gudaulin

I have never attended a strip show and if I were invited, I would decline. I consider it in the same category as wrestling or beauty pageants, which means a vulgar show. And from that perspective, it also affects my evaluation of Soderbergh's film, which I otherwise consider a demonstration of very decent filmmaking. However, I have a problem with the fact that the director made a pleasant, cultured, and romantic film from an environment that in no way is pleasant, cultured, or romantic. In short, it glosses over and moves it to a different level than the world of strippers or their consumers deserve. The British film The Full Monty took a different approach and wanted to communicate and sell something completely different to the viewers, and with that film, I was on the same wavelength. Overall impression: 45%.

For centuries, people lived with the idea that their ruling and wealthy elites were somehow inherently better, more noble, and more skillful than the common folks, and this view was not changed by occasional revolts and revolutions, including the most famous French Revolution with the motto "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity." Until World War I, the usual concern was how many poor maids and servants were needed in court to balance the testimony of one respected property owner, and whether it was even possible to allow property-less people to vote. World War I and the Great Depression embarrassed the elites so much that the opposite opinion soon spread, which automatically depicts a member of the wealthy class as a parasitic libertine, and it is precisely on this wave that Fellini's La Dolce Vita rides. His film hero Marcello, although not a bad person at heart, repeatedly succumbs to the seduction of the decadent and lewd lifestyle of post-war Italy's pop-cultural and wealthy elites. I disagree with Fellini's one-sided perspective, but that is not a reason for me to have such a detached relationship with the film that I express it with just 2 stars. As time goes by, I generally understand Fellini less and have major reservations about his inability to edit and get to the point. Where you can express the same thing with a two-hour film, there is no reason to watch an extra hour of material just because the director suffers from a lack of restraint. All those frills, digressions, all those scenes that are just there because Fellini fancied it in some movement of his mind reliably ruin my impression of the film. When a film bores you, the best reputation and a handful of festival awards are useless. Overall impression: 45%.

We've seen this before. The Great Beauty is a clear tribute to the famous Fellini film La Dolce Vita, and the comparison with this film is obvious and made me return to Fellini's probably most famous film years later. I consider Paolo Sorrentino to be the best contemporary Italian director who can create fantastic experiences with images and actors. As for the form, I think he reliably surpassed Fellini, as Sorrentino is truly brilliant in that aspect. However, when it comes to content, Fellini reliably defeated Sorrentino. I saw beautifully shot images, and decadent scenes from the lives of today's Italian intellectuals and those who eagerly play that role, but overall, I don't really know what Sorrentino wanted to convey to me. I appreciate the soundtrack and I repeatedly played the song "Far l'amore" at home and enjoyed it. The party scenes seem like a great music video for the song, but while watching the film, I was rather bored, and my resulting overall impression of 50% and 3 weak stars represent some kind of compromise in relation to the work, about which, honestly, I don't know what to think. Paolo Sorrentino can do much better, and when he wants to, he can also convey something. In my case, he didn't succeed with this film...

Slavik's television film pretends to be a crime story and unfortunately fails to deliver as such. The resolution of the plot is painfully clumsy, which ultimately leads me to give it a mere 1 star and a 25% overall impression. Despite that, it is an undeservedly harsh outcome for experienced and well-acting Milan Kňažko. As a psychological drama about an aging man who has reached the peak of his profession and can only lose in both professional and personal relationships, it would work much better.

The only reason to waste time with Modern Girls is the trio of girls that most likely catch the eye of any heterosexual man, and above all Virginia Madsen looks like the embodiment of every teenager's dream. Unfortunately, the screenplay is stupid even for a segment of movies intended for teenagers. Overall impression: 15%.

The second season adhered to the rule that a continuation must bring significantly more in order to hold the viewer's attention. Literally, it overwhelms with a flood of motifs that together create an incredible tangle that is more laughable than it is suspenseful or scary. The team of writers seems to have not formed a cohesive unit, but each did their own thing and played in their own sandbox, thus Asylum mixes motifs of aliens, psychopaths, serial killers, war criminals, purely ghostly motifs, and even the devil himself. Again, there are great acting performances and very interesting film characters, but their stories often get lost because the series loses any logic and internal coherence, so I have to ruthlessly give it two stars. Overall impression: 40%.

Those who choose films based on famous directorial aces will probably avoid Serial (Bad) Weddings. Those who seek the presence of movie stars also have no reason to waste time with this film. However, it is the most successful film of 2014 in terms of the audience in France, which was rare agreement by the audience and film critics alike. At a time when almost every third French person chooses right-wing radicals, when smaller armies can be assembled from French Muslims fighting for the extremist Islamic State in the Middle East, when anti-Semitic attacks engulf the country, it is simply nice to see a film that handles the burning issue of coexistence in a multiethnic society, clashes, and the search for religious and ethnic identity with comic detachment and aims for mutual understanding and a classic happy ending. The four charming sisters, although they have their differences, are able to find their way to each other through all the quarreling. There's nothing really deep here, as it is instead a matter of pure relaxation, a popular comedy that does not have ambitions to conquer the festival scene and attack the rankings of prestigious titles compiled by recognized critics. However, it is tastefully made and I cannot say anything bad about it. It's pleasant to watch, although it certainly isn't anything essential. Overall impression: 75%.

Those who are not familiar with the phenomenon of Gervais' most successful project should first watch the original. It is extraordinary thanks to the dedication and charisma of its creator and it discovered the phenomenon of the aesthetics of awkwardness for television. On the other hand, in my opinion, the Czech version does not deserve the ritual execution demonstrated by the reviewers just a few minutes after the first episode was aired. The complaints about the absence of English dry humor or the inability to come close to it are somewhat out of place. The British version of The Office is everything but traditional dry humor. It is an original that turns the classic sitcom upside down and attacks its most fundamental principles. By the way, the Czech version is not as good as the original, because it is not as cynical, cruel, and ruthless as Gervais' humor, which pulls no punches and is filled with vulgarisms. Kopta steers it into a more jovial position, which breaks the spikes of conflict. Overall, however, I have a better impression of the Czech version so far than of the American one, even though the production approaches are completely incomparable. The Americans quickly slipped into the form of a classic sitcom and Ricky's The Office was unrecognizable to me. Here, the gags work and I don't have any significant issues with Kopta despite the aforementioned problems. Criticizing the copying of a famous original in the case of a franchise doesn't make any sense. This is an intention fully supported by the rights owner, Ricky Gervais. I have some trouble with the casting of certain supporting roles. Sára Venclovská is not a good enough actress, and she doesn't fit the type as a substitute for Lucy Davis. The Czech version of The Office is not a literal copy of the famous predecessor, although logically it must adhere to the basic scheme and style. However, it differs in the portrayal of individual characters, dialogues, and atmosphere. So far, I would give it 3 stars, but I will reserve my overall review for the end. Postscript after the airing of the 6th episode: actually, it wasn't bad at all and my certain hesitations have dissipated over time. The fourth star is somewhat opportunistic in response to the extremely negative judgments of the series from some critics, but I can confirm that the positive impressions prevail and, within the context of Czech TV series production, it is a decent above-average show. Kopta approached the character differently than Gervais, and his self-centered, selfish, cheeky, and sexist guy is, in a twisted way, actually likable. I can imagine another six-episode series and I would actually be quite grateful for it. Overall impression: 70%.

I love this film and it is one of the most sympathetic representatives of the Czech crazy comedy genre, which amusingly parodies Western gangster films. Thanks to the cast, director Lipský made use of Bohdalová's and Janžurová's natural comedic talent and the perfectly cast Lubomír Lipský in the role of the naively trusting George. The chaos that ensues has not become boring to me even years later despite all the reruns. In the last third of the film, the energy somewhat dwindles, but the overall impression still packs a punch and amounts to an overall impression of 90%. Although catchphrases are not a measure of a film's quality or popularity for me, here I thoroughly enjoy them.

Van Gogh only confirms the long-lasting curse that haunts the biographical film genre. These films are too respectful, serious, long - and usually boring, tasteless, and odorless. Life, at least in its final stage, was fascinating in the case of Vincent van Gogh. This could have resulted in a captivating psychological drama of a man torn by loss of faith in himself and burnout, burdened by worries about fragile health and existential problems. Instead, we see a tired film without any spark, where the protagonist resembles a startled fish. Overall impression: 40%.