Reviews by johanlefourbe

I don’t know if you have noticed it but I’m a not huge fan of Jackie Chan. The funny thing is that I have actually seen virtually all his US productions which are probably his worst work. With this in mind, I thought this movie would be completely terrible (it also has a genuine rather lousy reputation) but, to be honest, I ended up being relatively positively surprised. I mean, obviously, to have the movie somewhat focusing on Passepartout instead of Phileas Fogg was a rather weird and misguided choice and the whole thing was obviously nothing great but, still, I thought it was not too bad at all and, in fact, much more entertaining than most of the movies I have seen starring Jackie Chan. Eventually, it was another massive commercial flop for Disney who hasn’t been able to make a really profitable familly feature for at least a couple of decades. Lukily for them, they still own Marvel and even Star Wars, so they are pretty much safe financially. Anyway, coming back to our main feature, I thought it was rather enjoyable for what it is and I think it is actually worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

To be honest, I’m not a huge fan of Steve Martin. Indeed, basically, I keep trying with this actor but most of his movies are just so average and there are only a few exceptions. This time, 7 years after ‘Housesitter’, he was working again with Goldie Hawn and, I have to admit it, I thought it was not bad at all and I would go as far as saying that it is actually one of his best movies. So, with this in mind, they was a possibility that this comedy could be fairly entertaining. Well, it wasn’t, I’m afraid. Indeed, the whole thing was just very predictable, very average and not really funny. Even the always dependable John Cleese couldn't save this from being a bore to watch. Apparently, it was a remake of comedy from the 70’s starring Jack Lemmon and since this original version was hardly a classic, you might wonder if a modern remake was really necessary. To conclude, I have seen worse (for example, ‘Bringing Down the House’ also starring Steve Martin is pretty abysmal, but it was still a rather weak comedy and I don’t think it is really worth a look, expect maybe if you are a die-hard fan of Steve Martin or Goldie Hawn.

I already saw this movie but since it was a while back and since I have it on DVD, I was quite eager to check it out again. Well, even though I really loved this flick the first time around, to be honest, I wasn't really impressed with this rewatch though. I mean, I still think it is a decent watch but I don't think it it is actually one of Spike Lee's best movies. At least, Denzel Washington gave here one of his very few really dark performances and he was just awesome. Not only the guy is immensely charismatic but he definitely has some talent and, as displayed here, he actually has some range as well and it is a real shame he doesn't take more risks and always ends up playing basically some variation of the same character over and over again. I was also impressed by Ray Allen who was, at the time, a major NBA player and it was nice to see that, not only he could play some ball but he could also stand on his own against one of the finest thespians. However, if I thought at first that the story was really strong, I wasn't really impressed this time around. First of all, to be honest, the concept of a convict being allowed one week of freedom so he could convince his son to join a specific college was rather far-fetched. However, the biggest issue was there was a bunch of half-baked sub-plots that didn't really work, especially the one involving Milla Jovovich playing a prostitue. Anyway, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, it was still pretty good and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Spike Lee's work.

After a 2nd watch, I have to admit that this movie was not as bad as I remembered but it was still pretty weak nonetheless. Eventually, the thing that probably bothered me the most was how lazy the whole thing was. Indeed, compared to the previous installments, there were many more killings which was not necessarily a bad thing but, as a result, there was no time left to develop the plot which was very thin, even more than usual. At least, it remained faithful to the concept, not like the 2nd installment which remains the worst of this franchise so far, but it was exactly what they did, they just sticked to the formula without adding anything really new. There were still a few good ideas in this movie but it was not enough to make it really interesting or entertaining. For example, it was a nice touch that they brought back some of the kids from the previous installment but, for some reason, they didn’t manage to convince Patricia Arquette to come back which was too bad. To make things worse, her replacement was just really weak, easily the worst actress of the whole bunch (fortunately, she was killed off half way through). Concerning Renny Harlin, it would be the real start of his Hollywood career which will be filled with some other B features like this one, with a few exceptions like ‘Die Hard 2’ and ‘Cliffhanger’. Anyway, to conclude, the whole thing was pretty weak and I don’t think it is really worth a look, except maybe if you are a die-hard fan of this franchise. 

When was the las time that Wesley Snipes has done something really worthwhile? At least more than a decade, I guess and this flick is basically a fine example. I mean, at least, there was a great title and there was the hope that this movie might have some potential but, unfortunately this title was the only very good thing this movie had to provide and this movie has actually nothing to do with it. Indeed, the action scenes were pretty average and rather boring to behold and, above all, the story was just not captivating enough. Obviously, if you have Donald Sutherland involved, you pretty much know it will be a B feature and a rather underwhelming action flick. Concerning Christian Duguay, his previous movie, also starring Donald Sutherland, was ‘The Assignment’, it was actually not bad at all and probably the reason why he was noticed by Hollywood to direct a more ambitious action flick like this one. Unfortunately, it was a big step down and it turned out to be terribly underwhelming. To conclude, I have seen worse but it was still a very average and forgettable action feature and I don’t think it is worth a look, except maybe if you a die-hard fan of this genre.

Of course, I knew that this movie was not really famous but I didn’t expect it to be so obscure. Anyway, before becoming worldwide known with James Bond, Daniel Craig was not really what you could call an action star. In fact, he was actually a really decent dramatic actor and, in this movie, Craig clearly displayed his talent. A part from that, this movie was also an interesting reflection on death and loss. Indeed, not so long before I watched this flick, my mother-in-law lost her husdband which was and still is a tragedy even after all these years and, with this movie, it was just really interesting and quite frankly fascinating to see a woman going through a widely different mourning process than my mother-in-law was. On one hand, I was quite eager to show this movie to my wife, to show her that there is no ‘good’ or ‘bad’ way to deal with the death of someone you loved but, on the other hand, I’m afraid she wouldn’t be open to a story like this one. Anyway, to conclude, even though it wasn’t really groundbreaking, I thought it was a solid drama and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you want to see Daniel Craig before he became Mr Bond.

Honestly, it is a rather obscure feature and I no idea what to expect from this flick but since I have a weak spot for Tim Robbins, I was still quite eager to check it out. Eventually, I thought that the concept was actually quite interesting (apparently, the main character was based on the director himself who, in real life, did break into people's cars to disable their noisy alarms and was even eventually arrested and jailed). On top of that, Tim Robbing is a capable actor and he definitely delivered a decent performance here. Unfortunately, like many other supposedly quirky indie features, the story didn’t remain really focused until the end and, therefore, it didn’t manage to keep me captivated. I have actually never noticed it before but this movie was directed by Henry Bean and the guy also made ‘The Believer’, another rather obscure but actually really amazing movie starring a very young Ryan Gosling. So, 6 years later, Bean came up with this follow-up and it was rather a step-down in my opinion. Still, in spite of its flaws, I thought it was a decent feature and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this movie but since there was a nice cast, I was quite eager to check it out. Indeed, I have a weak spot for all the actors involved (Holly Hunter, Robin Williams, Woody Harrelson, Alison Lohman, Giovanni Ribisi, Tim Blake Nelson) and they all did a good job but the story was not amazing and it was just too predictable in my opinion. Above all, it was really obvious that they tried just too hard to be as brilliant as 'Fargo' but they never reached this level of greatness. Still, any comedy involving Robin Williams and Woody Harrelson can't be boring and they made the whole thing quite entertaining to behold. Concerning Holly Hunter, after this movie, it would take 7 long years before she would show up in another theatrical feature (some really obscure and rather disappointing Dutch feature called ‘Jackie’) which is too bad because she is definitely a fine actress. Concerning Robin Williams who passed away not so long and who was apparently struggling with some drinking issues while shooting this picture, it’s just sad to look back at his work with all this in mind. To conclude, in spite of its flaws, I still think it is a decent dark comedy and it is worth a look, especially if you lik the genre.

Obviously, I didn’t expect much from this flick. Indeed, I didn’t like at all the first installment but I still ended up watching this sequel, probably with my kids. First of all, I have to admit it, I have never really been a fan of the cartoon. I mean, when I was a kid, I saw it from time to time and I thought it was all right but it never blew my mind whatsoever. Even so, I thought that the first movie was just terribly lame but, for some reason beyond me, it was a big box-office success, so, of course, they had to come up with a new installment. Well, at least, it wasn’t worse, I’ll give you that, but it wasn’t better either, I’m afraid. Indeed, the same underwhelming cast (Freddie Prinze Jr., Sarah Michelle Gellar, Matthew Lillard, Linda Cardellini) was brought back, the whole thing looked terrible and, above all, it was not funny at all. Apparently, even though this movie did fairly well at the box-office, it was still less than expected and, therefore, a planned third film was cancelled. To conclude, I don’t see any reason why you should watch this flick, it is just lame and you should pretty much avoid it.

I didn’t realize this when watching this flick but it is in fact a seriously obscure feature, probably one of the most obscure US features I have ever seen. Indeed, I was the very first listal member who has rated the damned thing and, apparently, only 3 other members have seen it so far. Anyway, the main reason I wanted to see the damned thing was because the lovely Bridget Fonda was involved. Indeed, I always had a weak spot for her and, unfortunately, it would be her final feature film role before retiring from acting in 2002. Coming back to our main feature, I have to admit that it is a rather harmless picture but, to be honest, it wasn’t really entertaining and I really had a hard time to care for the damned thing. Sure, Stanley Tucci and Bridget Fonda did their best with this material but it was just really forgettable and, in fact, even rather boring. Concerning Fonda, it is really sad that she would be in a great movie like ‘Jackie Brown’ and, only 4 years later, would show up in this to end her career on such a low note. Anyway, to conclude, I have seen worse but even though it tried to be whimsical and charming, it didn’t work very well, I’m afraid, and I don’t think it is really worth a look.