gudaulin

I do not understand the director Vejdělek very well and his latest films completely miss the mark for me. With three stars, he probably reached his maximum with Vaclav, which he will most likely never surpass. Similar controversial material has been made many times in world cinema, and in most cases, more convincingly and with greater emotional force. On the other hand, Vejdělek can rely on the great names of two acting generations. Emília Vašáryová is excellent in the role of a mother and Ivan Trojan proves that he is a major star of contemporary Czech cinema. Trojan is perfectly natural and believable in the role of a mentally unstable village fool. Occasionally, the script stumbles, but within the framework of Czech cinema of the first decade of the new millennium, it is, I'm sad to say, solidly above average. Overall impression: 60%.

From the times of Svěrák's 'Jízda,' we know that a film can be made in our country for just a million, but this encounter with a Czech road movie didn't offer much more. If I were to be critical, I would say that this is what perfect film emptiness looks like. Comparisons to 'Bezstarostná jízda' (The Ride), which were mentioned in several comments, seem almost offensive to me, and as a generational statement, 'Jízda' doesn't work at all. Simply put, it doesn't have much to offer; the music from the Buty band is too little for a cinematic experience. Overall impression: 30% (just to fit into 2 stars and not be accused of harming Czech cinema).

I'm sad to say that this claustrophobic spectacle didn't impress me at all. I acknowledge that the screenplay writer and director achieve maximum results with minimal space and resources to keep the viewer's attention, but it's still a very relative success. What matters to me is that I can't believe in the film. Granted, with other genres, I don't concern myself as thoroughly with the logic of what I see, and I'm not strict in my assessment because otherwise, I wouldn't enjoy them at all. However, the fact that this thriller is based on nonsense should be easily uncovered even by an elementary school student. Overall impression: 40%.

It's only been a few days since I wrote about Just Another Love Story, the previous work by Ole Bornedal, that it shouldn't have an ending and I would be satisfied. The second encounter with his work brought me the same experience. For three-quarters of the runtime, I was floating in the clouds of a highly outstanding spectacle, enjoying the excellent camera work, sensing the rising tension and alarming signals of an approaching crisis, appreciating the scenes of emotional impact like a thunder strike - and then everything went down the drain within a few minutes because the director pushed too hard and didn't understand the psychology of the crowd or the individual. As a result, the typical film construct is exposed. Undoubtedly, it is superbly shot, but at the same time, unreliable. From such material, much more could have been extracted if Bornedal had tamed his imagination, not chased too many rabbits at once, and fixed the logical gaps. The film notably resembles Peckinpah's Straw Dogs, and I wouldn't directly speak of plagiarism, but certainly of strong inspiration. However, that film seems more believable to me and more impactful in its consequences. Additionally, it lacks the strangely reconciliatory ending. Nonetheless, I have no problem with giving this film three strong stars. Overall impression: 65%.

The creative start of Alfred Hitchcock was slow, and the famous director has a number of forgettable titles to his name. However, with Rear Window, a period of relatively rapid succession of his most significant films opens up, only to fall back into mediocrity in the following years. This crime thriller with comedic elements is about the fact that even a view from a single window can provide countless information about one's surroundings. It is also proof that you don't need to change locations and sets to make a film attractive to the audience. The entire film is limited to a single location, the camera simply captures the view from the window of the main character, ignoring what is above or below, everything is simply across. The director even chooses a format that creates the impression of a view from a window. The attentive eye of the bored protagonist sees the small dramas and gradually reveals what the relationships between the residents of the opposite factions look like. From the fragments of collected information, he eventually uncovers the real crime. The director's excellent craftsmanship cannot be denied, and as a special bonus, we can admire the charm of the legendary Grace Kelly. Overall impression: 90%.

Horror productions often resemble a merry-go-round, where a successful film is usually the starting point for a whole series of inferior sequels and the genre actually recycles a few successful models. The Wicker Man stands out from the genre's compartments and plays with its viewers, just like it does with its protagonist. Policeman Howie comes to the island to solve the disappearance of a local girl, but from the very beginning, he faces strange reactions from the local population. Common conventions, rules, and laws recognized on the mainland do not apply in this place. A sinister premonition turns into certainty that a terrible crime is imminent, and that turns into a determination to save the victim's endangered life at all costs. The film uses motifs from the horror and thriller genres, but it disregards their traditional props and, in the end, it is closer to a very dark comedy. It overturns traditional Christian morality (from which the gothic novel emerges as a predecessor of modern horror), ridicules it, and gradually leads its principled protagonist into a fateful trap. The Wicker Man is not particularly profound or complicated, but it is surprisingly functional and above all entertaining. Overall impression: 75%.

I classify similarly tuned films as pure maliciousness. An experienced genre fan knows what to expect when the label spy thriller appears - chases, shootouts, hand-to-hand fights, and breathtaking action. However, you will be disappointed because none of that happens in this film. The film belongs to the stream of realistically conceived dramas, which consider authenticity as their strongest aspect. After all, the film was based on a true event, the scandal of the discovery of an Israeli spy in the American government once seriously shook the traditionally good relations between the two countries. After a brief introduction, where the plot introduces the viewer to the training of young spies, the screenwriter focuses on two secret Mossad operations in recruiting new agents abroad. Despite its longer duration, I certainly didn't get bored, but it is necessary to emphasize that the film has a more intimate tone and gives up on all the favorite genre clichés. It is driven by dialogue and appears more as a television series. However, those who are willing to overlook the above will definitely find something in this espionage game, although its quality is less than, for example, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. From the cast, I would like to point out Sandrine Kiberlain, the teacher from Little Nicholas who has a quite spicy past as a sensual call girl and a secret service agent who gathers information in bed. Overall impression: 65%.

Queer is the term for all those who defy the common norms of human sexuality, and therefore, many things fit into it. This journalistic program evidently does not worry about the feedback and consequences of their broadcasting, and it does not acknowledge taboos and stubbornly follows its own path. Sometimes it seems that sex can be practiced in many forms, for example, between a bisexual transvestite who is engaged in prostitution and a hypersexual lesbian with dominant tendencies. Only one of these options, rather eccentric and marginal, is the classic act of intercourse between a man and a woman. Queer can be witty and playful, it can bring interesting information from a world that only a few are allowed to glimpse into, and it can be urgent in defending the rights and freedoms of sexual minorities. However, it is often annoyingly self-assured and proudly proclaims its "otherness." The program forgets that if I have a private party, anything that suits the participants can happen there. But if I make it public, I should expect that many people may have different standards, and what they see may evoke unexpected and unwanted reactions. Queer can also be heavy-handed, unfunny, and parasitic on the outputs of celebrities. In short, it has uneven quality and one never knows what to expect. Overall impression: 55%.

I've seen too many films by Alfred Hitchcock to consider him an undisputed master of directing - too often I watched in disgust a story that, despite its fame, must have been naive even at the time of its creation. However, Hitchcock did not gain his reputation for free, and there are several titles where I nod approvingly and say, "Yes, this still works after all these years." I place Vertigo in the elite group among such titles as Psycho or Rear Window. It is a film about a murderous conspiracy, where Hitchcock used his favorite motif. An average guy is maneuvered into a terrifying mystery game that emotionally marks him for the rest of his life. Hitchcock's favorite interest in psychoanalysis does not come across as amusingly here as it does in the case of The Man Who Knew Too Much. Hitchcock combines the crime genre with romance and enriches them with mysterious and sensual elements. With ingenious camera movement, often directed into the depths, and disharmonic music, the director excellently evokes the feeling of the protagonist's turmoil, highlighting his uncertainty and fear. Vertigo represents excellent craftsmanship, a journey to uncover the identity of a fateful woman full of hints, mirror reflections, and playful use of color contrasts that can be appreciated even after repeated viewing. Vertigo belongs among the creative films that paved the way for new film methods and elements. Overall impression: 90%.

We all know films that are not suitable for children under 15, and even films that are only accessible for individuals over 18. However, there is a category of films that should be inaccessible to a wide group of candidates for marriage because otherwise, the already unnecessary group of singles will significantly expand, and thus the low birth rate will decrease again. I include Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? in this group, which represents the perfect opposite of all romantic comedies about partnership. It is a bitter drama about a marriage that is held together only by mutual hatred and the opportunity to mentally torture and humiliate each other as cunningly as possible. The screenplay is based on the play of the same name, and Mike Nichols had previously only had experience on Broadway. This was his film debut, so he did not even pretend to shoot anything more than an impressive theater play. For the overwhelming majority of the film, it gets by with just one set and four actors. Nevertheless, although it is practically unbelievable, thanks to the astronomical salaries of Taylor and Burton, it was the most expensive Hollywood project of 1966. However, the bet on the scandal-ridden married couple paid off - curious viewers speculated on how much the film fiction resembled the real marriage of Burton and Taylor - as they often appeared in public the same as they did in the film. Perhaps my 5 stars pertain more to the author of the original work, Edward Albee, but the drama runs smoothly and the atmosphere soaked in cynicism, anger, and alcohol works excellently. Both main actors also deliver masterful performances. Overall impression: 95%.