gudaulin

The series falls into a genre that I like, and the name of the original author should have been a guarantee, or at least a prerequisite, for solid entertainment. I should have been excited, but I approached the project with skepticism associated with the name Susanne Bier. I ironically nicknamed her the Rosamunde Pilcher of the festival scenes and consider her to be overrated on the global scale. I can imagine The Night Manager as a spy crime drama with adventurous elements about a mole deployed in an illegal organization. I can also imagine it working great under Kathryn Bigelow or decently directed by Agnieszka Holland, but with Susanne Bier, it's a disaster. The series is neither gripping nor impressive, and it's certainly not convincing. I criticize it for the lack of action and the chattiness of the series. However, I also have a problem with the style, expressive means, and emotions it relies on. Bier directs not a crime story, but a romantic miniseries made by a woman for women, where the main hero seems more like a sexual object than a secret agent. The driving forces behind his actions are love affairs and emotions in general. Seemingly incomprehensible comparisons with James Bond have their justification, even though you would look in vain for action elements in the series. The difference is that the Bond series is sexist, and filmed from the perspective of a dominant alpha male, while The Night Manager is gender-swapped. The focal point is not sex and action, but relationships. Not only the hero's love affairs but also his relationship with the main villain's son, for example. I feel no need to change anything about my rejecting attitude towards Susanne Bier's work, her handling of characters, or her storytelling. Overall impression: 45%.

Japanese mega-monsters were some of my first movie theater experiences in ancient times, and for a five-year-old boy, they were incredibly impressive with their sneaky special effects. Since then, a lot of time has passed, and my demands have multiplied many times over. I am not a fan of blockbusters and genre-wise, I am not interested in the genre of Edwards' film, so my expectations were low, and if the television hadn't served the film right under my nose, I wouldn't have bothered with it. I consider the subject matter even more infantile and outdated, especially in a time of booming special effects-based fairy tales for the whole family. However, with proper oversight, craftsmanship, and the ability to work with exaggeration appropriately, something interesting could have been created. Unfortunately, the film does not meet even minimal expectations. Once again, I had the feeling that someone had put my testicles in a vice. Edwards' Godzilla ultimately fails as an undemanding, entertaining big-budget spectacle, and it fails again in that it wants to break free from this label, using alternative elements and being more distinctive. Above all, it is simply stupid. Even within the framework of a fictional world, there should be some rules, motivation, and behavioral patterns. This is made for viewers with the intellectual level of a five-year-old child. I don't blame Godzilla for not being realistic and intelligent. You simply can't expect that from it. I do blame it, however, for not being smarter than its 70-year-old predecessors. I may have appreciated Edwards' debut film made in modest circumstances (appropriately), but here I get the feeling of insulting mediocrity. Sure, with such a high budget and technical means, it might be impossible not to shoot a few impressive, atmospheric shots, but as a whole, Godzilla is a painful defeat. An entirely different chapter is the enthusiastic comments and high ratings from some film critics, where one would expect expertise, objectivity, and an analytical perspective. Instead, I feel like they behave as if they are in a joke where a blind, deaf, and armless person is supposed to analyze an elephant. I declare that I will never watch a film about overgrown radioactive lizards again. Overall impression: 5%.

Daniel Holden was an 18-year-old somewhat impractical and far from mature student who could have had a great future ahead of him - if he hadn't been found touching the body of a strangled and abused 16-year-old schoolgirl and ritually surrounding her with flowers. Subsequently, unable to resist the focused pressure from investigators, he took responsibility for her death and spent nearly 20 years in prison, 19 of them on death row. He had already had the honor of personally meeting the executioner - one of the five appeals and subsequent postponements of the sentence came seriously at the last minute. As time passed, new investigation methods came into fashion, and DNA testing cast doubt on the old sentence. Daniel was released with the promise of a new investigation. Rectify is not a courtroom or prison drama, nor is it a crime show, at least not in the usual sense of the word. It is a psychological drama of a man deprived of his youth and thrown into a world he doesn't understand at all. He is not prepared to take care of himself, and he is overwhelmed by countless possibilities and perceptions. Moreover, for most of those around him, he remains a murderer. The girl's relatives want justice. For representatives of state power, it is unacceptable to admit that they destroyed the life of an innocent person. Moreover, and perhaps most importantly, outside of prison, Daniel has long stopped being relevant. Except for a few exceptions, he actually hinders everyone. His return causes confusion, doubt, and pain. Rectify is an intimate drama about the search for lost time and motivation to stand up and start over. It does not offer itself, it is not flashy, provocative, and above all, it does not hurry. All the seasons describe just 3 weeks of Daniel's life after returning home. But if you accept its pace and atmosphere, it has a decent chance of engulfing you, and along with Daniel, you will experience quiet dramas and rejoice in the small things that just a moment ago seemed mundane and insignificant. Last but not least, the series can be seen as a reflection, not so much on the state of imprisonment in the USA, but on the phenomenon of the death penalty. The main character returns to life behind bars in his memories and confronts it with life in freedom. Rectify is a series for patient and perceptive viewers capable of capturing and appreciating psychologically believable character sketches, hypnotic soundtracks, and top-notch performances led by Aden Young as Daniel and Abigail Spencer as the energetic and devoted sister Amantha. Personally, I give the series a definite thumbs up. After Westworld, it's another series that got under my skin in a short period of time. Overall impression: 90%.

Another elaborate return to the past by Visconti, where he assists in the decline of the old elites - this time capturing the decay of the wealthy Essenbeck family, German industrialists, who succumb to the dark force of victorious fascism during the years 1933-34. After the removal of the head of the family and the escape of his antifascist successor into exile, the remaining family members are driven by the desire for power and wealth, becoming easy prey for the manipulator and whisperer, SS officer Aschenbach, as a symbol of the new order. Unfortunately, just like elsewhere, Visconti allows himself to be carried away by the depiction of decadence and his favorite sexual deviations at the expense of the persuasiveness of his characters and the story. Where famous Czechoslovak films on the same subject, The Cremator and The Shop on Main Street, are disturbing and exceptionally powerful because they stem from a deep understanding of the conditions at that time and the understanding of historical processes, Visconti manages to create an absolutely gaudy and forcedly colorful poster that appears artificial. Aschenbach's disruptive demonic effort seriously makes no sense, he could easily charm an old man as well, and the German Chancellor had an exceptionally favorable relationship with the big industrialists, as both sides needed and complemented each other. Yes, Röhm was a homosexual, but it significantly weakened his position of power and certainly did not mean that the meeting of the SA leadership turned into a homosexual orgy. The atmosphere that Visconti wanted to associate with Hitler's regime could be found much more in the cabarets and luxury brothels of the Weimar Republic. On the contrary, for Nazism, the typical call was for a return to old virtues, and with a few exceptions, such as Göring's hedonism and Goebbels' womanizing, Nazi leaders acted as exemplary petit bourgeois, and that's how Nazi ideology appeared as well. Visconti's parade of decadence, animal instincts, and twisted characters did not generate sympathy in me, but on the other hand, the director had mastery over his craft, utilized quality actors, and did not bore me. It didn't make me angry enough to give it a rating lower than three stars, even though it would have appealed to me much more without the elements of theatricality and pathos. Overall impression: 55%.

Representatives of American studios will probably find my well-intentioned advice unconvincing, but just in case, here you go: When you next want to rehabilitate a fairy tale archvillain, don't skimp and hire a capable screenwriter alongside the cast and crew. I have nothing against alternative stories and different perspectives - I can even accept a gingerbread house being portrayed as a raid by ill-behaved imps destroying an old witch's dwelling, who in a sudden burst of emotion decides to deal with her lack of protein. Just write and film it in a way that makes sense within the context of the fairy tale world and its rules. Unfortunately, Maleficent fails in this aspect. The king, who faces a curse from his only daughter, the queen of the magical world, doesn't have her guarded like his most precious possession by an army of servants, but instead entrusts her upbringing to three clearly inept and quarrelsome fairies - representatives of the world with which he is at war. Nobody watches over the girl, and she regularly meets with the queen of the magical realm without any problems. Except for Maleficent, the other characters are underdeveloped, and in the end, the film relies on traditional Hollywood weapons - set design and special effects. Angelina handles her part with ease, while the other actors don't bring much to the table. I'm somewhat bothered by the visual style that caters to kids and the biggest kitsch enthusiasts. But then again, what can I expect from a family spectacle? Overall impression: 45%.

I admit that I enjoy similar movies to this one. Ones that are elaborate, technically precise with great camera work and soundtrack, and that attempt to convey a message while providing space for the viewer's imagination. The Lost City of Z is a film about human courage, the desire for knowledge, and the obsession to achieve a set goal. It tells a story from a time when explorers had to be adventurers and men, and when it truly mattered to push one's limits and consciously calculate that one might be saying goodbye to loved ones for the last time. In terms of genre, it combines adventure spectacle (without the beloved action and fantasy elements) with the biographical story of Major Fawcett, whose task was to map the region known as the "green hell" in the Amazon basin. A generation later, travelers were already using planes and motorboats, while Percy Fawcett resembled the renowned 19th-century adventurers equipped only with a compass and immeasurable determination to fill the vast blank spaces on the map. I like The Lost City of Z because it is a mature film in every sense, making no concessions to family audiences or teenagers, and not relying on emotions and sentiments. If I had to dwell on something, it would perhaps be the film's idealism of Fawcett's relationship with indigenous cultures, which corresponds to the opinions of modern urban liberals of Euro-American civilization and does not fit into the mindset of the British officers raised with the civilizational superiority of the white man and the elitism of a member of the British Empire at the height of its power. The film also could have been more atmospheric in the Latin American part, with more focus on magical realism elements. There could have been more scenes like the expedition's entrance into the opera straight from the jungle or the hallucinogenic scene of being captured by an indigenous tribe. Nevertheless, I give it an honest 4 stars and an overall impression of 80%.

Watching Son of Saul was such an intense and profound experience for me that I was unable to write an immediate comment about it. The filmmakers managed to create such a high level of authenticity within the genre that I consider surpassing it practically impossible. It's a naturalistic visit to hell as if you were suddenly immersed in hot water in a cauldron, and for almost two hours, you felt the devastating effects of sulfur, flames, and smoke on your body. Son of Saul captures 24 hours of the bitter existence of a Sonderkommando member in an extermination concentration camp. We observe the world through the eyes of a dulled and exhausted man who has experienced so much horror in recent months that, due to a defense mechanism of his psyche, he perceives the surrounding world as if in partial anesthesia through filters, completely detached. However, a meeting with a boy who miraculously survived being in the gas chamber awakens human emotions in him. Because his options are extremely limited, he clings to something that seems irrational at first glance, to an act that his fellow inmates do not understand. He does his best to organize a dignified farewell to the deceased in accordance with Jewish traditions, within the limits of what he can do. Son of Saul is an unpleasant and depressing film that cannot be recommended for casual viewing. It requires a certain level of sensitivity, and the ability to capture details and infer what is suggested. On the other hand, it is not deeply encrypted either, and reading some comments left me somewhat confused. Seriously, is it really that difficult to understand what happened with Saul's son and the rabbi? Personally, I consider it to be one of the most powerful film experiences ever. Overall impression: 95%.

Rob Marshall relies on superficial attractiveness, extravagance, and exoticism. His film is not intended for the Japanese audience, as it would probably be inappropriate to cast an actress of Chinese origin in a key role. The film has great visuals, at least in the first half, with the camera gliding along the winding streets of the historic district full of undulating roofs, the graceful curves of young beauties, their meticulous make-up, and elegant kimonos. While the form is polished, the content represents a banal fairytale about how a poor girl eventually found happiness through countless hardships and obstacles, fulfilling her desires. It is shallow and, considering the excessively long runtime, quite empty. The beginning is promising, but the rawness lasts only about 15 minutes, and then it just plays along without providing any statement about the time, society, or specific characters. Though Memoirs of a Geisha looks nearly perfect, it lacks spirit and without it, it is only halfway there. It resembles Christmas decorations - beautiful at first sight, shiny, but hollow and with a short lifespan. Overall impression: 45%.

Despite the promising cast, this is definitely not a film that could compete in the box-office hit of the year category. I assume that it will only briefly appear in movie theaters and viewers will have difficulty seeing it on the big screen. The truth is that this film is one of those that are suited for a small screen because it doesn't rely on special effects and set design. I remember the astonishment caused by Brad Pitt's character as a white gypsy in Snatch among less informed viewers. In Great Britain, gypsies do not have an ethnic dimension, it is a social category, the labeling of people who live a nomadic lifestyle and have a specific value system different from the rest of the population. The protagonist of the film is also one of these travelers - on one hand, he is the most promising successor of the aging clan leader, who should one day lead the whole family, and on the other, he becomes increasingly visible as a daring rebel who sees the need to adapt to the rapidly changing world, who wants to educate his children, and who wants to say no where tradition tells him to say yes. However, the surrounding world does not particularly care about him, the power of prejudices and legitimate mistrust takes its toll. Only the family can offer a helping hand against the pressure from the surroundings. Trespass Against Us is a work that combines social and psychological drama, as well as elements of crime with action. It can be proud of its dramatic escape from the scene of a robbery, just like a purebred crime thriller. Overall impression: 70%.

At the beginning of the new millennium, no sane person would have bet even half a penny on a film with pirate themes. The theme was considered exhausted and outdated, and not suitable for the era of computers and genetic engineering. The last attempts in the genre field also ended in failure. The idea sat in a drawer for a while, but director Verbinski finally took the plunge when he came up with an original, action-packed popcorn spectacle for all generations, and with a hero who had never been seen before. Depp's pirate captain has a much closer resemblance and behavior to the hippies of the 60s than to the classic idea of a sea wolf. And even within the series of extravagant loners and oddballs he usually portrays, he is an unmistakable figure. The film is a lavishly made special effects spectacle full of exaggeration and simple, yet unoffensive humor. It is in the best sense of the word a family adventure film that, in my eyes, does not age and even after the third viewing, I have no need to change my opinion about it. It's just a shame about the unnecessary sequels that plundered and diluted the successful original. Overall impression: 85%.