Lima

I liked Justin Timberlake’s natural acting, but Ben Affleck was much more fun, he really enjoys playing the asshole, and his is a case of “the older the better”. I don’t have any fears about Batman, he’s in good hands.

A sensitive take on a literary classic that unfolds slowly and you have to find your way to the characters, but as the narrative draws to a close, it grows in emotional intensity. You won't forget the drowning scene for the rest of your life, and the final fuck off is such a sweet, ironic icing that Paul Newman only confirms his status as someone few could match.

To accuse Peter Jackson – as many here do – of getting too carried away and overwhelming us with attractions is to misunderstand his essence. The truth is that he hasn't changed at all since he was a young boy baking evil alien masks in his mother's oven for his feature debut. He’s a big child who loves movie effects and likes to impress with visual stunts that often go over the edge. I’ve thoroughly enjoyed the overstuffed King Kong, and I’ve also enjoyed the overstuffed second Hobbit. It’s so visually sumptuous and rich that no other fantasy or fairytale movie of the last ten years can match it in this respect. It starts to make sense if you take the lukewarm first film as a launching pad of sorts for the massive second part. But at the same time, I warn you, if you are you looking for insightful ideas, eye-popping scenes, in short, that "humanly warm artistic experience", go elsewhere. If, on the contrary, you want Jackson off the chains and as his most exuberant self, you are in the right place.

Cimino spent four years recovering from the commercial disaster and the audience rejection of his ambitious Heaven's Gate, and came back with what I love him for: a piece of proper filmmaking, with "Cimino-esque" precision, where Chinatown, with hundreds of extras, pulses with life as believably as the explicit street gang violence depicted here with bullet-riddled bodies and one severed head. Mickey Rourke as the grizzled, uncompromising Commissioner Stanley White is perfect, and never mind the critics of the time who accused this character of open, unconcealed racism caused by the trauma of his military service in the Vietnam War, and then wrongly accused Cimino of being intolerant of minorities in American society. Maybe that's why the film kind of fizzled out without much audience response in the cinemas, Cimino became bitter and, to our misfortune, Year of the Dragon is his last big film. (watched on Blu-ray).

There hasn’t been such a good crime film since Fincher’s Zodiac. It has all the necessary ingredients mixed in a balanced ratio: a perfectly bleak, brooding atmosphere (cinematographer Deakins once again reigns supreme), acting sure-footedness where once again – as in Fincher's masterpiece – I loved Gyllenhaal with his beleaguered police figure, and a perfect screenplay that looks like an adaptation of an ingeniously written novel by one of the Nordic authors who reign supreme in the detective fiction genre today. And on top of that the shit-phile called verbal gave it 1*, so I don't know what better recommendation you'd want :o)

The events of the story are engaging and interesting, but unfortunately the film is completely brought to its knees by one major problem: Ashton Kutcher's lacklustre and dull performance; he simply can’t handle drama. I don’t know how Jobs was in real life, but I’m very sure he wasn’t a cold fish with the same set expression and slight smile. What's more, the film doesn't make it so clear what Jobs struggled with most – himself, his almost morbid perfectionism and uncompromising egotism, where he was willing to go over dead bodies – but in Kutcher’s interpretation he looks more like a puppy who occasionally barks and bares its teeth. All those casually thrown situations don’t really explain what Jobs’s greatness was. Better read Walter Isaacson's book, it is infinitely more engaging and dramatic.

I'm not a fan of categorical attributions or condemnations that label something as the best/worst, because these evaluations are always subjective and often out of context. But in this case I’m pretty sure, this is absolutely the most embarrassing film in the history of Czechoslovak cinema. For those interested in film history, it’s the most striking example of the normalization "cinema of oblivion" of the first half of the 1970s. Even the Communist approvers of the time shook their heads in disbelief at this masterpiece, and even though it blatantly referred to the events of the "Prague Spring of 1968" (which must have suited them), withdrew it from the cinemas and did not allow it to be shown on TV, because even for them it was too stupidly absurd and unwatchable. Even as study material, it’s for hardened masochists.

This ain’t for the killjoys. I'm not surprised at the high ratings on www.badmovies.org. This is a cheaper version of Star Wars, or Star Trek, which the film pokes fun at and above all makes fun of itself. Infused with insight and self-deprecating humour, it stays in the final rating for most of its duration in a slightly above average, as a pleasant entertainment, the fourth star definitely decided by the last quarter of an hour, when the filmmakers break loose and the phenomenon of the space-time paradox, popularly used several times in the Star Trek series, reaches such level of absurdity that I said to myself with a disbelieving look and an amused smile, "You don’t see this kind of crap every day." And that's appreciated :o)

A film so epic, monstrously megalomaniacal and auteurishly stupid that it fills me with horror and admiration at the same time. After the Oscar harvest of The Deer Hunter, Cimino lost his judgement and took on the role of a filmmaker who can afford anything, regardless of cost and creative power, but at this point I, as a fan of the sensibly narrated, megalomaniac productions that were made especially in the 1950s and 60s, can only be pleased. This is the last Mohican of good old Hollywood, this is the film that made history, regardless of (or perhaps because of, depending on your point of view) the label of "the biggest movie flop of all time" (watching the Criterion Collection Blu-ray version, 219 min.).

Towards the end it plays too much for effect and the slow motion shots are like a fist on the eye, but I still have to give full marks to a film that accurately names the ills of our time of alienation, loss of identity and dependence on the internet; a time of forming virtual relationships through bullshit social networks. No other film in recent memory has made it clearer that the internet is a good servant but an evil master.