POMO

In this delightful conversational film set in a living room, one line escalates into comical misunderstandings and a quarrel involving everyone. The charm of French chattiness and overwrought emotional reactions is balanced by serious moments and the revelation of the individual characters’ hidden feelings. What’s in a Name is similar to the slightly better Italian (and now German, as in this case) Perfect Strangers.

The return of the main characters from the first Jurassic Park was pleasing, as they are still likeable, enthusiastic scientists who love dinosaurs. Drawing the viewer into a world that dinosaurs are a living part of is cool. The movie gets off to a good start with the trafficker’s den in Malta and the long action scene that takes place there. Chases on rooftops and on a motorcycle in the streets, as we know them from Bourne and Bond movies, upgraded with velociraptors...why not?! But the rest of the film, in which we are only transported to a different reservation than in the first film, is a lumbering retread of what we have already seen, and it’s not very exciting, for that matter, with a lame Tim Cook-esque villain, logical crutches and nonsense unworthy of this film franchise. And only one fantastically shot scene that recalls Spielberg (the dive into the lake). And sadly, it is a short scene. Dominion is the weakest instalment of the whole franchise.

In the third episode of the saga, my favorite character, the lawyer played by Robert Duvall, is missing, along with the chemistry between the members of the clan, of which he was the unifying element. And Pacino’s Michael Corleone is very different – I wouldn’t say that eight years had passed since the previous film, but rather twenty. However, moving to his native Sicily and dealing with the Church in order to enter the highest circles of power is fertile ground for another gang of corrupt goons and Michael’s reflection on his own life with the devastating weight of remorse makes the film a respectable conclusion to the trilogy. And the most emotional.

The Godfather Part II is a cinematic masterpiece that extends the story of the Corleone family into the higher realms intertwined with politics and the even darker rules of mafia practices. Whereas the disintegration of the family as the only real value of the protagonists’ existence was hinted at in the first film, the second, longest part is entirely about it. One timeline – about the childhood and adolescence of the first film’s most magnetic character (Marlon Brando), played perfectly by Robert De Niro – depicts the core of Vito Corleone’s personality in his early days in New York, while the other timeline examines his more inconsistent and darker son Michael, who became the most powerful American mobster of his time. It is a great role for the charismatic, respect-inspiring Al Pacino, whose Michael is capable of anything. More characters, a more interesting revealing of the workings of the most powerful underworld and even more pronounced between-the-lines plot shifts come together to form a chilling mosaic of thought. With all due respect to Martin Scorsese, it’s a good thing Francis Coppola remained the director of the trilogy. His more poetic form of storytelling suits it perfectly.

The Godfather is a classic that engages viewers not emotionally, but through revealing the fascinatingly depicted world of a New York mafia family and studies of its characters. And through elegant filmmaking that doesn’t rush anywhere, because it wants to devotedly savor every morsel of the story. Marlon Brando gives a standout performance with creative details in his speech that make his character magnetically interesting. The film is a loftily conceived and inwardly sad portrait of people with corrupt ideals whose only non-false value is family. And of the disintegration of the family, because the rule “like father, like son” does not always apply. My favorite passage (other than all of the scenes with Brando) is surprisingly the romantic one and the only explicitly nice one in the whole long film – the wooing of the Italian peasant girl by Al Pacino and his show of respect to her father.

We have long been aware that Kosinski knows how to work with visuals and emotion, and here Bruckheimer and Cruise take him on a very pleasant journey of nostalgia. The connection to the original film is literally loving, the characters’ motivations complex and expansive. Fans of the original will get more of the same, but better, with an upgrade of the action scenes to a never-before-seen, physically honest airshow in the mold of Nolan. It’s been a long time since I’ve been so glued to an IMAX seat. I’m not giving Top Gun: Maverick a fifth star because the plot was safely predictable through the first 90% of its runtime in order to soothe fans of the original. The final 10%, however, is a wonderfully delightful Hollywood attraction. And I was pleased by the inclusion of Val Kilmer’s character.

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent is a pleasant diversion with several fine moments and references to other films, but it also has barren moments and numerous clichés – including the most hackneyed ones from Hollywood family movies. Nic Cage enjoys himself (as he should!) and Pedro Pascal’s acting is even more interesting here.

I like Affleck and Armas, and Lyne’s Lolita is better than Kubrick’s in my opinion, but Deep Water is a failure. Though the initial implausibility of their relationship eventually gets explained, that is the only thing the film aims to do throughout its entire runtime: reveal what holds them together despite their scorching jealousy and dangerously murderous game. In order for such a film to work, however, it would have to more intensely depict the psychological and physical dependence of one on the other, primarily with more frequent and daring sex scenes, releasing the constant tension between them. But Deep Water is NOT an erotic thriller, as there is minimal sex lasting only a few seconds. And it needs sex. A better choice is the earlier Unfaithful with Richard Gere and Diane Lane.

Triviality with a heart. Another teenager wants to leave her family that needs her so that she can achieve something more and apply her talent. And so they deal with it, but perhaps for the first time in an American film with deaf characters and sign language. Though the film mirrors the 2014 European original The Belier Family in terms of subject matter and key scenes, it adds a lot of ideas and is flawlessly directed and acted as a whole. The Oscar for best picture? CODA wasn’t made for the purpose of winning it, but it was made by a woman and it depicts the lives of the disabled with the aforementioned heart and storytelling inventiveness, so it had all of the prerequisites.

Eggers doesn’t get in a hurry and he gets off on the symbolism of the numerous dream sequences, but he never finds the time to explain and depict the key twists in the protagonist’s decisions in proportion to their importance. This is due either to unfortunate editing or to the screenplay by a filmmaker who knows how to do a lot of things, except for the most important thing, which is to tell the story in a dramaturgically complex way and to work sensitively with its motifs. The Northman entertained me with its spirit of a bloodthirsty wolf, visuals, distinctive cinematic world and cruelty of the likes that we don’t see in the current mainstream due to its incorrectness. But the more time that passes since I saw it, the more I see it rather as a boldly presented B-movie with embarrassing content than as an “art-house epic”.