Reviews by johanlefourbe

For many years, I kept hearing good things about this flick and even though it was barely noticed when it was released, it has become since then a cult-classic (it has an impressive rating of 7.9 on Imdb) so I was really eager to check it out. For Mike Judge, the guy behind Beavis and Butt-Head, it was apparently a tough experience even though he got much love afterwards. Personally, I thought it was indeed pretty good but it didn’t really blow me away though. I don’t know, maybe it has to do with the fact that Ron Livingston is not really a charismatic lead actor but, on the other hand, it was better to have an average looking guy to play an average character with an average job instead of the usually pretty faces. At the end of the day, this flick tries to be a really edgy satire about those (supposedly) dreadful office jobs but, honestly, even though some jokes were indeed really funny, some others didn’t work really well and, eventually, they were constantly opening a whole bunch of open doors, at least, that’s my opinion. At least, it was nice to see Jennifer Anniston in something else than her typical underwhelming romantic-comedies. To conclude, even though I don’t think it is a masterpiece, it remains a pretty good black comedy and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Every year I try to watch a franchise I’m rather oblivious of and if I recall correctly I started a couple of years ago with ‘A Nightmare on Elm Street’, than ‘Star Trek’ and last year I saw all the movies of ‘Planet of the Apes’. This year, I decided to watch all the Muppet movies and, of course, I had to start with this one. First of all, I think I never watched the Muppet Show (I did watch the cartoon ‘Muppet Babies’ a lot though) so I didn’t watch the movie feeling nostalgia and some past memories. Still, I have to admit it, it was pretty good. Indeed, most of the puppets are really fun, some of jokes were quite hilarious and those puppeteers definitely did an incredible job to give life to those characters. However, even though I’m fully aware that the plot was of course of no real importance, I had a rather hard time to care about what they were going through and I was expecting something a little bit more meaty. Furthermore, I’m not a huge fan of musicals and even though some of the tunes were pretty catchy, most of them rather bored me. Still, even though it didn’t really blow me away, it remains a nice watch and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

To be honest, it has been ages since I saw this flick. When I was a young teenager, my first favorite genre were the action movies and, already at 12 years old, I would go every month to watch the latest action flick and I think that, at around 14 years old, I started to open up towards other genres, above all thanks to my big sister. Anyway, I saw this movie back in those days and, at the time, I thought it was completely bad-ass. Of course, 20 years later, it seems to be a rather misguided idea to make an action flick with Billy Zane but, at the time, it didn’t bother me at all. At the time, Tom Berenger was still in demand and there was not many actors who you could have been believable to play such a character. Anyway, you can say whatever you want but to make an action movie about a lethal sniper was quite brilliant (I wonder why they don’t make more of this) and, personally, I thought that the makers did a pretty good job here. Of course, as it remains a typical US action flicks, you get some rather preposterous action scenes but it is inherent to the genre and it didn’t bother me here. To conclude, even though it is nothing really amazing, I think it is actually a decent action flick and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I already saw this movie but, since it was a while back and since I had it on DVD, I thought I might as well check it out again. Personally, I wonder why it took Alexander Payne 7 years to finally come up with a new director effort back then but I guess the guy is not really productive. Anyway, it was definitely worth the wait, that’s for sure. Indeed, I thought it was a very good drama with a perfect pace and it was probably the best directing by Payne so far. There were also some really strong performances and some of the best written characters I have seen for a while. The beginning monolog also stroke a personal chord in the sense that my ex-wife had been really sick for about 2 years now and I had about the same internal monologs as our relationship was already pretty chaotic even before she got some health issues and even more afterwards. Of course, I didn’t went through the rest of the story myself but it was definitely a good start. In fact, many later years later, we actually got divorced so I had a totally different vibe while I was re-watching this movie. But the movie was not only about a family tragedy, it was also about the fate of an aristocratic family and what they should do with their land. That part of the story was also quite fascinating and it is quite amazing that they managed to balance such diverse topics in one movie. This movie will also always be remembered as being the breakthrough of Shailene Woodley, even if she eventually never really became the next Jennifer Lawrence as predicted by many. She was still really good here though. Anyway, to conclude, I thought it was really good and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Alexander Payne’s work.

While, at least for some time, Pixar was always focusing on making the highest quality of CGI animated features, not only from a technical point of view but also storywise, Dreamworks never had such ambitions as they produced more features than Pixar and always with an obvious commercial purpose. As a result, their trackrecord as been pretty much spotty with a few bonafide hits (‘Shrek’, ‘Madagascar’, ‘How to train your dragon’) and a lot of misfires. Eventually, this movie definitely belonged to the 2nd group as it didn’t get much love but, personally, I have to admit it, I really had a weak spot for this flick. Of course, the story is actually not really amazing, there was no depth whatsoever but I thought it was still a fun animated feature. Apparently, it is based on a syndicated comic strip which I don’t really know and, pretty much like ‘Garfield’, it was a rather difficult task to move from those short little stories to a full length feature. At the end of the day, they focused mostly on the characters which were pretty funny and not so much on the criticism on our consumerist society. Still, even though it is nothing amazing, I thought it was pretty good and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

After Paul Verhoeven, Dick Maas must be the most succesfull Dutch director ever. I mean, unlike Verhoeven, he never managed to build up an international career (he did try though at the end of the 90’s, directing actors like Naomi Watts and William Hurt but both movies ‘Do Not Disturb’ and ‘Down’ were huge flops). Anyway, in the Netherlands, he had some major success, especially with the awful ‘Flodder’ franchise but he has made also some major Dutch classics and this movie was definitely one of them. Personally, I really had a hard time to care about ‘De Lift’ which has a very good reputation in the Netherlands but this movie was really good. Indeed, even though I don’t think it was really original, it was still a really solid thriller, with a good mood and a decent performance by Huub Stapel, a very good Dutch actor who has worked many times with Dick Maas. There was also Monique van de Ven, another major Dutch actress, involved in this movie. To conclude, I’m not sure this movie can be considered a masterpiece but it remains a pretty good thriller and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Dutch movies.

When I was a kid, I have watched this movie many times with my father (I was probably way too young at the time but I thought it was really awesome). Years later, I would watch it again with Nick, my step-son, but, somehow, he didn’t connect with the whole thing. I think it may have had to do with the pacing as it was way too slow for him. In fact, when you think about it, maybe half of the movie is made of static close-ups of the actors and there were not so many action scenes after all. Basically, it is all about the mood and, personally, right from the opening credits with the awesome score by Ennio Morricone, I was getting some goose-bumps. The way I feel about this movie probably has to do with a little bit of nostalgia but, still, even 50 years later, the whole thing is really entertaining. Personally, I always had a hard time with Westerns, even the major classics starring John Wayne, but those directed by Sergio Leone are still pretty awesome, even after multiple re-watches. Of course, Clint Eastwood, in a star making performance, was completely bad-ass and combined with the inspired directing by Sergio Leone, they pretty much reinvented the whole genre. To conclude, it is a classic that every decent movie buff must watch at least once in their life.

One of the worst thing about the current wave of CGI animated features is that it has made it much easier to combine animated characters in a live-action environment. It means that while ‘Who Framed Roger Rabbit’ was revolutionary back in those days, today, there is nothing really amazing about all those movies. Eventually, the main issue was that all these movies were just terribly underwhelming (‘Alvin and the Chipmunks’, ‘HOP’, ‘Yogi Bear’,…) and this flick was not an exception. I mean, seriously, Garfield is a great character and it was already difficult to move to a feature length format (I’m not sure if it was even doable in the first place) but why would you make a mix live-action and animation while 100% animation would have worked much better? As a result, you have a real dog to play Odie while Garfield is animated and it seemed to be a really misguided choice. On top of that, they completely miscast Jon who should have looked like a younger version of William H. Macy and, to make things worse, they added a terribly underwhelming romantic angle involving Jon and a veterinarian played by Jennifer Love Hewitt. At least, Garfield was pretty cool and Bill Murray was a great choice to voice the lazy cat but that was the only redeeming feature in this boring flick. To conclude, it is not really good and I don’t think it is really worth a look.

Honestly, I wasn’t expecting much. Indeed, with such a title, you can be pretty sure you won’t watch anything oscar-worthy. On top of that, I have never been a fan of skiing. I mean, I can ski, I gave it a try a couple of times but I think that those holidays are awfully expensive just to go up and down in the cold wet snow. Still, it is not very often that you get to see a movie in this environment and there was definitely some potential. Unfortunately, they put together 3 storylines (the girl was a ace skater and will apparently become an ace snowboarder, the girl falls in love with her boss and there is also some class struggle) and none of those was really satisfying. Personally, I think that they could have focused more on the sport stuff. I mean, it wouldn't still have been a great movie either but, at least, it wouldn't have been something I saw 100 times before. Still, Felicity Jones was really charming and she seems to have some potential, she just needs some better material than this and, of course, Good Old Bill Nighy could turn anything into gold, no matter how dreafull the movie is. Anyway, to conclude, even though it wasn’t really awful, it was still pretty damned average and I don’t think it is really worth a look.

Personally, I always had a weak spot for Dianne Keaton and she was the most attractive aspect of this flick. Indeed, in my opinion, it is a rather typical 80’s comedy, supposedly dealing with a timely subject, but the approach is usually cheesy and our appreciation of those flicks is usually colored by a good doses of nostalgia. Basically, this time, it develops this theory that, nowadays, women have become so focus on their career that they are not able to be mothers anymore. It was, at the time, something rather new and, of course, the studios had to surf on this new hype. On top of that, at the time, they created a kind of sub-genre in comedy about people getting a kid or a baby pretty much against their will and this movie was definitely one of those. Back then, when I was very young, I thought the whole thing was quite hilarious but, to be honest, it didn’t grow old very well. The point is that Diane Keaton has some very good comedic timing and basically carries the whole thing on her shoulders but, honestly, it was just way too pedestrian and predictable to become really rewarding. To conclude, I think my rating might be a little bit too generous but I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.