gudaulin

Only very rarely does a series succeed in creating an atmosphere and style that are difficult to liken to anything else. This series exudes bizarreness, darkness, and the mustiness of decades-old, neglected corners of a decaying house full of inhabitants with twisted characters, corroded by invisible evil. Sticky asphalt oozes from the cellars, altering characters and inducing strange hallucinations. No one and nothing can be trusted, and one mystery after another piles up. Even the main character is affected by paranoia, no longer trusting even his own father. For me, far superior to the overrated and overly convoluted Dark. A lot of bang for your buck. Overall impression: 90%.

Once I saw the name in the director's chair, I knew satisfaction wouldn't come. Unlike the film critics, Jasmila Žbanić failed to convince me of her qualities despite her previous works. Even Aida doesn't excel in captivating its audience; similar to Žbanič's previous works, I felt there was a lackluster handling of the filmic image and an inability to evoke emotions in the viewer at points that clearly deserved it. While artistically only average, there's still the explosive topic of the largest massacre with a hint of genocide since World War II in Europe... So, I'll slightly squint to justify the fourth star and give it a 70% overall impression.

The film benefits from the popularity of the series and the charisma of the main character, but in terms of the screenplay, it's somewhere around the level of the 5th season, which is not praise but simply an observation that the fatigue of the screenwriting team set in earlier. We can observe sentimental elements to a greater extent in the form of flashbacks from Ciro's childhood and his "paternal" relationship with the Italian community of his friends, as well as longing for Ciro's lost family. The logic of the characters' thinking and behavior is also not a priority for the screenwriters, which is most evident in the scenes of the final settling of scores. Ciro has a remarkable ability as a mafia man to utter heartfelt wisdom in inappropriate situations and to throw noble thoughts into the mix, but it comes off as inauthentic and disruptive. Additionally, viewers unfamiliar with the Gomorrah series won't be fully oriented in the characters and their relationships. Considering the nostalgia for the series, I award it 3 stars and a 65% overall impression.

This western is interesting because it plays with motifs somewhat unconventional for the genre. It combines the classic western polarization of characters and life in the American West with the detective genre, and it must be said that Tom Gries did not disgrace himself. Indeed, Breakheart Pass is a film that you can enjoy if you do not subject the script to critical examination and do not worry about the plausibility of the megalomaniacal conspiracy presented by the screenwriter. It is simply an adventurous fairy tale, where you must with a wink accept numerous scriptwriting shortcuts that the creators use to aid their storytelling. The acting performances are commendable, and I must particularly praise the scene where the steam locomotive climbs steep hills and conquers ancient bridges. Overall impression: 60%.

Tenet certainly doesn't pose an intellectual challenge and is one of those films that you'll enjoy the most when you think less about time paradoxes, the motives of the film's characters, and their quest to defeat the Bond-like villain. As a popcorn flick deliberately reminiscent of Agent 007 stories in a sci-fi coat, and as an action spectacle, Nolan's film really works. Thanks to John David Washington, we essentially have the first "non-white" Bond in history. I enjoyed the dynamic opening opera heist, where Nolan drew inspiration from a real terrorist act. Kenneth Branagh also pleased me, intentionally building his villain as a monstrous comic book character. Overall impression: 65%.

When I read Mika Waltarii's extensive novel many years ago, it was a profound experience for me on all levels. Waltari conceived "The Egyptian" as an opportunity to bring everything known about ancient Egypt and its culture to the Western reader at the time of the novel's creation. Egyptology is still developing, and new discoveries might slightly revise the content of Waltari's text, but I still believe that if I returned to reading it, I would definitely not be disappointed. Michael Curtiz's film is just a historical reminder of a certain chapter in the development of American studio cinema. In the 50s and 60s, these expensive costume projects from ancient empires were everywhere and represented the showcase of the production at that time. The Egyptian certainly is not one of the better films, and today the shallowness and trimming of the multi-layered novel motives directly annoy me. It's just a costume blockbuster from the 50s... Overall impression: 40%.

I intentionally give The Wedding Guest a fourth star because it seems somewhat underrated to me. However, I understand the cautious reservations because the director couldn't decide what genre he's actually filming, and labeling it as a thriller is somewhat misleading or unsatisfactory. Michael Winterbottom fails to properly build and maintain tension. It's simply a hybrid that oscillates between drama (which, on the other hand, lacks a deeper psychological profile of the main characters) and the aforementioned thriller. The film benefits from the exotic settings of Pakistan and India, as well as the theme of arranged and forced marriages. Acting-wise, both the charming Radhika Apte and Dev Patel deliver what is expected of them without any issues. Overall impression: 65%.

No, I will not throw out superlatives and I will remain significantly reserved in my evaluation. Some directors successfully fit the adaptation of a several hundred-page novel into a two-hour blockbuster, but Hamaguchi managed to stretch the adaptation of a short story one-tenth of the size into three hours. It took me three tries to watch the film and that's not a good sign. I constantly felt like I was watching a snail on vacation, not in a rush to get anywhere. The film drags on and even though it introduces interesting motifs regarding the artistic creative process and the psychological aspect of coping with the departure of a loved one, it really doesn't deserve a higher rating. Overall impression: 55%. I am horrified at the thought of how long the adaptation of a thick tome of a 19th-century Russian classic would stretch in the hands of this director.

These are times when predictability prevailed in both domestic and world politics, and politicians could be put in drawers with their respective labels. The phenomenon of populism and "illiberal" democracy with strong authoritarian features directly calls for artistic mapping, but after the first attempt, I feel like it will miss its goals and the audience. The series aims to be satirical but lacks moderation and refinement. It is often superficially silly and over-stylized, a test that few creators can withstand; perhaps Wes Anderson or Terry Gilliam in top form could handle this. In the first episode, I see clear limits, and Stephen Frears is long past his prime. If there is a reason to pay attention to Victory Day, it is Kate Winslet in the lead role. I believe in her psychologically unstable dominatrix character, as she enjoys playing the chancellor and lets her acting type shine. Just because of her, I'll give one more episode a chance and we'll see...

My commentary should start with something positive. I've been thinking for a long time about what I could say that would please Issa López, that I could give the show a thumbs up, but I couldn't do it. Yet I figured it out. The length. The modest six episodes saved the audience from more nonsensical screenwriting lapses, prevented us from spending more time with poorly written, untrustworthy characters, and prevented us from marveling at logical acrobatics in the plot. With a standard eight-episode length, I might have gone for just one star. If True Detective was exceptional in something, it was Nic Pizzolatto's screenwriting art, which was behind the previous seasons. The difference is overwhelming. The third season was marked by average direction, but Pizzolatto's influence saved the series from disaster. Issa López is a below-average screenwriter, but as a director, she knows what to serve to the audience so they don't feel bored, so she uses what she has seen elsewhere and is convinced it works. As viewers, you could play a game that she gathered inspiration from everywhere. For a moment, you feel like you are at Carpenter's scientific base from The Thing, for a while you face Nordic demons from The Terror series, and I could go on. Pizzolatto played with the audience, but it was a sophisticated game, while Issa López slides into cheap tricks to keep the audience's attention. The acting is average, as Jodie Foster struggles with her character, going directly against her acting type. I would consider the final resolution more of a disrespectful joke at the audience's expense. If you don't think too much about the plot, then the series deserves two stars. Overall impression: 40%.