gudaulin

Harrison Ford has an advantage over the vast majority of action performers in that he is a quality character actor. Director Phillip Noyce may never collect laurels at film festivals, but he is a decent craftsman who is occasionally capable of creating a great scene, such as the attack on an American convoy in the middle of a Latin American metropolis. The screenwriter appropriately tamed his imagination, so the story has a beginning and an end without convoluted structures. In the end, it is an average action film with a typically invincible protagonist. The genre's peaks are elsewhere, but Clear and Present Danger is a risk-free choice for a single viewing. Overall impression: 55%.

In this film, two great French actors Noiret and Rochefort got together, who are undoubtedly attractions for any passionate film fan. Moreover, the starting point of the film - dealing with an exceptionally critical family situation - promises a strong drama. Unfortunately, I did not have a great experience with this. The film keeps its viewers at a distance and does not try to engage them emotionally. You can only speculate about the motives of the crime, and if you learn from the perpetrator's mouth that he wanted to give a gift to his girlfriend by murdering the victim, it is practically impossible to identify with him or have an understanding of his attitude. It is also difficult to find understanding for any character in the film because their psychology, interactions, and motivations are inadequately depicted and justified. I don't know what the director wanted to convey to me, perhaps besides the banality that a descendant who committed a crime is still your son. However, even that can be conveyed in a disproportionately more interesting and emotionally engaging way. Overall impression: 45%.

The film cannot deny its connection to the western genre. Its story and conflict are built on the same foundation as the films about famous 19th-century gunslingers. The only difference is that the cowboys have been replaced by railway workers smelling of oil and soot, and the Native Americans and outlaws have become wanderers who want to use the railway for free travel across the endless distances of the American continent. Similar to a classic western, this film is also based on the conflict of two strong individuals and offers the romance of the beautiful American wilderness, unrestrainedness, and freedom, as well as the charm of the old industrial railway viaducts, depots, and steam locomotives. Just like a western, this film also leads the viewer astray with false mythology and non-existent rituals in the real world. The reality of tough and hardened wanderers was surely more down-to-earth, and they probably didn't care about any rules. For Ernest Borgnine, the character of the ruthless train chief was the role of a lifetime in its own way, and even the experienced and famous Lee Marvin can consider this a spectacular role in his long career. Overall impression: 80%.

I would never have believed that a film with such strong dramatic potential, favorable comments, and above all featuring the charming Natalie Portman would disappoint me to the extent that I would ultimately not even give it even an average rating. I consider the only real positive aspect to be Natalie herself, who practically never leaves the screen. For a similar dramatic role, many a TV star would do practically anything. Natalie is not only beautiful but also a talented actress, so there is nothing to criticize about her in this regard. However, the screenplay steers the film into the most banal waters of Hollywood studio mainstream with emotional manipulation, bookish dialogues, an overly smart child, and a typical happy ending. The music is seriously heart-wrenching, and unfortunately, I mean that ironically, but the film is knocked back two grades primarily because of the dialogue. Statements like "I may not have been a good husband, but I think I am a good person" are nothing compared to what the screenwriter is willing to put in his characters' mouths at key moments. The screenwriter may play with grand drama but lacks the courage for a real conflict and a significant clash. The situation of children living together with new partners of their parents often turns out much worse than what is depicted here, despite the best intentions of the adults. And one more thing bothers me. Watching American studio productions, one could easily get the impression that American society consists almost exclusively of elite lawyers, prestigious doctors, and successful entrepreneurs who consider it essential for their offspring to move from private daycare to a prestigious nursery school and from there to an exclusive private elementary school seen as preparation for Harvard. Their classmates may have a different skin color, but they must never come from a different social class, as the simple plebs could contaminate their children. Yep, even rule by meritocracy can be sickening sometimes. Overall impression: 40%.

Practically every economically developed country has experienced a smaller or larger epidemic of drug addiction, as well as a wave of reflection on the drug scene through the artistic sphere. In the conservative bourgeois environment of Germany in the 1970s, child drug addiction and prostitution were social taboos, and when two reporters attempted to publish extensive material in the form of a shocking open confession of a young prostitute, they faced harsh opposition and could not find a publisher. However, when they finally managed to publish the book, it became an incredible bestseller that influenced the social atmosphere and turned Christiane into an instant celebrity. Her literary confession ends hopefully with her departure to live with her grandmother in the countryside, away from drug-infested Berlin. However, her subsequent life was evidence of the saying that once a junkie, always a junkie, in the better case one who is currently abstaining. Christiane was an uncontrollable fireball. The creation of the film was inevitable, and fortunately, it received so much attention in its production that there was no major disappointment. The cast corresponds to the ideas I had formed about the book's characters. The film relies on the power of visuals, lacking the depiction of Christiane's thoughts and mental processes, which could have been resolved through the protagonist's inner voice. Of course, the film cannot encompass all the situations known from the book, but it accurately captures the important elements. We Children from Bahnhof Zoo is one of the most significant and tragic drug stories of the 20th century. Overall impression: 90%.

There are undisputed genre classics that I shrug off and, at best, give them an average rating. On the other hand, there are films that I find underrated. I include The Killers among them. Because of the number of reviewers on FilmBooster, it is essentially an unknown film, although it has been shown on television here several times. If I were to compile a ranking of the best noir films, The Killers would be somewhere in the second half of the top ten. The screenplay expands a short Hemingway story about a cold-blooded murder on demand into a sophisticated scam in the underworld that surfaces years later thanks to an inquisitive and tenacious insurance agent. The famous Burt Lancaster plays an unusual role as a victim, and he's not the main character in the film. Overall impression: 90%.

A professionally filmed melodrama that vividly illustrates the crazy circumstances in Stalinist Russia of the 1940s and 1950s to today's audience. Sandrine Bonnaire and Oleg Menshikov rank highly on my personal actor's scale and they definitely did not disappoint me. Despite its attractive subject matter and strong story, the film has something either excessive or lacking. Despite indisputable festival ambitions, or perhaps because of them, the result feels somewhat artificial and calculated. This is a common case with international co-productions, which involve a lot of compromises. Overall impression: 65%.

At first glance, Chomet seems to have calmed down compared to his most famous film (yes, I mean The Triplets of Belleville), giving up on his lively caricature-like drawings. He tames his creative flight to adapt a foreign substance and film a melancholic story of an aging entertainer who does not fit into the new rushed era, and dedicates his remaining energy to a poor girl, opening up to her the world of the big city from which he escaped to the countryside. The cabaret magician with a rabbit, essential props, and a supply of proven unchanging tricks is forcefully pushed off the stage by loud rock and roll and new techniques that offer greater miracles than the worn-out master. He has no home, and no future, and the present looks increasingly hopeless. Only nostalgia and memories of better times remain. The slow pace in this case does not matter because it corresponds to the chosen film aesthetics and subject. Overall impression: 80%.

I have never fully understood the enduring popularity of Pitch Black, which has become a small cult hit. There are even those that consider this film to be a cheap version of Alien, although upon closer inspection, it is clear that both creators were aiming for something completely different and despite the seemingly similar starting point in the form of a dangerous extraterrestrial organism, the quality of both films is light years apart. Where Scott hires top-notch theater actress, Twohy prefers a model with no film experience. Where Scott carefully builds atmosphere and works with a wide range of human emotions, from excitement of discovery to nervousness and tension, and even to sheer despair, Twohy primarily reduces his film to a routine action movie in the second half, with an invincible hero equipped with a tough shell, but a good heart. :-) The only positive aspect for me is the presence of the charming Radha Mitchell in an atypical role for her. Overall impression: 25%.

In terms of direction, character work, and tension, the film runs like clockwork. All three main characters are written, cast, and performed in a way that evokes a sense of maximum viewer identification and sympathy. The film has high-quality visuals, camera work, and atmosphere, but the list of strengths suddenly ceases if you reflect on the screenplay. It departs from the field of science fiction, which plays in the style of "what if," but still adheres to a logical interpretation of the world, whereas in the case of Source Code, logic took a vacation. Here, the story is based on a logical short circuit, a nonsensical premise that filmmakers get away with simply because a significant portion of the audience has become accustomed to switching off their brains with the first shots of a film and enjoying the visual effects and action. Another problem is the traditional Hollywood happy ending. This film would be much more impactful if it ended with the sacrifice of the main hero and his voluntary demise in the capsule in the laboratory. Overall impression: 60%.