NinadeL

So, what do we have here? The 40th film in the DC Universe Animated Original Movies series and the 16th installment in the DC Animated Movie Universe. It also marks the second appearance of the Justice League Dark team, which first had its solo film in 2017. In the meantime, the animated Constantine had his own film, Constantine City of Demons: The Movie, which was released in 2018. Thus, there are many prequels to consider. Additionally, this film adapts several storylines from comics that have been published over many years across different series—"Darkseid War" (Geoff Johns), "Final Crisis" (Grant Morrison), and "Futures End" (Brian Azzarello). It’s clear that only a select group of nerds who had the time to follow all of this will fully enjoy the movie. For me, it's a big treat because I’ve long outgrown generic origins, but at the same time, I’m slightly daunted by the amount of content I’ll need to absorb for future DC animated films. The continuation includes a short from the DC Showcase series—The House of Mystery.

Constantine was one of the surprising adaptations of DC Comics in its time. It took enough from its source material, "Hellblazer," to generate interest on both sides, but also became such a distinct work that it faced issues with sequels. If John Constantine were to be more faithful to the comics in the future and return to being a blonde, he would inevitably face comparisons with Keanu Reeves. However, the film hasn't been forgotten, whether due to its excellent cast—alongside Reeves, there's the divine Rachel Weisz and Tilda Swinton, and two problematic figures, Shia LaBeouf and Gavin Rossdale. A film that constantly has one foot in hell is ideal for reflecting on one's own fears.

John Constantine's animated solo project following Justice League Dark continues with a not entirely convincing effort. City of Demons is an experiment that functions as both a film and a series, so mainstream viewers will understandably find it confusing. It is also an adaptation of the comic "Hellblazer: All His Engines." The world of Hellblazer has a lot to offer, but it's not simple superhero fare, so it will always be a challenge to provide an adaptation that appeals to anything beyond a very narrow audience. Hopefully, the DC executives will figure it out soon.

I'm afraid that "Orlando's" reputation is much better than the actual film. The theme has resonated since 1928 when Virginia Woolf's novel was first published. People involved in Anglo-Saxon literature love "Orlando" for its satirical take on various phases of literary history, culminating in the completion of the fictional poem "The Oak Tree" by Lady Orlando. While the novel does not have many WTF moments, Sally Potter and Tilda Swinton chose not to address various motivations. They leave the question of Orlando's immortality and gender transformation to a magical week-long sleep. Today's more discerning viewer/reader needs something more. Immortality and fluidity of gender are well-explored in various fantasy and related sagas. For example, the TV series Highlander offers a pragmatic approach to the transfer of immortal assets, and Anne Rice often explored the role of gender in history. The film's biggest missing element compared to the source material is the lost reason for Orlando's departure to the East to Constantinople (driven by Archduchess Harriet). Additionally, the way the ending is tied to the contemporary period is off, as the direct reading of the film suggests that Orlando met Shelmerdine in 1850, was pregnant during the world wars in the first half of the 20th century, and the child was only preschool-aged in the 1990s, which is complete madness. The framework consists of Jimmy Somerville's two performances, and the biggest joke is casting Quentin Crisp as Queen Elizabeth I. But whether one reaches a critical or enthusiastic conclusion, Orlando is definitely worth your time. As is its previous adaptation Freak Orlando and the biographical film depicting the creation of the novel, Vita & Virginia.

Omar Sharif, although representing what is now considered a very modern approach to colorblind casting in his time, did not particularly impress with his acting. Similarly, porcelain doll Catherine Deneuve embodied in every shot all the cheap elements of bad historical films from the 1960s... and, of course, Ava Gardner was far from the real ascetic empress. The result is one of the weakest adaptations of the Mayerling affair ever.

The series Kafka is best approached with a sense of perspective. It is neither a classic biography nor a straightforward adaptation. After all, Reiner Stach did not dedicate just one volume to Kafka. Few members of the Prager Kreis achieved as much notoriety as Kafka, and few writers are as notoriously well-known. Yet, the image that the general public has of Kafka is quite vague. Every fragment of his texts has been analyzed, and he even has a "profile on FilmBooster." However, it is somewhat overlooked that Kafka, as a German-speaking Jewish writer from Prague, represents such a specific group that it is crucial to constantly explain his world rather than just him as an individual. When Lenka Reinerová passed away, the last living witness was gone. But when Kafka died, the Prager Kreis still had 15 years ahead of itself. This series is a wonderful gift for anyone who can distinguish between his life and work without assistance, who can navigate the map of Germania Slavica, and who enjoys encountering new German talents, among which David Kross and Liv Lisa Fries undoubtedly belong.

A pleasant reimagining of The Flintstones for a new generation. Naturally, the new series doesn't look like it did in the '60s and doesn't tackle '60s issues. The main characters are young Pebbles and Bamm-Bamm, which is great because, even though Hanna-Barbera told their stories into adulthood and had a standalone series, The Pebbles and Bamm-Bamm Show, they are by far the cutest as kids. The animation is nice, and the episodes are imaginative and brisk.

I’m excited about all the updates surrounding the Immortal Universe. It’s, of course, a complex process with grand plans, which is fine because Anne Rice built her world of vampires and witches from the 1970s, infusing it with her deepest experiences. This includes her youthful encounter with the lesbian film Dracula's Daughter and her own personal tragedy, where she witnessed the death of her five-year-old daughter from leukemia. These and many other experiences shaped not only Anne Rice's personality but also her work. She was the one who moved the vampire genre to New Orleans and played with homoerotic relationships among her vampires for years. She also had to watch numerous adaptations of her seminal novel "Interview with the Vampire" (1976). In addition to the classic film, there were musicals and many drafts intended to become additional films and the first series starring Lestat. However, the first series is only being made now. For the first time, Anne, her son Christopher (who became her successor), and the fans are satisfied. And no one wants to address the originally chosen real-life settings (the book’s Louis de Pointe du Lac was a plantation owner with slaves), nor is anyone up to handling Claudia as a real child (the book character was a faithful reflection of Anne Rice’s five-year-old daughter, a wishful thinking for her to live on - perhaps as a vampire); indeed, eleven-year-old Kirsten Dunst in the first film was also a compromise, so it’s understandable that the series creators have gone further and portrayed her as fourteen (Bailey Bass was replaced by Delainey Hayles in the second season). Personally, I’m not thrilled about moving the entire story to the 20th century, but there will always be opportunities to depict the distant past within the storytelling of other characters. At least, I hope so. In the film, Neil Jordan's team primarily shortened the events covered in this series, which explains the decision to remake the entire book in two seasons. Everything that happened in Paris fundamentally defined the events of the next 17 books in the series. So, I’m very pleased with the time spent with the Théâtre des Vampires, even though it is now set in the post-war period. The new aspect includes how to incorporate the new technologies of that time into the decadent theatrical plays. There’s also a new story for Claudia’s partner Madeleine, who is reimagined from the original book’s doll-maker (who sees Claudia as a replacement child) into a Jewish seamstress who builds a relationship with Claudia in a slightly different context. Another new element is the expanded story of Daniel Molloy, whose first interview with Louis is set back to the 70s, the time when the first book was first published. There’s also a depiction of the Talamasca processes, which first appeared in Queen of the Damned. This addresses the most glaring differences between the books and the first films. We have much to look forward to, and it will be grand. Sam Reid and Jacob Anderson are incredibly energetic, bringing empathy and passion to their roles, and it’s a joy to watch their interpretation of such a complex relationship.

A delightful biopic of an actress from the time of Louis XIV. Since all knowledge about the lives and careers of theater actresses before the invention of photography and later film is always dependent on contemporary customs, there is always ample room for artistic license. We know roughly that Mademoiselle Du Parc (1633-1668) was a dancer and actress, collaborated with Molière, was the subject of poetry by Corneille, and that Racine wrote "Andromaque" (1667) specifically for her. At the royal court, she mingled with composer Lully and poisoner La Voisin. This provides enough material for many novels and other dramatizations, so there's no reason not to enjoy this charming film full of enthusiasm for 17th-century theatrical art.

In the current climate, a standalone film dedicated to Priscilla's memories of life with Elvis seems like a logical step. Elvis's biography cannot be told without the presence of his teenage bride, who had to wait until she matured and finished school before she could become a mother... And now the time has come for this former child bride to speak out. Certainly, by today's standards, their relationship was somewhat "different," but practically nothing that happened behind the walls of Graceland was "normal" or in any way standard. Priscilla wrote her book "Elvis and Me" in 1985 and, twenty years later, added another book, co-written with her daughter Lisa Marie, "Elvis by the Presleys." The question is whether Sofia Coppola really made the right choice and found a suitable successor to her Marie Antoinette. Priscilla's story is interesting, but she found her own life without Elvis quite early on and never lacked anything. She isn’t the bearer of a story that should be rewritten through film. This seems to be the biggest problem with the resulting film. There isn't sufficient justification for its existence. Additionally, Coppola failed to secure the rights to the real Elvis, so the film about his wife became a cheap television production reminiscent of Lifetime Network dramas.