gudaulin

It's quite a pleasant film about the joys and sorrows of an average French middle-class family featuring adolescence, aging, love conflicts, emotional struggles, reconciliation, and forgiveness. However, I don't fully agree with the high rating this film has. It feels like a two-hour compilation of an average French family series with 150 episodes. But yes, it is a compilation of the best parts, and it's well-cast and acted. Nevertheless, I had the feeling of time passing too quickly and important themes and characters just passing by, rather than truly experiencing them. Overall impression: 65%.

In the early 90s, some films that had already premiered in the West in the 80s or 70s arrived in Europe for the first time. Among them were several horror titles, such as Prince of Darkness. I was truly fascinated by the jump scares and special effects at the time, which now look laughable, and so, originally, influenced by nostalgia, I gave it a higher rating. John Carpenter has the reputation of a great horror creator, but he has always been unequivocally a B-movie director who made commercial films, and only on a few rare occasions has he managed to surpass his own shadow. In fact, there are only two titles that I truly approve of, the legendary The Thing and In the Mouth of Madness, which beautifully - perhaps best of all the films on a similar topic - captures the sympathetic trashiness of Lovecraft's literary work. Prince of Darkness does not belong to those exceptions, the ravages of time have taken their toll on it, and above all, today I see the ridiculous dialogues and silly behavior of the characters. The screenplay is simply stupid. However, even after all these years, I can still give the soundtrack a perfect rating, as it is a real treat within the genre, and the camera work and visual design of the scenes are remarkable. For that, John gets 2 stars and contributes 45% to the overall impression. Unfortunately, this film also fully exposes the fact that Carpenter, limited by the budget, mostly - actually almost always - worked with B-actors, meaning second and nth-category actors...

Maybe it's a shame, but I still haven't read Kafka's "The Trial", and perhaps because I lack a comparison with the literary original, I was quite enthusiastic about the film version, impressed by the absurd dialogues and the atmosphere of crooked Prague streets, balconies, and historical corridors and halls of the Lesser Town, and I initially considered giving it five stars. Later, I compared it with the atmosphere of other similar films and I did lower my rating, but I still have to say that I enjoyed the film, and if there had been more good acting performances in it, I would lean toward giving it five stars. The best from the ensemble cast used in this film was Anthony Hopkins in the role of an uncompromising yet mysterious priest. Perhaps more could have been extracted from the subject, but even so, it deserves a solid 80%.

During the flood of films of both better and worse quality, one rarely has the opportunity to return to what they have already seen, and I personally only do it with films that I remember as remarkable and strong. I saw this film during its premiere in the mid-90s, and even though I wasn't a teenager anymore, it impressed me as a cleverly and impressively directed popcorn movie with an excellent cast and an emotionally perfectly functioning screenplay. The film hasn't changed, but the genre has gone through rapid development, and above all, I have changed, so this kind of action genre doesn't affect me the way it did years ago. Nowadays, I prefer a dynamic and realistic style, like the one director Greengrass promotes, so my favorite films include the Bourne trilogy, Green Zone, and Blood Diamond. Luc Besson's films are overly marked by the effort to cater to a mass audience, so they are naive, unrealistic, almost comic book-like, sometimes sentimental, and overall calculated. What remains is an excellent cast, with Jean Reno creating a star status for himself after a significant minor role in La Femme Nikita and being catapulted among the best French actors at a relatively mature age, and also gaining a few roles in Hollywood. Gary Oldman, on the other hand, created the wonderful character of a perversely debauched corrupt cop, who holds an honorable place in his gallery of villains. Young Natalie Portman also showed in this film why she would become a world-famous film celebrity in a few years. Overall impression: 55%.

Jean-Paul Belmondo created his acting reputation and fame precisely with characters of adventurers, detectives, and agents of various kinds, and his character from The Professional is literally the essence of what is typical about Belmondo's acting and what audiences admire. A smart script, dialogue, fights, and a surprising ending. Probably Belmondo's best film. Overall impression: 95%.

When asked about the best mafia-themed films, you probably won't think of this title or director. After all, associating Tornatore with a bloody story about the rise of an outsider to one of the leading positions in Italian organized crime can be quite surprising at first glance. He is usually connected to significantly more intimate projects. Nevertheless, it works in a strange way, despite some theatrical scenes and unfortunate casting. The inclusion of a relatively well-known American actor was certainly significant for the producer, who hoped for a favorable reception of the film overseas, and it also made sense in relation to the subject matter. Ben Gazzara never hid his origins and his positive relationship with Sicily, and his participation in the project was undoubtedly seen as an honor and a life opportunity. The problem is that such an exposed role requires a true acting chameleon, whereas Gazzara's acting repertoire was unfortunately limited. He simply couldn't handle this complex part in terms of acting. Laura del Sol, portraying the professor's sister, was type-cast, and it is easy to demonstrate through her fragile and innocent appearance how the environment changes her behavior and shift in values. However, there is a shocking age difference of 31 years between Laura del Sol and Ben Gazzara and it is hard to believe in their relationship as siblings. On the other hand, the power of the story about the rise and fall of a mafia boss works, the intense scenes, confrontations within the prison, and rivalry between gangs have undeniable strength, and Tornatore already showcased in his early period why he would be considered one of the greatest Italian directors a few years later. Overall impression: 80%.

I avoided this movie back when it came out with the thought that it wouldn't be my cup of tea. If I had listened to my instinct, I wouldn't have wasted a few bucks and almost 90 minutes of my precious time. But as years go by, as they say, people become foolish. So I was expecting many things, but I have to admit that I was equally shocked. While watching it, I had to constantly remind myself of the fairy tale "The Emperor's New Clothes", for which I have a personal version based on my own experiences. Once upon a time, in the 80s, a friend came up with the idea of teasing others and pulled out genuine marijuana, when he mixed used tobacco with several terrifying ingredients (yes, even just thinking about it now makes me feel sick) and let others smoke it. Everyone felt incredibly sick, but they all spread rumors that it was an incredibly beautiful experience, and not only that, they even believed it because, over the years, when at least some of them experienced the real taste and effects of marijuana, they still reminisced about their first experience with it. It's a bit like that with this movie, which is one of those that aren't interesting from a cinematic perspective, but rather from reading enthusiastic reviews. This sort of awkwardness isn't even seen in the works of film school students, and the desperate absence of anything that could be called an atmosphere with a large dose of imagination is unbelievable. This film doesn't contain a single interesting shot, a single cinematically interesting moment, or a single acting performance, and the only thing commendable is the marketing, which cleverly utilized the emerging phenomenon of the internet in the 90s to launch its advertising campaign and build a reputation as an independent cult film. After watching it, I had a night shift and climbed up the ladders of the technological shafts of a power plant block, where I didn't encounter a soul all night and only listened to the monotonous sound of fans and operating technological units. Sporadic lighting, insulation, and giant machines. If this film even had a hint of horror potential, I should have at least felt a breeze of fear. But it was nonexistent. This cult completely passed me by, and truth be told, I understand it the least out of all of them. Overall impression: 0%.

The film definitely cannot deny its theatrical roots. It has a significant TV film dimension, whether it is the fact that dialogues carry it from the beginning to the end, or the poor set design and static nature of the plot, which takes place practically entirely in one recreational cottage. Paradoxically, the film was somewhat hurt in my eyes by the fact that I had seen the play and the theatrical performance set a high bar for me, which surprisingly the well-known American actors failed to overcome... The idea of showing the transformations of society and modern American history through regular meetings of two lovers is good, but the comedic and dramatic potential was certainly greater, and in the second half of the film, more and more sentimentality creeps into it. Overall impression: 40%.

I didn't really appreciate the acclaimed Danish series The Killing, specifically its first two seasons, because I clearly felt their contrivance and considered them an artificial construct. The same can be said of The Bridge, and yet this series eventually captured my attention, despite my initial doubts, and with each episode, I enjoyed it more and more. I appreciated its social and psychological dimension, as well as its attractive characters. It is dark, uncompromising, consistently surprising, and overall an excellent work about how one embittered person can destroy their surroundings with their hatred. This is one of the peaks of contemporary television series production that can do without an excessively large budget. All it takes is quality screenwriting, clever directing, and excellent casting. Overall impression: 90%. /// I have just finished the second season and I must admit that it is as high-quality as the first one, maintaining its unique style and cleverly building on the previous narrative. I can therefore apply the same criticism to it, that it is an artificial construct, but very well executed, written, and directed. Simply a Nordic treat. After the second season, I feel like giving it 100%.

Of course, Most is far from a perfect film. Those who want to can point out the weaker moments of inexperienced actors and the slower start, as well as the uneven pace. On the other hand, it deals with an exceptionally strong anti-war theme and there are very few films that have moved me emotionally as much as this one has. Those who want to can also point out that modern war films have more special effects and are more spectacular. But at the time of its creation, Most was an extraordinary artistic achievement that, even after almost half a century, is still worth seeing. It contains a number of powerful scenes, absurd situations, and crucial dialogues. When compared to modern war films, such as those about the Gulf War, I can only give it five stars. Overall impression: 90%.