gudaulin

Spike Jonze's film was preceded by a reputation as a cultured romantic spectacle with refined acting performances, artistic visuals, and a sophisticated aesthetic. In short, it was one of the hot candidates for the Oscars. The praise was not lying. If the film were a date, then She has a fine appearance, a meeting with her will definitely not offend anyone, and it is a date on a level where you don't feel like wasting your time with someone mediocre. But unfortunately, a connection with her didn't develop for me. I have no problem with the casting, as Joaquin Phoenix is an excellent actor and delivers exactly what is expected of him. He gives his character a sadly melancholic and even tragic dimension, and his loneliness gradually starts to hurt you physically. I also have no problem with the filmmaking in any way. What I do have a problem with, however, is the genre direction, as well as the way the characters are portrayed and the lack of identification with them. I also have difficulty with how the screenwriter works with the material. This theme directly invites a comedic approach, and in the first few minutes, it seemed to be heading that way and I was enjoying it. But as soon as it turned into a study of human loneliness and emotional dissatisfaction, I started to distance myself from the film. This is especially true when the director presents his protagonist as a victim and someone I should sympathize with. So, who is the victim then? Technology? It is just a tool that can be used well or poorly. If you look into a contemporary restaurant, you will see several couples who show much more interest in their mobile phones than in each other. But those phones are not to blame for their inability to communicate. Computers can save time and perform a huge amount of work, or you can mindlessly waste a lot of time with them. Online discussions can serve as excellent platforms for exchanging opinions and information, but also for empty talk and trolling. If Theodore is someone's victim, then he is a victim of his own nature and actions. I see a man prone to depression who refuses to admit his illness and wallows in his own self. I see a blind man who overlooks the values that are right in front of him. I see a fool who prefers a substitute where he can - and he really can - have a full-fledged relationship. There are very few film characters that I dislike as much as Theodore, and during the final scene on the rooftop of a high-rise building, when the protagonists are about to escape from themselves, I had the strong urge to kick those two cowards down myself. As for love for a computer program, in our world, there are countless substitutes and replacements for a romantic relationship. You can travel, immerse yourself in your work like a workaholic, or dedicate your feelings to fish in an aquarium. A computer program, if cleverly set up, could become a highly seductive and efficient substitute for love, but it will always be a one-sided affair. I grew up on the works of Stanislaw Lem, and they are marked by a deep skepticism toward the possibility of understanding between different civilizations, cultural circles, or even animal species. It is absurd to assume that if I cannot understand, accept, and love other members of the same species, I will gain and maintain a love for artificial intelligence based on completely different values and perceptions. Such a program would cease to fulfill its function precisely at the moment when the term artificial intelligence is fulfilled and it surpasses the barrier imposed by the program. By the way, this development would be much faster than Spike assumes. Overall impression: 45%.

I want to start my commentary on Hereditary with a reminiscence of a horror series and a very famous horror film. Do you know what the most impressive thing about the whole Hellraiser series was? It was not the creatures from hell, the screaming victims, or the splashes of blood. The most impressive scene is when an unknown man enters a bazaar and looks intensely at the salesman, who returns his gaze, and dryly asks, "What do you want?" - "The box." - "It is yours. It always has been." The viewer doesn't know where the screenwriter and director are leading him, but from the construction of the scene, he understands that he has encountered something fateful and extremely unsettling. The famous film The Shining doesn't show puppets in every other scene, but creatively and cleverly builds atmosphere and gradually unsettles not only its protagonists but also the viewer, letting them know where the boundaries of erupting madness and encounter with irrational evil begin. The director simply knows well that we fear most what we cannot see and do not know... From a single film, I cannot tell if Ari Aster is a director who people will go see just because of his name, but from our first encounter, I know that he is a skillful craftsman and, in terms of direction, clearly represents above-average quality within the genre. However, the situation is worse with his role as a screenwriter. What caught my attention in his title are basically two things that differ from the genre average, which - let's admit - is quite low. For one, unlike the genre average, Aster takes his time with the exposition. For a long time, he saves the jump scares and puppets, and the moviegoer has the feeling they are watching a psychological horror about a family falling apart due to alienation, guilt, bitterness, and increasing hatred. For an average genre fan, Hereditary will be slow and relatively intimate. Even the supernatural motif that appears roughly a third of the way into the film tends to be considered something that is meant to deceive the viewer for some time, and you do not attach much significance to it. Unfortunately, in the final third, the author descends onto a well-trodden path of supernatural horror with a satanic motif. It's a shame, as the psychological and mysterious aspect, which dealt with the unknown, was much more interesting to me, and I consider the result rather a malicious deception from Ari Aster. In terms of logic in building the story, the final part unfortunately clashes somewhat clumsily with the previous one, and as a viewer, I am not very satisfied with it. Either surprise me with something atmospheric that manages to precisely impact my emotions and psyche, and reveals nothing about the essence of the unknown evil, or introduce a complex, functioning mythology of the world you want to invite me into. The second thing is the successful casting choices, where, above all, Toni Collette and Milly Shapiro are true treasures for the film, and they could have been worked with even more intensively. Similarly, the musical aspect of the film works perfectly, creating tension and a growing sense of depression and doom. It is precisely because of them that I ultimately lean toward giving the film four stars. Overall impression: 70%.

Heroes is by no means a B-series, as its reception in the United States was exceptional, and indeed, expected. It stems from the tradition of American superhero comics, but it is naturally adapted to the needs of today's mainstream audience. This is not a problem at all because the superheroes are much more down-to-earth, and the series does not overflow with the same level of pathos and exaggeration that is typical of traditional American superhero comics and which is rather laughable in the European context. Of course, there have been many films and series on this topic in the last twenty years, but Heroes managed to come up with a very elaborate and ever-evolving world. It is a fantasy that does not differ much from our familiar world, it is just much more thrilling, mysterious, and colorful. Your neighbor or schoolmate could easily be a superhero. Some are unaware of their exceptional abilities, while some, on the other hand, are unsure how to deal with them, and some abuse them. Evil in the series is cunning, ruthless, and strong enough to maintain the tension until the last second. The screenplay is carefully handled, although an attentive viewer will eventually realize that the heroes with supernatural abilities often unnecessarily complicate things. Despite their best efforts, Heroes could not avoid some genre clichés, such as the villain's end, or rather the escape into the second season really didn't surprise me. In terms of direction, the episodes have maintained a decent level regardless of the director, and the cast was also appealing with the authors utilizing several previously unseen young faces, who did not disappoint alongside such established actors as Malcolm McDowell or new stars like Ali Larter. The screenwriter strike in the United States halted the production of the second season of the series. My relatively sober assessment is based on my cooler attitude toward superhero themes in comics, as I prefer realistic European comics or avant-garde fantasies like "Sandman." Overall impression: 75%.

During the premiere, I considered The Man with the Iron Heart a waste of time, but when it appeared on TV years later, curiosity won me over to see if such harsh and venomous critiques from movie fans were truly deserved. Well, they were. I want to emphasize that I didn't care at all about the historical accuracy of the events portrayed; I simply saw it as a genre film from a Hollywood studio that aims to entertain and appeal to a global audience, where there is only a minimum number of knowledgeable viewers familiar with the historical events of World War II. However, the film fails because it doesn't know what it wants to be, or rather, Jimenez tries to cram everything into it. Superficial psychology, romance, adventure, war, political drama, etc. It doesn't come together as a whole, lacking any atmosphere or significant memorable performances. If the film manages to entertain in a few moments, then it's an unintended charm. For example, when the paratroopers conquer the Alpine peaks after jumping, or when surprised German soldiers are greeted with machine gun fire while attempting to infiltrate the paratroopers' hiding place. It is watchable, and I can understand giving it three stars, but a good film is something completely different. Overall impression: 35%. Valkyrie is a case of a Hollywood blockbuster that managed to use the resources of a major studio for something positive. The Man with the Iron Heart is the complete opposite.

Louis de Funes has been one of my favorite actors since childhood and I usually watch his films with a considerable amount of nostalgia. Hibernatus is one of the comedies that arrived much later when I had already shifted my perspective as a viewer and became somewhat tired of Funes' acting, which is based on a single type of hot-tempered choleric persona (although perfected over the years). Within the genre and considering when it was made, it may have been a decent film, but time cannot be stopped and it cannot be ignored that the film practically relies on a single idea... If I want to see a film about hibernation, I would rather choose Sexmission. Overall impression 45%.

A routinely shot cheap B-movie about an alien parasite that inhabits its host and forces them to commit criminal acts, and about its pursuers. From a sci-fi or horror perspective, it's an insignificant affair, lacking in terms of set design due to its limited budget. It's a one-dimensional film for action enthusiasts. Overall impression: 40%.

To be honest, 2 stars are perhaps too luxurious a gift for a B-movie with a terrible screenplay and clumsy acting performances, but I will be accommodating today and will appreciate primarily the atmospheric music of my favorite Queen, led by Mercury, and a few impressive flashbacks to medieval Scotland. Nothing else holds up today, even though it is evident that this title greatly elevates the nostalgia of older users and the conformism of younger ones. Overall impression: 40%.

Comparison with Greengrass's Captain Phillips is immediate and shows the fundamental difference between the American and European approaches to the drama genre. The American adaptation focuses on a strong individual, a top professional who fights a heroic battle against evil and can rely on military power and the exceptional position of his country in times of need - both of which were unquestioned at the time of filming. The Danish version is more modest and presents the opposite in all aspects. It is a civilian, unpretentious affair where weapons do not play a decisive role, but rather steady nerves in endless negotiations and the factor of (dragging) time. In A Hijacking, do not expect any favorite thriller or even action elements, as the focus is on creating authenticity and depicting the psychological state of the captured sailors. The performances are convincing but subservient to the idea of a slowly unfolding procedural drama. It is not a boring film, but if the viewer prefers entertainment, Captain Phillips is a more satisfying choice. Overall impression: 80%.

Up to this point, I had no idea about the existence, let alone the acting and singing fame of Hildegard Knef, and I must admit that even my encounter with this autobiographical film did not convince me that it would be any sort of a loss or mistake. Not even the big eyes of the otherwise sympathetic Heike Makatsch worked on me, no matter how hard she tried. I remained indifferent to her character until the end, and I consider the film to be a mere filler of broadcasting time. Overall impression: 40%.

In a way, it is characteristic of Czech animated production of the post-November era that even a renowned creator like Pojar had to rely on foreign contracts to be able to film at all... Pojar has a decent reputation in Japan, although far from being as prominent as Švankmajer. I think that the fact that the film was shot as a "hired job" and not as an author's film is evident, even though Pojar is a hundred percent professional. It simply lacks enthusiasm, although it is otherwise decently done work. The animation is of good quality, as long as we do not compare it with the latest films from large studios focused on producing animated blockbusters - that wouldn't be fair. The use of a combination of techniques is interesting and unconventional for Pojar - traditional Czech puppets with computer animation. The incorporation of Pojar's traditional poetics with oriental motifs is also attractive. We are reminded of these both by the music and the visual elements, as well as by the appearance of the puppets. The story is weaker, and I am far from certain whether this slow narrative will have the power to captivate today's children accustomed to a different pace and narrative shortcut. Overall impression: 60%.