gudaulin

How to review this... A high-budget film created as a deliberate calculation by the studio and the director. The money invested is evident in the visual aspect, with many effects remaining interesting even over time, but the script is stupid to the point of being offensive. I have no understanding for this type of production; it only brings shame to my favorite genre. The scenes set in the future appear as a cautionary example of creative dementia. Overall impression 25%.

My first and probably last encounter with the famous Jackie Chan. The film has a very stupid script with a lot of embarrassing jokes. Overall impression: 20%. The presence of several famous and sometimes decent actors doesn't save the film.

I do not deny that in the ranking of the best crime series, I prefer Breaking Bad with its fascinating story of the moral downfall of its hero; The Wire, however, comes in second place right behind it. The greatest advantage of the thrilling battle between the black drug dealers and the members of the anti-narcotics unit of the Baltimore crime branch is its civility and credibility. The script, which draws you into the world of police officers, criminals, addicts, pushers, and the inhabitants of neglected tenement houses is among the highest quality works in the genre. The Wire can constantly surprise you, keeps you on your toes, and dispels even the last illusions about the functioning of justice in the complex system of American society, where the interests of various parts of the state apparatus, business, and political elite intersect. The victory of justice is often relative and tainted, and its price is high. The war against the drug industry has no end and consists of countless small conflicts, moral compromises, manipulations, and pressure. Watching each episode was a small television celebration for me, and I will definitely return to this series. Overall impression: 95%.

A slightly below-average thriller where a traditional psychopath seeks revenge for (perceived) past wrongs on unsuspecting victims. A similar plot, with minor variations, has been used in dozens, if not hundreds, of films, and They Shoot Divas, Don't They? does not stand out in any way. The only allure and merit of the film is the mature charm of Jennifer Beals in the lead role of a singer going through a midlife crisis and confronted with the realization that her career has peaked. While the acting performances and direction are not exceptional, they maintain a certain standard, but the film truly suffers from being composed of recycled material. Overall impression: 45%.

A pleasant and smart comedy that relies on the typical advantages of British cinema, namely a certain soberness, rather dry British humor, quality acting performances, and original ideas. Especially in the first half, I even considered giving it five stars a few times. Although the dialogues are not overflowing with catchphrases and the individual scenes are not full of crazy gags, the absurdity of what is seen reliably brings a smile to one's face, as prisoners in a strictly guarded prison, all of them convicted for the worst crimes, namely murders, rehearse an opera performance about a serial killer with an ambitious theater group. Unfortunately, especially in the second half, the script slides from humorous exaggeration to sentimentality, especially in the banquet scene, where the air simply shimmers with mutual understanding, friendship, and love, where a little healthy cynicism wouldn't hurt. Of course, the whole scenario is unrealistic, as it would be difficult for, let's say, the head guard to rehearse a performance with his inmates without losing all authority and distance. Overall impression: 75%.

Yes, Steven Soderbergh is a successful and talented director, the film features well-known and talented actors, the budget was adequate, the producer was enthusiastic - in short, there were all the prerequisites for a good and successful movie. However, this film has one flaw - it doesn't work at all. Whether it's due to an unfinished script or the direction, and probably both together, the result is more than disappointing for me. Noble boredom in a confusing plot. Overall impression: 30%.

Schachter's film does not hide the fact that it follows the emotionally engaged tradition of Hollywood, which cleverly attacks the viewer's sentiment. The script goes straight to the point and shows the protagonist - a young man with a speech impediment and physical disability, armed with determination and supported by a devoted mother - obtaining a job at a trading company and gradually gaining the trust of the neighborhood residents as a door-to-door salesman. He becomes a part of their lives, witnesses breakups and reconciliations, occasionally helps by chance, and directs or reconciles people. The pace of time changes, people age, and door-to-door sales become an anachronism, overwhelmed by phone and internet sales. The protagonist must cope with a serious illness and eventually the death of his mother, which he manages with the same inner strength with which he faces his disability. Without a doubt, this film is not a drama in the spirit of neorealism, but a tearjerker that looks at the world positively and mostly sees its characters in a rosy light. Moreover, it is just a TV movie, as its budget certainly did not attract any records. However, Macy managed to imprint not only humanity but also persuasiveness onto his character. Objectively, it may be worth 3 stars, but from a subjective point of view, I would gladly add one more star because the emotional manipulation here is not cheap, and the film gives hope to millions of disabled people throughout the world. Overall impression: 70%.

A pseudo-historical film with a problematic script and acting performances, and an underestimated budget. Rutger Hauer played one of his typical routine villains. A forgettable superficial matter. Overall impression 20%.

I can only review the series, but I didn't last longer than eight episodes with it. Undoubtedly, in the history of film and television, there are much weaker works in the fantasy genre. However, compared to Sapkowski's excellent literary source, the result is quite awkward. The weaker screenplay, which also differs from the books in many ways, the uneven acting performances, and a noticeably lower budget couldn't be saved by Michal Zebrowski, who was a good casting choice for the role (and possesses a very decent acting range), or by the several Polish acting aces who appeared in minor roles. From such strong source material, a much better spectacle could have emerged and a much greater mystique could have emanated from it. Overall impression: 35%.

A film about the search for love and defining its boundaries. The less diligent and reliable Wilbur, who also suffers from various forms of depression and neuroses, is much more successful in gaining human sympathy and the favor of women than his older brother. Compared to Italian for Beginners, I rate this film by Lone Scherfig somewhat more critically. The main reason is the not very credible portrayal of the characters and their relationships. It's a bit of a mystery what fascinates all the women about Wilbur, who they constantly have to rescue from the bathtub or cut down from a chandelier. Everyone probably knows charming rascals who are completely unsuitable for ordinary family life yet extraordinarily attractive to women. However, Wilbur lacks their provocativeness and vitality. Nevertheless, the director's touch is evident, and the film is a good choice for those who enjoy psychological subtlety. Overall impression: 65%.