Reviews by johanlefourbe

Before becoming a ‘serious’ actor and winning two Academy awards back-to-back, Tom Hanks used to make some pretty goofy comedies and he was pretty successful at it. Well, this movie must be the goofiest of them all and even though Roger Ebert really loved it, I had a rather hard time to care about the whole thing. Of course, the plot was completely preposterous and it was supposed to be really whimsical but, honestly, I thought it was rather annoying. This movie would be the first Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan would make together (‘Sleepless in Seattle’ and ‘You got mail’ would then follow) and it was probably the least successful, even though it was probably more original. The one thing I enjoyed was to see Meg Ryan playing 3 different characters and I especially enjoyed the 1st one, Dede. Indeed, I really had a hard time to actually recognize Meg Ryan and I was quite impressed by her performance. The second character she played, Angelica, was too broad and obvious for my taste and the last one, Patricia, was just the typical blond girl that she has played so many times in her career. But that Dede girl was definitely something different and it’s too bad she was there only for 10 minutes. Except for that, I didn’t care much for the whole thing though. To conclude, even though they tried to make something different, it didn’t really work and I don’t think it is really worth a look.

Honestly, I thought it was a rather difficult movie to judge. Indeed, even though Ewan McGregor has gathered a respectable status as a movie star, from time to time, he still picks up some pretty challenging features and this movie was definitely one of those. Indeed, the whole thing was pretty bleak and depressing, with some rather explicit sex scenes (you even have some full frontal nudity by Mr McGregor himself if I’m not mistaken) so it was far from being a feel-good flick, that’s for sure. Still, there was something quite fascinating about the main character and Ewan McGregor delivered once again, one hell of a performance. To round up the cast, you had Tilda Swinton and Peter Mullan, two of the most underrated actors at work nowadays, and they were also really good in this. To be honest, I’m not really familiar with David Mackenzie’s work (I do have ‘Perfect Sense’ also starring McGregor on dvd so I’m definitely eager to expand my knowledge) but he is definitely an interesting director and I really appreciated the mood he managed to create. To conclude, even though I’m not sure if the story was actually great whatsoever, it still remain a really intriguing picture and it is definitely worth a look.

Honestly, it took me some time to appreciate Gérard Depardieu’s work. I mean, the guy is some kind of workaholic, he has made maybe 160 movies already, still making up to 5 movies a year, and many of them are pretty worthless. Still, after watching many movies starring this guy (almost 50 which is a lot but it is not even a third of what he has done!), I started to slowly appreciate what he does and when he gets the right material, he is quite amazing. Anyway, with his great international status, it is not surprising that he tried a couple of times to work in the USA, usually, with some rather disappointing results. This movie is, unfortunately, one of those. Basically, he got to work with Norman Jewison, a fine director who made some pretty good flicks such as ‘The Thomas Crown Affair’ or ‘The Hurricane’ but, this time, they were all stuck in some boring and cheesy plot. Indeed, even though it was fun to see Haley Joel Osment before he reached fame with ‘The Sixth Sense’, I didn’t care much about the whole thing. And if you add Whoopi Goldberg giving her usual obnoxious performance to the mix, the whole thing was pretty much doomed from the start. To conclude, even though I have seen worse, it remains a rather boring family feature and it is not really worth a look, I’m afraid.

Within a week, it was already the 2nd movie picked up by Roger Ebert as one of the best of the year without me knowing it before watching this. Even though I can understand why Roger Ebert was so enthusiast, I didn’t completely share his opinion though. As usual, I didn’t really know what the movie was about beforehand (apparently, it is an adaptation of book written by J.M. Coetzee, a major South African writer) and, at first, I thought that the main character was rather pathetic. I mean, in the first scene, he has sex with his regular prostitute, a gorgeous black woman, and then he has a rather lugubrious affair with a student. Then, he gets kicked out from his university and goes to the country side to spend some time in the farm of his daugther. At this point, you would think that there was enough material for one movie, but no, it doesn’t stop here, there was also some major dramatic event making the whole thing even more intricate. While watching this, I was reminded that South Africa is a wild and dangerous country, allegedly one of the most dangerous countries in the world, with a dark history and some very deep scars. In my opinion, there was a little bit too much going on for my taste but I was intrigued by the journey made by the main character and John Malkovich gave, as usual, a very good performance. Anyway, to conclude, even though it is a rather tough watch, it is actually pretty good and it is definitely worth a look.

George Clooney is what you could call a late-bloomer. Indeed, even though he is nowadays one of the biggest movie stars in the world, he was already in his 30’s when he got his breakthrough with ‘E.R.’. Pretty much like his best buddy Brad Pitt, even though he moved on pretty quickly to the silver screen, it took him some time to find his game and I think the ball really started to roll for him with this movie. Indeed, it was the start of a steady relationship between Clooney and Soderbergh and they would eventually make 5 more movies together (the Ocean trilogy, the ‘Solaris’ remake and ‘The Good German ‘). For George Clooney, it was the first time he was able to show his eternal charisma in a rather smart movie and he never looked back ever since. For Soderbergh, it was the opportunity to show he could also direct some more commercial productions and it opened many doors for him, even if the movie was not really successful at the box-office. Eventually, it is an entertaining heist feature combined with an unlikely romance and even though the dialogs were pretty cool, the story was not really amazing. Still, in spite of its flaws, I thought it was pretty good and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Steven Soderbergh’s work.

After I saw the trailer for this movie, I really wanted to see this flick. Indeed, I thought it was hilarious, one of the best trailers I had seen for a very long time. So, I did watch the damned thing and, to be honest, it was not as hilarious as the trailer. You know, with the trailers, it’s always the same, they show you the best bits and while the jokes worked there, there were not that funny when you watch the real thing. Still, it doesn’t mean it wasn’t a good flick, definitely not. Indeed, even though you can easily feel that it was Gordon-Levitt directing debut, it was still a really solid comedy. Or was it really a comedy actually? That’s the first interesting aspect with this movie, even though it is funny, I can’t say it was actually really a comedy. The second thing I enjoyed is how well written and developed all those characters were. Indeed, especially, Jon , the main character, was quite fascinating with, once again, a really solid performance by Gordon-Levitt. Furthermore, in contrary to 95% of the romantic-comedies, the whole thing was actually grounded in reality and it was just really damned refreshing. Like I mentioned before, you can feel that it was his directing debut and some things didn’t really work like constantly showing the daily routine of the main character. Eventually, it was only repetitive and neither really interesting or entertaining. Still, in spite of it flaws, I really enjoyed this flick, it is a solid directing debut for Joseph Gordon-Levitt and it is definitely worth a look.

Since this movie was directed by Edward Zwick and starring Jake Gyllenhaal and Anne Hathaway, I was quite eager to check this flick. Eventually, I had some rather mixed feelings about the whole thing. Indeed, at first, they try to convince you that a movie about a pharmaceutical salesman would be or should be either really interesting or hilarious but it was actually neither. Fortunately, Jake Gyllenhaal was really charming and managed to add some interesting facets to his character, otherwise I would really have had a hard time to care about the whole thing. At some point, they brought Viagra in the plot and you would think it would stir up the story a little bit but, no, it didn’t really happen. Then, with a rather odd move, they added a girlfriend inflicted with Parkinson’s. The way they portrayed this infliction was rather well done but then, it belonged to another movie. So, on one hand, you had a comedy about a salesman, and on the other hand, a drama about a romance jeopardized by a major disease so the whole thing was rather uneven. Since my wife has been really sick for more than 18 months with almost no chance of full recovery, I guess I should have been more touched by Gyllenhaal’s predicament but I honestly had a hard time to care about the whole thing. Still, above all thanks to the decent performances by Gyllenhaal and Hattaway and in spite of its flaws, it remains after all a decent flick and it is worth a look.

From time to time, my wife tries to surprise me by buying some (really) random dvds and she sometimes came back with the most obscure movies you could imagine. This movie was basically one of those. To be honest, I wasn’t expecting much but I was actually positively surprised. Indeed, it was a rather spellbinding thriller with only two actors (James Marsden and Scott Speedman) in a room and basically talking to each other (as a matter of fact, I have just seen ‘The Man From Earth’ with a similar structure and I really loved it so I guess I have really a weak spot for this genre). Obviously, it was adapted from a play and the cinematography was pretty cheap but I thought that both actors gave some strong performances and the dialogs, what this movie is actually about, were really strong. Out of nowhere, you have also a small cameo by the statuesque Sofia Vergara and you might wonder how she ended up here in the first place but since she doesn’t add anything to the mix, you shouldn’t pay too much attention to this. To conclude, even though it is nothing really amazing, it remains an intriguing thriller and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I already saw this movie but since I bought a brand new awesome TV, I thought I might as well check it out again. Well, 10 years after its release, it is still considered as the weakest MCU instalment but, in spite of its rather weak reputation, it is still watchable though. Indeed, it was pretty cool that most of the action was taking place in Asgard this time and it looked fine. Unfortunately, the plot was nothing really interesting, even if it became much better as soon as Loki was freed. Damned, this Tom Hiddleston guy is indeed a fine actor and Loki is an awesome character, easily one of the best villains so far in this Marvel universe. It's funny because, the first time around, I was disappointed that they killed off such a cool character but, the second time around, I was actually more disappointed that they brought him back at the end because, if Loki is really neat, it would have been more interesting to have Thor facing off someone else at some point. Anyway, Loki came in, throwing some awesome one-liners and the dynamic with his mighty brother was really entertaining. I also enjoyed the humor which they added this time and it was very welcome. However, the ending was not really amazing though. Of course, it was pretty spectacular but, seriously, at this point, we have been there, done that and bought the T-shirt a couple of times already. They really need to figure out a different way to end those super-hero flicks instead of giving us yet another huge battle in a major city, even though this time London was the victim, the outcome remains the same. The other thing that bothered me was the fact that Natalie Portman, probably one of the most interesting actresses in the world, was once again really wasted but, apparently, almost 10 years later, she is supposed to make a glorious comeback in ‘Thor: Love and Thunder’. Anyway, to conclude, even if it was nothing really mind-blowing, it was still fairly entertaining and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

It is one of those movies that I had like for ages on dvd but somehow, I never got the guts to see it. I mean, it looked terribly lame so I postponed it more or less forever. Anyway, I thought it was finally time to get rid off of this thing and, indeed, it turned to be pretty bad. I mean, back in the 90’s, there was this huge hype about drag queens and, of course, Hollywood had to surf on this wave when it was still around and they quickly released a movie about the subject. Somehow, they thought it would be a good idea to cast some tough guys like Patrick Swayze and Wesley Snipes to portray some drag queens and even though you have to praise the actors for trying something so risky, the end-result was pretty disappointing and I never thought they were really convincing. On top of that, the story was really tedious and pedestrian. As a matter of fact, the same year, was also released ‘The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert’, a movie about the same subject which has become since then a cult-classic and is so much better than this tedious bore fest. To conclude, the whole thing was pretty bad and it is not worth a look whatsoever.