DaViD´82

Or in other words how the originally unqualified Danish substitute gained great victory during the EURO 1992... I hoped that it would be the Danes who would be brave enough courage to trample on the classic scheme of sports-celebrated films about outsiders who become famous despite the expectations, and take it all at least a little subversively. And at first, surprisingly, these hopes are fulfilled, because it begins in a way of Okresní přebor. However, from the moment Yugoslavia get eliminated due to the conflict, it starts to follow that classic scheme "team made of quarreling individual stars, outsiders who are only makeweights even whose fans don't believe in them, who step by step unite, find their way to themselves and how to play, improve and finally they shock every one with their success so many people will be touched. It couldn't have been more mediocre, even if the creators deliberately had tried to do so. However, it could still work, have emotions (except for moving story of Vilfort's life, they remain sitting on the bench and do not get into the game at all) and the football segments alone could have had the appropriate drive, which they do not have, as they are a disparate mix of archival footage with artificial fiction which is conflicting if together. As a result, it is a mediocre sports standard, which somehow works mainly thanks to Ulrich Thomsen, who handled well the most clichéd possible role of a skilled coach, which goes against the flow.

Ray Donovan or in other words "Mr. Wolf, who solves the problems of the averted face of Hollywood" and his moonlighting jobs among the cream of the LA society, when he tries to balance his personal life with not always strictly legal jobs (read drugs, murders, mistresses) for mobsters, security forces, celebrities, porn magnates and who knows who else in the style of "I help you, you help me" and so as a hen runs (i.e. in his case drives Mercedes) from dusk till dawn in LA and sometimes he blackmails, sometimes bribes, oppresses, catches someone red handed, or he kills someone and buries his corpse. If that's not enough, he still has to solve the problems of his large mischievous family, where every family member is a trickster looking for troubles. And to top it all off, his crazy daddy, a longtime prisoner, and a former gangster bumpkin/hopscotch who doesn't know what to do with the rest of his life performed by charming Jon Voight. As long as/if there is at least one of the Ray/Mickey duo present on the stage, it's flawless. There´s enough tension, twists and turns, ideas, character development or pace. The problem (and fundamental one) is that they space covers about two-thirds of each episode. The rest is occupied by the relationship vicissitudes of Ray's brothers, the daughter's first love or the escapades of a naughty son and similar monkey business, which of course can be portrayed in an interesting and meaningful way, that´s for sure, but imagine family scenes filled with padding the last seasons of Dexter or Homeland (when taking about movies from Showtime station). Does it make you feel uncomfortable? So here it's the same, only a little worse, because the relationship segments are presented in such a way that it would not work even in the later faded Beverly Hills 90210 series. And what's worse, they treading water. Not in several episodes or perhaps one series, but even for several seasons. I would like to see the clever fellow that came up with the concept of "we will have a tough guy who every one respects, who is threatening every one with a baseball at and then cut, and we will focus on the daughter and her texting flirts and fondling and all this not only in one episode but for several seasons. The audience will be shocked and they could not wait until they find out if the rapper succeeds or not". But it's not just about the daughter, her brother, their mother. Even Ray's relatives are like two peas in a pod. In other words, about two thirds of the episodes/seasons/series are in the top of their league but the remaining third is way below the average and unbearably boring. Nevertheless, as a viewer I have been getting on with the multitasking Ray for several years, because no matter how annoying the above mentioned is, the genre (initially very fragmented) story line is inevitably worth watching and over time, even more and more.

Capturing of a wannabe global bureaucratic (and political) process precedes a possible counter-terrorist drone attack on the territory of a friendly state, when it is necessary to make Sofia's choice whether to strike despite the casualties of the civilian death toll. Time is running fast, the tension is growing, politicians are trying to get rid of responsibility, participants are having twinges of conscience, a higher principle is starts to play important role. The start was perfect and the first half is flawless. But there is one weak point. Namely, the more the footage is advancing the less distance Hood keeps and the movie starts being too emotional in a forced, cheap and unnecessary way. Seemingly cold or even depersonalized purely procedural approach would be much more appropriate, because in this way the movie explicitly says to the viewer what he/she should think and feel. And at the end of the day it would be much more impressive and chilling in a way Greengrass or Lindholm does it if done differently. In any case, it's a decent war drama, which, despite the fact that everyone is sitting all the time, has a furious pace, you won't get bored and it has something to say (it just says it too literally). They could have taken more out of the topic than only a "decent war drama", but to achieve that someone else than Hood, who has no style and likes routine, should have been behind the camera.

A war about peace. An industrial gangster movie about Birmingham hooligans with ambitions that is not afraid to take the time to build a story, intentions of the character and the environment in order to settle the accounts in an uncompromising, stylish and often sympathetic way without genre clichés. Although the first thing you will notice is cinematography and postmodern stylization (playing games with English dialects) or the setting, it´s mainly based on living characters their magnificent cast (without exception). There is a lot to be written about Peaky Blinders, we even might go into details, from the aftermaths of the Great War to how they work with contemporary political movements, but despite all possible weak points (slow pace of the opening episodes, overuse of retarding moment by some directors, namely Otto Bathurst was not able to handle it in this respect and it's him who is responsible for the three opening episodes, in other words he does the series rather a disservice) episodes cannot be denied that they are distinctive in its dirty street way, but the dirt is unfortunately washed away in the third series when turned them into "better people". Although you might find it similar with Boardwalk Empire in many ways at first, they have little in common in fact, except for the time and genre. But they definitely do not play in each other's backyard, they follow different paths and have different pace.| S1: 4/5 | S2: 4/5 |

Some people say that it is the best show about cars. Some say even say it's the best show ever. Personally, I wouldn't go that far, but it's true that the May trio (because it was only 50% before May came) / Hammond/Clarkson and their insidious producers made something that attracts admiration. They turned the show about cars into an unprecedentedly playful entertaining show for overgrown children with overgrown children, in which it doesn't really matter what (if any) cars mean to you. Everything you did with your toy cars as a child these three guys do also, but with real ones. And when I say everything, I really mean it, including dinosaur races, playing football with cars, assembling your own car, contact races of the airport vehicle fleet, destructions, explosions, flying caravans, etc. The only thing that is really surprising is that such a great show which is one of the craziest and daring shows ever, so stubbornly insist on unchanging and obsolete format, when they interview the celebrities and what cars matter to them, after that we stare how the celebrity is (un)able to drive a then we just twaddle about their place in this competition. This is something that should have been removed long time ago. This is something from the department of the Czech talk-show Nikdo není dokonalý (Nobody is Perfect) or something you would expect from the radio but definitely not from one of the most dynamic shows ever. And what is even more startling is that the BBC didn't take advantage of the fact that the original trio left and didn't change the content nor the format of the show. The only thing they got by doing this is that now it´s even more obvious that the new hosts are everything but not funny and it's clear they don´t have the same passion for cars and don't mess with each other in the same was as the original trio did.

A mediocre and the worst season so far (because it’s badly written), saved at the last possible moment by the double final episode, which on the other hand is one of the best ever, which, considering the quality of memorable episodes from previous seasons, is no small feat.

The fact that this is a pure marketing sequel in order to launch a merchandising tsunami (mimiDora, as the cutest small fish of all time, is directly asking for it, and I am surprised that my son did not want me to buy a him fish on the way from the cinema) and not a sequel made to say something new about the characters/the world (and such sequels were never unfamiliar to Pixar), so it's not bad at all. Mainly because it is basically the same like two peas. The main downside is Dory herself, who works great as a supporting character, but much worse as the main character, as you will quickly become tired of her energy and forgetfulness. However, she is backed by new characters, especially Hank the octopus. In many scenes he is the only main driving force that is pulling strings. It will pleasantly surprise you how well it works in terms of emotions. Which is balanced by the unnecessary escapade final rescue action and the Marlin/Nemo duo, who are here purely out of duty. Watching this is like a torture, especially how the creators forcibly incorporate them into the center of events and at the same time sideline them throughout the whole footage.

Icelandic royal bastard of the ambitious British series Fortitude. The mutual similarity goes so far that at the time of all those western remakes of serial Nordic noirs, one would somehow expect the British to just take over. The striking similarity (style, themes, characters, atmosphere, etc.) cannot be purely coincidental. And Iceland wins this battle, not undisputed though. What works in his favor is the fact that the real Nordic depersonalized cold gloom does look more natural and somehow more captivating, namely intrusive cold, whining winds, snowy wide distances, rugged fjord, rising sea... No, this series is packed with impressive genius loci. His second big ace is that he cast a silent bear who "sometimes grunts" and is tortured by inner demons with an unresolved personal life in the lead role. Perhaps the most clichéd possible archetype of Nordic crime movie, however, is presented/performed here in such a way that a nicer guy would be really hard to find. Perhaps only Skarsgård's River has such a degree of empathy River. Undisputed weak points include another of the hallmarks of all Nordic noir, namely unjustifiably overcomplicated things and, despite it, the excessive transparency of it all, which however, it is largely given by sympathetic civility in motivations and actions. What would help is would be to make it shorter by removing on episode (not particular one, but in each episode there´s at leas one padding scene). Despite all of this, I'm very happy about the series and no matter how traditional Nordic crime brings all the weak and strong points that it entails, the distinctive Icelandic nature is still kind of fresh compared to especially the Danish similar movies.

A hodgepodge, which is not even bad enough to be ridiculously amusing in its unwanted stupidity (albeit flashy visuals or magic neon run style with bloody menacing glances, fingers ominously tapping and you can hear whispering something like "blablagrgrplopplopouch" are dangerously close to it) and at the same time it is not good enough to stand without any objections as a quality genre and not just as a video game B-rate movie pretending to be A-rate. Basically, when panoramas are being shown, the characters shut up and fight in a way that "someone randomly dies", it works well. In other words, yes, it works especially if it's essentially a variation on animations, as we know them directly from Blizzard. Despite how seriously it is taken, it also works in orc scenes, in which this is exactly what the movie Warcraft as a whole was supposed to be. But from the Alliance's point of view, everything is pure hell. In addition, in every second scene, it's more than obvious that the footage has been shortened a lot (some allegedly by up to forty minutes), but paradoxically it is not to the detriment. What is obvious is that the footage was shortened mainly due to removal of piffle. I mean what is like a torture when watching film adaptation of Warcraft. Even so, there is still more piffle than would be appropriate. Overall, it has vast potential, interesting story lines, decent battle scenes, sympathetic uncompromisingness of the main characters, but it also has C-rate dialogs, awkward actors (the real ones look like without life compared CGI orcs), appalling (however based on the original) stylization and gala show of the most original and ridiculous clichés from the department of "fantasy for losers".

130-min footage is treading water in terms of genre. Moreover, it´s treading the same water that hundreds of movies already did before (literally, Enfield has already been portrayed before) and in the same style and in a better way (and also in a worse way, that´s for sure). Wan knows well what he is doing, but he still was unable to reveal scary scenes too early (which is his long-term and recurring weak point), so instead of being frightened to death you are only surprised that you are supposed to be scared. On top of that, the running time that includes a lot of padding is simply way too long. Another weak point is that movie is too flashy and some scenes are just randomly put one after another. Thy only thing what is missing apart from demon, scarecrow from a nursery thyme, obsessive child and poltergeist is clown, Ash with a chainsaw or Ghost Busters. On the other hand, in addition to the excellent craftsmanship, it´s well-paced and has several brilliant scenes that still keep the whole thing afloat. So, as a result it´s Wan's standard, only this time much longer and honestly, when did you see a continuation of a scary movie in the movie theater, which despite all its weak points was also a quality film?