Reviews by johanlefourbe

Even though the whole concept was actually rather lame, even more after all these years, I have to admit that I always had a weak spot for this flick. Indeed, in my case, it is pretty much a guilty pleasure and definitely a childhood favorite. Basically, I must have been 9 or 10 years old the first time I saw it, I even watched the damned thing in the movie theater when it was released and, back then, I thought the whole thing was just really hilarious. Give me a break, I was just a kid and I didn't know better! I still believe it was a pretty cool idea to have a baby voiced by Bruce Willis and the kid was just really funny. However, pretty much every else in the movie was rather underwhelming. Indeed, even if John Travolta and Kirstie Alley were quite charismatic and had some nice chemistry, I didn't care much about what they were going through and that was basically the problem with this flick. Indeed, if you removed the whole gimmick about the talking baby, this flick had seriously nothing to offer. Anyway, for Travolta, this movie would be his first and only hit during the 80's but he would have to wait a few more years to make his real come-back with 'Pulp Fiction'. Anyway, I always had a weak spot for this flick and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

Not so long ago, I saw 'The Beaver', the latest directing effort delivered by Jodie Foster. Even though I did like it, it was certainly a really risky project, not only because of the subject matter, but also because it was dealing with a man having a mental breakdown and this man happened to be played by Mel Gibson. So, it was risky and it didn't get much love when it was released which is too bad, especially if you consider the fact it took Foster 16 years to finally come up with a new movie as a director. It's too bad because, almost 25 years, when she made this directing debut, she definitely displayed some potential. Surprisingly, I just read on the internet that the director was actually supposed to be Joe Dante but he apparently left for the usual ' creative differences' so Foster took over as a director. Sure, it was pretty obvious that it was a directing debut and this tale was pretty straightforward and predictable but I did like the focus she gave on the characters, the mother and the son, and the whole thing was quite interesting and entertaing. To conclude, even though it was nothing really mind-blowing, it was still a decent drama and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

I remember it rather well, when this movie was released, there was quite some buzz about it. On top of that, I really liked 'Brassed Off' , Mark Herman's previous directing effort, so I was quite eager to see his following project. This time again, Herman was working with the always interesting Ewan McGregor but, this time, the lead was actually played by Jane Horrocks, an actress I had never seen before. Eventually, even though the critics were completely enthusiast, to be honest, I thought it was a decent watch but not much more than that, I'm afraid. I don't know, in my opinion, even though the story was entertaining, it was in fact fairly generic and predictable. On top of that, even though everyone thought that Jane Horrocks was completely amazing, personally, I think she had indeed a very strong voice but her character was not really interesting and, in fact, she was pretty much upstaged by the rest of the stellar cast (Brenda Blethyn, Ewan McGregor, Michael Caine, Jim Broadbent). To conclude, even though I think it is slightly overrated, it is still a pretty good flick though and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

It is a rather obscure flick and I wasn't sure what to expect but since there was a decent cast, I was quite eager to check it out. First of all, Ben Stiller has built up a rather successful career as a comedian and this movie was one of his rare attempts to do something completely different. Indeed, this time, Stiller was playing a drug addict. In fact, he was actually pretty good and quite convincing and his performance was definitely the best thing about this movie. It's too bad the movie itself wasn't really great. The fact that the whole drama about a downward spiral of a junkie's life was not really original was not even the problem. To start with, the introduction was terribly clumsy. Indeed, why starting the story with Ben Stiller meeting Maria Bello? It didn't reallly make sense and the whole gimmick of telling her his tale was just really weak as well. The point is that it is actually a rich story but, with such a short running time (just above 80 mins), you wonder why they lost some much time on this relationship. Indeed, they could have developed his youth, how he got into drugs, how he managed to balance his work as TV writer and his drug habbit, there were quite a lot to explore but the whole thing didn't really deliver. To conclude, even though I think it was rather half-baked, I still think it is a decent watch and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you want to see Ben Stiller doing something completely different. 

I wasn't really sure what to expect from this flick but since there was a decent cast, I thought I might as well check it out. To be honest, after maybe only 5 minutes,  I was already underwhelmed by the whole thing. Basically, it seemed to be one of those quirky romantic-comedies and,  apparently, I was just not in the mood for something like this today. To make things worse, it never got better later on and it seemed that the whole thing never really managed to take off. I mean, what was actually the deal with the main character?!? Even though he seemed to be a college student, he never went to class, never worked either, so, what did he actually do the whole day? To make things worse, he is lucky enough to have 2 very cute roommates and it seemed to be really unbelievable that he would manage to get something romantic going on with both of them with apparently no experience or skills in this area. After showing up in The Lord of the Rings trilogy, I always thought that Elijah Wood became very picky about his following projects but, a decade later, he has made only a couple of really good movies after all. In this movie, he tried really hard to sell this material but it just didn't work. Anyway, to conclude, I thought it was pretty weak and I don't think it is really worth a look. 

Already 2 years ago, Steven Soderbergh decided to retire which was too bad. I mean, it could have been nice if he could slow down a bit (he basically made 15 movies in 15 years before his retirement) but, to completely stop, that was rather extreme. Anyway,  this movie was actually made at a pivotal point in Soderbergh's career. Indeed, so far, he had been making some rather obscure and bairly seen indie features and, a year earlier, he had already started to change pace with 'Out of Sight'  starring George Clooney. A year later, he would release a double-bang with 'Erin Brockovich' and 'Traffic' and his career would never be the same anymore. Coming back to our main feature, it was still a rather obscure flick,  something much smaller with no big star and, to be honest, the plot was rather generic. However, this time, Soderbergh obviously didn't care much about the story, he was much more involved in the look, the mood and the style and I think it made the whole thing quite mesmerizing to behold. To conclude, even though it might not be a masterpiece, it was still a decent watch and I think it is worth a look, especially if you are interested in Steven Soderbergh's work. 

I already saw this movie, in fact, I even saw it in the movie theater when it was released, but, since it was such a long time ago, I thought I might as well check it out again. Obviously,  it is a rather minor effort in Bertolucci's otherwise rather stellar career but I still think there were many things to enjoy about the damned thing. Of course, you had the major obstacle of having Keanu Reeves playing Siddhartha who would eventually become no less than the Buddha. Basically, it is the very old dilemma of casting a famous actor above someone unknown who might have had a more accurate ethinicity. In this case, in my opinion, it was above all a rather odd choice to have an actor most widely known as being terribly wooden to portray one of the most highly sprititual figures that ever lived. And yet, it remains one of these rare movies dealing with spirituality, with no bad guys involved, and it was quite refreshing. Still, I'm not sure if it was such a good idea to mix the life of  Siddhartha with another plot dealing with the reincarnation of some lama. Concerning the reincarnation stuff, I wonder if most parents wouldn't freak out if someone would show up at their door saying that their young kid was the reincarnation of their guru. Anyway, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, I still think it is worth a look though, especially if you are interested in this subject.

I wasn't sure what to expect from this movie but since I have a weak spot for Jude Law, I thought I might as well check it out. Apparently,  it is his least favorite of his movies and, to be honest, even though it wasn’t really awful, I can’t say I really liked it either. To beginning with, it starts with a really awkward scene during which the lead character is just 5 years old and helps a woman to deliver her baby. Seriously, in the romantic-comedy genre, they come up with some weird meet-cute scenes to get a couple to get acquainted but that was really something else. I mean, they didn't actually make a big fuss out of it eventually, but, on a psychological level, it could mess you up to have your hands in a vagina to play around with a baby at such a young age. But, like I said before,  it is just a meet-cute and they didn't spend much time on this matter after all. Anyway,  even though both Jude Law and Gretchen Mol were really cute and had some decent chemistry together,  their story was rather underwhelming. On top of that,  Mol had also 2 sisters and 1 brother, all with their own half-baked sub-plots, and it was a little too much for a movie running just above 90 minutes.  To conclude, it was pretty weak and I don't think it is really worth a look. 

Obviously, the main reason I wanted to check this movie was for its controversial reputation. Basically, it was supposed to be one of the most sexually explicit mainstream movies ever made and I can guarantee you that it does really deserve its reputation. Indeed, right from the very beginning, you get several sex acts going from masturbation, to straight sex, gay sex and even some SM. At the end of the scene, you even get several ejaculations, even a guy ejaculating in his own mouth which was something I seriously didn't expect. So, you have been warned and if you still want to watch it, at least, you know what kind of trip it is. To be honest, even though there were a lot of gay sex, probably more than 50%, I think the explicit scenes were actually very well done and they didn't really make me feel uncomfortable, at least, not too much. Concerning the rest of the movie, I think the Shortbus club was quite fascinating and the group of characters involved were also interesting. Unfortunately, the running time was rather short (just above 90 mins) , I think there were just too many characters and, to be honest, some of their stories were either far-fetched or rather half-baked. Anyway, to conclude, for an experimental feature, I thought it was not bad, I guess it is worth a look, at least, if you are into this kind of features, otherwise you should definitely avoid it.

Apparently, Tim Burton was actually planning to make a third Batman picture but it seems that the studio got worried that his movies were getting darker and darker so they went for another director and this movie was the end-result. Eventually, even though it turned out to be another box-office success for this franchise, I didn't like it much, I'm afraid. Basically, the biggest change was in the tone. Indeed, if the Burton movies were pretty dark and sometimes even gloomy, this one was filled with some fluorescent colors and neon which made the movie maybe easier to swallow for the mainstream audience but it became also much less appealing to me. The other thing that bother me was how cheesy the dialogues were. Indeed, there were filled with some rather silly oneliners and I can understand that Micheal Keaton dropped from the whole thing since he didn't want to get involved in some cartoon. I have to admit it, it wasn't completely awful and I guess it must have been fun for all the kids up to 12 years old. Furthermore, Val Kilmer was actually a very good choice to play the Dark Knight, physically probably the best of them all. Nicole Kidman also never looked so stunning but I think I have never seen such a shallow psychiatrist before. Anyway, to conclude, I thought it was pretty weak and I don't think is really worth a look.