gudaulin

As a serious drama with a slightly twisted crime plot, it doesn't work because the story, or rather the behavior of the characters, is not from this world. On the other hand, if I approach Comedy of Innocence as a mysterious affair, it becomes a mysterious, slightly chilling plaything about alienation and dysfunctional family relationships, dominated by two top-notch actresses. And that's exactly how I perceived it. As a fan of Isabelle Huppert, I ultimately lean towards giving this poorly rated film a weak four-star rating. Overall impression: 70%.

Unfortunately, the attempts at comedy by members of Ypsilonka usually missed the mark and caused unease in me. The theater clearly relied on its loyal audience, who were apparently satisfied with being with their favorite actors at the Christmas party. My two stars are an expression of recognition for the actors who play musical instruments and can sing decently. Their carols were quite nice, even though they were widely seen on TV during the Christmas season, and I would simply expect more from Ypsilonka. Overall impression: 35%.

Operettas represent such a decadent way of entertainment that with a reasonable dose of detachment and irony, one can endlessly enjoy them. Overall impression: 55%.

I admit without hesitation that while I have a relatively good overview of the world of film, television, and theater, music is essentially terra incognita for me. Years ago, I shocked my colleague who innocently asked me which song by Frank Zappa I liked the most, I answered him just as innocently that I didn't know that gentleman at all. That ended it for him, and he looked at me with the utmost contempt. Similarly, until this day, I didn't know Jerry Lee Lewis, but I enjoyed Great Balls of Fire! all the more. The film exudes the excitement, temperament, and animality of classic rock 'n' roll, which broke the conventions of the time and outraged the moralists of that era. The film is catapulted into the four-star category by Dennis Quaid's excellent performance, possibly the role of a lifetime for him, and also by a very young Winona Ryder, who played the underage bride of the wild man. However, the screenplay doesn't strike me as particularly great, and from the otherwise very colorful life of Lee Lewis, it only focuses on a rather short episode with a tabloid feel to it. Overall impression: 80%.

From the large number of various cover versions, the one with Robbie Williams and Nicole Kidman stands out significantly and clearly surpasses the well-known version with the Sinatra family. And if I am already evaluating and commenting on the music video, it is because it has not only musical but also cinematic value. Nicole Kidman unmistakably shows her great acting skills and Robbie Williams is a great showman with considerable acting potential. Together they portray a loving couple, which is a joy to watch. The chemistry between them simply works great. Additionally, the video can be seen as a parody of the 1950s and their dream of domestic happiness. Overall impression: 90%.

I am ultimately ruthlessly reducing my original two stars to one. It's not that it's an entirely catastrophic disaster, but generally, I incline more toward clever movies and Waterworld unequivocally belongs to the second category. If it had been possible to maintain such a level of self-irony as the devilishly exaggerating Dennis Hopper, who was evidently enjoying himself, I would have been much more generous because then it would have been an entertaining and stylish rubbish, but Kevin Costner evidently took it too seriously for the mess he actually created. For those who just want to relax with the film, who are after some action and spectacle, it doesn't have to be a bad choice at all and they can comfortably add two stars. Overall impression: 25%.

This needed more. Either in terms of the budget and visuals, or a more inventive script and better character work, because after approximately 15 minutes, I came to the conclusion that I was watching a 2-star film, and until the final minutes, I didn't have to change anything about that realization. The film should either be a spectacle or have the ability to evoke strong emotions, none of which happened. Sebastián Cordero showed that sci-fi doesn't necessarily have to be made with huge investments, but that's about it. Overall impression: 40%.

Andrew Niccol has two super blockbusters to his credit, Lord of War and above all Gattaca were able to inspire me and when I add his work on the script for The Truman Show, his merits are exceptionally high in my eyes. Simone may not have been a film that could be talked about in superlatives, but it was still a very decent and definitely above-average affair. On the other hand, In Time is a decline in quality from all sides, which is rarely seen. This is especially painfully true in comparison to the genre and the thematically related Gattaca. I would describe Gattaca as a cultured and clever film, this film is banal shallow Hollywood nonsense without a hint of logic. True, it is filmed at a fast pace and with undeniable directorial professionalism, and it has "quality" (but at least attractive) actors in the lead roles, so I will give it a second star, especially considering Niccol's previous merits. But I do it with a truly heavy heart because this film is simply, to put it bluntly, stupid. Overall impression: 30%.

The Thomas Crown Affair will be engraved in your memory due to its style and star-studded casting of the central couple. In the world of cinema, it's not anything groundbreaking, but it is filmed with perspective and is enjoyable. The chess duel scene can be considered the most beautiful and nonsensical flirt ever to appear on the silver screen. The brilliant deductions of the charming investigator, which could outshine even Sherlock Holmes himself, may bring about an indulgent smile, but they only confirm that the film works much better as a romantic love story than as a crime film. Overall impression: 75%.

The golden times of Ypsilonka, when the theater ensemble was cherished by both critics and a large community of fans, were during the 80s and 90s, i.e., this play in a way concludes this famous period. Aging can't be stopped for either people or an ensemble, which did not renew itself quickly enough and could not replace the most popular stars on which the repertoire was built. As long as Petr Vacek continues his one-man show, it is excellent, and it gets even more attention with the arrival of Jiří Lábus, who mentally and physically crushes the host (black belt, third-degree). With the arrival of Jaroslava Kretschmerová and the approaching resolution, the play somewhat loses its impact, and I don't claim at all that it is solely the performance of one actress on the stage. Nevertheless, for me, it is clearly above average, but it is important to consider that the play has a crazy tone, and the actors, especially Jirka Lábus and Petr Vacek, intentionally overact. Overall impression: 75%.