Necrotongue

I enjoyed this film, and under different circumstances, I would have rated it with four stars because, among other things, I really enjoyed Roy Scheider's performance, but I did go one lower because, paradoxically, it was the stereotypical puppet-like portrayal of Chief Bill Gillespie's character that spoiled the overall impression for me. / Lesson learned: Always ask for the detained person's ID.

Sergei Bondarchuk did not disappoint and populated the Belgian battlefield, only to subsequently depopulate it accordingly. The clash of three great military leaders of their time ended with a crushing defeat for one of them, and due to the tactics used at that time, the human losses were enormous (although, with gradually improving methods, these numbers are not decreasing). People simply never learn. The film's creators offered a nearly perfect interpretation of historical events in broad strokes (the details were not as perfect, but that is understandable - there wasn't enough time, and Waterloo had so much material it could have been turned into a series). The soundtrack was fantastic, and the performances were outstanding. As for the military leaders (not the ones in the film), Marshal von Blücher (aided by August von Gneisenau) won me over, as he strongly contributed to the alliance's success at the age of seventy-three, even while believing that he was pregnant and would give birth to an elephant. / Lesson learned: Do not praise the day before sunset.

The film's strengths include exceptionally well-cast actors and decent historical accuracy. The technology used was predominantly American since the film was made long before CGI, but I didn't mind. What bothered me more were the scenes that I could easily do without, and the creators could have saved money, for example, on James Caan's fees. However, what bothered me was the introduction that said everything was going according to Hitler's plans until the Allied invasion of Normandy changed that. I'm still not sure if I should consider it a joke or a manifestation of creative dilettantism. Despite these minor flaws, I still think the film is a perfect example today of what can happen when a high military commander decides to prove to his rival that he can outdo him regardless of the consequences. / Lesson learned: If you are planning something, don't forget to consider the possible reaction of others involved.

I have been interested in the Russo-Japanese War for a long time because it was the first modern war. At the same time, it was a clash between a traditional power and a new (but more aggressive) player in the fight for colonial dominance. Russia and Japan fought their war on Chinese and Korean territory, so it was a confrontation between aggressors, and the only surprising thing was the outcome. The film's creators approached the subject in a Japanese way, and even though they followed historical facts in rough outlines, they let themselves get carried away in detail. When they informed me that the Imperial Army did not have machine guns, my jaw dropped, and I left it hanging for a while when I saw the number of Russian machine guns per square meter. I understand that they wanted to emphasize the heroism of Japanese soldiers, but I think it was completely unnecessary. They needlessly pushed the situation repeatedly to absurdity when it would have been enough for them to stick to the bare facts. The battle on the Liao-tung Peninsula was essentially a meat grinder in which infantry on both sides suffered, with catastrophic Japanese casualties. It was a story about an impregnable fortress, which was a grave error because the Russians didn't make much effort in terms of fortification. At the time of the outbreak of the war, they were mostly forced to defend themselves from improvised positions. Another error was the information about the loss of dozens of cruisers; anyone with even basic knowledge about the Russian navy at that time knows what I'm talking about. As I said, I think such nonsense was absolutely unnecessary, and this precursor to what would happen in Europe in ten years deserved a more honest approach. / Lesson learned: Once you mount a tiger, you shouldn't get off.

After the initial four minutes, I had an intense feeling that there were enough sounds in the film for a pornographic movie, while the visuals were significantly lacking in this regard. There was too much of both for a drama, though. I gave up all hope and prepared myself to write a negative review, but the creators surprised me with this slightly bizarre spectacle, which gradually began entertaining me. The film had a high-quality cast. I always enjoy seeing Martin Hofmann and Hynek Čermák. I also like redheads with freckles, and Matyáš Řezníček portrayed Petr convincingly enough. So, the only thing that bothered me was Eliska Křenková, who had a bland expression, and Captain Antonie Formanová, who didn't seem to be acting. The long, pathetic dialogue between Antonie and Petr made me decrease the number of stars. It was nothing special, but it could have been above average if the director had handled the situation better. / Lesson learned: If you have a fragile psyche, don't get involved in anything major. 2+

I was really looking forward to Babylon, so my disappointment was even greater when I spent three hours watching a movie that I could only react to with a slight shrug. Even the introduction with the elephant should have warned me to lower my expectations, but I ignored it and continued to hope. I know. I have only myself to blame. Gradually, it became increasingly clear that the creators were trying to shock the audience, and I'm sure they succeeded with the prude American public. For me, a European, their attempt shamefully failed. A naked female body truly doesn't shock me (unless it is morbidly obese or rachitic and emaciated, and even then, I'm disgusted rather than shocked). As a long-time consumer of pornography, urination play doesn't surprise me, and I consider defecation and vomiting to be the last desperate attempt by filmmakers to grab attention and create "controversy." Sure, that's not what the movie was about. It was mainly about the story, but I found it somewhat weak. Only Brad Pitt and Diego Calva impressed me with their performances among the actors. Margot Robbie pushed too hard, and my disappointment was considerable. I found the filming of Nellie's first sound scene amusing, I was surprised by the significant number of casualties during the filming of movies, and I still can't help feeling that this film must have sexually aroused more than one American lawyer when they saw the number of potential lawsuits. If the creators wanted to pay tribute to the art of filmmaking (judging by the ending), the Hungarians clearly beat them. / Lesson learned: Drugs, alcohol, and gambling are bad. 3*-

Both protagonists tried so hard that I even rooted for them at times (even though I'm not a fan of criminals). The only positive character was undoubtedly the laid-back sheriff with his humane approach but lousy tactics. The two convicts got much further than I had expected, occasionally singing a hit about a sewing machine, but I'm not giving them more than three stars. / "You've got the advantage, boy. You're tough to see if the light ain't good." / Lesson learned: You never know with whom you'll have to pull together.

I am not really a fan of French film, as the style does not resonate with me. However, sometimes it does hit the spot. Interestingly enough, the title of such films is often related to food. Today it was the absurdly absurd Buffet Froid. Plus, Delicatessen has long been on my top ten list. In the background and at the same time at the center of everything was the tower block; a building so ominous that it managed to entice even a violinist to move in!! I was intrigued by the high concentration of murderers per square meter, and I often laughed at jokes that many Americans would find inappropriate. Although I could never really warm up to Gérard Depardieu, his Alphonse was hilarious. However, my favorite character was Inspector Morvandieu, a big shot in the Parisian criminal underworld and a star of the resistance. This man more than made up for his weakness thanks to his six-barreled revolver, from which he could fire up to fifteen times without reloading. / "This is the first time I will see a man die." "Me too. I am usually late." / "Boss, we found a strangled woman on the fifth floor!" "Leave her, she is with us." / Lesson learned: A hitman may not share your sense of humor.

Let's face it, the movie has aged significantly. It's somewhat naive, and the acting performances aren't impressive (except for Gregory Peck, who was excellent as usual). The main idea of the movie, or rather the short story on which it is based, is still relevant. The world is full of hypocrites who pretend to be exemplary believers, environmentalists, or other such do-gooders, but it all changes as soon as money comes into play. / Lesson learned: Happiness is wonderful, but it can't be bought with cash. 4*

Let's be honest, this wasn't a horror, but I didn't care because it worked great as a mysterious drama. I first noticed Michelle Monaghan years ago in the movie Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. As far as I'm concerned, time hasn't treated her badly at all. The cute little curly rascal annoyed me even before his hairy friend returned, but I loved Skylar Morgan Jones as his sister. However, the sprinter and notorious escape artist Helen completely won me over and made me laugh despite all the tragedy. With horror films, I always prepare myself for disappointment in advance. It didn't happen in this case, but as I already explained, I didn't even think of this as a horror. I appreciate the creators putting together a fairly decent story with a good atmosphere, without stupid jump scares. Instead, they focused more on psychological aspects. So, yeah, it was a pleasant surprise. / Lesson learned: Beware of ungrateful dying people!