NinadeL

Whether it’s The Magpie in the Wisp or this, it's all the same crap anyway. The revolutionary "youth" in several ways... Or, as others noted, Ballad for a Bandit is a film for contemporary witnesses, or a memory of a play from the Goose on a String theater, which, of course, was only very loosely approached. Nothing more.

It’s very good, not perfect, but very pleasant. However, it’s really too bad about the cut scenes, whose runtime is not all that devastating, and yet it is without them that several jokes are robbed of their point. Above all, the characteristic of the buddy movie as defined by Frances McDormand as Guinevere disappears. In the background of the story is also the interesting tale of the adaptation of the book written by Winifred Watson in 1935, which was originally supposed to be filmed by Universal in the early 1940s, but Pearl Harbor put an end to all such plans. The story goes that Watson sold the rights to her book a total of three times, but sadly died 6 years before an adaptation could be made. Her son thinks she would have liked it very much. The question remains whether it was necessary to move the story to the brink of World War II and at the same time define Miss Pettigrew as a woman from whom one war took something and only the second gave it back. That is a cliché.

I Am Suzanne! is the third of five American films Lilian Harvey made for Fox and Columbia between 1933 and 1934. I Am Suzanne! is a colorfully-tinted melodrama set in Paris and based largely on the projection of the acting performances onto the marionettes they lead. The unhealthily-skinny Harvey is as if embedded in her classical environment, and the script offers her an artistic number in a European-style revue, but with a noticeably American signature. And that's the main problem. The whole misses the point when I Am Suzanne! merely pretends to be set in continental Europe without shedding the mannerisms of a cheap second-rate American production (there's no more compelling reason to make the transition to puppet film than hysterical kitsch). The rest of the cast, led by Gene Raymond and Leslie Banks, only confirms the pervasive cluelessness. On the other hand, I Am Suzanne! counters the traditional left-wing claim that German films could never be equal to American ones.

Dangerous Game is a classic example of a film about which Madonna fans will tell you: "The entire film was edited so much in the final scene that it completely changed the original look, and Madonna cried when she saw it and regretted that she didn't have the same power in the film industry as she did in the music industry because she said she would never have let that happen. In her own words, the film is bad, but she's good in it." This has resulted in the divided attitude toward her career as an actress and singer. Personally, I agree that this whole experiment stands and falls on the symbiosis of the performances of Madonna and Harvey Keitel, who have nothing to be ashamed of, but at the same time, the nature of their acting is revealed here, which in its naked version is not as bulletproof as at other times. They are still working together to this day, and the natures of the projects are diametrically opposed to each other, from Blue in the Face to Arthur and the Invisibles. However, I'll give Madonna more credit when she stars in classic wacky comedies and Harvey for anything with a traditional narrative. Unfortunately, the rest of the ensemble in this film is almost awkward and the original title Snake Eyes was more apt.

The first version of the adaptation by Majerová was accused of being too lyrical, particularly by the trio of screenwriters Otto Hofman, Jiří Weiss and Jaromír Pleskot, who also directed The Girl Robinson Crusoe. Ota Hofman completely abandoned this approach when he and Karel Kachyňa wrote a new script, which Kachyňa also created in 1974. This later version is, in my opinion, much more successful, although it did not learn from the basic mistakes that lay in the imperfections of the set design, which was set around 1936. Making do with one old car never made for a good retro film. If the main protagonist played by Tvrzníková seems to have fallen out of the most modern youth magazines of 1956, then it is literally flagrant. A proper acceptance of the time period of the plot is of major importance in understanding the main storyline, wherein the father is completely passive in taking care of the household and no one finds it strange that his immature daughter should literally sacrifice herself for him in this respect. She also flirts with the role of a surrogate mother to her newly born baby brother at the expense of her own emotional life. Fortunately, however, the story is based more on the girl's inner world, which will charm any admirer of Crusoe's adventures. There’s also no need to have it spoiled by the poor handling of the dialogue of the main protagonist, much less by the toothy model Rudolf Jelínek and the not- particularly-expressive Libuše Havelková, who made her screen debut as the maid Tonička.

Another hysterical comedy with Les Charlots and Michel Galabru. Even after years of seeing some of their films on TV, the current DVD re-release provides the same experience. It's crazy, very much so. It was only today that I first noticed the social motif that justified the film being shown in Czech movie theaters before 1989.

A teen series that was different because the main character loved classic Hollywood movies and passed that love on to others. There was also an episode set at a No Doubt concert in Season 6.

A meaningful series of half-hour documentaries on the main features of its genre. It is hosted by Christopher Lee, who is all the more likable to me because he himself had to admit that his Dracula (whichever version) was not the best and pales next to Bela Lugosi's version and those of many other successors. However, some of the themes are duplicated (Dracula and His Disciples, Blood-Drinking Beings and Bela Lugosi / Frankenstein's Friends, Baron Frankenstein and Boris Karloff) and I’m not a fan of some of the episodes (especially from the second half, such as Scream Queens, Gory Gimmicks or Man-Made Monsters).

Approximately 15 minutes of missing material is not so much that we cannot appreciate Marika Rökk’s return to film after the war. 4 years after the colorful The Woman of My Dreams, she appears in a logically smaller B&W production, which reveals that nothing has changed at all. War or no war, new regime or old, the genre of her films is immortal and still works. If you want to enter the perfect revue world with Marika, Fregola has the key to this dream. The plot is a superfluous component in this case.

An excellent original, which after 25 years Magda, unfortunately, covered up with the idea of making a color remake with her own daughter in the lead role. The only one who had any sense was Max Ophüls and he said he wouldn't do it again. Why would he? Having it perfect once is enough.