Marigold

A film that is loosely adjacent to Amarcord, but really loosely "double underlined". Narratively gripped stories from a small town replace the chaotic world of the city. The young boy arrives in an Italian jungle full of life, lights and screaming, and along with the change of environment, Fellini's directorial style changes. Roma is a work on the edge between documentary and film and skillfully works with fast editing, layered dialogues and shattering of various scenes. In the cabinet of curiosities of the city, not only do the stories of many people intertwine, but also two time planes – the past (with Peter Gonzal Falcone as a young man, discovering the secrets of Rome) and the "present", in which the shooting of the film is directly emphasized (Fellini plays the main role). Fellini's talent for a pointed situation does not disappear in the clutter of voices and events (an absolutely ingenious church fashion show, the discovery of a well-preserved Roman villa in the city's underground). Roma is indeed a masterpiece, which on one level is a plastic representation of life in the mother of all cities, on the other a metaphor for the civilization that arose on its foundations. An extraordinary film for extraordinary moments... :o)

Football: it's not just a game, it's an obsession. And this comedy illustrates it in an excellent way. To see Tibetan monks completely obsessed with a game that is so far removed from their closed world is great. A local Czech man used to frequently watching television cannot imagine what it would be like on the day of the World Cup finals not to have that magic box on the table and have to get it no matter what... A good, relaxing comedy that has a purpose and is above all a celebration of the phenomenon of fandom. The right choice for a group of friends who like Tibet and good comedies.

I love the people from Sklep very much, but I can't help feeling that the only person able to bring their humor to the screen is Tomáš Vorel. Marhoul filmed something that works in the first part as a funny set of theatrical sketches and not as a film, in the second it does something that works as a film but does not work as a set of funny sketches. Neither fish nor crayfish. Even the forever-starched Hanák is no longer as good as he was in Out of the City, and if it hadn't been for a few real acting performances, it could have ended up being a very big flop. Dobeška is Dobeška...

It's big, it's stupid, Roland Emmerich filmed it. No, I didn't pick that guy out, I didn't know who filmed it at first, but when I looked at this gentleman's filmography, everything was clear to me. What I don't know is how someone can spend that kind of money to promote a film in which "it's going to be big and it's going to stomp everything and sell like a plastic figurine on Uncle Donald's menu," was probably written in the script. Why Jean Reno plays in such a wretched role is a mystery to me, but then again, everyone needs to make a living... This Hollywood direction of "a lot of effects, not enough story" is an atrocity that I will avoid in the future. At least Peter Jackson and his King Kong will set a new standard. Roland, dear boy, you don’t have that much of a lack of talent to be funny like Ed Wood... You have a deficiency that bothers.

"Comrades, ugly enemy agents have landed in our country from outer space in order to plant potato mandelins in our harvesting pools. Comrades, we're not going to subvert the States! Moreover, we have the victorious July, so get them!" Capitalist realism in full force, as demented as Bolshevik agitations, as spectacularly pathetic. Plus, the characters. A good-humored "nigga," a heroic president-pilot, a drunk with the heart of a Don Cossack...an... intrepid cowboy... Just a case of brilliantly making a stinking ball out of a pathetic fart. A film about nothing with nice effects. The glamour and misery of Hollywood in full swing. It wasn't custom made for the White House??? Edit 2011: I have to admit that (like many Bolshevik agitations) I enjoy this film and fills me with a special pleasure of absolute foolishness. So, in hindsight, I'm giving it an extra star, compared to Battle Los Angeles, it's royal fun, and it doesn't deserve the same rating...

The most contentious part of the trilogy... The fact that the film is really very good in all aspects only stands out fully in the extended version, in which the otherwise rather broken story of Merry, Pippin and Treebeard is finally concluded; the story of Faramir (eventually one of the best changes) unfolds and the whole film gets some energy. Not energy in the sense of "dynamic forward run", but energy in the sense of "yes, it moves slowly, but I would like it to move even slower, because it is extremely beautiful". I am incredibly irritated by Aragorn's incomprehensible fall into the abyss. Why? But a speck this small can't devalue the impression of a great spectacle. King Theoden's monologue before the Battle of Helm's Deep is another of the moments that will remain in my memory forever, as is the return of the Rohirim to the king...

The most epic part of the trilogy... A scenic ride to see the beauties of Middle-earth, breakfast with hobbits, lunch with elves, tea at five with a bunch of goblins, and an evening flambé with the venerable Mr. Balrog in the best fellowship ever gathered on screen. Jackson has succeeded in the impossible - it is not an orthodox rewrite of Tolkien, but it is a wonderful film that, unlike the other two films, has no deaf spots and presents a lot of "small" heroic acts instead of great battle pathos. And, of course, in the extended version there is the most beautiful scene of the film – Gimli's courtship of Galadriel. Why didn't Jackson just put it in the cinema version? The master dwarf deserves to keep this part in the film, because it's... otherworldly beautiful. Like the whole of Fellowship of the Ring!

How Menzel was able to do this is still not understood today. Bringing to the screen the warmness, kindness and extensibility of Vančura's book is an act worthy of a fool, but it works! Vančura's "unearthliness" in the mouths of the big names of Czech film does not sound violent or inappropriate - it sounds exactly as it should. Moreover, the almost poetic backdrop of a small town and a small magic variety show perfectly match the original text. "Humor is not to laugh, but to know better," Vančura wrote, and it is, after all, the most beautiful motto for this comedy, which I place on my personal leaderboard the highest of all.

Unreal. That a puppet can't show emotion? Come on. All it takes is a master to create it. Actually, the master. For me, the most impressive and economical metaphor of any totalitarianism, of all its horrors and machinations. This should be watched in history class when the 1950s are studied. But after all, Trnka's Hand is typical of many other time periods and regimes in the history of this planet.

A love of black-and-white images that whisper their bizarre messages and prophecy into the quiet. The twisted world of the maniac Caligari and the creeping threat of the vampire Nosferatu. Undoubtedly the most suggestive treatment of the Dracula myth – precisely because evil cannot speak, precisely because it has only two colors. Nosferatu aka Orlock aka the mysterious Max Schreck is not only a cinematic creature, he is the perfect embodiment of evil and destruction, death, a hunch of the future destruction of the German nation. This film doesn't have weak moments. It doesn't scare intensely, but it's one long case of filmmaking enjoyment that doesn't need expensive effects to captivate the viewer with its emotionality and atmosphere. This is film in its raw form. This, ladies and gentlemen, is a film.