Reviews by johanlefourbe

Nowadays, Liam Neeson has made an interesting and surprising come-back as an action star thanks to 'Taken'. Anyway, I always thought he was a great actor able to do any genre of movies and I was rather curious to see him in a comedy. I must say that the concept (a DEA agent goes to a therapist after getting almost killed) was really awesome and Neeson had some good comic timing. To support him, there was the always funny, Oliver Plaat, and the always charming, Sandra Bullock so there was definitely some potential here. Unfortunately, the whole thing was rather disappointing. I mean, eventually, even though it indeed had some potential, the story was rather messy and, actually, not really funny and, as a result, I was actually rather bored by the whole thing. To conclude, I have seen worse movies but it was still pretty average and it is eventually not not really worth a look whatsoever, expect maybe if you are dying to see Liam Neeson in a comedy for a change.

Way before ‘Pirates of the Carribean’, back in the 90's, Renny Harlin directed this big budget pirate movie. Eventually, it turned out to be a huge a flop, it was even listed in the Guinness Book of World Records as the biggest box office flop of all time. The production company, Carolco Pictures, even went bankrupt after this disaster. Eventually, was it that bad? Not really actually. I mean, the costumes, the mood, the action scenes were all rather decent. The main issue is that the whole thing was unfortunately rather boring to watch. Indeed, it was too generic and predictable and the lack of exciting characters was really obvious. I mean, I have nothing against Geena Davis and Matthew Modine but they never managed to really excite me. It was actually a pretty neat idea to have a pirate movie with a female main character but the whole thing suffered from a terrible lack of inspiration. Eventually, almost 10 years later, with 'Pirates of the Carribean', they eventually got it right by hiring an awesome actor who was able to create a genuinely entertaining character, the legendary Captain Jack Sparrow. To conclude, this flick was not really bad but it was still pretty average and I don’t think it is really worth a look I’m afraid.

Ever since I have been living in the Netherlands, I have been interested in Dutch movies but, to be honest, most of them are actually rather disappointing. This movie was a fine example. Indeed, the storm of 1953 was the biggest natural disaster taking place in the Netherlands during the last century so it was not really a surprise that they finally decided to make a movie about this event. Unfortunately, even though there was definitely some potential to deliver something interesting, it turned out to be rather disappointing. Indeed, the first issue was that the acting and directing were pretty shabby. Furthermore, during the actual storm, the whole thing was also rather underwhelming. Then, slowly, the acting and directing got better but the main issue with this flick is that they didn't really manage to find a compelling story to tell around this disaster. I thought that, like many other disaster movies, they would focus on different characters and storylines but, actually, it was mostly about a mother looking for a baby. It was actually not a bad idea but the whole thing became then a rather unbelievable thriller with some really annoying twists. Anyway, to conclude, the end-result was half-baked but, still, if only for its historical value, it is actually worth a look, especially if you are interested in Dutch movies.

To be honest, I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but since there was an interesting cast, I thought I should give it a try. Furthermore, there was a an interesting director on board. Indeed, back in the 70's, Bob Rafelson directed the instant classic 'Five Easy Pieces' starring Jack Nicholson and was promised a bright future. Unfortunately, 40 years later, his recent movies are not so impressive anymore. This flick is a good example. Indeed, you had a very nice cast (Samuel L. Jackson, Milla Jovovich, Stellan Skarsgård) and a good mood so the whole thing had some potential. However, there were some big issues with the story itself. I mean, they keep you in the dark as long as they can and, for a while, I must admit, it was rather intriguing, but, at some point, they eventually had to explain what was going on and, honestly, I wasn't impressed (understatement of the year...). As usual, they just threw a couple of annoying twists and then I really lost any interest in the whole endeavor. To conclude, I have seen worse movies but it was still a really half-baked thriller and it is not really worth a look, even if you love the genre.

Since I have a weak spot for Dennis Quaid, I thought I should check this one out, even though I didn't expect much from it. Basically, to enjoy this flick, it all depends where you stand towards sports movie. I mean, if you enjoy them, you wil love it and, if you cannot stand the genre, you won't like it much I'm afraid. The fact that is based on a true story doesn't change this whatsoever. Indeed, basically, it follows a very old formula and didn't add anything interesting to it. What remains is a pretty good performance by Dennis Quaid and some competent directing which managed to make the whole thing entertaining even though it was completely predictable. Personally, I'm not fan of this genre and I wish they spiced up the whole thing a little bit but since it is a Disney, what did I expect? Still, I have to admit, in this genre, it must be one of the best one I have seen so far (for example, with a similar plot, it was better than 'Invincible' which I have seen just recently). To conclude, even though it was quite generic, I still think it was a well made and entertaining sport flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are a fan of this genre.

To be honest, I had no idea what to expect from this movie but any movie starring Sean Connery is worth a look, especially if it was directed by Sidney Lumet. To make it even more awesome they had Christopher Walken also joining the party. All right, Walken didn't have much to do here but it was nice to see him in his first part. Anyway, it was basically a rather standard but well made heist movie and Sean Connery, as charming as usual, provided a decent performance. the directing by Sidney Lumet was  also pretty good but, to be honest, the 70's music was rather annoying. Still, there was obviously one thing that it didn't work at all in this flick though. Indeed, they basically tried to mix the whole heist thing with some taping like in 'The Conversation' for example but even though it made me wonder where they were going with this but, at some point, I came to the conclusion that it was going nowhere! I mean, they should have dropped the whole concept since it didn't add anything to the whole plot. Anyway, to conclude, even if it was rather flawed, it was still a decent and entertaining heist movie and it is worth a look, especially if you are a fan of Sean Connery.

Honestly, I had never heard of this movie before but since it was starring the great Morgan Freeman, I thought I should give it a shot. Apparently, since it was a direct-to-DVD release, I shouldn't have expected much from it but it was not that bad at all after all. Indeed, I think Morgan Freeman is just awesome, especially when playing the bad guy and his performance was, as usual, a real treat. On the other hand, you had John Cusack who tried to do something else than his usual comic part and he should be praised for that, even though his character was nothing really interesting. Eventually, I thought the story was not bad, even though it was rather generic and predictable. Of course, since it was an American thriller, you had the usual annoying action scenes and some unbelievable twist(s) but it goes with the territory, I'm afraid. To conclude, it was a rather standard but still well made and rather entertaining thriller and I think it is worth a look, especially if you want to see Morgan Freeman playing the bad guy for a change.