Kaka

Cheap, economical and yet A-grade filmmaking, which is what Hollywood is all about. Spotlight isn't about emotions, it's about facts, hence the Oscars. A great thing and the biggest drawback for the viewer, as this two-hour procedural is a bit monotonous, tiresome and impersonal in places. On the other hand, the issues it covers and the testimonials it leaves are unprecedented, almost demonic, and a clear indication that the church is first class crap.

Unfortunately, it's the same thing again. Saving the world, an indestructible villain, some kind of magical energy, the right values. Not even the proven hitmaker Martin Campbell, otherwise known as a great innovator of established brands (Zorro, James Bond), can save this from boredom and mediocrity. Not that Reynolds isn't great, it's just that the insanely overblown space worlds set pieces are just a hair worse than the whole questionable mythology. So hats off to the visual effects artists, yes, but I wanted a better project, or better execution. The big advantage goes to Blake Lively, who could have easily just stood somewhere in an evening gown and everything would have been fine. But that's not enough for a cinematic experience, especially in a comic book adaptation, where the overkill is insane and destroying planets in the umpteenth way would already put off even a die-hard fan of the color green.

Ben Foster right on target, but otherwise too cold and detached a mosaic, which is shot in the style of Rush, i.e. semi-documentary/semi-fiction, but above all thrilling and energetic, but while aforementioned film, even with its sharp editing and abbreviated narrative at the expense of drama, is spectacular precisely in the way it manages to convey pure, deep emotions in a small space, The Program fails to do so. Lance Armstrong is too cold and inhuman, making it impossible to sympathize with him much or take one thing or another from him. As a documentary, then, it fails in its delivery, as it becomes increasingly cinematic as the minutes tick by. Still, I respect the people behind it, because the subject is quite unique and difficult to film

Exactly the same summer ride as in After the Sunset, only 12 years later with a more grizzled Pierce Brosnan, who is still very charismatic, and an ageless Salma Hayek, who leaves the 15 years younger Jessica Alba biting the dust. Instead of a heist comedy, what we have here is a lament about the life of a perpetual philanderer, which is actually fine at its core. Occasionally funny, but mostly absurdly far-fetched with zero plot build-up. A few sunny shots don't save it.

Marvel was almost a write-off after their sterile, same old superhero movies, Civil War is a hit and a significant step forward. It plays on a dark emotional chord within reason, opens up interesting questions of international security and laws, goes against itself, and introduces the viewer to new fighters in a very elegant and unobtrusive way. It's almost similarly entertaining to the first Avengers, it just took that tiny little half-step forward, because after all, in those four years we've seen at least five major comic book movies that were all still on the same page. There is of course the traditional stuff like riveting action – it has the clarity from the second, but even better – and the chemistry of the main characters, and even though it's still as simple and without digressions, it's very entertaining because you just don't see that many parametrically interesting and diverse characters on screen. However, by far the only most interesting and emotionally truly fleshed out character remains Bucky, the Winter Soldier.

Too bad about the last five minutes, they give various hints and bits and pieces from halfway through, and yes, it's a bummer. Otherwise, it would have been an unbelievable blast. Still, within the "American economy-real estate-hypothetical crisis" theme, it's still a bit better than The Big Short, which is unnecessarily layered, with a lot of angry superbrokers, verbose and complex for the layman with a lot of jumble of numbers. 99 Homes is an incredibly direct and raw film, where the crisis doesn't play out through numbers on paper, but through the stress and suffering on the street, right in the flesh, where poor people are losing their homes and the uncompromising Michael Shannon is just conducting his next demonic gala performance, this time as a materialistic stockbroker, from his new Range Rover. It’s so intense it gets under your skin. If it weren't for the ending, this would be one of the hardest films in a long time. And while the opposing sides are clearly laid out and you know who's the good guy and who's the bad guy, in some ways it's impossible not to understand both.

If they can’t do it through the comics, they will do it with visually impressive animal almost-animated adventures? No way. That's where the cool vibe of the book is. There's a lot of frolicking, and if it weren't for all the technical niceties and the incredibly elaborate digital animation of the animals, it would hardly be mediocre, because the few witty comments can't save the hugely short, desperately underwrought story and uneven pacing. Avatar remains unsurpassed in technical opulence and the effort here was felt all the way across the screen!

A tribute to classic Hollywood, similar to Basic Instinct, L.A. Confidential, or Chinatown, except that Player, in addition to its criminal intrigue, paraphrases in its language the cradle of film in the early 1990s, the era of budding big budgets and big politics that we know so well from today's cinema. Altman plays with genres, unafraid of the many innuendos, unorthodox opinions and attitudes, and the poignant situations the main characters must confront. The participation of so many movie stars is impressive and adds to the exoticism. So, apart from the excellent screenplay, you see cameos and posters of old flicks on the walls every now and then. One of the seminal films of the first half of the 1990s, and dare I say, it gets better with age, as the years have added a unique premise of sheer nostalgia, which was not possible at the time of its making.

It’s difficult to speculate to what extent the experiences, emotions and situations depicted are truly authentic and relevant, as the experience is so very specific, unique and unimaginably agonizing. From the filmmakers' point of view, we can call it more like "directorial or scriptwriting ideas" and a kind of an extract of clips and experiences – or perhaps one of the turning points of a 7-year long story – and there weren't enough of those ideas and clips for an emotional charge. It's a raw, sharp and straightforward film, it's just that the setup is too lacking in density and cohesiveness and some crucial question marks towards the main characters arise as the story progresses, but the viewer isn't given the answers, and so the most complete and emotionally resonant scenes are often the simplest (Jack with the dog, etc.). But credit where credit is due to both the direction and the fantastic Brie Larson, who has set up a career as a dramatically talented actress like Nicole Kidman and Julianne Moore. Lots of music in a minimal amount of space, but there’s no orchestra.

A slow and hypnotic film whose fragile emotional plane is the most interestingly story in a long time. Too bad about the uneven second half, which falls short to the slow-moving first half, though it doesn't change the overall quality and the feeling that after a long time you are watching something completely new and original, even though there have been countless personal stories about fateful love and omens with more or less mysterious touch or interesting twist. Jonathan Glazer surprises in the uniqueness of some scenes (a 2-minute shot on Nicole Kidman's face, for example), where you can feel the inner turmoil and dispair of the main characters even without words. The final shot gives the feeling that you missed something and can be interpreted in multiple ways. One of the few films where the closing credits come at a moment when you absolutely don't count on them.