gudaulin

The cult around this film completely passed me by from the start. I consider it one of Věra Chytilová's weaker films, with a poorly written script, and the vast majority of enthusiastic admirers don't perceive it so much as morality, but rather admire the protagonist's crudeness and "chomping." I admire Bolek Polívka for completely different roles. This humor was more from the basement, and I actually find the character repulsive. Overall impression: 40%.

I was genuinely looking forward to this film to the point where I didn't hesitate to go to the movie theater for it. I expected a comedy in the style of my favorite French series about the seventh company, but the disappointment was proportional to the level of expectation. One star may be harsh, but I really expected something else. The ensemble cast assembled for this film hadn't been seen in Czech cinema for several years, and the performances, along with some unusually cast actors (Vladimír Brabec and Pavel Kříž as established comedians cast as German officers), are actually the only positive aspect of this piece. The poor result can be attributed to the dismal script, where the inexperienced screenwriter failed to grasp the difference between a theatrical farce and cinematic reality. The substitution of a chimney sweep for a black man might work only in the theater; in the film, it comes off as naive and awkward. Yet, the situation created offered numerous possibilities - just the exchange of clothes between the two railway workers and the two German deserters, expertly cast with Miroslav Noga and Milan Šteindler, could have led to endless great gags. One of the few successful comedic situations occurs when the railway workers return home in German uniforms, and their wives greet them with desperate lamentation, believing they had joined the Germans just before the end of the war. The direction is uninspired and the final nail in the coffin is pounded in by the screenwriter. This film simply lacked that extra spark. Overall impression: 25%.

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%.

From a historical perspective, there might be a few reservations about this film, but the atmosphere of the rise of Nazism is portrayed authentically, and the casting is well done. The television format of the film didn't allow for any grand spectacle, but here, the focus is primarily on the story and the performances. Robert Carlyle handles the main role excellently; he has matured into a first-class character actor. Overall impression: 80%.

I've only seen the first two seasons, then this format got a bit tiresome for me. The series was preceded by a generous advertising campaign that set expectations very high. 24 is a typical commercial product, with its advantage lying in dynamic editing and a script that revels in dramatic twists, not to mention the lead performance by Kiefer Sutherland. On the other hand, the series is accompanied by a number of script shortcomings, such as the nonsensical and overcomplicated motif of the destroyed plane in the first season. There are also plenty of genre clichés from action movies and the invincibility of the main character. If Jack Bauer can do it, then why do Americans have trouble in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere? In the second season, the superfluous subplot with Bauer's daughter is evident, and similar criticisms could be found upon closer examination. Nevertheless, the dynamic plot and script twists place the series slightly above average. Overall impression: 60%.

Let's face it, the marketing didn't hold back with slogans like "first time on the screen," "original intertwining of animation and live-action film," etc., while here in the Czech Republic, we know that practically all the ideas and approaches that Robert Zemeckis came up with had already appeared in Czech cinema, in some cases even decades before Who Framed Roger Rabbit. On the other hand, none of those films featured Bob Hoskins in the lead role, didn't have such audience-friendly, gag-packed scripts, and overall didn't have that pleasant Hollywood pop culture packaging. Who Framed Roger Rabbit is a pleasant comedy, but from my perspective, it doesn't have a strong enough script to knock me off my feet. Maybe it's also because I'm not particularly drawn to the films it draws inspiration from and partially parodies. Overall impression: 65%.

Robert Zemeckis' masterpiece, an American variation of how a simpleton stumbled upon happiness without any effort of his own. A comedic journey through the history of modern America, where the main character, an innocent guy with a disability, traverses life and encounters famous figures from American history, even inadvertently playing a role in events like the Watergate scandal. Excellent casting, with situational and verbal humor. Americans love happy endings, but Zemeckis parodies the idea of effortlessly achieved happiness so much through his character that the whole film ends up feeling like a mockery of the traditional American way of life and the American dream. Tom Hanks excels in the lead role. Overall impression: 95%.

I like Joel Coen and Ethan Coen; they're among my favorite directors, but this one didn't quite work for them, and in my view, it resulted in their weakest film to date. It's noticeably weaker than the original version. Their characters this time are just superficial figures, and not even Tom Hanks in the lead role can save it. The biggest weakness is the screenplay overall; the quality of the dialogue is unsatisfactory, and the comedy simply lacks humor. Overall impression: 45%.

Otakar Vávra was an experienced and reliable director, originally trained as an architect, and he had a sense of composition, which is evident in this film. He excelled in crowd scenes, and he also had the support of the leadership of Czechoslovak cinema, so no expense was spared on the production, and he had the best actors at his disposal. Indeed, the film perfectly reflects the nationalistic sentiments of the official ideological doctrine of the time. The anti-German sentiment is clearly evident. At the same time, excellent neorealist films were being made in Italy, and modern cinema was clearly heading in a different direction. Of course, this film doesn't have much in common with medieval Czech history. Nevertheless, it's a decent watch. Overall impression: 60%.

American Psycho is one of those films that can be rated from one to five stars. From a technical standpoint, it's a decently crafted piece with good cinematography, editing, and especially strong acting performances, where most of the cast gives it their all, and it's almost a pity that the same level of performance isn't seen in a stronger film. Even in small roles, quality actors like Chloë Sevigny as the secretary shine. However, the problem lies with the content, which, while superficially flashy, is internally empty and decadent - scenes from the high society milieu, nightclubs filled with glamorous beauties and yuppies in elegant squares are typical. In short, it's a kitschy affair that, while somewhat faithfully capturing Bret Easton Ellis' literary source material, is quite indigestible for me. Overall impression: 40%.