gudaulin

A naive and desperately childish spectacle in the backstage of the sci-fi genre, lacking interesting characters and an appealing plot. One of the biggest mistakes of Ben Kingsley in the role of the villain Spoda and Jonathan Frakes, who not only took over the directorial position but also the role of producer. I estimate that this flop disappointed him the most... Overall impression 20%.

Arlington Road is a conflicting film that is based on the highly traumatic events surrounding the bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City in the mid-90s. It features a very decent cast and a typically Hollywood screenplay with several shocking revelations and plot twists. Herein lies the first hitch because the screenplay is somewhat overcomplicated. The initially very effective plot is, in fact, too dependent on the assumed actions of the victim, and a small hitch would be enough to foil the plan. Real conspiracies have simpler blueprints. The second problem lies in the core of the film - it speculatively assumes the existence of a deeply secretive and highly effective terrorist group that commits a horrifying attack. It is as if the film was made at the request of a police or secret service chief to increase their department's budget. It only creates psychosis, more surveillance cameras in the streets, greater powers in surveillance, and loss of privacy. The actual bombing in Oklahoma City was done by amateurs and succeeded due to the shameful underestimation of security measures and risks by far-right groups. Overall impression: 55%. The strongest scene of the film is the opening when a severely injured boy stumbles down an abandoned street...

Satisfaction with The Tale of Sweeney Todd is directly proportional to the willingness to accept that it is a small TV movie with an obviously limited budget. The screenplay is certainly not at the top of the genre, but John Schlesinger is an experienced and quality director who, even after falling out of favor with major studios, has not forgotten his craft, so the film has decent camera work and can convincingly portray the atmosphere of dirty Victorian streets. The film is a combination of elements borrowed from the stories of E.A. Poe and Charles Dickens. It is a historical detective story with a horror arrangement that will not offend, although it will not surprise and exhilarate an experienced viewer. Ben Kingsley delivers a traditionally reliable performance. Overall impression: 60%.

Highly unrealistic but pleasantly sentimental, this deeply human film depicts childhood experienced during a brutally cruel time. The script is cleverly built on the memories of a young boy. As is known, the human brain has a unique healing ability to filter out the unpleasant from our memory, making even such an idealized version of the past acceptable and justified. Thanks to this, the survival of Jews in a concentration camp can be presented as a captivating game, allowing viewers to dream along with the main character. Overall impression 85%. Roberto Benigni surpassed himself as an actor, writer, and director.

I apologize to the numerous community of Rob Zombie fans for often giving a Boo! rating to his work. It is only because the ratings are dangerously high, and an uninformed film fan could accidentally watch the movie. Similarly, I could have given any number of stars, and it would still have minimal informational value. Just like pornography, which, no matter what form it takes, is only about one thing and serves one purpose, and movies like The Devil's Rejects serve solely to elicit a certain type of emotion. Those who enthusiastically give four or five stars obviously have a good understanding of the film world and are aware of the film's minimal value in terms of traditional film values. Understanding the screenplay, observing camera work, editing, and acting performances – that's work for the seasoned. With one exception, and that is the soundtrack – which is understandable given Zombie's past. The actors are a separate chapter – but yes, this film does feature several actors... I pondered for a long time why they would get involved in something like this until I figured it out that they did it out of hunger! Only a terrible hunger on the brink of exhaustion could drive them to be part of something like this. In reality, Zombie's fans can recognize and appreciate the one thing that is worthy of admiration in his work – namely, the maximum undiluted, raw brutality in the smallest amount of space possible. We live in a difficult time full of neuroses, and The Devil's Rejects is a unique therapy for all those who can't afford to have their own torture chamber in the basement. It is truly expensive, believe me, I have calculated it countless times... Sometimes, however, even weaklings who hesitate to slap their mother can enjoy such creations, let alone break the neck of the scoundrel who bullies them... The overall impression for those who can release adrenaline differently should be zero... By the way, The Devil's Rejects has nothing in common with horror as a distinct genre. It is a tutorial for those who need to know how many square meters a human body splatters when run over by a truck or how much meat can be scraped off human limbs. Enjoy your meal!

Of all the directors of Polish films of moral unrest, Krzysztof Zanussi is the most distant for me because of his distinct Catholicism in his work. I come from different ideological positions and Zanussi's starting points are unacceptable to me from two perspectives. The escaped prisoner bears no responsibility for the executions in the concentration camp and therefore does not have to feel even the slightest guilt. Collective punishments were common in Nazism, and any resistance and opposition would be immoral from such a perspective. The executioners should bear all the guilt... That Catholic sense of guilt for the original sin and a long list of "sins" that followed has always been deeply unpleasant to me. The second perspective concerns the role of Catholicism in the 30s and 40s. Many ordinary Catholics and lower clergy certainly acted bravely and according to moral principles. However, this does not change the fact that Catholicism of that time systematically supported the worst regimes (for example, Hitler called Franco a Jesuit pig because of his closest ties to the Catholic clergy) and the Vatican behaved toward Hitler more than pragmatically... As for Zanussi's film, it may be thematically strong, but the execution lagged, the screenplay needed refinement, and considering the emphasis on dialogue and camera work, it is more of a TV production. Overall impression: 45%.

It's actually a tragedy when one realizes that the theme is perfectly exhausted and neither the script nor the direction are exceptional if we subject the film to a thorough analysis. However, it scores points by maintaining a certain level, not using toilet humor, and not pandering cheaply. If this were the genre average, then American cinema would stand very high. The likable and experienced female cast delivers the maximum of their potential, resulting in a pleasant situational comedy with a reasonable duration. Overall impression: 70%.

From a film perspective, it is not a perfect piece because Pierre Richard was still learning directing on it, but he definitely had more film ideas than in the second half of his career, so Distracted is full of energy and humor, just like the works of young Woody Allen. The commercials are almost a perfect example of parodying consumer style (especially the one with the last cigarette, which I really like). Overall impression: 75%.

A routine period crime drama, which would have a rating about 20% lower without Jean Gabin's participation. But even Gabin does not stand out from the average, as he has played countless police commissioners like this in his career. If the film is interesting for something, it is as a reminder of the actors' faces from that time. Overall impression: 55%.

Jurij Ozerov had a special privileged position in the Soviet film industry. He directed war films with a generous budget, which suffocated Soviet cinema because, for each of these grandiose films full of military technology, ten smaller and possibly better film projects could have been made. He logically had the support of official circles, so in individual scenes, we see dozens and hundreds of moving tanks, a huge number of extras, and the sky filled with airplanes. These parts of the film will be appreciated primarily by fans of military technology and military history, and Ozerov could have been engaged by any of the associations that organize historical shows imitating famous battles of the past today. On the other hand, working with actors, having a sense of detail, and real acting are things Ozerov was never good at. When I compare this film with the American films about Vietnam made in the 80s, the comparison is dismal. Individual soldiers do not mean much to Ozerov, as he focuses on the decision-making of generals and political figures. There are several scenes with pathos typical for Soviet war productions, and the dialogues are limited to proclamations and slogans. Ozerov's view of war corresponds to the official Soviet interpretation, so Stalin is portrayed slightly negatively in the spirit of perestroika, but the Soviet military leadership, which was extremely ineffective and caused immense suffering to the soldiers and the population, is not subject to fundamental criticism. Paulus, as the supreme commander of the encircled German army, is given little space and portrayed in a relatively favorable light due to his role, which he played in Soviet captivity and later in the GDR, where he did a lot of work for the Soviets in propaganda. Overall impression: 25%.