Reviews by johanlefourbe

Like the other movies directed by Lars von Trier, as usual, I had a rather hard time to connect with it as the narrative structure was really obscure which made for a quite mesmerizing but also rather frustrating viewing. Basically, what did he try to achieve with this tale? Difficult to say… Roger Ebert had an interesting theory that the film was about the severe pains ending in death inflected by Nazism, which is represented by the train, and the moral culpability of Americans and others who turned up too late to save the victims of these trains and the camps where they delivered their doomed human cargo. Personally, I thought that Katharina Hartmann maybe represented Germany, a beautiful attractive woman haunted and wounded by her past who ‘s not able to move forward. Leopold Kessler would then represent the USA, a young cute but rather clueless and naïve young man, who tries to fix things up but has actually no clue about what’s actually going on. Of course, those are just theories and I had seriously no idea what von Trier tried to achieve and, sometimes, you just have the feeling he wants to mess up with the audience, something he always do with all his movies. At least, his movie had a very interesting visual style, mostly in black and white, but sometimes with some colors here and there and he also mixed some different camera shots and techniques, creating a rather impressive visual collage. Unfortunately, even though I admired this feature, I can’t say I was really blown away. It was a little too osbcure for my taste and I really hard a hard time to care for the main character who was basically a spineless clueless wimp. Anyway, to conclude, even though I wasn’t really convinced, it remains an intriguing feature and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Lars von Trier’s work.

Not so long ago, I have seen ‘White Material’ also directed by Claire Denis and there is an obvious link with this movie which she was her directing debut and which she made 20 years before. Indeed, even though Denis was born in France, she actually spent the first 12 years of her life in Africa in various countries such as Cameroun, Somalia, Burkina Faso or Djibouti. Therefore, this movie was quite autobiographic and I thought it was quite mesmerizing. Still, the whole thing was obviously really personal for her and since we, the viewers, didn’t share these experiences with her, there was still some distance with the material and I never really fully connected with it. Eventually, ‘White Material’ would be even more obscure. Still, you really get a feeling of the place and Denis definitely developped some interesting dynamics and relationships between white and black folks beyond the usual stereotypes. This movie was also the opportunity to discover Isaach De Bankolé, an actor often working with Jim Jarmusch and one of the best African actors that I have ever seen. To conclude, even though it might not be a masterpiece, it is still a really intriguing feature and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Claire Denis’ work.

Honestly, when I first heard of this movie, I had some rather mixed feelings. Indeed, again another adaptation of Charlotte Bronte’s book… Basically, like some other classic books like ‘Pride and Prejudice’ or ‘The Three Musketeers’, they feel compelled to bring again another version every decade (I have to admit it though, I had only seen Zeffirelli’s version so far). On the other hand, there was a really attractive cast and since the reviews were pretty good, I still wanted to check the damned thing. First of all, Mia Wasikowska was a great choice for the title role and she gave a very good performance. Michael Fassbender, easily one of the best actors of his generation, was again really impressive and with Wasikowska, they had some really good chemistry. Furthermore, the directing by Cary Fukunaga was pretty much flawless (I will definitely check his other movies when I get the opportunity) , it looked great and he managed to create a very dreary atmosphere which you should expect to get from a Gothic Romantic novel. Unfortunately, I can’t say I really cared about the story though. I mean, basically, I’m not such a huge fan of those old-fashioned doomed love story and most of the time, while watching/reading such tales, I feel like kicking the characters in their butt in order to make them stop whining all the time and to get them in the sack once and for all. Anyway, to conclude, I have to admit it, even though I didn’t really love it, it is still a decent romantic feature and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

What ever happened to Anh Hung Tran?!? Back in the 1993, he burst into the film world with ‘The Scent of Green Papaya’ which was a massive critical success, at least in France, following its release at the Cannes Film Festival. Unfortunately, during the last 15 years, he has made only 2 movies, the Japanase ‘Noruwei no mori’ which got some rather weak ratings and the really obscure ‘I Come with the Rain’ starring Josh Hartnett. Anyway, following his promising debut, he came up with this flick, also taking place in Vietnam but, this time, the scale was much bigger and the whole project was really ambitious. Eventually, I really liked it and it was once again a critical success (at the time, it managed to win the Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival) but, to be honest, I thought it was not as successful as his previous flick. Indeed, ‘The Scent of Green Papaya’ displayed an unique and mesmerizing vibe, while this movie was solid crime drama but it was not really a game changer in any way. To conclude, even though I don’t think it is really a masterpiece, it remains a very well and interesting flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

This flick is registered as a TV show here on Listal but, in IMDB, it is considered a standard movie (I think it was considered as a TV feature on IMDB as well but it has been modified in the mean time). In fact, this film was originally supposed to have a theatrical release but it eventually ended up debuting on Showtime in the U.S. Anyway, I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but since I always had a weak spot for Sigourney Weaver, I thought I might as well check it out. Basically, it is a rather dark version of the famous tale but, even though the concept was interesting, the end-result was rather underwhelming. To start with, the reason why it wasn’t originally theatrically released is maybe because the whole thing looked pretty cheap. Furthermore, I had a really hard time to invest myself in this version because, by now, like everyone else, I pretty much know this tale and to make it really interesting again, they have to come up with something really impressive, which wasn’t the case here. At least, Sigourney Weaver was a very good choice to play the evil queen but it was the only redeeming feature here. To conclude, even though it is not completely awful, it is still a fairly weak feature and I don’t think it is really worth a look.

By now, I have seen almost all the movies directed by Hayao Miyazaki and, of course, at some point, I had to watch his directing début. Well, even though it was fairly enjoyable, it was still his weakest effort so far. Indeed, basically, it wasn’t a personal project but, like everyone else, he had to start somewhere and it could have been worse, I guess. Obviously, the animation felt rather dated, although some action scenes (above all the car chase at the beginning) were sometimes quite mind-blowing and I found out afterwards that they had just 4 months (!) of production. How could they manage to make this 100 minutes animated feature in such a short time is beyond me, especially when you think that the average production time for an animated flick is usually around 4 years. Apparently, because of this tight production schedule, Miyazaki had to play around with the script and he was never really satisfied with the end-result. To be honest, the whole plot was pretty chaotic but maybe it has to do with the fact that I haven’t seen the previous installment or the TV show it was based on. To conclude, in spite of its flaws, it remains a decent watch and it is worth a look, especially if you are interested in Hayao Miyazaki’s work.

By now, I have seen all the movies starring Eddie Murphy (I’m only missing his last movie ‘A Thousand Words’) and it has been a very thankless task. Indeed, it is not very often that you come across an actor who managed so thoroughly to destroy his career (Val Kilmer and Nicolas Cage are some decent contenders as well). However, it hasn’t been always like that for Murphy. Indeed, in the 80’s, he was definitely one of the most popular actors, maybe even the most popular one, and this movie was a huge success and it has become by far his most iconic part. With this in mind, I had some rather high expectations and, to be honest, I thought it was slightly underwhelming. The point is that the whole thing sounded great on paper but I thought that the end-result was decent but nothing really mind-blowing. I don’t know, in my opinion, it seemed that the makers were happy with the concept and just let Eddie Murphy throw some funny one-liners without really developping this concept. Therefore, I thought the timing was a little bit off. Surprisingly, I actually prefer the 2nd installment which had a better mix between the hard action scenes by expert Tony Scott and the wild humor provided by Murphy. To conclude, in spite of its flaws, it remains a decent action comedy, it is a classic, 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 a re-watch might change my opinion about the whole thing. On top of that, I have never been a huge fan of Stephen King’s book adaptations but, at least, the ones with a realistic angle were always better in my opinion (with the notable exception of ‘The Shining’). Anyway, I have to admit it, it was actually a decent thriller but I couldn’t help thinking that the whole thing was pretty much a gimmick. Indeed, 5 years before, Kathy Bathes already played a major role in a Stephen King story, in ‘Misery’, and she pretty much gave a career defining performance (and, indeed, ‘Misery’ is pretty much rock solid as a feature). So, this time again, they took the same formula (thriller+Stephen King+Kathy Bates) and hoped they would reach the same success. Sure, the plot was fairly entertaining and, at the time, Jennifer Jason Leigh was definitely one of the most talented actress of her generation (too bad she never got the major breakthrough she deserved) but I can’t say I was really convinced by the whole thing. Still, to conclude, I still think it is one of the better Stephen King’s book adaptations (with all the garbage they produce, it is hardly surprising) and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

It has been a while since I have seen this flick and I was quite impressed when I saw this as a kid in the movie theater. I must have been 6 or 7 years when I saw it at the time and I thought it was pretty dark and almost scary. Watching it back after so many years later, I can see that there was in fact not much to be scared about after all. I mean, sure, it was darker than your usual Disney feature but it was still really kid friendly with the usual annoying songs popping up every 10 minutes. At the time, Don Bluth, who once worked for Disney but decided to work on his own, was going through a golden period and this movie and his following directing effort ‘The Land Before Time’ were easily his biggest successes. Basically, I think it is a flick really enjoyable when you are very young and, for grown-ups, it remains an interesting watch but the cheesiness is a little bit too much for my taste. Anyway, to conclude, all in all, it is definitely a pretty good feature and I think it is really worth a look, especially if you are interested in animated movies.