Reviews by johanlefourbe

Since this movie seemed to have a really solid reputation (it is included in the ‘1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die’ list among other things), I thought I might as well check it out. There are apparently 3 versions of this movie (in French, in Italian and in English) but Jean Renoir apparently preferred the English version and, fortunately, it was the version that I saw. Well, it was definitely something completely different than the other movies directed by Renoir that I have seen so far and, above all, it was visually pretty neat (the restored version I saw on YouTube was pristine but it’s too bad there were some commercials every 5 mins). Still, to be honest, I actually had a hard time to care about the damned thing. I mean, what was actually the point of this movie? Apparently, it was supposed to be some kind of homage to the Commedia dell'arte, an early form of theatre originating in Italy, but beside this information, I have to admit that I didn’t know much about this Art form. At least, there is no doubt that Anna Magnani was super charismatic. I wonder if I ever saw her in another movie before but she was really the best thing in this movie. I really did appreciate the fact that even though she was attractive, she wasn’t your classic movie star, there was something really relatable about her which made her quite fascinating to behold. Still, did I really care about her character? Not really and the other characters were even less interesting, even if I have to admit that the Viceroy did have a couple of cool lines. Anyway, to conclude, even if it didn’t really work for me, it was still a decent watch and it is worth a look, especially if you are interested in Jean Renoir’s work. 

To be honest, I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but since there was a really solid cast involved, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, the damned thing turned out to be so much worse than anything I expected. Seriously, it was hands down the worst YA novel adaptation I have seen so far and you have a bunch of them out there which are seriously worthless. Eventually, the concept was basically some cheap knock-off of ‘Harry Potter’ switching witches with vampires but, above all, the biggest issue was that the execution was just awful. Indeed, they mixed some convoluted vampire mythology with some high-school comedy and a couple of half-baked romances and, even though this mix might have worked in the book it was adapted from, it never worked at all in this movie. I mean, right from the start, there was this seriously awkward intro during which who were the main characters, where they were, what they were actually doing, it was all seriously murky and it never really got better afterwards. Indeed, from this point on, they just jumped from one boring barely sensical scene to the other. The only silver lining was that the story at least slowly made more or less sense but the journey to get to the end was really bumpy and it was certainly not entertaining whatsoever. At least, I have to admit that Zoey Deutch tried really hard to deliver a plucky main character and I won’t blame her but there was not much she could do with this completely abysmal material. However, the rest of the cast (Gabriel Byrne, Olga Kurylenko, Sarah Hyland, Claire Foy, Joely Richardson) was completely wasted playing some poorly developed and really lame characters. Anyway, to conclude, the damned thing turned out to be pretty much an unwatchable mess and you should probably avoid it, even if you actually like the genre.

Since this movie had a really solid reputation (it is included in the ‘1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die’ list among other things), I thought I might as well check it out. Well, Barbara Loden did deliver a strange movie here. By the way, who was Barbara Loden actually? Apparently, she did show up in only a couple of movies and she was mostly famous for being married with Elia Kazan until her untimely death. Anyway, coming back on her directorial debut and only film she directed, it turned out to be some kind of combination of ‘Bonny and Clyde’, ‘Badlands’ and another movie which I can’t remember right now. Eventually, what should we think about Wanda, the main character? Sure, she was attractive but Loden definitely didn’t sugarcoat this portrayal as her character was the most aimless woman I have ever seen. Basically, she is a woman who doesn’t know why she exists (in fact, most of us pretty much pretend we do but that's another story, I guess) but it didn’t seem to concern her that much. Well, it sure did give me some panic attacks when I was around my 20’s. Still, she was definitely not cheerful though, that’s for sure, her life, even herself,  was basically completely empty and the whole thing was therefore seriously gloomy. At some point, she did get involved with a guy called Mr. Dennis and the whole thing became even weirder than it already was. By the way, for some reason, I thought that Norman Dennis was some kind of unhinged version of Walter White and I really wonder if this movie was an inspiration for Bryan Cranston when he created his iconic character because there were so many similarities. Anyway, to conclude, even if it was maybe not the easiest movie to watch, it was an interesting watch and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

To be honest, I didn’t have some huge expectations regarding this movie but since there was a decent cast involved, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, it turned out to be another typical Michael Cera vehicle and I guess we don’t hear much from him anymore because he never managed to be cast in something else than such roles of spineless losers. And, yet, this movie was not bad though. Indeed, the way the character was aching for sex but also to just have a girlfriend was actually so recognizable and Cera was actually quite pitch-perfect. Concerning Portia Doubleday, who was this girl with this incredible name?!? Indeed, I had never heard of her before and I wonder what she has done afterwards. Well, even though she was really cute and they made an effort to match their taste and interests, to be honest, I don’t think she had much chemistry with Cera though. Concerning the concept of this movie, the reason why it got this title, well, to be honest, I didn’t care much for it. I mean, if they really had pushed it very far or made it really dark, maybe, it would have been interesting but the way it was handled in this movie was too much aimlessly all-over-the-place. It was the same issue with the cast. Indeed, this cast was pretty neat (Zach Galifianakis, Steve Buscemi, Fred Willard, Ari Graynor, Ray Liotta, Justin Long, Rooney Mara, M. Emmet Walsh, Mary Kay Place) but most of them did end up with only a few scenes after all. As far as I was concerned, I was above all pretty neat to see Rooney Mara only 2 years before she got her breakthrough with ‘The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo’ playing some kind of oversexed nympho even if it was only for a couple of scenes. Anyway, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, it was still a decent watch though and I think it is worth a look, at least, if you like the genre.

To be honest, I wasn’t sure what to expect from this movie but since it was included in the ‘They Shoot Pictures, Don’t They?’ list, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, I have to admit that I haven’t seen many Asian silent movies and it was the first time I saw an Asian silent comedy. It was so intriguing because it was probably the first silent comedy I saw which wasn’t from the US. Anyway, the damned thing was just so funny, original and surprising. Indeed, I think it was also the 1^st time I saw a silent comedy with some children as the main characters and these 2 kids were just hilarious. Seriously, it was just impressive how they could deliver such strong performances while they were not even 10 years old at the time and it was even more impressive when you think that they had to deliver such performances without using any dialogues. Eventually, I’m pretty sure those two young boys gave some of the best children performances I have ever seen. Concerning the rest of the movie, at first, it did feel rather random, at least, too much to really make an impression. However, slowly, I have to admit that the damned thing really grabbed me and, towards the end, beyond being seriously entertained, I became actually quite fascinated by the damned thing. Indeed, it is usually a known fact that, in Japan, respect is so important towards your parents or your boss,  much more than in Western countries and I can imagine it was even more so back then in the 30’s. However, towards the end, you had this very young boy throwing a tantrum against his father which was just so surprising but also so intriguing because it seemed to go against so many stereotypes regarding Japanese culture. Anyway, to conclude, I really loved the damned thing and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre or if you want to see something really different. 

To be honest, I wasn’t expecting much from this flick but since it was starring Nicolas Cage and since it was available on Netflix, I thought I might as well check it out. Unfortunately, as I expected, it turned out to be one of these terrible direct-to-VOD features that Cage has been making during the last 10 years and, even though it wasn’t the worst of the bunch, it was still seriously weak though. This time, he got involved in some very lame and cheap ‘Taken’ knock-off and pretty much nothing worked with the damned thing. Indeed, right from the start, with the beginning scene involving Cage’s character and his daughter, nothing did sound or look convincing. Then, you had his wife played by Rachel Nichols who sure did look lovely but, unfortunately, she also gave a rather weak performance and had pretty much zero chemistry with Cage. Concerning the rest of the movie, well, the story was just so generic and so tedious and, for some very long stretches, nothing at all really happened (the damned thing could have been easily 15 mins shorter). The fact that there was nothing interesting or original done on the directing side obviously didn’t help either. Eventually, it did seem that the damned thing was going to be completely abysmal but, I have to admit it, the ending actually did recover (some of) the damages. Indeed, it made sense with what happened during the rest of the story and it was actually more rewarding than all these misguided vigilante movies ending with the ‘victorious’ hero after he killed hundreds of goons. Obviously, it wasn’t enough to turn this movie into a masterpiece but, at least, as a result, it wasn’t one of the worst movies starring Nicolas Cage after all. Anyway, to conclude, in spite a decent ending, the whole thing was still really weak and you should probably avoid it. 

To be honest, I had never heard of this movie before but since it was included in the ‘1001 Movies You Must Before You Die’ list, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, it turned out to be a really neat vintage UK science-fiction flick. Seriously, it was really impressive how much they did cover with a movie almost 100 years old and lasting only 90 mins. Indeed, I didn’t see it mentioned by other viewers or critics but, with this ‘wandering sickness’, they were pretty much the predecessor of all these zombie flicks that came afterwards (I mean, ‘The Walking Dead’ does sound extremely similar, doesn’t it?). Then, it was probably the oldest post-apocalyptic movie I have seen and it didn’t stop here. In this movie, you get to see some flat-screens and, even if it might not seem weird to us to see those, in fact, they would be invented only 70 years later. As far as I was concerned, the most hairy thing was how this movie was dealing with a large scale all-destructing war only 3 years before WWII actually started. So, it was definitely a prescient movie and you might wonder why it didn’t have more an impact back then and even nowadays. Eventually, I think it was because the whole thing was rather clunky which partially had to with the fact that they covered all of this (eventually, they covered a whopping 100 years) in only 90 minutes when, in fact, with so much material, they could have easily delivered a movie lasting 3 hours. There was also the fact that all the actors involved gave some rather poor performances but I have to admit that they were not helped by the fact that their characters were barely developed. Anyway, to conclude, even if it might not be a masterpiece, it was a really solid vintage SF flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but I thought I might as well check it out. Well, even if the opinions are mixed towards this sequel, to be honest, I thought it was not bad at all. One of the main complaint when it was released is that it was much more gory than its predecessor following the wave of slasher films released at the time but, since I have seen countless of such movies before, it didn’t bother me. First of all, I didn’t know that John Carpenter was involved with this sequel as a writer and producer and I’m pretty sure it was thanks to him that the damned thing didn’t become another lame horror sequel like so many others out there (However, to be honest, Carpenter apparently didn’t care much for this movie after all). Anyway, as far as I was concerned, I really liked the idea that this sequel started exactly when the first movie stopped. Even if it was maybe not super original, I thought it was really cool. It was also neat that Michael Myers would chase Laurie Strode in the hospital she was brought to following the events of the previous movie. However, even though the fact that most of the action was taking place at the hospital was at first interesting, it did seriously limit the scope of the action though. Indeed, basically, the whole thing was reduced to Michael Myers chasing one by one all the employees and kill them in a rather gruesome way which became rather repetitive at some point. It seemed also unlikely that such a hospital would have only 3 nurses, 2 paramedics, 1 doctor and 1 night guard working there at night. The last thing that bothered me was the fact that Michael Myers suddenly became this ridiculously indestructible antagonist which was a major mistake as he became completely unrelatable. Anyway, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, it turned out to be a decent sequel after all and I think it is worth a look, at least, if you really like the genre.

To be honest, I wasn’t sure what to expect from this movie but since it was included in the ‘They Shoot Pictures, Don’t They?’ list, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, I thought they chose a very interesting approach. Indeed, to tell the story of one of the most influential US presidents, instead of focusing on his presidency, they went way before that and focused on when he was much younger and when he started out a lawyer. Furthermore, I always had a weak spot for Henry Fonda, he was a perfect choice to play this character and he did deliver here another strong performance here. Sure, eventually, you might wonder what was the historical/educational value of this movie since it was pretty obvious that most of it was completely made up. On top of that, there is a fair chance that this portrayal of Abraham Lincoln was too positive, seriously, the guy seemed rather flawless. And, yet, I thought the damned thing was actually quite entertaining. Indeed, even if you have some doubts regarding the veracity of this tale, Lincoln did have some really humble beginnings but he still managed to become the most powerful man in the US. What made this movie even more interesting was the fact that he managed to do all this mostly thanks to his intellect which was and still is seriously inspirational. Lincoln was also apparently a charismatic funny guy but, in fact, it actually did display how smart the guy actually was. Indeed, this way, even though he sometimes didn’t always agreed with their thoughts and actions, he would very often still manage to get the attention of his audience and, eventually, it will allow him reach the masses at a later stage during his life. At least, that’s what this movie tried to demonstrate. Anyway, to conclude, even it was maybe not a masterpiece, it was still a really interesting historically drama and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

Since this movie had a really solid reputation (it is included in the ‘1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die’ list among other things), I was quite eager to check it out. For some time now, I have been watching some Soviet movies but this one was easily one of the most intriguing I have seen so far. First of all, the first thing that impressed me was the editing. Indeed, except for a couple of scenes with a rather poor transition, it was actually really tight and super effective, especially compared to most of the other Soviet movies I have seen recently. The other interesting aspect of this movie was that it gave a really different perspective on the Russian revolution. If this perspective was actually accurate, of course, it’s a different story though. I have to admit it, it’s only afterwards that I understood that the soldiers in Mongolia were actually British but, in fact, the British were never in Mongolia back then. Anyway, Russia was, and still is, a huge country including so many various peoples and cultures and it was really  interesting to see the Russian revolution and civil war from a different point of view, even if the end-result was hardly objective since it was a propaganda piece. The approach chosen was that, even at the far corners of Mongolia, there was also a class struggle taking place and the people also had to rise up against the capitalist oppressor. Unfortunately, as usual with such Soviet propaganda movies, the characters were not developed whatsoever but something that bothered me even more was the randomness of the whole thing but it is also inherent to the genre, I’m afraid. Anyway, to conclude, it was a really intriguing movie and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.