DaViD´82

An adaptation of no fewer than three proverbs at once: there is a price for stupidity, opportunity makes the thief and to say the third would be too big a spoiler. Excellent work with the soundtrack and a playful approach to genre clichés which loses a bit of its impressiveness by the fact that the authors show their cards a little too early. The consequence of which is that the twists in the final third of the movie are readable long before they come. On the other hand they also represent the only logical result of the way the excellently illustrated (and extremely repulsive) characters behave all the time, so it isn’t a big problem, just that it unnecessarily loses its sting.

A conman, a joker, a thief, a magician... Well, simply John Constantine. An Englishman from Liverpool, a blue-eyed, cynical, amoral, scruffy-faced blond who is forever shrouded in a cloud of cigarette smoke and, in a mysterious English fog, solves mysterious cases in which he relies on his wits rather than weapons to outsmart (or cheat) almost everyone, from ordinary mortals to the bigwigs of hell. None of the above, however, can be found in this movie adaptation, not even a hint of it. Not in terms of the look or behavior of the main hero, or the location, or the plot, or the action, or anything. And yet that doesn't mean Constantine is a bad movie; it’s not - it's just a bad adaptation. But damn it, of all the "CGI action comic book movies" it is, even years later, one of the best. Everything here is as it should be with a good popcorn movie; it just doesn't have anything of what a good adaptation of “Hellblazer" is supposed to contain.

Good old Porter, albeit unacknowledged and named differently in the film itself, in a Mexican mode (even with a pinch of umbrella Eastwood style on top). A likable, uncompromising and straightforward old-school genre movie that doesn't reveal or innovate anything, but what it comes up with is just damn good and absolutely functional in every way; even as far as the relationship is concerned.

Provence, which was the inspiration for Pagnol's work, in a movie about childhood based on the first part of Pagnol's famous memoirs. The basics of his work are clearly recognizable here, and moreover, the whole thing unfolds with the appealing spirit of an innocent carefree child's view of the world, which reminds us more than once of “Le Petit Nicholas" (even in specific details); so much so that I wondered if Goscinny had in fact been inspired by Pagnol.

Watch a few randomly selected meaningless home videos about bored teens on YouTube loafing about, every now and then add in some random special effects, and you'll immediately have a sequel to The Chronicle that is indistinguishable from the “original"; if you're interested in the Thai remake, watch a few randomly selected meaningless home videos about bored teens in loafing about Thailand on YouTube... And you know the rest.

Too bad about the eighties-style over-the-top ending where it’s all effects for effects’ sake and nothing else. Mainly the first half is an outstanding fantasy story which, unlike many of its brothers in the genre (and there were a lot of them), focused rather refreshingly on the dark side. If it had been considerably shorter and more restrained, Dragonslayer wouldn’t have remained overshadowed by its now unforgettable/unforgotten brothers.

A psycho(il)logical and strange picture that is hard to grasp... So, in fact, the type of classic that we are used to getting from Lynch. If it had ended twenty minutes earlier, this would have been maybe the most graspable Lynch movie ever, but at that moment is breaks into the most bizarre movie ever. Lynch on his best film-making (not series-making!) form.

Fewer minutes, less of the rich, kind sheik, less “lemonade" during the salmon finale, but on the other hand greater portions of the perfect bureaucratic satire (and why not just a straight comedy à la Yes, (Prime) Minister for the Kristin Scott Thomas/Conleth Hill) duo... That would have helped Hallström from falling into the “pleasant, but utterly humdrum" category. P.S.: McGregor is wrongly type-cast in his role; does anybody (women) find his boring, hen-pecked, dry pen-pusher act convincing? It’s like having Halle Berry play Precious.

Undemanding, popcorn paint by numbers with clear contours which begin to turn pastel green only after they line up. The Avengers Assemble is quality craftsmanship which unfortunately pays dearly for having just routine action (the first “teaser" part is markedly better than the second) and zero “emotional involvement" of either the viewer or the characters. The whole thing rests on the shoulders of the Stark - Thor - Banner trio and the remaining characters are either a necessary evil (Capt. America) or there to make up numbers. And also a proper baddy is sorely lacking; Loki is outstanding, but he’s more an amusing stooge than an arch-villain. As far as Marvel team productions are concerned, the movie versions of X-Men play in a much higher league.

Interesting - very much so. The problem is that the permanently enthusiastic (more likely coked up) Stewart is no guide, but draws all attention to himself. His megalomanic, annoying enthusiasm, full of American exaggeration, Scottish-style, gets on nerves quicker than a mother-in-law. And in the background, Zimmer’s music thunders away, while on principle he describes everything using the words unforgettable, breathtaking and fascinating several times in the same sentence. After a while, all you can do is grin and bear it, making fun out of it. This way, all the interesting information, phenomena and experiments are pushed out to the sidelines. But these sidelines in the end do make this a program well worth your attention.