Isherwood

After embarrassing trailers and 3D conversion, I avoided watching Thor in the movie theater. Now, in retrospect, I feel that was a mistake because Branagh has delivered a terrific comic book movie that bucks the fashionable trend of machine psychoanalyses of the heroic mind, and instead has a sympathetic man land on Earth who tackles everything with a disarming combination of unearthly naivety and muscularity. The characters are as flat as ever, but the actors are excellent, it moves along nicely, and it's full of humor (or Asgard) and proper pomposity. A sequel, please!

Either Jean Claude van Damme is such a major idol for Scott Adkins that it clouds his judgment in choosing roles, or he employs the worst acting agent in Hollywood. How else are we to explain why he keeps getting caught up in dull B-movie storylines in which everything except his physical abilities, which even with what little the film has to offer, are still in a dimension that defies the capabilities of mere mortals? One doesn't expect an ancient drama, but today, this sort of routine is slowly becoming unnecessary even on the shelf of video stores. [PS: Jean's violin playing is one of the most bizarre moments in the history of cinema.]

Along with X-Men, this is the second blockbuster this year that pushes the envelope in spectacular ways (WETA studio has once again pushed the boundaries of the impossible) while not being afraid to be clever. There may be some reservations regarding it, but we will see after the second screening. Very soon. [PS: When I heard the word "No!" my heart stopped for a few seconds.]

There are about as many quality lawyer movies as there are quality lawyers. But let's leave ethics aside. I've always passed by Michael Connelly’s books at the library, thinking it must be that sublime detective bore. This is perhaps the case, but this film parades through such a plethora of well-written, functional, and well-acted characters that I’m willing to forgive even the fancy points (if you've read a few books and seen a few films, it won't be anything special to you) and enjoy this great genre addition (how many years has it been, anyway?) without further lamentation. 4 ½. PS: I’m gonna take out that Connelly book, though.

The film features excellent individual elements that stand out on their own (Clint), underlined by spectacular visuals (Deakins), playful music, and a horde of allusions, quotes, and parodies. Unfortunately, the result of the aforementioned is a rather incoherent patchwork, whose issue is not so much that it dabbles in multiple genres, but rather that it lacks the real wit that might have brought (paradoxically!) a bit of childishness in Verbinski's writing, the absence of which, on the other hand, I can quite understand after the Pirates trilogy.

Characters with no proper motivation, whose behavior is sometimes borderline moronic (Gillen's villain), move around in a crime drama that attracted us with a promising theme and A-list actors via its trailer. If it weren't for them and the good soundtrack and the FB catchphrase, it would have whizzed by like a cheesy TV detective story.

It’s a mistake to expect, like I did, another funny asocial character with a genius brain like Sherlock or Dr. House. John Luther is a flesh-and-blood detective who sacrifices his personal life for his work, and it rewards him with hell. This is not done through witty bon mots, but rather through the not-so-appealing sewers of London society, where there are plenty of dead, while also managing to develop the hero's character, which you would definitely not put in the model handbook for young policemen. Idris Elba has lent his character that strange aura of a not-very likable and yet respected man who threw away his inner ethics long ago, and yet you will still end up rooting for him. After two seasons, I take my hat off respectfully. [PS: If there is another season, I want more Alice Morgan back!]

A monument to Hollywood idiocy so pompous that even Bay's supporters are now spitting on it, besides art lovers. I understand, but I don't share the sentiment.

The angry grandpa Nicolas Cage is decent, the blonde woman of action Amber Heard is too, and Fichtner's accountant deserves a monument. It becomes a tragedy when it's not the actors who carry the film, but the director, which is quite a mess given the fact that it was made primarily for 3D. This is because this whole ride comes down to terrible special effects, not much action, or even anything resembling a plot development. Audiences thus have a hard time dealing with all the boring parts. I went into it with no expectations, but after finishing it I find myself crying over the wasted potential. On paper (and with this cast) it was definitely there. Or have even solid B-movie directors died out in Hollywood?

An art-action film about a hit girl searching for her own female identity. I'll probably never understand how someone could push a script like this past the studio bosses, but I won't hide the fact that I loved it. There probably won't be many conquerors of this film in the "weird" box this year. In any case, it's clear that one box is very small for Wright. The chemical music is great, and Saoirse is an excellent actress, but Cate should ditch the negative roles. The Soviet agent has been replaced by an American, the black hairstyle by a red one, but the tragedy is the same. 4 ½.