Reviews by johanlefourbe

Since this movie has a really strong reputation, I was quite eager to check it out. By now, I have seen almost all the movies directed by Jacques Tati (I’m only missing ‘Trafic’) but, to be honest, even though I can say I’m quite familiar with his work, I’m afraid I never became a huge fan. Basically, with Tati, I actually understand more or less what he tried to achieve and I truly think the guy was an artist, it’s just that his art never really appealed to me. Well, this movie was not an exception but it doesn’t mean that I think that it was not enjoyable though. The most intriguing thing was probably the juxtaposition of a vintage version of the French way of life (I mean, it does feel ‘vintage’ now but, when it was released, it might have been actually quite contemporary) with a ultra-modern house. Of course, you might think that Tati hated this cold ugly house but I actually think he was actually fascinated by the future and what it would be like for the rest of us. Concerning the rest of the movie, I have to admit that I do like Tati’s vibe, the way that there is no real conflicts in his movies, no real bad guys, just some average people going on with their everyday life. So, there is something really harmonious in this movie and his work in general which is quite refreshing. Still, even though monsieur Hulot is a cute whimsical character, after all these years, I still don’t think he is fascinating or really entertaining though. The fact that the other characters were even less interesting probably didn’t help either. Anyway, to conclude, even if it didn’t really blow me way, it is still a classic and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

To be honest, I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but, since it was directed by Joachim Trier, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, it turned out to be a really enigmatic thriller and the fact that most of what was going on was a mystery through most of the duration made the whole thing equally fascinating and frustrating to behold. Eventually, did it all really make sense? Probably not but it was obviously not the point of this movie. Still, the fact that the main character forgot from her past exactly what was needed for the plot to work was narratively rather weak. Furthermore, I wasn’t so sure either about the anti-religious undertones. Maybe it’s because I’m getting more and more tolerant towards religious people as I grow older but I wonder how the movie would have been if this aspect would have been removed. Concerning Eili Harboe, she delivered here a really solid performance and she gave a perfect vibe for this character though. To be honest, I did wish that they did tone down the paranormal shenanigans so that they could focus more on her burgeoning relationship with Anja but, again, it was obviously not the point of this movie. Eventually, pretty much out of nowhere, this movie turned out to be somehow some kind of hyper realistic super-hero origin story which was definitely interesting. As a result, it basically displayed what could be the end-result with the super-hero genre if you would remove the spandex costumes, the carboard villains and this obsession of saving the world from some random impending doom which was definitely an intriguing approach. Anyway, to conclude, even if it not everything really worked, it was still another intriguing directorial effort from Joachim Trier it is definitely worth a look.

I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but, since it was directed by Erick Zonca and starring Tilda Swinton, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, it turned out to be one of the weirdest and wildest kidnappings I have ever seen, that’s for sure. To be honest, not everything did work in this movie but the damned thing was so unpredictable, at some point, I kept wondering what the hell would happen next which was definitely the strongest aspect of this movie. Of course, you also get around 150 mins of a non-stop one-woman-show from Tilda Swinton which was obviously pretty awesome as well. Concerning Erick Zonca, I wish I could rewatch ‘La vie rêvée des anges’ which had been a huge critical success when it was released in France. Anyway, almost 10 years later, he made his come-back with this movie which was something so completely different, so ambitious, in fact, I’m afraid it might have been too ambitious though. First of all, even though the Mexico scenes felt convincing enough, it was however never the case with the scenes taking place in the US. Seriously, I think it took me about 30 mins before I understood that the action was taking place in the USA and not in some other English speaking country. Furthermore, the appeal of this movie was the fact that the story was totally bonkers but, to be honest, some chunks barely made sense whatsoever. The biggest issue I had was that, while Elena was definitely an intriguing character, she was obviously mentally deranged but the fact that most of what she said turned out be true was rather ludicrous. The fact that Julia, even if she was a massive alcoholic, would believe anything she said was narratively really shaky as well. Anyway, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, it was still a decent watch though and I think it is worth a look, especially if you want to see something really different. 

Usually, when I watch a movie, I try to know as little as possible about it but, in this case, I actually knew beforehand what it would be about and it was actually the main reason why I wanted to check it out. Well, even if it was to be expected, the damned thing still turned out to be seriously dark and I guess what made this movie hard to swallow was the fact that its protagonist was also its antagonist played wonderfully by Trine Dyrholm. I mean, at first, she seemed to be some rather basic middle-aged woman slightly arrogant and self-righteous but it was nothing really shocking and it was to be expected from someone like her. At some point, it seemed that she was going through some middle-life crisis which was again fairly believable. However, her behavior became more and more erratic but I think the movie failed to really explained where it actually all came from. I mean, was she really so bored with her fancy house, her impressive job, her successful loving husband, her cute kids? Or was it something else than boredom? Eventually, it did feel that her actions were actually more plot-driven than anything else. Anyway, when her unsettling gamble seemed to finally explode into her face, the whole thing became even uglier than it already was. Indeed, instead of taking her responsibilities for her revolting behavior, she basically threw her step-son under the bus and the way she basically bullied her (coward) husband was really something. Indeed, it really felt so calculated, so calibrated, it was really powerful and one of the strongest scenes I have seen lately. Eventually, the impact on the poor boy was just so heartbreaking and you could see that his step-mom was not completely unmoved by his tragic demise but she still kept covering up her misdeeds anyway which was obviously rather nauseating to behold. Anyway, to conclude, even if it wasn’t flawless, it was still a strong drama though and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

To be honest, I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this movie but since there was a decent cast involved, I thought I might as well check it out. Unfortunately, the whole thing was actually based on a rather lame concept which was never really entertaining. Of course, the fact that the jokes were all pretty lame of course probably didn’t help either. Eventually, the only thing that worked was the relationship between Shirley MacLaine’s and Jessica Lange’s characters. Indeed, they had some really nice chemistry together, I really believed that these two women could have been best friends for decades and the movie almost worked as long as it was focusing only on them. Unfortunately, pretty much everything else was either boring or uninteresting or far-fetched or a combination of all three. The ending was also really pathetic as they made Eva (played by Shirley MacLaine) getting in a relationship with the insurance guy who was chasing her. I mean, seriously? It was even more ridiculous than the fact that her daughter would tag along with him to chase her mother all the way to the Canary Islands. I have to admit that I always had a weak spot for Demi Moore but I’m afraid she delivered here another half-baked performance and, to be honest, I can’t remember the last time she actually impressed me in anything. And what was the deal with Billy Connolly’s character? Was he really dement or was it just part of his scheme? They didn’t even take the time to clear that out at the end. Anyway, to conclude, even if I have to admit that the damned thing was rather harmless, the end-result was still rather pathetic and I would advise to avoid it, except maybe if you really like the genre. 

To be honest, I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but since it was directed by D.W. Griffith and since it is included in the ‘They Shoot Pictures, Don’t They?’ list, I thought I might as well check it out. First of all, after watching so many vintage features on YouTube of dubious qualities which were barely watchable, it was pretty neat to see a movie which was made more than 100 years ago and, yet, it was still in pristine quality. The soundtrack was also pretty good. Unfortunately, it’s too bad I didn’t care much for the movie itself though. Indeed, the tagline for this movie was ‘The Story of a Plain Girl’ and, even if it was indeed a fair description, I’m afraid it didn’t make this movie sound really exciting. Even though D.W. Griffith became famous at the time with his ambitious epic features in the 1910’s, this movie turned out to be a much more minimalistic affair focusing on a love affair involving Susie, who wasn’t the brightest of the bunch (it was even confirmed by this tagline) and William who was wasn’t much smarter either, I’m afraid. Concerning Lillian Gish, she made many movies with Griffith and was one of the most famous actresses at the time but,  even though she did look lovely, she didn’t really impress me here. At least, Robert Harron was slightly better as he was pretty convincing playing the same character when he was a teenager and when he was a young adult. Still, it was rather difficult to care about these characters and what they were going through since they were both hardly interesting. Anyway, to conclude, even if it didn't really work for me, I still think it is worth a look, at least, if you really like the genre or if you are interested in D.W. Griffith’s work.

I wasn’t expecting much from this movie but, since there was decent cast involved and since it was available on Netflix, I thought I might as well check it out anyway. Seriously, even before I actually started to watch the damned thing, the story did sound so derivative and hardly entertaining. To be honest, you might wonder how they managed to get such a solid cast involved (Toni Collette, Anna Faris, David Duchovny, Rosemarie DeWitt, Kathleen Turner, Ron Livingston). I do think that they all tried to make it work and I have to admit that there were some moments when they almost pulled it off. But, unfortunately, only ‘almost’…. Indeed, even though their whole plan was rather mean and obviously unethical, I don’t think the characters were really unlikable, with the exception of David Duchovny’s character though. Sure, Kathleen Turner played your typical grumpy old lady, and she did it with gusto, but her character was just one-note and she had no personality whatsoever. In fact, it’s just weird that, even though she was dying, even though she was high on morphine for most of the time, she seemed to be sharp enough to see what the hell was going on but yet she said nothing about it. Anyway, even if I didn’t hate these characters, it doesn’t mean that they were really interesting or entertaining at all though. Concerning the ending, at least, it was nice that Aunt Hilda’s final words were ‘You are all bastards’ or something like that but everything else happening afterwards (including the two twists) was just predictable, it was borderline pathetic. Eventually, when it is so difficult nowadays to get the greenlight for a mid-budget feature, you might wonder why something so hopeless from the start like this managed to get made at all. Anyway, to conclude, it turned out to be pretty weak and, even if I have seen worse, you should probably avoid it. 

To be honest, I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but since it did win the Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival, I was quite eager to check it out. Well, to be honest, since it had a strong reputation, I was actually expecting more from the damned thing which turned out to be 2 movies into 1. Indeed, on one hand, they focused on Nan Goldin’s life and career and, on the other hand, her recent battle with the Sackler family who was behind the opioid crisis in the US but, to be honest, I’m not sure if this mix really worked after all. First of all, I have to admit that I had never heard of Nan Goldin before and it was neat to discover this really interesting artist. Indeed, her life and work were quite fascinating and I think I would have been perfectly content if they would have focused only on that. I mean, her fight against the Sacklers was also interesting but I had a hard time to see how it did fit with her life in general. There was also the fact that it was obvious that Goldin had been using (and abusing) recreational drugs for pretty much her whole adult life and, to be honest, I think there was something disingenuous about her complaining about the fact that she got hooked on some legal drug pushed by her doctor(s) and the pharmaceutical industry. I mean, there is nothing more hard-breaking then hearing all these stories about young kids who never touched any drugs and suddenly became addicts after getting this legal drug prescribed but I do think that it was a completely different story for Goldin. Finally, there was the fact that she was supposedly instrumental for the ‘downfall' of the Sackler family but, at the end of the day, sure, they paid a lot of money but it turned out to be only a fraction of their huge fortune and, to be honest, who cares if their name was removed from some fancy museums? I’m pretty sure that it didn’t bother the Sacklers that much and I’m definitely sure that the drug addicts overdosing on this stuff certainly didn’t care at all but I can imagine that it did give Golding a better feeling about herself. Anyway, to conclude, even if it didn’t really blow me away, it was still a decent watch though and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in this subject matter.