Reviews by johanlefourbe

To be honest, it has been a while since I have seen this flick and maybe I will rewatch it at some point. By now, I have seen all the movies directed by the late Tony Scott, and I think this one must have been his most obscure feature. As a matter of fact, the whole thing was actually a pet project for Kevin Costner and Costner was in fact planning to direct himself the movie as his directorial debut. Eventually, back then, producer Ray Stark talked him out of it as he didn't feel Costner was ready to helm a project just yet. Anyway, I thought it was not bad and there was above all a pretty cool cast. Indeed, both Kevin Costner and Madeleine Stowe were pretty much at the top of their game at the time and they had some pretty good chemistry. Furthermore, the whole thing was rather entertaining but, unfortunately, as it is often the case with Tony Scott's work, the plot was just terribly pedestrian and unoriginal and, to be honest, I had a really hard time to care for the whole thing. To conclude, in spite of its flaws, I still think it is worth a look, especially if you are interested in Tony Scott's work.

It is not uncommon that, within a rather short-time periode, the studios would release two similar movies (see last year 'The Legend of Hercules' and 'Hercules'). Back in 1995, Mel Gibson had a massive critical and box-office success with 'Braveheart' but, a couple of months before, Liam Neeson already showed up in his own periode epic about a real-life Scottish hero. Eventually, even though this flick managed to get some decent reviews (For example, Roger Ebert really loved it), it always remained overshadowed by Gibson's classic. First of all, I had to admit that I never been a fan of 'Braveheart', I think it is an entertaining epic but not much more than that but I still think it was more impressive than this flick. I mean, don't get me wrong, it is also a rather well made flick but even though Rob Roy, the character, was pretty bad-ass thanks to an always dependable Liam Neeson, he never came near William Wallace in terms of sheer awesomness. Eventually, the only thing that really left a big impression was Tim Roth who was definitely one of the most interesting actors back in those days and the actor was just terrific portaying a great villain here. To conclue, all in all, I thought it was a decent watch and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

It had been a while since I wanted to watch this movie but, to be honest, I wasn't really sure what to expect. Indeed, the buzz was definitely mixed on this one as I kept hearing a lot of positive things about this flick but there was also a lot of people who really didn’t like it and it was pretty much a flop when it was released. Anyway, I thought it was actually pretty good. I mean, I have never been a huge fan of Adam Sandler, that’s for sure, but his character was really interesting, probably the best one he got so far and he definitely delivered a solid performance. In my opinion, he really carried the movie. Next to him, you had also a pretty good Seth Rogen but the guy was pretty much playing his usual witty looser. Eventually, the main problem was probably the running time. I mean, did this story really need to be 150 minutes long? I doubt it and it was above all obvious during the very long bit when they get stuck in Leslie Mann's house for like a hole weekend and the whole sequence lasted about 30 minutes for no good reasons. To conclude, yes, it was flawed but I still think it was quite enjoyable and it is definitely worth a look.

It has been while since I have seen this flick and, to be honest, I wonder how I ended up watching the damned thing in the first place. Indeed, I’m pretty sure I actually saw this in the movie theater when it was released and, after all these years, I still wonder how I ended up watching such a weird flick. Anyway, it is nowadays pretty much forgotten and it was basically a rather wacky periode comedy dealing with real life figure Dr. John Harvey Kellogg (yes, the guy who came up with all these cereals). There was a pretty cool cast (Anthony Hopkins, Bridget Fonda, Matthew Broderick, John Cusack, Dana Carvey, Colm Meaney, Lara Flynn Boyle) and this was the blessed time when Bridget Fonda was not yet retired and Lara Flynn Boyle was a still a cute up-and-coming actress. Indeed, can you believe that even before she was 40 years old, Bridget Fonda got married with Danny Elfman and pretty much retired? Seriously, what a shame. To conclude, even though it was rather flawed, I still have a weak spot for this weird comedy and I think it is worth a look, especially if you are interested in Alan Parker’s work.

This movie is definitely what you could call a massive chick-flick. Indeed, I’m pretty sure that both my wife and my mother-in-law really enjoyed it but, to be honest, I really had a hard time to care for the whole thing. I mean, sure, both David Duchovny and Minnie Driver had some pretty good chemistry but, in my opinion, the concept was actually pretty lame. Obviously, it was supposed to be sweet and charming but it just didn’t work for me at all. In fact, I have actually a weak spot for romantic features but it’s a pity most of them are based on some supposedly clever concept. Indeed, I always find it a misguided choice because if the characters work, if their romance is compelling enough, you don’t actually need such a gimmick. In a movie like this one, when the characters are rather weak, when the love story is not really mind-blowing, they always put the focus on the concept but it is always underwhelming and this movie was a perfect example. To conclude, I might be a little too harsh on this one but I don’t think it is worth a look, except maybe if you are a die-hard fan of the genre.

I have always been a huge fan of Akira Kurosawa and there was a blessed time when I watched many of his movies. To be honest, it has been many years since I have seen any of his work and I hope I will watch again some other of his movies or re-watch his great classics. Coming back to our main feature, to be honest, it was one of the last movies directed by the great master and, even though it was a decent watch, it never really reached the level of his best work (but that would be asking a lot). Eventually, it was definitely missing the sharpness of his best movies to become something really remarkable but the directing and acting were still fine. Back in those days, Richard Gere just showed up in ‘Pretty Woman’ and even though he was at the height of his career, he still agreed to be in this movie for a much lower salary than usual. Eventually, Kurosawa would direct only one movie after this one (‘Madadayo’) and I still need to check this one. Anyway, to conclude, I thought it was a good drama and it is worth a look, especially if you are interested in Akira Kurosawa’s work.

Obviously, with Adam Sandler's awful track record, I wasn't expecting much from this flick but, somehow, I still ended up watching it. And guess what? To my surprise, I didn't really hate it, in fact, I'm pretty sure it was the most watchable movie starring Sandler that I have seen in a very long time. Of course, it doesn't mean much but it is still something. At first, it was pretty obvious that the whole thing was going to be terrible. I mean, the premise was terribly misguided, Sandler was again playing one of his horrible obnoxious characters with this typical voice which has never been funny but, under all this garbage, there was something about this story that still did work. Indeed, the whole messed-up father-son relationship was actually intriguing and if it would have been a more straight comedy without all the moronic gross jokes, it could have been something. Berger was indeed a shitty father but he did love his son and even when he guy pretended that his father was dead and wouldn't introduce him properly, he would just play along to help him out. At the end of the day, it was still pretty weak though (my wife saw a bit and was appalled that I would watch something like this with my step-son) and it was still not really worth a look.

Even though it was slightly unexpected, my step-son Nick decided we should watch this movie this month in the movie theater and I thought it was a nice surprise. To be honest, I don't think it was really amazing but it was very well made and quite entertainining. In fact, it reminded me of 'Stormbreaker', another British spy feature starring a teenager as the lead character played by Alex Pettyfer which was made almost a decade ago and which is nowadays pretty much forgotten for the right reasons. This time, they pretty much nailed it though. Indeed, the action scenes were pretty badass, the oneliners were funny and the concept was just pretty cool. And yet, pretty much like with the James Bond franchise so beloved by the director Matthew Vaughn, I still had a hard time to care for the whole thing. I mean, there were just so many things that were ridiculous and, of course, we are not supposed to take it too seriously but, then, what should I really care? To be honest, I would be really surprised if they will really launch a franchise after this movie with such a competition at the box-office but we'll see. Anyway, to conclude, all in all, it was a fun movie and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

To be honest, it has been a while since I have seen this flick and, in fact, I think it woud be pretty neat to re-watch it again nowadays. I remember it very well, when this movie was released in France, back then, it was a huge critical hit (it even won the César of the Best French film of the year) and I was therefore really eager to check it out. Eventually, even though I did like it, it didn’t really blow me away but I think I was just too young at the time to really appreciate it. Indeed, even though it seems to a rather straightforward periode piece, it actually goes further than that. Basically, it is about how they use to verbally trash each other at the French court back then in 17th century. Pretty much like some good old hip-hop artists, it was apparently pretty common that the aristocracy would have some ‘duels’, fighting with their wits and vocabulary and to be ridiculed was the worst thing that you could happen to you. As a result, you get something really original and, the fact that you had a very solid cast (Charles Berling, Jean Rochefort, Fanny Ardant, Judith Godrèche, Bernard Giraudeau) was definitely a big plus. To conclude, even though it is pretty much forgotten nowadays, I think it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in French movies.

To be honest, I wasn't really sure what to expect from this flick but since I'm a sucker for Science-Fiction features, I thought I might as well give it a try. Eventually, I thought it was actually not bad at all. Sure, there was really nothing original and pretty much everything was taken from some other SF classics, above all the Alien franchise. And yet, I really enjoyed the whole amnesia thing and it was pretty neat that they kept the viewers as long as possible in the dark. In fact, they should have removed the intro which gave away really too much information right from the start. Indeed, imagine if they would have started the movie right away with Dennis Quaid and Ben Foster waking up from their hypersleep without remembering anything. That would have been really awesome. It was also a nice touch to have one character speaking a different language making it almost impossible for them to communicate with each other. Still, it was entertaining, they managed to provide a nice claustrofobic mood and, once again, Ben Foster displayed that he is one of the most underrated actors at work nowadays. To conclude, in spite of its flaws, I think it remains a decent SF feature and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.