Reviews by johanlefourbe

I already saw this movie but since it was a while back, I thought I might as well check it out again. Well, at last, after being literally lost for so many years making 'Where the Wild Things Are', Spike Jonze was finally back and the end-result was once again pretty terrific (By the way, it's too bad he hasn't released anything new since then). Anyway, he basically made here a fascinating movie which worked on so many levels. First of all, I really liked the minimalistic style and the whole thing was visually really appealing but it went way beyond that. For example, it might sound crazy to have the main character fall in love with his operating system but in a world where we barely speak to our next-door neighbours and yet manage to have 3000 friends on Facebook or any other social platform or manage to have a deep relationship with someone living at the other side of the globe, are we really so far from this reality? Talking about reality, is the physical world much more significant than any virtual world? And what is the foundation of our relationships? Is it something really physical or is it in fact the interactions that we have with one and another? This movie went really deep into those questions without of course giving any answers but the process displayed was just mesmerizing. On top of that, it was just so refreshing to finally see a movie dealing with an advanced AI who didn't become homicidal at some point. It's so frustrating that, very often in science-fiction, something new or unknown is automatically handled as a threat. Finally, I shouldn't forget to mention that Joaquin Phoenix delivered here another hell of a one-man show but it was also quite might amazing what Scarlett Johansson managed to do only with her voice. Anyway, to conclude, it might be Spike Jonze's best movie so far, it is that good and it is definitely worth a look.

That’s another seriously obscure feature. Indeed, I was the 2nd listal user to rate this thing and not even 10 users have seen it apparently (on the other hand, not even 1500 Imdb users have rated it and that’s terribly low as well). Anyway, back in those days, Peter Mullan was finally getting noticed following his stellar performance in 'My Name Is Joe’ and the very same year he decided to release this directing debut. It sounded quite intriguing so when to see this movie in the movie theater when it was released. To be honest, it was pretty obvious that it was a first directing effort as the whole thing was not really ambitious and the scale was rather modest but I still think it was a decent dark British comedy. Also, just like Mullan’s way of acting, I think this movie displayed his interest in the human sould and that was quite intriguing. His follow up would be ‘The Magdalene Sisters’, a much more ambitious historical feature which was quite heralded at the time of its release but also unfortunatelly rather forgotten nowadays. To conclude, even though it is a really obscure feature, I still think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I already saw this movie but, since it was ages ago and since it was available on Netflix, I thought I might as well check it out again. On top of that, I already watched again recently 'Les bronzés' and 'Les bronzés font du skis’ with the same group of actors and since I enjoyed these movies much more this time, I was really wondering how this movie would turn out after all these years. Indeed, when I was a kid growing up in France, virtually everybody was talking about this movie which is a major popular classic in my home country. With this reputation, I became really curious but, to be honest, back then, I thought the whole thing was rather disappointing. Well, with this rewatch, I was finally able to enjoy the damned thing. First of all, I have to admit that I didn't remember much about it which shows how little it did impress me at the time. Obviously, it was nice to see the troupe du Splendid (Christian Clavier, Gérard Jugnot, Thierry Lhermitte, Josiane Balasko, Marie-Anne Chazel, Anémone) at the beginning of their career with their most famous play. On top of that, after all these years, I have to admit that the damned thing was really funny. Sure, I still don't think that it is as hilarious as many die-hard French fans might argue but many jokes worked very well though. I also think that they had a gift to write some genuine characters who were compelling to watch exactly because they were so average with not much redeeming features. Anyway, to conclude, even though it is still not one of my favorite movies, I have to admit that it is actually a really solid comedy and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in French movies.

To be honest, I always had some mixed feelings about this flick. First of all, even though the John Grisham’s books adapations were really popular in the 90’s, I have to admit those were quite entertaining but I also find them always terribly far-fetched. Still, from a marketing level, this was a smart move. Indeed, after ‘Pretty Woman’, Julia Roberts was the most popular actress in the world and Denzel Washington was also becoming a very strong value and combined with John Grisham’s current best-seller power, it was a great combo. Still, as pointed out by Roger Ebert, it is rather sad that the guy behind ‘All the President's Men’, one of the greatest thrillers ever made, would eventually end up with a decent but still rather straightforward flick like this one. And, of course, you have the fact that even though, in the book, there was some romance going on between the leads, nothing like this happens in the movie. You might argue that it is always rather stupid that, in most of the thrillers, the main characters usually end up in bed but, in this case, it is pretty obvious that if they would have replaced Denzel Washington with Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt, you could be sure that some romantic angle would have been added. To conclude, even though I’m not a fan, I have to admit that it is still a fairly entertaining feature and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I have just discovered that I have actually seen all the movies directed by Michael Haneke. Right now, after winning back-to-back twice the prestigious Golden Palm at the Cannes Film Festival, the guy is pretty much at the top of his game and he is definitely one of the most interesting directors at work nowadays. It is also interesting that he has made half of his movies in France and this feature was the second one he made there. Personally, even though I was expecting a lot from ‘Code inconnu’, I thought it was rather disappointing and too difficult to decipher for me. Eventually, this follow-up was maybe more straightforward but eventually much more enjoyable to watch. Ok, ‘enjoyable’ might not be the right word as, like in all the movies directed by Haneke, you deal with some dark and ambiguous characters, dealing with some twisted emotions. Isabelle Huppert, one of the best French actresses, delivered an impressive performance and with Benoît Magimel, they had some really nice chemistry together. Like most of Haneke's work, the whole thing had a strong mesmerizing effect but the mood was so dark, it was as a result also quite alienating. To conclude, even though it wasn’t a complete home-run, it was still a strong drama and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Michael Haneke’s work.

It has been a while since I have seen this flick and I should definitely re-watch it at some point. First of all, I’m well aware of the fact that, ever since the ‘Batman & Robin’ debacle, Joel Schumacher has always had a rather lousy reputation but, somehow, I always had a weak spot for his work. I mean, sure, except for the criminally underrated ‘Tigerland’, he hasn't done anything really brilliant but most of his movies are actually quite entertaining and this flick is a fine example. Indeed, 2 years after ‘Tigerland’, Joel Schumacher decided to work again with Colin Farrell and he gave us once again one of his best features. I mean, sure, the whole concept was really far-fetched and terribly limited but that was also its appeal and they managed to get most of this concept. Indeed, one of the nice touch was to make the main character a fairly sleezy and unlikeable guy and the fact that Farrell gave a really solid performance was definitely an asset as well. To conclude, even though it wasn’t really a masterpiece, I thought it was a solid thriller and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but since I have a weak spot for Susanne Bier’s work and for Pierce Brosnan, I thought I might as well give it a try. Somehow, it did reminded me of ‘Mamma Mia!’. Indeed, if you would remove the ABBA songs, most of the inane plot but still kept Pierce Brosnan for good measure, those movies are actually somewhat similar. Anyway, I thought it was not bad at all, at least, it was much lighter than most of the Scandinavian movies I have seen so far. Still, there was plenty of dark stuff and the makers went constantly going back in forth between some rather fluffy romance and some overly tragic stuff. This mix was quite bold and interesting but it didn’t completely work, to be honest. On top of that, I think that they were too many supporting characters, each having their own little sub-plot, and they should made some choices about what to keep and what to drop. Still, I thought that Trine Dyrholm and Pierce Brosnan were both terribly charismatic and they had some great chemistry together. To conclude, even though it was nothing groundbreaking, I thought it was a decent romantic feature and I think it is worth a look, especially if you are interested in Scandinavian cinema.

I already saw this movie but since it was a while back, I thought I might as well check it out again. I have noticed that this movie doesn’t really have a strong reputation but, in fact, I actually have a weak spot for the damned thing which is rather surprising because I’m not really a huge fan of such action flicks. Indeed, in my opinion, even though the whole thing was obviously rather predictable, I thought it was a spectactular and fairly believable disaster movie. Of course, after watching this, my wife pointed out ‘if they all died, how could they know how it actually all happened?’. But it didn't bother me. Furthermore, they took their time to introduce these fishermen from Gloucester and the end-result felt really convincing. Anyway, to really enjoy it, you shouldn’t really watch it expecting a tale based on the testimonies of the survivors but even so, I thought that the material was fairly well handled. Concerning George Clooney, at the time, he was still struggling to find his mojo and, if you put aside the ‘Ocean’s Eleven’ franchise, it would be in fact his last blockbuster. 6 years later, Wolfgang Petersen would try again his luck with another boat related feature with ‘Poseidon’ but it would be a financial and critical flop. Anyway, to conclude, even though it was not a masterpiece whatsoever, I thought it was a decent disaster flick 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 was quite eager to check it out again. To be honest, I always had some mixed feelings about this flick. Indeed, on one hand, Jonathan Demme is a fine director and Denzel Washington and Tom Hanks provided also some solid performances. Especially for Tom Hanks, it really launched the 2nd phase of his career. Indeed, so far, Hanks was successful as a comic actor but, thanks to this movie, not only he managed to win his first Academy Award but he became overnight a really sought-after dramatic actor. Concerning the HIV issue, since it was a the first mainstream movie about the subject, it was indeed quite important. And, yet, the whole thing didn’t reallly convince me. The main issue was that this movie was just too late in my opinion. Indeed, in my opinion, they should have made it 10 years before, when the whole disease was completely misunderstood, then it would have been really ground-breaking. Basically, it just pushed a whole bunch of wide open doors, pretty much validating the prejudices of most of the viewers (’10 years before, we wouldn’t touch or speak to an AIDS patient because they were all gays and junkies and we were just ignorant but, at this point, everybody pretty  much agreed that it was all so sad’) and it got on my nerves. Still, they did get something right and it was to show how common it was at the time to be homophobic and, thankfully, we made a lot of progress during the last 20 years. Anyway, to conclude, even though this movie didn't really blow me away, I have to admit that it was still a decent drama though and it is definitely worth a look.

I don't know about you but I have seen this already 100 times before. Indeed, you get a fallen genius who has to coach a band of misfits and, against all odds, towards the end, they still manage to win a big tournament of baseball/basketball/football/ballroom/whatever. So, they definitely used a very old formula and, yet, I was really touched by this picture. Indeed, they started with this old gimmick but then they added a layer, then another layer and then another one and, as a result, you didn't see the formula anymore but only a really emotional tale with some really compelling characters. It also reminded me of 'Silver Linings Playbook' except that they had removed all the glamor and made it really dark and gloomy. Anyway, I really liked the fact for example that the older brother was not just some one-dimensional villain and they gave us the opportunity to understand the motivations behind his actions. And, of course, Cliff Curtis, for once playing the lead, was really impressive and it was really nice to have a main character who didn't look like a top model but like a regular guy. To conclude, it might be a really obscure flick but I thought it was a really intense drama and it is definitely worth a look.