DaViD´82

US Samoa is (was?) a synonym for an outsider of all outsiders. A team that almost never scored in an official match and almost never got any points, precisely did quite the opposite and regularly concede so many goals that the results of the team gave the impression that these are the match results of a completely different sport than football. And to make matters worse, it is also the team with the highest defeat in an interstate match ever in history. But its football chairman has a long-time dream; namely, nothing less than to be at least once place not on the last position of FIFA ranking... The best thing about this documentary is that no matter how ultimate feel good movie and no matter that it is an advertisement of the unbreakable team spirit, it doesn't in any way seem like a fabricated movie that is obviously fishing for emotions. After all, it can't even do that, because the authors could hardly count on such a development at the beginning of their documentary about the “worst team in history". And especially in the first half, you can see in which direction their original intentions were moving, before they were lucky enough to get the incredibly important characters and their incredible story both on a purely sporting level and, above all, on a personal level.

The sequences about the police side of the matter are kind of overplayed, but otherwise it is a success in terms of genre. The only drawback is the silly line "we play on smugglers" is exactly what ruins the movie in a nasty, terribly way. On the one hand, nothing happens in it beyond hanging out from nowhere to nowhere, where one is like a relieving element and the other, which has such an identical expression and attitude throughout the film that you have a reasonable suspicion of whether it is a real person or just a cardboard puppet used in different scenes. And this unintentionally ridiculous line has as much space as the solid police line, which together creates an unjustifiably gigantic footage. The intersection of these two lines then occurs only in the action scenes of the smuggling activities, which looks like Cobra 11 upside down. While even if some trips over a small stone it leads many somersaults and explosions, the main motto here is "make sure not to damage or scratch anything, the insurance company would kill us" and so all chases (there are not many of them, but they pretty long) are the embodiment on the action scene of unprecedented boredom.

Turing's Pure Soul that pays special attention to the (least) interesting aspects of his destinies (and when it pays special attention it is done in the style of cliché advertising like "when he goes, we also go" or "hurray" etc.) to sideline the most important and disproportionately interesting events which is strange. As a result, Cumberbatch's performance is particularly interesting. Not so much the performance itself (though this too) as in the context of his crucial roles, when after having performed characters of Hawking, Sherlock and Assange, this is already the fourth time when he plays similar role on paper, the archetype of the role of a "odd duck" genius, without in any way (or just a gesture) repeat the same performance over and over again.

Genre cuckoo, which nested elsewhere than a cursory glance would suggest... And in order present itself as something that it seemed to be from the very beginning, namely the quality Indian relationship movie (or rather "Indian relationship movie"), which you should carefully consider if you really want to watch it with your girlfriend/wife. Because you may learn things about each other that you probably prefer not to know, or in other words "what is the extent to which you consider me ideal, in percentage".

Le Carré can be adapted in various ways, but by no means theatrically, let alone melodramatically on a relational level and in a too talkative way. Which unfortunately is exactly what Lumet did. The simple fact that the original is le Carré's first book (and the first book in the series about Smiley), which has essentially the same storyline (just less sophisticated and in all respects significantly worse) than his later most famous masterpiece, so it does not much improve the final impression. Another thing that is hard to understand is why he did not use the same names as the original.

Finally a true animated movie which means the same for the theater what the Day for Night (1973) meant for movie industry back than. And its qualities are best illustrated by the fact that, although it has a form that is as captivating and immersive as the fascinating technical side and its consistent execution (I don't remember when visual effects were used so abundantly in almost every shot and still only "a good servant and not a bad master", as is an unfortunate standard today), so you film remember this movie for a long time. I'm just wondering how to approach the final scene. It is no less excellent than the mosaic of (un) theatrical (un) backstage, where "everyone drives the show for a while", which precedes it, but how can get you excited with gradation, emotions and ending of Keato... Um, Riggan's line, everyone and everything else is being sidelined so the movie can fully concentrate on this; and this is, on the one hand, pity, and then, thanks to that, it gives (the question for 10 points whether erroneous or justified) the impression of losing pace. In any case, the best "art for general public" (and this is not exceptionally meant to be negative) ever.

Undoubtedly an original theme and adaptation, but here and there Cahill commits punishable missteps (led by the final "pedophile" ten minutes "I need to close the past, so come with me to my room to collect strawberries, my ex love". Are they sure it could not be eighteen years later and instead of eight?), but they have nothing to do with whether it is on a (rational) scientific/spiritual level, because in both of them it is interesting, though not always well presented to the viewer.

Unprecedentedly impressive "Spanish-Louisiana" genius loci of a place in the middle of nowhere that goes hand in hand with a disturbing atmosphere in a thriller about a pair of distrustful detectives in a dark "Fincher crime movie" that is as much about the brutal murder of young girls as the about two of them, their demons and the time just after the Frank regime. Visually refined (shot from above of endless falling rain drops!), well performed and also, unfortunately, the closer to the end, the more the course and sound become somewhat genre-wise and already seen countless times elsewhere, although not necessarily always of such quality.

Big topic are "seeming randomly" addressed in an intimate and subtle way (these big topics overlap not only through character of Wanda with what we shall address in the Czech republic) with an unprecedentedly refined, coldly reserved visual side. And this visual side is surprisingly the biggest stumbling block, because each shot is so magnificently composed that the image steals the show. And it's never good. In other words, surprisingly, despite the rich and high-quality content, "the form overshadows the content" to a larger extent.

Mann is undoubtedly capable of more than only making a "sophisticated B-movie". But it's still more entertaining and disproportionately better shot than most of the other movies in this genre. It is a slowly developing thriller in a trademark Mann's neon hypnosis style, where computers replace guns and command lines bullets. And to its detriment, the movie is largely ruined by the final scene with "two person on the run longing for revenge" that immediately turns it into overplayed mediocre genre movie that has nothing to offer and is completely predictable.