Reviews by johanlefourbe

Honestly, even though ‘Shakespeare in Love’ was a huge success, financially and critically, I didn’t care much for this flick. Anyway, following this movie, John Madden became in demand and there were some rather high expectations concerning his directing follow-up.  Eventually, it was a flop and received some poor reviews when it was released. With this in mind, I didn’t expect much from this flick but I still wanted to check it out and, in my opinion, it was not so bad after all. I mean, of course, the whole thing is deeply flawed but I still think it was a rather charming romance and it was entertaining enough. The main issue was that the actors were widely miscast. Indeed, Nicolas Cage as an Italian, Penélope Cruz, John Hurt and Christina Bale as Greeks?!? They were all not really convincing and, from then on, it was rather difficult to take the whole story seriously. Still, like I said before, for a romantic feature, it looked really nice and if you are not too picky, you might enjoy most of it. To conclude, even though this movie was basically a failure, it was still not a complete disaster and I think it is actually worth a look, especially if you like the genre

Basically, it is once again one of these really obscure French movies that almost no one has seen here on Listal. I remember, back in the 90’s, André Téchiné released his movie ‘Les roseaux sauvages’, it was a huge success in France, arguably one of the best French movies from the 90’s. Well, a few years laters, one of the main young actors from ‘Les roseaux sauvages’, Gaël Morel, released his directing debut which was also starring his other co-stars from  ‘Les roseaux sauvages’, Élodie Bouchez and Stéphane Rideau. Apparently, Morel wanted to be above all a director and would act only in handful movies and, to be honest, except for this debut, I haven't seen his other directing effort so I don’t really have a definite opinion about his work. Anyway, this flick was pretty good though. I mean, it is really reminiscent of ‘Les roseaux sauvages’ in mood and style but it was not necessarily a bad thing. I mean, most of the musicians start with copying their favorite artists and, at some point, they develop their own style and, for filmmakers, it is not much different. To conclude, even though it was nothing really amazing, I thought it was a solid drama and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

Since I have always been a fan of Michael Haneke’s work, of course, I was really eager to check this flick. Man, even though the guy is already around 70 years old, he is definitely on fire right now and won with this movie his 2nd Golden Palm in a row at the Cannes Film Festival and it won many other awards as well. And, indeed, it definitely deserved all the praises it has received. Personally, I enjoyed it more than ‘The White Ribbon’ which was pretty good but didn’t really blow me away. Anyway, it is pretty amazing to see the evolution of Haneke through his movies. I mean, he has always been fascinated by death and how mankind deals with it (‘Der siebente Kontinent’, ‘Benny's Video’, ‘71 Fragmente einer Chronologie des Zufalls’, ‘Funny Games’) but his vision has always been ice cold and pretty much emotionless. Here, he finally gave us the opportunity to dive in his vision of our world but, for once, he allowed us also to invest ourselves in the characters and the end-result was quite amazing. Furthermore, I think it is disappointing that so few movies are dealing with elderly people (even though the older population is ever growing) and, instead, there is always this disappointing focus and obsession on youth. Well, here you finally get a realistic and spellbinding portrait of two old people who are facing the end of their journey together and the subject has never been handled so brilliantly before. Anyway, to conclude, like all the movies directed by Haneke, it was not an easy watch but, as often with this director, it was also quite fascinating to be behold and it is definitely worth a look.

Honestly, I wasn’t sure what to expect from  this flick but since I’m (or was) a huge fan of Edward Norton, I was still eager to check this movie even though it is a really obscure feature. At the time, Edward Norton was one of the most exciting young actors around (he just showed up in ‘Fight Club’ and ‘American History X’)  and this movie was one of the many bewildering choices he made afterwards throughout his career. I mean, Danny DeVito did make some decent movies as a director (I especially enjoyed ‘The War of the Roses’) but he has never become a major director and this movie must be his most obscure one. Surprisingly, it was a wide release but it turned out to be a major flop at the box-office. Personally, I thought the story had some potential as a dark black comedy dealing with some messed up children's television hosts but the whole thing never managed to find the right tone. Indeed, basically, both Robin Williams and Edward Nortong were portraying some rather annoying caricatures so I was rather difficult to take the whole thing really seriously. To conclude, even though it was very flawed, I still think it is worth a look though somehow, especially if you are a fan of Edward Norton’s work.

Even though this movie didn’t get much love (just check the ratings here on Listal and Imdb), I was still intrigued by this flick and the fact that Roger Ebert really loved it made it even more interesting. Eventually, I thought it was pretty good but not really brilliant though. I mean, pretty much like in ‘The Messenger’, the previous directing effort by Oren Moverman also starring Woody Harrelson, the directing was really solid and he managed to create some truly 3 dimensional characters but the story didn’t really convince me. First of all, it was hardly original. I mean, by now, I have seen my share of movies dealing with dirty cops (even though David Brown was not necessarily corrupted, he was still messed up and really violent) and while this one was really well made, it didn’t show anything really new. Furthermore, the narrative was a little bit confusing and while the cast was good, there were just too many supporting characters. Still, there is no denying that Woody Harrelson delivered once again a fearless performance, it was great to see him as the lead and he was simply terrific. To conclude, even though it is indeed flawed, I still think it deserves more credit and it is definitely worth a look.

After hearing a lot of good things about this flick, I was really eager to check it out. And, apparently, at last, Rian Johnson really nailed it. Indeed, even though I did like both ‘Brick’ and ‘The Brothers Bloom’, neither were really brilliant but, with this flick, he definitely pushed his skills to a whole different level. Basically, it is a visually impressive and quite fascinating SF feature and one of the few movies which managed to deal with the time travel concept in a satisfactory way. Furthermore, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who was barely regonizable, once again displayed that he is one of the best actors of his generation. Still, even though I enjoyed most of it, there were still some flaws in this flick. Of course, you could argue that any movies dealing with time travel have always some major plot holes issue but, as it was pointed out by Bruce Willis, ‘it is messy’, and that was not really my main problem. First of all, even though the Older Joe played by Bruce Willis was properly introduced, this character was actually hardly developed afterwards as he had one track-mind which was rather disappointing. Furthermore, what the hell where those numbers? At some point, he gets a phone-call from some other guy who explains to him that they are really important and, somehow, he figures exactly what to do with them out of the blue… Also, how did the younger Joe ended up in that farm? Just because it was nearby the dinner? Even if you put aside all the issues caused by the time-travel concept, there were still some stuff that didn’t really add up. Still, it remains a vivid and entertaining SF flick, probably one of the best movies dealing with this messy concept and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Since I kept hearing great things about this flick, I was really eager to check it out. Well, I have to admit it, it is a really odd feature, the only directing effort by Charles Laughton, Robert Mitchum’s favorite movies of his one, and, unsurprisingly, it was a critical and financial flop when it was released. Honestly, could you expect such a weird dark tale to reach an audience back in the 50’s? Even myself, 60 years later, I find it difficult to grasp the whole thing. Roger Ebert had some interesting theories about this movie, that it was some kind of nightmare which was something I didn’t think of while watching it and he also described it as an horror feature but I didn’t really agree on this. Like I said before, the whole thing is rather odd and, sometimes, it jumps from one scene to another without much continuity but there is no denying that it was quite spellbinding to behold. Above all, it is not often that you will come across such a despicable messed up and yet somewhat charismatic main character with a pitch perfect Robert Mitchum. To conclude, it is a really unique feature, a fascinating flick and it is definitely worth a look.

I can't believe that it was already 20 years ago that Luc Besson released his seminal classic. Indeed, I actually remember very well when it was released in France. Back then, before it became an international cult classic, it was a huge success in France and virtually everyone went to see it and bragged about how awesome the whole thing was. Personally, I saw it maybe a year later after its release and I was expecting something really really impressive but, eventually, I was amazed about how underwhelming the whole thing was. I mean, obviously, it was actually not bad at all. Indeed, the directing was solid (Luc Besson can definitely direct a movie) and Natalie Portman in her first part was pretty impressive but I still don’t think that it was really amazing. The point is that the story definitely had some potential but, not only it felt rather rotten (the director's cut had actually some pedophile love scenes between Jean Reno and Natalie Portman) but, above all, it felt terribly pretentious. Honestly, most of the dialogues were at best cheesy and most of the time even rather pathetic. At least, I’m not the only one who didn’t like this flick and both Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel were rather dismissive towards the damned thing. To conclude, it is far from a being a bad movie, I simply don’t see what is supposed to be so great about it but, considering its reputation, I think it is still worth a look.

At last, Darron Aronofsky was allowed to make a big blockbuster and, of course, I was really eager to check the end-result. Eventually, he didn’t go for the easy path and decided to go all the way and direct a massive biblical epic. To be honest, even though I was quite impressed, I’m still not quite sure what to make of the whole thing and I will probably re-watch it at some point in the future to make up my mind for good. First of all, it was visuallly impressive. I mean, throughout the movie, you get some mystical imagery but he managed to give it some really intriguing look and you really get the feeling that you are watching something out of this world. I have to admit it, I’m not a religious person, in the contrary, and I'm not sure I actually really cared about this ancient tale but I have always been fascinated by the concept of religion and this movie definitely gave some food for thought. Indeed, even though the scale was huge, the whole thing is basically about Noah himself and the struggles he has to face. How does he know exactly what his creator has meant him to do? He simply doesn’t and becomes pretty messed up in the process. Indeed, while building the ark, all the animals come automatically so that was pretty easy but what about mankind? How do you decide to let millions of people to die? Did they all deserve this fate? From that point, Noah is eaten by guilt and becomes pretty much a fanatical doomsday despot who decides that even his family should die. And that’s when the movie gets really fascinating and shows the difficult concept behind any faith and religion. Indeed, men are made of flesh and bones, they have feelings and even if you do something good, should you feel good about it, should you be proud? Noah did something terrible and he was even planning to kill his grand-children but he would save the planet in the process so that might be ok? Furthermore, who is he to decide who should live and who should die? I also enjoyed the way Ray Winstone developed some pretty interesting theories like if the creator gave us so many mighty gifts/powers, it is probably to use them, isn’t it? And after all, aren’t we dominating the world as it is nowadays? That’s some very great stuff and still, somehow, I can’t shake the feeling that the whole thing was not flawless. For example, the way Logan Lerman finds a girl was completely phony and also the way Anthony Hopkins had a major influence on those events didn’t work very well either. Futhermore, their genetic pool seems to be terribly limited to repopulate the Earth (does it mean that the youngest boy will have to be a bigamist and have sex with both his nieces (hopefully, not at the same time...) ?). Of course, you could say it was God's will but I don’t buy it as it is one of the major weaknesses in all religions in general. Still to conclude, it is quite a thoughtful epic and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Darren Aronosfky’s work.

To be honest, I had seriously no idea what to expect from this flick but since Tony Gatlif’s work is usually really interesting, I thought I should give it a try. As a matter of fact, Tony Gatlif is rather unknown here in Listal but his movies are actually pretty good. Usually, they deal with gypsies and other outcasts and there is definitely something mesmerizing about those movies. This time, he actually made a family feature still dealing with gypsies but with some kids as main characters. So, it was rather lighter than his usual work but I can’t say I was really impressed by the plot himself. Indeed, in my opinion, the whole thing was just too pedestrian and, honestly, not really interesting. On the other hand, the music which has always been central in most of the movies directed by Gatlif, was once again really awesome and could almost be described as a character on its own. The kids also gave some decent performances and the whole thing was a pretty nice watch. To conclude, in spite of its flaws, it was a refreshing family feature and I think it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.