Reviews by johanlefourbe

I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but since I have always been a fan of Cate Blanchett, I was really eager to check it out. Honestly, on paper, there was no reason why this movie should have worked. Indeed, a historical drama taking place in Ireland, directed by Joel Schumacher and produced by Jerry Bruckheimer?!? It wasn’t really an obvious mix as Joel Schumacher had a rather mixed track-record and Bruckheimer was above all famous for his bombastic and unsubtle action flicks but, somehow, it actually worked. Indeed, even though it was a rather standard and straightforward biopic, it was still an interesting story (which I didn’t know anything about before watching this movie) and, obviously, Cate Blanchett playing the lead was a great asset. Indeed, as usual, Blanchett delivered a really solid performance and she was really spellbinding to watch in this flick. However, even though she was quite brilliant, the movie was itself a little too pedestrian and predictable and I don’t think that Schumacher and Bruckheimer had really the ambition to make something really ground-breaking. Still, to conclude, even though it was nothing really amazing, I thought it was still a pretty good drama and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in this subject.

Honestly, I wasn't expecting much from this but many movies starring Jackie Chan are broadcasted on the Dutch channels and my step-son Nick has a weak spot for this actor so we ended up watching it. Contrary to most of the movies with Jackie Chan, this one actually had some potential as it was actually gritty (it was even R rated) and it was nice to see Jackie Chan trying something darker for once. Unfortunately, the whole thing was still terribly underwhelming as, even though the tone was indeed darker, they still managed to make it look rather goofy and I never had the feeling that they took the whole thing really seriously. Imagine watching 'Heat' with Al Pacino or Robert de Niro throwing a joke every 5 minutes. It just doesn't work or maybe I just don't get those actions flicks from Hong Kong as it seems compulsory there to mix some badass action scenes with some rather weak oneliners and poor jokes. It's quite a shame as, for once, Jackie Chan's character was really under pressure and I wonder how the end-result would have been with a better director. To conclude, I have seen worse but it was still a rather weak action flick and I don't think it is really worth a look.

Since I have been living in the Netherlands, I have been watching many Dutch movies but, to be honest, the Dutch film industry is actually rather disappointing. I mean, they are not really productive and, on top of that, most of those movies actually flop at the box-office, except for the family features and some high profile book adaptations. This movie definitely belonged to the 2nd category but I thought it was actually really good. Indeed, my wife made me see it and we actually both liked it a lot. I mean, sure, it remains a rather straightforward WWII drama and the genre is pretty much a typical genre in the Netherlands but I thought this one clearly stood out from the rest. Eventually, it was a popular and critical success in the Netherlands where it won the Golden Calf of the best Dutch movie of the year. It was even noticed abroad as it was nominated for the Best Foreign film Academy Award but it didn't win eventually. Basically, even though the story was a little bit far-fetched, it was really compelling to watch. To conclude, it is basically a Dutch classic and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Dutch movies.

Somehow, I have actually seen this flick in the movie theater (of course, not when it was released because I wasn’t even born). Anyway, at the time, I had no idea what to expect from this flick but since I was a huge fan of Orson Welles, I was really eager to check it out. Honestly, I have always been surprised by the fact that this movie is often considered as a ‘documentary’. I mean, sure, it is not really a fiction either since there is no real characters and no real plot but it is still far from being a documentary either. Eventually, it is probably the biggest appeal about this flick, the fact that it is actually quite experimental and that it doesn’t belong to any genre. To be honest, I must have been a little too young the first time I watched it, I probably missed a lot and I should definitely re-watch it at some point. Still, it was definitely an interesting watch, a very smart and labyrinthine feature, and a great final directing effort for Orson Welles. Indeed, throughout his career, even though Welles managed to make one of the greatest movies ever made at only 26 years old, most of his career as a director was pretty chaotic and it was just neat that he could end up with such a clever feature. Anyway, to conclude, even though I don’t think it is really a masterpiece, it remains a nice movie and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Orson Welles’s work.

I had actually already seen this flick but it was ages ago so it definitely needed a re-watch. Eventually, the most impressive thing about this directing debut was to see that the Coen brothers had their own style actually right from the very beginning. I mean, right from the very first minutes, with this very sarcastic voice-over, they established their very own tone and style, and 30 years later, they still have this unique touch which is quite remarkable. Obviously, since they were just starting, the scale was rather small, you just had a handful of characters, and, to be honest, the story was rather pedestrian but, like I said before, they were above all interested in the mood and they definitely succeeded in this area. The other interesting thing about this flick is how they created no character who seemed smarter than the rest, all these characters were guided by their impulse and sometimes rather poor judgement and it would definitely become another trademark in their work. To conclude, even though I don't think it really belongs among their best work, it is still a solid film noir, it is a very good directing debut and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in the Coen brothers's work.

Honestly, I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but since I have always been a fan of Al Pacino, I thought I might as well give it a try. Basically, it is quite an obscure flick that Pacino had made between two of his best movies ‘Heat’ and ‘Carlito’s Way’. Apparently, Al Pacino decided to do this film as a personal favor to James Foley because he had a great time working with him on ‘Glengarry Glen Ross’. Honestly, it was a rather decent drama but nothing really remarkable and it is not really surprising that it is pretty much forgotten nowadays. Coming back to James Foley, it is actually one of those directors who had once massive critical hit, in his case, ‘Glengarry Glen Ross’, but then he never managed to really build up on this success and all his movies were rather watchable but never really amazing (I still have a weak spot for ‘Confidence’ though but it was still nothing really amazing to be honest). His last movie was already 7 years ago, ‘Perfect Stranger’, and it was seriously one of the most far-fetched and underwhelming thrillers I had seen for a very long time. Anyway, coming back to our main feature, even though it was nothing really amazing whatsoever, I still think it is worth a look, especially if you are interested in Al Pacino’s work.

Honestly, I wasn't sure what to expect from this movie but since I have a weak spot for Bill Nighy, I thought I might as well check it out. Eventually, it was a fairly decent watch but nothing really remarkable though. I mean, there was definitely a nice cast with not only Bill Nighy, but also Stephen Rea and Timothy Spall. They all gave some solid performances, even though their characters remained rather stereotypical. I think I would have enjoyed more if it would have been straightforward instead of another comedy about some old rockers. Therefore, it was a little bit too easy and rather lazy if you ask me. I mean, towards the end, when they finally get in touch with their supposedly dead lead guitarist, it became slightly more realistic and this tone was actually more compelling, in my opinion. It was also fun that half of the movie actually took place in the Netherlands but it didn't have much impact on the story and it could have taken place anywhere else. Anyway, to conclude, it was not bad and I think it might be worth a look, especially if you like the genre but don't expect anything really amazing.

I already saw this movie, in fact, I even saw it when it was released but since it was a while back, I thought I might as well check it out again. By now, Jacques Audiard has turned out to be one of the most interesting French directors at work nowadays and many of his movies were rightfully critically heralded. At the beginning of his career, Jacques Audiard made some other movies which didn't really reach an international audience but they were pretty good nonetheless. Just like 'Regarde les hommes tomber', which was Audiard's directorial debut, it was again starring Mathieu Kassovitz, another famous French director (actually the guy doesn't direct anymore but that's another story). Eventually, I thought it was a decent drama with some really solid directing but, somehow, it didn't really blow me away and I think it mostly had to do with the main character. I won't blame Mathieu Kassovitz as he gave her a solid performance and it was a bold move to focus the story on a rather unlikeable character. However, in contrary to some major con-artists like Tom Ripley or Frank Abagnale who managed to do what they did because they had some impressive skills, on the other hand, Albert Dehousse was a passive pathetic loser with seemingly no talent whatsoever. However, after some practice, he became an expert liar succeeding in pretty much everything he attempted to do and I think the stretch between who he actually was and who he actually became was just too big. The fact that his intentions were murky at best probably didn’t help as well. Still, I have to admit that I have always been fascinated by such con-artists and Albert Dehousse was definitely an intriguing character. It was also interesting to dive into this time period, just at the end of WWII, and you could see how messy and confusing it was for pretty much everyone in France. Anyway, to conclude even if it didn't complete work, it was still a good movie and it is worth a look, especially if you are interested in French movies.

I remember it quite well, I have actually seen this movie when it was released in the movie theater. At the time, there was some buzz about it because it was Nick Cassavetes’s directing debut and he apparently was trying to follow the prestigious steps of his father, John Cassavetes. Eventually, I thought it was not bad at all, it was quite a charming little drama but it was missing something. I mean, on one hand, the influence of John Cassavetes was pretty obvious in the way that his son wanted to create a small scale drama above all from some strong performances but, on the other hand, there was also a strong will to create something else, something standing on its own and it was above all to be found in the tone which was much lighter than in Nick Cassavetes's father work. As a result, you have a rather typical directing debut, in the sense that the whole thing was absolutely decent and rather entertaining but also rather unfocused and, honestly, not really interesting. Indeed, in spite of the interesting cast (Gena Rowlands, Marisa Tomei and even Gérard Depardieu), I had a rather hard time to care about the plot. Still, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, I still think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre

Honestly, since it is a pretty obscure flick (apparently, I'm the only one who has seen it in Listal), I wasn't sure what to expect from it but since I have a weak spot for Jacinda Barrett, I thought I might as well give it a try. Eventually, it wasn't really good, I'm afraid. I mean, it wasn't completely worthless, in fact, the two boys (one of them being Kodi Smit-McPhee, currently up-and-coming) were pretty good and their relationship was quite well developed. James Nesbitt, also a favorite of mine, gave also a solid performance, even though his character was slightly over-the-top, especially in the beginning. Unfortunately, the rest of the movie was pretty much garbage, at least, that's my opinion. Indeed, they very awkwardly added a sub-plot about adultery but it seriously didn't work at all. Sure, it was added because it was, supposedly, an original way to save the young boy, but it was just really weak. I mean, it was rather sad to see Jacinda Barrett trying to sell those scenes and the way this whole plot came to an end was just rather pathetic. Anyway, to conclude, even though it could have been a very strong drama, because of some misguided choices, it was rather weak and I don't think it is really worth a look.