gudaulin

I have never really understood the enthusiasm that film critics and reviewers have for Věra Chytilová. I could never relate to her work and to some extent, her social views, activism, and feminism annoy me. I did a little recap of her and I would only be willing to give four stars to two of her films, with The Jester and the Queen being basically just a film adaptation of a play where Chytilová's personal contribution is not significant. Calamity is one of those films that leaves me indifferent. The screenplay is oddly fragmented, and the characters are mostly just figurines that Chytilová uses for some lines or pseudo-joke. The dialogues are downright forced. Thinking about it, even two stars are quite generous for the emotions that Chytilová prepared for me. Perhaps the biggest contribution is simply the presence of some prominent faces from Czechoslovak cinema of the 70s. Bolek Polívka is undoubtedly a very talented actor and comedian, but it is generally true that he needs stronger direction, and Chytilová couldn't quite handle him here. Overall impression: 40%.

Reviews of movies and series are usually derived from comparison, and unfortunately, I watched Caliphate only after finishing the excellent Israeli series Our Boys. It is among the rare titles that can be labeled as perfect, and precise, without any flaws or missteps. Caliphate is, let's say, fresh and made on a current topic, but it is far from a perfect experience. The acting performances are average in some cases, and the thought processes and actions of some of the characters evoke the feeling of the screenwriter's effort to go in a specified direction rather than a credible reality. I read somewhere a comparison to the American series Homeland, and I don't consider that a compliment. At times, there is clearly an attempt to make the story more attractive no matter what. Nevertheless, it is an interesting and recommendable series. Overall impression: 75%.

A very sparingly made film that relies on the impactful reconstruction of a real, brutal crime. The black and white camera dispassionately captures the perpetrators' narrative, the director uses mere hints where others would exploit the offered possibilities and realistically depict violence to increase attractiveness. It's exactly the kind of film that lingers with the audience for a long time and forces them to contemplate on the subjects of morality, guilt, and punishment. Well cast and acted. Overall impression: 90%.

The plot is, as usual, quite funny, but this time the visuals and the animation don't impress me. Both are too simple and you can't always blame it on when it was made. Overall impression: 40%.

"What about the glass?", asks the frontman of the Tango band in the main musical motif of the film, while Kachyňa, on the other hand, asks what to do with a life that has been diluted with so many compromises and concessions that it no longer brings joy. Kachyňa, for the second time shortly after A Good Light, presents a protagonist who is struggling with a mid-life crisis, combined this time with a clash with the world of pragmatic pragmatism, which his superior embraces, and an author's desire for honest work without compromises. It is true that I have seen better from Kachyňa, but after watching it several times I'm giving it an additional star. The second half of the 80s is reminiscent not only in the soundtrack but also in the overall mood of the film. The anger, helplessness, and aimlessness correspond to the feelings of many from that time. Moreover, Karel Heřmánek was experiencing the best period of his acting career at that time. Overall impression: 70%.

My review is influenced by nostalgia - I saw the movie and series on television a long time ago. It is a naive and cheap imitation of Star Wars, a B-movie spectacle that nowadays has meaning only as a springboard for the successful remake. Compared to today, the original movie and series are equally, and perhaps even more, naive than the original Star Trek compared to its current form. Overall impression: 35%.

No Man's Land is a fusion of three genres - a spy thriller, a romance set in exotic landscapes of the Middle East, and a war drama. A naive young man from secular Europe travels to Syria to search for his sister after not believing the news of her death. He becomes involved in a brutal conflict between the supporters of the Islamic State and Kurdish militias, with other significant players entering the scene. Against the backdrop of a civil war and the clash of ideologies, a personal conflict unfolds for several characters on both sides of the barricade, dealing with the conflict between love and friendship on one hand and ideals and duties on the other, often facing painful moral compromises. The script leads its protagonists through complicated and unpredictable paths, which I consider to be a strong aspect of the film. However, the cast also scores points with plenty of unfamiliar faces, especially Mélanie Thierry, who I need to keep an eye on. The contemporary world of TV series and films rides the wave of poster-manifesting feminism, which is opportunistic and unreliable, often even ridiculous. And yet I believe in this girl's strength and moral fortitude. The characters, including those who only get little space, are portrayed convincingly and without superficiality. Those for whom the series may not resonate are popcorn movie fans. No Man's Land doesn't cater to them. It is not a simplified film and it requires certain knowledge of the realities and your concentration. My overall impression is 90%, and I am looking forward to the second season, which the ending of the first directly encourages.

The most interesting thing - actually, the only interesting thing - is where Ivo Trajkov found the money for such a mess, because any producer who supports something like this clearly demonstrates their incompetence. It's also interesting to ponder where the actors' judgment went, as the cast is above average. It's a waste of time on every level. Overall rating: 0%.

Those who are not familiar with the phenomenon of Gervais' most successful project should first watch the original. It is extraordinary thanks to the dedication and charisma of its creator and it discovered the phenomenon of the aesthetics of awkwardness for television. On the other hand, in my opinion, the Czech version does not deserve the ritual execution demonstrated by the reviewers just a few minutes after the first episode was aired. The complaints about the absence of English dry humor or the inability to come close to it are somewhat out of place. The British version of The Office is everything but traditional dry humor. It is an original that turns the classic sitcom upside down and attacks its most fundamental principles. By the way, the Czech version is not as good as the original, because it is not as cynical, cruel, and ruthless as Gervais' humor, which pulls no punches and is filled with vulgarisms. Kopta steers it into a more jovial position, which breaks the spikes of conflict. Overall, however, I have a better impression of the Czech version so far than of the American one, even though the production approaches are completely incomparable. The Americans quickly slipped into the form of a classic sitcom and Ricky's The Office was unrecognizable to me. Here, the gags work and I don't have any significant issues with Kopta despite the aforementioned problems. Criticizing the copying of a famous original in the case of a franchise doesn't make any sense. This is an intention fully supported by the rights owner, Ricky Gervais. I have some trouble with the casting of certain supporting roles. Sára Venclovská is not a good enough actress, and she doesn't fit the type as a substitute for Lucy Davis. The Czech version of The Office is not a literal copy of the famous predecessor, although logically it must adhere to the basic scheme and style. However, it differs in the portrayal of individual characters, dialogues, and atmosphere. So far, I would give it 3 stars, but I will reserve my overall review for the end. Postscript after the airing of the 6th episode: actually, it wasn't bad at all and my certain hesitations have dissipated over time. The fourth star is somewhat opportunistic in response to the extremely negative judgments of the series from some critics, but I can confirm that the positive impressions prevail and, within the context of Czech TV series production, it is a decent above-average show. Kopta approached the character differently than Gervais, and his self-centered, selfish, cheeky, and sexist guy is, in a twisted way, actually likable. I can imagine another six-episode series and I would actually be quite grateful for it. Overall impression: 70%.

An interesting Russian drama, situated in the visually attractive environment of Afghanistan torn by civil war, the factual collapse of state structures, and the society's descent into almost medieval times. The crew of a transport plane is dragged into this boiling cauldron, who are unfortunate enough to be carrying ammunition for government soldiers as part of their cargo to Kabul. When they are forced to make an emergency landing by a rebel fighter jet, they suddenly become hostages, who, although potentially valuable in the propaganda war and as instructors to rebel soldiers, are still uncertain of their fate. Unbelievable dramas unfold before their eyes, and as weeks and months go by, their psyche is more and more affected. Stress, submarine sickness, uncertainty, and clashes of cultural and religious values increasingly take their toll on them. Unlike American productions, this film is noticeably more authentic, not only because it is based on a true story, but also because Russians have been involved in Central Asia for a long time and colonized a significant part of modern Central Asian history, so they know what they are talking about and what they should capture. Moreover, it has a surprisingly decent budget, so viewers are not deprived of (by European standards) a generous production design and it is also of good quality from a technical standpoint. Excellent camera work and very decent direction allow film enthusiasts to enjoy a few truly top-notch scenes, such as the bombing of Kandahar by government forces. On the other hand, the film features the traditional Russian flaw of a strong tendency toward melancholic lyricism, which leads to a loss of pace and the film appears longer than it actually is. However, I have no problem giving it 4 stars, even though the film clearly touches upon traditional strong Russian nationalist sentiments (the captain's statement "We are Russia") or makes a small concession to Americans - try to guess who the masked mysterious "greatest" Muslim in the world was. Overall impression: 75%.