DaViD´82

My record is a pair of lakes in one go. Can anyone beat that? P.S.: I would like to recommend Benning literature about the fundaments of landscape composition, since his dogmatic “halves" irritated me reliably after just ten seconds. And more than eight thousand more were waiting for me. I soon gave up. I just don’t have the patience for this kind of thing, let alone the time. Thanks very little.

The forth movie is in two episodes. And despite forming a single unit, they differ widely in quality. Where the first part is full of atmosphere, earnestness, detective work and brilliant demonstrations of the deduction method in practice, the second part turns into a fragmented unit where half of it is taken up by an independent memories passage, which I must admit is good, (a very free adaptation of “A Scandal in Bohemia") followed by more relaxed courting and vexation with dear Watson and “the one who looks like a skinny Hana Zagorová when she was young". We get back to the case itself only at the very end, which means that the Holmes character here is shamefully slow. But no wonder, everything is solved already by the end of the first half and this part is here simply for the steam boat finale when they catch the criminals. But still, it’s a great forth movie, but only because of the five-star first half.

Daytime boredom, existential boredom, boredom here and boredom there. Yes, that’s what Oblomov is (also) about. But despite all the boredom, this isn’t at all boring at any time. Why? Because Russian realism together with the Dejvice ensemble has been a guarantee of quality for many seasons already. Whether it’s an adaptation of Dostoyevsky, Gogol or Goncharov. And tales from Oblomov’s estate are no exception. Ivan “don’t call me an introvert" Trojan’s Thalia award was well-deserved. Macháček again proves that he is considerably happier on the stage than in front of the camera. And together they are like a enamored couple on a bicycle made for two. The other actors are also outstanding, but simply play second fiddle (here. In other situations Krobotová, Novotný and Myšička would be praised to the hills for their performances).

Do they have no shame? Don’t worry... Everything is as it used to be. Jan Hřebejk is still one of the greatest filmmaker talents in this country. He still has a nose for actors (but unfortunately not for non-actors). The rather shaky introduction is more than made up for by the subsequent storyline with Babčáková and Liška. And in the end, even Oskar’s story starts to get more interesting, improving hand in hand with the quality. Simply a classic Hřebejk movie (perhaps the best since Lop the Loop) with all of the pluses and minuses that this “subgenre" carries with it. The absence of Jarchovský (at last!) didn’t have any significant impact on the coherence of the screenplay. It remains a mass of perfect scenes that don’t make that much sense together.

Summer 1996. I’m a teenager and I want to go see an honest to goodness action movie. Dad’s paying, I’m choosing. Eraser with Arnie is playing at the Lucerna (and I know that my dear parent would rather go to that). There’s something by some guy called Bay playing at the Světozor, but it’s with Connery and Cage. Hmm, what’s the better investment? If I’d known back then that “some guy called Bay" was the very same Bay who made Bad Boys, I wouldn’t have hesitated a moment. But then I was in two minds. Very much so. In the end I decide on The Rock. It was longer. You get almost 140 minutes of action for the same money. Neither of us regrets the choice to this day. About six months later I nearly killed my dad when he rented this complete load of codswallop that takes itself far too seriously on VHS against my specific instructions not to do so. Back then the grapevine was saying that it wasn’t even worth the 40 crowns rental fee. And they were right. The day after we had to rent The Rock to get rid of the foul aftertaste, there was nothing else we could do. Nothing.

A cold Hollywood calculation “for one week" without any other ambitions than earning money fast and being forgotten even faster? Unarguably. On the other hand, it could have made good viewing. Yes, Caruso evidently likes Hitch, probably saw Space Odyssey and just loves movies like Enemy of the State. Which shows that he has taste, but says nothing about his talents. The beginning isn’t at all bad, but Caruso’s sprint runs out of breath half way through already. And during the true American finish, Eagle Eye commits harakiri at a moment when the end isn’t yet in sight. Shia is excellent as always, even though he was playing exactly the same role for about the seventh time over. But there are a few moments where I gets going (in the first half), so for a very forgettable, almost solid routine movie it’s just enough. By a very narrow hair’s breadth.

“The Liar" depends mainly on the performance of Thalia theatre award winner Vondráček in the role of Lelio and a set rich in scenery and costumes. The filmmakers captured the atmosphere of Venice surprisingly well - both those “wearing a mask" for the tourists, and those ordinary people hidden down some back lane. Lots of director’s ideas that brighten up the movie - especially the tourists went well. But despite updating the story to present day, these are still typical members of the comedia dell’arte. It’s full of confusion, mistakes, love and situation comedy. Which wouldn’t matter if it were funny - which it is, but only when Vondráček is on set. When he is watching his servant’s attempts to find love, then it’s almost unbearable. It needed to show a bit of courage and to break the rules of the aforementioned genre and get rid of this typical character. He is clearly superfluous in this play and in the end his story sort of trails off. Proof that even the very best production design and one actor can’t perform miracles at the drop of a hat.

The first twenty minutes, Watson is waiting for Godot, walking backward and forward. With the arrival of Godot (and a very stylish entrance, I must say) everything returns to the same well-intended, lightened-hearted rut. But, like in the preceding episode, I rate Sherlock most at the moments when he tries to solve unsolvable cases. And certainly not if he tries to unravel a network of conspiracy in London’s underworld. On the other hand, he is so pleasantly eccentric that he’s great to watch. So: “Do svidaniya at Baskerville, Comrade Holmes!"

Absolutely the best episode of the first two series. But, unfortunately for me, it is about the fight between Holmes and his nemesis. And I don’t like this part even in book form. I like Sherlock when he’s solving cases. And not when he marches around in a hero’s pose during duels with the origin of everything evil, Professor Moriarty (he is visually cast incredibly true to the original illustrations by Paget). The first time I saw it, I didn’t really like the light-weight mood, which was a little too much in places - it was different in past episodes. But, as I wrote, this is the best episode. If only for the obscure fight at the end. Far better than any King Kong vs. Godzilla.

This could have been an excellent episode, if it weren’t for the drawn-out passage about the robbery. It only gets interesting toward the end of it in the study. But watching the preceding almost quarter of an hour of the main duo’s escapades either in the yard or in the greenhouse is more irritating than entertaining. On the other hand, it’s nice that the creators went their own way, while still remaining faithful to the book it’s based on.