DaViD´82

I have been complaining for a long time that Czech cinema has been avoiding letting skeletons out of the closet of local history, while our German neighbors have been tackling one historical blot after another. Plus, they almost always do this in an unforgettable way. And so I am really extremely grateful that somebody here has tried at last. That it remained just an attempt is another matter... It was clearly lacking any dramatic tension. Tension that was present in The Ear. Cut deep and not just skate about on the surface. Even so, this is a sufficiently high quality picture (the scenes with the bicycles, the scenes with the photo-shoot!) that withstands, despite its shortcomings. P.S.: The poster only makes sense with the opening line, which, while being original, I would say is a little counterproductive. And also I wonder whether the similarity of the story with the fates of Čeněk Šlégl was merely incidental or not.

Truffaut's mastery is already on display in this film more than once, but it would only come out in all its glory in later films. PS: Am I the only one who thought that Paris was so visually and atmospherically reminiscent of old Žižkov?

The prawns would probably love Whiskas, but personally I would prefer to pay entrance for a movie that had it clear in its head whether it wants to be a sloppy B sci-fi where the worse it is the better, or E.T., Transformers, Children of Men or War with Newts. I’m not saying that it can’t be combined into one whole, but certainly not by forcibly changing genre every quarter of an hour, forgetting about everything that has come before and shaking a stolen closed circuit camera around like a maniac. I followed the trend presented by Blomkamp and within fifteen minutes I forgot that I had ever seen this movie.

Hell on Earth begins for him, for me doors open into movie heaven. A picture that took great advantage of the “gap" in crime sagas, i.e. the time spent in prison. Usually movies begin at the end (or end and the beginning) of a prison term, or they jump it with a caption reading “X years later". Audiard manages to create a really raw and unpleasantly authentic atmosphere that is at the same time full of poetry, the type of stuff that Michael Mann often smuggles into his movies. Simply a masterly, slow-moving movie. Nothing more, nothing less. And nothing else is needed.

A nature documentary from the BBC. What more do I need to say? Well, OK, this is the same as Planet Earth, not on a global scale this time, but focused fully on one place, the oldest national park in the world, Yellowstone. While the opening, winter episode is completely faultless, overflowing with quantities of unique information and shots, the parts about summer and fall end up rather overshadowed. Apart from the mountaineering bear expeditions it brings nothing that we haven’t seen before even in other documentaries (although never so beautifully) and the fall section is spoiled by cheap philosophizing at the end (while the opening half hour is again perfect; my favorite is Clark’s Nutcracker). However, I’m not sure myself where these are justified objections or if it’s just spoilt nitpicking which is the BBC’s fault for the high quality of its productions.

A synonym for darker than dark, cynical and absurd social comedy that doesn’t know the concept of political correctness? From now on, Louise-Michel!

12 Monkeys in the pub after a few rounds. In the end much less humorous and much smarter than it seemed to be at the beginning (up until the moment with the jukebox, everything thereafter is the reason why I almost went down a star). A beer and a hoodie are as essential kit as a towel when reading “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy".

All of you Rosemund Pilchers and Danielle Steels out there had better start getting worried, Almodóvar has broken into the romance fiction market. Boring romance fiction that you’ve seen a hundred times in telenovelas, feebly masked by calling it art. If it weren’t for Penelope, in a couple of years time, we’d be more likely to see this on morning housewives’ TV than on the CT2 Film Club.

Paradoxically, the only blot on the entire movie is that cult Mini chase through Turin at rush hour. The excellent tempo and textbook hyperbole that the movie had up until then slips into a series of forgettable scenes like out of a regular commercial. No people, just cars. This kills one of the movie’s main attributes, Caine’s charisma. That wouldn’t be so bad if the chase didn’t lack any hint of tension. And the bizarre idea of not having background music for the chase was largely responsible for that. But the stylish ending tipped the balance in favor of the movie in terms of the number of stars I decided to give it.

Gran Torino meets Indy in escapades à la Pixar. Some parts are great, but altogether it seems so inconsistent that it’s bothering. However, Carl is a really nice guy and his only blemish is that he’s not dubbed by Clint. The real “hero" and the dog do their CGI best to make this movie work. And they had to try hard, because this movie was moving alarmingly near to the shameful average (quite normal for Pixar).