gudaulin

When it premiered, the critics received The Tin Drum with certain reservations. They claimed that the film is merely a literal adaptation of the novel to the screen, and director Schlöndorff allegedly didn't incorporate anything special or outstanding into the film. Nevertheless, the film was awarded several international accolades. Moreover, even if the film critics were right, it is still an adaptation of one of the most significant European novels, an undisputed classic with an exceptional and extreme protagonist, dealing with groundbreaking events in (not only) German history. The Tin Drum is not a pleasant or likable film. Its characters perform ugly acts and do not allow you to feel sympathy towards them. A conformist and a Nazi in one, a stunted weirdo, a voracious bitch – that's not exactly the company you'd want to spend tea time with. The sexuality served by Schlöndorff can unsettle not only a staunch puritan. Oskar's peculiar position between a child's perception of the world and an adult's rational thinking constantly confuses the audience. Several scenes are disturbing to the point that they unsettle you, and if nothing else, the performance of the actor portraying Oskar is so suggestive that you will probably not forget it. As a bonus, you will witness the depiction of one of the most important and symbolic events of the German-Polish war - the bloody siege of the Gdansk post office. The Tin Drum is a unique and indescribable work that no film enthusiast should miss. Overall impression: 90%.

I do not deny that in the ranking of the best crime series, I prefer Breaking Bad with its fascinating story of the moral downfall of its hero; The Wire, however, comes in second place right behind it. The greatest advantage of the thrilling battle between the black drug dealers and the members of the anti-narcotics unit of the Baltimore crime branch is its civility and credibility. The script, which draws you into the world of police officers, criminals, addicts, pushers, and the inhabitants of neglected tenement houses is among the highest quality works in the genre. The Wire can constantly surprise you, keeps you on your toes, and dispels even the last illusions about the functioning of justice in the complex system of American society, where the interests of various parts of the state apparatus, business, and political elite intersect. The victory of justice is often relative and tainted, and its price is high. The war against the drug industry has no end and consists of countless small conflicts, moral compromises, manipulations, and pressure. Watching each episode was a small television celebration for me, and I will definitely return to this series. Overall impression: 95%.

Veep operates in well-mapped and largely exploited waters, but that is not its weakness. It has its own identity and functions at a very decent level as a comedy sitcom, which could, however, be set in essentially any institution or organization from a multinational corporation through a football team to a foundation. Far more than a thorough knowledge of the political environment and the subtle mechanisms of exerting power, what is typical for the series is the teasing of universal character traits such as vanity, self-centeredness, and narrow-mindedness. The British sitcom Yes, Minister has acted as a brilliant and timeless political satire for several decades since its inception, but giving Veep the same label feels inappropriate. It differs from the mentioned British series in its faster pace and eloquence. Something is always happening on the screen, to the point where it creates a sense of chaos. It is visible that the generation raised on computers and videos demands something different, and capturing their attention is more difficult. Julia Louis-Dreyfus is the ideal performer for the main role not only because of her excellent comedic acting, but also because she accurately portrays the type of professional career woman from her social class with rehearsed smiles and a visage shaped by plastic surgeons and beauty salons, making it very difficult to guess whether the woman is 35 or 65 years old. Overall impression: 70%.

Don't expect a romantic comedy from this. Except for one inappropriate joke about September 11th and a few amusing moments, the attempts at humor fall flat - especially considering the environment of stand-up comedians in which Kumail works. As a melodrama that wants to touch and manipulate your emotions, it surprisingly works well. The mere three stars I'm giving it are due to the cast. The chemistry between the central duo is minimal, but it's not just about their interaction. They simply lack the charisma to capture the audience's attention and carry the main roles in their respective genre. Kumail is simply not Hugh Grant or Colin Firth, and Zoe Kazan is not Meg Ryan. And here's another observation: rather than an indie film from the Sundance festival, this reminds me of a Hollywood studio production. The arranged brides look like a portfolio of a Pakistani modeling agency, and potential conflicts and barriers are overlooked and retouched. Rebelling against established norms, such as arranged marriages, is one thing, but admitting to parents the loss of religious faith and transitioning to agnosticism or even atheism in the conservative environment of Pakistani Islamic conception is incomparably more serious and hardly imaginable. The only possible consequence here would be immediate and complete expulsion from the family and community. It is good to remember that the (extended) family and community have a crucial significance in Islamic society, which the individualistic and rationalized West usually underestimates and disregards. Overall impression: 65%.

There are only a few horror genre directors worth buying a movie ticket for, and Ari Aster convinced me with his debut last year that he belongs to this select group. While watching Hereditary, I had the impression that the director gradually went astray and the result did not correspond to the possibilities, but with his second attempt, he hit the bullseye. Ari created an incredibly polished genre film that, in my opinion, will deeply divide not only the audience but also the critics. It is a film that goes against genre conventions and fan expectations. Do not expect typical jump scares, dynamic editing, sudden camera movements, ghosts, and blood splatters everywhere you look. For the average viewer, Midsommar will probably be too slow and frustratingly ineffective. Others, on the other hand, will encounter emotional barriers. Midsommar goes against audience expectations and needs, and it will unpleasantly attack your psyche. Aster questions the ethical norms derived from Christianity and enlightenment, returning us to the time of pagan cults, shamanism, and mysticism. He turns our value system upside down and shows us people willing to die voluntarily, as well as kill others without remorse because earthly existence is just a preparation for the afterlife, where death signifies mere metamorphosis into a higher sphere. Similarly, the depiction of the sexual act is unpleasant and significantly contrasts with current film trends. The director tests our limits of emotional endurance. He plays with open cards, he is predictable, but at the same time, he builds his game with the viewer. Carefully, he strains us with how far we are willing to go. Aster's direction primarily works with contrasts. The color white is usually a symbol of innocence, but here it evokes an evil premonition. The sun, a symbol of life, brings only ruin. Pleasing scenes hide horrifying content. Aster works his magic with the camera and skillfully mixes music, just like Lynch used to do. He relies on an unknown but flawlessly functioning cast, of which Florence Pugh, above all, will likely become a rising star of the film scene. The result is a film that pushes the boundaries of the genre. Surprisingly, no one thought to explore this highly interesting sphere, except for Robin Hardy's The Wicker Man (which lacks filmmaking precision). Overall impression: 90%.

Zelenka's significantly newer television adaptation charmed me a few years ago, and even more so I was looking forward to the recording of the play, which was performed by the legendary comedic actors of their generation. It was supposed to be a sure bet, but it turned out exactly the opposite. Zelenka's play is more civil and restrained. The Vinohrady Theater probably got much closer to Georges Feydeau's vision, but for me, it's too farcical, naive, and exaggerated. Josef Bláha is great, and Vlastimil Brodský and Vladimír Krška are very decent, but overall they do not lift it higher than an overall impression of 65%. Where the play was supposed to be strongest, it generated in me slight feelings of awkwardness and overacting.

In a flood of romantic comedies, Mickey Blue Eyes is slightly above average and can similarly be described within Hugh Grant's filmography, who founded his acting career on his sympathetic, innocent face. The humor is basically ordinary, so definitely don't expect an original or even intellectual experience. On the other hand, although the film clearly targets a mass audience, it manages to avoid awkwardness, vulgarity, and cheapness typical of overseas productions. The biggest plus is the casting, with actors known from bloody mafia dramas playing the roles of Mafiosi in a light-hearted game and perfectly fitting the image we viewers have of members of Mafia clans. James Caan in the role of the Mafia father of the bride is perhaps the best of all. This film doesn't invite repeated viewing, but watching it once won't offend you. Overall impression: 55%.

Birds of Prey is definitely not among the titles that you can watch regularly on TV. It's more of a rarity that they dig out from oblivion many years later. You are expecting it to be a hidden treasure, but it's something that rightfully belongs in the archives. Ventura is charismatic, just like in his most famous films, but the presence of a star does not guarantee a quality film by any means. One can definitely appreciate the music and personally, I was also intrigued by the exotic setting of the story. However, the direction is clumsy, the film looks like it was made in the early 50s, the performances in the supporting roles can be described as amateurish, and as for the script, it's a lost cause. There is too much talk and meetings in Birds of Prey for an adventure film, it is naive and schematic when it comes to social drama, and as a thriller, it fails due to José Giovanni's inability. Overall impression: 40%.

In the 4th episode of the series, the (black) protagonist Molly complains about how annoying loud black people are, and you will likely agree with her. In Issa Rae's work, everything revolves not only around two inseparable friends, but above all around the racial identity of the African-American minority and their struggles, problems, and desires. African Americans logically form the target audience in the eyes of the creators. While with "white" television and film creators, I feel that their characters are defined as part of professional and social groups, bearers of certain political stances (I am a lawyer, a liberal, a Protestant, a parent, etc.), in Issa Rae's world, skin color becomes the link that plays a crucial role in communication, work, partner selection, and elsewhere. The series aims to be informal and politically incorrect, so both friends curse like there's no tomorrow, and it reeks of being a pose. Although Issa tries to write differently and initially wants to introduce new topics, gradually another series comes out of this promising concept, where both actors "deal with" the problem of finding the perfect partner in a world of limitless offers of global social networks and unlimited possibilities of modern communication technologies. The first season earns an honest three stars from me, and I probably wouldn't recommend following the fates of the two girls any further. Overall impression: 60%.

Madigan seemingly has everything a good crime show should have, namely tough detectives, dangerous criminals, beautiful women, and a big case, and yet it ultimately falls short. There are too many dialogues, the pace is too sluggish, and it feels trapped in the 50s in spirit, although there are a few scenes that show that it tries to keep up with the times. I'll give it three stars, but they are completely different three stars than I usually give. I squint my eyes a bit and think that it wouldn't be fair to go any lower when it comes to the veteran Siegel. Overall impression: 50%.