Stanislaus

In the case of The Quake, I could write practically the same as I did for The Wave. This time, the action moves from a small Fjord town straight to the Norwegian capital and the devastating catastrophe is more spectacular. When it comes to the genre and the plot, the film doesn't have much to surprise, but I still have to admit that the sequence from the collapsing skyscraper was really cool and managed to make me tense (it’s like a scene in Jurassic Park 2 and it never gets old). On the other hand, it is true that the film had a somewhat slower start and I think it could have easily been a quarter of an hour shorter. As for the characters, I found Kristian a little too annoying at times, and little Julia could learn to listen to adults in catastrophic situations. Despite all this, however, this is still a solidly made film within its genre that certainly won't get lost among its American "cousins". Plus, there has been enough destruction of New York and San Francisco.

The open ending of the first Alien vs. Predator called for a sequel, which we got a few years later, unfortunately with a qualitatively lower value. The sequel completely ignores the story, doesn't try to build a universe around the two dreaded monsters, and simply focuses on the action, which, while abundant, feels cheap and cluttered. The oppressive atmosphere is gone, and this time everyone gets murdered on sight, the motto must have been "The more holes in the head, the better!". The characters are flat, incredibly stupid and in fact it could be said they are just for number; the protagonists are mainly the two monsters (and the hybrid), but in this case they lack most of their "cult charm". As far as that ignored story goes, the film slaps several storylines (family, relationships, and misuse of technology) together, but they're only held together by force of will. As a mindless one-view action film, this movie can be survived, but that's really a shame because the material was solid.

The 1970s and 1980s saw two famous monsters – the Alien and the Predator – and it was only a matter of time before they would meet together on the big screen. Alien and Aliens and the first Predator are classics of their genre, but the same cannot be said for their first crossover. While Alien vs. Predator offers superior visual effects (considering the time it was made), it falls noticeably short on the story level and in building the oppressive atmosphere that was so impressive in the first two Alien installments in particular. It terms of screenwriting, this is a weaker film, which is why it prefers to rely on action scenes and the presence of scares, which it mostly succeeds in doing. Personally, I didn't mind the fact that the Aliens were portrayed as the villains, because while they are no worse than the Predators, they are still more sneaky, and therefore more suited to that position. If you turn off your brain for an hour and a half, Alien vs. Predator isn't all that bad a movie. P.S. A small ("insignificant") plus for the open ending!

I've seen a few animal horror films with bloodthirsty boars, but they were all from the 21st century, so I was curious about this slightly older piece. The biggest stumbling block in the case of Razorback is the absolutely appalling acting by (practically) everyone involved, and a pretty stupid script. We don’t get to see that much of the grunting beast, which can be forgiven given the time the film was made. But still, not to cast aspersions, I really liked the art design of the outdoor scenes, which in a raw magical way perfectly complemented the atmosphere of the arid and inhospitable environment of the Australian outback.

The Wretched compiles elements, plot twists and characters from other films in various ways – it's hard to come up with something new these days – but it still manages to surprise in places. The film doesn't have that many scary scares and the blood is also spared, but that's not a bad thing – as they say, less is more. Moving past the various genre clichés, I was quite impressed by the plot about forgetting and especially by the few surprises awaiting at the end. Last but not least, I would like to highlight the visual of the witch and the graphic design of the opening credits.

Stephen Sommers is a master of B-movies with silly dialogue and shoddy effects, and Deep Rising is a prime example of this, but unlike The Mummy or Van Helsing, the level of stupidity in Deep Rising is on a higher level. I understand that for many viewers, this cross between 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and Poseidon is a guilty pleasure experience, but for me it was an incredibly stupid film with a bunch of mostly unlikeable characters that you couldn't possibly root for. Given the film's ending, on the one hand I'm perhaps glad there wasn't a sequel.

It’s impossible to avoid comparing Dreambuilders with Pixar's Inside Out, which also took the audience into the depths of the human head, but this Danish film lacked a strong and complex plot. Dreambuilders does have an appealing premise that actually lured me to the cinema, and it is a pity that the makers didn’t let their imagination run a little more free and rather focused (again and again) on relationship-family issues and (a little bit obvious) lecturing the viewer. I have to say that the character of Jenny really got on my nerves, and therefore I completely sympathized with Mina's actions, but as it happens, even the good characters have their downsides. It’s a shame that the film didn't offer any downright funny, dramatic or action scenes that would have stuck in my mind more, perhaps only the "sweater dejà vu" had a bit of a sharper comic edge. As a result, I enjoyed mainly the dream world "behind the wall", whose limitless possibilities remained at times punishingly untapped.

Christopher and His Kind would have worked more as a documentary, because even though it was supposed to be a biopic drama set in the inter-war period and also themed around homosexuality, it lacked any of the stronger scenes I would expect in a similarly themed film, even if made for TV. I'm familiar with the film Cabaret, and I've seen A Single Man, but I didn't associate them with the person of Christopher Isherwood, so at least I learned something new about his life, which I take as the biggest plus of this film. Otherwise, it's mostly a rather mediocre TV production, which I find somewhat disappointing for its underutilized potential.

I like movies with dogs, and since I was quite curious about the behind the scenes of dog sled racing, I went to the cinema to see Doggy Love without hesitation. At first glance, the documentary impresses with its amateurishly grounded execution, which is both its strength and a bit of a weakness. I have to admit that after watching it I felt somewhat enriched with information regarding the subject of dog sledding and everything related to it, so in this respect the documentary mostly met my expectations. However, in the first half I was somewhat annoyed by the overly amateurish concept and dialogue of the "actors", which thankfully changed in the second half. The dreaded Finnmarksløpet race is definitely a great challenge and Jana deserves admiration for her determination and her furry companions for their perseverance and loyalty. Better three stars!

I'm not a political person and I know only the most familiar things about the first Czech president, so I approached Havel with a very clean slate and with a certain expectation, which was aroused especially by the cast and the eerily authentic resemblance between Václav Havel and Viktor Dvořák. I'm aware that the person of Havel has many supporters as well as detractors, and if this biopic is even half based on truth, I find Havel as a person both morally strong and weak. I was a bit puzzled by the initial brevity of the film and (for the uninitiated like me) by the certain anonymity of the characters - I didn't immediately associate Patočka and Landovský with Havel, even though Martin Hofmann is very similar to Landovský. I liked the theatrical metaphors like "the world and life is one big and endless drama" on the one hand, but at the same time I was bothered by their (understandable) theatricality. As far as the performances go, I was generally satisfied: it was clear that Dvořák had put a lot of effort into his role, and he was convincingly seconded by Anna Geislerová (Olga) and Martin Hofmann, who provided several humorous scenes. Despite the great cast and solid topic, however, the film lacked any of the stronger scenes that would have explicitly grounded me, perhaps only the final preparation for the speech came closest. Last but not least, I must mention the decent music and camera work.