Reviews by johanlefourbe

To be honest, I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but since a decent cast was involved, I thought I might as well check it out. First of all, it has been a while since I came across such a weird and mysterious title. Concerning the movie itself, sure, it didn’t get much love when it was released but I thought it definitely had some potential though. What I enjoyed the most was the interesting ideas they developed about the relationship between Art, the artists and the art critics. Indeed, if you would believe this movie, art critics have above all an impact on the art business but, actually, not so much on Art itself and I would tend to agree with this assessment. On top of that, the four main characters were all intriguing and the cast was fine as well (Claes Bang, Elizabeth Debicki, Mick Jagger, Donald Sutherland). Finally, it was visually pretty neat and I really enjoyed the mood created by Giuseppe Capotondi. Unfortunately, even if all the right ingredients seemed to be present, the damned thing still didn’t completely work though. Above all, I think it was too short and, as a result, they didn’t have enough time to properly flesh out the characters and the story. I mean, it was rather impressive how much Mick Jagger and Donald Sutherland managed to do when they only had a couple of scenes but it was rather bewildering that there was no scene involving the two characters. On the other hand, even if I won’t blame Elizabeth Debicki who did what she could with the material she was provided, her character turned out to be rather bland simply because there was just no time to do anything else with this woman after all. Concerning the story, well, it did result with some major plots. For example, how come that nobody thought it was odd that, the very same night that Jerome Debney’s studio burnt down, James Figueras and his girlfriend suddenly left the estate? Of course, you could argue that Joseph Cassidy (probably the most satisfying character played by a pitch-perfect Mick Jagger) foresaw that Figueras would do something terribly drastic to achieve his goal and, since it did align with his own objectives, he didn’t interfere. Finally, the ending during which Figueras needed not one but two attempts to kill this poor girl did seem like a waste of running time which could have been spent on something else. Anyway, to conclude, in spite of it flaws, I have to admit that it was still a decent watch and I think it is worth a look. 

I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this flick but  I thought I might as well check it out. Well, being born in France, I was well aware of Marcel Pagnol’s reputation in my home country but, to be honest, I have to admit that I was surprised by how much I enjoyed the damned thing and it is impressive how much Pagnol managed to get from a such simple tale. Indeed, the action takes place roughly over only 2 days and it deals basically with a baker who can’t believe that his wife left him, not much more than that. And, yet, they delivered such a vivid depiction of a village in the South of France back in the 30’s. Within a few mins, it felt like I travelled through time and, as a result, it felt as if I was right there listening to the endless bickering of these villagers. It also touched me personally because I was myself born in a small French village. Sure, it was in the 80’s and in a complete different region but, still, it all felt so familiar. The other masterstroke was also to create such entertaining and complex characters. Sure, you might first laugh at them but, soon, you realize that they are much more than some laughable fools. Even Aimable, the poor baker, I was first thinking that the guy should get a grip over himself and go back to work but, actually, he was right. What was the point of all this if he had lost the only thing he cared for? It might also seem bewildering that he should probably never trust his wife again but he actually choses to and it did display the complexity involved in this movie. Indeed, he could get rid off of his wife and remain the rest of his days all by myself or he could stay with her and become completely paranoid but, instead, he choses to love her anyway after all that happened which was actually rather profound. Eventually, the only downside was that it was probably slightly too long but it was really a minor issue though. Anyway, to conclude, it turned out to be much stronger than I expected 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 since it was directed by John Huston, I thought I might as well check it out. On top of that, I have to admit that I never read the classic written by Herman Melville (I probably should at some point) and it was pretty cool to finally get acquainted with this famous tale. However, to be honest, I actually had some trouble to really care about the damned thing though. I don’t know, maybe Huston’s approach was too straightforward, but, as far as I was concerned, it felt like a rather basic story after all. The funny thing is that I did enjoy Gregory Peck’s performance but, back then, many thought he was actually miscast (in fact, Peck himself seriously disliked his performance in this movie). Maybe it had to with the fact that, except for Ahab, none of the other characters was really interesting and it was mostly because they were all poorly developed. Concerning the action scenes, it must have been a really difficult shoot (in fact John Huston did admit that it was the most difficult movie he ever made) but, for a movie made more than 70 years ago, I thought the end-result was not bad at all. I also wonder if it was an inspiration for Steven Spielberg when he made ‘Jaws’ as he also had so many technical issues with his fake shark. In fact, Spielberg wanted to include a clip of this movie in ‘Jaws’ but Gregory Peck refused because he disliked so much what he did in this movie. Anyway, to conclude, even if I didn’t care much for it, it was still a decent watch and I guess it is worth look but, if you have the choice, you should probably read the book instead.

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. Nowadays, they usually adapt the classic Shakespeare plays with a modern setting but I really did appreciate that Laurence Olivier set the story in the 15^th century like it was in Shakespeare’s original work. I was also impressed to discover that it was actually Olivier’s directorial debut as this lavish production was quite ambitious for a first time effort. Still, to be honest, it has been a while since I have seen such a challenging movie though. Indeed, even if I did watch it with some English subtitles, I still struggled with these 2 hours of non-stop vintage Shakespearean dialogues. Furthermore, is it me or was the story actually super simple? In fact, I actually saw [Link removed - login to see]’s version but it was ages ago and I can’t say I remember much about it though. Anyway, it seemed that Henry V, for some rather dubious reasons at least to me, went to France, kicked their ass, and married the daughter of the French king, Charles VI, but I thought it all seemed rather thin for more than 2 hours of running time. Eventually, the whole point was obviously not the plot but the intricate but still marvelous dialogues written by the Bard. On top of that, it was probably the most faithful adaptation of a Shakespeare’s play I have seen so far. Indeed, Olivier went as far as having the first scenes taking place as an actual play in some theater in 1600 and this approach was unexpected but really neat. The rest of the story was then handled in a much more straightforward way but it still worked though. Anyway, to conclude, even if it was a rather tough watch, it still definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I really had no idea what to expect from this flick but since it was starring Sally Hawkins and Ethan Hawke, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, I have to admit that I had never heard of Maud Lewis before watching this flick and, to be honest, I can’t say I’m a huge fan of this kind of Naïve paintings. However, this movie didn’t really focus on her Art. Indeed, it turned out to be mostly about her relationship with her husband, Everett Lewis, which wasn’t necessarily a bad idea. However, even in this area, this movie never really became fascinating though. I won’t blame Sally Hawkins as she gave here a really strong performance and completely disappeared in this character. On the other hand, I wasn’t so convinced by Ethan Hawke though. Sure, Hawke is a fine actor but, in this case, especially in his first scenes, it felt like he was pretending to be some grumpy guy but I’m afraid it was never really convincing. It’s too bad because the approach did have some potential. Indeed, it was interesting that these two characters ended up together, not because of love, but above all because they had been rejected by pretty much everyone else around them. However, unfortunately, they didn’t really go deep in this direction and, at some point, both Maud and Everett were eventually professing that they couldn’t live without each other which was maybe cute but it was also terribly derivative and hardly interesting. Eventually, they never displayed what was so special about her paintings or what was so special about her relationship with her husband so you might wonder why you should care at all after all. Anyway, to conclude, in spite of its flaws, thanks to a fine performance by Sally Hawkins, I still think it is worth a look though. 

I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this movie but since it had a really solid reputation, I thought I might as well check it out. To be honest, with such a title, I was actually expecting something rather cheesy. Well, I have to admit that the end-result turned to be not so corny after all and, eventually, I wonder what they actually meant with this title. Still, even though they did give an interesting look on what it meant, and probably still means, to go back home for many soldiers, they didn’t cut really deep into this sensitive subject though. Indeed, not one of these soldiers suffered from debilitating PTST, not one of them did beat up their wife or girlfriend, not one of them became an alcoholic or a drug addict and not one of them went on a shooting rampage. Still, I still have to admit that they didn’t complete sugarcoat what they went through and their portrayals did feel truthful and convincing. The fact that these 3 men were basically some average guys and not some kind of perfect super-beings also really helped. On top of that, it was definitely courageous to take some distance from all these movies displaying war as such a great and honorable endeavor for all involved, especially only a few years after WWII ended. It was also a master move to cast Harold Russell, an actual wounded soldier, to play Homer Parrish and you can imagine that, nowadays, they would hire instead a famous actor and use some CGI but this approach was obviously much more naturalistic and simply better. Anyway, to conclude, I have to admit that the damned thing was actually pretty good, much more than I anticipated, and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre. 

I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but since it was Marvel’s first special and since it was available on Disney+, I was quite eager to check it out. I have been faithfully watching everything from the MCU, the movies and the mini-series, and I enjoyed most of it, even ‘She-Hulk’ which didn’t get much love, but, to be honest, I had a rather hard time to care about this Halloween special though. I did appreciate that, once again, they went for something completely different as, this time, they delivered some kind of vintage Halloween horror special, even in black-in-white and I have to admit that the approach was actually pretty cool. Unfortunately, as far as I was concerned, the story was just terribly flat. Same thing with the characters. I mean, Gael García Bernal was as usual not bad at all and his character, Jack Russell, was fairly entertaining but all the other characters were just so underwhelming though. I should also praise them for going for some practical effects instead of the usual CGI for their werewolf character but, to be honest, the damned thing looked really cheesy. What I also missed was a link with the rest of the MCU, something that already bothered me with ‘Moon Knight’ and ‘Ms. Marvel’. With the previous phases, at the end of each phase, there was a huge Avengers blockbuster uniting  all the characters that were introduced during the las phase but, in this case, we will have to wait up until the end of Phase 6 which is rather disappointing. As a result, the whole Phase four did feel rather disjointed and this special was a good example why. Anyway, to conclude, even though I didn’t care much for it, it was still a decent watch though and it is worth a look, at least, if you are really into the MCU.