gudaulin

I have seen only four episodes, so I am definitely not an expert on it, but from what I had the opportunity to watch, it is a decent British sitcom based on situational and verbal comedy. The humor is generally accessible, and though it is not an intellectual matter, those who liked the show Step by Step at the time will definitely appreciate My Family. It is a more refined sitcom than the well-known American cult series Married with Children. It is well-cast and well-acted. Overall impression: 70%.

A regular commercial product that would have had more to offer if a higher-quality screenwriter and director worked on it. The concept is not at all bad and - after all, some of the jokes from the first part of the movie are not to be dismissed. Like this, though, it's just one in a long line of films that try to lure audiences with a star in the lead role and low-level humor. Overall impression: 25%.

It is naturally just a coincidence, but Michaela Pavlátová managed to finish the film and send it for distribution at the ideal time when the dramatic events of the fall of the pro-Western regime fueled by American and European money are still fresh in people's minds. The visual aspect may not be innovative but thank God for that because Czech animated films have been stagnating due to lack of funding for many years. There isn't much to argue against the story, which is based on Petra Procházková's experiences and information gathered from her contacts with Afghan women, except perhaps to note that the scene where Afghan women are running toward freedom en masse is just an illusion. Procházková encountered only a small percentage of women who have been slightly or more Westernized (and not even close to one hundred percent) and desire some Western achievements, and essentially, the vast majority of Afghan women are actually quite content in their comfortable domestic cage. Overall impression: 75%.

A pleasant, positively tuned film about multicultural coexistence that relies on immediacy and authenticity thanks to the casting of the screenplay author Nia Vardalos in the main role and the casting of most of the characters with less known, yet visually interesting, unfamiliar actors. The screenplay is autobiographical, as Vardalos described her experiences with her own family in it and thus avoided the usual untrustworthy script constructions. The humor in the film is not exceptional, but pleasant, and it's simply a romantic comedy about love and tolerance. By the way, this small, low-budget film celebrated huge success in the American market. In my opinion, this is thanks to the fact that it is, in the positive sense of the word, an average film made tactically to appeal to the widest audience. It is understandable to everyone, but not cheap, and it is a film that can be watched by all age categories and viewers with various interests and professions. Overall impression: 75%.

Have you ever had the feeling of déjà vu? Something previously seen or experienced? This inconspicuous film quickly reminded me of one of the masterpieces of the American independent scene - The Station Agent by Thomas McCarthy. Two men, one woman, the search for a way to each other, and comedic and dramatic elements in one. However, there is a crucial difference. Both films are about friendship, but The Station Agent is a positive film that feels like an uncritical tribute to pure friendship devoid of any ulterior motives or sexual sparks, whereas Bicycling with Molière gradually takes on a darker tone and eventually comes across as an example of selfish behavior that kills true friendship. Friendship requires generosity and tolerance, which the protagonists of the French film are unable to show in decisive moments. The male ego is great and artistic vanity is immense... Bicycling with Molière is a small, intimate, and civically conceived film about one meeting, from which something great could have been born if its protagonists were able to suppress their pettiness. Overall impression: 70%.

One of those films that is bound to have very mixed reviews. An attempt at "highbrow culture" - and who wouldn't want to be considered an aesthete... Such a film will either resonate with you or bore you to death. For me, it's an unnecessary film that tries to be satirical but uses problematic methods and tools to do it. The long shots end up being boring, there is practically no story, and the characters are bizarre but in a way that is more awkward than unsettling or provocative. It's not funny enough to be a parody, either. A cold, impersonally made film - a calculated effort for the festival audience... Overall impression: 25%.

In the case of Munich, a comparison with the recently made film The Baader Meinhof Complex is possible and even desirable. While the German film is a precise analysis of a terrorist organization and manages to fit its inception, era of greatest success, and defeat into one feature-length film in a very complex way, prioritizing the analytical perspective over the entertaining aspect, Spielberg used a well-known terrorist act as a starting point for a drama that aims to entertain the audience and take certain ethical stances. It is definitely not a credible film in terms of historical accuracy, mainly because there are no verifiable documents - secret services and terrorist organizations usually do not reveal the details of their operations to the public. The Mossad agent, who served as the inspiration for the main protagonist, also noted that the character of the actor portraying him differed significantly from his thoughts and actions, so the film is certainly not a credible account of the events. Spielberg's approach is certainly pleasing to audiences, but from my point of view, the actions of the Israeli commando are burdened by unprofessionalism and in many details, they are not trustworthy. The screenwriter drew too much inspiration from spy pop culture thrillers like Ronin; for example, it is difficult for me to imagine that the top-secret Mossad, considered along with the East German Stasi as the absolute pinnacle of secret services in the second half of the 20th century, would depend on collaboration with an unknown private organization with uncertain goals and unpredictable behavior. From an acting perspective, this is a high-quality project. The screenplay and direction are traditionally at a high level, as is customary for Spielberg. The unexpected encounter of members of the commando with a group of OOP fighters, with a series of polished dialogues and the scene of their rivalry over a radio receiver, is undoubtedly pleasing to the audience and dramatically refined. Likewise, the portrayal of individual terrorist attacks, executions, and conflicts will satisfy both traditional genre fans and viewers who are looking for more than a one-dimensional action spectacle. Overall impression: 85%.

The film is as cold as a dog's snout and lacks tension in many places, which one would expect in a spy drama. Many people have already written about the unfortunate choice of casting Adolf Hitler's character. Hitler was at the peak of his popularity and his physical and mental strength at that time, and he had nothing in common with the Nosferatu vampire presented in the film. On the other hand, Jeremy Irons is exactly right in the role of Chamberlain, but I'm afraid that's the only thing that will stick in the memory of viewers in the long term. Personally, I don't like it when foolishness like an SS officer attacking a member of the British diplomatic mission at the summit meeting during the Munich conference appears in a realistically-looking historical drama, on which the attention of the world public was focused. That person could consider himself extremely lucky if he ended up only in a concentration camp and not directly in front of the firing squad. Overall impression: 55%.

The vast majority of film fans associate the title Repentance with the incomparably newer film of British-French production from 2007. If I remember correctly, only a few films have amused me as much as Tengiz Abuladze's did. The expression of concentrated boredom and embodied despair in the eyes of the audience during the screening of the film has deeply stuck in my memory. In the mid-80s, when the film was released in wider distribution, it became not only a film event but a social event, where everyone who wanted to be popular simply had to see Repentance. The problem is that it is a typical club intellectual film that is difficult to digest by a wider film audience. I would be a great optimist if I said that 5% of the viewers "got" the film, while 95% of them were at most disgusted. That doesn't change the fact that everyone praised it. It earned its place in film history for being the first film indictment of Stalinism. However, it's full of metaphors and symbols and has a dysfunctional story... As an introduction to the era of Stalinism, films like The Feasts of Valtasar, or The Night with Stalin and Burnt by the Sun work much better. Repentance is an overly long, poorly edited film that can be screened at a philosophical faculty, but not in regular distribution. Overall impression: 40%.

In the professional life of every actor, three phases can occur. In the first one, the actor simply wants to make a living. In the second, they want to stand out and increase their value. If they succeed, the third phase follows, where they strive to prove that they are not just a star of one TV role or representative of one type of actor. In other words, in this phase, it's about professional prestige and recognition, which has nothing to do with the cheap popularity of celebrities and B-movie stars. Such an actor is willing to even act for free, and will even engage in the production. So it happened that one of the highest-paid stars of contemporary cinema wanted to escape the cage of roles based on physical attractiveness and prove that she could play practically anything she was given. She chose the role of a worn-out rough prostitute, and it must be said that the transformation is (even in the context of roles she played a decade later) fascinating in its own way. Charlize did not limit herself to physical transformation but thoroughly studied masculine behavior to the extent that you doubt her sexual identity and at least have the feeling that she must have trained long-term on the Czech-German border while satisfying the desires of truck drivers and previously went through some brothels and prison. On the other hand, as a psychological study of an extreme human character, the film fails because its main character is not an interesting and multi-layered personality. The direction is unremarkable, the screenplay too straightforward, and except for the main character and the increasing number of corpses around her, it has nothing to offer. All in all, it's a 3-and-a-half-star movie, and since this is a highly-rated film, I am giving it a lower rating as usual. Overall impression: 65%.