gudaulin

In the context of so-called Belmondo films, it is a weak endeavor, and I wouldn't hesitate to say one of the weakest. This is not only because Belmondo is not here as a quote-happy plebeian, but he is a member of the country's financial elite and actually the planet's as well. Elegant suits and luxury do not suit him as well as the negligent attire of a police officer or a gallery attendant. The whole story about a left-wing industrialist and his fight against evildoers and war criminals, as well as the conspiracy against him, is poorly conceived and unbelievable. A businessman pursuing criminals in a man-to-man battle is suitable for Batman, but not for a crime story that tries to appear serious. Here, it eventually sounds strained and unintentionally funny. Overall impression: 40%. Some moments, like his relationship with a prostitute who almost destroyed him with false evidence, are beyond basic logic and what I am willing to tolerate from a screenwriter...

I have, as my single star testifies, almost no understanding for this kind of pretentious mystery for snobs. According to my judgment, two out of the three stories represent a real disaster and only Louis Malle delivered a decent performance, but his work is undermined by the fact that the point is easily readable after a few minutes and the story itself fails to surprise. Moreover, Alain Delon in the lead role is unable to portray the whole range of emotions that would be desirable in this case. From pride and arrogance to the despair of a person driven to the brink of madness. Roger Vadim showcases what he did for the majority of his career. He sells women's charms in a quasi-aesthetic style that would fit into typical soft porn of the 70s. And Federico Fellini just confirmed that he is practically unusable for genre films. In his auteur art, his mannerism is somehow able to be hiden, but here, the overacting and pretentiousness really hurt. Overall impression: 25%.

It is not common for Czech actors to have the opportunity to play in an international co-production with recognized world film stars and in a production that can afford to portray imperial maneuvers with hundreds of soldiers, period military technology, and court settings without unnecessary compromises. However, what's the point when the result in this case was a mediocre film that can only satisfy a high school teacher during a school performance? It is simply unremarkable, a typical film that will be forgotten in two or three days and only deserves a third star out of obligation for portraying a significant historical event. The direction is unimpressive, and the screenplay is unnecessarily diluted. It lacks sharpness, directorial courage, and cleverness. In the end, even the historical accuracy of the facts is somewhat lacking. The assassins belonged to typical romanticizing nationalists, and Bulajic, perhaps to meet the contemporary demands for engagement, portrays them more as anarchists dreaming of a social revolution. Overall impression: 50%. I will give it three stars, but just barely. It is quite typical that I watched The Day That Shook the World on the occasion of the hundredth anniversary of this event. Films of this kind tempt precisely this kind of use...

I didn't read the book, but it launched Stephen King's career as a bestselling author, so I have no doubt that it had its qualities and appeal to fans of psychological horror. After all, critics may point out King's work as part of the so-called "lower literature," but his sense of atmosphere, psychological portrayal, expression of emotions, etc. cannot be denied - he was a true master at that. On the other hand, no offense to Brian De Palma, but I don't see the same atmosphere, tension, and sense of capturing emotional dramas in his characters, not even in Mrs. White as Carrie's mother. The only thing that really works well is the casting and the performance of the main character. For the outstanding Oscar-winning actress Sissy Spacek, this was probably the most gratifying role in her otherwise fruitful career. The opening scene set in the girls' locker room is interesting, where Brian De Palma demonstrates his sense of eroticism and the exploration of the beauty of the female body. He had a rather long period when he experimented with how far nudity and sexuality could go in mainstream cinema, and his music video connected to the song "Relax" by Frankie Goes to Hollywood on YouTube best illustrates what De Palma was aiming for. Overall impression: 45%.

I've seen two episodes, but actually one was enough for me to realize that I won't get into this TV series. It's diligently cool and it uses all possible popular and impactful tools to capture the viewer's attention, with an interesting environment, and mentally disturbed or exceptional character types, but somehow I'm missing the point with this style and I see it as mere purposefulness. If I'm being honest, the only thing that really works in the series is Mads Mikkelsen and his doctor Hannibal Lecter. However, he doesn't play a dominant role and, on the contrary, the main protagonist of the series is, in my opinion, a complete mistake and his interactions with the doctor don't work. If I were to compare Anthony Hopkins and Mads Mikkelsen, it would be very difficult for me to decide whom to highlight (although the classic would probably have the advantage in the end), but everything else in comparison to the legendary The Silence of the Lambs falls short in my opinion. Overall impression: 35%.

An extraordinarily sweet tribute to the American independent scene, which is reminiscent of Tarantino's magnum opus with its opening scene set in a roadside restaurant - after all, Tarantino's face as a legend of this part of cinema also appears on the poster of that establishment. However, it reminds one much more of Jim Jarmusch; one could say that if a person didn't know it was a French film by a European director, they would immediately classify it as belonging to Jarmusch's black-and-white cinematography. Four stories supplemented with an appendix in the form of a continuation of the first episode are not about major criminals and crimes that fill the media, but rather about people who (already) only play at being a part of a gallery. It is poetic, funny, and playful, plays out at an unhurried pace, and with actors who seem to enjoy themselves as much as the audience. It is a little melancholic, nostalgic, and moody. It is definitely not a crime film in the true sense of the word, and those who approach it as a typical genre film will be disappointed. For me, it is an autorial film where the chemistry between the pairs of actors works excellently. After all, the strange romance between the waitress and the failed robber is played by a real-life couple. Overall impression: 85%.

A magnificently filmed entertaining summer sci-fi blockbuster about the war between human and alien civilizations, in which the most affected person is a failed advertising manager who is condemned by the war situation to the role of a military propagandist and an unmanageable conflict with his superior to the position of an ordinary soldier. He is most affected because his fate is not to die once and for all, as soldiers die in battles, but thanks to a time loop he experiences the same day over and over again with the same bungled battle, which ends in a horrifying massacre, and he repeatedly dies in the most painful and bizarre ways. The morbid concept, however, thanks to irony, black humor, exaggeration, likable cast, and detachment, is easily digestible, and when I think about it, I can't find a reason why it shouldn't have the highest rating out of the original 4 stars. Tom Cruise is in his element as a blockbuster hero, and by being a coward and a guy who wants anything but to save the world, he is more likable than usual. But yes, criticism of the illogicality of the initial situation and the whole story is certainly appropriate, but honestly, who would want to dissect inconsistencies in the playfulness with a time paradox in such a relaxing genre? Some scenes definitely remind me of The Matrix or related genre productions, but that's just the way it goes in the crowded world of cinema, and I certainly wouldn't accuse Liman of cheap plagiarism. Overall impression: 90%.

It is evident that nostalgia does a lot because Abrams made his film as a clear tribute to Spielberg's 80s family sci-fi films E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial and Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Not only does he keep up with them, but at least when it comes to effects, cinema has advanced a bit, making it a more enticing spectacle for today's audience. Such a train derailment and subsequent catastrophe full of explosions and flying wagons must bring excitement to every fan of flashy blockbusters. Nevertheless, Abrams received considerably weaker reception and significant doubts. After all, in terms of subject matter and directorial style, today's cinema has moved somewhere else, more toward comic book and video game adaptations. As for Abrams' direction, I can't fault anything, he has a good eye for casting child actors and Elle Fanning is so adorable to the point that praising her to express my sympathies toward this young actress would risk accusations of pedophilia. Abrams knows how to work well with child actors and has a sense for careful tension-building. But what can I say, I have also outgrown this production, and when I recently revisited Spielberg's filmography, films like Jaws, Duel, etc., despite being old, they still worked on me just as they did before, but Close Encounters and E.T. really disappointed me. It's just not the same anymore. Overall impression: 55%.

Originally, I thought that my one star would be for the star-studded cast and the other, if nothing else, for the neurosystem M5, but in the end, I reflected and realized that it would just be a waste of stars in all directions. Repo Men fails in the most basic thing that I appreciate in a movie. The film is unable to even create a functional world based on logical foundations, and actually, completely gives up on its construction. That society doesn't work even in the most basic sense, and logic limps in both the specific actions and events at the level of individual characters and scenes. It's a typical example of a movie where the director prioritizes the chase, the shootout, or the physical fight over logically justifying the events on the screen. Two other things bother me - I don't like it when something pretends to be wise and tries to appear smarter than it really is. I also dislike the inconsistency of the script, which in the first half wants to be a dark dystopia, warning about the misuse of technology, and then in the second half turns into an action ride, which can only be accepted as a pure comedy due to how exaggerated, bloody, and flashy it is. But I'm afraid the director didn't want to parody anything and it was just about having a cool style. In the end, it's just a contradictory action B-movie - true - with a pleasant and functional cast that fans of the genre or generally viewers who don't have a problem with illogical plots will appreciate. Overall impression: 25%.

Martin Frič was the biggest directorial star of the First Republic and nationalized cinema, and Karel Höger was a charismatic actor whose similar style of roles, like his Lieutenant Mareš, was a perfect fit. My third star is ultimately for Höger and his acting. From a technical standpoint, there isn't much to criticize about Lost in the Suburbs, and overt propaganda is also absent from Frič's film. In fact, at the beginning of the film, the participation of Czechoslovak soldiers in operations on the Western Front is mentioned in one sentence, and it was certainly the last time that happened for many years, until the filming of Oasis and Riders in the Sky. On the other hand, with all those happy smiles, uniforms, and sympathetic Red Army soldiers dancing the Cossack dance, the whole atmosphere sends subliminal signals about a time that led to the suppression of Czech culture. This film is like the regime of the years 1945-48. In a way, I consider this kind of filmmaking more dangerous than those dull propaganda films, which are easily identifiable and laughable in their naivety and straightforwardness. What were those sympathetic soldiers doing in the Sudetenland - spreading democracy? In short, emotionally, this film never resonated with me. Overall impression: 55%.