gudaulin

That organized crime played a significant role in the building of American society, not only during Prohibition, is widely known, and the intertwining of American political elites at the local level with the underworld could be the basis for epic TV series that would grab the attention of crowds while still staying true to reality. Scorsese could have undoubtedly directed a magnificent story without using exaggerated elements like in the case of Gangs of New York. Even the opening scene of the battle between two clans looks like something out of a dark medieval fantasy, full of characters who seem to have just stepped out of a sadomasochistic roleplay session. It's all shot for effect, with brutal violence and exaggeration that would be more fitting for a comic book. What works perfectly is the scene that truly breathes a romanticized, yet still somewhat accurate, history of America's most famous metropolis. The cast, led by Leonardo DiCaprio and Daniel Day-Lewis, is also solid. However, from a director of Martin Scorsese's caliber, I expected something more than a costume drama with a B-movie theme based on these non-existent underworld rituals and their glorification. The reality was much more down-to-earth. Overall impression: 60%.

Czech cinema cannot complain about not having attractive themes. In fact, Czech audiences will rightfully feel that Czech films repeatedly devalue these attractive subjects with their approach. The story of Radovan Krejčíř has occupied the media, as well as the police, the justice system, and political representation, for many years. His name has become known even on an international scale, where it has become a symbol of corruption and organized crime in South Africa. His case could have made a great action movie - if it hadn't occurred in the Czech Republic. If someone has the skill and talent, they can make something like Mesrine: Killer Instinct, which, even though you know about Mesrine's life experiences, works excellently as a thriller and representative of the adventure genre, which also says a lot about the time and French society. If a Czech filmmaker and Czech production company take on this challenge, a film will be created that has less tension than an average newspaper article. Gangster Ka simply does not work as a genre film, it does not evoke emotions, and it is simply boring. Having a narrator was a complete mistake, and the direction is unexcitingly routine. No, I won't even give it two stars. It's a waste of time that perfectly illustrates the state of Czech cinema. Overall impression: 25%.

One has to admit that director Paul McGuigan is a master of his craft and has also gathered a decent amount of experience, so he currently belongs to the significantly better part of what British cinema has to offer. Paradoxically, I would have liked his film more as a classic straightforward gangster story about how things work and how new generations alternate within the gang, rather than as a psychological study of a deviant person, envy, and violence in general. The film portrays gangsters as people whose moral standards are shifted compared to the general population. However, McGuigan doesn't handle this psychological aspect very well, so the film sometimes teeters on the edge and the script, along with the motivations and actions of the individual characters, somewhat drags on. My weak three-star rating is ultimately saved by the cast, led by experienced actors Malcolm McDowell and Paul Bettany. Moreover, the depicted violence at times very much stands on the edge and can evoke disgust in many viewers. Overall impression: 50%.

I haven't seen this in the theater, but because I am well-read in Fassbinder, I understand that he wanted to settle things with the German bourgeoisie, the establishment that never fully separated itself from its war past during Fassbinder's short life, with all the conformists against whom the left-wing agitator defined himself. Thinking about it, he was bothered by everything and everyone. With knowledge of German history, everyone probably understands why a big Jew appeared in the play, and with awareness of Fassbinder's sexual orientation, you will understand why his characters have such complicated sexuality. However, this context is lost when the play is transferred to the Czech environment, and what remains is a clumsy attempt at great art. I also have a fundamental problem with Gabriela Míčová. Her prostitute Romi, at least as I understand her, was supposed to be in the midst of those selfish monsters, the only human being who allows herself to be exploited by others, and one should feel at least some sympathy for her. I don't know if it's her acting or if her personality has this effect on me, but she seems just as repulsive or unsympathetic to me as the rest of that strange gathering. Overall impression: 25%.

The minister, as a member of the political elite, has a simple life and enjoys without hesitation the privileges that his position provides for him - starting with a demanding mistress and ending with a government villa. However, a union demonstration shakes his position to such an extent that resignation seems like a reasonable solution. The minister returns back to his hometown, back to his roots, and to his friends and acquaintances. Paradoxically, he realizes that he feels much better here than in his prestigious position. If anyone thinks that I have just spoiled something, they are mistaken. In the case of Iosseliani's film, it is not about the plot at all, but rather about the style, mood, and poetry. The director uses absurd exaggeration, populates the image with bizarre characters, and employs peculiar humor that will not appeal to everyone. However, I get the feeling that Iosseliani sometimes gets lost in his poetry and loses the key to what he wants to communicate to his viewers. On the other hand, compared to Havel's Leaving, which is somewhat about the same thing, it is in my eyes the unequivocal winner, simply because it is at home in the world of cinema, while Havel couldn't free himself from theatrical thinking. Overall impression: 60%.

In the first scene of the film, the protagonist is sitting in an airplane that obviously found itself in serious trouble, and we are watching terrified passengers who are putting on oxygen masks and, unlike the protagonist, are struggling to cope with mounting panic. This scene builds up anticipation for an emotional spectacle, but in the following moments, the creators set a completely different tone and we observe a typical festival production about how a teenage hero deals with traumas from his childhood and searches for his place in life. It could have been really interesting if I didn't get the feeling that these emotions are somehow artificial and the protagonist, just like the whole film, is under sedatives. In my opinion, the screenwriter, as well as the whole crew, were also under the influence of calming substances. I don't believe in the dialogues of the film characters and their emotions, and the film seems to me like a pleasingly calculated affair for the festival jury at the Sundance Film Festival. Overall impression: 40%.

The original comics were great. They were aimed more at adult readers with their cynical humor, and although the creators of the animated series have kept the basic outline with all the characters, they have shifted toward non-conflicting family entertainment aimed at a child audience. It's not bad, but it's completely different than what I had hoped for. Overall impression: 50%. The uniqueness has simply vanished, and we are left with routine and mainstream.

Darkplace did not become for the horror genre what Red Dwarf is for fans of the sci-fi genre. The creators lacked greater moderation in setting the level of exaggeration, and a sense of defining the boundary when the joke needs to be cut off because intelligent viewers only need a hint, and there's no need to overdo it. Darkplace is too literal and attacks at the first signal, although it certainly cannot be criticized for a lack of ideas and wit. It functions as a funny parody of B-movie horror series and can accurately capture their numerous weaknesses, but on the other hand, this trashy production represents an all too easy target for ridicule. It does not create a functional micro-world and does not bring forth compelling characters that you would want to follow long-term and look forward to more sequels. It's too nonsensical and it exhausts itself after a few episodes. A six-part series was more than enough for me, whereas with Red Dwarf, as a little boy, I was excited about more seasons. The creators don't only go after the horror genre, as it can also be seen as a parody of series set in a hospital environment. Last but not least, the series also points out phenomena such as the transformation of the roles of female protagonists because in the 80s, macho heroes were still ruling and Ripley was just an exceptional phenomenon. For me, the funniest parts were the speeches of the creators, which exuded immense ego and an effort to defend a production that has minimal credit. Overall impression: 70%.

One possible definition of political realism could be that it is a somewhat idealized reality free from disturbing elements, accompanied by mood music and poetic stylistic dialogues. Perhaps the closest example of it in modern French cinema was approached by Jean-Pierre Jeunet in his popular and critically acclaimed Amelie. Poetic realism, therefore, somewhat magically "enhances" the present and enchants the viewer. However, Gates of the Night had the opposite effect on the audience when it premiered. Although Carné retouched the post-war face of Paris with his imagery and dialogues, it was not enough for contemporary viewers who wanted to see different content and hear stories full of heroism and exemplary punishment of traitors. Carné's portrayal of swindlers and cunning turncoats brought unwanted tones into the discussion of that time and showed more than the French were willing to tolerate at the time. For the director, it was an unpleasant failure, and the film quickly disappeared from movie theaters. Today, it is a matter for film clubs and late-night broadcasts on TV art channels. However, it can offer viewers an impressive example of magical realism in the European concept. Overall impression: 75%.

Gattaca is literally an embodiment of the genre essence of sci-fi and in every aspect it is a highly above-standard movie, where all the ingredients that make up a good artistic work are excellently harmonized and balanced. An imaginative screenplay utilizing the latest scientific discoveries and speculating where these findings and new technologies can lead society. Sensitive, highly professional direction that can evoke strong emotions without cheap effects, cast which has no visible weaknesses and brings a lot of great performances. Gattaca is actually already here, we just haven't fully realized it yet, but in about twenty years we will be fully facing what is depicted in Gattaca. Overall impression: 100%. It is astonishing how such an exceptional film could be created with such a small budget.