gudaulin

Easy Rider is usually considered the cornerstone of the road movie genre and the beginning of the 60s trend, when Hollywood began to turn away from making films for the settled bourgeois, from whom the comfort of the television screens took them away from the movie theaters, to the young generation that looked at the world around them differently and above all behaved differently. Sex, drugs, long hair, and a dream of unlimited freedom are typical attributes of the hippie generation. The feeling of unrestraint is evoked by Dennis Hopper's long panoramic shots of the endless American heartland, which are alternated with shots of his heroes and their powerful motorcycles. It is noticeable that the film did not have a solid script and Hopper obviously improvised at some points, but thanks to the presence of the central trio of actors, I lean toward giving it 4 stars. The film's nonconformity also plays a significant role in my assessment - I seriously do not like those southern hillbillies, militaristic members of the militia, and conservative small-town folks that the director confronts with his characters. I appreciate the authenticity of Easy Rider because the film evokes the feelings of the '60s generation like very few others. Overall impression: 75%.

It's strange. Cast Away seemingly contains everything that predisposes it to triumphant success, namely an attractive subject matter, an excellent cast, a famous director, a decent script, a reasonably large budget, and so on. Nevertheless, in the end, something didn't quite click for me. I feel a certain unfulfillment of expectations and I don't want to give it a fourth star, even though the film is disadvantaged by the fact that I saw it on television. Perhaps on the big screen, I would lean towards giving it a fourth star. I pondered what was excessive or missing for me, which turned out to partly be a certain melodramatic aspect, but I still couldn't define the core of the problem. Cast Away is too literal, unnecessarily sprawling, pathetic, and overblown. Despite all the effort, it doesn't captivate, even though Hanks gives his all. Overall impression: 65%.

I would like to go to Camille's sculpture exhibition, but this biographical film about the bitter fate of an artist who stands out from the crowd only confirms that this genre requires a special approach because otherwise, the stories of potentially fascinating personalities easily turn into noble boredom. That is exactly what happened with Nuytten's film in my opinion. Not even the engagement of the charming Isabelle Adjani in the lead role or the presence of the famous Gérard Depardieu as her co-star helped at all. As I have a weakness for Isabelle, she could not help me at all with the tormentingly slow passage of time, although her performance is certainly not bad. But that's not enough to make a great film. Camille Claudel looks like a typical creation of someone who is convinced that high art must be directly proportional to the number of microsleeps that the poor viewer undergoes while watching. This needed some editing, a better screenwriter, more original direction... and so much more. Overall impression: 25%.

Battlestar Galactica appeared during the boom of TV series production when budgets of individual projects reached multiples of what crews could have asked for just a decade ago, and it really shows in its visuals. I vaguely remember the original series from the late 70s, which looks really laughably cheap compared to this. The visuals and the level of the script pleasantly surprised and even amazed me in the first episodes, so I was willing to consider giving it the highest rating. But as time went on, certain script shortcomings started to show, and there was a decent amount of dead weight in the episodes. Not to mention that as time went on, I started to feel like the Cylons were trying to dig under the house, break through the wall, or jump down the chimney, when all they needed to do was turn the doorknob and walk in. Basically, they come up with insane conspiracies that are not worth thinking too much about, where in reality the exhausted opponent is waiting for a mercy blow. Over time, it increasingly became a social game about which crew member, again against all logic, hides their Cylon nature. Too many traitors and conspiracies for too small a community of refugees. Overall impression of the series as a whole: 60%.

I consider myself a left-wing liberal, but the first seasons of Downton Abbey enchanted me with its old-fashioned conservatism of the noble estate, where respect for traditions and natural authorities are not taken for granted, and after five episodes, I eagerly awarded it 5 stars. However, the second season followed, and it somehow declined in my eyes, and I more or less endured the third season. When I attempted to watch the fourth season, I began to feel an immune reaction in my body and gave up on it. It's not so much about the usual illness of TV series or a decline in the quality of the screenplay, but rather my political beliefs were being triggered, and the conservative idyll started to irritate me immensely. On such a large scale, any false note naturally becomes apparent, and I have to agree with the notion that Downton Abbey seems like a grandly staged soap opera for snobs. The on-screen events could be easily parodied. When you look at it closely, I always wondered how the cursed and despised genre of soap operas would look if it were filmed not as we know it from Czech or Latin American soap operas, but with careful attention to quality casting and directing, and in the case of Downton, I actually managed to find out. At first glance, it works, and one can admire the acting of the participants, the beauty of the women, the nobility of the men, and the scheming of the villains, but at the same time, one must not think too critically and must delicately turn a blind eye to some of the actions of the characters on TV. If I evaluate the series as a whole, I would give it a mere 2 stars and a 45% overall impression. If I were to evaluate only the first season, I could possibly consider giving it 4 stars.

Repeated viewing of this film convinced me that it is underrated. It has an excellent screenplay, a great retro atmosphere, and great acting. Perhaps the climax could have been somewhat more impressive, but even so, it was an extraordinarily enjoyable 113 minutes of my film life. The British simply mastered this genre mix. Overall impression: 90%.

The Sex Pistols represent one of the most important origins of the punk movement and a musical legend. Their behavior, provoking the establishment with their lyrics and music, is simply the essence of punk, and the twisted smirk of John Lydon is actually a punk identifier. In fact, the whole movie is punk. Dissolute, provocative, unconventional, vulgar, and self-centered, packed with plenty of visual material and information, skillfully edited, impressive, and simply good. It excellently manages to place the band's music production and performances in the context of the time and clarify the social and political dimensions of their production. This is how I imagine a music documentary. Overall impression: 90%.

Some films are able to make me angry, and fortunately, Kingsman did not succeed in that, even though the film missed the mark for me by a mile. I simply expected this outcome in advance. Kingsman is essentially James Bond for teenagers in a comedic form. The entire James Bond series is outside the scope of my interests and I haven't been a teenager for several decades. It's not my cup of tea, just like a Justin Bieber or Katy Perry concert. The film's humor doesn't work for me about 95% of the time, just like the catchphrases, and in some cases, I cringe when I hear them. The action scenes are filmed in a terrifying way - too fast, chaotic, and stupid, just like the plot of the film. Of course, it's a blockbuster that can offer entertainment and effects, so from my perspective, there is at least some satisfaction. And the presence of proven top British actors is also not to be dismissed. That all amounts to 2 stars. Compared to this creation, Live Free or Die Hard, for example, is genius in terms of the screenplay. Kingsman can be considered a perfect, and I mean perfect, adolescent film and the high percentages of popularity clearly indicate who makes up the majority of movie viewers. Overall impression: 35%. Yes, I agree that in a certain respect, Kingsman represents the future of the film industry. Unfortunately.

A very successful combination of Russian classics from the pen of satirist Gogol and members of the Drama Club at the peak of their fame. Here, one understands what a perfectly synchronized acting ensemble and dedication to acting mean. The comedy, which speaks to the present day, after all, is about human weaknesses that have accompanied us since time immemorial. The actors can be considered as a kind of prototype of sophisticated fraudulent groups. Overall impression: 95%.

If an animated feature film wants to succeed, it has become obligatory in the last two decades to come up with a concept for the whole family. This is not fulfilled by A Cat in Paris, as it is exclusively aimed at children and therefore lacks appeal for their adult accompaniment. On the other hand, it is definitely not a stupid film, as it has certain poetics that set it apart from North American films and it is also visually interesting. For those who don't mind returning to their childhood and are able to watch through the eyes of a child, it may not be a bad choice at all. For me, it's a 3.5, but this time I'm willing to add to it because European animated films don't have it easy in competition with Disney films. Overall impression: 70%.