gudaulin

Genny has come a long way during 4 seasons of development from a spoiled weakling mafia brat to a killer and leader of street criminals, to an entrepreneur who tries to play the role of a respected citizen in front of the public, forgetting the roots from which he emerged. He doesn't succeed much because the burden of the past is too great and the risks that arise from those who haven't forgotten on both sides of the barricade are considerable. Genny clears his surroundings of the obstacles standing in his way, and he doesn't even hesitate when it comes to his own family. At the end of the journey, his father could be rightfully proud of him because his son has achieved much more than his father could have dreamed of. Despite its seemingly episodic form, the series has a cohesive storyline and character development leading to a dark catharsis. Overall impression: 85%.

When the screenwriter miraculously revives a dead character from the past and when you start to feel a certain repetitiveness and fatigue in the endless bloody shootouts between rival gangs in Naples, combined with the feeling that the number of dead is approaching Syrian civil war battles, it occurs to you that it may be time to end the series. Though it still works to some extent. The harsh and tough soundtrack, guys who just need to give you a fierce look to make you drop your wallet and run away in despair, charismatic villains with whom you experienced their victories and defeats in previous seasons. But in the fifth season, the approach of the screenwriter changed, maybe due to fatigue from the subject matter. He started playing strangely with his characters and it no longer adheres to elementary logic. Strange conflicts that make no sense, go against the interests of the actors, deny their psychological profile, and ultimately even the development in previous seasons. It was fine, but it's good to end on the highest note, and the fifth season falls a bit short. Overall impression: 65%.

A disturbing, intelligent thriller with a provocative theme and an even more provocative climax, which pits law and justice against each other, i.e., the criminal code and morality. It even explores the boundaries of ethical behavior by relativizing the concepts of good and evil. Its characters are not black and white and are also exposed to extreme situations that require truly fundamental and difficult decisions. The clever script has several significant twists in the perspective of the characters and their actions, and the film can be watched not only as a brilliant detective story but also as an excellent psychological drama. Moreover, the film is brilliantly cast and professionally directed and acted. I have absolutely no problem giving it five stars. Overall impression: 95%.

I associate Fincher with "precise craftsmanship" rather than a "film event." I got plenty of that in Gone Girl. I definitely do not regret going to the movie theater because the big screen highlights all elements of Fincher's filmmaking art. But then there is the plot and the screenplay, and I'm not as satisfied with those. It's a typical artificial construct, another one in the endless series of American films about highly intelligent psychopathic manipulators and their ability to escape justice. While watching, I couldn't help but think of Primal Fear, which made a name for Edward Norton. The film can be in any genre, but I need to believe in it, and I simply couldn't believe in Gone Girl. The film is simply too well-crafted for me to consider it lighter entertainment. As for the emphasized social-critical dimension toward the media, we have already seen that countless times in American cinema and elsewhere, often done better. For me, it gets 3.5 stars, with the certainty that Gone Girl will have so many enthusiastic fans that it definitely doesn't need the 4th star from me. Overall impression: 65%.

Phillip Roth is considered one of the most acclaimed writers in the world today, and each of his literary works evokes enthusiastic reactions from renowned critics. However, literary awards tend to elude him and his books are usually not among the bestsellers. He does use amazing language and can analyze the movements in society and capture the nature of his character excellently, but he is a very unpleasant author because even though he writes with humorous exaggeration, he is sarcastic and ruthlessly cruel to his characters and readers. That is actually how it is with this film. It describes the story of a girl from a successful family and a young man who is still searching for his way in life. But it's not a pleasant romance, but rather a caustic look at a certain social class and its rules. America never had nobility, but it has been and still is socially divided, and its upper class is well protected by social barriers and membership in exclusive clubs. Roth, through Larry Peerce, ridicules the rich manners of the successful Jewish community and the bourgeois attitudes of his protagonist's parents. The girl, although she looks at her parents with a critical view of the rebellious youth of the 60s and finds the conservative ways of the previous generation alien to her, cannot exist without her parents' wealth. The young man Neil, although he instinctively feels resistance to this environment and glosses over the events around him somewhat like Oscar Wilde, cannot offer a meaningful alternative. Overall impression: 80%.

A smart and above-average satire, not just by German standards, on so-called "ostalgia" - the nostalgic longing for the old certainties of real socialism in the former East Germany (GDR). We know this phenomenon in a weaker form in the Czech Republic as well. The film is built on an excellent idea supported by a well-developed script and decent, imaginative direction. The actors are well-cast and mostly good in their roles. However, those who can truly appreciate this film are the ones who lived through that era and understand it. Overall impression: 85%.

This is a film that is much more about depicting the relaxed atmosphere of the 60s with the arrival of rock and roll, sexual revolution, and liberal society than telling a story. However, it suffers from the fact that despite the presence of numerous top-notch and popular comedic actors from Britain and overseas, the script fails to bring out fully developed characters from the actors and sell all members of the crew to the audience. Many of them are simply criminally underutilized. Pirate Radio is more of a mishmash of entertaining scenes, among which unfortunately there is also a fair amount of filler in the style of sex-crazed groupies, wild parties, and so on. At the same time, I think that even the main character could have been cast with a more charismatic actor and the script could have given him more space. Perhaps the best part of the movie is the moments with the minister, who is portrayed as a caricature of traditional British conservatism and puritanism. Overall impression: 65%.

In many respects, an exceptional film that can be considered a political timeless manifesto of liberal and democratic values, freedom of speech, and association. This intimate drama deliberately devoid of any potentially disruptive entertaining elements subordinates everything to the impression of period authenticity and the content of the message. The director attempts to create a timeless allegory of the eternal conflict between abstract democratic ideals and the down-to-earth exercise of political influence exposed to the temptation to abuse concentrated power, through the conflict between a courageous journalist and a populist politician of one era. The film is in black and white, it is measured and has civil acting without star mannerisms, and attempts to capture the atmosphere in a documentary way. The film is dialogue-based and requires an attentive viewer. Overall impression: 95%.

We have an endangered animal species on the brink of extinction, difficult living conditions in central Africa, and a brave woman who does not hesitate to sacrifice her current life and give up the comforts of civilization in favor of fighting for animal rights... Is it possible to find someone who would give only two stars to a film with such a subject? It is indeed possible. The film is as thin in its plot as stool after a salmonella infection, it is overly long, which I unfortunately prolonged even further by falling asleep three times in the first half and having to watch that part of the film again. The screenplay is very average and overall, Gorillas in the Mist heavily relies on the message of the film and the myth surrounding Dian Fossey. Her life story is exactly one of those romanticizing fairy tales that are so enjoyable to listen to thousands of kilometers away from the actual events, in the absence of knowledge of reality. Dian Fossey was actually a highly contradictory person, and while the screenplay lightly touched on some of her eccentricities, it by no means depicted them in their entirety. She was a self-centered individual who fell in love with gorillas with the uncritical love of an animal lover who lets their pets sleep in their bed and eat from the same bowl. She did not care about the problems of the countries where she resided and moved within the local community with the ease of an elephant in a china shop. The omnipresent poverty and malnutrition of black children excited her much less than the death of a single gorilla from the group she observed. Because she sacrificed her personal life for her passion, gorilla conservation became an obsession for her, and she waged a private war against poachers, which she eventually paid the price for. By the end of her life, she had become essentially difficult to get along with. Sigourney Weaver, of course, humanizes and improves her character. The actress already had a few highly successful commercial hits at that time and was earning hefty pay; however, as it goes, she longed for festival success and Academy recognition. However, those are usually not given for lead roles in sci-fi horror films. The lead role in this autobiographical drama of this caliber was a deliberate calculation for her journey to an Oscar. As far as I know, she at least received a nomination. My overall impression, 45%, is influenced by my relationship to the actual character of Dian Fossey, although I do not deny her contribution to saving a species. Supporters of Greenpeace and retouched biographical narratives can easily add two stars. By the way, there was nothing mysterious about Dian Fossey's death. I even get the feeling that the killer is known today.

Gothika is a highly polarizing film, with a subpar script full of illogical constructs on one side and solid casting and excellent direction on the other. It depends on whether you want to think about the how and why... or surrender to the atmosphere and enjoy the ride. If you choose the former, deduct 15-20% from my rating. I chose the latter and came out with a 70% overall impression. For Halle Berry, it's a rewarding role that she handled with honor - definitely above average for her - and Penélope Cruz performs her usual standard, which means she did well. There were several scenes that startled me or gave me a feeling of unease, and what more can you ask for in a horror film? Gothika will never belong to the top of the genre, but it's a film worth watching once.