Reviews by johanlefourbe

Even though it seems to be a long time ago and most of us have forgotten about it but, at first, DreamWorks animation started out with some good old hand-drawn animation but expect for ‘ The Prince of Egypt’ which was financially and critically successful, the rest didn’t work very well and after only 4 hand-drawn features, they completely left out this medium and focused solely on CGI animation (just like Disney). Eventually, out of this 4 movies, this movie was their biggest flop ever and it has the dishonor to be the only DreamWorks Animation picture not to earn a profit at the box-office. I think it’s too bad for two reasons. First of all, this flick was actually pretty good. The animation looked really good and it was pretty neat to make a story about this subject. My guess is that even though the story was entertaining enough, it was still too pedestrian and after decades of sugarcoated Disney features, the audience want a little bit more from those stories instead of all always the same characters going through basically the same issue over and over again. I still think it ‘s a real shame though that they dropped this way of making animated features. Basically, when they noticed that Pixar popularity kept on growing with every movie and above all, after ‘ Shrek’ massive success, they found their new cash cow and nowadays, you have actually an overdoses of CGI features. Not only from Pixar and DreamWorks (whose features are not always amazing) but also from maybe 5 or 6 different studios and, in my opinion, the quality is not always there (even with Pixar nowadays..) and they make those movies above all because they are usually profitable. Anyway, this movie was basically a victim of this new hype and that’s too bad because it is actually pretty good and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in animated features.

Even though I’m well aware of the fact that his movies are not really good, I always had a weak spot for Renny Harlin’s work, and his movies are among my guilty pleasures. However, I thought this time it could be a real gem though. Indeed, even though it was not really successful when it was released, it has since reached a cult status. Furthermore, the story was rather intriguing, some kind of female Jason Bourne, from a screenplay written by Shane Black (sold at 3 million dollars, it is the most expensive screenplay ever). Geena Davis looked pretty badass and with Samuel L. Jackson as sidekick, how could it go wrong? Unfortunately, even though all the ingredients were there to make a really awesome action flick (even the title was cool), the end result was still pretty underwhelming. It’s pretty obvious that Geena Davis and her then-husband Renny Harlin tried really hard first with ‘Cutthroat Island’ and then with this movie to launch her career as a female action star but it just wasn’t meant to be apparently. I mean, she wasn’t bad but compared to other actresses such as Sigourney Weaver, Angelina Jolie, Milla Jovovich or even Noomi Rapace, she wasn’t really convincing. On the other hand, in my opinion, it was above all the story which was honestly pretty weak (I don’t really understand why they spent so much money for this). I mean, it started pretty good but really quickly it became just another really pedestrian action flick with some really bland and boring characters. Even the action scenes were not bad, but still nothing remotely impressive. At the end of the day, the whole thing remains watchable but it could have been so much better. To conclude, in my opinion, it was yet another underwhelming movie directed by Renny Harlin and I don’t think it is really worth a look.

Of course, a movie about Chauvet cave (la grotte de Chauvet in French) was really intriguing and after watching ‘Grizzly Man’ and ‘Encounters at the End of the World’, I have become quite fond of Werner Herzog’s documentaries. However, I didn’t expect it to be so awe-inspiring. I mean, at first, I thought ‘Great… I’m getting to spend 90 minutes in some cave, I’m going to get bored so fast…’but no, it never got boring. Indeed, from the very first second we entered this cave, the whole thing was quite spellbinding. Basically, those paintings are the oldest ever found (about 35000 years old) and about twice as old as the previous oldest painting. When watching these, it’s basically watching the birth of Art which was quite overwhelming, at least, if you have any interest in Art like I do. The striking thing is that even though those paintings were obviously primitive, they also had some impressive artistic qualities to them, like some amazing shades and contrast effects and those were just simply beautiful to look at. It was also kind of emotional to realize that those ‘primitive’ cavemen actually had some artistic aspirations already 35000 years ago, something that really has defined us as human-being and one of the major differences we have with other animals. As usual with Herzog, you have this rather weird narration provided by Herzog and it can be annoying (sometimes, he throws the weirdest questions to the people he interviews and they often look at him giving him this look ‘what the f*ck are you talking about?!’) but I think it’s an asset because its enhances the whole surreal aspect of this situation. Apparently, it was released in the theaters in 3D and, according to Roger Ebert, it worked pretty well so I really wonder how the whole thing looked in this format. To conclude, I thought it was pretty awesome, you’ll never get closer to this cave and it’s a lifetime opportunity to see those amazing paintings so I think it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Art.

I wasn’t sure what to expect from this movie, but since Kate Winslet was starring, I was really eager to check it out. Basically, it is one of her more obscure movies and even though she is shown very prominently on all the promotional material, she is not in fact the main character. But, it didn’t matter and I thought it was actually a really decent WWII feature. The biggest issue I have with movies dealing with WWII is that I have seen so many of them and, nowadays, to really impress me, they either need to be really brilliant or they need to tell me something I haven’t heard already 100 times before. And this movie, even though it was nothing really amazing, definitely belonged to this 2nd category. Indeed, I thought it was pretty neat that they focused on those cryptanalysts (the people who were cracking those codes) , to see approximately how they worked and I also enjoyed the fact that we were dealing here with some men and women actually using their brain to solve some issues instead of the usual macho trigger happy kind of guys. Of course, the twists were rather far-fetched and the love story was rather unnecessary, especially after you read that the main character was based on a real life person called Alan Turing who was notoriously homosexual, prosecuted for it and even chemically castrated via estrogen hormone injections (!) (That could have made a great story actually) . Still, the directing by Michael Apted, a usually underrated director, was pretty solid, there was a nice cast (Dougray Scott, Kate Winslet, Saffron Burrows, Jeremy Northam, Tom Hollander , Matthew Macfadyen, Corin Redgrave) and, above all, it was a very interesting subject. To conclude, even though it is nothing really mind-blowing, it remains a decent WWII feature and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I wasn’t sure what to expect from this movie but since I have a huge weak spot for Emma Thompson, I was still eager to check it out. I must admit it, it all started pretty good and I really admired the relationship between Charles and Sebastian thanks to the great performances by Matthew Goode and Ben Wishaw, two actors who keep impressing me each time I see them again. Unfortunately, the rest of the movie was rather dull. Of course, Charles falls for the sister which it was terribly predictable and, honestly, not really interesting. And the rest of the story was not much better, I’m afraid. I mean, they try to convince you that the mother, the catholic dogma and even the house have some terrible influence on this family, basically, destroying them but I didn’t really buy it. The main issue, in my opinion, is that the book itself (which I haven’t read) probably develop much more all those elements whereas they all felt pretty much half-baked in this movie. I mean, at some point, Sebastian goes to Morocco and for a while, I thought he was dead since he wasn’t around anymore and nobody was talking about him but, no, apparently, he was still alive! What happened to him? Why was he not coming back? Why didn’t they get in touch with him? Why didn’t Charles get in touch with him? And it is the same about most of the characters and the sub-plots. It’s too bad because I think the whole thing really had some potential. Indeed, the cinematography was pretty good and the relationship between those two guys was really interesting. To conclude, in spite of its flaws, above all thanks to the actors involved, I still think it is worth a look though, especially if you like the genre.

Before reading this, you will get the usual warning... If you haven't seen the movie yet and you have any intention to see it some day, don't read this review, stop right now and try to avoid any trailers of any piece of information. It's the best way to watch it. Then, the second important thing : was it fake? I honestly don't know but, frankly, I don't really care. Every documentary is more or less manipulated but it seemed genuine to me, for what it's worth. Anyway, I thought it was pretty good. It started as some kind of facebook diary, then it became a thriller for a while, and at the end, it was something else entirely. The point is, at least, that's my point of view, in real life, people will tell you a lot of sh*t, and on the internet, it is 100 times worse and that's the main reason why I never, really never, get too close with people on the net. And that's basically the weakness with this movie. I mean, when you read the messages she sends, it was really obvious that those were fake and it was rather mind blowing that the guy didn't realize earlier what was going on (Eventually, it was only after 8 months of this cyber relationship that he suspected that something fishy was going on). On the other hand, it was quite priceless to see his emotions evolved, going from a crush, to love, to awareness, anger, bitterness, and unexpectedly compassion. Indeed, you would expect them to completely tear her up apart with her filthy lies but, no, they go along with her for a while and rather gently they tell her she should stop. To conclude, I thought it was pretty good and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are into weird documentaries.

P.S. : It is rather weird but just a couple of days before watching this movie, I started a correspondance with another listal member who told me at some point he had watched around 20 000 movies. When I told him that he must be at least50 years old and that he must have watched 500 movies each year for the last 37 years, he changed his story by saying that he had watched 14 000 short movies ((amateur and professional) did he count his home videos as well?!?) and watched about 6000-8000 feature films. Also, and that's the best part, apparently, he is a screenwriter who do some rewrites on original scrips for feature films or TV and he sells some ideas to some famous screenplay writers who buy the rights to re-sell it to some studios or producers.... I think I have found my own catfish, how about that?

I find it really difficult to judge this movie. Indeed, I thought it was pretty good, probably the most original biopic I have ever seen but, honestly, I thought the whole thing was a little too damned alienating. Back then, when I was a kid, my dad would listen very often to Bob Dylan so I have some very fond memories of his music but,I must admit it, I was and still am rather oblivious about his music and the guy himself. Of course, I have heard about his sudden sometime even bizarre 'transformations' but not much more than that I'm afraid and I think it is imperative to really know the man and the songs to fully appreciate this movie (I really wonder what my father would think of this movie but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't care for it). Actually, this flick reminded me of two other movies I saw recently. The first one is 'Accross the universe' which was another interesting experiment, making a movie using the songs of the Beattles. The other movie is 'Cloud Atlas' in the way that it intermingled various stories with different timelines, constantly switching back and forth between the stories and with a very thin connection between those tales. Personally, I thought it was better than 'Accross...' because the story was more intriguing and the experiment was much bolder whereas 'Accross...' was just a standard musical. However, I did prefer 'Cloud Atlas' because, even though it took me a while, I was eventually able to connect with the whole thing whereas it never happened here and some bits, especially the one starring Richard Gere, were just way too obscure for me. Still, the directing was really good, there was a great cast involved and it remains a very original feature. To conclude, even though it is definitely an acquired taste, I thought it was pretty good and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in experimental movies.

I already saw this movie but since it was a while back and since I have it on DVD, I was quite eager to check it out again. For many years, Oliver Stone had been a struggling director and at the time of production, he thought that this movie was going to be his last chance, having already made 'Seizure' and 'The Hand' which were both failures. However, in 1986, he made two movies which both managed to be, at least critically, successful. Of course, we all remember 'Platoon', crowned with the highest prize, in my opinion the best movie about the Vietnam war and rightfully considered as his magnum opus. However, we tend to forget the other movie he made back then in 1986, a movie so overlooked that it did not even have a wide distribution in the United States. Eventually, it was re-released after the success of 'Platoon'. Anyway, it is actually a damned fine picture. Indeed, it is one of those edgy movies that Stone used to make before going soft. The subject was topical with some very good performances, even by James Belushi, usually one of the least interesting actors I have ever seen. James Woods, a really underrated actor, gave here one of his typical nervous performances and I think he was really good in this. Anyway, to conclude, it is actually a pretty good movie and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Oliver Stone's work.

Even if I have lost faith a long time ago in Woody Allen, I still keep watching his new movies once in a while, for old times' sake. Some of them (a very few) get some good reviews but, in my opinion, he hasn't done anything really great for at least two decades. Anyway, this movie was a very average one, that's for sure. This time, Larry David plays the typical Woody Allen character but this version was even more obnoxious, vicious and mean than usual. At least, he was very funny and some of his dialogues were just hilarious which is something Woody Allen still can deliver. Unfortunately, I can't say the same about the other characters. Indeed, the character played by Evan Rachel Wood and her parents were just terrible. Indeed, I thought that Wood was really not convincing or maybe it was just that her character was just poorly written, I don't know. It was just striking that the main character was really interesting whereas this young girl was just some pathetic caricature. To make them a couple was also rather ridiculous as if Woody Allen still needs to believe that a 20 year old girl could still fall for someone like him. To conclude, in my opinion, it is one of the weakest movies directed by Woody Allen, even worse than 'Scoop' or 'Cassandra's dream', fortunately, Larry David made the whole thing watchable and I guess it is worth a look if you are die hard fan of Woody Allen's work but don't expect anything remotely amazing before watching the damned thing.

Even though it seems like ages ago, there was a time when every single movie directed by Rob Reiner was a big hit, critically and usually also financially. I mean, just check his track record : 'This Is Spinal Tap', 'The Sure Thing', 'Stand by Me', 'The Princess Bride', 'When Harry Met Sally...', 'Misery'. This great combo started in 1984 and was ended by the dreadful 'North' released exactly 10 years later in 1994. This movie was the last one in this impressive serie. Basically, it is a rather standard court drama taking place in the military world. What makes it better than the usual flicks in this genre was first of all the very solid directing by Rob Reiner. He managed indeed to make one exciting thriller. The other great thing about this movie was the cast (Tom Cruise, Jack Nicholson, Demi Moore, Kevin Bacon, Kiefer Sutherland, Kevin Pollak, Christopher Guest, Noah Wyle, Cuba Gooding Jr.). Back then, Tom Cruise was a huge megasuperstar, every single of his movies were some huge hits, Demi Moore was one of the most popular actress, things have changed a lot in 20 years... Anyway, even though both of them were pretty good, they were eventually both blown away by Jack Nicholson who gave once again an impressive performance, playing against type an uptight conservative high ranked soldier. At the end of the day, you won't learn anything really new with this film but you will be really entertained, that's for sure. To conclude, it is a really solid court room thriller and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.