POMO

An epitaph to the dark past of the Czechoslovak nation. A past that took the smile off the people’s faces and yet thirty percent of them want to return to it. It’s sad that a foreign filmmaker had to be hired to capture this past in a dignified manner. Agnieszka Holland confirms her status as a quality dramaturge, and you can sense from the film that the subject matter is close to her heart. Considering it’s a TV production, Burning Bush is well written, convincingly acted and visually attractive, making it worthy of the big screen. I was most impressed by the first, most human third.

A lot of great work went into the editing, acting, set design and period stylization of J. Edgar. It is definitely a more fun and livelier movie than Lincoln. However, it should have focused more on what makes it attractive to the audience. Hoover’s attempt to introduce the revolutionary idea of collecting fingerprints (the most interesting storyline) is not finished, and his physical relationship with an actress whose portrayal could help explain his complicated sexuality is missing completely. Even though the second half of the film is more about his inner demons and intimacy, it is just as interesting as the crime-oriented first half. Anyway, it is a respectable monument to a controversial personality and has indisputable educational value.

“What will happen when there’s no more Woody?” someone wrote in their review on a Woody Allen movie. I keep asking myself that when I watch almost every single one of his movies. No one else can write such dialogue. No one else can portray characters in this way and have them played by such aptly chosen actors who, for just a small paycheck, enjoy every line. Human, intelligent, sensitive and conveyed with a light ironic touch, Blue Jasmine is also sad, making you sympathize with the protagonist.

Runner Runner is listless. There are loads of similar genre movies that are more captivating and ingenious and I usually give them three stars, because even though they might not be ambitious, they at least provide me with sufficient entertainment for two hours. Runner Runner failed to do that. It has a weak script and non-existent chemistry between the actors, who were not good casting decisions.

Gravity is not about its story, which is practically non-existent. We learn minimum information about the only two characters and we’re able to build an emotional connection to only one of them. Gravity is about conveying a feeling. It’s a space survival drama where you dodge flying debris, save oxygen and try to get hold of something. It is a distinctive and unique film in the filmmaking respect, one of a kind. But how long will it resonate within us given that it lacks a more powerful message or a more surprising ending? Thanks to Sandra Bullock, who acts as if her life depended on it, it resonates longer than it would have without her. There is no sense in seeing Gravity anywhere but on the big screen.

Tom Cruise’s carbon copy and Kate Hudson, who comes across as rather vain, star in this romantic flick for the ladies, which full of all kinds of clichés averagely mixed together. Ginnifer Goodwin is cute, but a little awkward in her role. The only solid performance comes courtesy of John Krasinski.

A sclerotic look back at a love life in which fragments of memories and feelings are purposefully arranged into some meaningful plot. It’s a long cinematic journey from gushing over a beautiful introduction, through atmospheric levitation in the middle of a bison herd, to a gradually growing test of the audience’s patience. At least Olga Kurylenko and Rachel McAdams are bewitching and the music is nice.

“Look how I can get you with something you’ve seen a hundred times before!” the talented James Wan said to himself. Brilliant filmmaking, especially the long introductory shots. The 1970s atmosphere, which best suits haunted houses, is well depicted. The Conjuring has quality actors and great sound, making it a grade-A horror movie that Warner Bros. can be proud of. But the ending could have offered more. The first [Rec] set a real high bar for final escalation.

Ron Howard’s perfect craftsmanship with soul and a nice message. The director proves that he knows both his craft and people. The focus is not on the races but on the characters. The two main characters are diametrically different but equally respectable madmen. Both embody the archetypes of today’s favorite film heroes – a wild guy who enjoys parties and women versus a level-headed, introverted and ambitious intellectual. What unites them is adrenaline and the desire for victory. And a strange form of friendship. They compete while inspiring each other. Thanks to Howard’s direction, you can enjoy every scene they appear in, whether separately or together. The script is said to contain factual errors and I missed the first race when Hunt recognized Lauda as a threat. But these are forgivable flaws of a beautifully rendered film about rivalry with the smell of burning rubber, which you simply cannot dislike. Daniel Brühl delivers one of the best acting performances of the year.

After its cool reception in the US, I found this movie a pleasant surprise. It does not deal with Jobs’ private life, but with his role in Apple’s establishment and the first phase of the company’s existence. It delves into his personal life only marginally, for a quick outline of his character by showing his approach to unexpected life events (which he did not address in an exactly typical manner). The main focus of the narrative is his approach to professional events: his passion for his work and adamant belief in his vision. This, along with the profound ideas he continually expresses, makes this film inspiring and energetic; something that can give you a nudge in the right direction. Plus, it shows “how it really happened”, which will be relatable to all ambitious garage-based startup founders, who also struggle with their creativity being misunderstood by profit-seeking investors. Jobs is a pleasant and useful little film on the level of the “TVlike” Hitchcock, but of course it’s not as good as The Social Network, which is more refined in its screenplay and direction. Ashton Kutcher’s good. The fourth star in my rating is purely personal – I understood his every decision, urge and move, and even the glass table in his office was similar to mine. :-)