Marigold

An image of the disintegration of the Eastern community in Ireland, but which disintegrates internally before it can impart anything meaningful to the viewer. All that is left is the Dadaism and depressing zone of affect, departures, arrivals and breaking up of the crowds. In the real scenery of Dublin, only a flimsy story was created, which is kept above water at least a little by the solid design...

Very superficial and shallow, stuck between big words and the paradox that the film tries to say something about which "no one knows anything", as David Strathairn admits. Barthes is thus in the grip of the same paradox as Dr. Flinstein, portrayed by Strathairn. He is able to abstract material, but he has no idea what to do with it. He is thus left with pseudo-intellectual sarcasm and the truly excellent Paul Giamatti. It's too bad. Perhaps if the film followed an excellent intimate storyline with Uncle Vani's rehearsal and didn't try to make an absurd caricature out of the contemporary world, it would all be more coherent and meaningful.

Clean, honest, and balanced between Gomorrah-style documentary slaughter and sensitively rendered melodrama. The word riveting doesn't come into play here, but Fukunaga's debut is still a very strong and distinctive film with a very powerful message about the state of the world.

A film with absolutely NO CHARISMA, which is quite a big mess given that this a project that stands and falls with conversational tension. Tony Scott's clip exhibition in the action scenes fails completely and Pelham is pretty cumbersome in the tunnel. Being good at a craft and having good actors on the set is not enough. Overall, solidly above average, but one can rightly expect more from a filmmaker with Scott’s credentials.

Another part of the increasingly disgusting "Czech cinematography and important topics" farce. Starring a broad-shouldered, overacting playboy, and a director who balances the elaborate message with a sterile formal exhibition. In the supporting roles: stilted V. O. soundtrack. Bauer, a hospital on the outskirts of the city, a lack of light bulbs and a careless articulation with which many actors would not even pass the entrance exams at the Amateur Theater of District Speech Therapy. A positive aspect of the film is the complete barren environment and the cruelly panoptic image of the Czech healthcare system, which is sometimes so exaggerated that it is entertaining.

In previous films, Tarantino paid tribute to everything possible, and in this one he pays tribute to himself. And it’s not bad at all! Although the controversial filmmaker cannot deny his trademarks, Inglourious Basterds feels somehow more sedentary, sensible and moderate than his annoying genre masturbation in the past. If I have to choose the character that they are most similar to, the it is undoubtedly Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt). The characters in Inglourious Basterds have charm, cynicism, straightforwardness, and they talk in a protracted southern accent. The dialogues and individual situations are incredibly drawn out, but at the same time they perfectly create tension between the characters, which each additional replica can cut into a sharp and short shootout. Surprisingly, Inglourious Basterds is not an action film, but rather a conversational film. So, what is there to complain about? The fact they do nothing more in a fantastic area other than recite a banal guerrilla story, pretend to be catchy comic book characters, and bow to the subversive powers of the film. If I compare it with Tarantino's previous films, it's a complete epic... In my opinion, this is probably the best film by the king of film pulp.

Harvie Krumpeta's anecdotic and pitch-black morbid core stretched to a feature format and slightly diluted with infantility. Unfortunately, Elliot was unable to avoid the signs of self-purpose and cheapness, although even this time the atmosphere and the characters easily get under one’s skin. Mary and Max is one of the strangest cartoons you will ever see. The artistic aspects only strengthen the deformity and psychosis of the main characters, and it is therefore all the more beautiful to watch how the film produces pure and positive emotions. It’s just too bad about the occasional repetition and excessive eloquence.

There is no point in expecting it: you will not find the great truths of life here again in a form other than those which are very trivial, but that is also not what Pixar is all about. This studio matures with every film and dazzles kids with narrative action and a great ability to bring timeless children's dreams to the screen. The story of Carl and his strange retinue is captivated by emotions in some places (particularly the introductory retrospective is divine) and sometimes the first signal amuses (it’s probably too infantile for some people, but so be it). There is no denying that this is once more a compilation of several shorts, the level of which is not exactly stable, but the overall impression is clearly "Up".

The incredible has become a deed. An entertaining satire and a kind idyll with strong characters and a screenplay that does not make your stomach twist. Without any exaggeration or embarrassing variety, Sedláček managed to make an intelligent film which, with certain aspects, subscribes to the new wave (authenticity, celebration as a space of satirical expression of characters), and with certain aspects it remains entirely contemporary. Above all, however, all of the aspects entertain and hit on more general phenomena. It's unfortunate that there are a few moments in the film when Sedláček started looking for humor elsewhere than in the non-exciting and straight-forward flowing life of a small village. Other than that, I like his film, despite the fact that he does too many things at once. The film mysteriously functions as a satire, a love story and a village idyll. Rather than a scathing Forman critique of public affairs, let's look for a correlation with the kind drollery of Vančura or Chevallier.

Most of the time I thought that critics had hurt Knowing, because it is a thrilling and suggestive disaster film that surpasses its even more expensive colleagues thanks to Proyas' directing and great visuals. However, the biblical finale turns the tolerable ridiculousness into something very close to farce. One tends to forgive disaster films their plot holes and the strange (un)motivation of the characters, but the moment the creators hit you with heavy metaphysical calibers, you can now veto the tolerance. Knowing clearly suffers from ambitions that were too high. If it had stayed more grounded, it would be amongst the top films of the genre. Nicolas Cage saying a sentence like "how do I save the world?" would be a problem even in a much better-thought-out film. [65%]