Reviews by johanlefourbe

Even though Tom Cruise doesn’t have much a good reputation these days, I still think he is an intriguing actor and always try to check his movies when I get the opportunity. This flick was released the same year as ‘Risky Business’ which was his first hit and 3 years before ‘Top Gun’ which would make him a superstar and the new box-office darling. Basically, it is one of his more obscure features but I thought it was actually pretty good. Of course, it is not a masterpiece whatsoever and the whole thing remained a little too pedestrian and predictable but I thought it was better than the average flicks in this genre. Indeed, I thought it was rather realistic and I really enjoyed the rather grim tone of the proceedings. Indeed, even though it follows the usual events inherent to this genre, the end was far from being really positive which I found really refreshing. Even though it won’t be remembered as one of his best performances, I thought that Tom Cruise did a decent job here and he and Lea Thompson had some good chemistry. To conclude, even though it is actually nothing amazing, it is still a decent sport flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Tom Cruise’s work.

In 2010 was a terrific year for Natalie Portman. Indeed, she showed up in ‘Black Swan’ giving her best performance so far and won the Academy Award for the Best Actress. The year after, she was in 3 big Hollywood productions. I still have to have to watch ‘Your Highness’ which looked promising but seemed ultimately rather underwhelming. ‘Thor’ was a decent super-hero flick but nothing really amazing in my opinion. And then you had this romantic-comedy which, pretty much like ‘Your Highness’, sounded pretty good on paper but was eventually pretty disappointing. Indeed, even though the whole thing was supposed to be a bold and irreverent attempt at the genre, I thought it was in fact terribly tame with a really pedestrian plot. First of all, I thought they took forever to set up the whole thing. Indeed, there was not one meet-cute but 4 of them… Of course, it was copied from ‘When Harry met Sally…’ but it felt really redundant here. After that, the whole plot was just really underwhelming and predictable, going from A to B to C and ending on D. Ashton Kutcher was not too bad but he gave once again his typical goofy guy act and it is getting rather boring at this point. I mean, if he ever want us to take him seriously as an actor, he seriously has to show some range in the future. Concerning Natalie Portman, I felt rather bad for her while watching this. Indeed, in spite of the poor material, she actually gave a very good performance and she definitely deserved a better story. The main issue, in my opinion, is that romantic relationships are in real life usually more complicated and always more interesting than these old tired stereotypes. Why they keep on going with this old formula is seriously beyond me. Anyway, even though the whole thing actually had some potential, it still remains a rather weak romantic-comedy and it is not really worth a look, even if you like the genre.

I remember, when this movie was released in France, there was quite a buzz about it. Michel Blanc was above all famous as a comic actor and it was his 2nd directing effort. Honestly, it was quite an ambitious project, some kind of metaphysical comedy which Michel Blanc not only directed but also for which he portrayed the main character who happened to be himself. Still following me ? It definitely had some potential and it reminded me a little bit of Woody Allen with this rather neurotic character. It was also fun to see all those stars showing up for a cameo (Carole Bouquet, Philippe Noiret, Josiane Balasko, Marie-Anne Chazel, Christian Clavier, Guillaume Durand, Charlotte Gainsbourg, David Hallyday, Estelle Hallyday , Gérard Jugnot, Dominique Lavanant, Thierry Lhermitte, Mathilda May, Roman Polanski,…). Still, even though the whole thing was rather clever and midly entertaining, it was still nothing mind-blowing in my opinion. Indeed, instead of developing the concept and giving it some depth, Michel Blanc usually prefers to go for the cheap jokes which was rather underwhelming. Still, it remains a decent comedy and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in French movies.

Honestly, I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but since it won the César of the best French movie of the year and since it has been added to the ‘1001 movies you must see before you die’ list, I was really eager to check it out. First of all, even though I’m not a religious person (I don’t believe in God at all), I think Religion is a fascinating subject. Anyway, this movie was quite fascinating to behold and, honestly, one of the most spiritual movies I have seen. Indeed, it shows that the main purpose and goal of Religion is or should be love and all those men were thriving to reach this love and somehow became more human than most of us. I thought there were also something really divine in their behavior and they were quite remarkable. The juxtaposition of the fanatism going on in Algeria back in those days was also intriguing but you can see that the army or even the local authorities were not really found of those monks who naturally refused to take side in this ruthless conflict. This tale had also a more personal impact. Indeed, when I was a kid (just 9 and 12 years old) , I went twice in Algeria, spending some time with some local friends of my parents, playing with their kids, I even went to the Sahara a couple of times. Anyway, while watching this flick, I couldn’t help thinking about those friends and those kids I played with. What happened to them? They must have seen some terrible things during this reign of terror which has lasted 10-15 years and, suddenly, while watching this flick, I felt a terrible guilt. Maybe the only flaw about this movie is that you don’t really get to know those guys and their behavior was maybe too perfect. Or, like Roger Ebert pointed out, they should have left this place, go somewhere else helping some other people in need, instead of dying for no good reason. Indeed, at the end of the day, even if it wasn’t their intention, they still died as martyrs. Anyway, I thought it was a very interesting drama and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested by this subject.

First of all, I want to make something clear, this is not a Disney feature. Even though their logo is displayed prominently on all the promotional material, they in fact only distributed it in the US, they didn’t actually make it. Actually, it was made in Europe by Ealing Studios and produced by Vanguard Animation. Even though it is always honorable when Europeans try to compete on the highly competitive animation market ruled by the Americans and the Japanese, in this case, the end result was not really convincing, far from it. First of all, I’m rather surprised when I read that some viewers thought that the animation was very well done. Honestly, I thought it was actually pretty ugly. Furthermore, even though the concept had some potential, the whole thing was barely entertaining and the humor was just inane. There was one thing that I enjoyed and that was the bad guy portrayed by a falcon. Indeed, this character looked and sounded pretty awesome but I didn’t care much for the rest. To conclude, even though there were some good ideas here and there, it remains a rather ugly and boring animated feature and it is not really worth a look, even if you like the genre.

If I recall correctly, I saw this movie in the theaters when it was released. Since then, it has reached a rather solid status and it is even considered one of the best movies made in 90's by Quentin Tarantino (Tarantino was actually offered the chance to direct, but turned it down). To be honest, I never thought it was that amazing. Still, since it has been years since I saw it I thought it was time for a re-watch with Nick, my step-son. To my surprise, it was damned entertaining, even more than I remembered. The most enjoyable thing was the fact that it was made before the whole CGI overdose. Indeed, thanks to the CGI technology, they can make basically everything they want which is sometimes awesome but also sometimes rather underwhelming, especially concerning action movies. Take the last 2 Die Hard installments. There, you have a whole bunch of completely preposterous action scenes where neither Bruce Willis or even a stuntman was actually involved. It is all fake but back in the 90's, those were real explosions and you really wondered how they managed to shoot all that stuff. This movie was also the directing debut for Jan De Bont who was up to that point Director of Photography above all for Paul Verhoeven but also for a few Hollywood productions such as 'Die Hard' or ' The Hunt for Red October'. The Dutch director basically made his best flick and never reached that level again, unfortunately. A young Keanu Reeves was back then trying to profile himself as an action star and even though many thought his acting was wooden (which is often the case), I thought it worked here. Indeed, the guy is supposed to portray a cop, focused on his work, not making jokes à-la-John McClane and I thought he was convincing. For Sandra Bullock, it was her breakthrough performance and I must admit it, she was really damned charming back in those days (she still is, as a matter of fact). Honestly, I was surprised about how the whole thing was damned so entertaining and I was on the edge of my seat during the whole duration. The only flaws would be that it was a little bit too long and the romantic ending was rather underwhelming. Still, it is easily one of best action movies ever made and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

A while back, I came across this really obscure flick called 'Eye of the beholder' starring Ewan McGregor and Ashley Judd. To be honest, it was not really good as it was a rather weird and really unfocused thriller but there was definitely something fascinating about it. Later on, I found it out it was actually a remake of a French movie so I was really eager to check the original version. This flick was directed by Claude Miller who's not really famous abroad but he is definitely one of my favorite French directors. This time, the leads were played by Isabelle Adjani, who was probably at the height of her career and was quite spellbinding to watch, and Michel Serrault who was as usual pretty good, even though I preferred Ewan McGregor in this part. Pretty much like the remake, it is a rather weird thriller and during the whole thing you are never really sure what the hell is going on which makes the movie quite fascinating but also a little bit annoying at the same time. Personally, I tend to prefer a little bit the remake but it is a close call. To conclude, even though the whole thing is rather flawed, it remains an intriguing thriller and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in French movies.

Carlos Reygadas is one of those directors which I find really intriguing, even though I don't really like their movies (Kim Ki-Duk is also one of those). This was his directing debut and it gave lots of food for thought. First of all, Reygadas has a really nice directing style, something in between Terrence Malick and David Lynch, and very often his shots are very beautiful to look at. Pretty much like Malick, you never get to know the characters and there is not much plot whatsoever. Eventually, his movie are more like a sensorial experience. Indeed, the goal, I think at least, is that you feel something while watching, traditional narrative conventions don't really matter and, as such, there is something really spellbinding about the whole thing. There is also always at least one or two really shocking scenes in his movies (just check the first 30 seconds of his directing follow up 'Batalla en el cielo'...) and, this time, at the end, if I recall correctly, there is an almost graphic scene of the main character having sex with a very old woman. Honestly, I'm not a prude, I don't really mind such scenes at all but, in the case of Reygadas, I really wonder what is the purpose of those scenes? What is he trying to achieve? Still, like I mentioned before, even though this movie and his work intrigues me, I can't say I really enjoy it though. First of all, especially with this flick, the pacing is really terrible and the whole thing is really but really slow. Furthermore, you spend 2 hours with a guy who wanders without a clear purpose, you never get to know him or what he exactly wants or thinks and, as a result, the whole thing feels rather pointless and frankly very often plain boring. To conclude, even though I can't say I really enjoyed this flick, I still think it is worth a look though especially if you are interested in the genre.

I didn't expect much from this flick but, somehow, I still wanted to check it out. When it was released, it was a flop, especially if you consider how big the budget was for a Jack Black vehicle. After watching it, I'm not really surprised it tanked. Basically, they tried to mix a classic fairy tale with a typical Jack Black comedy and that wasn't a good idea, that's for sure... I mean, as if young kids would care about Black frat humor and as if his fans would care about the Lilliput world... Furthermore, I really dread this trend to take a classic story and put into a modern context. I understand they do it so we probably can identify with the characters but it is just a tedious gimmick. Just keep the original setting and use our modern special effects to create a beautiful world, that's it. I felt above all bad for Emily Blunt... She is such a talented actress but, after all these years, I'm still waiting to see her in something truly amazing. Here, she had a small boring part and can you believe this? She was actually originally cast as Black Widow in 'Iron Man 2' but dropped out to be in this movie... I mean, 'Iron Man 2' was nothing amazing but the whole Marvel universe seems a little bit more interesting than Gulliver shenanigans... Anyway, to conclude, I have seen worse but it was still pretty damned average and I don't think it is really worth a look.

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 6 years old daughter seemed to enjoy it but does it mean it was actually any good? I don’t know, personally, I really had a hard time to care about the whole thing. Apparently, it is an adaptation of a very famous children book but I’m not familiar with this book, to be honest. I seriously hope that the book has a better storyline because I thought the plot was pretty inane. The fact that I always had a hard time with taking animals didn't help either, I'm afraid. I mean, make a movie with human-beings, make a movie about animals but don’t make a movie about animals acting like human beings, please! Furthermore, they made a big deal of the fact that Dakota Fanning (still playing young girls back then) was in it but she hardly does anything during the whole thing. The main characters were therefore the animals with a star cast for the dubbing (Julia Roberts, Steve Buscemi, John Cleese, Oprah Winfrey, Cedric the Entertainer, Kathy Bates, Robert, Thomas Haden Church, André Benjamin). It is really something of our time to have such big stars coming along just to give a voice-over for a spider, a horse or whatever. I’m probably just too cynical for this kind of features but a while back, they made a movie called ‘Babe’, it was nothing amazing but it was still a decent family feature, and this movie was just way too similar, only more boring and less interesting. To conclude, even though it is nothing awful whatsoever, it remains a rather average family flick and I don’t think it is really worth a look, except maybe if you have to entertain some very young children.