Lima

The best sports-themed film in years. It doesn't matter if you understand baseball or have a relationship with the sport itself, Sorkin's brilliant (again) script is all about passion for the cause, boundless faith in one's own judgement and in what one is doing, despite the risk of losing one's credit. The interactions between Pitt and Hill are a joy to watch. All this without annoying clichés and fake spectacular scenes that would make a stone cry (see e.g. Warrior).

Cliché over cliché where everything goes according to a template seen hundreds of times, following the expected tracks, when it’s very easy to guess the development of the plot for long minutes ahead, even the dialogues you can chew in your mind before the actors let them out of their mouths. The comparisons with Rocky are ridiculous; more than anything, Rocky was an original and unconventional love affair, while Warrior has nothing original and unconventional at all. PS: Forget the much-vaunted Oscar, boys and girls.

A supremely aesthetic affair in which Tarsem Singh has imprinted his unmistakable, bizarre visual sensibility. The theatrical stylisation, the lack of epicness and the sparseness of the film's sets (while at the same time visually intoxicating) are the author's intention, not due to the producers' boredom and a hole in their wallets. I want to have this in Blu-ray.

After the third screening, it's clear to me: this film has matured and offers much more than a first superficial viewing might suggest. What hightlights it above all is its playfulness. It’s packed with so many directorial ideas and visual tricks, visual and sound games (functional flashbacks, image splitting, refreshingly chosen music) that watching its atypical narrative is a joy – this despite the slightly morbid climax. James Franco is a great actor in this film, and Danny Boyle is a genius.

As a frequent viewer of Soviet war movies, I experienced "Russian pathos at its most annoying" to a great extent during the previous regime, but Michalkov's film is definitely not one of them. On the contrary, what I appreciate is his systematic subversion of the clichés of the war genre, either through subtle absurdist humour or farcical situations that illustrate the absurdity of war, or through an unusual authorial approach that is unexpected and therefore refreshing (the final scene with the exposure of breasts). Yes, there is pathos too, but to a very reasonable degree. Michalkov certainly has nothing to be ashamed of and I look forward to the second part of the story.

There aren't many male authors who write out their feelings and then let women play it out. I consider Melancholia one of the most honest authorial statements of recent years and the opening prologue with slow motion shots and Richard Wagner's impressive music an aesthetic orgasm. What the 19th hole meant is, I don't think, very indicative (I can already see Von Trier laughing under his beard as he reads the various nonsensical explanatory theories).

Although I’m a great lover of Ray Harryhausen's work (here he produced the visual effects, co-wrote the script and produced the whole film), I have to admit that this is the film that has been ravaged the most by time compared to the rest (including Clash of the Titans). It’s not lacking atmosphere and the pleasantly old-fashioned story is engaging, but the effects (especially all the front/rear projections) are of questionable value. This does not apply to the stop-motion puppets, they are perfect, with the animated golden statue with the bull's head, the giant walrus and the duel between the prehistoric giant and the tiger standing out.

Engagingly shot and I think it faithfully portrays all the negative aspects of the police state, but otherwise I have one big problem with this film. I did not believe at all the transformation of a heartless spook into the essence of virtue, who even sheds a tear to the sound of moving music, and the ending with the "dedication" falls somewhere into the realm of unbelievability and incomprehensibility. But thanks to the sensitive direction, the almost two and a half hours were easily digestible, even though the dialogues and the whole concept of the story were a bit daft.

A tad better than the genre and thematically related Crazy Heart with Jeff Bridges. Comparing the two characters, consumed by the demon of alcoholism - while Bridges basically repeated a tamer variation of the Dude from The Big Lebowski, Paltrow gives a focused performance, and even vocally she was definitely not behind her colleague. Emotionally, both films are roughly the same, emotions float lightly on the surface and do not bite deeper into the viewer, even though Country Strong has a more fateful and tragic story. What was definitely a pleasant surprise was the performance of young Garrett Hedlund, he’s likeable in every way and sings beautifully. Country is not my cup of tea, but in such a pleasant presentation I can enjoy it.

Basically, it's an enjoyable conversational film set in a tightly confined space in a backwoods town, with an unexpected amount of verbal humour, sparse action for a western (which doesn't matter here in the slightest) and likeable performances from all involved. I never liked John Wayne, but sheriffs, green berets and alpha males were his reliable acting style.