Malarkey

The Coen brothers have always had their own specific approach to storytelling and this short-story western is no different. The beginning, for instance, is an exemplary bliss. Buster Scruggs is a character you simply have to love because the things he does in the first short story are simply badass. Coupled with the specific direction style of the Coen brothers, it’s the bomb. But then the first story ends, the second one starts and things get incredibly boring. The stories don’t follow up on one another and there aren’t any great endings that could attract your attention… the stories simply flow and the original excitement about the director’s ideas gradually fades and all you are left with is Buster Scruggs himself.

The main character of Dogman is probably the most interesting film character I have seen in a long time. You simply can’t stop rooting for him, but on the other hand you get pissed at him at certain moments because of where the story is going. The film’s setting is the right amount of bleak, the people are the right amount of Italian. Everybody fits in, like a deck of card fits into its box. And since everything is quite accurate and some of the shots are like the most beautiful ones from the rather unsightly Italian seacoast in autumn, you would expect that the revenge, which is what this movie is truly about, turns out like it usually would in a movie… and in the end, it turns out to be sort of… absurd. In my opinion, the ending could have been a bit more consistent and factual, but other than that it was one of my best Italian film experiences.

At first glance, this film looks a bit like the Russian version of Suck Me Shakespeer. But the opposite is true. The geographer Viktor Sluzhkin drinks like a fish and lives in a high-rise in one of the many ordinary housing projects in Russia. The school building – even though the pupils are horrible brats – looks like the most beautiful building far and wide. Other than that, everything is really bleak and it isn’t too much fun, really – even though it actually should be. Nevertheless, Konstantin Chabenskij puts on a great acting performance, as is usual for him, and he confirms my belief that he is one of the best contemporary Russian actors. The ruin and depression of the housing projects full of prefabricated high-rise buildings is then rescued a little bit in the second half of the movie with a trip to nature, which even though it is still unfunny is at least quite interesting as far as the sceneries go.

The Scandinavians decided to tackle a traditional entertaining theme, which – if approached in the right way – cannot fail. The only thing that is a pity is that Nikolaj Lie Kass’ character in this one is so terribly unbalanced because otherwise the movie would have been the true bomb. The actresses in this one are incredibly beautiful and they are headed by the most beautiful one of them all – Lene Maria Christensen. However, Nikolaj decided to approach it as a bad ass, so at one moment his character looks like he couldn’t count to five, and at the next one he behaves like an introvert nuclear physicist. It’s been a long time since my sympathies for the protagonist wavered so hard according to his irrational behavior.

Barry Jenkins has practiced art movies with Moonlight, which was awarded an Oscar, so he thought that he could continue in the same vein. The acting is OK, but in terms of the story it was so incredibly boring and dull that even the interesting cinematography could have saved that.

It’s been a long time since I saw a dramatic comedy by American authors that would involve such great acting performances (Viggo is fantastic and Mahershala delivers a decent above-par performance), a great to amazing atmosphere, real friendship between men and moments in which I simply admired both gentlemen’s acting, watching the slightest movements of their faces. Even those alone could tell you a lot about the situation and help you form a well-rounded opinion on what was going on in the USA in the 1960s. The American people are truly absurd and this year’s Oscar ceremony provided a proof of that in form of two movies – this one and the BlackKklansman. An A+ from me for sure. Just keep it up! Self-criticism is important and it is really good that it’s being opened up in the world beyond the Big Pond. On top of that, I’m really glad that Peter Farrelly’s work was rewarded as well because when do you get the chance to win an Oscar if under other circumstances you are making wacky comedies with your brother that are commercially successful and every now and then you pull a prank on somebody and pull your wiener out at a casting interview: Naturally to ease up the situation. In the overall context this is great and congrats on that. Finally, after a really long time a movie was given the Oscar that I was rooting for with my entire heart.

The Czech version of the title says it all: Despair and Hope. Especially since the hope in this case is rather sporadic, borderline nonexistent. The thing is that the movie indirectly hits at the Church, which is represented by a depressed priest portrayed by Ethan Hawke. He is doing quite a good job of it. The film even has a number of interesting ideas and the right atmosphere for those who revel in sadness… but what happens at the end of the movie, that’s simply a bit off.

I guess this was probably the first time I had seen Melissa McCarthy act in a serious role. And actually, she did quite a good job of it. Only the movie is sort of really black and white that I don’t really know whether I am watching a biography of an interesting personality from our world, or simply the story of a person that I am not really interested in. In the end, I decided to stick with Melissa’s acting performance and that’s about it.

Those who went through a similar story of grandparents in their own family will certainly understand the context and the acting exertion of Glenn Close. She really sacrificed herself for this movie with her performance. Otherwise, it is a weirdly bleak and gloomy flick that is trying to be funny at times, but that is not 100 % in either respect.

An art-house movie about an artist that at the same time is as accessible to the viewer as possible. Willem Dafoe is great and his transformation into van Gogh is perfect. But his acting performance isn’t the only thing that the director is treating us to because a whole number of equally interesting actors are making an appearance in smaller roles, who are making the movie a lot more interesting. If it weren’t for the art-house nature of the movie that is sometimes very prominent, I would have given it five stars. On the other hand, you cannot say that this piece isn’t eccentric, which makes is all the more original.