gudaulin

A documentary about the fact that we largely live in closed bubbles, and at the same time, an exemplary demonstration of the thinking of urban liberals who use the word "gender" in every other sentence and are soaked in feminism. However, they are completely unaware of how bizarre they appear in the eyes of those who hold different values. The problem of the documentary does not lie in what it relies on, but in how it is communicated. It convinces the convinced and reinforces the others in their rejecting attitudes. It is clumsy and very poorly presented. Overall impression: 25%.

I appreciate Saša Uhlová's project, and therefore I am even more disappointed that I have to express my disappointment with how the documentary turned out. I considered the idea of a series of investigative visits to companies relying on low-skilled workers to be necessary and impactful. I read the original texts with enthusiasm, and the reactions to them allow for a better definition of the dividing line of political opinions across society than anything else. Unfortunately, Apolena Rychlíková's film adds practically nothing to them - on the contrary, it dilutes them. The technical quality of the hidden camera footage is desperate, and the content of the documentary is ambivalent. Instead of analyzing her own feelings, Saša should have focused on the stories of those for whom the environment that traumatized Saša is a long-term fate, not a short excursion. Overall impression: 50% out of respect for Saša.

I liked Sirový's earlier trips to Alaska much more, even though they were in black and white. This piece isn't poorly cast, but it has a weaker script. However, it reliably reaches three stars. Overall impression: 55%. Nowadays, it's an ideal film for ten-year-old boys.

An unjustly overlooked film, one of the products of the liberated creative atmosphere of the late 1960s. Its strong points are the dialogues and the concise length of the film. It's a masterful performance by three great personalities - Rudolf Hrušínský, Blanka Bohdanová and Karel Höger. History is presented without embellishments, nationalistic, or revivalist myths. It's just a pity the film isn't in color. Overall impression: 90%.

This film seems to have been made from a forgotten script abandoned in the early 50s... A typical product of the emerging normalization, a distasteful glorification of the secret police (STB), and the period of collectivization. One of the weakest films of its time... Overall impression 5%.

The definition of love is a tricky thing, and at different ages, through different life experiences, and ultimately with different goals, we perceive it completely differently. For two visitors of an oncology clinic, who have come to see their sick partners, at first, getting to know each other only represents a sense of belonging during a painful time, an awareness that there is someone who understands them and is in the same boat. However, as time goes by, a spark ignites and confirms the old saying that friendship between a man and a woman only works long-term under the condition of impotence or mutual homosexuality. For those who stay, the film is about sadness and farewell, but it is not emotionally manipulative. It gives hope and says that where something ends, space is simultaneously created for something new. Last but not least, this film is proof that besides a few overused stereotypically cast stars, French cinema has plenty of great actors who, while not as firmly rooted in international consciousness as they deserve, can deliver remarkable performances and convincingly portray their characters. Vincent Lindon has convinced me in several films that he is a great interpreter of civilian but rugged heroes, and Emmanuelle Devos is a very interesting actress who can oscillate between drama and comedy. Overall impression: 70%.

When watching this film, I couldn't help but think of Zelenka's The Karamazov Brothers, which is quite similar. Staging a classic theater play in a specific environment and under special conditions naturally has a different impact on the viewer and is characterized by a completely different atmosphere than on a traditional stage. However, there are two fundamental differences here: Petr Zelenka can rely on some of the best actors of his generation, additionally perfectly experienced from theater engagements. His film is much closer to the classic conception of a live-action film. On the other hand, the Taviani brothers filmed a peculiar documentary where you don't know where the boundaries of human pose, pretense, and exhibition in front of the camera begin and end. Their "heroes" are real criminals, murderers, mafia members, and drug dealers sentenced to long-term imprisonment. The Taviani brothers are minimalist, you learn very little about their "actors," and their true thinking is hidden behind a mask. Only a few scenes demonstrate the internal tension and the environment of the prison with special security measures. Caesar Must Die is a typical festival film, definitely not one intended for the average viewer who sits down in front of the screen to relax. Those who can appreciate the unspoken, who can appreciate the absurdity of scenes where mafia killers act out a story about a murderous conspiracy to remove Caesar - the godfather, will be more than satisfied. Since I gave The Karamazov Brothers 5 stars, I ultimately lean towards the same rating here. The story of the fate of Salvatore Striano, who started acting after being granted clemency from his prison cell, is one of those you think can only happen in the film world. Overall impression: 90%.

One of the four Lloyd A. Simandl films that appeared on TV in the mid-90s, and it was the very first one. Czech viewers finally had the opportunity to get acquainted with the work of a self-confident and passionate lover and creator of films, for whom the term Czech Ed Wood would be appropriate. The screenplay must have been spawned by a junkie in the midst of withdrawal, the level of dialogue is such that the participating actors must have had uncontrollable fits of laughter during breaks between shooting, and last but not least, the film is evidence of the dire straits of well-known Czech actors, as only hunger and deprivation could compel them to participate in this garbage. As in other Simandl films, the only interesting aspect is the pornographically conceived erotica, but even that cannot redeem the film from getting a Boo! rating. Overall impression: 10%.

This is one of the examples that the controversial director Zdeněk Troška was able to make films of a completely different nature in the past, and his direction towards crystal kitsch was far from clear in the mid-80s. It is a Jirásek story about the clash of dogmatism and conservative thinking with a modern view of the world, set in a noble estate at the end of the 18th century. It has a reasonably short duration and a likable cast. Overall impression: 60%.

Poor Charlie is drowning in sorrow over the tragic death of his little brother, and I'm drowning in grief over the loss of one hundred minutes of my life that I spent with this pseudo-romantic kitsch pretending to be a drama. Actually, no, I'm kidding, I fast-forwarded through some parts, so I was saved from some of the embellished dialogues, pathetic scenes, and mediocre actors pretending to have deep emotions. Overall impression: 25%.