gudaulin

Pavel Juráček was primarily a screenwriter, but he also directed one of the most interesting films in Czech cinematic history. During a brief period of creative freedom, he made an imaginative allegory based on the famous novel "Gulliver's Travels," highlighting the absurdity of life in totalitarian Czechoslovakia. This film is not only a key work of Pavel Juráček, but also the most significant role of actor Lubomír Kostelka. The plot is not crucial; what matters is the atmosphere built on black humor, biting sarcasm, and immense exaggeration. The regime never forgave Juráček for his film, and things ultimately ended up very badly for him. If there is a cinematic work in the second half of the 20th century in Czechoslovakia that reflects Kafka's literary style based on absurdity, it is Case for a Rookie Hangman. Overall impression: 100%.

For a very long time, American studios had to adhere to the so-called moral code and especially the productions of big studios were characterized by incredible prudishness. Then things opened up a bit, which led to a lot of nudity, vulgarity, and unnecessary films that relied on the cheapest pandering. Secretary is not an erotic film, as it is rather a humorous story about the search for sexual identity and coming to terms with it. While homosexuality has been successfully portrayed multiple times and certainly does not surprise as a topic, sexual deviation, which plays an important role in the film's story, still has a touch of something unusual, rarely seen in fictional films. Maggie Gyllenhaal and James Spader act with perspective and Secretary can be considered a pleasant film in the style of the American independent scene. It is a film that, although cautiously and gently (in fact, it moves within the boundaries of classic romantic comedies despite its tragicomic and dramatic elements), still pushes the boundaries of style and theme. Overall impression: 80%. It is, among other things, a film about tolerance, and it will probably be appreciated by those who have long understood that the boundaries of so-called normality are moving elsewhere than in the previous century and that love has many forms...

I noticed something interesting - those who rate Signs very highly often have great reservations about The Village. For me, it's the opposite. While I consider The Village to be M. Night Shyamalan's masterpiece, I not only disliked Signs, but it disgusted me. That's because the film touches on a genre that I like very much, and I know quite a lot about it. However, it does so in a very superficial way, using ideas from B-movies of the 1950s. Its portrayal of aliens and the risks associated with them made me laugh in the movie theater. In that case, any attempt at a "thriller" and "horror" is doomed to failure. Where others talk about the "great atmosphere and mystique," I sometimes felt like the director was openly making fun of me. Signs does not work as a psychological film for various reasons. What remains is the traditionally good work with actors, and the children acted very decently, while Gibson delivered his standard performance, he did not suit his role in my eye. He looks much better in action roles. Shyamalan is very good at working with details and sounds, but this time it wasn't enough to create the good atmosphere that his filmmaking stands for, due to the poorly chosen approach to the subject. In particular, the incorporation of religious elements into the story really didn't sit well with me. Overall impression 40%.

I by no means claim that The Village is M. Night Shyamalan's best film, but I like it the most. Emotionally, it may resonate with me more than the acclaimed The Sixth Sense. In one of Švankmajer's films, the heroine says: "You have to close your eyes, or you won't see anything." In the case of The Village, it is not necessary to close your eyes but to embrace the director's game and let your imagination carry you away. The film doesn't function as a thriller or even as a horror, and anyone who thinks in terms of traditional genres will inevitably be disappointed. However, The Village, despite many contrary claims in the reviews, offers a range of very good acting performances, directorial ideas, and above all, atmosphere. Overall impression 90%.

From an emotional perspective, it is an almost perfect film that is based on real events that took place during the infamous genocide in 1993. Excellent screenplay, quality casting, and clever direction. The result is a film that has been successful worldwide and has managed to convey the cruel events in Central Africa much better than the media. One of the best films of recent years. Overall impression: 100%. However, it is not a film that is capable of conveying a good mood, it is a distressing testimony about a country that is deformed by its poverty and ethnic hatred.

Gattaca is literally an embodiment of the genre essence of sci-fi and in every aspect it is a highly above-standard movie, where all the ingredients that make up a good artistic work are excellently harmonized and balanced. An imaginative screenplay utilizing the latest scientific discoveries and speculating where these findings and new technologies can lead society. Sensitive, highly professional direction that can evoke strong emotions without cheap effects, cast which has no visible weaknesses and brings a lot of great performances. Gattaca is actually already here, we just haven't fully realized it yet, but in about twenty years we will be fully facing what is depicted in Gattaca. Overall impression: 100%. It is astonishing how such an exceptional film could be created with such a small budget.

For most critics, the film Brazil represents the peak of Gilliam's work, while Twelve Monkeys is considered too mainstream, where Gilliam's creative vision was hindered by strict producer oversight. The truth is that Brazil is indeed a pinnacle work in certain aspects (especially in terms of its visual design), but it is also very unbalanced, narcissistic, and difficult for most viewers to comprehend. On the other hand, Twelve Monkeys is an exceptionally balanced genre film, built upon a strong theme, an intelligent script with a highly emotive plot, and a superbly crafted tragic yet ambiguous final scene. Even a disciplined Gilliam presents his viewers with absurd ideas from his workshop (the punishment chair), Orwellian situations (scientists with gifts above Cole's tortured body), and plenty of clever shots with a sense of composition (Cole's ascent into the abandoned city with wild animals on the ledges of the buildings). The excellent cast is led by Bruce Willis, who delivered top-notch character acting without wrestling holds and punches, unlike in his other films. The crazy Brad Pitt showcased once again that he has a very impressive range as an actor, beyond just a handsome face. We also get the demonic David Morse in a small role. There are no weak performances here. For me, this is the absolute pinnacle of the sci-fi genre. Overall impression: 100%. Excellent work with the time paradox within the genre. Even the very tragic theme of a hero desperately trying to stop a catastrophe is lightened in several scenes with small sarcastic jokes.

The Brotherhood of Wolves is a type of French blockbuster movie that attempts to resemble overseas blockbusters with its colorful plot, exteriors, and action elements, and it succeeds fairly well. It is necessary to highlight the excellent camera work, dynamic action, romantic exteriors, and decent visual effects. What falls behind is the screenplay, which clearly doesn't pay too much attention to the logic of the plot on screen and a whole range of significant details. The Native American and his European friend use East Asian martial arts, and the monster on screen seems more like an intrusion from another genre. Nevertheless, it is enjoyable to watch and the viewer isn't bored for a moment. Overall impression: 50%.

David Cronenberg had been considering an adaptation of the famous William S. Burroughs novel for a long time, but he didn't know how to make it and with what resources. Despite the diametrical differences in the environments that shaped them and the differences in their personalities, both creators are united by a high level of creativity and a refusal to be bound by conventions and prejudices. Given his and the writer's reputation and the scandalous content of the work, he understandably could not secure the support of major studios. The adventures surrounding the making of the film could be the subject of another movie. Because Naked Lunch is essentially a surrealist affair that can only be literally filmed as an animated film or an extremely expensive digitally created blockbuster without a chance of box office success, Cronenberg wrote a screenplay that used the literary source material only as a starting point. It's a film about how writer William Lee, aka Burroughs, writes Naked Lunch, the creative struggles he experiences, and how he's plagued by demons of drug addiction and sexual fantasies. Dream visions and drug hallucinations often appear. This provocative, hard-to-digest film, which is definitely not for everyone, received enthusiastic acclaim from critics and won several professional awards, but logically failed commercially. The central theme of Cronenberg's film is loneliness and the resulting frustration of a highly talented individual surrounded and threatened by a conventional environment. Overall impression: 95%. Acting-wise, Peter Weller and Judy Davis had great performances.

David Cronenberg is a director whose work corresponds to my ideas about the sci-fi genre, and his style, which deals with mysterious elements, atmosphere, and morbid ideas, has thrilled me in many cases. EXistenZ is his fantastic piece, where the cast, performances, screenplay, and individual visual elements have come together to create a work that I have nourished within myself for many months. In the film, reality seamlessly merges into a dream without warning the viewer, and the protagonists themselves do not know whether they are connected to a computer game in virtual reality or experiencing real emotions and events. "You don't have to kill me," says one of the heroes, and immediately adds, "but tell me, are we still playing the game?" The film raises a number of questions about the extent to which technologies controlling the human mind can go and the price of human life. Overall impression: 95%.