Reviews by johanlefourbe

Claude Chabrol tends to be rather overlooked but he was actually part of the French wave, just like the giants Jean-Luc Godard and Francois Truffaut, and even though he never had the same amount of success abroad, he was quite heralded in France during a career which went over more than 6 decades and he made more than 50 movies in the process. To be honest, I haven’t seen many of his movies (at least, not enough I believe) but this flick is one of the best so far. Once again, it stars Isabelle Huppert in the lead part, they would make many more movies together, and she was quite brilliant as usual. The plot is a little bit similar to ‘Vera Drake’, a more recent feature directed by another great master, Mike Leigh, in the sense that it deals with a woman who performs unlawful abortions. The big difference though is that Vera Drake was actually a kind woman who wanted to help other women in need, here the main character, Marie-Louise Girard (a woman who actually did exist for real), actually did the same thing above all for the money and she didn’t care much for those women or the women’s rights in general. Personally, I have always been rather fascinated by dark and ambiguous characters and, therefore, this movie was pretty spellbinding to watch. To conclude, even though this flick is rather obscure, it is actually really good and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in French movies.

I wasn't expecting much from this flick but I didn't expect it to be so bad that it would become the worst movie released in 2011 (at least, among the ones I have seen so far). I mean, I always had a weak spot for romantic-comedies but this one was so cheesy, it was quite embarrassing to behold. Right from the start, with the ‘Once upon a time…’ text, I knew it would be quite terrible and, indeed, it never got better. Not so long ago, Mandy Moore made another rom-com about marriage called ‘Licence to Wed’ and I thought it was quite terrible but this was even worse, way worse. None of the characters were interesting, the plot was just inane and there was barely any redeeming feature about the whole thing. I have to admit it, the guy from ‘Twilight’, Kellan Lutz, actually tried to portray a nice guy but he was just terribly bland, just like the rest. The story also didn’t make much sense. I mean, at some point, it was pretty obvious that the main character should let it go but, no, instead, she makes her father make a fake suicide attempt and, magically, her parents get back together! To conclude, it is a really weak romantic-comedy and it is not really worth a look, even if you like the genre.

I always had a weak spot for both Nicole Kidman and Alec Kidman so I was quite eager to check this flick, even though I wasn’t expecting much, to be honest. Back in those days, Nicole Kidman was mostly known as ‘Mrs Tom Cruise’ and she was still struggling to be taken seriously as an actress (it will start to change 2 years later with ‘To die for’). For Alec Baldwin, the situation was not much better and he was also struggling to become a bonafide leading man. To round up the cast, you had Bill Pullman and (a very young) Gwyneth Paltrow. Eventually, for both Kidman and Baldwin, this movie wouldn’t really improve much their career, I’m afraid. Indeed, basically, it is a rather basic and underwhelming thriller which tries to create a tense mood with some spooky music. Basically, no substance whatsoever and all atmosphere. Of course, since you are dealing with an Hollywood production here, you have a series of idiotic twists towards the end (something I always rather dread) so I really had a hard time to care about the whole thing. To conclude, even though I have seen worse, it still remains a rather underwhelming thriller and I don’t think it is really worth a look, even if you like the genre.

I have just seen recently ‘Harlem Nights’ starring Richard Pryor so it was pretty nice to see so soon another comedy also starring this guy. This time, it was one of those flicks he made with Gene Wilder (they eventually made 4 of those together) and I thought it was not bad. Indeed, the concept to have a blind man (played by Pryor) teaming up with a deaf man (played by Wilder) was actually pretty neat. It might sound silly on paper and it is indeed a typical concept comedy but the comic possibilities were infinite but it’s too bad they didn’t exploit better this interesting material. Indeed, the way they met was just poorly handled and, at some point, they get involved with some gangsters (played by Kevin Spacey and Joan Severance who were both starring also at the time in the TV show ‘Wiseguys’) was just really underwhelming. It was rather funny to see Kevin Spacey in his first major movie part, even though his character was boring like hell. Furthermore, the whole thing went too long for its own good. Eventually, the more I think about this movie, the more I think my rating was actually generous but I guess it is worth a look, at least if you like the genre.

It is one movie I kept hearing about (especially at my work, all my colleagues kept arguing that it was easily one of the best movies ever made...) and since the ratings were indeed pretty good, I was really eager to check it out. The first thing I really enjoyed was the fact that the two main characters were not really necessary the good guy and the bad guy. Indeed, they created this interesting grey area where the actions of Clyde (the psychopath played by Gerard Butler) were rather understandable while the actions by Nick (the lawyer played by Jamie Foxx) were rather reprehensible. It gave an interesting dynamic but, unfortunately, the makers just dropped the ball at some point and the rest was just your typical Hollywood thriller with some big action scenes and explosions. I mean, it was entertaining, that's for sure, but the story barely made sense with some massive plot holes. Basically, it is a rather typical thriller with an omnipotent serial killer who is so smart, he can predict all your moves and he also seems to have an unlimited budget. Even with 'Seven', a far superior movie which is considered as a classic by many people, I didn't care much for this gimmick and it didn't work here either. Eventually, at the end, you discover how Clyde pulled the whole thing and either you will find it ridiculous or either you don't care if a thriller doesn't makes any sense at all. Still, I have to admit that it is a decent thriller with some interesting stuff and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Back in the 94, Jim Carrey finally had his breakthrough with ‘Ace Ventura’ and in the same year, he also had some major success with ‘The Mask’ and ‘Dumb & Dumber’ and, seemingly overnight, he became one of the biggest movie stars in the world and 20 years later, he is still one of the most recognizable actors in the world. Through the years, Jim Carrey has wisely avoided the sequels following his starring vehicles and he did pretty good since they were all terribly underwhelming (‘Son of the Mask’, ‘Dumb and Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd’, ‘Evan Almighty’). The only exception was this sequel which Carrey did just a year after making the 1st installment. Personally, I always had a weak spot for ‘Ace Ventura: Pet Detective’. Indeed, I saw it when it was released (it was actually released after ‘The Mask’ in France when it was the other way around in the USA), I must have been 14-15 years old and I thought it was actually pretty funny. Eventually, it took me about 10 years to finally see this 2nd installment but, to be honest, I didn’t like it much. I guess, the fact that I was very young help me to enjoy Ace’s first adventures but, this time, I thought he was pretty annoying, not really funny and I seriously had a hard time to care about the whole thing. To conclude, even though it was one of the very rare sequels starring Jim Carrey, it was still not really good and I don’t think it is really worth a look, except maybe if you are a die-hard fan of Carrey’s work.

Nowadays, Paul Greengrass, is mostly known for helming the 2 two successful sequels of the Bourne franchise. To be honest, even though I enjoyed those movies, they were not my favorite Bourne movies (I actually prefer the 1st installment) and they are not even my favorite movies directed by Greengrass. Indeed, even though those two were some solid action flicks, I actually enjoyed more his highly realistic historical features, above all ‘Flight 93’ which must be one of my favorite movies of all time, and also ‘Bloody Sunday’ which must be the most underrated movies directed by Paul Greengrass. Back then, when it was released, it was actually quite heralded and even won the Golden Bear at the Berlin movie festival but it was eventually quickly overshadowed by ‘The Bourne Supremacy’ which came just 2 years later. It is a real shame because it is a quite a harrowing drama giving a great insight on one of the biggest tragedies of our modern times. I mean, we always talk about how the Palestinians and the Israelis have been butchering each other for decades but, not so far way, in Nothern Ireland, the situation was actually quite similar and it is only recently that the whole thing seemed to have been finally settled. To conclude, I thought it was a very good historical drama and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Even though I wasn't expecting much, since it was one of the last movies starring Eddie Murphy which I hadn't see yet, I thought I might as well give it a try. Like many other actors, Murphy thought he could be a director and with this project, he went all the way, as he produced, wrote the whole thing and even played the lead character. He even managed to get his big idol, Richard Pryor, to get on board as well and it sounded pretty cool on paper to have those two guys in the same movie. Unfortunately, Eddie Murphy thought he might as well make a period piece since he never had the opportunity to play one before (he never made another one afterwards). Well, that was a really misguided choice and while watching this, I was wondering why he didn't make a period feature taking place in the 60's or the 70's since he grew up in those decades. He must have had some interesting knowledge about this time period, instead of going further in the past, telling some story about some culture he obviously knew nothing about. Anyway, the whole thing was just terribly tedious, the directing was lifeless and most of the jokes were just not funny. The only redeeming feature was Richard Pryor who had a nice delivery and, from time to time, a nice one-liner but that was definitely not enough to save this flick. To conclude, I think my rating is actually pretty generous and I don't think it is really worth a look, except maybe if you are a die-hard fan of Eddie Murphy.

I already saw this movie but since it was a while back, I thought I might as well check it out again. The main thing that attracted me with this movie was the fact that, even though Dustin Hoffman and Gene Hackman had been friends for decades (they even lived together with Robert Duvall when they were all young struggling actors), it was the first time they were actually working together. Well, only for this reason, this flick was worth a look but the rest of the cast was really nice as well (John Cusack, Rachel Weisz, Jeremy Piven, Bruce McGill, Dylan McDermott, Jennifer Beals, Orlando Jones, Luis Guzmán). Still, I wasn’t really blown away by the whole thing though. I mean, basically, it was a decent John Grisham trial thriller and it was entertaining enough but, dear, it was also terribly preposterous. I mean, wouldn’t be nice if the guy would write a more realistic court drama or thriller for a change? The whole thing was so remote from our world that it made it rather difficult for me to take it seriously or to even care about what was actually going on. I mean, to show how a big lawyer firm would try to manipulate a jury was actually really interesting and probably not so far from the truth but the whole plan cooked up by John Cusack’s and Rachel Weisz’s characters was just too much and even borderline ridiculous though. Still, the actors involved were good, the directing was decent and, I have to admit that I was actually fairly entertained. Anyway, to conclude, even though I’m not a huge fan of this kind of thrillers, this one was not bad and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

After her breakthrough with ‘Dark Angel’ (which I have actually never seen), Jessica Alba became the new ‘hit girl’ and quickly moved towards full length features. Instead of taking any risks, she decided to make a dance movie which must have satisfied her fan base at the time but I thought that it was actually rather underwhelming. I mean, to be honest, it was rather well made, Jessica Alba looked terribly charming but the whole thing had a rather pedestrian plot with the usual stereotypes. I mean, the rocky romantic relationship, the evil producers, the big show at the end,… It went just by numbers but I guess that the target audience didn’t mind much (I think I saw it at the time with my step-daughter who was just 12 years old and she probably thought it was pretty neat). On the positive side, the ending was pretty cool, with a catchy tune and some nice dancing but, beside this, the whole thing was just terribly forgettable. A few laters, Jessica Alba would show up in ‘Sin City’ (probably the only good thing she has done so far and she seems to like working with Robert Rodriguez since they made no less than 5 movies together) and her career was really launched. To conclude, I didn’t care much about the whole thing and I don’t think it is really worth a look, expect maybe if you really love the genre.