Kaka

Proper and precise building of a grounded, sordid and dramatic, actually in a way spy story. The last two episodes are set to be a real inferno.

The scene with the father is understandably one of the most memorable. A chilling experience that Arthur had to endure.

Very good, but it doesn’t beat the previous episode in terms of drama and the tightness of the story. It's a bit undermined by an unnecessarily expository script with twists and surprises the kind you usually see only in films with "super smart scripts". The surprises and coincidences were many and not very believable given the trends set in the beginning.

The British version of Gangs of New York. It may lack the lavish production design and pompous sets of its US sibling, but it's still a well-paced crime drama with brilliant dialogue and cleverly written and well-developed characters for a much smaller budget. The stage is set for the next season.

I wouldn't overstate it with the return. Stallone is far from the intensity of the new Rambo. This is neither a comedy, nor action-packed enough, nor a clever heist film. There are too many coincidences and it is too straightforward with various plot inserts that are too obvious and for effect. There is little action and you have to wait for it for a long time. There are a few solid scenes, but they don't raise the adrenaline as much as you would expect from an old action school flick, and that has nothing to do with the age of the protagonists, they are completely fine. Only the screenplay should have been much better – even in honor of the 80s B-movies. Jim Caviezel is brilliant.

The Czech Tony Scott directed the Czech version of American Gangster, and there is a noticeable difference unfortunately in most aspects, maybe except for Vica Kerekes, who’s always good. A shallow film with a bit too much humour and not enough mafia moments, terrible video clip-like music, and an absolute absence of anything seemingly epic. The effort is appreciated, but it’s not groundbreaking.

Very similar style to Clint Eastwood's Mystic River, just as austere and economical, with utmost emphasis on editing and minimalist musical composition. While that film is more complex and interconnected in terms of screenplay, Prisoners relies on a linear plot and open, long scenes full of emotions, when the camera does not move. It is dense, strong, and uncompromising. However, it is also filmed with sensitivity, with an exceptionally effective ensemble cast. Hugh Jackman gives a great performance.

The first one was simple, but also time direct and enjoyable. Red 2 has the same ills as, for instance, the sequel to Ocean’s Eleven: a layered plot that is confusing, crammed with different locations, jarring shifts and cuts, etc. It has no juice and the second time around it's a tired borefest. Not much action either, and the stuntmen are too visible. If it weren't for Helen Mirren in an unusual and unique role, and John Malkovich in full blast, this would be crap seen a hundred times that belongs in the toilet.

Probably the first essentially non-action film with Jason Statham that makes the viewer think. This is called progress. But they succeed only halfway. The ideas are nice, Statham occasionally tries to act, but I still didn't believe him very much as a homeless man.

Basically a franchise reboot. It has almost everything in common with the first one: a tight group of people, a survival style - meaning no extravagant plot, no mythology, we don't learn anything additional. The script relies only on how diverse the characters are and how strong the motivation of each of them is to survive, you won't find much else, maybe a digital dog and a few well-made creatures. The chemistry between the characters works quite well and there are also a few decent lines and funny situations in the end. It's not completely stupid or bad, but it will be disappointing for those expecting a continuation of the second film. This is solely about Riddick being such an interesting film character that will make squeeze some money for a movie ticket.