Reviews by johanlefourbe

Honestly, I wasn't expecting something amazing from this but, at least, I thought it could be an entertaining action flick especially with such stars like Richard Gere and Bruce Willis. Unfortunately, it barely managed to be an average action feature. The worst thing is that, since then, I have seen 'The Day of the Jackal', the movie which has inspired it, it was completely brilliant and it makes this 'remake' look ever more incompetent. Where should I start? First of all, I have to admit that it was pretty neat to see Bruce Willis portraying a bad guy for a change and he did a decent job but compared to Edward Fox in the original movie, it was nothing really impressive. Willis did OK but I can't say the same about Richard Gere... He was supposed to play an Irish terrorist but he was not convincing whatsoever and don't get me started on his pathetic attempt to give an Irish accent... Furthermore, the story was just really weak, they even threw in a love story. The whole thing was just way too pedestrian and not interesting whatsoever. Honestly, it remained watchable, but they completely wasted this opportunity to create a modern version of this great story and it was just too bad. To conclude, I have seen worse but it is still a really average action flick and it is not really worth a look.

I really like Bruce Willis. I have watched most of his movies and even though some of them are pretty forgettable, I usually manage to find some redeeming features, usually Bruce Willis himself. However, a few of them are just terrible and even Willis didn't succeed in saving those from being a total disaster. This movie is one of them... Not only it is a very boring and uneventful action flick, it is above all one of the worst depections of autism I have ever seen. I don't want to blame the young boy who played that part, he did what could and was not half bad actually. It is just the way they used this condition to fit a popcorn flick was just rather infuriating to me. I mean, for me, it is a rather personal issue as my step-son is an autist and I even can barely stand 'Rain Man' which is considered a classic by most of us. It is just really annoying that in Hollywood, they can't write a story about an autist without making him or her some kind of freakish genius. Autism is actually a little bit more complicated than that. Of course, it is just a commercial picture and I probably shouldn't take it too seriously but it doesn't change the fact that it is one of the most tedious flicks starring Bruce Willis. To conclude, in my opinion, it is one of the worst movies starring Mr Willis and it is not worth a look whatsoever.

Honestly, I haven't heard much about this flick but any movie starring Samuel L. Jackson and Michael Sheen is a must see in my book. Anyway, it was another example about why you shouldn't know too much before watching any movie. I started watching it without knowing anything except that those two guys were in it and it made the whole thing even more interesting to watch. It reminded me of 'Rendition' in the way that it makes us wonder how far we should go to fight terrorism. Personally, I'm pretty sure that many muslims have been badly tortured, just like Michael Sheen in this movie, and the whole point is : should we actually do it? Is really it worth it? The director and the actors did a pretty good job and I know where I stand but they really succeeded in drawing a grey line between what is right or wrong and that was pretty impressive. Unfortunately, it wasn't really flawless. For example, even though Carrie-Anne Moss did a pretty good job, she looked too good for this part and it was kind of distracting but that was a small thing. Above all, the whole thing tends to loose focus when they get engaged in all kind of thriller theatrics. The most obvious example is how they basically gave Jackson carte blanche to do anything he wants to get some results but, constantly, the people around him stops him and then tell him to go on, and again stops him and then tell him to go on... That was far from being realistic, rather tedious and really a blunt way to show the moral struggle of this tale. So, it was far from being perfect but it made some interesting points and I'm frankly still shaken up after watching it. To conclude, it is an interesting thriller which didn't reach its full potential but it is still worth a look though.

Since I grew up in the 90’s, of course, I watched the cartoon many times. I honestly didn’t care at all for the live-action features as I thought the concept didn’t fit this medium at all and looked pretty stupid but many people loved those flicks. Anyway, I thought it was a great idea to adapt those characters into a CGI animated feature which was, in my opinion, the best medium for them. However, since no sequel came afterwards, my guess is that it was not really successful at the box-office, even though the critics and fans were rather positive. My guess is that even if the Turtles were really hugely popular in the 90’s, those days are however long gone and except for the die-hard fans looking for some piece of nostalgia, the rest of us didn’t really pay attention to this flick. Still, I have to admit that it was actually not bad at all. Indeed, like I said before, CGI animation was a perfect choice and the whole thing looked really good. The story was entertaining enough but nothing really mind-blowing though. I guess, it all depends that where you stand about the Turtles. If you think that mutated turtles with some awesome fighting skills is a great concept, this movie is for you. Personally, I never really bought this concept so it might explain why I wasn’t a really huge fan of this movie. Still, to conclude, it remains a decent CGI animated feature and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are a fan of those wacky turtles.

Back in the 90’s, Kenneth Branagh became one of the most promising directors. In the 2000’s, even though he continued to direct, his work as a director was barely noticed but he made an interesting come-back in 2011 with the big budget ‘Thor' and I wonder where it will lead this time. Anyway, I kept following him all this time and it was the main reason why I wanted to check this flick. It was his 5th Shakespeare adaptation but like most of his recent work, it was barely seen. There was actually quite a lot to to enjoy here. Indeed, the whole thing looked quite gorgeous with some very nice use of colors (just check the poster) and Bryce Dallas Howard never looked better. They made also an interesting choice to keep the original text which was sometimes a little hard to follow (I’m French but I saw the movie in English with Dutch subtitles...). Still, the language was pretty impressive and there was some really huge monologues, all respect for the actors involved. Still, I can’t say it was really amazing though. Indeed, I really didn’t care much about the story. Indeed, it started as drama but then, suddenly, it became a very frivolous (and rather boring) comedy. Furthermore, I didn’t really dig the whole thing about the girl disguised as a boy while nobody recognized her. I thought it was pretty tedious and not really interesting. Still, it remains a well made Shakespeare adaptation, the cast was really good, and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Even though André Téchiné is pretty much unknown here in Listal, he is actually one of the most highly regarded directors in France and already for 40 years. This movie is the oldest one he made that I have seen so far and even though it wasn't one of his best work, I still think it was pretty good. It was the first time he worked with Catherine Deneuve and they would eventually make 6 movies together. It also features the tormented Patrick Dewaere in one of his last performances. You have probably never heard of this guy but he was a very good actor and pretty famous in France in 70’s but he was apparently deeply disturbed and committed suicide at the beginning of the 80’s. Honestly, I have to admit that the story was nothing mind-blowing but Deneuve and Dewaere were terrific, they were were spellbinding to watch and they had a great chemistry. Basically, it is one of this typical French love stories, it is very complicated, very painful and rather doomed. Nothing much happens in those flicks, expect that the characters talk a lot but I always prefer this genre than the bland Hollywood love stories. Anyway, to conclude, even though it is nothing really amazing or original, I thought it was pretty good, above all, thanks to the great lead actors, and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like French movies.

Honestly, I have never cared about this franchise but I was intrigued by the way it really resurrected itself with this 4th installment when, in fact, most of us thought this franchise was pretty much dead and buried, so I was really curious to check if it was as awesome as everyone was saying. Unfortunately, the whole thing turned out to be rather disappointing, I'm afraid. I mean, I have to admit it, the action scenes were pretty neat and it was a little bit better than its predecessors but the improvement was only marginal in my opinion. The worst thing is that the whole thing really had some potential. Basically, you have 2 best friends, one is a cop, the other a thug. The cop is not exactly a hero and the thug is not really that a bad guy and, obviously, they should avoid each other but they keep hanging out together. Eventually, they are torn between their loyalty to their friendship and their loyalty to their own people. Now, that sounds like a good story but, unfortunately, instead we get this terribly tedious story with some pathetic dialogues and with some below average acting. To conclude, it is not really bad but I have seen many more inspired action flicks than this one, I don’t really understand why everybody got so excited by this sequel and I don’t think it is really worth a look, except if you are a die hard fan of this franchise.

Since it is a classic and it has inspired many directors such as Ridley Scott, John Frankenheimer, Tobe Hooper, and John Carpenter, so I was definitely eager to check it out. Honestly, I’m not really knowledgeable about those old horror flicks and except for ‘Nosferatu’, I still have to watch all the following : ‘King Kong’, ‘Frankenstein’, ‘The Bride of Frankenstein’, ‘The Wolfman’, ‘The Fly’,…. Anyway, it is always pretty neat to get acquainted with a new genre and I thought it was a pretty good flick indeed. Back then, they didn’t have monstrous budget (as a matter of fact, it was made with only 40,000 dollars) and they didn’t have such complex special effects or CGI like nowadays. In those days, it was all about the characters and what they were going through. Basically, there were 3 group of characters : the military, the scientists and the press (solely represented by Scotty). Each group had their own reaction towards the ‘thing’ and it was pretty interesting to see them discuss how they should handle the situation. I thought it was also pretty neat that, for a good chunk of the movie, you didn’t see ‘it’ at all, you just had to imagine ‘it’ following the words and the body language of the characters. As soon as the alien (which of course looked rather ridiculous) was displayed, this tale unfortunately lost its edge but, still, for a 60 year old feature, it thought it was pretty solid. I also enjoyed the fact that Nick, my 15 year old step-son, thoroughly enjoyed it. So young and still able to enjoy a very old black and white flick movie without any impressive special effects. I thought it was pretty awesome. Anyway, in spite of its flaws, it is a pretty cool classic and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I didn’t expect much from this flick but since I have a weak spot for Michelle Pfeiffer, I thought I should check it out anyway. Eventually, I found it really difficult to judge this movie. Indeed, in my opinion, this whole genre of the real-life TV drama is usually pretty dreadful. I know, it is a matter of taste, and my wife, for example, actually enjoys those movies but even though the stories might be true, the way they are told I just terribly tedious. This movie is no exception. Just check the trailer. It is filled with a terribly melodramatic score and the movie is not different. Check the Whoopi Goldberg character. For some reason, her character reveals she’s gay. What the hell has it do with the whole thing?!? Absolutely nothing, it is just a way to to emotionally manipulate the audience with some cheap tricks. Still, in this genre, I have to admit it is one of the best I have seen. Indeed, Treat Williams and, above all, Michelle Pfeiffer gave some very strong performances and the first half was pretty much heartbreaking. The second half was also not bad but it felt too much plot-driven and I wish they investigated more the psychological turmoil lived by the characters. Eventually, it is a pretty standard story, even if it is based on a true story (which is usually the case) or on a best-seller novel (what happened here) but it is some powerful stuff, I’ll give you that. To conclude, against all expectations, it was not bad at all and it is actually worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

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. Unfortunately, pretty much like ‘Badlands’, this movie never really did fulfill my expectations. I mean, I did like it, that’s for sure, but I can’t say I was really blown away by the whole thing. Indeed, I didn’t really care about the plot (I’m pretty sure Malick didn’t care for the plot either, if there was any) and I also didn’t care much about the characters either. It is probably a results of the choice made by Terrence Malick to have the story told by a young child. Even though it had some interesting aspects (it must be one of the most daunting voice-over I have ever heard), it was also terribly alienating as you never get to know the three main characters. It is actually something quite inherent in Malick’s work, the fact that you are never explicitly told what the characters are exactly thinking or feeling, a more realistic approach than your standard Hollywood feature where everything is explained and dumbed down so I understand and usually appreciate this approach but it was rather frustrating this time. Still, it remains a fascinating picture. Indeed, the directing was just flawless and it is definitely one of the most beautiful movies I have ever seen. Basically, most of the movie is shot outdoors at dusk or dawn, something technically terribly difficult to achieve (how long can you manage to have the right light for example?) but so awe-inspiring to watch. Most of the shots were just so perfectly composed, it was just jaw dropping and, even if you don’t like his movies, you have to admit that the guy is a true artist. Anyway, to conclude, even though it didn’t really blow me away, it is still a classic and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Malick’s work.