Reviews by johanlefourbe

Since I’m a huge fan of Alfred Hitchcock, I was really eager to check this flick. It is not one of his most famous features but one of those many spy movies he made in England before moving to Hollywood. It was also an adaptation of a book written by Joseph Conrad. To be honest, I haven’t read the book but I have seen another version which was made exactly 60 years later by Christopher Hampton with an all-star cast (Bob Hoskins, Patricia Arquette, Gérard Depardieu, Jim Broadbent, Christian Bale, Eddie Izzard, Robin Williams). Anyway, even though Hitchcock didn’t have such a cast, the modern technology and probably had a smaller budget, his version was still better. Indeed, the story and the characters were actually not really interesting but his directing was, as usual, really efficient, creating a really tense mood . Furthermore, even though Hitchcock said that he regretted including Stevie's death, I didn’t see it coming and I thought it was quite powerful. I thought also that Sylvia Sidney, who I didn’t know before, was really charming (Hitchcock really knew how to pick his actresses, that’s for sure) and if Marion Cotillard had made movies in 30’s, she would probably have looked like this lovely lady. To conclude, even though it is actually nothing really amazing, it remains a solid spy feature and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Hitchcock’s work.

I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but since I have a weak spot for Steven Soderbergh’s work, I was really eager to check it out. Soderbergh is a very profilic director, very often releasing 2 movies in the same year but I’m not sure if it is a really a good thing since the quality of these multiple productions are rather disputable. Anyway, from time to time, he manages to make some more experimental features like ‘Bubble’ or ‘Full Frontal’. ‘Full Frontal’ was a disjointed mess, a terrible bore fest but ‘Bubble’ was pretty good, even if it didn’t blow me away like good old Roger Ebert. This feature was another experiment basically ending between those two, quality wise. First of all, the first surprising thing is that even though the main character was played by a notorious porn star and even though she was playing a high-end escort, there was actually no sex scene whatsoever. I’m pretty sure that many guys watched this flick hoping they will see some piece of action. Well, they must have been pretty disappointed. Personally, I didn’t bother me at all, in the contrary. This way, the whole thing was not exploitative whatsoever. Basically, it was more about the interactions between this escort girl and her clients and I thought it was really intriguing. Furthermore, I thought that Sasha Grey was actually pretty good. I mean, I read here and there that she was emotionless showing a terrible lack of acting talent but I don’t agree. In my opinion, the lack of emotion was perfect for the character and I thought there was something actually quite captivating about Grey’s presence and charisma. I would like to see her in another mainstream feature which has nothing to do with the sex industry, just to see if she could pull it off. Still, to be honest, the whole thing didn’t work very well, unfortunately. First of all, was it me or did half of the movie take place in restaurants and bars?! I wonder if it was done in purpose but it seemed rather redundant at some point. Another thing that bothered me even more was the random chronology. Basically, I spent the whole movie trying to fit the different pieces together which was a frustrating waste of time. Seriously, it is a gimmick which annoys more every time I see it because, most of the time, it doesn’t help or enhance the story at all. Especially in this case, it seems that they used it to mask the fact that there was no real storyline but just a bunch of half-baked sub-plots. And finally, that’s the last thing that bothered me. Indeed, there were way too many little stories going on and many were not interesting at all, especially the ones involving the boyfriend (his trip to Vegas or his work at the gym are just a few samples.) To conclude, it was not really a great movie, far from it, but there was still something quite mesmerizing about it and I think it is worth a look, especially if you are interested in Steven Soderbergh’s work.

Oh boy... It has been a while since I have seen this flick... Was it in the theater or on TV? I don't remember for sure and it is probably one of the most obscure features I have seen according to Listal (only two of us have seen it). Anyway, it is basically one of those typical convoluted French romantic dramas. I mean, there is not much going on expect for the various character endlessly talking to each other. You either love those movies or you don't. To be honest, it is sometimes rather pointless but I always had a weak spot for those kind of features. I also find Jeanne Balibar a really charming and talented actress. It has been a while since I have seen her though and I wonder what she is up to nowadays. The rest of the cast was not really memorable but since she was the main character and therefore the main attraction, it worked fine with me. To conclude, even though it is nothing really amazing, it still remains a decent drama and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in French movies.

Before it was released, there was some pretty good buzz about it but it didn't fair so well eventually. Still, it quickly reached a cult status and even reached the Imdb top 250 so I was really curious to see if it was that good. To be honest, I think it is kind of overrated. Indeed, it basically follows the good old formula of the usual underdog who gets his shot at the title. I mean, 'Rocky' was released already 40 years but I can't believe they are still chewing on this old story. Still, it doesn't mean this movie wasn't any good. Indeed, they added a little twist which was not to have one main character, but two main characters which happen to be brothers and, of course, who will end up fighting each other during the final showdown. Since you are rooting for both guys, who should win eventually? To be honest, I figured out pretty easily which brother would eventually win which was rather disappointing (One of the brothers seemed obviously weaker and was fighting for his own family so he was a more likely candidate). Another strong aspect was the acting by the three main actors (Joel Edgerton, Tom Hardy, Nick Nolte) which was much better than what you usually get in those kind of movies. Concerning the fighting, it all depends if you are into this MMA stuff. If it's your thing, you will be delighted. If you are not (like me), it was rather distressing to see two grown-ups completely beating the sh*t at each other even when someone is on the ground and obviously had enough. To conclude, I don't think it is that amazing but it remains a solid sport feature and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Not so long ago I have seen ‘Wyatt Earp’ another Western directed by Lawrence Kasdan and also starring Kevin Costner. Even though it sounded great on paper, it turned out to be one of the most underwhelming Western I have ever seen and it was definitely a deserved flop when it was released. However, back in the 80’s, not only Lawrence Kasdan had some major success as a screenwriter (he wrote ’The Empire Strikes back’ , ’Return of the Jedi’ and ’Raiders of the Lost Ark’ , not too shabby, ain’t it?), he developed also a solid career as a director and all his movies were acclaimed efforts (’Body Heat’, ‘The Big Chill’ , ‘Silverado’ , ‘The Accidental Tourist’) . Anyway, 10 years before making ‘Wyatt Earp’, Kasdan and Costner got together to make this Western which was exactly the opposite. Indeed, it wasn’t epic at all, just a rather modest Western but it worked like a charm and I thought it was a very fun flick. The first thing to enjoy was the pretty cool cast (Kevin Kline, Scott Glenn, Kevin Costner, Danny Glover, John Cleese, Rosanna Arquette, Jeff Goldblum). The other enjoyable thing was to see a rather young Kevin Costner just before his breakthrough in ‘The Untouchables’ 2 years later. There is a lot of energy, youth and carelessness in his performance and it was greatly appreciated. At the end of the day, this movie is nothing really amazing but since it never takes itself too seriously, it does work. To conclude, it is a pretty cool Western 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 I have a weak spot for Robert Downer Jr., I thought I should give it a try. Honestly, it was pretty obvious what the producers were up to. Following the surprising massive success of 'The Hangover', they decided to quickly cash-in on the popularity of the new funny guy in town, Zach Galifianakis. In the directing chair, you have again Todd Phillips and as the sparring partner, you have Robert Downer Jr., hotter than ever, so it sounded like a pretty good combo. Unfortunately, I didn't like it much, I'm afraid. Basically, it is some kind of a remake of 'Planes, Trains and Automobiles' and even though I enjoyed this classic, it didn't really blow me away like good old Roger Ebert. Anyway, this new version didn't add much to the formula and I had really a hard time to care for the whole thing. Even though Galifianakis' character was more obnoxious than funny, Downey Jr. delivered the goods as usual and saved me from total boredom. There were a few cameos, some totally wasted (Juliette Lewis, Jamie Foxx) and some pretty good (RZA, Danny McBride) but, again, they didn't redeem the whole thing. To conclude, I think I'm being rather generous with my rating but I guess it is still worth a look, especially if you like the genre or the actors involved.

To be honest, I wasn't sure about this flick but since there were a couple of interesting actors involved, I thought I should give it a try. First of all, the title is not really bad but it doesn't make the whole thing really attractive. At least, you know beforehand that you will be dealing with and for a movie dealing with teenage anxiety, I thought it was pretty solid. Above all, the characters were really interesting and the understated acting by Vincent D'Onofrio, Tilda Swinton and Vince Vaughn was really appreciated. Concerning Keanu Reeves, it was honestly a nice attempt to try something else but his character was just way underwritten and his behavior was impossible to follow. The main issue I had with this flick is that it was still rather unfocused in my opinion. I mean, you start with the whole thumbsucking business but then it is about a debate team and later, you have some pot smoking. Each time, the behavior of the main character changed rather drastically and it was a little too much. Not that Lou Pucci should be blamed as he gave a pretty solid performance. To conclude, even though the whole thing is not really original or convincing, I still think that they managed to create some interesting characters and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

So far, it is the best movie I have seen which was released in 2012. I know, many of you will probably be surprised that I give it so much praise, especially considering the fact that I'm not really generous with my ratings nowadays but this movie was just really amazing. I even shed a few tears, something that never happened to me before. First of all, after 20 years of mindless garbage, the great Robert De Niro was finally showing up in a good movie giving a great performance like in the good old days. Secondly, the characters and the whole story really touched me personally as I was reminded of how I met my wife and why we ended up together in the first place. As soon as the DVD is out, I will buy the damned thing and watch it with her. Finally, it was just a terrific movie with some real characters, with some real issues, dealing with their emotions and making me laugh and cry. I was also impressed by Bradley Cooper. Man, this guy seems to be the real deal. Indeed, only a few years back, he got his breakthrough with 'The Hangover' as a supposedly funny guy, then he became quickly another pretty face but, now, he is profiling himself as a genuinely talented dramatic actor. Concerning Jennifer Lawrence who just recently won the Academy award for this performance, I'm not so sure. The point is that it is only the 2nd movie starring her that I have seen so far (the other one being 'X-Men: First Class') and, in my opinion, she was actually too young for this part but she was solid so I'll give her the benefit of the doubt for now. Anyway, to conclude, I just loved this flick, it is an awesome drama, a great romantic-comedy and you should definitely check it out.

I wasn't sure about this flick but after hearing so many good things, I seriously wanted to check it out. And I wasn't disappointed. Indeed, it was a really fascinating story, a gorgeous movie to look at and I'm really glad I'm managed to watch it in the movie theater and in 3D. Pretty much like the late Roger Ebert, I really dread this new 3D hype but Ang Lee used it very well and it definitely enhanced the whole experience. It is pretty funny to think that 10 years ago, Ang Lee was ridiculed for 'Hulk' (in my opinion, a feature criminally underrated and actually one of the best super-hero flicks ever made) above all for its really ugly CGI sequences. This time around, Lee didn't only manage to master the CGI, he made one of the best use of it I have witnessed. Just mind-blowing. Used properly it can be a great tool but it's unfortunate that nowadays it is mostly used to create some big robots, huge monsters or impossible explosions. So, it was visually fascinating and the story was also really interesting with some thoughts about fiction, reality, religion and rationality. I must admit, I will have to re-watch it in the future to make a fair assessment concerning the story itself. Anyway, once again, you have here a movie which was rather low in my priorities but turned out to be one of the best released in 2012. To conclude, I thought it was an enchanting and touching tale and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Ang Lee's work.

In my opinion, the problem with such flicks is how much slack should you give to a movie because it is a family feature? I mean, my step-son used to love it and have watched all the sequels, I presume, but does it mean it was actually any good? I don’t know, personally, I really had a hard time caring about the whole thing. Still, I have to admit, it was really successful when it was released and it became quickly a classic among family features. So, following this reputation, I think it was time to finally check it out. Unfortunately, since I'm not 12 years old anymore, I thought the whole thing was pretty tedious to watch. I mean, it is well made, harmless and still rather watchable but like most of Disney features, it was completely by the numbers. I mean, you have the poor beast which was not treated as an animal but as a human being, you have the good guys, you have the bad guys and I thought it was quite boring. The usual argument is that since it is a family feature, I shouldn't expect so much but I don't agree. In my opinion, there is need to be so condescending with kids who are much smarter than we usually would admit. To conclude, even though it is far from being awful, I still think it is far from being really good either and I don't think it is really worth a look, expect maybe if you have some very young kids and nothing else to watch.