gudaulin

Many films about the Holocaust and the world of concentration camps during World War II have already been made, including big-budget, visually stunning horror shows, and audiences are already sufficiently satiated by such sights. Coming up with something new is difficult, but Stefan Ruzowitzky succeeded. If anything can be criticized about The Counterfeiters, it is the small, typically European budget that does not allow for any grandly filmed crowd scenes, panoramic shots, or visual orgies. It is a small film that relies on a strong story, interestingly outlined characters, quality acting, and, last but not least, the fact that it is based on a true event, and the creators faithfully stuck to reality. The story of a group of prisoners who produced counterfeit money at a Nazi extermination camp in strict isolation and maximum secrecy offers plenty of absurd moments, such as the class differences between a professional criminal and a banker who meet in the same cell to carry out a shared task of devaluing currency. An excellent move was not making the main protagonist an idealistic political prisoner, but a cynical member of the underworld trained to survive in extreme conditions, who has a very unique sense of honor. A strange psychological battle for survival and the most dignified reconciliation with their role in working for the Nazis unfolds between the counterfeiter Sorwitsch, the young communist sabotaging production, and the SS officer supervising the counterfeit workshop. Overall impression: 90%.

Recently I read an extensive interview with an ecologically oriented scientist who claimed that one hundred million people clearly suffice for this planet and any larger number burdens its ecosystem. Fortunately, I did not find out how he wants to reduce the number of Homo sapiens members to an acceptable level, but I think that while watching Scola's film, the scientist's forehead wrinkles would deepen when he saw the main character's family clan happily expanding. Historical events such as the rise, culmination, and fall of the fascist regime, the post-war building of democracy, and the development of consumer society, all are noted by the viewer only fragmentarily, as if on the periphery. The director is interested in a specific family, the meeting and passing-by of its members, and the love and disagreements of the family clan. Although the film has a runtime of over 2 hours, given the large number of characters and, above all, the captured time period, it is a necessary minimum. Despite that, it is difficult to navigate through the constantly emerging faces of children and grandchildren. Overall impression: 80%.

My second encounter with Bruno Dumont also didn't go well. It was to such an extent that it was most likely the last. As a construct, I didn't accept his script at all. Slack Bay has at least decent poetics, great camera work, and excellent casting. It's just a pity that it's so shallow and goes nowhere. For about three-quarters of the film, I thought I was watching a 3-star film, but in the final part, I felt tired from the constant overacting and grimaces, and the ending that seemed to go nowhere decided about 40% of my overall impression. You can enjoy Slack Bay the more you don't take it seriously and give up on searching for any allegories and deeper meanings. It's actually a slapstick about how egalitarian France distributes degeneration democratically among elites and the proletariat. While Fabrice Luchini portrayed his degenerate with cuteness, Juliette Binoche played such a self-centered and affected bitch that you would hardly find an equal in the film world. I was impressed by the young Raph, I can see her potential, which would be a shame to waste. Slack Bay is one of those films where everyone certainly had a great time on set, but the reactions in the movie theater will, in my opinion, differ radically. This film will definitely divide the audience in a very significant way.

Am interesting movie with great potential, which Hans Weingartner managed to fulfill only partially. Partly because he didn't shoot all that much, but mainly because the viewer understands too soon whose side the director sympathizes with. The theme could have been approached as a ruthless drama, where the game would soon get out of the hands of the young "revolutionaries," but the director did not have the courage for that. Or as a sarcastic comedy about why revolutions are so difficult in Western Europe today. As Karel Kryl wrote, revolutions have not succeeded in Germany since the 1950s because revolutionary-minded students quickly buy a car and an apartment after starting work and have no desire to demolish their belongings in revolutionary riots. But the director didn't have the desire for that either. It would have been beautiful if he had cut to ten years later, when Julia Jentsch leaves a similar clique with her partner, just like they were improving their class opponents' lives in their youth. For a functional drama, it would have been good if the kidnapped manager became an equal opponent and the screenwriter equipped him with arguments and audience-sympathetic qualities to deepen the dramatic conflict. However, the creators wanted to portray him as an unsympathetic scoundrel, so the only scene in the car with police escort actually undermines the whole point. The film runs at half throttle from beginning to end, and it could have been funnier, more dramatic, and more provocative. Overall impression: 60%.

Veber's situational comedy usually relies on the contrast of mismatched pairs, and A Pain in the A... does not deviate from this definition. It is precisely the foundation of this film that allows its humor to work so well, that Veber returned to it in his old age and filmed a remake of the film for which he once wrote the screenplay. Before him, Americans also used the same material and commissioned the famous Wilder to improve the studio's budget and get the most out of the meeting between a cold-blooded killer tasked with a key mission in his career and an ambitious troublemaker. It is customary to praise the original version and criticize - as film fans say - unnecessary remakes. However, I will not do this in the case of A Pain in the A...; over time, I have seen all three versions and do not consider any of them to be artistic failures. Not even A Pain in the Ass, although film critics and fans ritually shot it down. Each version has its strengths and weaknesses. The combination of the best elements from all three films would result in a great action movie. Lino Ventura's presence is amazing in A Pain in the A... He was not a comedic actor, but the role of a cold-blooded killer suits him perfectly. He does not overact, and you simply believe in his character. The desperation in his eyes looks authentic and creates even more amusement. On the other hand, there is Jacques Brel. I do like him as a chansonnier - although he is essentially trying to play a comic character seriously, it comes off as rather annoying here. I have a fixation on Pignon as a likable character, but in Brel's performance, he represents such a bothersome individual that I would gladly punch him. Overall impression: 80%.

I unfortunately have not read the book, so I cannot join the usual reservations that the literary source material is significantly better, and I cannot identify with the frequent criticisms of Tom Cruise's acting. Although he is certainly not the best character actor of his generation, he also does not embarrass his profession and can successfully handle the role, which shows why he is the highest-paid male star in American cinema. The film has a solid screenplay without errors in logic, unrealistic action, and ridiculous conspiracies while being suspenseful and entertaining. In addition, in the final confrontation with the leaders of the mafia gang, the ending is clever and surprising. Although the film does not change the view of the genre in any way and is a classic thriller made by a major studio, I still highly appreciate it within its category. Overall impression: 85%.

Is this a case that an intellectual and sophisticated aesthete like Paolo Sorrentino made a common genre film? Nope. He cleverly and with subtle sarcasm pulls the viewer's strings. It somewhat reminded me of the Coen brothers and their film No Country for Old Men, in terms of how it deals with audience expectations. However, Sorrentino's approach is more intimate, and slower, and his film has a distinctly Arthouse nature. No, The Consequences of Love is not primarily about crime, but rather about the feeling of the worst possible defeat in life, and above all, it is a film about revenge. Revenge beyond the grave, where the key to understanding the whole film lies in the opening scene, where the anti-hero looks out the window and watches a funeral procession. When you realize that you died ten years ago, you don't have to worry about the consequences anymore. Toni Servillo delivers a focused performance and proves that he belongs to the elite of the current Italian acting scene. Overall, this drama seemed to me the second most likable film by Sorrentino, although it certainly isn't for everyone. Overall impression: 80%.

A nicely filmed series with a clear effort to capture historical events and the atmosphere of that time as faithfully as possible. If anything hurts the project in my eyes, it is the fact that I am intimately familiar with the history of the French Revolution, so the plot and the development of the relationships between the characters of the series could not surprise me in any way. The project deviates from historically verified facts only in details that are not at all important for the average viewer. The casting is important and very good, and it is clearly an international project involving film stars from all over Europe. Brandauer is especially good in the role of Danton, but that character is so fascinating that it would be a sin to play him poorly. Overall impression: 90%. The creators did not shy away from describing bloody repressions and the motif of the guillotine appears more than often...

The Time Traveler's Wife is a well-made, cultivated film that combines a love story with sci-fi themes, but to be honest, I found it boring to watch, and, although I can't fault it for anything major, as sci-fi it is logically unfinished and overall, it seems really unremarkable to me. It lacks a more significant plot and tension. It's an ideal film for a romantic evening at the movie theater, when a couple in love focuses primarily on themselves and sees the film only as a backdrop for their date. Overall impression: 45%.

I haven't read the book or seen the original 1970s film version, so I don't have to deal with the eternal problem of how the screenwriter and director have allegedly desecrated the sacred source material. Departing from the original genre to make a sci-fi comedy seems like a very sensible idea, as such a subject can't be taken seriously today. I openly admit that I enjoyed this more than most contemporary comedies, though that doesn't necessarily mean the film is full of original, sparkling humor. It's more a reflection of my positive relationship with sci-fi, as one tends to poke fun at what they love. Frank Oz's direction is decent within his capabilities, with the weaknesses lying more in the script. The casting is good, and in the case of Nicole Kidman, a perfect hit. Overall impression: 55%.