gudaulin

In my reviews regarding animated films, I often criticize the prevailing Disney-style production and American slapstick for their uniformity, pandering, and dominance. Here I had a unique opportunity to see the complete opposite of such productions, and once again, I am not satisfied. I have seen expressions of admiration for imagination, dreaminess, poetry, or creativity, and in principle, I agree that these attributes can be attributed to Chomet's work. However, Chomet fails in one very important aspect, which is the story. This would have been sufficient for a charming short film; after all, I enjoy many similar alternative films from the works of Priit Pärn and many other independent animators from around the world. However, on the scale of a full-length film, this film becomes too stretched out and therefore exhausting. It lacks the art of brevity, compactness, and dynamics. The famous creator is simply playing around, and the viewer doesn't really matter to him. Yes, it has a very decent rating, which I think is related precisely to how much this film deviates from the current world production. My two stars primarily represent excellent visual design and the aforementioned creativity rather than my overall impression, which, considering what has been written above, is genuinely mediocre, and I would rate it at around 40%.

Manhattan is considered by film critics as one of the most important and highest-quality films by Allen, but to be honest, it didn't impress me as much for a simple reason. It concentrates on all the main and favorite motifs of Allen's work - emotionally unstable intellectuals, the city of New York, favorite music, criticism of intellectual snobbery, loneliness, unfulfilled romantic desires, and nostalgia. Because I saw Manhattan later than many of Woody's other films (and there were quite a few of them due to his overproduction), those previous films played a more significant role for me. Not to mention that I appreciate the much more comedic early Allen or the late experimenting version of him. In Manhattan, there are certainly classic Allen slapstick tones, but the motif of sadness and nostalgia is much stronger in the form when family relationships were far more understandable and stronger, divorces and custody battles were exceptional, and people were closer to each other. Of the two fateful women in Woody Allen's life, I like Diane Keaton much more than Mia Farrow, but even that didn't get Allen a fourth star this time, even though everyone in the film delivers honest acting work. Finally, the greatest impression is made by the black-and-white cinematography and the dreamlike photographic scenes of the nocturnal panorama of Manhattan and the most famous New York architectural wonders, as well as similarly shot scenes of the connection between the two tragic protagonists of this sad love story. Overall impression: 65%.

There is the murder of a young woman in the film, but it is, overall, more of an interesting psychological study of human loneliness, bitterness, and alienation than a classic crime drama. In the first half of the film, the screenwriter still lets us wander and thanks to fragmented scenes and a non-linearly told story, it raises a number of questions in the viewer about the role of the individual characters of the drama. However, in the middle of the film, it reveals its cards and the film works primarily due to the emotions of pity for the tragic character of the eccentric tailor. Monsieur Hire lives alone and his only companions are white mice in a terrarium. Furthermore, besides occasional visits to the brothel, his only hobby is spying on the charming neighbor across the street. However, one day one of them takes a step toward being closer together... But it's not a love drama, it's a bitter story of unfulfilled feelings. It is a slow film where even a relentless boxing match is accompanied by the tones of classical music. Overall impression: 80%.

I am going to be much soberer and in opposition to film fans on FilmBooster, who ranked Seven in the top ten, I have to say that in my opinion, the film has only one, but very significant plus in the form of David Fincher's atmospheric direction. Just like elsewhere in his work, he works magic with the camera, carefully creates scenes, plays with sound and imagery, and everything is subordinated to maximum effect and audience experience. Unfortunately, at the expense of logic, it is simply straightforward. Instead of being a crime thriller, it leans more toward the horror genre, specifically foreshadowing the later successful horror series Saw. The screenplay is overly complicated, just like in similarly tuned films with a brilliant manipulator, such as Primal Fear, and this simply would not work in reality. It is interesting to observe several film details where Fincher subordinates everything to the atmosphere. For example, wherever the characters enter, it must be dimmed and for God's sake, no one should press the light switch. They use flashlights or the room is sparsely illuminated by red flashes, to emphasize the gloominess of the environment and its mystery. The director chooses the most repulsive environments, neglected and dirty alleys on the outskirts, and old buildings with peeling facades, and plays even more with the interiors. These are usually much more dirty and devastated than would be possible in reality. The camera revels in decay and mold, which would have already alerted the surrounding tenants to some irregularities. The police officers enter an apartment with their guns raised and proceed to the last room, where they only then lift the cover off the victim, suddenly clutching their noses. Again, Fincher subordinates everything to the element of surprise. It is good to compare the dynamically shot chase scene in an apartment building with the chase scene on the roofs and in the apartments of an Arab quarter in The Bourne Supremacy. While the latter fits organically into the story, here the culprit should be able to run down the stairs and disappear through the main exit, but that would, of course, be artistically unattractive, so Fincher lets his villain and the pursuer run through parts of the house that probably no one has yet built and will never build because it would be an unapprovable architectural masterpiece. There are many similar absurdities, but the power of Fincher's unmistakable directorial style is so pronounced that it reliably conceals them in the eyes of the majority of viewers. Even I have to appreciate the atmospheric nature of the scene where Brad Pitt has a gun to his head and expects a shot. The brutality of the individual crimes naturally also captures the audience's interest, but my impression is lowered by the philosophical framework of the drama, with which I do not identify in the least. While another Fincher film, Fight Club, seemed like a great portrayal of the phenomenon of rebellion, anarchy, and consumerism in a modern metropolis, here the nihilism and depression seem inappropriate to me. Overall impression: 60%.

Mike Hodges' film is interesting. An atypically shot and realistic gangster film, with the support of the star Michael Caine, should have the potential to become a cult film, thanks to its bloody revenge story. However, it is emotionally cold and distant in its execution, reminiscent of Michael Haneke's later work, and that may be why some people use the term "boring" in their reviews. At the same time, I am somewhat bothered by unfinished or improbable details, such as the gun our anti-hero takes to the busy city to carry out his revenge. Parading around with it in broad daylight on busy streets is not exactly logical, although you could say it's effective. An American remake was made based on the motifs of this classic British film, with Sylvester Stallone in the lead role, but it didn't come close to the qualities of its original for understandable reasons. Today's fans of popcorn movies may be put off by the somewhat unusual editing and longer scenes, but for me, it gains in attractiveness as a film that stands out from the crowd. Overall impression: 65%.

This film is somewhat superficial, with cheap effects, and the selection of information and processing is tendentious. It may be sufficient for an average viewer, but it definitely won't enrich history enthusiasts. Overall impression: 50%.

Sam Raimi has made a decent series of films, some of which benefit from the nostalgia of movie fans (The Evil Dead), some from his reputation as a commercially successful creator (Spiderman), but if I had to label a film that he truly succeeded at and is the pinnacle of his directorial efforts so far, then I would without hesitation point to A Simple Plan. Some compare it to Fargo, whereas I would rather use the analogy to Sidney Lumet's film Before the Devil Knows You're Dead, but in any case, it belongs to the same dark crime genre that transitions into top-notch psychological drama with well-developed characters and polished emotional scenes. The scenes in the sheriff's office, where the protagonist hunts down individual bullets, and later in the crashed airplane, where he tries to load them, are among those that I will hold in my memory of my best movie experiences, and the scene of the final execution reminded me of a similar tragic scene from Of Mice and Men. So what is the message of the film? When you find a bag full of money, try to be single if possible, or quickly hand over the money to the appropriate authorities. Otherwise, things will quickly start to go wrong and you won't want to see those consequences. Compared to Fargo, this film is somewhat less flashy, so don't look for any bodies in a woodchipper, but the ending is more acrid. The sad protagonist finds himself in a situation where he doesn't experience a terrible ending, but rather endless horror. Overall impression: 90%.

Twin Peaks was, at one point, something of a revelation for me in the field of TV series, completely turning my view of TV production upside down and introducing me to David Lynch as a top-notch master of the mystery genre. Even though more than 20 years have passed since then, I think this series has not been surpassed, despite the fact that TV production in the United States is currently experiencing a huge boom and the mystery genre is very popular. The most fascinating thing is to watch the transformation of the individual characters and, thanks to the professionalism of the entire team, be carried away by the atmosphere of mystery and anticipated threats. In the second half of the series, especially toward the end, it heads towards distinctly hallucinogenic territory, which Lynch perfected in his mishmash Inland Empire, and so I'm one of those who appreciate the more sober first half. I must also emphasize the atmospheric music, which perfectly evoked the dreamy mysterious atmosphere of the town. Overall impression: 95%.

Please do not confuse this version of The Professionals with the famous British action series. This is a classic western, set on the Mexican border during the end of the Mexican Revolution, where a wealthy financier sends a group of four adventurers to rescue his wife from the clutches of kidnappers. The fact that something is different is already signaled by the information about the film's content, so I wasn't surprised by the "big" surprise and I have a fairly indifferent relationship with the western genre; I tolerate its clichés much worse than, for example, gangster films or other lighter genres. This film really does have all of the genre shortcomings, which fans of westerns will appreciate, but I just shrug my shoulders at them. And so the four gunmen fearlessly eliminate dozens of their enemies and practically massacre the entire rebel unit to save the Mexican federal army some work. The actors, who exude authority and charisma, just barely earn this film three stars. They were simply Actors with a capital A, not bodybuilders, boxers, or wrestlers, who would go on to dominate the action genre twenty years later. The film is also harmed by the screenplay that culminates in a finale that is expected, but truly idiotic in the context of the previous massacres, making the previous human casualties completely unnecessary. Overall impression: 50%.

From the perspective of form, it's not particularly groundbreaking, but it is strong in its content, concise, and without any apparent errors. An overview of crime in the Czech Republic, its various sectors, and the problems of police forces in adapting to new conditions. There is a lot of information in a reasonably large space without the exhibitionism of film creators or those interviewed. The film features the faces of real criminals and journalists specialized in investigative journalism. Overall impression: 90%.