D.Moore

Bond’s vendetta was a success. From the opening credits to the closing credits, the lightning-fast film races like a doped-up athlete, and it doesn't care if you can keep up with it and follow it or not. The best scenes, like in Casino Royale, come right at the beginning (the car chase and running on the rooftops), but "boring" is the last word that comes to mind in connection with the rest of Quantum of Solace. The finale is great, as is the airplane scene. Craig has confirmed that he is the best actor that could be acquired for the role of the modern 007. I hope he has many more Bond films to come.

At times it is strangely bland, at times it is a great action film with a lot of good to great things. Especially the duo of Jim Brown and Burt Reynolds, Goldsmith's (another) unforgettable score, and everything that happens in the final quarter, during which I was reminded at times of The Wild Bunch (from the same year). The overall impression was spoiled mainly by Raquel Welch, who looked great under the running water, but apart from this scene I couldn't find any other scene in the film where she had to "act".

Not great, not terrible. The story could have taken place anywhere, let's say in British Columbia, from where (or to where) the central couple would be transporting, say, a grizzly bear... The science fiction presentation just bogs it down with unnecessary questions like "Why does the planet freeze overnight and how does nature deal with it?". Neither of the Smiths gives a particularly interesting performance, nor does the direction come up with any great ideas... Perhaps only Newton Howard's music is above average.

I missed a final point, and the film didn't even have a proper plot - we know what happened to the characters, but unfortunately we don't learn what happened to the survivors. However, the writer's (and director's) ideas are very pleasantly blackly entertaining and watchable. Three and a half.

All I wanted was an ordinary unpretentious action movie that could entertain me (or at least not bore me), and I didn't even get that. Man, this was stupid! The director of the great Die Hard 2 made a stupid clone of Die Hard 3. Crap! And that “actor” in the main role…

Ninety-four minutes of film... And I wasn't bored with a single one. I read the book in one sitting, so I was "just" waiting to see how Danny Boyle would handle it. I have to say, he did a great job. It's not clear to me why the plot deviated so much from the book and Ralston's real story in the beginning of the film (the swimming with a couple of girls is a purely cinematic, completely unnecessary addition and also the only minus), but everything that came after that was sensational, believable thanks to Franco and constantly imaginative thanks to Boyle (you wouldn't believe how many possibilities there are to place the camera in such a narrow canyon). The film looks amazing, features an impeccable soundtrack and won't get out of my head any time soon.

It's a shame that some of the sympathetic believable bearded men end up being so interchangeable in the chaos, though the film's opening takes quite a bit of care to introduce them as best it can. It's the only thing that bothered me about 13 Hours. But on the other hand, it is quite possible that when I see the film on DVD, I will be able to tell one from the other more easily and it will only improve the film. Michael Bay surprised me - the film is not that pathetic (by his standards!), the action is not overdone and the wait for it is really exciting. The script can afford to let the characters say lines like "It's like Black Hawk Down!" without sounding ridiculous, and the director can use a trick mortar shell flight to refer to the dropping of the Japanese bomb in Pearl Harbor... I hardly noticed the runtime, there was always something going on and everything was in moderation. In short, more than a good film.

A decent noir movie - especially in the second half, it's one surprise after another (I like these stories in which everything seems to be solved, but it's in fact far from it). Thanks to the mostly believable acting performances and skillful direction by Frič, you will remember a lot from Guard 13, and Julius Kalaš did an above-standard job, because the music is downright great.

A great film. From the horrifying "audio story" of my beloved SK came an above-average film in all respects, which brings back memories of the good old days when the word horror didn't just mean dozens of disgustingly slit throats, piles of disemboweled intestines and a poor atmosphere. I have no reservations about the way the filmmakers handled the subject matter. The short original text was obviously not enough for the whole film, so a lot of things had to be thought out. But even the added passages feel like they are straight out of Stephen King! I was staring... Admiration must go to the director, the special effects team and especially John Cusack, who simply excels in this film about one progressively mad author. And so I thought - if I gave five stars to Darabont's The Mist, why not give them to 1408? One of King's best adaptations.

I wonder if all the critics of “American patriotism" who scold this film would be shouting so much if the main protagonists weren't Americans, but maybe Italians or Poles. I think not. Clint Eastwood doesn't give a damn where these guys are from - he was interested in their ordinary heroics and where, in a simple man, the courage to “just do something" comes from. Rather than glorious, I think he wanted to make a motivating film, and he did. Eastwood then showed his own courage when he cast the three guys whose story he is telling in the main roles, and along with an army of various acting coaches, he made it look natural in front of the camera. He did a great job of it. Their ordinary childhood and quite common worries with their choice of profession and a trip around Europe contrast quite sharply with that unhinged horror on the train, which Eastwood filmed with his typical style of a cold observer.