gudaulin

My reviews of Claude Chabrol's works so far have been fairly balanced, in that I more or less knew in advance what I was getting into and how it would affect me. Usually, I have his films about 3 and a half stars, with me deciding between 3 and 4 stars depending on the mood, actors, and small nuances in the script. I'm almost certain that Chabrol will never reach 5 stars for me, and until now I assumed that he wouldn't cause any significant disappointment. However, Bad Girls is simply and plainly boring. The plot is thin, psychologically shallow, and somewhat tiresome. I understand that in the 1960s, mere signs of a lesbian relationship and bisexual orientation had to be provocative, but the time when something like that shocks is long gone. There was Stéphane Audran, who had excellent prerequisites for portraying all kinds of fashionable characters and was an excellent choice for bored middle-class housewives or bourgeois ladies. There was also Jean-Louis Trintignant, a charismatic actor of his generation. However, two interesting actors do not make a good film. Overall impression: 35%.

I don't feel competent to claim that The Good, the Bad and the Ugly is the best film of its genre. I haven't seen that many westerns and, to be honest, modern anti-westerns like Dead Man or Dances with Wolves resonate with me more. Nevertheless, it is definitely a very entertaining and high-quality film. I don't really care for the western genre, and I have given five stars only to the absolute minimum of these films. The reason for the popularity of this film lies in the fact that Leone managed to make a film that appeals to everyone, which is rather rare in cinema. It is adventurous, thrilling, and very clever, as well as conveying an obvious anti-war message. It combines classic genre conventions with modern filmmaking elements, a traditionally excellent soundtrack, camera tricks, and occasional ventures into purely artistic waters. In certain moments, the film forgets itself and succumbs to genre clichés, such as the shootout with the Tuco's gang, where we see a traditional scene from B-movie westerns, where the hidden rifle shooter misses the gunslinger who shoots him from an unfavorable position with a quick draw. However, due to the overall lighthearted atmosphere, these few minor missteps easily fade away. Leone adeptly alternates the pace, combining genuinely humorous scenes with tragic ones, and, above all, relies on top-notch casting. The director always managed to choose actors who perfectly suited their roles, whether it was Clint Eastwood, Lee Van Cleef, or Eli Wallach. Overall impression: 90%.

When two people fight, a third laughs. Even after almost three decades since its premiere, it is still a pleasant and functional comedy with several excellent moments resulting from the mutual rivalry of two swindlers in one arena. Glenne Headly is a good actress, but she lacks that little bit of charisma to keep up with her colleagues, so the majority of the runtime is rightfully dominated by Steve Martin and Michael Caine. It is not so surprising that the seasoned British veteran performs better on screen, embodying his character with charm and nobility. His American counterpart, on the other hand, tends to overplay his portrayal of an uneducated brute. It is paradoxical that even though Caine plays a polished man from a higher class, he actually comes from a neglected working-class housing estate. Overall impression: 65%.

Truffaut mainly focused on studying interpersonal relationships in his work, especially those between the two genders, and he didn't delve too much into the past. Two English Girls can be considered his only costume film, but it is not from history that is all that distant. The story takes place at the beginning of the 20th century, and Truffaut describes an interesting love triangle between a young French man from a well-off bourgeois family and two sisters from a typical puritanical English family. It is not just a film about love and sex, but also about different cultures and particularly about a transformative era when modern society as we know it was born. The girls Muriel and Anne are products of the modern world, they play tennis, eagerly explore the world, and have excessively progressive views considering the families they come from. At the same time, they are influenced by the traditional values of bourgeois conservatism and dare not rebel against the strict rules of morality at the time. From today's perspective, it is a bit of a peculiar world, where the first sexual encounter takes seven years to happen and is filled with abstinence and futile longing. Some dialogues may seem somewhat literary, and in another film, I would mind, but I believe in Truffaut and his characters. The attitudes and behavior of Claude's mother, who embodies bourgeois calculation and pure pragmatism, are a true delicacy. Overall impression: 95%.

I have great respect for the social dramas of the Dardenne brothers, but there has always been something missing or excessive for me in their films. Yet this drama, set in a corporate environment, resonated with me so much that I accepted it without reservations and with enthusiasm. For me, this is the most crucial film by the sibling duo. The seemingly artificially created situation corresponds to the conflicts that unions and management resolve in collective bargaining in companies when they have to decide between preserving jobs or increasing wages. One of the world's best actresses in the lead role is just the icing on the cake. Overall impression: 90%.

This is proof that the Russians have not forgotten about animation and can produce feature-length animated films at a very decent craftsmanship level. The world of medieval German Hanseatic cities, where Wilhelm Hauff placed his stories, romantic nature, dark witches, is all beautifully drawn and animated. The creators played with the script, added a number of small jokes, so that for children, the time will fly by with a very reasonable runtime for the film. I just have to sigh about the issue of......... globalization - unfortunately, the whole thing strongly resembles an American Disney production, not only in terms of artistry but also with sentimental songs that interrupt the storytelling. Overall impression 75%.

If there is something perfect that deserves a five-star rating about this film, it is definitely Edward Norton's performance in the role of a man accused of murdering a celebrity. In his debut, he showed immense potential with his talent and both critics and film viewers were amazed by him. He has certainly rightfully ranked among the most significant names of his acting generation. I have no problem with Richard Gere in the lead male role either, who is, although two or three levels worse than Norton, still good enough, and above all, Gere was perfectly cast in a role that he masterfully controls, and he has experience in portraying these types of self-confident elegant characters. However, what bothers me is the screenplay. It's the typical Hollywood construction that tries to manipulate the viewer as much as possible and prepares a "shocking" twist at the very end. That is exactly what pleases many film fans on the other hand. It's not about the fact that the perpetrator plans 20 moves ahead because every top chess player does that. It's rather about the fact that the brilliant plan counts on the reaction of many involved parties, which cannot be accurately predicted in reality, and if their reactions were to deviate even slightly from the assumptions, the perpetrator would end up in the electric chair very quickly. Not to mention that according to my indirect knowledge, this is not how the American justice system truly works. Overall impression: 65%.

I do not share the general enthusiasm for this psychological drama about painful coping with war experience and marriage breakdown. Firstly, I do not agree with the evident influence of Dogma 95, which, like any dogma, flattens possibilities and burdens the ability to express oneself. Without these limitations, the film would not be more superficial or appealing, but simply more interesting, captivating, and visually impressive. However, what bothers me the most is that the film fails in the most important aspect, in that it has unconvincing psychology because for the characters to behave as the story presents, much more should have happened behind the scenes. Frankly, to break the relationship between a man and a woman, the person doesn't need to be declared dead. Long-term separation, for example during military missions, is enough for alienation. But for the children to spontaneously reject their father upon his return and prefer the substitute partner is extremely unrealistic. Any similar story to this would probably be strongly influenced by other family members, especially the parents, who would make life hell for the daughter-in-law and the other son. Of course, the premise is interesting, and I would prefer the war section taking place in captivity in a distant country, a foreign culture, and a hostile environment. Soviet soldiers had extensive experience with this during their long years of imprisonment in Afghanistan in the 80s. Overall impression: 50%.

An unknown and exceptional war film, which is interesting primarily because of its perspective and depiction of the environment of defeated fascist Italy. The war is captured from the viewpoint of an Italian officer, who experiences disillusionment and the loss of his values upon his return home after the Italian surrender and the dissolution of the regular Italian army. The soldiers of his unit disperse, leaving only a few men heading in the same direction. The screenwriter embodies certain experiences typical of that time in their characters. Despite the chosen lighter tone of storytelling, it is essentially a tragic anti-war film, where practically all the main characters gradually perish, with the exception of the main protagonist, who is, however, very close to it during the final clash in the chaos of war when we leave him. The film is shot with an ethos typical of post-war Italy and France, explaining the political situation of the time from the perspective of the victorious anti-fascist coalition, and glossing over certain unpleasant aspects of the reality of the time. The screenplay therefore employs some simplifying techniques, such as the scene of the Jewish woman being discovered by German soldiers, which is not credible. If the screenwriter were honest, he would have let the passengers on the bus expose her for her share of the loot hidden in the trunk. The revelation of an American prisoner hidden with an anti-fascist family would naturally not just lead to the execution of the man as the head of the family but to the annihilation of the whole family, and especially the brutal rape of the wife, which incidentally was commonly committed by both fighting sides. It is highly probable that a high-ranking Italian officer would not immediately join the partisan resistance organization controlled by the Communists after the Italian surrender... I could go on. Despite the mentioned minor screenwriting flaws, it is an excellent war film that has a great cast and performances. Overall impression: 80%.

After a great internal struggle, I am giving this film three stars, but they are not convincing and I still have doubts about them. They are more for the concept and cast than for the screenplay and execution. This film delves so deeply into the inner turmoil of its protagonists' souls that it almost drowns in psychology. Then there's the sentimental music, tormented faces, and the obsequious melancholy from the camera. In short, I have a feeling that Ponti wanted to make a strong impression on his audience and sell them a melodramatic story that somewhat flirts with emotional manipulation. Overall impression: 50%.