gudaulin

It's not smarter than the previous parts in the series, just more talkative. It's not even fun. The story has disappeared, and the development of Katniss and Peeta's relationship, which held the first and second parts above water, is sidelined. I've never been a fan of Panem's world, and I really don't have anything to lean on here. Overall impression: 25%. It seems to me that the whole series mentally corresponds to the world of 12-16-year-old teenagers, and it is questionable whether this stretched filler can satisfy them...

The continuation of Hunger Games has enjoyed much greater viewer favor, but my impression is exactly the opposite. Among the positives, I can include more reasonable editing and a larger budget, which was not just consumed by Jennifer Lawrence's and other participants' higher fees, but also contributed to better (more bombastic) effects. However, that is where the list of positives ends. The second installment needed to further explore the world of Panem and honestly, it only revealed greater shallowness and, I dare to say, stupidity. Creating dystopias that could be taken seriously was never Hollywood's strong suit, and here, given the target audience, the effort was not significant. The story does not bother with logic, and the dialogue seems even dumber than in the first film. President Snow, who was supposed to embody sophisticated all-powerful evil, instead appears as a stubborn old man in the early stages of senility, who adds fuel to the fire with primitive violence and demonstrations of tyranny, where he should manipulate and corrupt through intrigues, cooling down passions. Apart from Philip Seymour Hoffman, nothing really interested me about the second installment. Overall impression: 35%.

The Hunger Games, or dystopia for teenagers, utilizes the concept of fighting in an arena, which has been used many times in literature and film. You shouldn't expect any deeper psychology or convincing portrayal of society, but who would expect that from a Hollywood production of this kind anyway? The level of violence is adjusted to the target audience, so anyone expecting uncompromising, gritty action will inevitably be disappointed. However, considering the target segment of the audience, the film works decently on an emotional level, skillfully playing with sentiment, and the relationship triangle between the adolescent protagonists is relatively solid. The cast greatly helps the film, with young stars led by the charismatic Jennifer Lawrence delivering their performances reliably. On the other hand, the depiction of the social elite from the Capitol feels cliché, resembling an unwanted parody of American television show business mixed with a drug-induced trip by a film costume designer. Although I am far from being the target audience, I would probably lean towards giving the film 3 stars, if it weren't for the chaotic editing that significantly drags down the film, especially in the more action-packed scenes. Overall impression: 45%.

Sophie Marceau is undoubtedly a charming woman with an extraordinary amount of personal charm. She represents the type of actress who only needs to flash a fleeting smile or cheekily wink an eye and the audience is on her side. However, in the case of Marquise, that is far from enough. The story presents tiresome costume boredom, where the only value, besides the presence of Sophie and a few other famous names from French cinema in the 90s, is the generously conceived set starting with the costumes and ending with the spaces of the Versailles castle complex. The film failed due to its dramatic incapability, it doesn't work as a story, and its characters are also dysfunctional. That's strange, as the screenplay was a team effort, and yet it became the project's Achilles' heel. Overall impression: 35%.

The beginning of the film is marked by a dynamic mix of documentary shots of the bloody massacre of Charlie Hebdo magazine employees and shots of four men from different social backgrounds. After the introductory minutes, the impression of chaos changes into an intimate atmosphere as we follow these four characters inevitably heading towards a fateful collision. As the movie title suggests, it will be fatal for some of them. The thriller atmosphere is mainly created by the dark tones of the background music, which subtly (because it is muffled) affects the viewer's senses. However, Madsen's film cannot be seen as a classic thriller; it is rather a tribute to the victims of the attack that significantly influenced the social debate in the country and drew attention to immigrant ghettos, where a parallel society with different values from traditional Danish culture is spreading. Subsequently, there was a reassessment of the previous generous immigration policy. One indicative scene in this regard is when one of the film's protagonists exposes the hypocrisy of a friend who passionately defends multiculturalism but does not consider sending his own children to a state school with a high percentage of immigrant children, instead opting for an expensive ethnically pure private school. Overall impression: 75%.

Unlike the rest of his filmography, Kubrick's latest film was controversially received. Remarkably often, five-star enthusiastic reviews full of superlatives are alternated with two-star reviews, where displeasure with the film's sexual openness and disgust with the vulgarization of the subject of romantic relationships prevail. I won't take either side in the dispute. The truth is that Eyes Wide Shut impressed me noticeably less than Kubrick's other dramas. It's not that his venture into the world of desire didn't evoke any feelings or questions in me, but they were sins committed in different places and of a different kind than the director intended. The bored, fresh widow (already a much worn-out topic these days) Nicole Kidman doesn't evoke sinful desires in me. Her beauty is the detached beauty of a runway model, not that of a sensual woman inciting sinful thoughts. Beauty and erotic allure are less related than commonly believed. Alice's flirtation with the aging beau at the party doesn't come off as erotic, but rather awkwardly lascivious. Alice and Bill's relationship is not driven by sexual fantasies and is instead a study of marital alienation. Kubrick should learn about desire, passion, and pleasure from Polanski. Animality belongs to desire, playfulness to eroticism. However, the game that Bill unknowingly enters into feels strange, overstrained, and overconstructed after three sexual revolutions. I don't even understand how Bill identified the masked beauty from the party with the dead woman in the morgue, and I don't understand many other things either. If anything, the film sparked an interest in the source material by Arthur Schnitzler in me. I will be wiser after reading it. My overall impression is 65%, with the understanding that my review is aided by Kubrick's traditional ability to work with images and master the technical aspect of the work.

The Witch is a return to the foundations of the genre, whose cinematic form crystallized in the 1930s, thus a return to careful work with atmosphere. We can observe a gradual uncertainty and loss of support shaping the spiritual and physical world of immigrants to the New World in the 17th century. Suffering leads to the breakdown of the family, which we tend to consider as the basic building block of society. At that time, the community was most important. Outside of it, there was only struggling and in the long run, zero chance of survival in the wilderness. The key to the film is the opening scene of excommunication from the church and the community, the cruelest possible punishment, harsher than the death penalty. What follows is a logical descent into darkness and ruin. Just as shamanic magical rituals are a reality for tribal natural cultures, witches are a reality for people shaped by beliefs and early modern religion. The clash of devoutness, the depth of which secularized Europeans cannot imagine tainted by science and modern technology, with freethinking and hedonism of sinners, is precisely what makes the film so impressive. The Witch is not a flashy and expensive film, but it is meticulously shot with knowledge of the subject and awareness of what the filmmaker wants to achieve, and last but not least, it is characterized by a refined sense of detail. Some of the popcorn-eating viewers may feel deprived of some jumpscares, but for me, the film is an exemplary example of what a horror film should be, and if Eggers had refrained from a too unambiguous interpretation of events at the end, the film could have received a perfect score. Overall impression: 85%.

Negative feedback after the premiere led me to the decision not to spoil the positive impression of the first part and instead avoid the sequel. I should have stuck with that choice because the result exceeded my worst expectations. It and Chapter 2 are like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. It is incomprehensible how the success of the first part caused Muschietti to lose all his sanity. The first film was not flawless by any means, but it was a dignified and sympathetic adaptation of brilliant source material. Chapter 2 looks and functions like an overpriced low-budget B-movie with an absurd runtime, cringe-worthy dialogues, terrible visual effects, glaring directorial clumsiness, and unremarkable acting, even considering the talented cast. (Jessica was indeed perfect for the role of Beverly, but her presence did not help the film.) The director lost control of the film, failing to capture even a hint of atmosphere and impressiveness. It's sad to say, but Stephen King is used to similar endings regarding his stories. Overall impression: 20%.

The comparison to Burton's Ed Wood, which many commentators resort to, is logical and The Disaster Artist does not come out of it with honor in any way. James Franco still has a long way to go to be a master and above all, he lacks imagination. It's simply not a playful Burton-like film and it can't do anything other than parasitize on the legendary flop The Room. There is nothing else here than mechanical copying, while Tommy Wiseau is portrayed as a completely uncharismatic and, unfortunately, also downright annoying guy, who annoys the viewer with his performances. Much more could have been extracted from the source material. Overall impression: 45%.

Growing up is not easy, and if your father is in prison, it's twice as hard. Your hormones are working full throttle, the desire to seek missing role models clashes with the need to assert oneself against their surroundings. A small smuggling deal threatens to turn into a big disaster with unforeseen consequences, and a meeting with the father on parole brings disillusionment and further complications. I don't trust bloated film co-productions, but this collaboration of Latin American and European filmmakers worked perfectly. It's a film full of energy, tension, believable conflicts, and emotions, and it is not half-hearted and leaves a lot to its characters and audience. In just 24 hours, the teenager Cambra accomplishes a lot and takes a big step forward on the path to adulthood. Karnawal is not an interchangeable film product. South American temperament, deeply-rooted machismo, the exoticism of carnival rhythms, and the difficult social reality of South American society are abundantly present in the film. I would also highlight the authentic performances and appropriate duration. All in all, I have no reason to give it less than 5 stars and a 90% overall impression.