Reviews by johanlefourbe

Even though I always had a hard time with Luc Besson’s work, I have to admit that, for the last 30 years already, he has been probably the most ambitious French director and his movies were always intriguing to watch. However, it all changed with ‘Taxi’. Indeed, it was the first time that Besson was written a movie for someone else and, even though this movie was truly dreadful in my opinion, it became a massive box-office hit, especially in France. From then on, Besson would become some kind of factory releasing one brainless action flick after the other (by now, the French writer/producer/director has already reached 60 writing credits!). This movie was basically one of those. Indeed, even though it was watchable, with a strong Jet Li at the top of his game, the story was just way too generic to hold my attention and I really had a hard time to care about the damned thing. At least, this movie would be one of the very last opportunities to see the lovely Bridget Fonda who would soon go into early retirement following this flick. Anyway, to conclude, I thought it was really average and I don’t think it is really worth a look, except maybe if you a die-hard fan of the genre.

I remember it pretty well when this movie was released and I’m pretty sure I actually saw the damned thing in the movie theater at the time. Before it came out, it was supposed to be the next big action flick starring Arnold Schwarzenegger but, unfortunately, it was critically panned and another box-office failure. I think it’s too bad because the whole thing definitely had some potential and it was probably the most original and ambitious movie made by John McTiernan. Personally, I don't think it was that bad though. The main issue is that they tried to combine many styles together (action, comedy, satire,...) but the whole thing was pretty messy and the tone was just all over the place. In my opinion, McTiernan is/was good, even one of the best, in straight action movies but his style was not subtle enough to carry something like this. Eventually, the problem is that a blockbuster of this size can never really be experimental so the whole thing was never really bold enough and, therefore, it never really reached its full potential. Anyway, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, I don't think it deserves such a bad reputation and it is actually worth a look, especially if you want to see an action flick which actually tries to be slightly original.

I remember very well when this flick was released, in fact, I’m pretty sure I saw the damned thing in the movie theater. Back in those days, I must have been 9 or 10 years old and I thought the whole thing was really hilarious. Sure, after all these years, the concept does really sound lame but I can’t help thinking again about this movie filled with nostalgia. Still, even though the whole thing might sound totally stupid and misguided, it is actually fairly entertaining. Indeed, Arnold Schwarzenegger, like any other major action stars like Sylvester Stallone, Dwayne Johnson, Vin Diesel or even Jason Statham recently,  decided at some point to get involved in some comedies but, in the contrary to his colleagues, his attempts were actually pretty decent. Indeed, the plot was rather preposterous and the whole thing was rather generic and predictable but Schwarzenegger was actually pretty funny and he managed to make fun his own machismo image. Anyway, after ‘Twins’, it was another hit for Ivan Reitman and Arnold Schwarzenegger and , a few years later, they tried their luck again with ‘Junior’ but it was a massive commercial and critical flop. Anyway, to conclude, even though it was probably not a masterpiece, it is definitely a guilty pleasure and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I already saw this movie but since it was a while back, I was quite eager to check it out again. First of all, I have noticed that some viewers believe that this feature is one of the most underrated movies ever made. Well, it is definitely an intriguing movie with 2 great actors at the top of their game, I’ll give you that, but I still don’t believe it is actually a great movie. I mean, the concept was interesting but I didn’t really dig the way they handled this material. Indeed, I think psychology is really fascinating but you don’t have many movies that really deal well with this subject and this movie was one of those, I’m afraid. Basically, they gave us here a deeply deranged man played by Kevin Spacey and, in this movie, instead of exploring his wounded psyche, they went for the option ‘what if what he said was actually true?’ which was just a rather underwhelming angle. Indeed, because of this approach, the whole psychological aspect, in fact the biggest asset in this flick, was just greatly undermined and what we got instead was some melodramatic fantasy. Basically, the whole theory developed in this movie was that mentally ill patients might actually be telling the truth after all which might be neat for some viewers but I thought it was rather ludicrous and not really compelling. Anyway, to conclude, even though I didn’t really care for this movie, I have to admit that it was rather well done and the actors involved did a fine job so it is still worth a look, in spite of some massive flaws. 

I had actually already seen this movie but it was such a long time ago, I could barely remember it, so it was really time for a re-watch. On top of that, one of my colleagues gave me this DVD so I had another good reason to check it out again. Well, it definitely deserves its stellar reputation, that’s for sure. Indeed, it is probably one of the best film noir ever made and the whole thing was quite pitch-perfect. First of all, Vienna, at the end of the WWII, was a  really murky place, it was the perfect spot for such a story and those chases down the sewers have become quite legendary by now. I also really enjoyed the dialogues which were sometimes almost hilarious but , above all, I really liked the fact that all the characters were far from being perfect, in the contrary. Even the main character was pretty much a loser,  a writer of cheap novels who seemed to be borderline alcoholic and the gorgeous Alida Valli, probably the least reprehensible character, was also seriously naive. The only slight issue I had is that I didn’t really understand the motivations of Harry Lime. Indeed, why did he actually ask his friend Holly Martins to come to Vienna? Why did he actually show up again to meet his friend? Maybe I missed something and should check it out again at some point.  Anyway, to conclude, it is a very good film noir and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

I already saw this movie but, since it was a while back, I thought I might as well check it out again. Well, the damned thing didn’t grow old very well, I’m afraid. First of all, the King Arthur tale is one of those stories that has been told so many times, just like The Three Musketeers, Sherlock Holmes, Tarzan or Robin Hood and every decade, we get a new version, even if we didn’t really ask for it. In the 2000's, just after the success of ‘Pirates of the Caribbean‘, even though it did sound like another misguided blockbuster, Jerry Bruckheimer released his own version which was directed by Antoine Fuqua but even though there was some buzz before its release, it didn’t get much love after all. Well, the cast was definitely interesting (Clive Owen, Ioan Gruffudd, Mads Mikkelsen, Joel Edgerton, Hugh Dancy, Ray Winstone, Ray Stevenson, Keira Knightley, Stellan Skarsgård, Til Schweiger)  and the whole thing looked decent enough but this movie still didn’t really work though. Basically, they went for a gritty and more realistic approach, which wasn’t necessarily a bad idea, but it certainly didn’t help that, at the very last minute, they decided to massively tone down the violence displayed. Another thing that bothered me was that, while most of the cast was decent enough, especially Stellan Skarsgård who was pretty much pitch-perfect, Clive Owen was rather weak here. It’s rather funny that, back then, Bruckheimer rejected a then-unknown Daniel Craig in favor of Owen because he was convinced that Owen would become the next James Bond. Anyway, there was not a single scene during which Owen did sound or look convincing. To conclude, I wonder if my rating might not be too high here but I guess this movie might still be a worth a look though, at least, if you like the genre. 

From time to time, you always meet someone that will argue that this movie is actually the best ever made. To be honest, I always had a hard time to get what was really the fuss about this flick. I mean, I will have to admit it, it is a very good néo-noir feature, probably even the very best one but could the best néo-noir feature also manage to be one of the very best movies ever made? I actually doubt it. The issue I have with this flick is that it is so well made, so slick, it might be actually be too faithful to the genre to be actually really remarkable, at least, that’s my opinion. Still, it remains a really solid flick nonetheless, easily the best thing ever made by Curtis Hanson who never managed to reach this level in his career again. Concerning this cast, it was pretty damned amazing (Kevin Spacey, Russell Crowe, Guy Pearce, Kim Basinger, James Cromwell, Danny DeVito, David Strathairn) and they all gave some of the best performances in their career. To conclude, even though it might not be one of my all-time favorites, it is still a very good movie and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.