Reviews by johanlefourbe

Back in the 90’s, I was a huge fan of Woody Allen. Indeed, every year, I went to see his latest directing effort in the movie theater and I tried to watch most of his older movies as well. However, after all these years, I came to the conclusion that it's just too bad that the guy keeps making a movie every single year. Indeed, basically, it is basically impossible to produce a great picture EVERY freaking year. Instead, he basically settles with an average movie which is just very sad. However, a long time ago, at the end of the 70's, this director was pretty much on fire and he made his best movies. This flick is definitely one of them and it is a great classic. I mean, the structure is similar to his recent work (hell, he basically always uses the same structure…) but the huge difference is that he managed to create some really fascinating 3 dimensional characters and, back in those days, no one less than Allen could write such amazing and hilarious dialogs. To conclude, I really liked this movie a lot and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Woody Allen’s work.

Personally, I always had a weak spot for Pierce Brosnan, especially after wathing the criminally underrated ‘The Tailor of Panama’ and ‘The Matador’ and, even though his career obviously had an amazing boost thanks to the James Bond franchise, unfortunately, for the rest of his career, he will always be remembered as the famous spy when this guy has actually so much more to offer. Anyway, coming back to our main feature, to be honest, I wasn’t sure what to expect from this but since Brosnan was involved, I was quite eager to check it out. Eventually, I thought he did a fine job here and the directing was decent as well. Unfortunately, it was not bad but it was just too sentimental and predictable for me to really enjoy the whole thing. I mean, on one hand, it deals with a interesting real subject, the fact that in the very traditional Catholic Irish culture, it can’t be a picnic to get back your kids, even if it seems to be the right thing but, on the other hand, the way it was handled was really not subtle at all. Still, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, I think it was a decent watch though and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

To be honest, I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but since I have a weak spot for Kevin Costner, I thought I might as well check it out. Back then, Costner was still a big star but within a few years after some massive flops like ‘Waterworld’ and ‘The Postman’, his status would drastically change. So, this was a small movie that Costner made between his usual blockbusters and, to be honest, I thought it was actually pretty good. With such a title, indeed, you might expect a massive ambitious epic but, in the contrary, it is in fact a rather low scale and almost intimate drama but I did like its soft nostalgic vibe. I mean, sure, Kevin Costner pretty much gave his usual perfomance of righteous guy but it didn’t bother me at all it and Elijah Wood definitely displayed already a great potential at a young age. The very same year, Elijah Wood would also show up as the lead in ‘North’, one of the most despised movies ever made but he still managed to get some positive reviews so that definitely says something about this skills. To conclude, even though it was nothing very original, I thought it was a solid drama and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I wasn’t sure what to expect from this movie but since I have a weak spot for Claire Danes, I was quite eager to check it out. Eventually, I was actually positively surprised and I thought that it was a very interesting picture. Indeed, I wasn’t really familiar with the British theater world in the 17th century and I thought it was just rather fascinating to behold. Eventually, even though Claire Danes did give a solid performance, above all, I was really impressed by Billy Crudup and his character was definitely the main point of interest in this movie, at least that’s my opinion. Indeed, even though the plot was about a woman who manages to convince everyone that a woman should be the best person to portray a female character, I thought it was more impressive to see how this guy became a superstar playing some very stereotypical female characters. Eventually, you get to see the transition from a very specific rather weird and over-the-top style of theater to something more like our current modern theater. To conclude, even though it wasn’t really a masterpiece, I thought it was a nice watch and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

It is quite an obscure feature but since there was a really nice cast, I thought I might as well give it a try. Indeed, there were some good actors here (Christopher Walken, John Turturro, Dennis Hopper, Ethan Hawke, Robert Knepper, Griffin Dunne, Rosanna Arquette, even Martin Scorsese!) but they couldn't save this mess and you wonder how so many talented actors chose yp work with a first time director with such an underwhelming script. Well, the reason why they deciced to all work for this guy is that, apparently, he was/still is a major New York artist so they couldn’t possibly refuse an opportunity to work with this guy. Well, even though it was apparently positively received at the Sundance Film Festival, I really didn’t care much for the whole thing and, in my opinion, it is just one of these very cheap indy features which doesn't make really much sense and which are, in fact, pretty boring to watch. I don’t know, the characters were either uninteresting or even obnoxious and I seriously had a hard time to find any redeeming feature. To conclude, even though I have seen worse, it was still pretty weak and I really don’t think it is worth a look.

I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this movie but since there was a pretty cool cast, I was quite eager to check it out. Indeed, I really have a weak spot for Nick Nolte and Ewan McGregor and they both did a pretty good job here. The directing was also decent as well but, unfortunately, the story didn’t really work and the ending was even rather disappointing. Basically, like most of your other average thrillers, even though the concept is intriguing (a night watchman at a morgue starts to see some pretty weird stuff), it is also really preposterous. I mean, sure, at first, they manage to create a nice and ominous mood but, at some point, they have to explain what the hell was or is going on and that’s when most of those movies become terribly underwhelming. Anyway, concerning the director Ole Bornedal, this movie was actually a remake of his own movie made in Denmark and, apparently, the guy managed to get a multi-picture deal with Miramax but after many ups and downs, he eventually left his deal to return to make movies in Scandinavia. To conclude, coming back to our main feature, I think it’s too bad because the whole thing had some potential but I still think it was a decent watch and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Of course, when this movie was released, many people thought it was actually pretty lame but, in my opinion, if you compare it to what Nicolas Cage has been doing during the last 10 years, the damned thing is almost a masterpiece. In fact, even if you don’t take this into account, I don’t think it wasn't so bad after all. Of course, if you watch this expecting a deep and thoughtful feature, you will be very disappointed, that’s for sure. In my case, I'm a real sucker for movies dealing with treasure hunting even if they are rather preposterous like this one. I mean, sure, it was not Indiana Jones but I thought it was still rather enjoyable. Concerning Diane Kruger, she is sure a fine looking lady but, after all these years, I’m still not convinced by her acting skills and I can’t say she had really much chemistry with Nicolas Cage. Concerning Cage, 3 years later, he would make another movie with Disney also directed by Jon Turteltaub, but for some reasons beyond me, instead of making another sequel which would have made more sense, they would try to launch a new franchise with ‘The Sorcerer's Apprentice’ but it turned out to be a flop. To conclude, if you take it for what it is, a brainless pop-corn blockbuster, it is is actually fairly enjoyable and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

To be honest, I wasn't expecting anything really brilliant with this movie but I thought that the title was rather catchy and, I don't know why, I thought it could be entertaining. Eventually, I really had some mixed feelings about the damned thing but, all in all, I think it was still rather disappointing. Basically, Renny Harlin keeps making B-movies and this one was not an exception even if it actually had some potential. Indeed, there were a few cool scenes (especially the infamous one involving Samuel L. Jackson, it was just really awesome, I won't spoil it but you really need to see this) but the whole thing was still rather lame. Indeed, the sharks looked really cheap, the action scenes were nothing great and above all, the story was just really idiotic. Ever since, for the last 15 years, Renny Harlin would manage to make some even more underwhelming features with maybe ‘Cleaner’ as a notable exception but it was still nothing really impressive. To conclude, it is a rather average shark movie and it is not really worth a look, expect maybe if you are a desperate shark movie fan and, even in this case, you'd better re-watch 'Jaws' instead…