DaViD´82

A series half-way between Scandinavian style and the overseas “precinct" approach to the genre. From the first of the above it borrows solving just one case per season and concentration on all of the concerned characters (the suspects, the investigators, the defense, the accused, the relatives and so on) as much as on the crime storyline. And from the second, it borrows the way in which the personal dramas are addressed; you will recognize the approach capturing the daily routine of one particular police station à la The Shield or NYPD Blue. And it’s not a bad attempt or just a makeweight because “the American viewpoint" succeeds in curing some of the maladies (and creating new ones) of the Scandinavian crime movie. Mainly the overcomplicated plot; here it doesn’t follow the cannon “every two episodes a new suspect appears". (hi thereThe Killing) and not even “bad guy whose plans miraculously work out exactly as he had planned.“ (hi there The Bridge). The case is quite down-to-earth and in many ways true to life. Which is also a disadvantage because it makes it standard and predictable and so you’ll probably see through the “who, how, why and how to convict them" much earlier than the authors had wished (like right at the beginning). In their defense, it must be said that the outcome is not what is most important, but it is the journey leading to it. But that unfortunately starts with a tragic pilot dowsed in clichés, emotional blackmail and dullness. The next two episodes are much better, but it’s not till the second half of the series that it matures into adulthood. The authors can thank mainly Cromwell and also Felton, without whose interpretation of the “American dream come true" which contains something dark, calculating and disturbing, it would have collapsed before it had a chance to get going. In the end it’s a solid crime movie true to its genre, but nothing more.

He's a sarcastically honest selfish guy with antisocial behavior at all times (read: a likable bastard like Hank Moody or Bernard Black), she's a crazy imp who doesn't know what she wants and is up for anything wicked. They're made for each other, but others can hardly get along with them in everyday life. Simply friends with benefits on a common path to a (perhaps someday) functional relationship. A sitcom (more like Britcom in many ways) that isn’t forced and is tremendously enjoyable in its irreverent approach to the material. For example, the fact that it is able to make “jokes" about sex during sex scenes without slipping into crude or cheap phrases. However, despite the alternative approach, it is still at its core mainly and above all a relationships show. Just really pithy and with a nice punch to it. The second season is longer and less balanced, but in addition to significantly weaker episodes, it also offers memorable ones, which are (so far) the best in the series. | S1: 4/5 | S2: 4/5 | S3: 3/5 |

The most sophisticated spy picture of all time. But beneath all the distant sleekness, it is seething. By focusing on "irrelevant" details, Alfredson is able to create a complex storyline that in other films would require long minutes of dialog and an explanatory voice-over monolog. Here, a stubborn silence is maintained, and only rarely a cursory sentence is uttered, seemingly about nothing. And that's the biggest positive (and for many, the biggest negative). If you're on the same page with the film, in the silent scenes where the two Englishmen look at each other over a cup of tea, you'll be on the edge of your seat, covered in sweat, because "you know he knows that him over there knows" and there's no need for it to be mentioned through dialog. If you don’t catch this movie train or if leaves without you then you'll have long minutes waiting for you, watching two Englishmen looking at each other with cups of tea in their hands, and you’ll get nothing out of it. The borderline is thin, but it separates one of the most powerful experiences of recent years from one of the most boring experiences of recent years. So, it is hardly a film for everyone, but at least because of the unusually confident and stylish “70s" directing, it’s worth seeing. Also because it is a prime example of how to adapt a complex and extensive book; it is not a slavish copy nor a mere illustration, but a real adaptation fully transformed into cinematic language.

The opening two thirds, riding on a wave of the intimate heist genre with a pick-and-mix band of villains, are excellent, self ridiculing and, in the current deluge of “let’s save our city/world/space/existence" DC/Marvel cartoons, refreshing. However at the very end, the hitherto absent Batman for some reason takes the reins and suddenly this turns into a standard “let’s save the innocent by doing a lot of pow, pow, bam". But when the action begins (and it isn’t bad at all), else is forgotten; and so that opening two thirds simply fade into nothing. In any case, it is nicely maturely uncompromising (within the bounds of a mainstream superheroes cartoon) and, for fans of the DC movie and comic universe and Rocksteady games, full of references and tributes.

This is no Dirty Dozen, but it trying very hard to be like the Dirty Dozen. But instead of finding its own way toward achieving that, he it merely copies its elusive role model blow by blow. And although it is worse than its prototype in every respect, this is still an entertaining, unrealistic wartime action movie which is considerably better than the official sequels to the Dozen.

Equally original and ingenious as it is unpolished, languishing in its aimless weirdness and with an unusually annoying voice-over that goes on and on, while not saying anything at all. You wouldn’t hear so much meaningless prattle even drinking coffee at a two-day Mills and Boon fans convention. Does the previous sentence seem senselessly convoluted, trying to be funny while saying nothing at all? If so, welcome to the world of Mike Hodges’ Pulp. Only Michael Caine holds it back from toppling over the edge of endurability.

To the depths of wartime madness along a Conrad-style journey to the parched, vast horizon and beyond. It is mainly Isham’s background music that is fascinating; it’s like straight out of a creepy horror movie from the 80’s which together with wide-angle shots of the awe-inspiring stony desert create a captivatingly and disturbing atmosphere that helps us to understand the impulsive (and often also illogical) behavior of the characters balancing on the edge (and in some cases dangling over the edge) of sanity. The only criticism maybe just the thick American accents in the mouths of the Soviet heroes and the first third of the movie after an excellent prologue which is standard to the extent that it borders on dullness.

The equivalent of a garden party clown you know exactly what to expect from. Nothing miraculous, but solidly performed craft where you know and can see through every magic trick, but that’s also what you are expecting from it and that’s what you are getting. But with Woody Allen you might expect him to pull something of Copperfield-type dimensions out of the hat after all and not to satisfy himself with something cute and trivial. Maybe in the next show.

Even though you find out the authors’ opinion on nuclear energy pretty soon on, this is more than just a cheesy protest movie. Quite to the contrary, it uses paranoia and conspiracy quite sensitively according to the motto “the more minimalistic, the more intense". Most of the movie looks (I repeat: “looks" not “is"; from a technical point of view in fact it isn’t and doesn’t pretend to be) so true to life (and in the end more disturbing because of it) that if there was a caption saying “based on true events" many would jump at the bait; and they couldn’t be blamed for that.

The Wire² in Naples. Roberto Saviano stirs up stagnant waters with Gomorra. What the book was lacking in literary quality was made up for by the urgency of trying to change something, supported by the informational value of this insight behind the scenes of the Camorra. And he was rewarded for this by a public death threat. I don’t even want to imagine what threats the Camorra makes to the crew making this series (in terms of story the series and the book have nothing at all in common, but in spirit this is still the most faithful of adaptations). This trip to the dark side of Naples where we see everybody from the pawns up to the top dogs on the social ladder is, in its unembellished, bleak reality, much more powerful than the very best documentary. In fact, this series frequently has aspects of a documentary. But heavily enhanced by a distinctly (but truly distinctly) movie-type look. Gomorra cuts to the quick and, despite the fact that it gets by without any frills, it is unprecedentedly rough, dirty, uncompromising, with a remarkable sense of detail, often hypnotic but still in many aspects true to the rules of the genre. Nobody glorifies nothing, but nor does it pass judgement; it carefully avoids any evaluation, opinion or moralizing. It just shows things as they are. And maybe that’s why this is the purest (if not the best) mafia saga (although... in the others, the important thing is family, rules and honor; here the central theme is “business") of all. Season two becomes less documentary-like and concentrates much more on fate storylines and intrigues inside the mafia. Unfortunately it starts repeating what has already been said, but the final episodes more than make up for this shortcoming. Season three continues in the footsteps of season two. But although this series contains by far the most powerful moments and even episodes of the whole series, overall it shows that this didn’t necessarily have to be twelve episodes long. In places, again mainly at the beginning, there was too much talk for talk’s sake. | S1: 5/5 | S2: 4/5 | S3: 4/5 |