2024.

Season 7 - Cult

Unexpected

The most original and unpredictable season so far. The first few episodes I was on the verge of giving up. It balanced on the edge of boring and I thought it was a cheap horror that totally misses the mark, but soon it turned out that my premature conclusions totally missed the mark and that there was something much more complex before me, which would not have occurred to me.

Under the guise of a silly horror cliché, the stage was set for an excellent social satire with phenomenal characterization and constant unexpected twists. Although it is not horror in the classic sense of the genre, this season is a mirror of the horror in which we live. "Cult" delivers a story that is fundamentally strong and impressive and I can't wait to see if the writers manage to surpass her in the following seasons.

8,5/10

Season 8 - Apocalypse

Surprise, bitch!

The season started quite promisingly, but with an unexpected twist, it turned into a rehash of previous seasons. For the most part "Apocalypse" is a crossover with "Coven" and "Murder House" and a back story for the first and last episode.

On the one hand, the interweaving of seemingly unrelated seasons is interesting to me, on the other hand, the entire eighth season seems forced and gives the impression of a filler season, the sole purpose of which is for the authors to gain time until they get inspiration for a new story. I can't say it's bad, but it's certainly the least good so far and far below the standards this series set in its early days. Too campy to deserve a place alongside the top seasons that preceded it, yet not campy enough to turn the game around and fall into the "so bad it's good" category, like "Scream Queens" with which it shares Emma Roberts. Somehow neither here nor there.

The only constant in this series is the acting. The entire cast is excellent, and as icing on the cake, there is also the cameo return of Jessica Lange.

6,5/10

Season 9 - 1984

Back to 80's

Not only is the plot set in the eighties, but the season is completely done in that style and looks almost as if it was filmed then. From opening credits, through music, costumes, hairstyles, and the script in the style of cult slashers, the ninth season of AHS is a time machine to my favorite decade and caricatured clichés of the eighties simply scream in your face. At the beginning, it seems like just another stupid slasher, but soon it starts to line up fun and, if you've watched enough old horror movies, witty twists and turns and becomes a rather complex homage-parody of slasher horrors of the last century, which uses the most worn-out cliches of the genre in a new and unexpected way. Towards the end of the season, they start to overdo it, just enough to kill a potential nine on solid

7/10

Season 10 – Part I: Red Tide

"Once you sell your soul, it's gone"

The tenth season of "American Horror Story" is divided into two stories. "Red Tide" occupies the first six episodes. Although it deals with one of the most prevalent themes in horror, the approach to this theme is surprisingly original and interesting. Some things are visually done rather naively, but the story itself is a well-developed psychological horror-drama, with some really macabre moments. Again, the returning cast didn't fail, and I didn't even recognize one of the actresses till the second episode, even though I watched her season after season. Acting is truly the strongest asset of this series.

Dark and poignant, with a good analysis of human nature and the occasional nicely blended dark humor, a story that, although slow-paced, strongly holds the viewer's attention. The characters are impressionable and quite decently developed, considering the relatively small number of episodes, and their epilogues are somewhat unexpected, which is a pleasant surprise for the horror genre. However, the finale wasn't striking enough.

When the sixth episode ended, I didn't realize it was the end, and when I played the next episode I was totally confused to see a new, unknown story, without any connection with this one. I didn't know at the time that the tenth season was a double feature, of course. Now, that my impressions have settled, I can't say that the story remains unfinished and every part of it is nicely rounded, but the real grand finale, the striking ending, is missing. Like when a hard rock or metal song ends with a fade-out, it's a bit disappointing.

8/10

Season 10 - Part II: Death Valley

A conspiracy parody

Have you noticed that since the middle of the last century, technology has advanced more than in the previous few thousand years? If you are interested in what caused such a sudden jump and accelerated development, watch the last four episodes of the tenth season of "American Horror Story".

"Death Valley" is not horror in the true sense, but more reminiscent of a long episode of "Twilight Zone", by Rod Serling. While previous seasons dealt with a different approach to the most typical horror clichés, this one devoted itself to alternative history and an attempt to connect famous American scandals and conspiracy theories into a logical whole. From famous Kubrick's Moon Landing, through Area 51, all the way to the Watergate affair, find out the fates of Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, and Marilyn Monroe.

Unfortunately, only four short episodes, but very ingeniously designed and fantastically shot. I am delighted.

9/10

Season 11 - NYC

The '80s again, but from quite a different angle

The gay community in the early eighties. On the one hand, an irresponsible, loose, promiscuous, and apparently joyful 24/7 party, on the other hand, ignorance and rejection by society and institutions. Two serial killers are lurking in the shadows. One with a crazy agenda, skilled, cunning, ruthless, but still catchable. The second, much more cruel and dangerous, invisible and unexpected, will turn the end of the twentieth century into one of the greatest horrors the gay population has ever faced. Together with the rest of us.

A story that deals exclusively with the gay population and in which almost all the characters are gay, but without even an undertone of modern LGBT propaganda and Woke culture. And it was not made in the '80s, but now! It's nice for a change to watch a gay series that keeps both feet on the ground and doesn't stick a finger in your eye. These are gay people you can relate to and sympathize with, because they are portrayed non-aggressively, as common next-door guys, as they mostly are. With real problems of real people.

The atmosphere is quite serious and it stands out from the previous seasons, which were obvious parodies and caricatures of clichés or at least pulled in that direction. The impression that I don't watch AHS anymore is reinforced by the fact that almost the entire cast is new, with very few returnees. But the fact that they are new does not mean that the acting is any worse than what we are used to in this series. The sound and music are very well-blended and atmospheric. The ending is also completely different than in the previous seasons. Instead of twists and surprises, typical of horror, "NYC" gives us a calm, sad, natural epilogue, which nicely wraps up the story.

Unlike the horror genre that aims to scare and entertain, this season is more of a drama, strong, poignant, and human. Although, of course, there are explicit horror and other elements typical of AHS, just so we don't forget what we're watching.

8/10

The origin story of Uncle Fester

Charles Chaplin's first feature-length (an hour) film combines his well-known slapstick comedy with a highly emotional drama.

The tramp finds a baby next to a dumpster and raises it as his own child. Five years later doctor finds out that the child is not really his, and the police try to take the boy away and place him in an orphanage.

I never liked Chaplin and I find his slapstick quite boring, so the comedy aspect of "The Kid" was not particularly funny to me, and the dream sequence was really too much, but Jackie Coogan was an adorable child, who performed the role perfectly, and the dramatic aspect of the film is strong.

I can't quite agree with the IMDb list that it's one of the best movies of all time, but it's certainly very emotional and impressive and I warmly recommend it.

9/10

Depressing optimism

Fate crosses the paths of two lonely members of the lower working class in Helsinki. Will the feelings that have arisen manage to overcome a series of unfortunate circumstances and grow into love...

Why did I watch this movie? It is classified as a romantic drama-comedy. Impressions on the Internet are mostly positive. Comparisons with Jarmusch. I liked all of the few Finnish films I've seen so far. It won the Jury Prize at the Cannes Film Festival...

The camera and the acting were ok for me, and the small homages to some iconic works from the last century caught my attention. That's the only reason I stayed to the end. The film is not boring, but it does not captivate, it did not engage me in any way, make me think, or arouse emotions. I have nothing against a minimalist approach and spartan dialogues, but here it is reduced to the edge of emptiness. Humor is several unpleasant situations, emotions are seen but not felt, and the comparison with Jarmusch is acceptable only to roughly describe the genre and style, not at all in terms of quality, depth, and strength.

I'm not saying this is a bad movie, but I didn't like it. I have the impression that in "Fallen Leaves" the seeds of a good film were sown, but they did not sprout.

5/10

"A re-imagining of jazz legend Chet Baker's musical comeback in the late '60s"...

...says IMDb and that's quite a sufficient description of the plot of this film. It is important to emphasize that the film is not a true biography, but a fictional melodrama only roughly based on the life of this jazz legend.

The story of a former music star who tries to break free from his addiction and return to the stage, despite many difficulties, is a topic that has been filmed many times and this movie does not bring anything new or particularly interesting in the field of script. The music is ok, but they could have made a better soundtrack if they hadn't blindly stuck to only the most famous jazz standards. All in all, there's not much to complain about, but there's not much to praise either. What pulls it slightly above mediocrity is the overall atmosphere and the performance of Ethan Hawke in the lead role (although Willem Dafoe might be a better fit).

6/10

Douchebag of the year

"Superhero Movie" is to Marvel and DC superhero actions what "Scary Movie" is to the horror genre. An unscrupulous, offensive mockery of the superhero genre, with an accent on "Spiderman", full of slapstick gags, profanity, and mediocre jokes. It's reminiscent of Leslie Nielsen's earlier work ("Airplane!", "The Naked Gun"), but it's not on that level. While I think the superhero genre absolutely deserves to be mocked, it could have been done a lot better. It entertained me and made me laugh a bit, but is it a good movie? No, it is not. Is it worth watching? If you liked "Scary Movie" further than the first one, give this a chance.

5/10

Nothing beats a first kiss

Henry (Adam Sandler) lives in Hawaii, works as a veterinarian for marine animals, and spends his free time on one-night stands. Then he meets a local girl (Drew Barrymore) who radically changes his attitude about being single, but the very next day he realizes that she has a memory disorder and that she wakes up every day without remembering the previous one. Most people would give up in disappointment, but Henry decides to win her over every day.

You probably know what to expect from a movie starring Adam. You will not see technical qualities here. The typical Sandlerian humor is also nothing special. Cheap jokes will be hilarious only to children, although I have to admit that I laughed out loud a couple of times. After all, it's not just Sandler here in charge of comedy, there are also Rob Schneider and the legendary Dan Aykroyd.

But "50 First Dates" is a romantic comedy that focuses more on romance than comedy, and it turned out to be the right move. The film is extremely emotional and shows only the best aspects of human nature, and the chemistry between the main characters is catchy. Maybe this movie is trying to catch you on basic emotions (not to say pathetic) and fairy-tale outcomes, and it has no touch points with reality, but it does it very effectively and you really have to be made of stone not to get caught at least a little bit.

If you want to relax with a "feel good/guilty pleasure" movie, you won't be disappointed with "50 First Dates".

6/10

Something, something, something... we win

In a retro-futuristic world, a young knight is accused of a crime he did not commit. While his recent colleagues are chasing him, with the help of an unusual "teenager" he tries to clear his name and save the kingdom along the way.

Interesting animation, likable characters, a story that combines modern trends with traditional fairy tales, quite a good choice of music, and dialogues that vary from slightly vulgar humor, through somewhat philosophical, to deeply emotional. It is Netflix, so the strong PC and LGBT note is not surprising, but here it is not unpleasantly aggressive, but quite naturally blended. Ok, I didn't really like the final kiss, but I guess this time it's more me than that it's inappropriate for the story.

"Nimona" is not a masterpiece of an animated film and I doubt it will ever become a classic, but who wouldn't be curious about a medieval-futuristic, SF-mythological revisionist-traditional fairy tale... Worth watching.

7/10

"Sometimes the greatest happiness happens in the worst times"

Wim Wenders worked on this project for 14 years, spent 23 million dollars, and traveled halfway around the world, filming in 15 cities, in 7 countries, on 4 continents. He called it the ultimate road movie, although, in my opinion, it doesn't fall into that "genre" at all.

The film was released in 1991, and he set the action in 1999, so that he could insert non-existent technology into the story, while keeping the feeling as close as possible to the present. From today's perspective, the film is more retro than sci-fi. After all, the technology is only there to establish the premise for drama, adventure, and characterization and development of the characters.

Movie reviews usually include a brief description of the plot, but in this case, I don't know how to formulate that synopsis. But, it's the least important. The story is full of holes and illogicality, it is drawn out, full of meanders, and on the verge of boring, so I will not even deal with it. The other aspects of the film are what make me recommend it.

Visually, the film is gorgeous. Except for the depiction of futuristic technology, which is totally retro and silly, with Super Mario-style animations, and which possibly serves as comic relief, every frame of the film is a soul-capturing art photograph. The cast is numerous, diverse, and up to the task. Everyone can find themselves in some character and they are all built so nicely that by the end of the film, you have the impression that you knew them personally. Admittedly, the film's duration of almost 5 hours contributes to that impression quite a lot. There is also a half-shorter theatrical version, which I haven't seen, but I can say with certainty that it's not good. This movie simply cannot be cut in half and retain its qualities.

And finally the music! Wenders contacted his favorite musicians and asked them to write tracks for the film in the manner they thought they would create at the end of the century. The response was fantastic and, as he couldn't bring himself to make a shortlist, he decided to include them all. Joke or truth, Wenders said that because of the total duration of these songs, the film had to be so long. In my opinion, a wise decision. The soundtrack for this film is probably its strongest asset. If you don't have the nerve to watch a 5-hour movie, at least listen to the music, which can easily be found on YouTube.

!!! Spoiler Alert !!!

"There's a line that should never be crossed, and we passed it a long time ago."

"Until the End of the World" held my undivided attention for 4 hours and the overall impression was somewhere between a nine and a ten. Unfortunately, the final leg of this adventure, the part after the Aborigines leave the whites, turns into agony. It's as if this part was filmed by someone else. The story descends into insane exaggeration, the acting into overacting, and everything turns into something on the verge of embarrassment transfer and boredom. There are endless scenes in which we watch the protagonists of the story watching the "protected witness" quality of the image on their mobile monitors, interspersed with scenes of their psycho-physical descent into madness, all totally unconvincing and quite boring. But the excessive, pretentious, and somewhat pathetic last hour does not diminish the magnificence of the first four. Although I probably would have ended the film with the scenes closely after the death of the mother, even with this crazy, and in my opinion unnecessary, extension, the film is still very impressive and worth the investment of time.

8/10

What is life? What is consciousness?

29 December 2017

What is life? What is consciousness? Can artificial intelligence become conscious, and at what point does a machine cease to be a thing and become a life form? The series asks these questions and, rather than getting lost in trying to provide answers, it leaves its characters and its audience to decide for themselves where they draw the line.

After eight episodes of the "Westworld" series, although I am a big fan of the sci-fi genre, especially artificial intelligence and life-imitating machines, I must admit that I was not thrilled. I haven't seen the movie the show is based on, so I won't go into that part and I don't have any specific complaints to point my finger at. It's all nicely designed and packed. There are no obvious technical flaws or illogicalities in the story. Acting, directing, production, everything is top-notch and my brain tells me that this is a great series. And yet, it leaves me almost indifferent. It lacks something that cannot be pointed at. That something that moves you and that can sometimes be found even in bad movies because it doesn't depend on technical aspects. Let's call it a soul.

And then I watched the last two episodes and realized that the series is a mindfak and that during the whole season I actually had no idea what I was watching. From the beginning, it was clear to me that the story was not entirely linear, but to what extent it was non-linear and convoluted I could not imagine. The twists in the last few episodes are completely unexpected. Once they happen they become obvious and you wonder how you didn't foresee them, but you didn't, and with each new "revelation" the overall impression of the series is getting stronger and stronger. And the finale...

8,5/10

You can't play God without being acquainted with the Devil 22 February 2024

I finally watched the remaining three seasons. Technically, the series maintained the level. Essentially...

After the philosophical AI SF of the first season, "Westworld" has degenerated into an insane action rollercoaster, which holds attention, but I have no idea what it's for. Did the authors get lost in their own story, so it can't keep up with itself, or has the story become such a tangled mindfak that my intelligence can't follow it... However, the end of season four makes sense and I like how they wrapped up the story, but by the time we got to it, I was on the verge of giving up more than once.

I love mindfak, but I suppose the point of that genre is that it makes you brainstorm and wait eagerly for the solution, and not that for the whole season you have no idea what you're watching, to such an extent that it kills your desire to watch at all, and in the end you wonder if you are stupid or the script. In this case, I'm almost certain that it's the script, which has turned from the aforementioned philosophical AI SF into an AI SF bullcrap of epic proportions.

7/10

"Useless piece of American garbage"

Seven years after the rather good adaptation of King "The Mangler", director Tobe Hooper refused to direct the "sequel". It is not surprising, because such a scenario would be rejected by anyone who has any self-respect. The movie is at least a class below the worst installments of the "Scary Movie" franchise, without being a parody, but a film that takes itself seriously. It is so bad and in such a way that it cannot pass either as "so bad it is good" or as a guilty pleasure. This is just plain and simple miserable on all fronts, to the point of exhaustion, and accompanied by unbearably irritating music. Right now I can't think of a single movie that has a worse soundtrack. Do I even need to mention that it has nothing to do with King... Ok, the girls aren't that bad (one is half-naked for almost the whole movie), but everything else is. Why Lance Henriksen agreed to play in this movie and how this script was even approved for production is beyond me. It says Horror/Sci-Fi... true, it's fantastically scary how I wasted an hour and a half of my life.

2,5/10

Too weak for such a powerful premise

An unusual phenomenon is spreading in the world. Humans randomly start mutating into animals. The cause of this process is unknown, and the treatments do not give results. The film focuses on a high school student who lives with his father, while his mother is in the process of mutation in a specialized institution.

"The Animal Kingdom" is a coming-of-age drama with elements of fantasy and horror and some humor. It can be interpreted in various ways, literally and metaphorically, but I don't want to get into that multitude of interpretations, let everyone judge for themselves. I will present only my impressions, positive and negative.

The film is visually beautiful. Cinematography, make-up, and effects are superb, and for much less money than in Hollywood. The creatures, for lack of a better term, are striking and endearing. Romain Duris is good in the role of the father, and Paul Kircher in the role of the son gave an Oscar-worthy performance. I like the messages that the film sends, and the main asset is certainly the originality of the premise and the approach to it.

However, in my opinion, the script is too weak for such an original and interesting idea. The story is insufficiently developed, especially for a film of over two hours. You will not find out how and why these mutations occur and on what scale. If humans devolved into lower primates, the film would fall into the realm of sci-fi, but as they randomly mutate into literally anything and everything, not just mammals, but insects, reptiles, amphibians, and birds, I'd rather classify it as fairy tale fantasy, which conflicts with the very realistic tone of the film. I get the impression that "The Animal Kingdom" got dissolved in trying to cover too many themes and send too many messages across too many genres, and as a result, it felt sketchy and tepid. The authors bit off more than they could swallow and failed to fulfill the big potential of the project they embarked on.

Overall, a technically good but essentially disappointing film. Still, it's worth watching, if for no other reason than for the contrast to the garbage America is showering us with, the original ideas and performance of Paul Kircher.

7/10

"You two must think I'm the cucumber in the gardener's ass"

A middle-aged, working-class couple's marriage falls apart because the husband cheats. Three grown-up daughters support their mother, while the father is torn between his wife and his mistress. A story about ordinary people, everyday sins and redemptions, told in an unusual way, through a movie that is and is not musical.

James Gandolfini, Susan Sarandon, Kate Winslet, Steve Buscemi, and Christopher Walken are the names that pushed me to watch this movie. But "Romance & Cigarettes" is not even close to the level I expected from a movie with such a cast.

The theme does not stand out, the characters are mostly uninteresting, and the story is too silly for drama and too pathetic for comedy. Everything is kind of messed up, even though nothing seems to be happening. Vulgar, an unimpressive movie that will ambush you with random musical sequences. I think Turturro tried to be original under the strong influence of the Coen brothers. It's quite original, and it's somewhat Coen-esque, it's not boring, but even though I watched it last night, I don't remember half of it already. However, I should probably mention that I don't like the Coen brothers, and that this movie might leave a stronger impression on their fans.

On the plus side, the cast alone is worth the time, there are some really funny moments and crazy dialogue, and the soundtrack is good too. For me, the musical sequence for the track "Delilah" is by far the most impressive part of this film, and I also liked the emotional "A Man Without Love". Good, but not great. Worth a look.

6,5/10

"For most people, life is like a henhouse ladder: shitty and short"

An eccentric professor, a problematic student, and a cook are the only ones who will stay in the empty boarding school for the Christmas and New Year holidays. Three unfortunate life stories, three seemingly incompatible human characters.

"The Holdovers" takes place at the end of 1970 and that's what it looks like. Aesthetics, story, acting, pace, in all aspects of "The Holdovers" leave the impression of a movie made in the early seventies. I have to say that I really liked it for a change. The main asset of the film is undoubtedly the acting, especially Paul Giamatti, although the cook, Da'Vine Joy Randolph, won the Oscar, and Dominic Sessa was also a pleasant surprise, considering that this is his first role.

The movie is good, I enjoyed it and I'm glad I saw it, but the internet debates where many think it should have won the Oscar for Best Picture are not clear to me at all. If the movie is really from the seventies, then so-so, but in 2023, "The Holdovers" brings us a templated story, so unoriginal and already seen so many times that it could be characterized as a cliché. I repeat, a nice film, well filmed, well acted, nominations for actors and editing are in place, but this is not Oscar material for Best Motion Picture of the Year, nor for Best Original Screenplay.

7,5/10

"This movie is what is wrong with cinema and television as of late. I could feel my IQ drop with each minute of it."

"Barbie" is not a movie for children. Furthermore, it should probably be R-rated. Not because of the sexual content or violence, but because of the messages it conveys, which children will not properly understand, but take for granted. This is an adult film that could only appeal to little girls still playing with Barbies (and possibly those brainwashed by the current woke trends). They wouldn't understand it? That's exactly why they would like it. Nice, colorful, semi-retarded.

The only Oscar nomination that is in order is for costume design, everything else is bullcrap, including the music. "I'm Just Ken" was nominated for an Oscar (Slash, what the hell happened to you?!), and it's won by "What Was I Made For?", which left such a strong impression that I can't even recall it. The fact that this *beep* was nominated for so many Oscars, including Best Picture, shows that this prestigious award has completely lost all essence and significance. Admittedly, for quite a long time now, fewer and fewer people have been taking the Oscars seriously.

The first half of the movie held my attention so much that I fell asleep before the end of the first hour. The second half made me sick. Wasted two hours.

4/10

It's far and away the most anti-woke movie that I've ever seen in a movie theater in my entire life. That alone, in today's world of über-woke movies, was totally worth the price of admission. - William Sullivan (American Thinker)

A psychiatrist comes to the prison to perform a psychological evaluation of a serial killer and judge whether he is insane, or sane and therefore eligible for the death penalty. The film is classified as a horror thriller, but that can easily lead you to the wrong expectations. There are no spilled guts, no jump-scare moments, no monsters, no action. Although some of the scenes it verbally evoked in my imagination are more gruesome than they could visually present them. The entire film is reduced to a dialogue between two protagonists, one of whom is an atheist, and the other claims to be a demon.

Although it does not have many other qualities, "Nefarious" makes up for it with an intelligent and well-written philosophical, theological, and moral discussion of opposing points of view, which presents the problems of the human individual and society honestly, directly, without without masking and beautification. Since the conversation is dominated by a demon (Sean Patrick Flanery nailed the role), who tries to convert an atheist psychiatrist, many dismiss this film as Christian propaganda. I did not experience it that way, even though I am an atheist. I experienced it as a refreshment in the sea of politically correct works in the same mold, which threaten to completely suffocate the seventh art.

7/10

"None of these men are criminals in the usual sense"

Kubrick's third film tells us the story of the racetrack robbery, detailed planning, and successful execution, which ends ingloriously. You could say this black and white noir is the "Ocean's Eleven" of the fifties. In fact, "The Killing" is the film that inspired the original "Ocean's Eleven" as well as many other iconic films, including Tarantino's "Reservoir Dogs" (1992). With its non-linear flow from different perspectives, it confused the audience of the time, and it did not do particularly well back then, but it was appreciated by filmmakers and secured Kubrick the direction of "Paths of Glory" (1957).

Many consider this film to be Kubrick's first masterpiece. Perfectionist that he was, Kubrick paid attention to every detail in this film, and the script is impeccably precise and the film superbly shot, but even though I love Kubrick, it didn't leave a particular impression on me. Maybe the movie has aged badly, maybe I've seen too many movies and I can't put myself in the perspective of the fifties, when this was something new and exciting, but with all the objective qualities, the overall impression was quite unimpressive. Except for the unforgettable ending, which is simultaneously hilarious and tragic and, I suppose, represents a lesson that crime does not pay.

7/10

Not the worst, not even close

I have repeatedly come across comments that "Manos" is the worst movie ever. How can you resist and not see it for yourself? Even though I'm very poor with my free time and choosing what to spend it on, I couldn't resist my curiosity. I watched it, it's bad, very bad, but nowhere near the worst. I've seen a couple of thousand movies and some were quite worse than this one.

Basically, the idea and the script aren't that bad at all, the problem is that it was shot totally amateurishly, with an obviously ridiculous budget and equipment, by people who barely knew what they were doing. It's as if someone without any film experience filmed a home movie for the fun of it. It could pass as the first attempt at a feature film by first-year students, but mostly it looks to me like a recording of a theatrical performance of some amateur theater. Seen from the latter perspective, it is not so catastrophically bad. I wouldn't even rule out the possibility that it was done that way on purpose, because at times it has a vibe of a misunderstood art.

All in all, "Manos" is a very bad movie, but it's not bad enough to deserve the cult status of the worst, nor is it bad in the way that some movies turn the game around and fall into the "so bad it's good" category. Any way you look at it, it's a waste of time.

3/10

"You son of a motherless goat!"

Three silent Western stars lose their jobs and accept an invitation to perform a show in a remote Mexican village, unaware that there is a misunderstanding and that they are actually expected to fend off an attack by a real gang of gunmen.

John Landis' ("The Blues Brothers") parody of the Western genre, with an accent on "The Magnificent Seven", is by no means a masterpiece of the seventh art, but it is a masterpiece of lighthearted comedy of its time, a film that does not take itself seriously. Without the profanity and forced humor that are increasingly the basis of comedies of recent date, "Three Amigos!" combines slapstick gags, witty remarks, and humor suitable for all ages into a relaxing film for the whole family.

Steve Martin, Chevy Chase, and Martin Short give us no more and no less than we've come to expect from them, entertaining performances, without much to praise or complain about. Good music (Elmer Bernstein, who also did music for "The Magnificent Seven"), a relaxed and cheerful atmosphere even, if not especially, in "tense" situations, a couple of absurd and a few really hilarious moments, make this movie a classic of the eighties.

If I were to rate it from the perspective of an elementary school student, which I was when I first watched it, it would be a straight ten, but if I suppress the nostalgia and try to maintain objectivity, I think it's realistic to rate it

7/10

Hard and cruel, but somehow tempting way of life

19 January 2018

I'm not a fan of historical and quasi-historical films and series, so I had no high expectations for "Vikings". But the first season bought me right away. It's completely different from anything I've seen so far, and there are more dead than in "Game of Thrones". Now I finished the second season and the series just keeps getting better. It seems to me that there are more scheming and twists than in GoT. The acting and characterization are excellent, and the action scenes are incredibly believable and realistic. It gets more and more complicated and tense and will not only hold your attention but also your breath.

7 April 2024

I finally made it to the end. In the later seasons, the story branches out in too many directions and gets overly complicated. The series in most respects maintains the level until the very end, but the story begins to repeat itself, the same plots revolve around different generations of characters and, although it cannot be said that the quality decreases, it all becomes a bit monotonous. Some of the denouements delighted me, some disappointed me, and some felt unfinished, but I guess that's a matter of taste. All in all, an above-average series, but I think they should have ended it earlier. Definitely a recommendation, if for no other reason than because of the original and striking performances of the entire cast, among which Katheryn Winnick, Gustaf Skarsgård, Alex Hogh Andersen, and Travis Fimmel stand out the most.

8/10

Style over substance

The rating on IMDb is 6.6/10, Metascore is 52, but how could I resist it when the movie stars Catherine Deneuve, David Bowie, and Susan Sarandon, and opens with the Bauhaus number "Bela Lugosi Is Dead".

Ignore the description on IMDb. There is no love triangle here, and the film is a horror only because there are vampires. It is an atmospheric, slightly psychedelic and surreal drama. Although he is the male lead, David Bowie plays a minor role here with a relatively brief screen time, while the focus is on the fairly good characterization of the Catherine Deneuve and Susan Sarandon characters and the lousy development of their relationship.

The story, at least from my perspective, is quite original, but not developed enough. Although the film is slow-paced, the story is rushed and just as it started, it reached the closing credits. The acting and characterization are satisfactory, although it could have been much better. What really counts in this film is the stunning atmosphere of the fantastically filmed, slightly surreal sex scene between the two female protagonists. Everything else is mediocre at best, and the ending is total nonsense.

6/10

"I have just been fired because nobody wants to see vampire killers anymore, or vampires either. Apparently, all they want to see are demented madmen running around in ski masks, hacking up young virgins."

At the end of the eighties, I often went to visit my uncle. His son had a big poster for this movie on his bedroom wall. A poster that fascinated me and aroused my curiosity, and because of which I nothing would made me stay alone in that room. At that time, I didn't have a video recorder, and I don't think there were any video clubs, and even if there were, I doubt that my parents would have let me watch horror movies. Three and a half decades later, I finally watched it.

"Fright Night" is without any competition the film that has been sitting on my watch-list for the longest time, and probably decades of anticipation and childhood fascination raised my expectations unrealistically high, but I must say that I am quite disappointed. This movie is not bad, far from it, but it is even further from horror. To whom this is scary, "A Nightmare on Elm Street" would cause a stroke or a heart attack.

A typical representative of the light-horror films of the eighties, at a time when slashers were at their peak, "Fright Night" returns to the vampire mythos and combines it with teenage romance. Characteristic make-up and special effects of that era horrors, with a fair amount of humor and obligatory comic-relief characters (Peter Vincent - the vampire killer, a witty name that alludes to Peter Cushing and Vincent Price). The film is in all respects quite nicely done and entertaining for a relaxing afternoon, but also quite unimpressive and forgettable.

6,5/10

WTF I just watched, but in a good way

At one point, 2% of the world's population simply disappears. 140 million people simply evaporated, seemingly at random and without any reasonable explanation. Three years later, the world is still struggling with this trauma, and the three seasons of this series follow that struggle over the next four years.

All three seasons are very different, thematically, atmospherically, tempo-wise, and one could even say genre-wise. What they have in common is that two-thirds of the time you'll have no idea what the hell is going on and why. From the premise, through the situations it causes, to individual human reactions, everything is completely insane. But once you manage to accept that craziness, the story takes on some internal logic of its own and is quite consistent with it. You will get answers to a very small number of questions right away, to many by the end of the season, to some you will forget until you are reminded of them by the denouement in the next season, and many remain a mystery left to free interpretation until the end.

If you're looking for a sensible story that ultimately gives you a rounded denouement and satisfaction, bypass "The Leftovers" in a wide arc. But if you like mindfak stories, which, albeit slow, make your brain speed up to overheat, if you like superb acting that brings a variety of characters to life with depth and believable humanity and powerfully conveys the emotions and drama of human existence, then prepare for an experience you won't easily forget.

9/10

People of the Earth! This is NOT Dethklok!

Ten years after the phenomenal "The Doomstar Requiem" comes the sequel "Army of the Doomstar", this time as a feature-length animated film. All the technical aspects of the series we loved are here again, everything is apparently the same as it was, except for the most important - humor. Not that this isn't hilariously funny, but it's not even mildly entertaining. One big nothing dragged out for almost an hour and a half, with characters rendered pathetic, rare and failed attempts at humor, and without a single catchy track. Not only is there nothing memorable, but it is so boring that I did not manage to watch it all at once. Shame.

5/10

"After Hours" meets "From Dusk Till Dawn"

To be accepted into a fraternity, two teenagers (Chris Makepeace and Robert Rusler) go in search of a stripper for a college party. Of course, things go wrong and turn into a teenage horror-comedy.

While watching the movie, scenes from Scorsese's "After Hours" (1985) and then from Rodriguez's "From Dusk Till Dawn" (1996) flashed through my head. Later I saw online that many people had the same associations. I wouldn't be surprised if this film was inspired by Scorsese's, as well as if the iconic Rodriguez was inspired by this, with Salma Hayek being, in my opinion, a convincing step up from Grace Jones.

Grace Jones got a relatively small, but important and very impressive role, which should combine sexual sensuality with mystery and fear. She presented the mystery and horror perfectly, but it is completely incomprehensible to me to associate Grace Jones with sexiness, although this lack is obviously subjective, since I didn't find people sharing my opinion. I would also like to mention the leader of the albino gang, who is played by Billy Drago and who is probably the only character that will remain in my memory. The rest of the cast and their performances don't stand out from the sea of mediocre teen comedies.

The same goes for all other aspects of the film. I have no complaints, but I have nothing to praise either. The movie is entertaining, holds the attention, but nothing particularly stands out. Ok for one viewing.

7/10

"Remember, gentlemen, life is an adventure"

In the future, robotics has advanced so much that many wealthier people opt for female androids instead of complicated male-female relationships (which are far more complicated in the future). When Sam's (David Andrews) partner (Pamela Gidley) experiences a short circuit, he hires a tracker (Melanie Griffith) to retrieve the same one from an abandoned warehouse in a lawless desert.

I watched this movie on television as a child and it remained in my vivid memory. In the decades that followed, it often crossed my mind, but I was too lazy to search, until a few days ago I stumbled upon it again. Often, re-watching beloved childhood movies only brings me disappointment and spoiled memories, but that was not the case this time.

The retro-futuristic and somewhat post-apocalyptic story and setting are very reminiscent of the cult "Mad Max", but this is on a lower level. "Cherry 2000" combines an adventure story with some humor, a love triangle, and beautifully directed action at a pace that holds the attention from start to finish. The characters are likable and interesting, except for the main villain, who in my opinion was a miscast, and then thirty-year-old Melanie Griffith steals every scene she is in. With her irresistible charm and unbelievably good looks for a woman who gave birth just before filming, Melanie is by far the strongest asset of this film.

7/10