gudaulin

This film reminded me of a joke about a foreigner traveling through Russia by train and after several hours of waiting at the station, he disgustedly asks the train conductor what the problem is. The engine driver is changing the locomotive. For so long?! He's changing it for vodka... Honestly, this is a completely average gangster film, so average that I realized I had seen it years ago, which wouldn't be strange if I hadn't realized it during the last scene. I had perfectly erased the film from my memory. It has an uneven pace with a lot of dull moments, but it scores points with its atmosphere of a country where the state structure is collapsing and general chaos prevails. Widespread corruption, unemployment, and alcoholism. The absurd scene where a wounded gangster stops an ambulance and demands to be taken to the hospital, only to find out that the ambulance has been "privatized" for five years and a small business owner is currently transporting a load of cabbage heads in it, is typical of the film. Overall impression: 55%.

A thematically very strong film that, like few others, attempts to come to terms with the oppressive legacy of the 1950s, when one hundred thousand people found themselves in camps and prisons, a burden that mostly marked them for life. The film is dominated by Jiří Schmitzer's convincing performance as the main protagonist. He managed to convey his own experiences from prison, where he ended up after a tragic car accident. His performance is completely authentic and rightfully earned him the Czech Lion award. This drama is interesting for its cast, with several actors appearing in atypical roles (Milan Šteindler, Jiří Krampol, and others), but the average screenplay and direction undermine the overall impression. Overall impression: 75%.

Although I can't consider myself a music expert in the slightest, this piece, which I watched by chance, caught my interest. It has a sense of humor, an interesting and original format, and meticulous execution. Serious music presented in a lighthearted, modern, and unconventional way. The weakest element is the connection between the individual episodes, but that's only a minor flaw. Overall impression: 80%.

Enchanted fully corresponds to the traditions of the Disney studio focused on producing commercially successful family films with fairytale themes in the most conventionally imaginable way. It is desperately cluttered, colorful, romantic, emotional, and above all, extremely saccharine. It's like eating four large chocolates at once. Not that I, with my notorious sweet tooth, wouldn't try that, but the result would be a ruined stomach - and that's how it is with this film. It is an adorably kitschy work that many can swoon over, but it simply doesn't sit well with me. Just like the artistic style of classic Disney movies doesn't sit well with me. Overall impression: 40%. The only thing worth mentioning is the visually remarkable closing credits that imitate the style of books painted by medieval monks.

A few of my favorite users have given 5 stars to this with such positive comments as if they had just learned about the establishment of eternal world peace or the eradication of hunger in the Third World and a universal cancer cure at the same time. I will be considerably more sober and include uncompromising condemnation. For me, Breaking and Entering is kitsch intended for festival audiences. Untrustworthy behavior, poor dialogues, and bizarre characters like prostitutes portrayed by Vera Farmiga. I already had a big problem with The English Patient, the flagship of Anthony Minghella's directorial work, and now I have just confirmed that I do not get Minghella's vision of the world and artistic creation. One star is for Jude Law and Juliette Binoche, the second for the rest of the cast. However, I have to take away the remaining stars this time due to the screenplay and the dialogue originating from it. The aforementioned actors are likable, but with some of the phrases that came out of their mouths, I had the temptation to kick them in the groin in places where the screenwriter thought I would cheer. Overall impression: 40%.

You live your ordinary peaceful bourgeois life and feel safe, protected by your family background, secure job, and supported by state institutions with its police apparatus. The state can be an enemy at most to anarchists and shady elements. However, one day your partner finds herself in the wrong place at the wrong time and you will feel how quickly your protective barriers can crumble, and nothing that was valid yesterday matters anymore. Only sadness remains and a growing determination to stand up against the system, maybe even with a weapon in hand. And so, a serious teacher begins to plan an adventurous escape for his wife from prison and does not hesitate to confront the criminal gang or the numerous and well-coordinated police machinery. Anything for Her is a film about an ordinary guy in a damn heated situation, a film about a great love that is capable of great sacrifices and unimaginable risks. Where most men would prefer a pragmatic relationship with a divorced lady from the neighborhood, the film's protagonist demonstrates an incredible amount of selflessness. Anything for Her breaks away from the usual routine of today's crime stories and moreover, it largely surpasses them with its emotional engagement, credibility, and energy. I have already seen an American remake of it, but I couldn't finish it because it replaces originality with the usual Hollywood routine. Overall impression: 80%.

I cannot review this film completely objectively - the problem is not that I consider the subject matter to be too "feminine" or that there is no trace of romance in me. However, I am a descendant of the plebeian society and plebeian ancestors, so instead of being moved by noble manners and witty sparkling dialogues, I feel like grabbing a pitchfork, poking Mr. Bingley in the backside, and shouting: "To the Bastille!" Besides, I get the feeling that the creators did not capture Jane Austen's essence very well. In reality, she was more like an English Chekhov of the late 18th century. She had her own thoughts about the manners and conventions of the confined aristocratic society, and her novels can be read more as a gentle social satire on contemporary morality. However, the humor in the film shifted more toward romantic comedy than satire. Keira Knightley is perfect for her role - delicate, fragile, romantic, and charming. However, her male counterpart lacks the charisma that Colin Firth showed ten years earlier. The cinematography and the selection of exteriors are very good, and the period music accompaniment is pleasant as well. Overall impression: 70%.

The potential was great, as the topic of emigration and the associated troubles of integration into society and navigating in a foreign environment offered plenty of opportunities, especially when the director chose several interesting personalities. However, Boková's approach reliably destroyed that potential. The result is bloated, and full of filler, mainly because the director forgot to edit, but above all, she let her sheep talk about whatever came to mind, so instead of a thematic documentary, it turned into a pub conversation about nothing at times. The duration of 114 minutes is ridiculous, and with a reasonable edit, an interesting documentary of about 45 minutes could have been created. Overall impression: 35%.

I once liked the atmospheric and decadent film The Company of Wolves, and this is not the first time that Jordan enters the world of romantic fantasy. However, it seems to me that his later work does not come close to the quality of that early film. Byzantium is a compromise on all fronts between a commercially pleasing popcorn spectacle and an alternative interpretation of myths from the world of the undead with an artistic touch. The problem is that the chosen position satisfies neither side. Art fans will (rightfully) criticize Byzantium for the shallowness of its motifs, the inability to imprint true destiny, and the tornness and tragedy of losing the most precious thing that can never be regained. Commercially-minded viewers, on the other hand, will criticize the film for being tiresome. Both groups can then criticize Jordan's loosely presented mythology of the world in which Jordan's protagonists operate. It's not a disaster, as the body of Gemma Arterton and the melancholic face of Saoirse Ronan save the film along with the quality of the cinematography and music. Overall, it is a film that rather raises hopes rather than fulfilling them. It is simply frustrating to look forward to something that never comes. Overall impression: 55%.

The opening scene in the crypt of the ossuary and the subsequent assassination clearly entice, and the director sets the bar high and makes it known that the presence of the star Ventura will not be his only advantage. This is a film that respects the atmosphere and has style. However, its weakness lies in the script. The murders of high-ranking judicial officials are not investigated by a team of well-equipped specialists from the criminal investigative team, as one would expect in a politically exposed case, but rather by a lonely commissioner equipped with a pencil and a notebook. Until about halfway through, the drama represents a more or less classic narrative about a criminal case, which, despite detours and minor problems, leads to a specific culprit and the resolution of the case. However, then the director changes gears and we find ourselves in a world of conspiracy theories and hints of complex and extensive conspiracies, and the film increasingly falls into paranoia, which culminates in a bloody question mark. The truth is that Francesco Rosi worked with very specific feelings of concern from the Italian left about the development inspired by Pinochet's coup in Chile, which took place just two years before the filming preparations. In the mid-70s, Italian society was indeed going through a protracted crisis of the political system and the economy, and the country was exhausted from strikes, demonstrations, and political assassinations. So, in terms of "feeling," Rosi's piece works, but in terms of content, it contains logical somersaults. If the commissioner argues with journalists and opposition MPs about essential evidence, then the viewer sees nothing but helpless perplexity and a growing sense of threat and loss of trust in the institutions on the part of the protagonist. If you want to give the film a chance, do not expect a film based on action or a film that provides significant revelations. But as a dark experience, it can work. Overall impression: 75%.