Reviews by johanlefourbe

Honestly, I wasn't sure what to expect from this flick but since I'm a huge fan of Alfred Hitchcock, I was really eager to check it out. After watching many (rather disappointing ) silent features directed by Hitchcock, it was quite nice to see a good old thriller directed by the great master of the genre. I have to admit it, it wasn’t one of his best work and even though it was a box-office success, Alfred Hitchcock himself didn’t like it much but I thought it was fairly enjoyable. Indeed, even though the story was rather flawed, it was still entertaining and it featured one of the best villains ever displayed in a Hitchcock thriller. Indeed, I kept hearing Charles Laughton was a great actor and, here, he really impressed me. The rest of the gang was not really interesting but Sir Humphrey Pengallan was a really intriguing and funny fellow and Laughton really stole the show every time he was on the screen. It was also quite nice to see a very young Maureen O’Hara in her very first part and even though her character could have been more developed, she still managed to give us a strong and high-spirited woman. Eventually, it would be the last British feature directed by Hitchcock and he will then take off for Hollywood reaching some even greater success. To conclude, even though it is actually nothing really amazing, I still liked the damned thing and it is worth a look, especially if you are interested in Alfred Hitchcock’s work.

At last, I finally saw this flick. I mean, it was on my queue for more than a year but I kept pushing it away because, let’s face it, to watch a 3 hours silent feature is a rather daunting prospect, at least to me. Eventually, I have to admit that it was quite impressive. I mean, it was a very ambitious production, no doubt it, and the production value was really amazing. Apparently, D.W. Griffith spent $2 million to make this flick which was a huge amount of money at the time and, apparently, even so, the audience were not really attracted by such a long movie so it wasn’t really a financial success after all. I must admit it, myself, I was quite intrigued during the 1rst hour but then, I had a hard time to focus until the end. Griffith basically mixed 4 stories, 3 around some historical events (the fall of Babylon, the crucifixion, the massacre of the St. Bartholomew's Day) and a contemporary fiction and the fact that he kept switching between all these tales made it even more difficult to hold on the whole thing. Still, it was very well directed, especially when you think that it is almost 100 years old. To conclude, even though I’m not a huge fan of those very long silent features, this one is a classic and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Since I’m a huge fan of Sean Penn, of course, I was really eager to check this flick. On top of that, Sean Penn was nominated for the Academy awards for this performance and this movie had some really good ratings so I had some rather high expectations. Honestly, I was rather surprised about how underwhelming the whole thing was. I mean, it is not a bad movie at all, there is some great stuff but it is also deeply flawed and I’m amazed that those flaws didn’t bother more the other viewers who raved about this movie. Anyway, let’s start with the good stuff. Indeed, Sean Penn was great in this. Man, what a fine actor! He gave here one of the most believable performances of a mentally disabled man I have ever seen, it was really fascinating and quite heartbreaking to behold. I also liked the directing style with some interesting angles and some nice hand-held camera. Still, it didn’t really blow me away. I mean, come on, the story was really preposterous and completely manipulative. I don’t know, maybe it’s because I have an autistic son, maybe that’s why I reacted so passionately about the subject. I mean, if someone can barely take care of themselves, I’m sorry, they shouldn’t get custody of their own children, end of the story. I understand, it makes for a very emotional Hollywood tale but it doesn’t work like that, I'm afraid. To conclude, I don’t think it is that great at all but I still think it is worth a look, if only to see Sean Penn’s great performance.

I wasn’t expecting much from this flick but Nick, my step-son, really loves this stuff so we still ended up watching it. Honestly, I was rather bored during the whole thing. I mean, there is this new trend of taking an old tale and give it a new hype and modern twist and while ‘Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter’ had some potential, this flick really didn’t really work for me. First of all, even though Gemma Arterton was a fine choice, I thought that Jeremy Renner was rather miscast. I mean, I’m glad for the guy that he got his breakthrough with ‘The Hurt Locker’ but since his new found popularity, it seems that he is trying to get involved in as many franchises as possible (‘The Avengers’, ‘Mission: Impossible’, ‘The Bourne Legacy,…) and while in all these movies, he was fine, he didn’t fit here at all. Anyway, he wasn’t the main issue though. Of course, you shouldn’t expect an amazing plot from something like this, but, at least, you should be entertained and that wasn’t really the case here. To my surprise, even though it was a flop in the US (what a surprise…), it was actually successful abroad and, apparently, they are working on a sequel right now. Dear Lord… To conclude, it wasn’t really bad after all but I don’t think it is really worth a look, except maybe if you love the genre.

If I remember correctly, I saw this on VHS back in the days when I had my first apartment and back then, there was this awesome ATM-like machine where you could rent movies with your creditcard. We ended up renting seriously about 30 movies every month and I barely can remember some of them. Under those circumstances, maybe I should re-watch this comedy someday. I mean, I have heard some good stuff about it but, somehow, it didn’t really blow me away. I mean, the genesis of this project can attract you but I thought it was actually rather dubious. Indeed, back then, when Tom Hanks won his first Academy award, he thanked a gay teacher. Well, the whole idea of this movie is that imagine the same situation, an actor wins an award for playing and homosexual and thanks also his teacher. The only issue is that the concerned teacher is actually heterosexual… I don’t know, I wasn’t really blown away by this concept. On top of that, I have never been a fan of Kevin Kline, especially when he plays some rather hysterical characters. On the other hand, I always had a weak spot for Frank Oz’ work, I think he is actually rather underrated as a director and he actually did a fine job here. To conclude, even though I had some rather mixed feelings about this feature, I still think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Since I kept hearing some good things about this flick, I was quite intrigued and rather eager to check it out. Indeed, even the great Roger Ebert loved this movie but, honestly, I’m not sure I really shared his enthusiasm. I don’t know, maybe I have seen too many similar flicks like ‘District 9’ or ‘Cloverfield’ and even though I enjoyed most of it, I can’t say I was really impressed. First of all, I do have a weak spot for those movies which have a realistic approach towards Science-Fiction, it is a very nice trend, and Gareth Edwards has indeed created a very nice mood but I didn’t care much for the rest, I’m afraid. I also liked the fact that we don’t learn much about the two characters, once again, a nice approach, but what we did learn about their private life was really tedious and the way they slowly get attracted to one another seriously didn’t add anything to the story. Furthermore, some people really loved the ending but it was nothing really new or ground-breaking and ever since ‘Close Encounters of the Third Kind’, we have had already many other SF features showing aliens who might not be so bad after all. Anywayt, o conclude, even though I had some rather mixed feelings about this one, it definitely had some potential and it is not bad at all so I still think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Honestly, I wasn’t expecting much from this flick but, somehow, I still ended up watching it. Basically, it is one of those movies which gives you some preconceived ideas even before you see it and I didn’t think I was actually the target audience. Eventually, I thought it was actually gritty, of course, not gritty enough to become really remarkable, but it was gritty enough to become watchable and rather entertaining. Of course, this movie was the breakthrough for Kate Bosworth who was supposed to become a major player but she never fulfilled those expectations. Back in those days, she looked much healthier and she was definitely quite charming. Her profile would keep rising until ‘Superman Returns’ which was not that bad but it was still a flop. She was definitely miscast in this blockbuster and her career has never really recovered from the blow. Anyway, coming back to our main feature, it is basically a rather standard surf drama but it was rather well made and it seemed to be rather realistic so, I must admit it, I was actually rather positively surprised. To conclude, even though it is nothing mind-blowing whatsoever, it is actually rather entertaining and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Honestly, I wasn't sure what to expect from this flick but since there was a pretty cool cast, I thought I should give it a try. I always had a weak spot for movies about poker which is a fascinating game and this movie definitely had some potential. Apparently, in spite of its attractive cast (Stuart Townsend, Sylvester Stallone, Gabriel Byrne, Jamie Foxx Melanie Griffith, Thandie Newton), it was apparently barely seen when it was released and it was another flop for Stuart Townsend whose career was once promising but never seemed to take off. So, I really liked the mood, the characters, the card tricks but it is honestly difficult to care for a poker movie which deals with cheaters. I mean, to see a guy winning a game because of his skills, his experience or even his luck is much more intriguing than to see someone winning because he is actually cheating. It makes the whole thing much more predictable and not really rewarding in my opinion. Eventually, it is more a movie about cons than poker. Still, in spite its flaws, it remains an entertaining thriller and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Even though I’m not a huge fan of musicals, since this one is a classic, I thought I might as well give it a try. Well, I really enjoyed the opening scene with Louis Armstrong, actually, all his scenes were pretty neat but, as soon as the actual story started, I got bored pretty quickly. It is only when it was finished that I realized that it was another version of ‘The Philadelphia Story’, a better classic which still didn’t really blow me away. Still, the cast was pretty nice (Bing Crosby, Grace Kelly, Frank Sinatra, Louis Armstrong) and it was interesting to see Grace Kelly in her last part before she became Princess Grace of Monaco. To be honest, even though she was really amazingly charming as usual, I really had a hard time with her but I’m not sure if it was her acting which got on my nerves or her character. Eventually, only Frank Sinitra did manage to make something appealing with his character, the rest didn’t entertain me at all. At the end of the day, it is a mix between a musical and a screw-ball comedy and therefore the whole thing was just too fluffy for my taste. Still, even though I didn’t really like it, it remains a decent musical and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I wasn't sure what to expect from this flick but since there was a pretty cool cast, I thought I should check it out. Usually, I don't really care much for such thrillers with a really far-fetched plot but, I have to admit it, I really liked this one. I mean, the whole thing was really preposterous, that's for sure, but the makers managed to keep it somehow a little bit realistic (in my opinion, even if it was really unlikely, everything happening in this movie could happen in real life, at least, that's how it felt for me) and there was a pretty good suspense during the whole thing. On top of that, there was indeed a pretty nice cast (Kim Basinger, Chris Evans, Jason Statham, William H. Macy) and they all delivered some decent performances. If I remember correctly, it was the first movie starring Chris Evans that I saw and, back in those days, he was already quite charismatic. Again, usually, I really don't care much about this kind of US thrillers. I mean, they are usually well made and rather entertaining but they are also usually quite idiotic especially with their annoying endings filled with ridiculous twist. Still, even though, this time again, the whole thing was pretty far-out, I actually have a weak spot for this one and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.