DaViD´82

Simple a reality TV concept connecting Dragon's Den (investors looking for a project) with Hell's Kitchen (a behind-the-scenes look at the management of a wannabe restaurant). The first season makes the mistake of having a repetitive format, there is a minor focus on the business side of the required investment (ROI, financial analysis, salaries, locations, rentals, etc.) and too much space for a (however nice) host at the expense of the restaurant owners and investors. Also, the concepts are confusing and conflict with each other, while some prospects are asking just for “a few pennies“ to move from a successful food truck to a brick-and-mortar restaurant and possibly launch a franchise, while others are after a “Michelin" restaurant. Both concepts require a completely different approach, different investors, different skills. The first series is supported mainly by the participants themselves. The second series kept only the basic idea, but otherwise changed almost everything: format, course, selection, stress tests, simply everything. Suddenly, it's one class better and more interesting, because in each episode, one fine-dining concept runs independently of another, where a chefs with experience from top restaurants mostly try to stand on their own feet, and one of them tries to move up from his food truck. The former can cook, but struggle with running a restaurant, the behind-the-scenes work beyond cooking and with numbers. The others generally already have experience with how it works with suppliers, the financial side, etc. But without exception, they are surprised that just taking the few meals from the food truck into the restaurant and raising the price of a burger is not enough, as they also have to rely on their team and have to make money from drinks, and that it is not possible to handle one order after another like in a food truck, etc. I could still imagine slightly more space for torturing them with numbers, but at the end of the day, everything comes down to the dreams and ambitions of the contenders rather than about peeking under the cover of the investor's side of things. Unfortunately, we need to do some research on Google to find out whether the investment deal was a success or not. The good thing is that you will know where to go on your next visit to London. | S1: 3/5 | S2: 4/5 |

The movie strives to be a “kind of sequel of The Big Short", but this time about offshore and shell companies. The movie wants to “exaggeratedly shine a light" on the serious background practices that are difficult to understand for financial laypeople and that only a few people have an insight into but that have affected each of us. But it does not have such vigor and drive, nor does it capture the profit-seeking sophistication and interconnection of the system, nor the implications for the lives of specific people. It has good moments and there are storylines where it almost works as it should. But where the model could captivate even an unfamiliar viewer, Soderbergh fumbles and gets bogged down. Which is strange, as he has undoubtedly addressed a more accessible and tangible topic. What's worse is that the caricatural Oldman/Banderas duo make faces all the time (without any exaggeration, they are in the annoying mode of the naughty devil and the water goblin from The Watermill Princess). As the narrators, they give the film a completely different level and atmosphere than the rest of the actors.

I know I’m supposed to say, if I had it to do over, I wouldn’t lie. But the truth is ... I would lie earlier. And better.  A true-crime series about how the system does not work (which has a significant impact on individual people) until the moment it finally starts working, better late than never (which has a significant impact on individual people). The biggest complaint about the series is that after a focused and disturbing introductory episode, it is split into two timelines about two different genres. While one line (about coming to terms) follows the original storyline, where one unfortunate decision starts a chain reaction of other unfortunate decisions, the other storyline is far too standard and procedural, which benefits mainly from the performance of Wever and her empathetic policewoman, which is in conflict with her type. However, the first storyline does not have the necessary space and omits the most interesting sequences of those three years. The latter, thanks to the standard course and compression, on the other hand, gives the impression of an ordinary series and also omits the most interesting part and at least also the epilogue involving “what the hell happened with the hard drive".

Detailed portrayal of characters in the form of a family drama that plays out over several decades in the context of the historical twists and turns in China. In terms of structure, it is the embodiment of “a great novel in film form". Although it lasts three hours, it feels like six, at least. But not in a bad way, because Wang can be so enthralling that at the end of the movie you do not feel “that you have seen something", but “that you have experienced something". And if you leave the cinema with such a feeling, then you will be fine with the film's many shortcomings. And there are quite a few of them; a strong emotional twist in the end, diluted to perhaps twenty-three endings, around half of the running time comprises way too many digressions before it gets back on track. It is not always consistent (paradoxically, the best scene of this intimate film is a speech give to a proletarian crowd, which seems to be from another movie by a different director). The editing is either terribly amateurish or a case of not everyone being able to keep up with the phenomenal central duo.

Yes, it's basically trivial and in surprisingly many ways less sophisticated than it looks (apart from idea with laughter and the final “relativization"). Yes, its quoting/following of Scorsese’s examples in the form of Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy is too obvious and consistent to be considered a plus. It's not surprising in terms of its course or outcome. At the same time, however, it is undeniable that what Sher can do with the camera, Guðnadóttir with the droning (non-)music and especially Arthur Fle ... Um, Joke ... Um, Phoenix, together make a film that is disturbing, gets under your skin and won´t fade away when movie is over. Even without an apologetic excuse “in the context of a comic-book movie". Which means a lot.

As an interactive experiment, Late Shift is uninteresting and the movie clearly missed the bus, because others have already done the same but better. In addition, the choices for a similar type of experiment are not very common. And after all, with a few notable exceptions, it's more of a semblance of choice, as you alternate the main character's reactions to the event rather than directly influencing the event. That wouldn't necessarily be a problem if the non-actors were good, but they are not. If the directing was good, but it is not. If at least the script had been good, but in fact it is not. It is appalling and doesn't make sense. So, as a movie, it doesn't work at all. Nor does it work as a game, because the two dozen meaningless yes/no decisions are simply not enough for a “full-length". Instead of feeling that you are creating the movie, you feel more like a passive spectator who has to avoid falling asleep between long boring non-interactive blocks before you can make another choice. Moreover, most choices are one-word and, given their outcome, clearly misleading. The creators specially designed repeated passages, but they doesn’t work, precisely because it is hard to watch due to poor quality and it cannot even be played due to the lack of meaningful choices.

The cult Czech one-liner "Don't be angry that I'm bothering you again, but I forgot to ask if you have a cellar. Do you have a cellar? And could I see it?" elaborated in the form of a feature film consisting in (by far not only) a thriller mixed with a black-humor class satire in which you never know what you can believe as a spectator. This could have easily ended up as an embarrassing mishmash (and this has happened to Bong Joon-Ho in the past), but it resulted in a scathing masterpiece that give the South Korean wave a second wind. Second wind? This is not a simple revival, but a full-fledged comeback in several respects.

As a whole (i.e. three episodes), this is the best of the whole European quartet. Like the others, the dialogue is very well written and cast is a great fit. The series toys with the connecting format, but the highlight by far is the way it handles the overall course of the interrogations, twists and “overlapping sauce" around them, whether that involves the social aspect or that in front of/behind the mirror.

Horror subgenres are bound by traditions, and this applies to “folklore horror" even more. It can’t surprise anyone, if we are talking about a movie that is centred around following and respecting traditions, right? Maybe that's why not many filmmakers are eager to make something like this. Because dealing with the fact that the viewer will know “where the movie is going" is certainly not easy. You will not only know it, but you will expect it and maybe even require it. What's worse, you get into a position where you reluctantly expose your work to the  pedestal of cult classics with The Wicker Man at the top. Nevertheless, several good films in this vein have appeared in recent years. Aster's Midsommar is the best of them (although it is paradoxically closer to the new Suspiria than the original The Wicker Man (1973). After all, as with all the best horror movies, “scaring/disturbing" is just a means of looking at ordinary problems. So Midsommar is primarily a chilling psychological study of a dysfunctional relationship/breakup, and what goes hand in hand with that is the fact that this study is disturbing, unpleasant, magnificently shot, enriched with some gore effect and performed in a riveting way.

Easygoing and fast paced. It could have a little more pulpiness, more active involvement of Grace during the finale, and especially a cameo from Vin Diesel with a speech about family.