Lima

This is not so much a film about boxing and the hardships this sport brings (that's why comparisons with Rocky, Raging Bull, etc. are unwarranted), but mainly a social drama about a crazy family, a domineering mother-manager and two brothers who are completely different in character, all with riveting performances by almost everyone involved. While Wahlberg, with his unchanging poker player expression, hits his acting limits here, the anorexic Bale clearly reigns supreme and whenever he's on screen you can't take your eyes off him. There is such a believable and intimate atmosphere permeating the whole film, that you have no problem empathising with the action and watching it all in one breath. The only thing separating this film from a maximum rating is the fact that the plot meanders through predictable twists and turns, but otherwise it’s undoubtedly one of the films of the year and the Oscar nominations are well deserved.

Is it possible to dislike a film that humorously subverts comic book superhero and supervillain clichés, while playing bangers by AC/DC, Black Sabbath and Guns´n´ Roses? Hardly. A reliable mood lifter and a pleasant surprise in one.

A masterpiece that matures with each viewing. Brilliantly directed, inventively scored by Reznor, perfectly edited, with flawless casting. First of all – unknown to me until now – Andrew Garfield impressed me with his masterful performance (great hope for the next Spider-Man), but the slightly autistic talented asocial Jesse Eisenberg is not far behind him, I believe that in both cases Oscar nominations at least are certain. Every era had a significant film that characterised it, went to the heart of its essence and became timeless, and Fincher's work, in these times of the information technology boom and the fearless entrepreneurship of the young generation, is such a film.

At times the words about the triumph of film design come to mind, but the boredom reliably overwhelms everything. I, as a viewer, have long since sobered up from the 3D fascination and the new Tron has nothing new to offer. Neither story-wise nor narratively; adjectives like "riveting" or at least "interesting" have no place in Kosinski's world. I enjoyed the old Tron infinitely more, even with its simple 8-bit graphics.

Through Štindl's magnificent script, precise and detailed production design (it brought back memories of the ticket punching machines in trams, etc.) and an inventive soundtrack, Špaček tells an interesting, weighty and well-crafted psychological portrait of a brooding bastard who plays at being a demigod from his position as member of the secret police. I consider the final meeting in the dissident's flat to be the best executed and acted scene in a Czech film last year. Ondřej Malý can already prepare a shelf for the Czech Lion.

An unexciting attempt at psychologically sophisticated art. Slightly irritating in places, unconventional thanks the interesting ballet setting, but an attempt nevertheless. Someone should tell Aronofsky that he is not the Kubrick of the 21st century. I admire the difficulty of ballet as an art, as well as Tchaikovsky's magical music, but this film is so empty and uses so many horror tropes that it's maddening. Hype of the year. PS: If it wasn't for Natalie Portman, who put so much effort into her role, I'd go even lower with the rating.

Especially in the last 30 minutes a solid adrenaline dose. It's been done before and in a better version (Končalovský's Runaway Train, for instance), but otherwise this action flick has one big trump card, and that is the unorthodox setting of railway transport. Scott ticks along with the action, thanks to which even the mandatory clichés surrounding the protagonist's family can be survived unscathed.

Any film that steps on the toes of the Nazis on the one hand and the Czech Communists on the other has my sympathy, because it remains impartial and factual, as it should be.

This film was shown on our TVs many years ago and it was quite entertaining back then. Today, the ravages of time are very much evident, but that's not a complaint. What bothers me is that the script is a bit infantile (Swift's novel is, after all, about something completely different) and covers only a small part of the book: Gulliver's fate in the land of Lilliput. If I were to compare it to the 17 years older version, Richard Harris is a much more charismatic guy (and a much better actor) than Kerwin Matthews, but otherwise this newer version loses out cinematically, especially when it comes to special effects. If you want to experience a better and not so plot-trimmed “Gulliver's Travels”, your best choices are the British adaptation with Ray Harryhausen's effects, or the one with Ted Danson, which is slightly more Hollywood, but it covers the entire source material.

It's a shame that there are so few reviews here, because this is really well done, with top-notch work by visual effects genius Ray Harryhausen. His optical tricks are so good that I never once doubted the quality of the effects in the entire film (okay, maybe the giant squirrel is a little weaker). The slogan on the poster almost doesn't lie, for its time it really was "nothing less, than a miracle in motion pictures". The script departs quite a bit from Swift's original, covering only the worlds of the Lilliputians and the giants, but thanks to being so condensed, the plot moves very quickly and there’s no danger of boredom. The clever dialogues are also a plus, Gulliver occasionally spews out a very funny line, it's only a pity that the ending was rushed (budget problems?). Of course, a must-see for lovers of Harryhausen's work!