Reviews by johanlefourbe

After hearing many great things about this flick, I was really eager to check it out. Personally, I was more familiar with Lean's later work, composed of great epic adventures such as 'Doctor Zhivago', 'Lawrence of Arabia' or 'The Bridge on the River Kwai'. Here, it is something quite different entirely, in fact, it is the complete opposite. Indeed, it is in black and white and it deals only with two characters, a man and a woman dealing with some rather mundane predicament. However, if the scale was smaller, the whole thing was nonetheless quite fascinating. Indeed, basically, it is a very simple story about love and adultery but so human, so recognizable, so relevant which is something quite amazing considering the fact that this movie is now almost 70 years old! Honestly, I can't pretend I was really familiar with the actors portraying the two main characters but they both did a really good job. Above all, I was really impressed by the directing by David Lean. Indeed, like I said before, we are here far from his epic work but he still managed to share with us the tormented life of those two lost souls and it was quite something to behold. To conclude, in my opinion, it is David Lean's first masterpiece and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in his work.

Ever since I saw Michael Winterbottom's directing debut, 'Butterfly Kiss', I have been faithfully following his work. I must say he has never been really popular but he has certainly been productive, making 19 movies in 16 years! Anyway, even though not everything he touches changes to gold, it is always interesting and this flick is a perfect example. Indeed, it is one of the many movies he has made with Steve Coogan and probably one of his most original work so far. I remember perfectly, I saw this movie a while back and it was on the BBC without subtitles, I had no idea what it was about and I'd really like to re-watch it at some point to make up my mind about it. Basically, it is a very experimental movie based on a very experimental book and it is almost impossible to describe it. You could say that it is some kind of comical mind-f*ck. Anyway, since I didn't know what it was about, I was confused and lost during most of the duration but it was certainly intriguing. It also depends where you stand concerning Steve Coogan. I mean, if you can't stand the guy, you probably won't enjoy it but, fortunately, I think he is really funny and it is probably his best movie I have seen so far. To conclude, it is obviously an acquired taste but I think it is definitely worth a look, especially if you want to see something different.

Even though the first sequel was rather disappointing, since it was again a huge success at the box-office, it was quite obvious that they would come up with another installment. Honestly, after hearing only bad things about this flick, I had the lowest expectations but, in my opinion, it wasn't that bad. Don't misunderstand me, it was indeed a very average flick, another step down compared to the awesomness of the original classic but I don't think it was one of the worst movies I have ever seen. First of all, the whole thing was very often out-of-focus probably because it was meant to be seen in 3D. Furthermore, the 3D effect shots looked really ridiculous above all in 2D, but I'm pretty sure it was just as pathetic in 3D. What could I add? The story was quite laughable and didn't make much sense. I mean, apparently, one shark managed to get in the sea world but, suddenly, you learn it was just a baby (something which wasn't never mentionned before) and that his mother was also in the park... Come on, give me a break! Still, at least, this time, they tried something else, compared to the 2nd installment which was basically a remake and it was pretty neat to see again the Brody brothers. To conclude, once again, I'm being really generous with the rating here, it was a really average flick and it is honestly not worth a look, even if you love the original classic directed by Spielberg.

Since 'Jaws' was a huge success and the very first summer blockbuster, of course, they eventually had to make a sequel. Unfortunately, like most sequels, this one was pretty disappointing. The first issue is that the concept can work only once in my opinion. Indeed, as a stand-alone, it worked fine, but the second time around, the story was virtually the same thing and not only it was the same thing but the element of surprise was gone and what remained was this feeling of déjà vu throughout the whole thing. The other issue is that Jeannot Szwarc is no Steven Spielberg, that's for sure. Indeed, even though Spielberg had a rather small budget and many issues during the production, he still managed to make one of the most thrilling features. This time, even though I'm pretty sure the budget was doubled, they still used the same trick (show the shark as less as possible) and it still looked really cheap. Above all, except for one scene when they managed to bring up a kid on a boat just a second before he was beaten by the shark, I really had a hard time to feel excited about the whole thing. There were a couple of good ideas, I liked the focus on the teenagers and the way Brody seemed to become really paranoid but, unfortunately, those ideas were barely developed. To conclude, I think I'm being actually generous with my rating but I guess it is still worth a look, especially if you love the first installment.

For many years, I had very often the opportunity to watch this flick, especially around Christmas, however, each time, I passed. I mean, even though it is a classic, I'm not really a huge fan of musicals and this one didn't really appeal to me. On the other hand, a movie directed by John Huston and starring Albert Finney couldn't be really awful, right? Eventually, I finally saw the damned thing and, I have to admit it, it was indeed not bad at all. It was still nothing really amazing in my opinion though. Indeed, some of the songs were pretty good, some dances were also pretty neat and Aileen Quinn who played the title character was quite convincing. Unfortunately, I didn't care much about the story, it was pretty generic and, above all, I thought it was very long. Indeed, it was more than two hours long and I seriously almost fell asleep a couple of times (the fact that I was really tired didn't help either, I guess). Basically, it is one of those musicals with a song every 5 minutes but they could have removed 30 minutes if you ask me. Still, like I said before, I'm not a huge fan of this genre and I can understand that some people really love this movie. To conclude, even though I was rather bored watching this, it still remains a decent musical and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Honestly, I wasn't expecting much from this flick but since there was a nice cast, I still wanted to check it out. First of all, I really have to point out how unappealing the title was. I mean, when you hear this title, do you really feel like a giant urge to watch this movie? Not me. It actually reminds of another movie with also a terrible title, 'Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood' (which title is the worst? Difficult to choose...). In both movies, you have a young woman who is confused concerning her love life and she gets advise from her mother/grand-mother and her excentric circle of friends. Once again, you have here a rather impressive cast (Winona Ryder, Ellen Burstyn, Anne Bancroft, Alfre Woodard, Jean Simmons, Kate Capshaw, Dermot Mulroney, Rip Torn). Even though Winona Ryder was the lead, she was pretty much uptsaged by those great actresses. They are so good, you wish they would be get something more substantial than this to chew on but, I guess, it is better than nothing. For Winona Ryder who was a few years before making this one of the most popular actress at work, it was yet again a rather disappointing feature and nowadays, we are still waiting for a great come-back. Still, I have to admit, if you manage to put aside this terrible title, the whole thing is actually not bad at all. To conclude, if you want to see some great actresses at work, you should definitely watch this flick but don't expect anything really amazing.

Even though I wasn't expecting much with this flick, since I have a weak spot for romantic comedies, I still wanted to give it a try. Unfortunately, this one was just terribly average. Basically, it is one of those romcom with a concept based on some rather random superstitious belief (here, if you pick up a coin thrown in the fountain of love in Rome, the person who threw it will fall in love with you). Seriously, I think I have never seen a good movie based on some superstition. The main issue, in my opinion, is that instead of getting to know the characters, you spend a lot of time with some stupid jokes around the superstitious stuff. There was actually a pretty good cast but even though Kristen Bell was really charming, she honestly didn't have much to do and her character was rather bland. On the other hand, I must admit that I was actually positively surprised by Josh Duhamel who was the only highlight in this debacle. Indeed, even though his character didn't have much personality either, he managed to make his character really funny and quite appealing. To conclude, even though it was not really awful, it was still a really weak romantic comedy and I don't think it is really worth a look, even if you like the genre like I do.

Since I'm not a huge fan of this genre, I wasn't expecting much from this flick. However, since I have a weak spot for Joe Dante's work, I still wanted to check it out. First of all, I was quite surprising to discover that John Sayles was one of the writers on this movie (Apparently, he used the profits from the film to fund his own projects. It was also his scriptwriting debut). Eventually, since it is a Roger Corman production, you pretty much already know what you are getting into, even before the whole thing started (blood, naked chicks and some cheap thrills). As I expected, it was a rather weak horror/monster flick with some cheap ass special effects, a total rip-off of 'Jaws' but since Spielberg himself loved it, they didn't even get sued. I was actually surprised that they even went far enough to slaughter some kids at a summer camp and, I have to admit it, it was slightly better than the horrendous sequel which was James Cameron's directing debut but it doesn't say much. I guess, I wasn't really the best audience for this kind of cheesy movies and if you are fan of the genre, you will probably enjoy it more than I did but I wouldn't recommend it and I don't think it is really worth a look.

Honestly, I never heard of this movie before but since a colleague had the DVD, I thought I should check it out anyway, especially since I have a weak spot for William Hurt. Hurt is an actor with a really peculiar career. Indeed, he started out int the 80's and quickly became one of the most succesfull actors at work, resulting with 5 of his movies being nominated for the best picture academy award in only 6 years ('The Accidental Tourist'(1988), 'Broadcast News' (1987), 'Children of a Lesser God'(1986), 'Kiss of the Spider Woman'(1985), 'The Big Chill' (1983)). Eventually, none of these movies won but it was quite remarkable. Anyway, as soon as the 90's started, his career went unfortunately rapidly down the drain. Such a shame because he is actually such a fine actor. Anyway, how was this movie eventually? Was it any good? I'm afraid not. Indeed, it was just one those dreadful straight-to-DVD features. Basically, it is a boring thriller, with a far-fetched plot with some annoying twists, some weak directing, even the acting was poor. Watching this, we are far from the Oscar material tackled by Hurt in the 80's that's, for sure. To conclude, it is actually pretty bad and it is not really worth a look.