gudaulin

The Party may not have the intensity and intellectual depth of movies like Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, or the Pink Panther series with its burst of entertaining gags. However, it is essentially the same type of humor we know from Inspector Clouseau - a likable bungler who means well and tries hard, but usually ends up causing a disaster, only to miraculously emerge with honor at the end thanks to his famous luck. Here, the humor is set in a grotesque environment that clearly mocks the snobbish Hollywood elite. The film doesn't have an extraordinary screenplay, and at times the screenwriter seems a bit lost, so the humor is based on chaotic running around, falls, and props like a painted elephant. Nevertheless, it is still an above-average work. Overall impression: 75%.

Michelangelo Antonioni never knew how to film stories. He did not consider it his goal or his handicap, and he never actually tried it in practice. The Passenger is a film that does not deviate from this statement, but its subject matter acts as a disguise that obscures the existential nature of the film and evokes a feeling, or rather a hope, that you are watching a genre film. The basis of the drama could easily be used for a gripping thriller, its potential is enormous. You easily forget how "empty" the film actually is, thanks to the internal tension. The charm of the film lies precisely in the viewer's expectation of what exciting thing will happen in the following scene. You will realize over time that the director was pulling your leg (although I don't think that was his intention). Antonioni traditionally reveals the minimum about his characters and devotes the most time to exterior shots and his protagonist. The feelings you take away from his film will depend on what you expect from cinema as a whole and the time devoted to the film. Antonioni was never a fan of action spectacles, but I don't think those are the types of people who will seek this film out. Overall impression: 60%.

I classify similarly tuned films as pure maliciousness. An experienced genre fan knows what to expect when the label spy thriller appears - chases, shootouts, hand-to-hand fights, and breathtaking action. However, you will be disappointed because none of that happens in this film. The film belongs to the stream of realistically conceived dramas, which consider authenticity as their strongest aspect. After all, the film was based on a true event, the scandal of the discovery of an Israeli spy in the American government once seriously shook the traditionally good relations between the two countries. After a brief introduction, where the plot introduces the viewer to the training of young spies, the screenwriter focuses on two secret Mossad operations in recruiting new agents abroad. Despite its longer duration, I certainly didn't get bored, but it is necessary to emphasize that the film has a more intimate tone and gives up on all the favorite genre clichés. It is driven by dialogue and appears more as a television series. However, those who are willing to overlook the above will definitely find something in this espionage game, although its quality is less than, for example, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. From the cast, I would like to point out Sandrine Kiberlain, the teacher from Little Nicholas who has a quite spicy past as a sensual call girl and a secret service agent who gathers information in bed. Overall impression: 65%.

I'm a bit torn apart about this film... Even though I consider The People Under the Stairs to be first-rate nonsense that doesn't hold up under strict logical analysis, I was still satisfied with it, and I can even say that I enjoyed it better than objectively much higher quality films. Wes Craven is simply not only a good craftsman but also a connoisseur of genre rules and his audience. He knows very well that a fan of low-budget horror films doesn't watch them to elevate themselves intellectually but to evoke emotions. Craven knows the structure of horror, all its genre topics, props, and especially the desired clichés, both in theory and in practice. His film dabbles on the edge of horror, splatterpunk, parody, and comedy. None of it works perfectly and it doesn't come close to the quality of Scream. Of course, the horror atmosphere prevails, where Craven feels at home, but at the same time the director goes a bit into a parody exaggeration, which may not provoke bursts of laughter but does manage to make the corners of your mouth twitch – moreover, it leads to the fact that the viewer generously waves away the plot holes bigger than the damage to the Titanic caused by the iceberg... A completely undemanding, but functional affair. Overall impression 60%.

The life themes of Forman's films are the position of defined personalities within the system and especially the search for personal freedom within a liberal society. Where are the limits of acceptable human behavior, where does freedom of speech end, and whether it should be set at all? In The People vs. Larry Flynt, he continued what he started in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and continued in the musical Hair. While his previous films received enthusiastic applause from critics and audiences, The People vs. Larry Flynt faced harsh criticism from multiple sides. It came from both the influential Christian right and the equally influential feminist movement, as both groups organized furious demonstrations and disrupted the distribution of the film. The film sparked great controversy and Forman was left significantly isolated this time. Honestly, the real Larry Flynt is an extremely repulsive character, whom Forman, despite all efforts to capture from many angles in the most diverse perspective, humanized inappropriately. This was also aided by the fact of personal friendship between the director and Larry Flynt. Woody Harrelson's outstanding performance in the lead role also contributed to this humanization. The real Flynt was not so much a victim of his passions as he was an excellent unscrupulous businessman. From a directorial standpoint, it is an extraordinary film with a great cast, and even Courtney Love as an uncontrollable bullet of American pop culture performs very well. And why not, when she essentially plays herself? Edward Norton is perfectly cast and the supporting actors around the main stars deliver reliable performances. Only the pathos at the end of the film is unnecessary. But that is related to what I suggested above. It is not a bad film at all, but for its content, I have a considerably colder attitude toward it compared to Forman's other films. Overall impression: +- 80%.

The most significant film by Juraj Herz in my eyes will always be The Cremator, but The Petroleum Lamps is a serious contender for second place in the rankings. The film has high-quality and emotionally powerful literary source material, a provocative moralistic subject, two top actors in the leading roles, a careful selection of costumes, props, and interiors, and above all young Juraj Herz from a time when he was bursting with ideas and had an exceptional sense for creating atmosphere - all of this makes The Petroleum Lamps one of the best psychological dramas that have been created in Czechoslovakia. The demonic Petr Čepek, who always had an exceptional gift for portraying the dark sides of human nature, demonstrates the disintegration of the personality of a person afflicted with a serious illness and as always, is perfect and unpleasantly convincing. However, more interesting is Iva Janžurová, considered by film fans to be a typical comedian. She shows that her acting range is much wider and that she is capable of playing practically anything. The Petroleum Lamps works on two levels. Firstly, as a critique of a small-minded environment full of prejudice, where the film's protagonist is too free-thinking and emancipated, and thus her surroundings respond to her in their own way. Secondly, it is a film about the unfulfilled life of a childless woman who spends the best years of her life caring for a bitter human wreck. I don't usually mention it, but in this case, I will make an exception and emphasize the film's set design, which is done in the Art Nouveau style. This is something that is rarely seen in Czech cinema, and I can only recall another film by Herz, Morgiana, which had the same visual style, from hairstyles to clothing. Overall impression: 95%.

The works of Luis Buñuel are framed by two films. At the beginning of his career is the short experimental film, Un Chien Andalou, where he was still feeling out the terrain and exploring the possibilities of the genre and the medium of film. At the end of his creative journey stands an absurd and mischievous play on the illusion called freedom, composed of disconnected grotesque surrealist mini-stories. In it, Buñuel playfully toys with social conventions and human prejudices, mocking good manners and sarcastically striking his usual targets - conservatism and the prudishness of the church, as well as the arrogance and hypocrisy of bourgeois and bureaucratic layers. Buñuel looks skeptically upon the invoked freedom. We human beings are imprisoned by our surroundings, society, upbringing, emotions, instincts, and above all, our genes. Similarly to Lynch, Buñuel stopped taking external influences into account as he grew older and filmed for his own pleasure about what interests him the most. But while I find later Lynch films indigestible, Buñuel served me such a delicate film essence of the genre that I had to reevaluate a few other films in its light. Moreover, when it comes to the filmography of the Spanish surrealist, I have so far preferred the substantially more conventional The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie. However, The Phantom of Liberty immediately catapulted to first place. Nevertheless, I would recommend not starting your contact with Buñuel with this film. If you prefer his more mainstream films, you will enjoy even more the brief appearances of his regular actors and the style based on sarcasm. I would save The Phantom of Liberty for the end, as it is too peculiar, deviating from what audiences are accustomed to and willing to accept. Overall impression: 95%.

Polish and Russian relations have been burdened by centuries of mutual rivalry, which, in the modern era, underwent a fundamental shift in the balance of power in Eastern Europe, greatly favoring the tsarist empire and resulting in the long-term loss of Polish independence and the tormenting experience of Poles with a repressive, backward, and poorly governed state. It is even more surprising that the film is set in present-day Russia and that the overwhelming majority of dialogues are in Russian. It doesn't make sense to approach The Photographer as a typical crime story about an elusive phantom leaving behind ruined human lives. It is much more a mysterious story through which the authors return to the recent past and shed light on the essence of the functioning of the Soviet system and its impact on society as a whole. Don't be discouraged by the absurd elements or confusing genre categorization. This is a strong and originally shot film about an individual who initially wanted to perfectly conform to the system, only to subsequently rebeliously defy it in a peculiar and cruel way. As an added bonus, we also get the interesting and unconventional Taťjana Arntgolc. She is a discovery for me, and I hope to have the opportunity to admire her acting in a decent blockbuster sometime. Overall impression: 80%.

Director Stölzl probably enjoys watching American epic fantasy films and fulfilled his dream of shooting something in their spirit. I don't consider his film a serious historical drama, and I would tear it to pieces. However, as a lavishly made fairy tale, where individual shots can be used as computer wallpaper or framed on a wall, it works decently. Yes, it is shallow, designed to appeal to the widest possible audience, it is colorful, romantic, and suspenseful, but also full of the most cliché and predictable elements. I don't have a big problem with the film, but it won't get an overall impression from me of more than 55%.

In The Pianist, it's evident that the film was directed by someone who personally experienced the horrors of war and the Holocaust. It's an exceptionally strong and authentic portrayal of the fate of Jews during World War II. Unlike Spielberg's acclaimed Schindler's List, it's not polished and calculated, which reflects in slightly lower ratings. Unlike Spielberg, Polanski opts for the form of an intimate drama of a single man, yet it's an exceptional, poignant, and brilliantly acted film. Overall impression: 100%.