DaViD´82

Despite more than three decades of development and unprecedented advances in science in this area, this show is still stimulating and informative. Thanks to this, many Czech (not only) boys failed to resist the "magic of space/science". And perhaps in three decades the same will be said about an unofficial special which does the same in a format adapted to the "modern time".

The French Connection made in a French way loosely based on real events of the Marseille camorra. This is done through a decent old-school crime movie that consistently builds the duality of the two main characters from the opposite sides of the barricade. It goes so far that they are also stylized in the same way, so in some scenes it is hard to tell them apart and throughout the whole footage the following rule applies "if one of them appears on the screen for one minute, then the other one will appear soon". And no matter how stylish it is, it makes it far too obvious to its own detriment, that the movie wants to be part of the same club as the classics of French Connection, Heat or American Gangster, without, however, having their qualities. But that doesn't at all mean that it is not a very good crime movie anyway.

As if the "Victorian Dickens spirit", complex, refined in terms of style and packed with different aspects, and through and through purely British (non) fantasy original was also reflected in the BBC's respectful approach to capturing this material. With this being said, it is rather an illustration of the original than its adaptation. However, it must be acknowledged that it is a beautiful and detailed illustration that accurately captures the original (in terms of atmosphere, cast, slow pace and processing), which is definitely not so common. Wait a minute… it is for BBC actually.

It seems that someone at Warner Bros must have gone mad because to approve budget in the amount of an expensive blockbuster for a 70-year-old director who has not made any feature film (let alone action or high-budget) for almost twenty years, that even includes bizarre scenes (breast milk, flamethrower guitar!) "from the world after the fall of values" filled with psychedelic metal opera/road movie madness about mad guys (on top of that hidden "remake" of the General), which is a continuation of his own amateurish “Grindhouse-like" cult post apocalypses trilogy, it requires a lot of courage. What is the most surprising is not the above-mentioned but rather fact that the new Mad Max is not a ridiculous dull follow-up or an indecent smooth derivative of the original trilogy, but it is an unusually confidently made straightforward (not to be confused with dull!) "dirty movie" (basically a mix of the ending of the second movie extended to full-length footage, Doomsday, Wages of Fear and Spaghetti Western in an unprecedented and a world that is depicted in detail where madness is the standard and not the eccentricity) with playfully inventive and imaginative non-stop action, which is not just an empty mandatory filler, as it is typical for most blockbusters today, but there is something special about it and moves the story forward; moreover, it way it is shot is captivating, independent and clear. Thanks to which the fourth Max movie becomes an instant genre classic. It will take you back to a time when this type of film did not mean over-the-top CGI adventures with no a stuntman (let alone an actor) at all. On the contrary, this movie has everything that a great movie of 80s show have in all respects. The only difference is the possibilities and budget corresponding to the 21st century and with the best action heroine "who is not just a guy with breasts" from the times of Ripley from the first Alien. It is sad that such a movie is only a kind of unrepeatable studio anomaly, but because of this we should admire (of even love) the fourth Max even more. PS: Refined Mad Max: Fury Road Black and Chrome Edition is a great watch, which is easy to believe that Miller wanted it like this from the beginning.

"Marvel is playing games with the audience "Find ten differences". Leaving aside the obligatory "bigger, longer, more expensive, more computer effects", it is indistinguishable from the first movie. What you would miss terribly is a charismatic villain (again), it is noticeably lacking the human element (again), what is completely absent is any fear of the characters (again), everyone is just playing with each other in a harmless way (again) and the final hour turns into one big not escalating, confusing and an interchangeable CGI action mess (again), in which just a bunch of bad guys from space replace countless robots. It is almost impossible to tell the first and the second movie apart, because each of them has the same pros and cons, so you know exactly in advance what and in what form you will get. Which, of course, applies to some extent to all (cinema) Marvel movies. The question is whether to take this established "corporate unified approach" as a good thing or bad.

Clever and sophisticated. Just to its own detriment, not as clever and sophisticated as it seems. Above all, the final fifteen-minute ending gives the impression that they don't know how to go on, so they just make it easier for themselves and incorporate the easiest way out of it in terms of a screenplay. They do not care at all it doesn't fit the previous story line. The Black Mirror anthology often addresses the same themes and asks the same questions, but finds much more interesting, more disturbingly current and not so obvious answers to them. Which does not mean that it is not a nicely intimate, intelligent and, above all, high-quality sci-fi, which is quite rare. Especially in Czech cinemas. PS: And if nothing else, at least the shooting took place at the Norwegian Juvet Landscape Hotel, so it is an impressive example of organic architecture in practice.

There is no point in denying that sometimes it is almost too tendentious and manipulative. Especially when the author gradually loses distance during those seven years and makes some questionable (un) ethical decisions in order to achieve his goal. But... But thanks to that, it's so fascinating to watch. As Jarecki becomes more and more obsessed with this subject the more from gives up from being an impartial witness of the "procedural process of clarifying the circumstances of a murder" and becomes unprecedentedly active in his investigative role of the main driver of events, whose primary goal is to be the one who reveals/convicts the culprit once and for all. And these events are really something, because something SO fascinating, unbelievable, exciting and extremely disturbing and chilling is quite rare. You simply cannot resist and sooner or later you start having doubts whether it is a brilliant mystification, because Durst's actions and life story shocks with their "complexity" that easily overshadow all the over the top Nordic thrillers about the black sheep of a wealthy family who are elusive serial killers thanks to impenetrable walls in the form of billions in the bank. In any case, thanks to the above, it would have not been less interesting if a documentary filmmaker had watched Jarecki impartially over time during the filming of this one.

He’s a lawyer who breaks the law. A Catholic who dresses as the devil. The biggest advantage of Netflix's Daredevil is, to a large extent, its biggest weakness too. The creators were completely openly inspired by the best authors of the Murdock Saga; Frank Miller, Brian Bendis and Mark Waid. So, this adaptation is just as dark, uncompromising, full of rain and blood, based on a gloomy atmosphere, slow-paced, shows fights where every punch hurts and addresses purely adult themes, erases all differences between black and white, as might be expected. The centerpiece and main driving force is Murdock's defense lawyer (in this respect he is the only hero who is interesting in everyday life but the creators did not take full advantage of it, sadly) and his concealed alter ego. It's not just another standardized, fluffy, colorful popcorn movie for the whole family, which Marvel has previously mass produced both for TV and cinema screens. Daredevil is a dark crime movie about organized crime and corruption. So this is the first time that Marvel is more interested in characters than (super) heroic tinsel. The problem is that as the creators adapt the individual lines/motifs in above-mentioned way, they fail make them sophisticated enough, and so many of seem unnatural and forced an in one case the character also fades away. The ambitious are high, so the movie mentions a lot of things but most of them have no continuation. What's more, there's no as fatal escalation between Murdock and Fisk, who mainly acts from behind the scenes, as would be appropriate given how excellent thy both are (and I must stress that D'Onofrio's Kingpin is the first bad guy ever of Marvel's universe who does the job, is interesting and respectful). This snag is even more unpleasant considering that other filmmakers have done it already in the same or maybe even better way. And not only in the movie department, but also in the television and it will remind you of Arrow, but Daredevil has more in common withPerson of Interest in terms of style, approach to action, how the moral principles and bad guys are addressed. After all, the local Elias is the same as Kingpin.| S1: 4/5 | S2: 4/5 | S3: 4/5

You would not resist falling in love with it if the movie had been more (much more) self-conscious as it was in the Rock or Statham scenes. In this way it is an unprecedented “over the guilty pleasure top" soap opera action movie with over-the top story line, which despite having an ultimate testosterone cast is lame, because instead of these guys punching each other all the time, the computers animating their CGI doubles in flying cars in many different ways are applied. And it is captures by a shaking camera, where the overall confusing chaos is multiplied by the epilepsy-inducing editing. Last time we saw such a waste of potential/cast was in... Well, actually sixth Fast and Furious. PS: Diesel will say "We are/I was a family" in different ways perhaps even more often than "I'm Groot" in the Guardians of the Galaxy.

An annoyingly eager wannabe modern western set in the rainforest that somehow works when it doesn't weave overused wisdoms or cheap mystical parallels pulled out thin air and focuses on the genre line, which is present only in the final twenty minutes.