Reviews by johanlefourbe

I wasn't really sure what to expect from this flick but since there was a nice cast, I was quite eager to check it out. On top of that, I had this dvd already for ages so it was really time to watch the damned thing. To be honest, I had no idea that it was actually based on a true story, about the relationship of George Hamilton (apparently a famous actor but I had never heard of the guy before) with his mother but even with this information, I can’t say I really cared about the whole thing. I mean, I thought that Lorgan was actually pretty good and the guy is so charismatic, he could end up with a very interesting career. Unfortunately, they decided to focus on the mother, played by Renée Zellweger who gave once again one of her typical quirky Southern types. Zellweger did her best but I have seen her doing this gimmick too many times before and, like the character she portrayed, she is pretty much over the hill, I'm afraid. Basically, at the beginning, she was downright obnoxious and you are supposed to slowly get attached to her but it just didn’t work, at the end, I still thought she was pretty annoying. Anyway, to conclude, even though the whole thing was not really bad, I thought it was still pretty damned average and I don't think it is really worth a look.

I already saw this movie but since it was a while back, I was quite eager to check it out again. In fact, in the Netherlands, it is a huge classic and it is broadcasted on TV at least twice or three times a year. Indeed, most of Paul Verhoeven's movies are more or less controversial but this one is usually considered a Dutch national treasure and it was, at the time, the most expensive Dutch movie ever made. Eventually, it is a really solid WWII feature but, to honest, after rewatching it so many years later, I thought the story was actually pretty messy. Sure, the beginning was pretty strong as you get a pretty good feeling on how it must have been to in live in the Netherlands just before the war started. However, instead of giving us a clear steady narrative thread, they actually went for something really episodic and kept jumping from one random event to another. The characters were all quite intriguing though and I thought they all seemed vulnerable and fairly complex but it’s a pity that, since there were so many of them, they were all barely fleshed out after all, even the main character played by Rutger Hauer. Finally, I still believe that the damned thing tends to be a little too patriotic for my taste but I guess that’s the reason why it has always been so popular with the Dutch audience as it always gave them a rather positive image of their past. Eventually, even if some stuff didn’t really work in this movie, I still think it is better than ‘Zwaartboek’, another solid WWII feature from Verhoeven, which was actually too straightforward. Anyway, to conclude, I really like the damned thing and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Dutch movies.

Since I had this movie already for ages on dvd (I bought it maybe 4 years ago), I thought it was really time to watch the damned thing. It is quite an obscure feature and, to be honest, I had no idea what it was about before watching it and I was really pleased to discover that it was dealing with chess, a game I always found so fascinating. At the center, you have a chess master called Luzhin, very well played by John Turturro, a man who might have been autist or psychotic, a man constantly on the verge of madness because of his obsession with chess. All this was quite absorbing and I liked how you are never sure that chess was a gift or a curse for this brilliant man. Somehow, he falls in love with a woman, also very well played by Emily Watson but, to be honest, I wondered how it was supposed to fit in with his way of thinking. On top of that, they added his old evil chess master who was such an annoying character. I mean, everything the man did was so despicable but, above all, completely plot-driven in order to add some extra drama and tension. Anyway, to conclude, even though it wasn’t entirely successful, I still think it was an interesting watch and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in this subject.

To be honest, I wasn't really sure what to expect from this flick but since I always had a weak spot for Gwyneth Paltrow, I was quite eager to check it out. Basically, like most romantic-comedies, it has a gimmick and this one (we get to see 2 storylines intertwined depending on a simple choice made by the main character somewhere at the beginning) was not really original whatsoever but it was not bad at all and at least it was entertaining enough. At the time, Gwyneth Paltrow was probably at the height of her career (the same year, she would be also in 'Shakespeare in Love' for which she would win an Academy Award, probably one of the most disputable winnings but still), she was still getting leading parts and I thought she was really charming in this. Eventually, the best thing about this movie is that they didn't make a choice between one of the storylines so each one of them was well developped which made for a rather rewarding watch. To conclude, even though it is nothing really amazing, I still think it is a decent romantic-comedy and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I remember it very well, I saw this movie when it was released at the time and I was just about 17 years old which must be the perfect age to watch a movie like this one. Back in those days, I was just discovering cinema. I mean, I had been watching movies for many years but mostly commercial features and, at the time, I realized that there was something else to seek in motion pictures, something more meaningful and artistic and I never looked back ever since. Sure, if you compare this flick to what Bernardo Bertolucci's work from the 70's, it is actually too light and rather weak but it was probably the first movie he made that I saw and I thought it was rather charming. Indeed, I always thought that there was something whimsical about this feature, not like many annoying Hollywood romantic-comedies, and I thought it was quite neat. Liv Tyler was just starting at the time and she was definitely quite charming but I don't think she ever fulfilled our expectations. To conclude, to be honest, the whole thing was maybe a little too pretentious for its own good but I still think it is pretty good, especially if you are interested in Bertolucci's work.

Since I had this movie already for ages on dvd (I bought it maybe 4 years ago), I thought it was really time to watch the damned thing. On top of that, even though I have always been intrigued by Peter Greenaway's work, I think it had been been at least a decade since I had seen anything directed by this guy. I remember it very well, almost 20 years ago, I saw 'The Draughtsman's contract' and it was one of those very defining moments in my life of movie watcher. I had never seen anything like this before and I thought it was one of the most beautiful and spellbinding thing I had ever seen. Of course, this movie reminded a lot of his previous directing effort and if you were expecting a straightforward retelling of Rembrandt's life of how he ended up making his most famous masterpiece, you will be really disappointed. Instead, as usual with Greenaway, you get something really surrealistic and , to be honest, I had a rather hard time to connect with the whole thing and it didn’t really swept me away like 'The Draughtsman's contract' . Still, it looked really amazing and I was quite impressed by Martin Freeman who (literally) showed some balls here giving so far his best performance.

As usual, with Ridley Scott, I was really eager to check this movie but, to be honest, it was again really disappointing. In fact, I have actually missed 'The Counselor' last year but, apparently, it was one of the worst movies released in 2013 (with such an impressive cast, it seems rather hard to believe) so it didn't really miss much apparently. The issue with Ridley Scott, in my opinion, is that, ever since 'Gladiator' was a huge success, he has been making just way too many movies since then (11 in the last 14 years and he has already something coming up next year...). This movie is a perfect example. Indeed, as usual with this director, it really looked good and I thought that Christian Bale gave a solid performance but it was such a by-the-number adaptation of the Exodus, it was just quite underwhelming. The only original thing was to portray God or his messenger as a child but it seemed rather chosen at random and it didn’t have much impact. This year, Darren Aronosfky released his own biblical epic 'Noah' and even though it didn't get much love, it was much more daring and therefore much more rewarding than this snooze party. To conclude, I think I'm being rather generous with my rating here, but like everything directed by Ridley Scott, I still think it is worth a look but don’t expect anything really amazing before watching this.

Even though I didn’t really hate 'X-Men Origins: Wolverine', like everyone else, I thought it was quite disappointing. It seems that they really wanted to make amends with this sequel and when I heard that they picked up Darren Aronosfky do direct the damned thing, I became really excited. However, he dropped out at some point and since this movie didn’t make much wave after its release, I thought I might as well take my time to watch it. Eventually, it was not bad but, in my opinion, it was just slightly better than its predecessor. I mean, I really liked the fact that it was taken place in Japan but I'm afraid that's the only thing that I really enjoyed. The story was decent but nothing really amazing and I pretty much lost track of who was actually the bad guy in this tale (I think I counted about 5 villains...). I was also surprised about how few mutant were involved in this story. I mean, if you remove Jean Grey, who was basically a ghost, and the 2 cameos during the credit sequence, there were only 2 of them and Viper was not really impressive. Anyway, I hope one day we'll get to see a super-hero feature directed by Darren Aronosfky (he was also supposed to make Batman before Nolan took over) but Wolverine remains a badass character, this installment was still a decent watch and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

As you may have noticed, as a kid, I kind of missed on the whole frenzy around 'Back to the Future' but I sure didn't miss a thing about this flick. Indeed, I was just a little bit older than my own daughter when I watched it in the theater and I just loved the damned thing. Basically, Robert Zemeckis tried to make a convincing mix of animation and live-action, at the time, it was quite revolutionary and, at my young age, I thought the whole thing was just mind-blowing. Back then, I even had a book about this movie collecting all the stickers. Basically, I was a huge fan. Of course, later in my life, I had to re-watch it with my kids (that's the great thing when you get some kids of your own, you get an excuse to watch again all those childhood classics with them) and I was still impressed by the damned thing. I must admit it, the whole detective story was maybe not really original after all, but it was still really entertaining and, visually speaking, after all these years, it remains a great technical achievement. Above all, it is a really fun flick and possibly the best thing Zemeckis has made in his whole career.