DaViD´82

A movie that, with regard to its setting and style, should be based primarily on retro cheap poetics, which, however, is sadly not present here. The rest is a typical product of the Marvel production line, with no plot, basically nothing is at stake and the whole thing holds together only thanks to the rapid popcorn pace and the fact that Peggy and Jarvis are messing with each other all the time.

Picturesque Victorian farm melodrama in a style "she is alone and there are three of them" with all the good and bad, what you would expect from a slushy romance. The problem is definitely not in the genre or performances (although Christie overplays in a theatrical way sometimes), but in an inappropriate directing, when Schlesinger tends to devote too short time to abbreviated plot and behavior of characters and at the same time he devotes almost three hours of footage to treading water. Thanks to that it is rather slow and sometime not that interesting. What is surprising is that the movies is far better at the details of everyday life on a large farm than during the emotional challenges of the main characters.

What is nice that this movie does not follow the well-known path of the more famous feature-film but it strives to find its own way how to adapt the original instead. What is not nice, however, is the selected, because Ellroy's books do not have such a straightforward, direct and "too polite" structure free of complexity of motives, ambitions and richness. Don't get me wrong, Ellroy undoubtedly belongs on television screens, whether with his criminal quadrilogy about LA or the trilogy about the averted face of "spy" America; but it would have to be under the wings of some cable or streaming station. Just someone who has the resources and a willingness not to dodge Ellroy's uncompromising controversy. On the other hand, we can clearly see how the quality television production has evolved in the last fifteen years (it was filmed in 1999), because this "hot goods" at the time would not have the slightest chance to attract anyone today and the question is whether it was interesting in this form even back then. In other words, yes, I think someone in the management was smart enough not to approve it and did not make a regular series from generic thing. Or he simply liked Ellroy.

I got a feeling that I can't let go. The same thing applies to the series as it does about its book preview. It's nothing that would move the genre forward in any way, set the direction or come to mind when naming the best movies in the field of thriller-like dark crime movies, but at the same time it's a long way from the author being relegated among countless mediocre routine authors whose books only collect dust in bookstores. It's just damn good genre literature and a very well done craft. And the series is like that too. Decent, high-quality and well-executed craft with a retro approach that got stuck in the 1990s during the time of "one hundred and one variation on The Silence of the Lambs/Se7en". Whether you take it as a good or bad thing is entirely up to you. It is therefore necessary to take into account that it will inevitably resort to genre-justifiable, not entirely logical, behavior of the characters in favor of increasing tension. To some extent, it is surprising that it is more procedural than the original and it leads nowhere. The biggest strong point is (apart from the style theme song) the cast of Harry Bosch by Welliver. He is simply perfect at portraying this very specific detective. This strong point is even more important, because the show is completely dependent on him. You can count the scenes where he does not appear on fingers of one hand of a clumsy carpenter (with occasional exceptions confirming the rule from Waits' point of view). And rather than his fellow actors from flesh and bones, he is backed by Los Angeles and its genius loci. The only thing that sometimes seems inappropriate is that the plot is continuous but sometimes the used (sub) plots from various unrelated originals (especially the dark thriller-like Echo Park and the purely detective City of Bones) seem somewhat clumsy incorporated into a single storyline. The second season deals with that noticeably better and the transitions between the individual story lines from various books (especially Trunk Music, The Drop and a bit of The Last Coyote) are no longer so striking. After all, this series is not clearly better, but it looks more dynamic (apart from the mentioned beveled edge of individual lines, partly because this time it's not just about Harry, but the others get some space too) and it is even one level more old school than before. And already the first season was nostalgic tribute to the style and pace of the thrillers and crime movies of the 90s. The only drawback is that the final episode follows significantly different direction, at the expense of the story lines of the previous nine episodes. The third season suffers from a slower start, where there is a noticeably conflict of the “trademark" mixing of multiple lines from several originals into one (this time The Black Echo in combination with A Darkness More Than Night) and because of that there is a discrepancy between the story line about revenge of megalomaniac director and the one about strange games played by members of special forces. As soon as it starts, however, it contains some of the best sequences in the entire series. Otherwise, it follows the same path as the second season; which is good, because in the second one, unlike the first season, it already has its unique style, which at first glance may look only like numerous police clichés, but the result is that the masters of the genre hit the target. In other words, it is really hard to find a better "old" crime movie. And Santiago needs his own spin off! The fourth season is the best so far. It combines the most personal case Nine Dragons with one of the best Angel´s Flight. What is true that the personal line is kind of obviously incorporated and is undoubtedly sidelined, but it works emotionally and thus forms an excellent counterweight to the search within own department during the impending civil unrest and the behind-the-scenes plotting. The fifth season seems to deliver flawless genre experience for a long time. But many well-developed story lines end far too early and too straightforwardly. Which is not bad, but at the same time it's kind of "not enough". Paradoxically, in the final two episodes, more attention is paid to starting three to four new story lines for the next series than ending the existing ones. The climax doesn't seem unfinished. No, that is not the case but kind of... Usual. The sixth series is a return to the top, which cleverly connects and closes the lines of the previous series. It could have been done without the expected explosive finale though. | S1: 4/5 | S2: 4/5 | S3: 4/5 | S4: 5/5 | S5: 4/5 | S6: 5/5 |

Adaptation of a better original, because while Mantel often pays too much attention to descriptions, wordy sentences and chatter, Straughan's screenplay takes full advantage of the original. And the original has a large potential. That is for sure. In any case, for both the original and the adaption it is true that there is nether introduction nor explanation of anything. It is hard to find more incomprehensible historical topic for the "general public". Find out for yourself what was done of duty, and what does or does not look hopeless. While the "CVs" of the main characters and the fundamental events around them are well known in the Czech republic, the procession of dozens of nobles from god knows where might be a problem for Czechs. A general picture obtained from Wikipedia is definitely not enough. And although it is about seemingly the same as the recent Tudors show, the result could not have been more different. I can only say the well-known saying "when two do the same thing, it is not the same thing ". The two approaches/series do not compete in anything; if anything at all, on the contrary, they complement each other. After all, here the time, events, characters and behind-the-scenes plotting are basically sidelined, because everything here no matter what revolves only around Cromwell´s career, spiritual and personal life. And if you don't consider Cromwell to be one of the most prominent political figures (not only) in British history, there's no reason for you to start watching this successful (and deliberately lengthy; this must be taken into account) and controversial show (Cromwell is usually portrayed as a charismatic statesman, but here he is portrayed rather as a pen pusher that is hard to understand).

When you cheat and take drugs, you become a prostitute... What is surprising is that the Wild is also good in terms of the intimate and chamber line "lonesome Witherspoon - inhospitable nature - endless purifying walk - the eternal self-question of the heroine". On the contrary, on this level, it does the job really well. To the extent that it makes you want to take a bag pack, go on a solitary hike and at the same time clear your head. The only drawback are the unnatural flashbacks, which at first can do with only hints/flashes in a nice way, but the closer Cheryl's journey comes to an end, the more literal and didactic they are. But what it only takes is one alpaca and everything what should be said becomes instantly clear.

Run, Andula, run! So, actually... Take steroids, Andula, take steroids! The topic of "anabolic government programs for top athletes of the Eastern bloc through personal drama, we say hello to Kratochvílová and Fibinger" looks promising on paper and is likely to take moral and ethical (not only) historical skeletons out of the closet. Skeletons everyone prefers to remain silent about even today. But as a result, Fair Play doesn't play fair play with the viewer, because it opens the door of this closet so little that even a malnourished infant would have a significant problem putting his little finger inside. Sadly, the movie only stays on the surface and does not go into details. There is no room for having own opinion beyond the standardized Czechoslovak's conciliatory view of the normalization period in a style “this is how things worked during this period, it is not our fault, what can we do about it today". The same approach is true for most of Czech movies. Which is an even bigger letdown because this movie has a large potential to get out of this cursed box of current non-documentaries in the Czech republic. In fact, even the main story line "can she run so fast?" does not work, because of the Summer Olympic Games 1984, i.e. it is soon clear what this means for the finals. Simply another movie with good performances (although Bárdosová is clumsy, especially in tense scenes with Geislerová, but in those scenes when she is silent and only sweats, she looks determined and convincing) and routine craftsmanship that is not bad, not boring, but despite the theme has nothing to say. And so, the movie says nothing and just keeps up with the others, meaning, it politely remains silent, while another layer of dust is collected on the skeleton in the closet...

A famous hypnosis expert and a tricky case of a seemingly rational female patient that "sees dead people" who her colleagues have no idea to do with. A mysterious thriller about two characters who get to the essence of things one night through psychotherapy and hypnosis. There have been some films of a similar nature (whether working directly with hypnosis or dreams, for example), but not so many good ones. Especially those that would be so well thought out, built and properly executed in terms of quality. Basically, there is not much to complain about in terms of the first part of the movie until the point. But after the point... But don't get me wrong, the problem is definitely not in the point as such, but in what follows. It's hard to find another film of a similar kind, which would devote fifteen minutes of footage to literally explain everything in a way of "shot by shot, sentence by sentence, look after look". What's more, it's not justified, because it's not so tangled that the viewer can't unravel it himself (after all, it's likely that you'll see it through to some extent before it's revealed). And to make matters worse, this is followed by quite a few more minutes, which spoil the movie even more; namely, a melodramatic ending which is superfluous and looks like a scene from a film of a completely different genre.

They might have directly called it Das Schwindelgefühl sakumprdum because it was inspired but... you know what. And to its detriment, because from the scene "in Johnny's lair for the first time" on, it will have the exact opposite effect instead of having tension between the characters. This is a great example of plot planning so everything leads to the only one possible outcome. And this outcome, unsurprisingly, is slowly achieved about an hour later. So it works mainly thanks to the introductory third and the central duo (in which he is an unacknowledged German-speaking illegitimate child of Russel Crowe. Even so, it is a solid “Hitch movie", which, paradoxically, is better off in the line of "finally a different grasp of the theme of coping with the return from the concentration camp and post-war identity of the German nation", which in all its subtlety, hints and all that unspoken stuff is much more impressive than if it just followed the genre.

It's quite likely that after you see what kind of official shenanigans and "you can't make this stuff up" absurdities around the daily “traffic” and “construction” of the bridge, you will replace the phrase "Like in Kocourkov" in your dictionary with the much more apt "Like in Mumbai".