Reviews by johanlefourbe

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.

If I remember correctly, this movie was one of the first I went to see with Nick, my step-son. Indeed, for already 5 years, we have been every months to the movies together (our last movie was ‘Thor: The Dark world’ by the way) and we always have a blast. Back then, since Nick was still quite young, we would mostly watch animated movies and that’s how we ended up watching this flick in the theater. Honestly, I thought it looked different than the other CGI animated features we get nowadays, the market is terribly saturated, and I thought this flick could give a fresh approach on the genre. Eventually, it was indeed a rather well done flick and the whole thing was rather gorgeous to look at but, honestly, Despereaux was not really a fascinating character. Furthermore, the story was nothing really original or entertaining and eventually, I was rather disappointed by the whole thing. I don’t know, I thought there was a terrible lack of ambition and there was an obvious focus on the younger viewers so I definitely didn’t belong to the target group. To conclude, even though it was rather disappointing, it is still a well made animated feature and it is worth a look, especially if you have some young kids who need to be entertained.

Honestly, it is rather surprising that even though the first movie was a huge success, this movie didn’t do so well at the box-office and you could go even further by saying that it was actually a flop. Maybe it was the fact that they waited relatively too long to release this sequel and the hype was gone. I have to admit it, I did see the first one in the theater and saw this sequel only on DVD. Still, usually, when you deal with such high profile book adaptations like ‘The Lord of the Rings’, ‘Harry Potter’, ‘Twilight’ or ‘The Hunger Games’, when the first installment is such a success, the rest follows pretty smoothly. Well, this franchise must be the exception to the rule, I guess. Anyway, even though it wasn’t a big hit, I thought it was not bad at all. In my opinion, the story was actually better balanced this and it was not so rushed like it was in the first movie. However, somehow, I have to admit, I did miss the sense of wonder that I got the first time. Basically, at that point, you have been there, done that and bought the T-shirt a couple of times, I guess. Eventually, 2 years later, they came up with a 3rd installment which wasn't a big success either but they are still talking about continuing to adapt the other books, even though you might wonder if it would be a sensible business decision. Anyway, to conclude, I still think is still a decent, well made and entertaining fantasy feature and if you like the genre, it is definitely worth a look.

Even though he makes nowadays only average movies, Robert De Niro remains my favorite actor. On top of that, I thought that 'A Bronx tale', his directing debut, was a pretty good flick so I was really curious to see his second directing effort. First of all, with Matt Damon as a lead, you definitely have a good start and he delivered the goods as usual. On the other hand, I must admit it, I was not so convinced by Angelina Jolie. I mean, I'm not so sure if I was bothered by her acting but her character didn't have much to do during the whole thing. A part from that, the rest of the cast was composed of very dependable character actors and they all did a decent job. Furthermore, something I really liked was the fact that they decided to show the first CIA agents not as some super-hero spies like James Bond but as some desk persons with glasses and suits. However, in spite of those good elements, it was still a flawed movie though. Indeed, the main issue here was basically with the story itself. Eventually, even though the subject was rather spellbinding, the movie never really succeeded in mesmerizing me and I was left rather unmoved by the proceedings. Still, it remains a very well made flick about a fascinating subject and it is definitely worth a look.