Necrotongue

Oriol Paulo appears in two of my Top Ten lists, so I expect nothing but the best from him. When it doesn't happen, like in this case, I tend to get frustrated, affecting my evaluation just like the domino effect. Paulo usually amuses me with a cleverly intricate story, in which I am not sure at the end if I am watching a movie or if the movie is watching me and I am just playing the role of the viewer. The director and screenwriter in one often uses the script to trick his audience, just like an experienced football player uses body feints. These intricacies were lacking this time, which was a problem for me. The topic of psychiatric institutions has already been explored in such great depth that I can't imagine how the filmmakers could possibly surprise me. Holding my full attention for such a long time (the running time was quite lengthy) was practically impossible. However, even though I didn't enjoy it thoroughly this time, it wasn't a complete disaster. / Lesson learned: Everyone is sane until they talk to a psychiatrist.

I understand that shooting a big-budget film about the Hussite Wars would be extremely expensive (almost insanely so). Still, I consider it a cop-out that Petr Jákl placed Yan Sheeshka, Sigismund "The Red Fox," and Henry Rosenberg in a period from which we know nothing about Žižka. Instead of a historical film based on Jan Žižka's true story, it is a pure fabrication, which couldn't go wrong because there is no solid foundation. Anyway, the original title of this film is Medieval, and in this regard, Petr Jákl succeeded. Although historical fencing experts may disagree, I liked the action scenes. What I consider a mistake is that the film was heavily promoted under the title Jan Žižka. With the original title and without historical characters, it could have been an average medieval action flick. To sum it up, the action scenes were the only thing I liked about this film about the beginnings of a future military leader and promoter of jigsaw puzzles made of hay wagons. The story fell flat on me and didn't stir any emotions. Despite the creators' undeniable effort, it left me somewhat indifferent. / Lesson learned: If you plan to shoot a historical or "historical" film, find out the difference between a bow and a crossbow.

This is what fairytales would have been like if they hadn't been modified so that children wouldn't have lifelong trauma from them. This film brought stories that resonated with my present self simply because there was very little singing but a lot of medieval influence instead. If you are considering what to show your children, you'd better avoid this film unless you want to explain many unpleasant matters to them and, at worst, hire a therapist. For an experienced and emotionally worn-out viewer like me, it was an enjoyable experience full of the Italian perspective, very interesting costumes, and stories that amused me more than I had originally expected. / Lesson learned: When children are told fairytales with a happy ending, does it distort their view of reality? 4*+

I found it somehow dull. For die-hard believers, it must have been a nerve-wracking experience. I see it as a rather unexceptional film full of religious lunatics capable of penetrating an infant (in this case, with a dagger) because of an eight-century-old literary vomit of another fanatic while maintaining very atypical eating habits. I would probably rate it higher if the plot weren't so painfully obvious. I could tell who the bad guy was right off the bat, and then it was a bit boring to watch the creators trudging to the expected result. I didn't particularly enjoy myself, and my rating reflects that. / Lesson learned: Do you want to take a trip back to the Middle Ages? Become religious.

Depressing Tony has returned to the scene for the third time, and despite my great concerns, it was another success. After the second season, I was expecting it to be much less funny (hence the concerns), but although the third season by no means reached the quality of the first, I have no reason to tear it apart in any way. Surprisingly, I could tune in to the more serious tones in the end and quite enjoyed it. / Lesson learned: Yeah, life is still a bitch.

The sixth episode was rather grim, and jokes were scarce. As I have said many times, I expect sitcoms to make me laugh, and the show failed in this regard. The tone was mainly serious and emotionally intense, but I'm giving it five stars anyway. Why? Because it surprisingly resonated with me. As an atheist, I don't have a positive attitude toward the supernatural, a higher power, and similar nonsense. Still, I have no negative comments about the concept of angels presented here. I am not what you'd call an emotionally sensitive viewer, but Ricky Gervais, despite all the overt emotional manipulation, made me think hard, which I liked. / Lesson learned: Laughter yoga was extremely terrifying. I saw it for the first time, and I'd like it to be the last.

I like how the title has a double layer to it. I was excited to see the movie, and now I'm disappointed. I soon began to feel that the creators were trying to imitate Quentin Tarantino's style. Badly. Don't get me wrong, when it comes to ripping off his ideas, they succeeded. They even managed to find a fake Vincent Vega and Jules Winnfield. While Lemon didn't draw quotes from the Bible (probably not to offend believers, non-believers, and heretics), but from Thomas the Tank Engine, and I think we can all be glad that it didn't come to Teletubbies or Harry Potter. There was even a female villain, but unlike those in Tarantino's films, this one didn't have a cute, innocent face. Instead, it was that murderous monster that had recently brutally depopulated an unnamed tower. And her face made it clear to everyone that she was happy to do it again. Despite all the negatives mentioned so far, I was entertained, sometimes almost against my will. The action scenes were well-executed and even funny at times. For example, the assisted suicide of that South American cop made me laugh out loud; it was like in Tucker & Dale vs. Evil. If the creators hadn't blatantly ripped off Tarantino and used more of their inventiveness, my rating would have been more generous. / Lesson learned: Before traveling by train, get properly vaccinated. 3*+.

I'm not going to boo this time. The product placement wasn't excessive, at least I didn't notice, which I consider a big plus. I imagine it could work very well as a play, which it was based on, but I was not too satisfied with the movie adaptation. There were some funny parts, but also many clichés and melodramatic scenes, which I found hard to believe. Kristýna Hrušínská's acting performance wasn't very convincing. However, I will admit that Milan Šteindler didn't make me cringe which hasn't happened in a long time, and Zdeněk Žák was perfect. / Lesson learned: If I had two terabytes of porn on my harddrive, I would now be a terabyte and a half in debt.

If I didn't know that it was filmed by the same director who also made my favorite movie, The Thing (1982), I wouldn't believe it. I still find it hard to believe. This film had a considerable number of flaws, and some moments startled me. No, it wasn't fear; it was just that there were some poorly executed scenes with weird action or messed-up logic. The logic was being disregarded throughout the whole time. Plus, many action scenes looked very poorly done, and some of the performances weren't exactly up to par. Yet, I'm giving it four out of five stars. Why? Because it was a typical action B-movie without any unnecessary message, which is often supposed to compensate for the lack of a plot in movies today. Nobody was trying to guide me ideologically, and no matter what objections I had, the story itself wasn't bad at all, so despite all the negatives, I had a good time. / Lesson learned: An angry group of miners is dangerous enough; doping is redundant.

I guess I had expected more from the movie than I ultimately got, so I was pretty disappointed. Concerning the acting performances, I can't fault the film; my issue was with the script. It seemed too thin for such a runtime, so I was sometimes bored, which was a shame because I enjoyed myself in certain moments. If the creators had maintained the whole thing at that level, I would give it a more generous rating. Both main male characters were interestingly written. While Félix was a typical star enjoying fame and everything that comes with it, Iván was a typical poser, thus more annoying. The most interesting (and entertaining) character for me was undoubtedly Lola. Penélope Cruz really stood out. But even quality actors couldn't hide that the film was largely uninteresting, so it won't get more than two stars from me. / Lesson learned: Never start a fight/brawl in the kitchen, on the stairs, on the roof, or above a tank with acid or unquenched lime.