Stanislaus

Barry Keoghan has an unmistakable 'punch him in the face' look, and if we add in the scary makeup and the affected but impressive acting, we have another distinctive Joker. I agree with the opinion of others that this scene would have stood out too much in the final film, so cutting it was a tactical move and an enticement for a (possible) sequel.

The Notre-Dame fire is undoubtedly one of the most significant events in French history in recent years. Three years ago, it was not only a cathedral that burned down, but also one of the symbols of Paris, France and perhaps even of Europe. On the verge of his 80th birthday, Jean-Jacques Annaud takes on this (literally) searing story and made a film with both fiction and archival footage that presents this infamous event quite faithfully, but without getting into any unnecessary narrative around it. Everything centers on the cathedral, the devastating fire, the determination of the firefighters and their race against time. I was initially a little distracted by the embedded archive footage and there were a few 'weird' scenes that didn't need to be in the film, but it's still a solid drama with a strong documentary feel and more than one suspenseful scene.

I took advantage the re-release to celebrate the film’s 20 anniversary and went (for the umpteenth time) to the magical world of Amélie of Montmartre. Jean-Pierre Jeunet's film has lost none of its distinctive charm and atmosphere – Amélie has aged like a fine French wine. Apart from the sometimes melancholic but all the more endearing story with an incredibly positive charge, I liked the narrative and visual style that more than once reminded me of Wes Anderson's work. The icing on the cake is the wonderful soundtrack, which has basically taken on a human form over the years. Amélie, the a timeless story about a young woman who tries to make the world around her a better place, while easily forgetting herself, always gets me, entertains and moves me with every viewing.

The Bad Guys relies on similarly unusual animation style as The Mitchells vs. the Machines, which is arguably the film's biggest draw. Story-wise, it doesn't really have much to surprise us, we've seen similar stories (the transformation of a villain into a good guy transformation or don't judge a book by its cover) elsewhere. But thanks to its original visuals and a enjoyable dose of action and humour, The Bad Guys manages to engage, thrill and entertain despite its rather generic premise. A weaker four stars! PS: At the beginning I had a bit of a problem with the fact that the main characters are animals in a world of humans (and a tiny minority at that) - but whatever.

Being part of the generation that grew up on the Harry Potter books, I'm always excited for every return to the world of witchcraft and wizardry (not just) at Hogwarts. However, I have mixed feelings about Fantastic Beasts even after the third installment. On the one hand, I'm glad that the mythology of the wizarding world is expanding, but on the other, this series reeks of milking a famous brand for profit. The Secrets of Dumbledore has more than one remarkable (and nostalgic) scene, but at the same time I felt that more than one well-intentioned or imaginative scene was lost in the tangle of the awkward script. The line with the qilin was great, though I couldn't help but think of the poor unicorn from The Philosopher's Stone at every mention of its purest purity. The depiction and reinterpretation of the relationship between Dumbledore and Grindelwald was perhaps a little too literal in places, but I quite welcomed the casting of Mads Mikkelsen (Johnny Depp may be my favorite actor, but he just wasn't a good casting choice). With the magic duels, I felt like the creators were inspired by the MCU, especially Dr. Strange, and I don't really know if that's a good thing or not. The character of Queenie was finally tolerable to me, while Credence didn't sit well with me this first time around. Thanks to the setting of the story in Berlin, among other places, the film features several German actors, which I welcomed, and I would especially single out Oliver Masucci (known from the series Dark). I'm obviously curious about the next (and hopefully final) sequel, and I'd be lying if I said I didn't enjoy the third Fantastic Beasts in the cinema, yet as a viewer I it left me with a sort of bad aftertaste from the obvious plot overkill and disjointedness. Better three stars!

Shadowplay lured me to the cinema mainly thanks to a good trailer, a decent cast and a genre that, according to the previews, smacked of a dense crime-thriller. After watching it, I have to say that they did not make full use of the potential that lay dormant in the premise. If it had ridden a similar wave as the opening sequence, Shadowplay would have been a solid representative of its genre, but I had the feeling that the stiffing prologue was followed by scenes that skimmed the surface instead fo really digging into the core, which wasn't helped by the grimly stylized visuals. Of the actors, I was most impressed by Hynek Čermák and Vladimír Javorský, I had rather mixed feelings about Milan Ondřík, and Leona seemed a bit out of place. Weaker three stars!

Six years ago, the creators of Perfect Strangers certainly did not count on the fact that the premise of their film would be translated into many languages. After the Italian original and the German remake, I went to the cinema to see the Czech-Slovak version, which has the unfortunate fate of being the umpteenth of the same theme. Perfect Strangers sticks more closely to the source material than the German version, yet that unpleasant chill at the end of the Italian film will probably remain undiminished. Conversational and intimate films rely largely on the performances of the actors, and in Perfect Strangers they handled their parts reasonably well – I would single out the Martin Hofmann-Petra Polnisova duo in particular. On the one hand, it is true that the umpteenth (and in many ways literal) variation on a theme is unnecessary, but on the other hand I don't regret going to the cinema. A weaker four stars! PS: I missed the short but all the more powerful scene with the old people on the balcony.

I found the second outing of the blue hedgehog comparable in quality to the first one, in fact I could write almost the same thing about the sequel as I did about its predecessor. Sonic the Hedgehog 2 is entertainment with all the trimmings, aimed mainly at a younger audience, yet it manages to appeal to an adult viewer as well. Jim Carrey as Robotnik may have changed his moustache, but his (at times annoying) ticks remain. The alien family has grown to include two more characters (Tails and Knuckles), but they were not as entertaining as Sonic. A good portion of the humour was again provided by Natasha Rothwell as the very bad-ass bride. In the last third, the films winks at the MCU – Magneto and Captain Marvel. The kids in the theater were laughing out loud, I was more just inwardly amused. But I'll gladly go to the next sequel, which the ending this one beckoned. Better three stars!

Regarding the qualities of Morbius, there is a lot of mention of the Venom 2, which was qualitatively on the edge of average and subpar, but at least it tried to be funny and sometimes it succeeded. Morbius doesn't know who and what it could (and should) impress with! Espinosa's film is neither action-packed, nor scary, nor – as I mentioned – funny enough. It has a punishingly short running time, so you watch a sequence of randomly arranged scenes, all without causality or logic. In terms of visual effects, this is a dud by contemporary standards – the vampire look is more creepy than horrifyingly scary. Even the “smoke moves” of Nightcrawler in X2 were better done than Morbius and co. Jared Leto tries his best, but the bad script trips him up every step (or jump), while Matt Smith was downright embarrassing. The rest of the cast was just sort of pointless filler. I'm curious to see if Morbius will appear on the big screen again after this below-average piece, given the (rather) tepid title end credit scenes.

I've never read anything by Murakami, nor have I seen any film adaptation of his work to date, so Drive My Car was my first encounter with this world-famous writer. I was a bit put off from the screening by the three-hour running time, but it didn't matter that much in the end. Indeed, Hamaguchi's film (and fresh Oscar winner) has a gradual but not boring narrative pace. We follow the story of director Kafuku and his driver Misaki, two people who have little in common at first glance, yet are united by guilt and the trauma of having lost a loved one. In hindsight, it could be said that the basic structure of the film isn't really that original – we've seen coming to terms with the past and the struggle with its demons elsewhere – but Drive My Car has several moments and elements that bring it to life – the behind-the-scenes preparation of a play, the blending of several cultures and languages (thumbs up for the insertion of sign language), or even the opening credits almost halfway through the film. PS: Kafuku does bring to mind the name Kafka for a reason (see the author's 2002 novel).