Dionysos

The film captures the nearly twenty-four-hour-long self-destructive descent of one man, one archetype, and one mental world. The desire to obtain and understand abstract pure power, passing through wealth itself, the desire to predict, control, and live in the future, enjoying a primitive sense of superiority and strength without sympathy for the surroundings due to one's position. All of this collapses upon realizing that the future cannot be controlled and that death awaits everyone indiscriminately. In the end, it did indeed catch up with Eric Packer not only for how he lived but mainly for how he thought. The film is an above-average faithful adaptation of its source material, which is both a positive and a negative. The disadvantage is for those who have not read the book - then the film will probably turn into a series of scenes that are only understood by chance, or rather, or not at all... I cannot overly criticize that the film did not capture all the thoughts of the printed source, as that is simply a limitation of almost all films based on any book. I had not seen R. Pattinson in any major role before this, so I can objectively say that he does not (particularly) detract from the quality of the film.

I want the Cold War, apartheid, nuclear threat, and class enemies to return! A paradoxical sigh that could be uttered by many modern people living amid a values crisis in Western material society. Where are the times when people believed in (even if naively and foolishly) ideas and tried to change the world, fight, take action... In today's world, people have already resigned from searching for a higher meaning of existence and active efforts to make deeper marks in society through their actions. Today - in a world of triumphant market and seemingly clear evidence of the victory of Euro-American civilization - where it seems that the individual cannot change anything and can only drown in banalities, there is only one thing left - to immerse oneself in an endless feast, to indulge in hedonism, in which shallowness is a virtue and to gulp down "life" to the fullest. The confrontation of a man thinking within the confines of the past with his counterparts 20 years younger does not bring a clear resolution, only a bitter sobriety on both sides.

The overall tone of the film is hinted at by the expressive opening captions and the first introduction to the main character through his distorted subconscious dreams. Impulsive, fervent, and unpredictable painter Franco Nero decides to retreat to an abandoned country estate in an attempt to immerse himself back into his work, where he fully descends into the depths of delusions, dreams, obsession, and inner conflict. The horror element of the film is manifested during the painter's obsessive exploration of the past life of a beautiful aristocrat who lived in the house before him during World War II and served as his inspiration. The film is particularly pleasing with its surreal visions, the materialized dreams of the artist, and the blurring of the boundary between reality and imagination, culminating in a tragicomic ending.

Another in a series of bleak films that in a raw way and without sentimental embellishments capture the harsh life of survival in a depressing economic situation, set in gloomy tones and where the frosty weather serves as a backdrop to the pre-Christmas rush to emphasize the cold reality. As in any society, especially in the Western consumerist society, money is, unfortunately, a necessary means for even basic simple happiness, but when it is lacking, even an otherwise orderly person can succumb to an easy but illegal way to get rich. It is sad that (especially in the USA), money is perceived not only as important but as the main source of happiness (a new television, a nicer house, more expensive toys). Thus, the true "happy ending" is that this perception changes for the film's protagonists in the end.

In the office of the secretary of the national committee, there are pictures of Beneš, Masaryk, and Stalin hanging next to each other in a prominent place. In the same historical atmosphere, this film is being made, clearly advocating for the emerging socialist order and specifically for nationalized industry. However, it is not an orthodox building film, as the main role is played by human calculation, trickery, and slyness, accompanying the public tendering and assignment. With almost all of the numerous characters, we encounter some form of selfishness, self-centeredness, and often even such stupidity that even the intentionally positive characters did not seem particularly sympathetic to me (except for the main protagonist, whose unwavering altruism is one of the few explicitly black and white things in this film). Today's viewers will certainly be interested in the circumstances of public tendering, which are still unchanged, such as commissions for council members, personal favors, manipulation of the public, etc...

Alcohol is much worse than snake venom, which either quickly kills you or can be counteracted with serum. Alcohol slowly destroys a person and there is no cure for it. The unfortunate person must help themselves out of notoriety with their own willpower, but when mental strength is lacking... Even Josef Vinklář is unable, after his recently rediscovered daughter throws him what is probably the last rescue rope, to emerge from the partly self-pitying escape from responsibility, people, and the surrounding world. The final minutes are a sufficient warning for all those who like to drink excessively. "Why do you drink?" asked the little prince. - "To forget" - "What do you want to forget?" - "That I am ashamed" - "Why are you ashamed?" - "I am ashamed that I drink."

The film captures the reaction of a well-established, calm, exemplary, and capable husband of a beautiful woman, who thought that his marriage was also calm and exemplary, but who was mistaken both in this idea and in the idea that he knows not only his wife but also himself. For we can never know what is happening within a person, even if they appear polite or kind, for example... The reasons for the characters' actions are not easily revealed; their feelings and thoughts are hidden behind a difficult-to-penetrate exterior wall of ingrained behavior, and until the last moment, you cannot guess which emotion will emerge.

One day, the bored Frédérique spots a homeless girl from the streets of Paris, hoping to help her pass the time of her saturated life. She is motivated not only by the unique behavior of the unknown woman named Why but also, as the "Prologue" already reveals, by physical desire. The two proud individuals slowly grow closer until the architect Paul enters their tight relationship, forming a rather conventional love triangle in which the previously close women become hidden rivals. Why, just as proud as Frédérique, who always confidently resisted her situation even on the street, has no intention of giving up the newly acquired and still unknown happiness, even in the current danger of losing Frédérique's favor.

Earthly life is sad and violent, while the world of supernatural beings is magical and pleasant. In this film, however, things are definitely not like that. Yet in the supernatural world, you can at least eventually find justice. In the earthly world, no. Or yes? Just as Ophelia cannot reconcile herself with the (albeit inconspicuous) injustice done to an innocent creature and, as a result, becomes an innocent victim herself, Spain was forced to become a victim of Franco's fascism for four decades. Ophelia is rewarded for it in the fairy tale world. Spain, in the real world, may not seem like it at first glance, but there is still a chance - if the Spaniards were not willing to sacrifice the innocent for their own happiness, the new generation, even if it emerges from the horror of the previous generation, can experience more just and free times.

The pitfalls of the big city are unpredictable. For one brother, money, booze, and prostitutes can destroy a promising career, life, and character, while for the other, his gigantic altruism can paradoxically lead to self-destruction and more harm than good (it's no coincidence that all ancient and medieval saints end up crucified/dismembered/decapitated, etc.). However, the film's ending belongs to neither of them (despite the tragic culmination of their love triangle), but rather to the unobtrusive brother in the background, who until then was probably the most unremarkable character in the whole drama. It is he who carries the message that was very useful for Italy in its difficult post-war "neo-realist" times - to stick to honest work, not to come up with risky attempts to get rich, not to lose will and hope, not to forget about family, and grit your teeth and wait for a better world to come.