gudaulin

The Decalogue was created in a special situation in a seriously ill country. Poland was unable to reconcile with the martial law from 1981 and the fact that the legal opposition in the form of Solidarity had to go underground. Repression and strict censorship became characteristic of the country in the following years. In the mid-1980s, Poland was deeply divided in terms of opinions and was economically and morally/socially in ruins. Only after the arrival of Gorbachev as the General Secretary of the Soviet Union did the pressure from the state power begin to weaken and prominent Polish directors returned to themes that were characteristic of the Polish moral unrest film movement. Acclaimed director Krzysztof Kieslowski, who had to remain silent for several years after his film Blind Chance, was looking for a subject with a strong substance that would avoid direct political engagement and not contribute to the already tense societal atmosphere, but at the same time would also address fundamental questions of today's morality. As a deeply religious person, he logically chose the biblical Ten Commandments as the ideological basis for the cycle of 10 hour-long television films, with each episode dedicated to one commandment. With the exception of the last episode, which has a comedic tone and is lightened mainly by the presence of Jerzy Stuhr, the others are more intimate dramas, often of a very tragic nature, dealing with the loss of a loved one, execution of a condemned person, or attempted suicide. The series had a significantly limited budget, and Polish state television, promoting it as a religious work, put it in an uninteresting broadcasting time slot. However, it immediately gained extraordinary respect from the viewers and was broadcast by many TV stations abroad with a great response. It was precisely The Decalogue that made Kieslowski famous in France, where he could then realize his film trilogy referring to the ideals of the French Revolution. Overall impression: 90%.

Originally, I had no reason to waste time with this series, as there are many shows and significantly less free time. The flood of categorically formulated waste and terrifyingly negative comments sparked my curiosity as to whether it is really as bad as the legends claim. After the roughly 20 minutes that I spent with the snowman, I must confirm that from time to time public opinion aligns with reality. Attempts at situational gags can be divided into two categories - roughly half and half: the first completely miss the mark in terms of not only my concept of humor, but I fear also anyone's concept of humor because it is desperately awkward and unfunny. The second half has potential, but it is killed by bad acting, and incompleteness, and it's rushed; I can imagine that it would work if there were different actors. Unfortunately, that's not the case. Coincidentally, I am currently watching the British series The League of Gentlemen, where the truly inappropriate humor is often on the edge, but what the Czech group is doing is far away from this not just by one, but several galaxies. It reminds me of the stories from the members of the Monty Python group about how their sketches were created. They spent hours working on them, refining, transforming, adjusting, crossing out, and rejecting. Here, I am afraid that the Czech sketches were created on the fly by public television. Overall impression: 5%.

A television studio game that does not look at Czech history and famous rulers with admiring eyes and does not depict Ottokar I of Bohemia as a noble knight of exceptional virtues, but as a cynical pragmatic man who is determined to follow his own path and does not care about his surroundings. You believe in Josef Somr as the king and realize that, despite his historical greatness, he was not alien to anything human and could be impulsive, petty, cruel, and loving. Overall impression: 60%.

In his feature debut, Tarkovsky already showed what his strongest aspects were - camera work, the ability to create magical images, a lyrical atmosphere, and sensitive selection and work with actors. While his film lacks the famous ideological fervor and heroism typical of Soviet war movies, it is, nonetheless, much more civil and focuses not on ideology but rather on patriotism. This early piece by Tarkovsky is probably the most sympathetic to me (although far from the best) for one simple reason. Here, he still holds back and manages with a very reasonable runtime. The long shots are thus not tiring or burdensome. Tarkovsky's work can be seen as the absolute opposite of today's music video production, which relies on wild editing and camera movements. In Tarkovsky's work, the image itself and its composition are important. Overall impression: 65%.

I don't even know what I was hoping for when I started watching this 80s TV detective show. I just wanted to remind myself of what TV productions were like back then and compare it to the current state. Anyway, this is the weakest work by director Svoboda that I have seen so far. Boredom, dullness, desperation. Today's TV producers have something to build upon. Overall impression: 10% for the actors.

A mystifying story about a cunning revenge and a man maneuvered into a situation reminiscent of its hopelessness and absurdity, slightly resembling Franz Kafka's "The Trial." Alain Delon plays the somewhat unusual role of an antique dealer who feels that something is not right but does not know how to escape the tightening noose. The twist revealed by the director at the very end is indeed impressive, and the whole story subsequently leaves you with a bitter taste. However, I cannot help but point out that in this film, things are set in motion not due to natural causes but at the instigation of the screenwriter. As a whole, it is simply too improbable and artificial, constructed for participation in festival showcases. Overall impression: 70%.

Battles BC cannot deny the fact that it came from a commercial studio and that its task is not so much to educate and instruct, but above all to entertain and attract attention. The commentary does not go into details, does not overwhelm with facts, and is narrated in an easily understandable form, focusing on what is interesting and attractive. Unfortunately, the visual aspect of the documentary series, in order to maximize attractiveness, resembles more of a scientifically conceived documentary of heroic fantasy than a sober one, and in this respect, it is amusing at best. The graphic concept is based on Miller's comic "300: Battle of Thermopylae", popularized by the eponymous film. The series also suffers from the well-known disease of documentary cycles from the North American environment. The breaks intended for inserting advertising blocks can be precisely identified, giving viewers a unique opportunity to enjoy certain scenes multiple times. Despite the mentioned shortcomings, considering the attractive topic, it deserves three stars. Overall impression: 55%.

In his early films, Woody was lively and showcased a whole geyser of gags that the audience loved, but then he longed to have more serious storytelling and "more serious" subjects. However, the audience desired that old good comedian and did not accept his seriously inclined films. Especially Stardust Memories ended in a painful failure - and I write this with the knowledge that in the case of Woody Allen's work, it was never about box office hits. Woody responded by returning to his comedic roots, but he approached it differently nonetheless. The humor in Zelig is more subtle and sophisticated, and the film is much more demanding both in terms of the script and production. The result is a satirical mystification, where Woody mocks conformity through the story of a man - a chameleon, who perfected his effort not to draw attention to himself and blend in with his surroundings. He is capable of not only changing his political beliefs or religious affiliation as needed but also his gender or skin color. With a terrifying ease, he adapts to any social environment and community. The Ku Klux Klan sees in his ability to become a member of any racial minority the greatest danger to America, while in Germany, Zelig becomes an enthusiastic Nazi. On another level, the film is also an excellent parody of biographical documentaries. Woody used authentic film material from the 1920s and 1930s and combined it with newly edited shots. The fictional Zelig thus appears in periodicals and documentary footage with real historical figures, and Allen lets actual experts talk about the whole case. Zelig is certainly among the most interesting and playful of Allen's films, and I admire the ant-like work and ideas, but this film is not a spontaneous favorite for me. Overall impression: 80%.

Jean-Pierre Melville was a prominent director who stood out from the majority of his French colleagues in the 1950s and 1960s who rejected classical Hollywood and contributed to the emergence of the French New Wave. This movement can be considered a rebellion against previous film conventions and genres. Melville actually admired and developed a style influenced by American gangster films. Many elements and scenes in A Cop cannot deny their inspiration from overseas cinema. Hats, long coats under which you can safely hide a shotgun, empty streets immersed in darkness, minimalistic dialogues, and long gazes that increase tension. For Melville, style meant a lot, sometimes at the expense of other aspects of the film. We can probably attribute his fondness for American cinema to the casting of Richard Crenna as a rival to Alain Delon. The film depicts two audacious robberies carried out by a small but well-organized gang, pursued by none other than Alain Delon, who, in the 1970s, hardly ever took off his police badge even when going to bed. It may not be a perfect 4-star film, partly because Melville underestimated the ending, as had become somewhat customary in his films, which could have left out the logical flaws and could have been somewhat more complicated so as to increase viewer suspense. Nevertheless, for me, the film deserves a 70% rating, noting that Melville bid a dignified farewell to the world of cinema.

Mélanie Laurent is great, that the film has a very pleasant cast and a pretty clever idea, but above all, it excellently utilizes the motifs of classical music, but the different elements of the script do not harmonize with each other, or rather, it tries to combine a crazy comedy with a melodramatic story that emotionally manipulates to the extreme. In the first 15-20 minutes, I had a great time and had no doubt about giving it a 5-star rating, but as time went on and Radu Mihaileanu increased his efforts to be touching, my favorable feeling quickly dissipated. It doesn't work. Or rather, the exaggeration on which the script is based doesn't work in combination with the tragic story it wants to tell. Overall impression: 45%.