gudaulin

The majority of the runtime maintains a reliable four-star level and ranks significantly higher than what American studios produced in the genre in the 1950s. It plays with a similar motif as the famous film High Noon. By coincidence, the responsibility for resolving the crisis situation falls on the lonely hero, who overcomes his fear at the decisive moment and becomes a moral authority. The film uses typical western characters but gives them a deeper psychological dimension compared to the customs of the time. In particular, the leader of the gang is not a typical western villain with a black soul and fast guns. He is a player, manipulator, tempter, and negotiator, but also the owner of a unique and solid value system. The film usually avoids using genre stereotypes, is sparing with action scenes, and focuses on the psychological conflicts between the characters and their dialogue. Unfortunately, in the last fifteen minutes, the western myth comes to life in full force, and suddenly we have a typical 1950s western with an invincible hero and a naive plot. The triumph of justice should have taken a different form, and the final scene of the transition from the hotel to the train is a typical example of the screenwriter bending logic in favor of their goal. In my eyes, the film deserves one star less for this, but a genre fan can easily add another star. Overall impression: 65%.

I call this category of festival films "Rohypnol" for their fascinating ability to reliably put you to sleep after just a few seconds. Imagine the sea waves, pebbles on the beach, and calming sounds, and the disaster is complete. I would like to mention many other things I saw in the movie, but unfortunately, I don't remember anything else. Overall impression: 5% - and don't ask me what it's for.

During its release in movie theaters, the film was met with conflicting reactions, ranging from enthusiastic ovations to significant doubts. I must admit that I didn't have much faith in Mašín's debut film, so I avoided it at the time. However, the time has come to catch up, and it turned out to be a very pleasant surprise. 3 Seasons in Hell is primarily a carefully and honestly crafted film - such professionalism combined with a solid budget is not common in the Czech Republic. It may indeed be a bit too polished, and I would have preferred the film to be more surreal and provocative, but Mašín simply and correctly decided to make a film for a broader audience, who are not necessarily as interested in the fates and work of this enfant terrible of Czech culture. I agree with the opinion that this is a quality film that may not deserve a perfect 5-star rating but should be up there, and in this case, I happily round it up. Especially for the presence of the charismatic Karolina Gruszka, who perfectly fulfills my idea of a fateful Bond woman, capable of driving her surroundings and especially men to the brink of madness. Yes, one could die for a woman like her, but it's better to run far away from her... Overall impression: 90%.

It is said that the first five minutes decide your relationship with a movie. In that case, I would have to give it a very low rating, because for about the first half an hour, the film bored me and I couldn't get into its rhythm and mood. However, gradually the story started to captivate me more and more, and in the last hour, I enjoyed every scene regardless of Altman's traditionally slow pace and sparing use of editing. Altman is deceiving with the title because although three women do appear in his film, the (co)owner of the guesthouse is explicitly missing. The majority of the spotlight belongs to Shelley Duvall and Sissy Spacek. The majority of cinema-goers fixate on Sissy Spacek as the ugly duckling with a good heart, and Shelley Duvall, well, she's the ugly one from The Shining with oddly bulging fish-like eyes. But here, film fans would be astonished because both girls are actually femme fatales. True, never at the same time, because the film relies heavily on the strange interaction and interweaving of their characters. One takes the lead for a while, and then the other. Shelley, alias Millie, is a girl who can be described as clingy. She tries to attract attention, gain admiration, and make friends at any cost. Sissy, alias Pinky, desperately seeks a role model, someone she could enter into life with. By chance, they collide and a game begins to see who gradually gains the upper hand. Altman is actually deceiving with the style or genre because his traditional collage of visuals and stories is gone. This is a pure psychological drama with a touch of surrealism as if it came out of Polanski's workshop. I truly enjoyed the peculiar mood and provocative female game, and 3 Women will receive my overall impression of 75%.

Berlin has fallen, the leader of the German nation has passed into eternity, and the surrender of the German armed forces was expected with each passing day. No one is rushing into battle anymore because who would want to die just before the end of the war? Actually, only the clean-up remains. However, a group of German soldiers who have gathered on the shores of the Baltic Sea do not want to surrender to the Red Army. They are not enticed by the prospect of infamous Siberian labor camps and forced work. They are considering escaping by boat to Denmark, where British captivity offers a considerably more favorable future. The Soviet captain does not press them. He, too, lives with the prospect of an imminent ceasefire and does not want to risk a clash against tenfold superiority. Moreover, he has enough worries of his own. His group has settled in an orphanage, and a German boy would like to experience the battle firsthand and gain some military fame. 4 Days in May is an intimate war film that focuses not so much on the grand epic picture of battle and war machinery, but rather on the personal dramas of people who must cope with the loss of a familiar world, new responsibilities, and above all, the question of whether and for what they should die for at the very end of the war. It is an inconspicuous film at first glance, but it is emotionally impactful, and it has left a mark on me. Overall impression: 90%.

I definitely don't claim that this is a bad movie, but the expectations were too high in this case, and during the final scene, I was thinking, is this really the end? Is there nothing else coming? Are you telling me this film won at a category A festival and is considered by film fans and critics alike as the European film event of the year? The thing is, this film somehow deceives in its substance and offers substitute emotions, or rather, in my opinion, it fails precisely in what it is most adored for, i.e., a statement about a certain country and political system. Many reviews enthusiastically admire its amazing authenticity, but how many of those viewers experienced communist Romania first-hand? I haven't been there, but from the testimonies of eyewitnesses, I know that even ten years after the revolution, some places in the countryside had no electricity, many remote areas are today economically worse off than during Ceausescu's regime, and the mountainous regions are depopulating. Comparing the former Romania to Czechoslovakia is misguided, as the situation there was disproportionately worse and, above all, systemically different. The abortion that is at the core of Mungiu's film, is presented as purely a technical problem. Those girls, just like the other film characters, are not victims of the system, but part of it. Polish films of moral unrest were able to address moral conflict issues in the behavior of their characters during the deep communism of the 70s and 80s, whereas here, a college student undergoes an abortion of a fetus that is merely an obstacle to her career. We learn very little about the system itself, and it is necessary to realize that abortions were also prohibited in a number of European countries in the recent past, and a similar film could be made in present-day Poland, in a democratic system. Since 1993, abortion there has been limited to the absolute minimum of possibilities. That pre-revolutionary Romania was an inhospitable and freedom-restricted place to live in is quite evident in some places, but that is just a secondary motive. If the main problem for Romanian college students in dormitories was obtaining a certain brand of Western cigarettes, then those girls really didn't have a bad life. In short, it is watchable but, from my perspective, also an overrated film with an unclear concept. Overall impression: 60%.

I'll admit, I rarely watch romantic movies anymore because, in that stereotypical whirlpool, there are only very few titles worth watching. The vast majority of those genre pieces are made as if following a template and differ only slightly in doses of naivety and, when it comes to teenage matters, even in the level of tastelessness. (500) Days of Summer really stands out from this flood because it has honest craftsmanship and a few decent ideas as well as pleasant casting. But from my perspective, it's by no means a cult film. It was allegedly a huge hit at the Sundance Festival, but any major studio could have easily financed this Webb film. In fact, it is purely a mainstream affair. If stars were given for the best mainstream romance of the year, (500) Days of Summer would probably win hands down, but that's not how it works for me. It differs from the usual productions mainly by the fact that the screenwriter admitted that not every romantic love ends in marriage, but if they want to sell me these discoveries, they should turn to someone else with such banalities. After two days, I can only remember very little from the film. It's pleasant enough for one viewing, but nothing more. Overall impression: 60%.

The screenplay is unfinished. Although it is well-acted, it feels like a fragment of a feature film rather than a standalone functioning short film. The female element is also unnecessary in a script like this... Overall impression: 50%.

When watching Fifty Dead Men Walking, I remembered a similar Spanish production called Wolf, where the main character infiltrated the ranks of the Basque separatist organization ETA. That comparison did not go well for Fifty Dead Men Walking because Wolf seemed much more cinematic and better developed. In the case of the British film, the screenplay seemed somehow unfinished, and the important motives for the protagonist's actions and decisions were either concealed or untrustworthy. Additionally, the real Martin McGartland was driven by much less altruism in his activities than the film tries to convince the viewer of, and his motivations were more down-to-earth. The whole process of breaking and recruiting a collaborator for the British security services is very rushed and in practice, Martin's decision based on such an offer would be pure foolishness. Of course, the film heavily relies on the environment in which it takes place, namely a war-torn and terrorized country, and it is based on true events, although, as is quite common and logical, it partly interprets them according to its own interpretation. Even though I would like to give it four stars, it seems too much like a TV film to me and I am disappointed by the wasted potential. Overall impression: 65%.

Each of us is intimately familiar with this situation: the smaller the expectations, the greater the enthusiasm for an otherwise average film. And vice versa - the greater the expectations, the more bitter the disappointment, even though objective reality is somewhere in the middle. I seriously expected very little from this movie, or rather "nothing." After watching it, I initially intended to give it four stars with excitement, but then I pondered it and erased a star. Rob Schneider is slightly less awkward than usual, but he still overacts and Sandler also recalls his worst acting several times (most notably in the scene where he cries on the boat, reminiscing about lost love). Nevertheless, despite all of this, it is still the best Sandler comedy with surprisingly civil performances from both main characters and a funny storyline. Overall impression: a decent 65%.