Reviews by johanlefourbe

‘A bout de souffle’ is and will remain one of my favorite movies forever and I have been following Godard ever since his masterpiece really blew me away but, unfortunately, no one of his movies have reached this level of awesomeness, at least not in my opinion. The point is that, pretty soon in his career, his movies started to get pretty cryptic really soon and become harder and harder to follow and, nowadays, except for a few die-hard fans, we all pretty much agree that his work has become some incomprehensible pseudo-intellectual and political mix, a mix I always had a hard time to appreciate. This movie is a pretty good example. I mean, it was actually quite intriguing but it was so hard to follow, I can’t say I really loved the damned thing. Still, it was pretty nice to see the always awesome Jean-Pierre Léaud, the most popular actor among the French new wave. Basically, it is a meditation about politics and how the young people struggled with those ideas back in the 70’s. Or maybe it was something entirely different, it’s almost impossible to tell with Godard. To conclude, even though I don’t think it is a masterpiece whatsoever, it remains a typical Godard effort, I enjoyed it and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

Back in 2004, Martin McDonagh made quite an impact with his directing debut with ‘In Bruges’ and, now it is the turn of his brother John Michael McDonagh to come up with this directing debut and it was once again a critical success. First of all, it is pretty easy to make the connection with those 2 movies since they are both filled with Irish characters with especially Brendan Gleeson playing the lead in both movies but, actually, a part from that, I thought that those flicks were completely different. I mean, once again, Gleeson really stole the show and I thought it was seriously hilarious and easily the funniest movie that came up in 2011 (yeah I wasn’t really impressed by ‘Bridesmaids’). Indeed, the dialogs were just great and continuously spot on. Furthermore, the messed up relationship between Brendan Gleeson and Don Cheadle was pure gold as well and it’s too bad they didn’t spend more time together. So, it was really good but, still, it was missing something to become truly remarkable. My main issue was probably the fact that, even though the characters and dialogs were very well written, the story was not really strong, I’m afraid. Still, there was a lot to enjoy here and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Honestly, I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but since I have always been a fan of Clint Eastwood’s directing work, I was really eager to check this flick. Basically, it is one of his more commercial and more accessible movies and it was quite entertaining but nothing mind-blowing whatsoever. The thematic is actually similar to ‘Full Metal Jacket’ (which would be released a year later as a matter of fact). However, even though Eastwood is a very good director, he is still doesn’t play in the same league as Kubrick, that’s for sure. I mean, if you put those 2 movies together, it is pretty obvious. All right, it might be unfair since this flick is obviously a weaker effort, at least compared to his better movies, but still. However, I was still rather entertained by this movie. Indeed, Eastwood keeps toying with the fact that he is actually too old to play those kind of characters but he still convinces us that he is one bad-ass SOB, tough as nail and quite able to beat up any guy half his age without breaking a sweat. Eventually, this convoluted character was quite interesting but I didn’t care much for the rest of story which was rather pedestrian. To conclude, even though it is a minor effort, I still think it is worth a look though, especially if you are interested in Clint Eastwood’s work.

Recently, I have re-watched ‘The Beguiled’ which must be the darkest and weirdest movie starring Clint Eastwood. Well, this movie is another really dark feature with Eastwood and I will probably re-watch it at some point in the future. Basically, it is a rather standard cop feature and many could think it is a just another Dirty Harry installment but it is actually something else. Indeed, it is a really sleazy thriller dealing with the sex industry and, pretty much like in ‘The Beguiled’, Eastwood plays once again a man with a dark side who treats women pretty badly.  So, you get to see some brothels, prostitutes, a SM dominatrix and a gay bar in the process. Obviously, it wasn’t really subtle but still pretty effective and it was interesting to see Clint Eastwood losing his shit as the killer keeps stalking him. In my opinion, Eastwood really took some risks with this flick and there were even some rumors at the time that he might get his first ever Academy Award nomination for this film but it didn’t happen eventually. To conclude, even though I’m usually rather critical about this genre, I thought this flick was pretty good and it is definitely worth a look.

Honestly, I really had a hard time with this flick. I actually had never heard of it and saw it above all because it it was included in the ‘1001 movies you must see before you die’ list. I don’t know, maybe I wasn’t in the right mood when I watched it. Basically, it is an uber-romantic tale about a doomed love story and, right from the start, they make sure you won’t have any hope that they would end up together one way or the other. At first, I was worried that they would never speak to each other and I thought ‘Girl, either you’re going to talk to that man or you’re going to do something else with your life’ but, at last, they got together so there was some hope but, then, he apparently forgets about her(!) and she gets pregnant in the mean time. Since they seemed deeply in love that seemed rather far-fetched but, well. I was ok with the fact that he didn’t recognize her the 2nd time they met since they barely talked to each other when they lived in the same building but it was fairly unconvincing that he wouldn’t recognize her when he meets her a 3rd time maybe a decade later. So you see where it goes, you either love that kind of story or you don’t. Personally, I’m not a huge fan, but I have to admit it, the directing was very neat, the actors involved were quite good so it was still a decent watch and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

When I was a kid, I used to watch the ‘Astro Boy’ cartoon and while I wasn’t a huge fan, I was always fascinated by the introduction when you saw this little robot come to life. Unsurprisingly, they decided to adapt this cartoon and since the animated market is rather saturated, it was pretty much a flop. Still, there were some interesting things in this flick and there was some darkness rather unexpected in such a familly friendly. Indeed, during the first half hour, it was pretty much a mix of ‘Artificial Intelligence: AI’ and above all ‘Frankenstein’. It was quite striking and almost unsettling the way Dr Tenma try to resurrect his lost boy through this robot and his rejection of this little robot was also quite heartbreaking. Since ‘Up’, I had never seen such a dark introduction but the makers didn’t care much about all this and threw us not one but two rather underwhelming plots. Indeed, there is first the evil and boring President Stone who desperately wants to be re-elected and another story involving the people downstairs in the slums (which shows once again that ‘Elysium’ was seriously not original whatsoever). Honestly, I thought I was watching maybe 3 movies crammed into one and I wish they focus on the whole ‘Pinocchio’ tale instead. To conclude, even though it was flawed, the whole thing looked pretty good, there was something really interesting about this main character and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Eventually, I'm surprised that I was expecting something more from this flick. The point is that it was not bad at all and definitely miles better than the previous version directed by Roland Emmerich but it was still nothing really amazing though. Basically, I was rather fooled by the awesome marketing campaign (they made some really impressive posters) and their convincing trailer. Still, it was far from being a failure. Indeed, it was pretty neat that they went back to the roots and started the story in Japan. I also always appreciate it when they kill some major actors right from the start (Indeed, Juliette Binoche didn't last more than 5 minutes and they got rid off of Bryan Cranston within 30 minutes). The main issue is how can you build up a compelling story with an invincible monster like Godzilla? I mean, with the Hulk, you have at least Bruce Banner to root for but, here, you have nothing much to connect with. At least, he looked awesome but, honestly, he didn’t much have much to do. The way they tried to put Aaron Taylor-Johnson in every single locations where those monsters were active was also rather awkward and he had the rather thankless job of being a rather useless main character who just stands there and watch the mayhem with us. To conclude, it was not bad and rather entertaining but I can’t say I was really blown away by the whole thing though.

Honestly, I had no idea what to expect from this flick but since there was a pretty cool cast, I was quite eager to check it out. I mean, indeed, check this out : Talulah Riley, Rupert Everett, Jodie Whittaker, Gemma Arterton, Juno Temple, Tamsin Egerton, Lily Cole, Russell Brand, Lena Headey, Toby Jones, Colin Firth, Mischa Barton and Stephen Fry! That was neat to see all these familiar faces but, honestly, the movie was not really good I’m afraid. Basically, it is a rather commercial movie which pretends to be alternative and sarcastic but it wasn’t really convincing. I mean, who you go in any room of the school, you don’t believe that any of those wild girls are responsible for this rampage but it is obvious that you get to see the result of some rather elaborate set-dressing. There were two actors who got the right tone : Russell Brand who unfortunately didn’t have much to do and Rupert Everett who once again really stole the show. The worst might have been Colin Firth as he gave a straight and very dry performance but it just didn’t work. To conclude, even though the whole thing really had some potential, it was a rather average flick and I don’t think it is really worth a look.

Before producing arguably his best directing efforts, Clint Eastwood had a rather weak period as a director from 1997 until 2002 ending with the terribly weak 'Blood Work' which must be one of the most underwhelming movies he has made. This flick actually reminded me somehow of 'Blood Work' in the sense that it was yet another weak feature, it was again a really preposterous thriller and basically Eastwood seemed again way too old to portray the main character in this movie as well. The big difference is that even though the plot was really ridiculous (within 12 hours, Eastwood discover that a death-row inmate might be innocent and manage to save him at the very last minute), the whole thing was rather well made and, I must admit it, it was actually fairly entertaining. Pretty much like ‘Training Day’, a decent but overrated movie, it is rather difficult to believe that all this would happen within a day. In this case, it was even worse because half of the duration was filled up with some personal drama involving Clint Eastwood’s character. Eventually, if you compare it to the great masterpieces directed by Clint Eastwood, it is rather abysmal but if you compare it to the average thrillers produced by Hollywood every year, it is actually decent and worth a look but don't expect anything mind-blowing whatsoever.

Obviously, ‘Boogie Nights’ is and remains the ultimate film about John Holmes but there was a few years later actually another film made about the notorious porn star. It was barely noticed when it was noticed and didn’t get much love (Roger Ebert gave it only 2 stars but we don’t need to agree on everything I suppose) but I thought it was actually pretty good. Contrary to ‘Boogie Nights’, it focuses on a specific time period in John Holmes’ life and the tone was much grittier than Paul Thomas Anderson’s opus. Furthermore, even though Anderson  wasn’t really trying to be faithful to the facts, this movie seemed to be more factual even though they always modify some details to make it more dramatic. Personally, I liked the gloomy tone and Val Kilmer gave a solid performance at the time (such a shame that his career has become so disappointing).  It was also a time when Kate Bosworth was a promising actress with a bright future. Unfortunately, her rise was pretty much stopped 3 years later with the failure of ‘Superman Returns’. To conclude, even though it is nothing really amazing, I thought it was a decent flick and I think it is worth a look.