Reviews by johanlefourbe

Since I kept hearing good things about this flick, I thought I should check it out. Eventually, I wasn’t disappointed and I thought it was a very good movie. Indeed, it is basically a typical quirky indie drama/comedy movie but they managed to create some really touching characters instead of the usual eccentric caricatures. Indeed, it deals with a family and, basically, they are actually all losers but, and that's the genius of this movie, after a while , instead of annoying you, you can't help caring for every single one of them. My favorite was probably Alan Arkin who was portraying the foul-mouthed no-nonsense grand-father, I thought he was just hilarious and I'm happy he won the Academy Award for his performance (yeah, they do get it right sometimes...). Steve Carell was also pretty good and played here someone slightly different than what he usually does and he did a very good job as well. But eventually all the actors were pretty awesome and it made the movie really compelling to watch. To conclude, I think it did deserve to be heralded, it is a very good indie feature and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Almost 10 years before directing the best picture of the year (at least, according to the Academy of Motion Picture), Kathryn Bigelow directed this unknown/unseen flick. Basically, it is an interesting drama/thriller with a rather amazing cast (Ciarán Hinds, Sarah Polley, Ulrich Thomsen, Katrin Cartlidge, Vinessa Shaw, Catherine McCormack, Sean Penn, Josh Lucas, Elizabeth Hurley). Indeed, they all gave some very good performances, the movie was very well directed and I really enjoyed the great mood. Still, even though the whole thing was rather spellbinding, it was unfortunately still a failure. In my opinion, the main issue was that it contained 2 different stories taking place in different time periods and the movie tried very hard to convince you that the 2 plots were closely linked to each other. Unfortunately, during the whole thing, you have actually the feeling that you are watching 2 stories which have barely anything to do with each other. I mean, both stories were quite good but they just didn't fit together at all and it was eventually rather annoying and frustrating to switch between the different plots. Still, in spite of its flaws, it remains a well made and intriguing flick and it is definitely worth a look.

Honestly, I had no idea what to expect from this flick but since I have a weak spot for Diane Kruger and the ratings were pretty good, I eventually decided to check this one out. To start with, it was a rather striking true story and I thought it was well made. There were also some very good performances by all the international cast which also included Guillaume Canet who was Diane Kruger’s husband at the time. However, even if the story was intriguing, it was still nothing mind-blowing and maybe it was just too sweet for me. 'Let's have a break, drink some wine, sing a song and later on, let's blow our heads off!' You see what I mean? It is a nice story but I have see way more movies about the Great war which had a more compelling plot than this one. I don’t know, maybe I’m just too cynical for this kind of story, apparently many loved this flick and, I have to admit it, it wasn’t not bad at all. To conclude, even though I wasn't blown away by the whole thing, it is and remains a well made war movie and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

First of all, you might wonder how I ended up watching such an obscure movie and I want to point out that I wanted to watch this movie in the first place because I thought that Mel Gibson was in it. Well, he has indeed a part but he was on screen for maybe 10 seconds so you shouldn't watch it only for this reason. However, surprisingly, the movie itself was not so bad at all. Indeed, it is some kind of thriller dealing with paparazzis and the whole thing was actually quite watchable. For once, Cole Hauser was the lead actor, he usually has supporting roles but I thought he was pretty good here and he delivered a believable performance. Furthermore, in spite of the fact that it is a thriller, it remained actually rather down to earth and pretty realistic and that was much appreciated, especially when you consider all these preposterous American thrillers we get on a regular basis. To conclude, even though it is nothing mind-blowing whatsoever, the story was intriguing enough and I was rather entertained throughout the whole thing so I think it is actually worth a look.

Since I'm a huge fan of Roman Polanski, I feel compelled to watch all his movies and even though I wasn’t expecting much from this flick, I still wanted to check it out. Indeed, this is a very old story which has already been told so many times before and I have even already seen the musical version and even the cartoon versions where the characters are portrayed by cats and dogs so, honestly, personally, I'm quite done with this tale. Anyway, how was the end result? Like any Polanski flick, the directing was nothing short of amazing, the movie was really beautiful to look at and I also enjoyed the performances of the whole cast, especially Harry Eden who was quite brilliant as Artful Dodger. However, even though the movie seemed to be rather faithful to the original story (I haven't read the book though so I can’t really tell actually), they didn't add anything really new or interesting to the mix so the whole thing seemed to be a beautiful but also pointless and honestly rather boring exercise. Still, it is a very well made flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Polanski's work.

Honestly, I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but since I have a weak spot Denzel Washington, I thought I should check it out. Indeed, I think Denzel Washington is quite awesome and I would watch anything starring this actor. However, I can't say I really enjoyed this flick though. I mean, you really have to praise the guy for trying something else and I think he did deliver a good performance. However, the whole thing was just too sentimental and sugar-coated for my taste. Furthermore, the whole thing didn’t really work out. I mean, he is supposed to make sure that Whitney Houston stays with her husband but during the whole thing, you feel this chemistry between them and it makes watching the whole movie rather awkward since you get all the wrong signals (She is married with someone else, he is an angel, so there is no way with such a predictable, clean and safe picture that they would end up together). Anyway, to conclude, even though I have to admit it, it is a rather sweet and romantic movie, it was also very flawed and eventually it is not really worth a look, I’m afraid.

Honestly, I never understood why 'Get Shorty' is considered such a cult-classic. I mean, I thought it was ok but nothing mind-blowing but maybe I should check it again at some point. Anyway, In the mean time, I have watched this sequel even though it was poorly received. Unfortunately, the whole thing was not really good, it was even pretty average I’m afraid. First of all, I think it was really a cheap shot to put Travolta and Thurman together and to make it sounds as if it was an awesome combination like in the good old days of ‘Pulp Fiction’, probably the only great movie they both made (yeah, I’m not a huge fan of ‘Kill Bill', don’t start with me on this subject…). Basically, both their characters were not interesting on their own, they were still not interesting when they were together either and I didn't care much about the story. To make things worse, some of the supporting characters were truly annoying (for example, Vince Vaughn) but some others were pretty good (for example, Dwayne Johnson which shows that, giving the good material, the Rock could actually be a pretty cool actor). To conclude, even though I have seen worse movies, the whole thing was really misguided, it is an average flick and it is not really worth a look.

Honestly, I had some pretty high expectations with this flick. I mean, come on, a movie directed by Sam Peckinpah and starring the king of cool, Steve McQueen, it really sounded great on paper. Indeed, I think that Steve McQueen was a really awesome actor and I try to catch up his movies whenever I get the chance and, this time, he was working with Sam Peckinpah so I thought this flick should be a winner. In my opinion, McQueen basically plays the same type of character over and over again but he does it so well and he is always so freaking awesome that I actually don't really mind. This movie is a perfect example. Indeed, it was very well directed by Peckinpah but the story was nothing original or mind-blowing whatsoever. What made it interesting was Steve McQueen's character and his relationships with his wife, played by his then-girlfriend Ali MacGraw. Indeed, they have some great chemistry and it made the movie really compelling to watch. Eventually, 20 years, they would release a terribly underwhelming remake with Alec Baldwin and Kim Basinger who were also a couple at the time. To conclude, even though I don’t think it is really amazing, it still remain a solid action flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in McQueen's work.

Honestly, I wasn’t expecting much from this flick but since I have a weak spot for Robin Williams , I thought I should give it a shot. Indeed, Robin Williams can be a funny actor and sometimes, he can be great in dramatic parts as well (Actually, I think he is even better in thrillers like ‘One Hour Photo’ or ‘Insomnia’ but never mind…). Unfortunately, quite often, he can be downright obnoxious and, in this flick, Williams played once again one of this hysterical and annoying characters. I have to admit though, the story was actually interesting and there was actually some potential but the end-result was so over-sentimental, it made it really difficult to enjoy the movie. You should check the review by Ebert & Siskel, they explained way better than me why this movie was a failure (check the videos linked to this movie). With this movie, there is no middle ground whatsoever, it just goes constantly for the cheap emotional shots. Apparently, even the real ‘Patch Adams’ himself despised the movie and the way he was portrayed so that’s not really a good sign. To conclude, even though, I don't think it was as bad as Ebert & Siskel said, it was still an average biographical drama and it is not really worth a look.

Before his career took a new turn with movies such as 'Broken Flowers', 'The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou', 'Lost in Translation' and 'The Royal Tenenbaums', Bill Murray was mostly famous for such laugh-out-loud performances. Apparently, this flick is a real cult classic starring Bill Murray and many Murray's fans will tell you that it is one of his best movies so I had some rather high expectations before watching it. Honestly, I can't say I was really blown away by the whole thing though. I mean, Bill Murray was indeed pretty good and he made me laugh many times but Geena Davis was not really convincing and wasn't really funny at all in my opinion. And it was about the same thing with Randy Quaid. Furthermore, even though I did enjoy the heist very much, the rest of the movie was not so inspiring and rather comic routine, in my opinion. I don’t know, to be honest, while watching this, I had sometimes the feeling to watch some obnoxious characters stuck into a tedious plot. Still, I have to admit, it remains a funny and entertaining flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Murray's work.