Isherwood

A relatively sympathetic hour and a half of terror, which probably won't admit its inspiration from the French film Them, but I won't take points away for that. The film deprives itself of them (unnecessarily). The promisingly sketched plot loses steam before the halfway point, only to end up on a miserable flywheel of long-worn clichés, which then culminates in an ending that is a great celebration of correctness. Unfortunately, this also brings down the well-sketched relationship of the main characters, which the director manages with a few shots, and the successful build-up to the "action," when the pounding on the door freezes the blood... it’s too bad because even watching it at midnight with my laptop in bed didn't help.

The mistake must have been made in the book because I don't believe that any dramaturgist would see such dialogue on paper and not immediately whip the scriptwriter for it. One rhetorical gem after another, let loose from the mouths of perhaps the most awkward lovelorn couple of recent years - Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson, along with Catherine Hardwicke's tired, unnecessary, and underdeveloped direction, alternated within me a gloating smile with deep yawns. There’s so much wrong with the film that I wonder if someone wanted to sabotage Hollywood in the most insidious way. It’s quite the guilty pleasure, as well the knowledge that I have never wished to be a 15-year-old girl who paints her nails black, stabs the surroundings with her rough eyes, and the highlight of her pleasure is getting deflowered by a pale dude she meets at a gothic convention. Let’s go, I want the next film! :)

It's hard to expect anything more than what the trailers showed us. McG serves up (unsurprisingly) a decent summer blockbuster, cheerfully shoving in one quote after another, all in the visual style of Charlie’s Angels. It works, especially in the first half, more than adequately. The atmosphere of the demolished streets draws the viewer right into the middle of any hit game, and the action sequences, in which the heroes are chased by giant robots, have more life in them than all of Transformers. The problem, however, is the writers, who obviously don't care much for sound logic and have to start dissecting characters and relationships just to get to the tear-jerking ending that grabs you (literally) by the heart. In the end, one name comes to mind - Sam Worthington. This guy is going to make a big splash in the ranks of charismatic Hollywood guys. It is he who overrides my seventy percent hesitation to give it a fourth star. It's hard to say what time away and a potential second watch will do to that.

Four years before he divided the audience into two irreconcilable camps with his martyr's opus, Pascal Laugier, under the production supervision of Christophe Gans, made quite a decent ghost story. In it, he gives vent to his predilections (a strong female protagonist, the detached atmosphere of the sets) and at the same time shows that he has mastered his craft perfectly. The sympathetic face of Virginie Ledoyen, combined with the creeping camera and ominous music, works wonders. On the other hand, I still maintain that he should have thrown away the pen and paper because the whole thing doesn't make enough sense (even though the artist plays with hints and refuses to be unnecessarily literal) and the ending falls into the category of the unnecessarily self-indulgent. Regardless, thumbs up, with the knowledge that the talent is there.

I’m quite puzzled as to why Alien: Resurrection received such a backlash from the viewing public. Perhaps Jeunet's irresistibly decadent atmosphere wasn't quite what fans expected after Fincher's unconventional contribution. The director demolishes the myths of the entire universe and makes fun of them on top of it. In doing so, he is constantly his own man, giving Aliens his unique imprint as a French poet, culminating with the final arrival of the overgrown albino. To say that this is the worst film in the series is stupid. It's only over the years that the whole series has swelled to a cult status where everyone likes to claim their own film they like best. I’m not saying I don't do it too, but even though Jeunet's film is not one of my favorites, I refuse to denigrate it.

This initially playful formal plaything is surprisingly trumped by the plot, which is packed to the brim with cynical dialogue that hasn't lost a shred of its attraction. Hitchcock also lets it build up to incredibly unpredictable turns through the actors, so it holds the tension without losing its pizzazz and filmmaking ease. An incredibly clever film.

Fincher's feature debut was clearly plagued by the studio's pansy wallet and promotion, which is quite visible even years after the film managed to reclaim its well-deserved reputation. Regardless, this goes hand in hand with the trend for each director to approach it radically differently, which is also done here to great effect. The atmosphere of a penal colony, where nothing works, is definitely something to behold, especially when you look at the local population, who have clearly done a number of unpleasant things in their lives. As an added bonus, there’s also decent Goldenthal music, great camera tricks with the FPS look, and a cut-out Ellen Ripley. 4 ½. (The rest I leave to the possibilities of the expanded edition.)

The film has a great start, but after a while, it becomes a more and more naive game, which also goes quite hard against the basic logic of the thing. Yet the film still has the incredible balls, even after all these years, to thrill by having one of the characters fish a lighter out of a sewer. There’s just no other way.

Uwe has finally stopped being a major obstacle in the forced consumption of his works and the kid who had to have everything he could think of in the film has finally turned out to be a mischievous teenager who enjoys watching action B-movies while downloading the latest video game hits. I will probably never forgive Crytek for selling the rights to him, but while watching it I giggled mockingly at the thoughts of how faint they must have been at certain moments. Boll did it quite unconventionally and made a brisk action comedy, in which Til Schweiger rocks it to the fullest. His Jack Carver is literally a jukebox of catchphrases, who just happens to have a "free play," so his mouth doesn't slow down, and even in the action he kicks the asses of any overseas tough guys who write the profession "action hero" on their business cards. Everything else sort of falls behind his charisma, but so be it. It’s hardly great as a game adaptation, but given the expectations and the surprising outcome, I'll give it the three stars it deserves. PS: I hope Valve considers this a sufficient memento.

What a bunch of nonsense! The film, which is meant to show how the government can manipulate public opinion through the media, tries to fool the viewer into thinking that it actually takes only three people to do this. Sure, it's satire, but it goes against sound logic and is absolutely toothless. With a few exceptions, the characters don't let anything out of their mouths that has any impact or wit. DeNiro and Hoffman are great but actually shoot blanks for ninety minutes. At least the film had potential at the time it was made; over the years it has lost even that.