Reviews by johanlefourbe

I wasn't sure what to expect from this flick but since I heard some good things about it, I thought I should give it a try. Eventually, it was an interesting and pretty deep drama about one of the most thankless jobs in the world. So, I did like it but, somehow, it didn't really grab me. I'm not so sure why but maybe it had to with the fact that there was no real storyline but just some episodes randomly put together. Furthermore, I wasn't sure what to make of the two romances involving Ben Foster, especially the one involving Jena Malone. Basically, there were many little stories but none of them was really fully developed. Still, it remains a strong drama, no doubt about it, with some tremendous acting by the whole cast (Ben Foster, Woody Harrelson, Samantha Morton, Jena Malone). It was especially nice to see Ben Foster and Woody Harrelson finally in the spotlights for once. Those guys are among the most underrated actors nowadays and they gave some of their best performances here. To conclude, it is a pretty solid drama and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in the actors involved.

Jean-Paul Rappeneau is not really famous abroad but he is pretty well known in France. In fact, he is basically the French Terrence Malick. Indeed, even though Rappeneau’s career spread out over almost 40 years, he made eventually only 7 movies. The most famous one must be ‘Cyrano de Bergerac’ which was a massive success in France back then and was even noticed abroad. Anyway, this movie was one of his first ones and, to be honest, I don’t think it was really good. Basically, it is one of those fluffy comedies starring Jean-Paul Belmondo. Belmondo started with the French new wave but quickly became a super-star in France and to a lesser extent abroad as well. Then, he turned away from the Art house movies and focused more on commercial efforts with a tremendous success. This time, even though there is an actual historical background, like I said before, it is not a serious affair and I had a hard time to care about the whole thing. Somehow, it reminded me of ‘Tout Feu, tout flamme’, another feature directed by Jean-Paul Rappeneau which was even more underwhelming than this one. At least, Belmondo and Marlène Jobert were really charismatic and had a good chemistry together and the whole thing was mildly entertaining. To conclude, even though it was nothing amazing, it remains a decent comedy and I think it is worth a look, especially if you are interested in French movies.

I remember, when this movie was released, there has some huge buzz about it. I mean, it is quite understandable since the biggest movie star and the biggest movie director (at least, if you consider the box-office revenues) were finally working together and we all expected some fireworks. Eventually, it was pretty successful financially and critically but even though Roger Ebert chose this movie as the best one coming out in 2002, I can't say I shared his opinion. I mean, it is definitely a solid SF feature, no doubt about it. Indeed, the visuals were awesome, Spielberg managed to create a really intriguing vision of the future and, for once, the whole thing was pretty gloomy which is something you don't expect in his work. Furthermore, the original concept was really interesting and created some neat moral dilemmas. Finally, you can say whatever you want about the guy but Tom Cruise can deliver and he gave here a solid performance. Unfortunately, I thought the ending was rather convoluted with too many annoying twist(s) for my taste. The point is that if you deal with future, present, premonitions and stuff like that, they will be plot-holes without a doubt, but the last 30 minutes made this even more obvious and this last act was rather weak in my opinion. Basically, the story was just fine until Anderton eventually shot the guy. Everything before was fine and really spellbinding and everything after was far-fetched, nonsensical and pretty disappointing. Still, even though I don't think it is really amazing, it remains a visually fascinating SF feature, most of it is damned entertaining and spellbinding to watch so I think it is definitely worth, especially if you like the genre.

I have never been a fan of those Stephen King's novels adaptation but this one must be the worst I have seen. It is even more disappointing considering that there was a pretty good director (Lawrence Kasdan) and a decent cast (Morgan Freeman, Thomas Jane, Jason Lee, Damian Lewis, Timothy Olyphant, Tom Sizemore, Donnie Wahlberg). 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’) . Way later in his career, he made this movie which is his worst so far, a huge flop in the US (it did manage to just break even thanks to the worldwide gross). It was a huge blow for his career and it took him almost 10 years to direct another feature, the also underwhelming and underperforming ‘Darling Companion’. So, what went wrong here? Actually, the first half was watchable. I mean, it was still pretty weak and not really above your average B feature but there was something appealing about those guys with a special ‘power’. However, in the 2nd half, they brought in some kind of Alien invasion and the whole thing became really horrendous. I mean, seriously, it must have been one of the worst movie sequence I have seen. Yeah, it was that bad. The story became really idiotic, the aliens looked awful, hell, even Morgan Freeman looked awful (just check those eye brows…). If the 1st half would have been as bad as the rest, it would have probably ended up in my top 10 of the worst movies ever made. To conclude, I really really didn't like this flick, it is a mess and it is not worth a look whatsoever.

I remember it as if it was yesterday. Back then, when I was just a kid, not even 10 years old, I saw the trailer for this movie. I thought it looked awesome and I was really eager to check it out. Somehow, it took me 20 years (!) to finally watch this flick. I have seriously no idea why it took me so long but the kid that I used to be was really grateful towards the older myself to finally grant him an old wish. On the other hand, it was also sad since it was obviously too late to watch this flick and I would have enjoyed it much more 20 years ago. Still, it remains a solid comedy, a typical Tom Hanks feature that he used to make in the 80’s before becoming a ‘serious’ actor and winning two back-to-back Academy awards in the process. I mean, it is pretty funny, when you check the reviews about the people who love it, it always concerns people who watched it first when they were kids and now they get a great nostalgia feeling when they re-watch it nowadays. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that but there is definitely a target audience here and, for grown-ups, it is slightly enjoyable but not much more than that. I mean, it is fun, Tom Hanks gives a very good performance and it is good while it lasts but it is nothing really ground-breaking in my opinion. To conclude, even though I don’t think it is really great whatsoever, it still remain one of the better comedies coming from the 80’s and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Within 2 days, I watched this whole trilogy and I thought it was a really rewarding watch. This time, this last installment had the very difficult task of wrapping all the murky stuff developed in the previous installments. Personally, I thought that this last feature was the least focused one. Indeed, instead of one main character, they had this time two and since the running time was again rather short, I really wonder if it was a wise choice to have two storylines. Furthermore, one of those two men was one of those despicable West Yorkshire police officers and even though it was indeed a bold move, it was also really difficult to root for the guy or to care about what he was going through. The other storyline was about some looser lawyer who keeps wondering if he should get involved with the whole thing or not but there was not much time to develop this character in my opinion. Once again, for the 3rd time around, there was again a really underdeveloped and underwhelming romance, just like in the other installments, but this time around, it was involving a psychic which made it even more disputable. Still, what a strong conclusion for a really intriguing trilogy! As a whole, it works even better than if you take all the movies as stand-alones. Indeed, the 3 really different directors managed to create a dark and fascinating world with one of the vilest police forces you’ll ever encounter. To conclude, even though this last installment was not really flawless, I really enjoyed this trilogy and I highly recommend it, especially if you like the genre.

After the incredible mayhem ending the first installment, I was really wondering where this sequel would go. Eventually, this sequel didn’t really follow these events and instead, it dealt with a totally different serial killer case which took place 6 years later and what remained was the setting, especially the police force of West Yorkshire. This time, it dealt with a real-life serial killer called the "Yorkshire Ripper’. To be honest, I didn’t know it was a real-life killer while watching this flick but some news footage felt pretty genuine so I wasn’t really surprised when I found out later on. To be honest, pretty much like the previous movie, even though I liked this flick, I can’t say I was really blown away by the whole thing. Once again, I felt that the whole thing was rather short and there was barely room for the police investigation which was actually pretty interesting (the way the main character was, out of nowhere, fired for some dubious reasons was rather unconvincing and right after that, seemingly out of sheer luck, they managed to get the Ripper undermining even more his investigation). Furthermore, there was once again a really unnecessary and underwhelming romantic angle, just like in the 1st movie. They could have get ridden of it , as far as I’m concerned, but at least, it was the best and most convincing romantic storyline in the whole trilogy. Still, in spite these flaws, I really enjoyed this flick. Indeed, this time, they brought another director, James Marsh, responsible for the marvelous ‘Man on Wire’, and even though the directing style was quite different, it worked like a charm and there was a great gloomy mood. Furthermore, once again, what a strong cast! This time, the main character was played by Paddy Considine, an actor who is definitely growing on me and he was really good in here. To conclude, even though it was not really amazing in my opinion, it remains a very good sequel, a fascinating thriller and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Not so long ago, Renée Zellweger was on the A list but, nowadays, we don’t hear much from her anymore. It seems that it started to go wrong for her after ‘Cinderella Man’(an actually really decent feature) tanked. Since then, none of her movies really managed to be successful and it seems she is in need of a major come-back nowadays. Anyway, she made this romantic-comedy just after her breakthrough performance in ‘Jerry Maguirre’ and it was not really good, I’m afraid. As a matter of fact, Zellweger was not even the main character, the main character was played by an even bigger has-been, Chris O’Donnell. O’Donnell was another decent upcoming actor but his career never really recovered from the disastrous ‘Batman & Robin’. To be honest, I’m not sure if they should be blamed since they both did what they could with the material. Indeed, basically, it is one of those terribly underwhelming romantic-comedies with a tedious concept. At least, it was well made and there was a nice supporting cast (James Cromwell, Marley Shelton, Peter Ustinov, Mariah Carey, Sarah Silverman, Jennifer Esposito, Brooke Shields) but it was still a very weak effort. To conclude, it is a really an average romantic-comedy and it is not really worth a look, even if you love the genre.

There was something really appealing about this trilogy and I was really eager to check it out. Eventually, even though I enjoyed this first installment, it was still a little bit disappointing in my opinion. The point is that the story was not really strong. I don’t know, maybe it has to do with the fact that it was rather short and, as a result, the whole thing was either too confusing (I often struggled to remember who was who and who was doing what) or too simplistic (during the whole thing, there is only one guy who could be the killer). I also had a hard time with the journalistic investigation, especially when the reporter ends up sleeping with one of the mother’s victims. Still, there was definitely something spellbinding about the whole thing. Indeed, I loved how they created north England in the 70’s and there was a great gloomy mood. Furthermore, Andrew Garfield must be one of the best actors of his generation and he was really good in this. The rest of the cast was also really strong (David Morrissey, Robert Sheehan, Eddie Marsan, Peter Mullan, Rebecca Hall, Sean Bean). Furthermore, even though the whole thing was rather predictable, I thought that the ending was actually rather surprising. Indeed, out of nowhere, it ended up in complete mayhem and it was even more surprising when you think that there are 2 more installments to come. Only therefore, I can’t wait to see what will happen next. To conclude, even though it was not as good as I was hoping for, it still remain a solid thriller 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 and since it was available on Disney+, I thought I might as well check it out again. To be honest, if there is one musical genre with which I don't feel any connection whatsoever, that would be definitely Country. Still, even though I don't like the genre, Johnny Cash remains a very intriguing figure and he has made some pretty bad-ass songs. The fact that I didn't know much about Cash made the whole thing even more appealing to me. Eventually, it was a typical directing effort from James Mangold who is not a very bad director but he is definitely not a real artist either so the end-result was a solid but still rather generic biopic though. And yet, I really enjoyed the damned thing. The first reason was that Johnny Cash was such an interesting character, at least, the way he was portrayed in this movie. Indeed, he was so full of insecurity and had such low self-esteem, I could really identify with him. The other reason was that, 20 years ago and 15 years before he would finally get his first Academy Award, Joaquin Phoenix was already displaying that he was one of the best actors of his generation. It was just really cool to see him taking such a generic genre as the biopic and deliver something so heartfelt. The funny thing was that he did not look at all like Johnny Cash. Sure, at the time, he lost against Philip Seymour Hoffman in ‘Capote’ but both of them were some acting giants at the top of their game so you won’t hear me complaining. Concerning Reese Whiterspoon, I do think she did get seriously upstaged by Phoenix (who wouldn’t be?) but I have to agree that she was really good and it was easily one of the best performances of her career. So, the movie focused on the romance between Johnny Cash and June Carter which was fine but they made it look like as if Cash did got clean for her when, in fact, he actually kept using drugs through most of his life. Anyway, to conclude, even though it was far from being really original, I really liked the damned thing and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.