Reviews by johanlefourbe

It is one movie I was really eager to watch for a very long time. Indeed, even though he is pretty much overlooked as a director nowadays, I always had a weak spot for John Dhal’s work (even though I didn’t care much for ‘The Last Seduction’ but I definitely have to re-watch it at some point). Unfortunately, it was not really good and I thought it was actually really disappointing. Indeed, the whole thing was basically some rehash of other better thrillers such as ‘Duel’ (its biggest influence) or ‘The Hitcher’. Of course, with Paul Walker and Steve Zahn in the cast, I should have known better and lower my expectations. Considering Leelee Sobiesky, she was one of the most promising actress at the end of the 90’s but this movie is a perfect example of the direction her career was taking and, nowadays, she is involved in some even more forgettable features. To be honest, it wasn’t really an awful movie, the whole thing was actually well made with a decent mood, but I was expecting more and it was just way too bland for my taste so it was definitely a let down. To conclude, I thought the whole thing was really disappointing and I don’t think it is really worth a look, even if you like the genre.

I saw it again recently (I actually even bought the DVD when vacationing in France) and I thought it was actually better than I expected. In fact, I'm not even sure if I have seen it in the theater when it was released. Anyway, even though it was a success at the box-office, it tends to be overlooked which is actually not really surprising. Indeed, this movie was the beginning of the end of the Disney Golden Age and it followed up such massive success like 'The Lion King', 'Aladdin', 'Beauty and the Beast' and 'The Little Mermaid'. Of course, compared to those, it wasn't so successful but, as a stand-alone, I believe it is actually pretty good. First of all, the animation was, as usual, really stunning and I think it is a really gorgeous animated feature. The soundtrack was also really nice but I think they should have dropped the songs but I'll come back to this later on. Finally, Pocahontas, the character, is one of the best female characters created by Disney, at least, that's my opinion. Indeed, she looked stunning, there was something rather mesmerizing about her and, for once, she really looked like a woman and not some little girl like Ariel for example. Finally, I really enjoyed the sad and melancholic tone, which was fitting since it was dealing with some doomed love story pretty much like 'Romeo and Juliet'. Unfortunately, the whole thing was still rather flawed though. In my opinion, the main issue was that the guys at Disney tried, for once, to make a grown-up tale, hence Pocahontas's look, and I think it was an awesome idea, to make something a little bit deeper, a little bit darker, than their usual kiddy stuff but, unfortunately, they chickened out. Indeed, they threw in some supposedly funny animal sidekicks (one of their awful trademarks) and a few unwelcome songs so the tone was really uneven. As a result, the whole thing was too dark and serious for the kids and still too frivolous for the adults so it never really found its audience. After this flick, it pretty much all went downhill for Disney and it took them some time to finally get their sh*t back together. Still, to conclude, in my opinion, I believe this flick is actually quite underrated and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I wasn't sure what to expect from this flick but since there was a nice cast, I thought I should check it out. Basically, it is a mix of neo-noir and hyperlink (you know, when you have multiple characters with separate story-lines which usually come together at the end). To be honest, I'm getting a little bit tired of those movies with a rather short running time (this one was just about 90 minutes) with way too many characters and sub-plots. I mean, I have seen many of those lately and those are just frustrating and they are starting to seriously get on my nerves. In this case, most of the characters were actually interesting but you barely spend enough time with any of them to get really acquainted or even care about them. Still, there was indeed a massive cast (Danny Aiello, Jeff Daniels, Teri Hatcher, Paul Mazursky, James Spader, Eric Stoltz, Charlize Theron, Keith Carradine, Louise Fletcher). It was above all really nice to see Charlize Theron in her acting debut. Indeed, not only she looked really stunning (she still does almost 20 years later) but she gave a decent performance, even though her character was rather underwritten just like all the characters in this convoluted story. To conclude, even though the whole thing didn't really work, there was some interesting stuff in here and I still think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

To be honest, I had no idea what to expect from this flick but since I’m a huge fan of Al Pacino, I still wanted to check it out. Basically, it is one of his most obscure movies and it was barely seen when it was released. In my opinion, the main attraction was to see Al Pacino playing a totally different character than his usual tough guys. Indeed, his character is this time some kind of has-been, a loser. Pacino was really convincing and quite spellbinding showing some impressive acting range and the depth of his skills. Unfortunately, the movie was not really great whatsoever. I mean, it was definitely intriguing but not much more than that. Both Kim Basinger and Téa Leoni both gave some interesting performances but their characters were rather underwritten in my opinion. Basically, it was an interesting movie thanks to Pacino’s impressive performance but that was basically the only interesting thing this movie really had to offer. Still, to conclude, even though the movie itself was rather underwhelming, I still think it is worth a look, especially you are interested in Pacino’s work.

To be honest, I had no idea what to expect from this flick but since there was a pretty good cast, I thought I should give it a try. Personally, I really have a weak spot Aaron Eckhart and even though he makes some dubious choices sometimes, I think he is really talented and easily one of the most underrated actors at work nowadays. In this movie, Eckhart was again quite amazing. I mean, not only was he quite hilarious but he managed to built up a convincing character with the whole package (beer bully, greasy hair but also speech patterns and some impressive body language). Basically, the guy was just a looser, the complete opposite of Harvey Dent and that’s what acting should be about, about someone disappearing behind a character. Such a shame that, at the end, they just dropped the whole thing and made Eckhart becoming the usual hunk destroying all his good work, that was definitely disappointing . Unfortunately, the rest of the movie was not really good. In my opinion, the main issue is that there were too many characters and too my sub-plots to deal within a rather short running time (about 85 mins). For example, Logan Lorman’s character was also pretty cool but his part was seriously underwritten (why does he want to hang out with Aaron Eckhart? where are his parents? what’s the deal with this guy?!?). But you could say the same thing about his gay brother or Jessica Alba’s part which were even more underwritten. As a result, many characters (his wife, the news anchor guy sleeping with his wife, his in-laws,…) were rather annoying which could have been improved if they had been a little bit more developed. Still, Eckhart was really impressive, often very funny and some scenes worked very well. To conclude, in spite of its flaws, I still think it remains a decent comedy and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I already saw this movie but, since it was a while back, I thought I might as well check it out again. Well, I have to admit that I didn't remember it at all and, to be honest, I'm pretty sure I will forget most about it within a few days. First of all, I was rather surprised that, even though it is considered a musical, there were actually very little songs included but I guess it was a good thing since I'm not a huge fan of the genre (it did include though 'Diamonds Are a Girl's Best Friend', easily one of Marilyn Monroe’s most famous songs). Concerning Monroe, I think I finally figured out what is my grip with her. First of all, I have to admit it, she was really gorgeous at the time, no doubt about it, and she had indeed tons of charisma. However, in too many movies like this one, she was stuck playing such seemingly empty-headed blondes and I wish she got to play something else at some point. I mean, it was obvious that Jane Russel was actually playing the main character and, above all, her character was more complex and was not only characterized by the way she was chasing men because they were rich. Above all, just like 'How to Marry a Millionaire' which I saw not so long ago, the damned thing was just way too shallow for my taste. Sure, you might argue that it was the whole point but, at the end of the day, it did feel more silly than really entertaining to me. Anyway, to conclude, even though I didn't really care for the damned thing, I have to admit that it was a decent musical comedy and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Even though I have seen this movie years ago, somehow, I still can remember it as if it was yesterday. Indeed, I was invited at a (girl)-friend's house and she had rented two movies, 'Lost Highway' and this flick. She was a huge fan of 'Lost...' whereas I always thought it was a rather underwhelming mind-f*ck so we had those very long conversations about this flick... Anyway, after 'Lost Highway', we ended up watching this movie. I'm pretty sure she didn't know if it was any good beforehand and just picked it up because Klaus Kinski was in it. Kinski remains one of the most intriguing actors the world, even though I have barely seen any movies starring the guy (only 5) and most of his work was actually garbage. Anyway, this movie was one of the last he made and it wasn't really good, I'm afraid. I mean, Kinski was, as usual, pretty creepy and his charisma remains indisputable but everything else in this movie was just terribly weak. The plot, the directing, the other actors,... everything was just terribly underwhelming and without Klaus Kinski, it would have probably ended up as one of the worst movies I have seen. To conclude, I think I'm being rather generous here, it is a very weak thriller and I don't think it is really worth a look, even if you are a fan of Klaus Kinski.

It had been a while since I wanted to check this flick. Indeed, since it was nominated for the Best Picture Academy award back in 1986, I thought I should give it a try. To be honest, even though I thought it was pretty good, it was nothing really great. The first issue I had is that the whole thing was some obvious Oscar-bait (dramas based on handicap or diseases always score well with the Academy). I was also concerned at first because it started pretty much like 'Dead Poets Society' with the excentric teacher who becomes really popular with the kids and, of course, the conventional director becomes his nemesis... Thankfully, it didn't go that road and instead we got a rather striking love story involving the two leads, one hearing, the other obviously not. There were some very strong stuff here and William Hurt and Marlee Matlin were both really good in this. Still, I was missing something. I mean, the whole thing got stuck really soon because they were both stubborn (he wants her to speak, she doesn't want to...). I mean, at least half of the movie was about this conflict which was rather disappointing. For example, I heard that Hurt and Matlin became an item for a couple years but, apparently, their relationship was really stormy with some substance abuse on both sides. Now, that sounds a little bit more compelling. Finally, like Roger Ebert pointed out, you wonder why there is not one single scene during which William Hurt stopped translating what they say so you can finally experience this peculiar world of silence (I mean, it is not that difficult, you just add some subtitles and you are good to go...). Still, in spite of its flaws, it is probably the best movie dealing with this subject, the actors were excellent and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Honestly, I had no idea what to expect from this flick. Basically, I bought the DVD because there was Winona Ryder and Charlie Sheen on the cover and it took me almost 2 years to finally watch it. Still, at some point, I discovered that Roger Ebert chose it for his top 10 of 1986 so I must admit I was rather intrigued. At first, I had a hard time during the first 10 minutes to get into the story, probably because of the awful cheesy 80's soundtrack but, pretty quickly, I was rather fascinated by the whole thing. Indeed, it was probably one of the best depictions of adolescence I had ever seen. To start with, all the actors looked pretty much the right age which was a nice touch and they all acted pretty well. Above all, I was really amazed about the behavior and even more by the dialogues which sounded for once really realistic. Indeed, those kids had some conversations which were really intriguing and you could feel that the makers really put their heart into it. The only thing which felt rather phony was the ending at the school which was too overblown and out-of-proportion and the soundtrack was pretty horrendous throughout the whole duration but, a part from that, it was a very satisfying viewing. To conclude, I really loved this flick and I think it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

It is another DVD I had for more than a year on my shelves and I'm glad I finally watched it. The fact that two of my favorites Listal members actually advised me not to watch it probably influenced me pushing it indefinitely but since Christina Ricci and Liam Neeson were involved, I still wanted to check it out. Well, it was indeed not really good I'm afraid. The point is that there was definitely a good story, there somewhere, but I thought that the directing was really underwhelming and I had a terribly hard time to care about the whole thing. I don't know, for starters, I thought the whole thing looked terribly phony (the funeral home, the school,...). Furthermore, it was also rather annoying how the director tried to trick you all the way about the fact that she might be dead or not. It felt also rather phony and manufactured. Finally, why on Earth was Christina Ricci completely naked during half of the movie?!? Not that I complain about it but I wonder how it provided any support for the story. Still, I give it a few extra points just because the actors involved (Christina Ricci, Liam Neeson, Justin Long) were trying something really different than their usual work. Still, to conclude, I think I'm being really generous with my rating here, I didn't like it much and I don't think it is really worth a look.