Lima

I wouldn't have expected such a bland performance from Norton (another Italian Job?), and maybe he didn't even know what ear-splitting lines the script would force him to let out of his mouth. The only thing that keeps this below-average fable afloat, with the look of a slightly more expensive TV production, is the great (and better from film to film) Giammatti, while the final Shyamalan-like twist stands on very shaky legs. And I might rename the whole film to "Hologram Man" – Eisenheim's stunts in the second half were closer to science fiction than to illusory shenanigans (nasty nitwit Lima).

Mitchum's absolutely delicious, characteristically ambiguous Dr.March is great – cynical and almost reprehensible in his relationship with his wife. On the other hand, his correct and almost fanatically consistent adherence to medical ethics seemed out of this world in the context of the lax attitude of his colleagues. Such a well-written character was just a joy to watch. Add to that the enjoyable and talented Sinatra and de Havilland and a nice emotional ending, then I'll slap on a 4* without even blinking.

The atmosphere and the production design are flawless (I simply love films with this retro mood), unfortunately the story seemed too skeletal and it was even missing De Palma's visual tricks like in Snake Eyes or The Untouchables. Hartnett's sonorous, deep voice was beautifully suited to the role of the narrative guide, and at times it even seemed that De Palma had turned him into something called an "actor", but then the ghost of Gittes from the similarly tuned Chinatown appeared before my eyes and I immediately dismissed the idea. Hartnett tries, but he can't play the dark strings, he's such a "sunny boy", every moment I expected him to rip off his jacket and hat and jump on a skateboard, and that leaves the characters of actors a class better than him – Eckhart and Johansson – without much room to be more engaging. All in all, it comes out to a – forgettable – three points.

Of the many recent political dramas commenting on contemporary problems of civilization, this film is one of the best, along with Syriana. This one deals with the problems of today's Africa, with the growing influence of multinational pharmaceutical companies and the harmful interference by corrupt officials and governments in the work of NGOs. Unlike the somewhat aloof and cold Syriana, however, Meirelles's film is told more clearly (without a barrage of names) and, thanks to the big theme of love beyond the grave, is more emotional, including an impressive ending that lifted the final impression to the absolute. I didn't think Rachel Weisz's performance was Oscar-worthy, but I kept the scenes with her in front of my eyes even after the film was over. Maybe I’m in love? :)

If there's one film in the last year that I unexpectedly completely missed, it was this one. William Macy under the direction of horror personality Stuart Gordon and a screenplay from the pen of David Mamet, one of the most respected screenwriters in Hollywood today? An unusual connection...good. I was looking forward to it! And it was like a cold shower. For the first third or so, the film is kept afloat by a likeable politically incorrect approach to some of the characters and by Macy, who’s fun to watch even if he’s reading from the phone book the whole time he’s on screen. Starting with the unbelievable (in a bad way) scene between Edmond and Glenn, I stopped believing everything that happens in the story; the words “unnatural” and “unbelievable” describe it well. Whether it's the development of the main character, individual scenes that would make your toes curl, and most importantly, I haven't heard such screwed-up, unnatural dialogue in a movie in a long time, including the philosophizing of the two convicts at the very end (I really didn't know whether to laugh or cry). A 76-minute cinematic torture, perhaps misunderstood on my part, but in this case I don't regret it.

This is one of those films that fizzles through your head quite painlessly and doesn't leave behind any unpleasant hangover. In short, a classic Disney product "for the whole family" (which always pays handsomely in overseas cinemas), touchingly transparent and predictable, with boilerplate characters; the perfect 100-minute brain off-switch. The whole thing is reliably kept in the waters of tolerability by the eternal boy Mark Wahlberg, and those who don't care for club fandom beyond the grave may be amused by the fact that American football is put in a sort of religious position here, with its worshippers spouting adorable catchphrases. Well, you tell me, is it even possible to be angry at a film where one of the characters, with a completely serious face, says to his son: “You know how I used to tell you about Van Buren scoring that touchdown back in '48? That touchdown got me through 30 years at that factory. Got me through all those times your mother being sick.”

A pleasant surprise, which I hadn't even hoped for after the uninteresting prequel. Except perhaps for the first 20 minutes or so, with some wannabe-funny dialogue in the vein of its predecessor, for which Smith deserves to be raped by Gandalf's staff, but starting with the great verbal duel Randal vs LOTR fans, the film catches its second wind and I enjoyed all the movie quotes, allusions to current modern trends and the dialogues with funny life observations, including Randal's surprising emotional outburst at the end. So, unexpectedly for me, I'm happy to rank this sequel alongside the smart Dogma and Chasing Amy.

Quite an entertaining piece of crap, perfect for a fun movie gathering with a beer in hand. It requires a lot of detachment, and then you don't mind the crazy logical lapses and the fact that something similar, in different variations, has been done many times before (although I don't remember "oral sex" by a rattlesnake). I missed a bit more humour and an original idea that would refresh the pile of predictable clichés (although I admit that the initial idea and the showdown with the snakes is appropriately crazy). Of course...when the ultra-cool badass Samuel L. Jackson, with an irresistibly pissed off expression, blurts out "Enough is enough! I have had it with these motherfucking snakes on this motherfucking plane!", it's clear that you just can't go below the 3*, albeit close :)

Al Gore, with his environmental sensibilities and close ties to the scientific community, has always been somewhat out of step with the US political establishment, his books (one of which was published in this country), articles and lectures speak for themselves. This film is one of those lectures. Fortunately, Gore is no boring uncle, he can often be funny, caustic, but above all specific, without using clichéd phrases, but offering scientifically proven facts. Chilling comparative photo-documentation, relentless graphs, opinions of top scientists and some light-heartedness here and there (the creators of The Simpsons also contributed). All this in a very understandable way, so the hour and a half passes very quickly. Then you can even forgive some of Gore's brief, undisguised grievances, which are a bit "off-topic" (the lost presidential race, the death of his wife and the subsequent anti-smoker activism, although I otherwise have no objections to them). The UN report, based on the conclusions of the Paris conference of world climatologists in January 2007, agrees completely with Al Gore. Among the few who rejected the conference conclusions were China and Saudi Arabia (how typical) and also Václav Klaus, Oilman of the Year 1993 and two-time winner of the "Green Pearl of the Year" poll, i.e. someone who has spent his entire political career downplaying environmental problems and treating the issue of global warming as a leftist myth, adding "I don't see any destruction of the planet, I've never seen it in my life, and I don't think any serious and reasonable person could say that." - Hospodarske noviny, February 9, 2007. The professor has his sights set on another Green Pearl. PS: On 1 February 2007, Al Gore was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences for his environmental work.

This is no milestone in the history of cinema, for that Cuarón would have to be as good a screenwriter as he is a director, but it’s definitely a film that can only be recommended. At least 2 scenes – the carjacking and the wartime turmoil in the refugee zone – are worthy of inclusion in the proverbial "hall of fame" of memorable scenes; the only thing I missed while watching them was an involuntary "Holy shit!". Another thing worth praise is the interestingly portrayed atmosphere of the near future: bleak and troubled, free from exaggerated technological trappings, but with an emphasis on one of the expected future problems of Western civilization, which is already beginning to rear its ugly head (see this year's events in France), namely the problem of illegal immigrants and the related rise of xenophobia. Clive Owen is a very charismatic guy and a good actor, I'm rooting for his current status as a major leading man, just a shame that in his case it didn't come sooner.