 years later. Indeed, the whole concept of the James Bond girl started here with the gorgeous Ursula Andress and it would always be a great challenge for many actresses to fill in her shoes (most of them would ultimately fail). Dr. No would be also a really memorable villain and the blueprint for many other villains that would come later on in this franchise. And, of course, the ultimate masterstroke was James Bond himself. I mean, right from the start, he became one of the most iconic characters and even though many believed that Sean Connery was a poor choice (even Ian Fleming himself), he was just awesome giving this character many of his most famous trademarks. To conclude, even though it was maybe not a masterpiece, it remains one of the best James Bond flicks and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

This movie is pretty much the stuff of legends. Indeed, even though it is probably the least regarded movie directed by David Lynch (himself always considered it a massive failure), it has now reached more or less a cult status. Anyway, it must sound surprising but I thought it was actually not bad at all. I have to admit it, the fact that  that I did read the book before watching this movie might have helped me as the story was never really confusing to me. I guess, without this previous knowledge of the material, I wouldn't have enjoyed this movie that much. Still, it was the first and last time that David Lynch was directing a big budget feature and, honestly, I thought it was pretty neat to see him at work within a totally different environment. Of course, with a director like him, the whole thing was pretty much doomed from the start but I always had a weak spot for SF features and I enjoyed the way Lynch developed this epic tale (Can you imagine if they did give him the final-cut on this production?). Apparently, Lynch didn't enjoy much being a director-for-hire and he would only make his own personal projects in the future. Anyway, to conclude, even though this movie has a really lame reputation, I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

When I heard that Bernardo Bertolucci was coming up with a new directing effort, I got pretty excited. I mean, sure, it had been already a couple of decades since he had released a great movie but the guy had such an impressive legacy so I was really eager to see this movie and I even went to see the damned thing in the movie theater when it was released. For this come-back, Bertolucci decided to make something smaller, something more intimate than some of his previous work, but even though it was an interesting approach, I’m afraid it rather backfired since the whole thing had such a small scale and therefore it had little impact. It’s like the characters themselves, they tried to make you believe that they were some very interesting individuals with some fascinating thoughts but I wasn’t really convinced. It’s like showing them naked and being promiscuous, it was maybe groundbreaking in the 60’s when the action was taking place but in 2003, it was nothing really new. Still, it was pretty neat to discover a very young Eva Green who not only looked quite gorgeous but who was also really talented. To conclude, in spite of its flaws, it was still a decent watch and I think it is worth a look, especially if you are interested in Bernardo Bertolucci’s work.