DaViD´82

They might have directly called it Das Schwindelgefühl sakumprdum because it was inspired but... you know what. And to its detriment, because from the scene "in Johnny's lair for the first time" on, it will have the exact opposite effect instead of having tension between the characters. This is a great example of plot planning so everything leads to the only one possible outcome. And this outcome, unsurprisingly, is slowly achieved about an hour later. So it works mainly thanks to the introductory third and the central duo (in which he is an unacknowledged German-speaking illegitimate child of Russel Crowe. Even so, it is a solid “Hitch movie", which, paradoxically, is better off in the line of "finally a different grasp of the theme of coping with the return from the concentration camp and post-war identity of the German nation", which in all its subtlety, hints and all that unspoken stuff is much more impressive than if it just followed the genre.

It's quite likely that after you see what kind of official shenanigans and "you can't make this stuff up" absurdities around the daily “traffic” and “construction” of the bridge, you will replace the phrase "Like in Kocourkov" in your dictionary with the much more apt "Like in Mumbai".

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not watching you, in other words avoid a fire alarm at all costs. A (non)conspiracy thriller par excellence in the form of an unfinished documentary. I understand that when they started filming, they still couldn't know exactly how it would progress and what would be unleashed, but that does not justify the poor dramaturgy done "in the editing room" during the completion. Maybe it should have been made later than only after one year or it should have not covered so many topics. It's a little bit about Snowden, but not that much. It's a little bit about the phenomenon of whistleblowing, but not that much. It's a little bit about the leaked materials, but not that much. It's a little bit about moral and ethical issues, what to publish/hide, but not that much. It's a bit about secret government programs, but not that much. It's a bit about the work of investigative journalists and the media in general, but not that much. It's a bit about everything from this department, because a lot of things are briefly mentioned but only a little is actually said and even less that we wouldn't (in the meantime) already know from elsewhere. None of the above, however, means that it would be bad or uninteresting. It's just wasted rather than anything else, because having the possibility to talk to an unprecedented source during (even after) such historical event calls for so much more than Laura Poitras did. Because he was afraid to ask Snowden displeasing questions. Others had to do that for him. PS: Citizienfour is a perfect example of the type of documentary in which the "importance" of the chosen event/topic is often (and easily) confused with the "importance" of the documentary as such.

Borgenov-like behind the scenes plotting enriched by the thriller and crime movie frame (or is it vice versa?) so target-oriented and escalated. And on top of that, wearing a shabby washed-in Nordic sweater... Yes, Sarah is back. The first season diluted the unprecedented and stimulating personal approach by stretching the season into twenty episodes with repetitive sub episodes, while the second season is more dynamic, has less episodes, greater filmmaking and the approach of "everything should be more tense and everything must be bigger". As a result it lost its unique concept and thus became an exciting and high-quality, but somewhat overplayed genre variation of other movies. However, the third season takes the best from the two previous ones and at the same time it did its homework and avoids their drawbacks. Thus it is far the best, the most dynamic and the most exciting. This is largely due to the fact that only in the third season the consistent adherence to the trio of story lines (criminal, political and personal) has finally worked. In previous seasons, their interconnection has not always worked, but this time they appear hand in hand as one integral whole.

The second movie of the non-declared Morris Cycle With Former War Ministers of Defense... And despite some reservations about this part, I would appreciate if they make a "third sequel" (William Perry should be the first choice). In any case, Donald Rumsfeld is an undeniably interesting figure, and Morris is a documentary filmmaker who is capable enough to take advantage of this, and (unknowingly) hand in hand with the World According to Dick Cheney's that is just being created and presented, to create an extraordinarily interesting image based on views of two main figures of Bush (or Cheney if you want) administration "looking back after some time". Traditionally, Morris is an exceptionally good documentary filmmaker with an ironic perspective, who can ask questions, put things into context and work with archival materials, but he is also a very capable filmmaker who is fully aware of the importance of the audio-visual side; especially for a documentary with only one talking person. As a result, however, it is worse than the Mist of War in terms of quality , which is largely due to the fact how McNamara approached it at the time and what Morris got from him.

Taiwan from a height that provides both the necessary distance and insight into both stunning beauty of nature and ruthless conflict with "an expanding civilization ignoring everything versus defending nature" which has no winners, only losers who failed terribly. In addition, Chi Po-lin has a sharp eye in terms of lines, contrasts, curves and composition as such, which is nice to watch all the time and he manages to avoid a syndrome similar to "too many, too brief, too quick beautiful full HD images", which are usually ruined by the fact that there is nothing else except these embellished images that you quickly become bored with if watched as a feature-film. The worst thing is the introductory third, which has its flaws and looks to a large extent only like a promo video saying "immediately pack your things and come here". But I must admit on the other hand it is a breathtaking promo video, that is for sure.

Kick-Ass made in a style of classic Bond movies. And it is done so consistently and one to one (again, it is genre conscious as much as subversive, furious, with a considerable portion of meta exaggeration, it emphasizes being cool in all circumstances and the resembles in clearly seen also in the course, the type of roles, allusions, etc.) that is clearly to its detriment, because the Vaughn/Millar duo are undoubtedly capable of doing more than just copying themselves. However, if (and as long as) it is such a thoroughly likeable incorrect fun, who would mind it? PS: Too bad the official subtitles, which are not very imaginative are not very good. At least Valentine's speech impediment directly calls for a playful approach.

US Samoa is (was?) a synonym for an outsider of all outsiders. A team that almost never scored in an official match and almost never got any points, precisely did quite the opposite and regularly concede so many goals that the results of the team gave the impression that these are the match results of a completely different sport than football. And to make matters worse, it is also the team with the highest defeat in an interstate match ever in history. But its football chairman has a long-time dream; namely, nothing less than to be at least once place not on the last position of FIFA ranking... The best thing about this documentary is that no matter how ultimate feel good movie and no matter that it is an advertisement of the unbreakable team spirit, it doesn't in any way seem like a fabricated movie that is obviously fishing for emotions. After all, it can't even do that, because the authors could hardly count on such a development at the beginning of their documentary about the “worst team in history". And especially in the first half, you can see in which direction their original intentions were moving, before they were lucky enough to get the incredibly important characters and their incredible story both on a purely sporting level and, above all, on a personal level.

The sequences about the police side of the matter are kind of overplayed, but otherwise it is a success in terms of genre. The only drawback is the silly line "we play on smugglers" is exactly what ruins the movie in a nasty, terribly way. On the one hand, nothing happens in it beyond hanging out from nowhere to nowhere, where one is like a relieving element and the other, which has such an identical expression and attitude throughout the film that you have a reasonable suspicion of whether it is a real person or just a cardboard puppet used in different scenes. And this unintentionally ridiculous line has as much space as the solid police line, which together creates an unjustifiably gigantic footage. The intersection of these two lines then occurs only in the action scenes of the smuggling activities, which looks like Cobra 11 upside down. While even if some trips over a small stone it leads many somersaults and explosions, the main motto here is "make sure not to damage or scratch anything, the insurance company would kill us" and so all chases (there are not many of them, but they pretty long) are the embodiment on the action scene of unprecedented boredom.

Turing's Pure Soul that pays special attention to the (least) interesting aspects of his destinies (and when it pays special attention it is done in the style of cliché advertising like "when he goes, we also go" or "hurray" etc.) to sideline the most important and disproportionately interesting events which is strange. As a result, Cumberbatch's performance is particularly interesting. Not so much the performance itself (though this too) as in the context of his crucial roles, when after having performed characters of Hawking, Sherlock and Assange, this is already the fourth time when he plays similar role on paper, the archetype of the role of a "odd duck" genius, without in any way (or just a gesture) repeat the same performance over and over again.