gudaulin

When something is done for the third time, usually you already know how to do it, and even though the previous two installments of the series were not bad in any way, the third Indiana Jones represents the real peak of this mini-series and in a way also one of the peaks of its genre, which is adventure film. It doesn't take itself seriously, and that is extremely important, while also having a sufficiently high budget and an inventive screenplay that doesn't let the viewer breathe for a moment, with a great cast led by experienced Ford and Sean Connery. The two of them complement each other perfectly, resulting in a fascinating spectacle. The scene of the tank battle or the rescue in the underground labyrinth will stay in the viewer's memory for a long time. Another excellent music. Overall impression: 100%.

From a formal point of view, i.e., from the perspective of the film craft, there is not much to criticize about the film, almost nothing. It is an emotionally and extremely expensive blockbuster, which rightfully belongs in film history, especially with its opening 15-minute battle sequence. There could be endless things to say about Steven Spielberg's directing abilities, about how he can work with visual composition, build up a scene, and direct actors - and it would all be praise. However, what concerns me more is the formulaic script, the same problem I had with Spielberg's Schindler's List. When I compare this film to Klimov's drama Come and See, for example, I clearly feel Spielberg's superficiality. To label this film as just a popcorn flick would be grossly unfair, as there are incomparably worse films of its kind. It is undoubtedly an attempt at a serious war drama, but I fail to understand why Spielberg is not satisfied with real stories and real war history and feels the need to produce fiction. Sometimes the unnecessary pathos also bothered me, especially toward the end. Overall impression: 70%.

After elementary school, Jan Svěrák decided to take a risk and try out a substance that had not yet been tested in the Czech Republic, which was a genre mix between parody, comedy, love story, adventure film, and philosophical allegory. While The Elementary School is a stylistically pure retro comedy, which was written with certainty, Accumulator 1 had a difficult time finding an audience in the Czech Republic due to its genre ambiguity. This was partially due to the risky casting, which cast Petr Forman in the lead role, and his co-star was also an unknown actress in the Czech Republic. Additionally, at the time of its release, the Czech Republic was not sufficiently saturated with Hollywood action productions, which Svěrák evidently made fun of. The cosmopolitan film, to a large extent, unfairly earned a reputation as a weaker film both from critics and audiences. On the other hand, the film's budget and the technical aspect, which was especially demonstrated in scenes from a parallel reality behind a TV screen, are at a very respectable level. It is not a bad film, even if only for its originality and uniqueness among Czech films and the high professionalism of the screenwriter and director. Overall impression: 75%.

Juráček was primarily a screenwriter, but he also signed as a director for one of the most interesting films in our film history when, in a brief period of creative freedom, he made a clever allegory on the absurdity of life in totalitarian Czechoslovakia based on the famous novel Gulliver's Travels. It is not only a key work by Pavel Juráček, but also the most significant role for actor Lubomír Kostelka. The plot is not crucial, decisive is the atmosphere built on black humor, sarcastic sarcasm, and immense exaggeration. The regime never forgave Juráček for his film, and so this author ended up really bad in the end. If there is a film work in the second half of the 20th century in our country that reflects Kafka's literary style based on absurdity, it is precisely The Case for the Rookie Hangman. Overall impression: 100%.

For a very long time, American studios had to adhere to the so-called moral code and especially the productions of big studios were characterized by incredible prudishness. Then things opened up a bit, which led to a lot of nudity, vulgarity, and unnecessary films that relied on the cheapest pandering. Secretary is not an erotic film, as it is rather a humorous story about the search for sexual identity and coming to terms with it. While homosexuality has been successfully portrayed multiple times and certainly does not surprise as a topic, sexual deviation, which plays an important role in the film's story, still has a touch of something unusual, rarely seen in fictional films. Maggie Gyllenhaal and James Spader act with perspective and Secretary can be considered a pleasant film in the style of the American independent scene. It is a film that, although cautiously and gently (in fact, it moves within the boundaries of classic romantic comedies despite its tragicomic and dramatic elements), still pushes the boundaries of style and theme. Overall impression: 80%. It is, among other things, a film about tolerance, and it will probably be appreciated by those who have long understood that the boundaries of so-called normality are moving elsewhere than in the previous century and that love has many forms...

I noticed something interesting - those who rate Signs very highly often have great reservations about The Village. For me, it's the opposite. While I consider The Village to be M. Night Shyamalan's masterpiece, I not only disliked Signs, but it disgusted me. That's because the film touches on a genre that I like very much, and I know quite a lot about it. However, it does so in a very superficial way, using ideas from B-movies of the 1950s. Its portrayal of aliens and the risks associated with them made me laugh in the movie theater. In that case, any attempt at a "thriller" and "horror" is doomed to failure. Where others talk about the "great atmosphere and mystique," I sometimes felt like the director was openly making fun of me. Signs does not work as a psychological film for various reasons. What remains is the traditionally good work with actors, and the children acted very decently, while Gibson delivered his standard performance, he did not suit his role in my eye. He looks much better in action roles. Shyamalan is very good at working with details and sounds, but this time it wasn't enough to create the good atmosphere that his filmmaking stands for, due to the poorly chosen approach to the subject. In particular, the incorporation of religious elements into the story really didn't sit well with me. Overall impression 40%.

I by no means claim that The Village is M. Night Shyamalan's best film, but I like it the most. Emotionally, it may resonate with me more than the acclaimed The Sixth Sense. In one of Švankmajer's films, the heroine says: "You have to close your eyes, or you won't see anything." In the case of The Village, it is not necessary to close your eyes but to embrace the director's game and let your imagination carry you away. The film doesn't function as a thriller or even as a horror, and anyone who thinks in terms of traditional genres will inevitably be disappointed. However, The Village, despite many contrary claims in the reviews, offers a range of very good acting performances, directorial ideas, and above all, atmosphere. Overall impression 90%.

From an emotional perspective, it is an almost perfect film that is based on real events that took place during the infamous genocide in 1993. Excellent screenplay, quality casting, and clever direction. The result is a film that has been successful worldwide and has managed to convey the cruel events in Central Africa much better than the media. One of the best films of recent years. Overall impression: 100%. However, it is not a film that is capable of conveying a good mood, it is a distressing testimony about a country that is deformed by its poverty and ethnic hatred.

Gattaca is literally an embodiment of the genre essence of sci-fi and in every aspect it is a highly above-standard movie, where all the ingredients that make up a good artistic work are excellently harmonized and balanced. An imaginative screenplay utilizing the latest scientific discoveries and speculating where these findings and new technologies can lead society. Sensitive, highly professional direction that can evoke strong emotions without cheap effects, cast which has no visible weaknesses and brings a lot of great performances. Gattaca is actually already here, we just haven't fully realized it yet, but in about twenty years we will be fully facing what is depicted in Gattaca. Overall impression: 100%. It is astonishing how such an exceptional film could be created with such a small budget.

For most critics, the film Brazil represents the peak of Gilliam's work, while Twelve Monkeys is considered too mainstream, where Gilliam's creative vision was hindered by strict producer oversight. The truth is that Brazil is indeed a pinnacle work in certain aspects (especially in terms of its visual design), but it is also very unbalanced, narcissistic, and difficult for most viewers to comprehend. On the other hand, Twelve Monkeys is an exceptionally balanced genre film, built upon a strong theme, an intelligent script with a highly emotive plot, and a superbly crafted tragic yet ambiguous final scene. Even a disciplined Gilliam presents his viewers with absurd ideas from his workshop (the punishment chair), Orwellian situations (scientists with gifts above Cole's tortured body), and plenty of clever shots with a sense of composition (Cole's ascent into the abandoned city with wild animals on the ledges of the buildings). The excellent cast is led by Bruce Willis, who delivered top-notch character acting without wrestling holds and punches, unlike in his other films. The crazy Brad Pitt showcased once again that he has a very impressive range as an actor, beyond just a handsome face. We also get the demonic David Morse in a small role. There are no weak performances here. For me, this is the absolute pinnacle of the sci-fi genre. Overall impression: 100%. Excellent work with the time paradox within the genre. Even the very tragic theme of a hero desperately trying to stop a catastrophe is lightened in several scenes with small sarcastic jokes.