gudaulin

The viewer realizes that what comes around goes around when watching how the flawless machinery of the organization of contract killers begins to creak, mistakes and inexplicable failures start piling up, and the gang boss starts to feel like he's in hot water. For many years, he sent others to eternity, now he is succumbing to paranoia, thinking that someone is trying his own tricks on him. The movie is a carefully crafted work in every aspect, and it is a joy to watch especially thanks to the amazing camera work. I won't give it five stars due to the overly constructed script - the assassinations may be perfectly combined games, but in real life, they would likely fail. Otherwise, I have no objections. The hesitant reviews of many are rather related to the fact that they expected a somewhat different genre and a different kind of spectacle. It is not an action film in the least, and certainly not in the spirit of the famous Hong Kong action movies. It is also more suited for a festival audience than for regular pop culture fans. Overall impression: 80%.

The fact that Iñárritu has been part of the directorial elite for a long time is known among fans, and with The Revenant, the Mexican director only confirmed his position. The film represents top-notch filmmaking and is impossible to overlook not only within its genre but also in terms of the year of its creation. In many ways, it is the polar opposite of commercial blockbusters. It is a slow film, despite the initial bloody intimate battle, and not striving for cheap effects. One can talk in superlatives about the cinematography, which captures fascinating shots of the harsh mountainous landscape of the American Midwest, the desperate struggle for survival in an almost hopeless situation, and the magical hallucinogenic images unfolding in the protagonist's mind. In terms of the plot, it is an emotionally straightforward story of betrayal and subsequent revenge, interspersed with insane survival across the freezing hostile mountainous terrain, which does not forgive weakness and hesitation. For Leonardo DiCaprio, after his drug trip in The Wolf of Wall Street, the fight with the enraged she-bear is the second exceptional scene that will go down in film history. DiCaprio does not showcase any grandiose character acting, and besides, not much can be seen under the tangle of disheveled hair and massive beard. However, the filming required extreme physical exertion from him; he literally had to wear out his role and surely went through a lot. The true star of the film for me, however, remains the cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki, who confirms his exceptional qualities. The American West is not portrayed in the film as a romantic place or a promised land but rather as a place where harsh conditions for survival prevail, and most of the energy is spent on securing basic human needs. Despite its undeniable strengths, The Revenant will not receive 5* from me. Iñárritu is, after all, a considerably better director than a screenwriter. His hero represents a master in survival, whom even James Bond would envy. Escaping from an Indian encirclement or enduring a grizzly bear attack is one thing, but endless immersion in the icy water of a mountain river gripped by the cold of winter and crossing snowy mountains is another. Since the tragedy of the Titanic and the Allied convoys to Murmansk, we know how long it takes for a person to succumb to cold water, and it is not even hours, more like minutes. Glass would have frozen to death countless times over. To top it all off, a pursuit of a fugitive by two men ensues. I understand that Iñárritu needed a spectacular ending - a typical western finale of a man-to-man fight, but he should have handled it more cleverly (for example, with an avalanche). In real life, at least a dozen exceptionally motivated men would have set out after the thief who turned the fortress inhabitants into beggars. Overall impression: 85%.

Mississippi Burning is not only a high-quality crime drama, but also a political film with a clearly defined opinion, and ultimately, an artistic portrayal of a real case that stirred public opinion in the United States when three activists against racial segregation were murdered. The film is one of Hollywood's most significant contributions to the pressing issue of racism. There are plenty of crime stories, but films with uncompromising political stances are far less common. It is not a typical genre film, but rather an appeal against the influence of the Ku Klux Klan and a critique of social conservatism and Southern values. The film clearly aimed to bring back and reignite strong themes that resonated in American society in the 1960s. From the performances of the involved major actors, I get the impression that Hackman, Dafoe, and McDormand didn't approach their roles as just a regular business transaction, but that they also injected their own convictions into their performances. Overall impression: 95%.

Some comments did warn me, but the cast led by my favorite actress Reese Witherspoon looked promising and, above all, from the first shots, the set design seemed great. I had a sense of an authentic touch with the distant past. However, with each passing minute, my disappointment grew. The film could have been made as a social drama about an outsider girl who wanted to escape the unattractive prospects of her social class at all costs. Her background and occupation as a governess in an aristocratic family would allow her to become an observer from below with the ability to capture life across all social classes - especially during the exceptional and uncertain period of the Napoleonic Wars when human characters were shaped and many lives were turned upside down. Unfortunately, the film gets lost in the penny-dreadful, which turns promising solutions into banalities and romantic clichés. The director doesn't commit outright atrocities, but she fails to extract a strong and impressive story from this promising material. Comparing it to Bondarchuk's monumental War and Peace, considering the exceptional nature of the source material, may not be fair, but to some extent, it explains my doubts and low rating. Overall impression: 40%. 1 star is for the set design, and the second is for the visual sophistication.

Gomorrah gives a completely new dimension to the famous saying "See Naples and Die." Endless trash and poverty-ridden panel housing estates, communities that adhere to outdated and morally unacceptable norms, failing institutions, fear, corruption, and hopelessness - all of this is part of the world dominated by Gomorrah. American series tend to romanticize organized crime, relativize its crimes, and give them an entertainment label, smoothing them over and trivializing them. The authors of Gomorrah take a different approach by demystifying organized crime. At the head of the clan is a wealthy family without education or good taste (a single shot of a kitschy family portrait hanging on the wall speaks for itself) with a very peculiar conception of universal and personal morality. The gang boss considers his subordinates as consumable material and without hesitation sacrifices many of them to strengthen his personal prestige. Although the screenwriter follows the fates of the gang members, his aim is not so much to capture personal dramas as it is to describe the functioning of the mafia as a whole, as a pathological organization that parasitizes on and breaks down society. The viewer will probably not identify with the members of Gomorrah but rather observe them like fish in an aquarium. Overall impression: 90%.

The main role in the historical epic film is not played by the character of the famous Sun King, nor even the character of his court composer Lully, but rather the era of the peak of French absolutism, when Louis' exclusive position was reflected in his cultural activities. The greatest monarch of his era had to have everything be the best. Through his lifestyle, behavior, and activities, he demonstrated the exceptional nature of his position and his personality. The characters of the story are in the background, while the foreground is filled with the opulent splendor of baroque decoration, noblewomen's robes, theater sets, and the king's costumes. The film showcases the entire cultural epoch, its most distinctive and majestic form. It can practically be considered a musical film interwoven with period music. Overall impression: 80%.

My one and only star testifies to the fact that I completely didn't get the film. The sweet face of Elle Fanning and her diligent acting performance are not to blame. Barnz's direction didn't impress me, but the reason for rejecting the film lies elsewhere. I generally don't like this kind of emotional manipulation, because it rarely succeeds in mixing the ingredients in a way that the result doesn't seem like a chef's hand slipped with the sweetener or onions. Phoebe in Wonderland is a typical representative of a large group of American films, where children are portrayed differently than is known from personal experience. They are mentally more mature than their age would suggest. Most American cinema tends to perceive children as little adults who need to be respected and considered equal in their own way. But the fact that little adults cannot compete with the big folk in everything is obvious. Especially not in responsibilities - they are best not burdened by them at all. Hollywood cinema has been assuring us for a decade or so that the quality of parenting depends on how much parents love and care for their children to make them happy - not on how capable they are of raising them, instilling moral principles, preparing them for independent life, adulthood, and the ability to start their own family and succeed in a parental and partnership role. I have the feeling that most American film productions spread the idea that the most important thing in life is the feeling of happiness, not the satisfaction of effort and fulfilled responsibilities. Overall impression: 25%.

I do not take dance drugs and it definitely cannot be said about me that I am the target group, even though I occasionally watch The Chemical Brothers on YouTube and highly appreciate several of their videos. The problem with Don't Think is that what would work wonderfully on the surface of a several-minute music video appears monotonous in the form of a full-length film and despite all efforts, it cannot evoke the same feelings as being at a concert. Where I would prefer to watch the performers on stage, the camera repeatedly attacks the crowds of trance-induced Japanese people. Watching the concert must have been a fascinating spectacle, with laser effects, video mapping, and the musical expression of The Chemical Brothers. Yes, I would have quite liked to have been there. However, in my living room, it's just not the same, no matter how hard I try. If they divided the film into 20 music videos, my rating would be different. Like this, unfortunately, my overall impression is only 45%.

Tarantino's approach to his film The Hateful Eight can be compared to the intercourse of long-term partners. They know their pleasures, they know what to expect from each other, they have perfected their technique over the years, they no longer rush, and they no longer have anything to prove or fight for. At the same time, it never occurs to them to get rid of their controversial practices, nor do they feel any need to conform to general norms and demands of good manners. With the isolated environment and the limited number of characters who do not trust each other and search for a "weak link" among themselves, the film reminded me of Tarantino's debut. Here and there, the focus is mainly on exposing the characters in a borderline situation. For about 3/4 of the film, we follow eight characters trapped in a cabin in the middle of the mountains, cut off from civilization by a snowstorm. They all have evident and hidden reasons to be on guard, the three-hour duration is filled with dialogues, sometimes seemingly banal, other times punctuated with inappropriateness, vulgarities, and racist remarks. For many viewers, it may be tormenting boredom, but I have no problem with that when it comes to Tarantino. He is too experienced a filmmaker to fill the time with static shots and boredom. He is artistically inventive enough to skillfully dose tension and, from the minimum offered to him, extract the maximum. He can ultimately rely on a strong cast that plays with enthusiasm and considers it an honor to be a part of the film. The actors pay tribute to the cult director, they enjoy it, and lightly overact to highlight mostly the negative characters. The director presents the viewer with a sophisticated cat-and-mouse game but that is where the first stumbling block is hidden. It turns out that the game is somewhat purposeless, or rather does not make much sense, once the resolution is revealed. It is as if the villain tried to break into a house that nobody guards or locks in a convoluted way. The desired result could have been achieved in a much less complicated way, but then it would have been a different film for a different audience. The second problem, which, however, will not bother a large group of Tarantino fans, is the depiction of violence. Violence has always been Tarantino's trademark, and his typical screenwriting and directing feature is the use of violence as a source of humor. On the other hand, in The Hateful Eight, it is clearly evident that Tarantino has not matured. The gratuitousness of certain scenes is striking. A man who has several potential adversaries and should save every bullet that may come in handy for his survival joyfully turns a corpse's head into a bloody mess. Why? Simply because the bloodied floor and tissue remnants all around look impressive. You either deal with this or pick yourself up and move on. Despite the mentioned criticisms, I must say that it is the most likable and interesting Tarantino film since Jackie Brown. Tarantino still has something to offer, and his wild pulp aesthetics, together with the brilliant acting of the cast involved, are worth seeing. Jennifer Jason Leigh deserves a mention. She is already at an age when agents don't often contact Hollywood actresses anymore, and this was an opportunity she did not want to miss. Overall impression: 60%. I have something to add after watching Django Unchained, which I haven't fully digested yet: I have no reason to change my claim that The Hateful Eight is Tarantino's best film since Jackie Brown. However, even this insight does not change the fact that his films are burdened with mannerisms, self-centeredness, and an effort to cater to the presumed expectations of his fans. The long scene where Major Warren vividly describes the execution of a Southern officer's son simply does not deserve a fourth star for its degradation. Tarantino once again proves that he has no limits when it comes to lowering the bar of good taste.

With a few exceptions, I generally don't like these types of movies. This film is shot professionally and has a good cast, so it gives the impression of a solid genre spectacle, but one it cannot fulfill. The director seems to have no clear idea of which genre he wants to be part of. Even a top-notch crime thriller would not be ashamed of the opening scene of the assassination, and the film initially appears serious and repeatedly returns to this expression. But while the murders may look brutal, suddenly a serious scene is followed by shots from a crazy grotesque, and in my opinion, this change of tone does not work at all for the film. Genre hybrids sometimes work and they can be charming, even irresistible. Unfortunately, Jack Reacher isn't one of these in my opinion. The ending is also predictable and completely undermines the feeling of the scenes that were done well. Overall impression: 25%.