Reviews by johanlefourbe

Recently, I have seen 'Becket' and Richard Burton completely blew away so I was really eager to watch something else starring this guy. Furthermore, Franco Zeffirelli has made some solid Shakespeare adaptations so I was definitely keen to check this flick. I think it was the first time I saw a classic adaptation of this play and I thought it was indeed pretty good. The thing I loved the most was the juxtaposition of the luxurious costumes and decors with the luducrious manners of the characters, especially Petruchio and Katarina. Basically, the whole thing was a mess and I have probably never seen such a chaotic wedding. Once again, Richard Burton impressed me (after all, he was an experienced Shakesperian and already played roles such as Hamlet, Iago, Edgar, Hotspur and Romeo on stage) and I definitely have to watch more movies with this guy. I still have to make up my mind concerning Elizabeth Taylor but since it is only the 3rd movie I have seen with her (another one being the dreadful 'The Flintstones'), I'm in no position of judging her acting capability at this point. Anyway, those two had some tremendous chemistry, that's for sure. Still, even though I liked this flick, I can't say it was really mind-blowing. I mean, I don't think it is one of Shakespeare's best work and, after a while, I got a little bored by their continuous bickering. Still, it remains a solid adapation and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Even though I'm far from being a fan of Adam Sandler, I still end up watching his movies. To be honest, pretty much like 'Grown Ups', this one was not really that bad. I mean, I'm used now to lower my expectations before watching a Sandler feature and, honestly, he has done worse. Still, who am I kidding? It was still a terribly lame comedy. I mean, right from the start, the whole thing was misguided. For example, like any Sandler feature, even though the humor was really rude and crude, the characters were all actually terribly nice and, as a result, the plot didn't hold up whatsoever. Indeed, Palmer not only has a smoking body, but she seemed to be a very nice girl as well and it is pretty obvious that if, when she discovered the ring, he told her something like 'I used to be married but got hurt and keep this ring as a warning and reminder', I'm sure she would have given a big hug. But no, instead, you get involved in some very convoluted plot where all the characters end up in Hawaii so you can see Brooklyn Decker, Jennifer Anniston and Nicole Kidman in various swimwear. I have to be honest, I did laugh a couple of times, but still, most of the jokes were just really lame and the plot was just terribly idiotic. To conclude, even though it is not the worse movie starring Adam Sandler, it still remains a really weak comedy and it is not really worth a look.

Samuel L. Jackson is a pretty cool actor and, like anyone else, I like his work and I try to watch as many as possible of his movies. But the guy is some kind of workaholic, making about 5 movies a year, and even though I have watched about 60 of his movies already, I still have to see 40 more! As a result, not everything he is involved with is actually really amazing and some of those are obscure and sometimes even rather weird. This movie is a perfect example of his more obscure work. For the second time around, after the acclaimed 'Eve's bayou' (which I still need to watch), Jackson was working again with Kasi Lemmons and it was one of the rare occasion that he was playing the lead. That's is also the main attraction, Jackson's performance. Indeed, he gave a very hearfelt performance of mentally disturbed man, he was completely convincing to watch and quite spellbinding to watch. Unfortunately, they decided to mix this with a rather pedestrian and uninteresting police investigation so you could have some suspence, cliffhangers and other boring theatrics. Furthermore, the directing was decent but nothing really remarkable so, without Samuel L. Jackson the whole thing would have been rather pointless. To conclude, even though it is far from being, I still think it is worth a look, especially if you are interested in Jackson's work.

James Foley is not a really famous director but he has made a few notable flicks such as 'Glengarry Glen Ross' and I always had a weak spot for his work, even though it tends to get a little too generic. This movie is a perfect example. Indeed, it is rather entertaining, the directing and acting were decent but it was honestly a rather pedestrian court-drama. Back in the 90's, John Grisham's books were all best-sellers and they made some pretty successful movies out of those such as 'The Firm' or 'The Pelican Brief'. To be honest, I have never been a fan of those Grisham movies. In my opinion, they are usually fun to watch but the plot is so irrealistic and so preposterous, I always have a hard time to really care about them and the fact that it is actually some shallow entertainment desguised under some morals and serious matters (such as racism in this case) doesn't help much. Anyway, this adaptation is probably the most obscure one I have seen so far and it is John Grisham's least favorite movie adaptation calling the film a "disaster" and a "train wreck from the beginning". Personally, I don't think it was that bad though. I mean, Gene Hackman is a terrific actor and delivered a decent performance as usual and I thought it was midly entertaining. To conclude, I thought it was actually a decent court-drama and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Before making the Spider-Man trilogy and becoming one of the most successful mainstream directors, Sam Raimi made this moody super-natural thriller. It is also interesting to point out that Billy Bob Thornton did write this movie (maybe people tends to forget it but Thornton got his breakthrough with his directing and writing and not actually as an actor). Anyway, there are many things to enjoy here. First of all, Raimi knows how to direct a thriller and the whole thing was really a nice moody affair. Then, there was a very nice cast (Cate Blanchett, Giovanni Ribisi, Keanu Reeves, Katie Holmes, Greg Kinnear, Hilary Swank, J.K. Simmons) and they all delivered some solid performances. It was above all pretty neat to see actors such as Keanu Reeves, Hilary Swank or even Katie Holmes to play against type. Still, even though the whole thing was rather entertaining, I was still disappointed by the plot. Basically, it is one of those typical thrillers with a pedestrian plot and some obligatory and annoying twist at the end. It is quite a shame because, the director was good, the actors were good, the whole thing looked terrific, it's just too bad they didn't make sure they had a really terrific story to start with. To conclude, in spite of its flaws, it still remains a decent thriller and I think it is worh a look, especially if you like the genre.

Honestly, I find it rather difficult to judge this movie. Indeed, I have always had a weak spot for John Boorman's work and I wanted to watch this flick for many years. Furthermore, it had built up a decent cult following since its release so my expectations were pretty high up. However, I can't say that the whole thing was mind-blowing though. I mean, I did like this movie but there were many things that also bothered me. For example, the beginning really looked cheesy but it got better after a while, even though I don't agree with Roger Ebert who thought that it was visually amazing (he did write his review 30 years ago so maybe, back then, it was a milestone in this area). And it was the same thing about the cast. Indeed, the cast was pretty impressive (Helen Mirren, Gabriel Byrne, Gabriel Byrne, Patrick Stewart, Ciarán Hinds) but, even though they were usually pretty good, the dialogs were sometimes downright cheesy but, on the other hand, we have no way to know how they talked back in those days. Still, I enjoyed this movie and it is definitely the best version of the Arthurian Tales I have seen so far. Indeed, we are pretty far from Disney here, since the whole thing is drenched in violence, blood, lust and you even have some incest. Basically, the mood and general approach was really dark and gloomy but it was a great way to handle this material. To conclude, even though it wasn't the masterpiece I was hoping for, it still remains a solid medieval feature and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

After their huge success with 'Airplane!', the directing trio Jim Abrahams, David Zucker and Jerry Zucker went to direct another parody but, this time, about WWII spy movies. Even though this flick wasn't as successful as its predecessor at the box-office, it has since then become a cult classic and it is considered as one of the best parodies ever made. Personally, even though I thought it was not bad at all, I can't say I really enjoyed this flick. I mean, after watching almost everything those guys have made starting with 'Aiplane!' to the Scream franchise and passing by the Naked Gun trilogy, I came to the conclusion I just don't really like this genre after all and this movie wasn't an exception. I mean, there were many funny jokes, that's for sure, but there was also plenty of stuff for which I couldn't care less and, sometimes, it was even downright pathetic. I know, it is inherent to the genre but I always find it difficult to enjoy a flick when it indulges itself with some stupid jokes. Still, there was definitely some neat stuff like, for example, Val Kilmer, in his acting debut, delivered a decent performance. I always had a weak spot for this guy and I hope he will make one day make a deserved come-back (he would have to stop to make all those dreadful straight-to-dvd gardage though...). To conclude, in spite of its flaws, it remains a decent parody, especially if you like the genre.

Since I kept hearing good things about this flick, I was really eager to check it out and the fact that I always enjoyed Sydney Pollack's work made made me even more eager. Actually, it had been a while since I saw one of his movies but this one really blew me away and it is definitely one of his best efforts. I mean, I knew beforehand that it was dealing with a dance marathon but I thought those events lasted about 2 or 3 days but, in fact, apparently, those marathons lasted weeks, even months! As a result, you see the contestants undergoing some kind of physical and mental meltdown and it was seriously quite distressing to watch this amount of human dispair. Furthermore, even though the ending was a little bit predictable, I thought they would find a way to revert the course of those events somehow but, no, they just went all the way which was quite courageous. Eventually, this movie was pretty depressing but it wasn't a bad thing since the story and the characters were really compelling. Pretty much like Pollack, it had been a while since I saw something with Jane Fonda. Back then, she was a terrific actress, she gave here one of the best performances and I definitely must watch more movies with her. To conclude, even though the whole thing is terribly grim and gloomy, I thought it was quite spellbinding to watch and it is definitely worth a look.

James Foley is not a really famous director but he has made a few notable flicks such as 'Glengarry Glen Ross' and I always had a weak spot for his work, even though it tends to get a little too generic. This movie is a perfect example. Indeed, it is rather entertaining, the directing and acting were decent but the plot was just too pedestrian to make it really remarkable. In my opinion, the main attraction was to see such young actors like Mark Wahlberg and Reese Witherspoon starring in this at the beginning of their respective careers. There was even Alyssa Milano in one of the very few theatrical releases she has done in her career. You could argue that Mark Wahlberg was not really convincing as a violent pyschotic young man but I thought it was a decent attempt and it was interesting to see him portraying something else than his usual macho tough guys. At the end of the day, the main flaw was the plot which was just terribly generic and predictable but I still enjoyed most of it, above all, thanks to Foley's moody directing. To conclude, in my opinion, it remains a decent thriller and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Ooooh boy, what was I thinking again?!? Why did I watch this flick?? I guess there was nothing else on TV so I ended up watching this but, still, what a waste of time... And what the hell happened to Martin Lawrence?!? Already 17 years ago, Will Smith and him both gave their breakthrough performances in 'Bad Boys' but whereas Will Smith subsequently developped a really impressive career, becoming a huge super-star in the process, it never really took off for Martin Lawrence and he keeps playing the same character in some weak comedies which get more and more moronic. Honestly, this must be his worst movie I have seen so far. I mean, it is based on a very old formula (a celebrity goes back to his home town and is confronted with his familly and his past) and not only this formula is not really interesting but the jokes were just pathetic. The best example is this scene where you have 2 dogs, a big one and a small one, having sex and, no, the whole thing is not implied, it is displayed right in front of you... Not only is it physically impossible but, above all, it wasn't funny at all. Eventually, the rest of the movie didn't rised above this level of stupidity. To conclude, it is just pretty bad and it is not worth a look whatsoever.