laszlo-05700 Reviews

El Topo (1970)

Too much symbolism, too little logic

[4/10 · 14 May 2023]

Seeing El Topo at height of the sexual revolution must have been an incredible experience. I can see why this is a cult movie for a generation and I can't fault them for it. It has everything that was popular at that time and everything at square. It doesn't shy away from critizing society for their Biblical sins and that part still stands half a century later.

On the other hand, while calling something an art movie might be a good excuse for a lot of plot holes and rawness, it is not an excuse for making a movie where you are the director, writer, producer and you cast yourself for the character of the Western Jesus. Jodorkowsky is a phenomenal thinker, but his crazy ideas badly lacked a counterweight - someone who could've advised him about what works in cinema and what does not.

So unfortunately it's another example that drugs actually do not make art any better.

Guy Ritchie's the Covenant (I) (2023)

Team America: World Police theme music intensifies

[5/10 · 14 May 2023]

Guy Ritchie is a director known for badass gangster movies, so picking a war hero story - and even labeling it as his own - was kind of a risky move. It didn't go completely bad like when he produced a CGI-filled weird King Arthur remake, but it still misses the mark in storytelling.

Ritchie mastered gun-filled action scenes and the crew seems to have done the homework in military strategy as well - in these terms the cinematographic execution sets a high score. It's not trying to be extremely realistic, but rather the cuts set an enjoyable fast-tempo when necessary and pause in just the right pace when drama ensues.

However, The Covenant fails by idolizing the main characters and military service - it's the complete opposite of Jake Gylenhall's first war movie, Jarhead. A good war movie doesn't necessarily needs to be critical of war, but should drop more hints that the characters work in an obedience-based system which has limits compared to the viewer's civilian world. The Covenant instead paints a fairy tale picture where soldiers are best buddies and cool guys don't look at explosions. This works in other Guy Ritchie movies, but is somewhat ridicolous in an Afghanistan conflict setting.

Overall, I think The Covenant is a must-watch movie for Guy Ritchie-fans, but depending on your attitude or affiliation towards the military, you may find it either entertaining or far too dishonest to be a legit war movie.

Burnout - The Truth about Work (2021)

Documentaries with "the truth" in their title usually don't reveal any truth

[3/10 · 6 May 2022]

If you are looking for a good documentary on the psychological, medical roots of the burnout syndrome...well, this is not it.

Rather it's one of those capitalism-crticiques that are produced by the dozen and in which philosophers and economists end up discussing things like basic income. Which is fine, Zeitgeist.and it's predecessors inspired a whole generation of creatives, but if a crew sets out to produce yet another Zeitgeist it shoiuld at least try to introduce something new to the concept.

Truth to be told (pun intended) the.docu occasionally gravitaves back to the topic and possible causes of burnout for a few seconds, but pretty much accepts it's own preconceptions without any room for debate that the system is flawed and only interviews people with the exact same opinion.

The Great Hack (2019)

A drama-driven documentary about a data-driven topic

[3/10 · 4 August 2020]

I worked in the field as an engineer and although I didn't know much about The Great Hack before watching I was expecting a regular briefing for dummies on the matter from lawyers, data scientists and business managers on the moral hazards of this small (but quickly growing) industry which became such a hot topic recently. Well, there were legals, business people and even a data scientist guy, but instead of diving into technical details and explaining the way companies can exploit personal information found on the internet, the director gets bogged down with politics over and over. A shame, because it will hardly aid the viewer get to know the process and statistical background of collecting such big data sets and thus it won't help at all with avoiding, or at least minimizing the risk of such incidents. Instead of informing and allowing the audience to form it's own opinion it only keeps emphasizing that collection of personal data is very dangerous and there are bad guys using it (yet somehow forgets to mention that the good guys are using it too). This generalization hardly justifies the almost 2-hour long runtime, especially since it's filled with empty shots flashing social media posts. The crew selected a great subject, but were unfortunately not qualified to make a decent documentary out of it and didn't seemed to ask the right questions from the professionals.

The Laundromat (I) (2019)

A fine piece if one doesn't minds Soderbergh's storytelling style

[6/10 · 12 May 2020]

Both Soderbergh and Netflix left their signs on this film, which may be a good indicator for some, but bad for others. The Laundromat is a classic finance movie which became a popular genre after the 2007-2008 crisis and includes detailed description of how the Panama papers loophole unfolded and where the profit lies in such a crime. It doesn't difers much from the likes of Big Short, it employs the same documentarist tools to explain every necessary concept to the viewer, yet remains fun and entertaining. With stars like Antonio Banderas and Gary Oldman there's no need for much depth either: the script is well laid out and the narrators can fill small gaps between scenes. Some may see the lack of character development as a bit of weakness, but the main problem is that they tried to skip it in a movie that also tries to focus on the social injustice side of the scandal. The final few cuts can't really help wrapping up 90 minutes of missing plot. We are presented the vague motives of each player in the scheme, but then all this is left hanging in the air. Still, if one is interested in how tax-havens work in a nutshell, the Laundromat is a recommended watch and the world definitely needs more similar productions.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)

70% Coens, 30% Classic

[7/10 · 23 December 2018]

Despite what the name suggests, The Ballad of Buster Scruggs is only partially a ballad of Buster Scruggs. It's a movie of 6 varying length segments, each based around the 19th century wild west - and only the first one really qualifies as a ballad, the rest are simply novels. That's not an issue, since the tone of storytelling adjusts really well between the episodes. However I'd recommend drawing a line between the four parts written by the Coen brothers themselves, and the two others that are based on original Western stories by Jack London and Steward Edward White. The first 3 stories are all Coen originals, the first one being Buster's. It's simply an introduction to catch the viewer's attention with a bright cowboy-gangster like figure who sings and seems to be a general satire of all the '50s and early '60s American Western movies. The story with James Franco in lead doesn't goes too deep in terms of character development either, but the cinematic tools seem to be switched up to resemble the spaghetti western era. It's cool, but they still didn't invent anything revolutionary. With the 3rd episode comes a remarkable switch - and the simple explanation is that Liam Neeson and Harry Melling nails it. The movie starts to take a dive into becoming a sociography and the first steps are a success. Yet, my favourite parts - the 4th and 5th chapters - are the height of the movie. Here, the Coens semeed to have thrown everything they know into the trash bin and adapt these stories á la natur. For anyone who read Karl May or similar author's books they will find these tales very familiar. Yet they are so alien from the regular Western movies, that it's easy to tell the difference. The finale is once again a Coen-written screenplay, which I think doesn't really fits into the movie, especially not as a closure. It tries to analyze a few social classes associated to that era, but seems to leave a mess with the dialogues. Maybe they were thinking too much about writing a regular screenplay instead of focusing on what they did best in the previous 5 chapters and throughout their careers. All in all, it delivers as an interesting project movie - I would definitely give 9/10 or 10/10 to the middle of the film, but they just don't mix well with the parodizing start and the unfinished last chapter.

Other People's Money (1991)

Old but gold

[8/10 · 25 September 2018]

Despite a few early 90's cliché and a shallow economic explanation of the plot, Other People's Money is a classic gem - especially when it comes to so-called business movies. I'm not really a fan of Danny De Vito, but he totally suits the character of the rotten, sexist capitalist he plays: spot on. Maybe the audience in those days didn't believe it was a realistic role? Well - a few decades later we can know for sure that it was as real as it gets. This is also the last movie where Gregory Peck played a major role - can't be sure how much he was affected by health problems, but I think he bid farewell to the world of cinema with a solid acting. As for Penelope Ann Miller - well, I felt she was just giving herself, really natural in the role, love it. There are a few strange cuts and screens where I asked myself "Hey, why is the camera doing that?" or "why are they using this weird angle?", but since it's a piece strongly relying on the story, as adapted from a theatre play, it deducts very little from the value of the movie. The most important scenes are all well directed, there are a tons of hidden fun references for econ-junkies (basically everything they say about Japan) and in the end it can even deliver as a comedy.

The Whiskey Bandit (2017)

Average crime story told with outstanding direction

[7/10 · 7 June 2018]

The Whiskey Robber tells the story of a cultic bank robber in the '90s of Eastern Europe. It sounds a bit boring? Well, sometimes so is the movie - but luckily you can always find joy in the details. One can only praise the work of Nimród Antal and his crew, they did an exceptional job with turning around a plot that would otherwise settle down outside the action scenes. Superb sounds and music, great cinematography, costumes and locations providing more insight to the story than the conversations. Basically this movie could be about anything - a milkman or an insurance broker - it would still be interesting.

Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (2017)

Classic teen movie for the next generation

[6/10 · 22 March 2018]

I had no high expectations towards the Jumanji sequel and to be honest, I never though the original was some milestone cult movie either. It was a cute Robin Williams film aimed at the youth, and I think it delivered just that. However I had a fun 2 hours watching the new Jumanji, and I think it's a well produced and highly entertaining piece even despite it's weaknesses.

Let's start with the script: it's very well put together - the idea of reproducing Jumanji for a 2017 set doesn't sounds easy at all, but the writer's didn't take much risk and chose to turn the board game into a video game. That eliminated the chance of mediocre teen acting and too much "teenager" elements, because for some reason teens nowadays don't like movies with teens. They like Dwayne Johnson action scenes, and they got just that.

As for Mr. Johnson - I think despite all his bad movies, he is a very talented and skilled actor, he won't let down people in Jumanji either. Kevin Hart's OK as well. But when it comes to other members of the cast I think it was just too difficult for some roles to be reproduced authentically. I'm not saying overacting shouldn't be a part of a movie like that - you can tell that Jack Black totally tried to do what s(he) was supposed to do, but the difference between a genius and dumb character is very narrow here, it's hard to tell if he did good or not. But the point of Jumanji is not collecting Oscar awards, so that won't ruin anyone's career, none had to prove how fantastic actors they are, the goal was to provide entertainment to the viewers, which they succeeded in.

Also, there are some funny pop-cultural references in the movie, which might be good jokes even for adults, but to be honest, there are so many aspects in which it delivers only "mediocre", that the 2017 Jumanji surely won't be as memorable as the original one. The base concept wasn't something new, it's classic Hollywood content recycling, even if it's done right.

Shinjuku Incident (2009)

Jackie Chan creates the migration-educational genre?

[7/10 · 23 February 2018]

As a child I grew up watching tons of Jackie Chan movies, which very much made my generation addicted to his kind of karate. We liked Bruce Lee for sure - but he was often too serious for us Western kids. His martial arts movies were really "art", whilst Jackie Chan just made fun of everything - he was the perfect entertainer for child and adult alike.

Now as an "old" man he not just plays a rather passive (compared to his former roles) main character, but also does it seriously. And honestly his work just blew my mind. I hope I won't spoiler anything, but while he may not do any funny karate moves, there are enormous amount of razor sharp blades, blood and raw violence. Yet, the story is centered around one of the biggest social problems of our days: migration. Migration brings happiness, fear, success, illegal jobs, family reunion, crime and organized crime. And Jackie Chan is no shy man to show both the bright and dark side of this topic. However, at some points the direction insterted parts of the script as rather silly sounding conversations, which might seem even more comic to those not familiar with Asian culture. In these scenes the movie wants to draw some moral or ethical conclusion out of what the characters have done so far. It is a bit pointless unless the goal was to educate the viewers about what a Chineese immigrant can do in Japan - which actually pretty much makes sense in this context. But it interrupts the movie's rhytm so heavily, that it's like an intermission cut in from some low score movie. Still, I'm quiet sure Jackie and director Tung-Shing Yee had good intentions with these scenes (as with the whole movie), so I'm just noting it for those who might think it will be 2 hours of endless killing. No, it won't - sit down, it's the perfect opportunity to learn your lesson about migration's challenges and grow some emotional intelligence if you are only in for the missing body parts.

As for the actors - I'm proud of myself that I could always differentiate between Japanese and Chineese characters. Though I probably shouldn't be - it's likely the result of good casting and costume design. So a big thanks for the film crew for this - some of us just don't have the ability to tell the differences. Character development is also a strong point, couldn't really say there were "bad" roles - even minor actors did OK with Western standards, which is actually a bit of a surprise if you know how much the Chineese movies were about overreacting some years ago. So yeah - even though it has it's strange habits, Jackie Chan did not let his fans down. He just tried something different this time - but he excels just as well in this dark criminal movie, as in his own realm.

Logan Lucky (2017)

A movie that hurts nobody

[8/10 · 29 January 2018]

NASCAR, prison, family, robbery, rednecks, State of Virginia, USA. First seeing the headlines made me think there's no way I'm going to like this movie. But was I wrong! Of course, Steven Soderbergh is a very experienced man in this genre - altough I'm not a fan of the Ocean's movies, it was him who gave a strong basis making sure Logan Lucky can't fall in the "bad" category of the reviews. But it wasn't the director, who made the movie shine. There's a scriptwriter by the name Rebecca Blunt, whom nobody seems to know anything about (could be a trick to boost ticket sales). Whether she exists or not - the story is the main strength of this movie. Not absolutely original, but has very fine taste in joining together the main storyline and scenes with little drops of comedy (almost dramedy) elements. Then there is a family side-story which in the beginning I though could easily ruin the whole show, since it's very risky choice for a heist movie - but it didn't! It even adds a little personal touch to the movie - without offending anybody. A rare virtue among family movies! As for the cast there's no much surprise. When the NASCAR cameo stars appear naturally it's a bit amateurish, but in the end it didn't felt like it was a NASCAR themed movie - it's really just a background for the more important actors. Daniel Craig seemed sensational as always - giving an almost Vinnie Jones-style British bad guy (was suprised he didn't beat up anyone) while acknowledging that his actual role is to make a parody out of that. Adam Driver played a very authentic one handed bartender-bro and the rest of the main characters were OK as well. For the bad parts: this superstitious unlucky family-hex seemed a bit out of context, it only related to the title, but as we can't go too deeply into the characters past it doesn't have much meaning to the viewer. The prison scenes seemed so silly that no wonder they ended up as more of a fun-source rather than actually serious part of the action. The lack of budget shows here and there, but all in all Logan Lucky is probably the strongest contender for a fictional "Suprise movie of 2017" award. I'm really happy when a relatively new production company succeeds with a good movie against the big Hollywood studios, but here it is: I can recommend this movie to anybody who wants to see such phenomenon.

The Meyerowitz Stories (2017)

Stiller and Sandler are OK, the rest needs rethinking

[5/10 · 16 November 2017]

What everybody wanted to know before The Meyerowitz Stories came out, if combining Adam Sandler and Ben Stiller can work in the end. Luckily, it does - even in a non-comedy production. They are both highly skilled and professional actors and give their best to make the movie better, so no surprises about that, I would like to see them working together in the future. Sadly, it's the scripting and story that lacks detail here and that's why poor old Dustin Hoffman's role failed. So unfortunately it's one of those movies, where the director and writer being the same person caused a huge uncertainty. That doesn't means Mr. Baumbach would be particularly bad at either one, but here the two jobs should really have been separated. A wise choice would have been to send back such a script for rewriting - but you naturally won't do that if it's your own work. I didn't really get the editing either - it's clear that they wanted to provide some chaotic artistic view by separating the movie into chapters - yet always cutting the ending scenes of each episode. But that doesn't make the movie any better and you don't get more involved in Harold Meyerowitz's insanity. It's really just there to divert your attention from the main story-line which is below average. Anyways - I still think it's still a must watch for those who are fans of the family drama genre (there aren't many movies released for them), but otherwise you might want to turn off the play after about 30 minutes. I advise you to don't do that - there are some good bits in the second half, but it's understandable if someone still won't like the Meyerowitz Stories in the end.

A Fish Called Wanda (1988)

Lightweight British comedy

[9/10 · 9 October 2017]

The fact is, that John Cleese and Michael Palin are incredibly funny even outside their usual Monty Python stupid people roles. What they do here is something completely different. These two actors alone could make this movie work, but we also have the young and wild Jamie Lee Curtis and Kevin Kline close to his peak form. Really everything is given for a totally catastrophic movie - yet the clash of the British and American school somehow worked out brilliantly. There are no scenes that would try to give you the experience of an extremely big laugh, but it very smartly convinces you to be interested in the lead of the story and be a bit amazed about every little twist and joke. Luckily, the romantic side was not emphasized too much - it is still more of a comedy than a romantic comedy. A few theatrical motives might show up here and there, but I think that deducts little from the value of the final product - it only means that "A Fish Called Wanda" could work well on stage too.

Baby Driver (2017)

It's not about the cars, music or characters...it's about popular culture as a whole

[7/10 · 9 October 2017]

I was waiting for this movie with great interest, as many journalists wrote things like "it's going to be the car movie of the year" or "chase scene orgy never seen before". Truth to be told, 'Baby Driver' is a no-brainer for a die-hard car junkie, it's no better than a random Fast & Furious episode...which is bad. It's bad in terms of showing anything else than the usual stereotypes about driving & action and how they work together, contains little new or unique elements.

But at about halfway to the runtime I realized the director probably didn't wanted to show anything like that to the audience. The characters are so ridiculously simple that they practically play no part in the movie - they are merely just tools for showing off mighty pop culture icons like an iPod, a Subaru Impreza, a cassette recorder or the waitress at a 60s style American restaurant. The list could go on for pages. And the music choices - well, they are brave, but I can say they worked out amazingly well - soundtrack is definitely the strongest point of 'Baby Driver'.

So all in all this movie is a mirror to the societies of the last ~50 years. If you realize this, and that in fact it's still a pop-corn movie, not the nominee of an art film gala, you may be able to enjoy it - just don't concentrate on the story. What you want to watch out here are the items the characters use, wear, how they talk and the archetypes the actors play. It's about the details, not the big picture.

Betting on Zero (2016)

A good watch for those interested in investment science. For others, less so.

[7/10 · 4 October 2017]

As of October, 2017 - a few months after the premier of this documentary - Herbalife stock price peacefully sits at ~67 USD. I just wanted to start the review with this statement to let everyone know the company is still well and thriving. None should look at this production as the documentary that exposes the dirty cheats that may run a corporation bankrupt or earn them the most thorough federal investigations of all time. My law teacher once told me: everyday people think that courts provide justice for the mass, but it isn't true. What they provide is law. This applies to Herbalife a lot: the way an MLM company operates is clearly unfair and unjust, but none was able to prove so far that it is completely against the law. There may be illegal operations behind the curtain we don't know of yet or 'Betting on Zero' was unable to bring to light, but as far as they are considered clean by the regulators, they go on.

However I must praise the documentary for the financial approach. It gives very good explanation on basic terms like shorting, provides a good view of the hedge fund world and reveals why the efficient market theory is far-far away from reality. So in case you want to be the next George Soros, this is a must-watch for you. If you are looking for a documentary where the little men fight to get revenge on big money, then just skip this - Mexican immigrants praying with attorneys will hardly provide you any useful information.

Runaway Train (I) (1985)

Above-average cast, good story, outstanding cinematography

[7/10 · 3 September 2017]

Indeed a fine piece, from the era when action movies were taken over by the likes of Schwarzenegger or Stallone. But the production company seemed to completely ignore this fact, and have chosen to base their movie on an old Akira Kurosawa screenplay. Risky choice, but as we know it didn't paid off - it was the last Northbrook film, and the Cannon-Golan companies didn't last much longer either. So Runawy Train might have been a financial failure, but I'd call it an artistic success. The technical specs doesn't show that it was shot on some kind of special equipment, but the way they captured the snowy landscape is still a masterpiece. If someone appreciates this kind of detail, it's definitely a must-watch movie (in the digitally renewed version, if possible). Otherwise the story is good too - not as much action, craziness and twists as in other 80s productions, but it has a tasty outcome between the good guy and the bad guy - probably Kurosawa would have done it better, but I really can't blame the directors for every little mistake. The last strong point of this movie is probably the cast, however - some might find Eric Roberts and a few supporting actors a bit irritating sometimes. Anyways, Jon Voight is at his best here. Unfortunately, other aspects of the movie seemed to be rather mediocre - very generic music choices, dull stunts and decorations, strange cuts. But those only play a minor part in the big picture, so I can recommend Runaway Train to anybody, who's just after a little entertainment.

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017)

When Guy Ritchie re-imagined British folklore as a Tolkien fantasy

[4/10 · 19 August 2017]

Oi, as many wrote: this movie bears undeniable Guy Ritchie marks on it. The cuts, the characters, the lines. It's love it or hate it: personally I didn't mind about most of the movie being 'Snatch' based in historic England with some added flavour of magic. But sometimes magic was too much in the form of CGI. I mean it's hard to imagine some englishman woke up in the morning and said to himself: "Hmm, it would surely be a good idea to include some Titanic-sized war elephants in King Arthur's story, ravaging like dinosaurs. Maybe in the end the elephants could serve some tea to the Queen." No, that just doesn't roll with the rest of the movie - so in the big picture it felt like that the good, calm part of the movie was directed by a British crew, and the action scenes were done by some Hollywood jack-asses, who think the amount of monsters equal with revenue. I would rate the Guy Ritchie-ish part 8, and the fantasy content 4. But I warn anybody, to handle 'King Arhur' as an average performer - if you can survive the opening scene and doesn't mind the end turning into a pop-corn movie, you are going to enjoy a very unique, very refreshing experience.

Maybe they could have casted Arhur with Jason Statham and Vortigern as Vinnie Jones, but let's not go extreme - the actors were fine, it's just some magical force that denied King Arthur from reaching a higher score. Maybe the competing movie studios have taller towers - who knows.

The Accountant (2016)

Not sure if B movie or not - but I liked it

[7/10 · 3 August 2017]

Don't have the money to make the super-production of your life? Can't afford big booms, expensive equipment, CGI scenes? Doesn't matter - just take a pair of Hollywood-standard federal investigators to assist leading a criminal story and help extending the runtime, add some shady background to the main character with his family and don't forget about some good old fighting scenes. Scratching the surface of some topic unknown to the average viewer (accounting, mathematics, autism) might work too. But hey, what is Ben Affleck doing here? Honestly, I have no idea, but I'm happy that Hollywood scrapped the likes of Chuck Norris and Steven Seagal for this role. I tried my best to not categorize The Accountant as a B-movie, but no other marking seemed to fit it. Very typified locations and actions, lack of detail, average cinematography, perfect headshots that even the best snipers would envy. Yet in the end it works. What amazed me that even the supporting actors showed their best. Hope this movie can earn them higher profile roles in the future - they deserve it. So this might be a B-movie, but a masterfully implemented one. Definitely worth a watch, there are some twists in the story, but don't expect too much surprise.

Tour de Pharmacy (2017 TV Movie)

HBO is having some real quality control issues

[3/10 · 31 July 2017]

I would like to start with the statement that I'm a real cycling fan since about my childhood and I also love mockumentaries, which I think is a real undervalued genre, when it comes to quality entertainment. So when I noticed that HBO has this thing coming out, I was really interested, because I hoped they can make a short movie that offends me heavily and does it in a way I enjoy so much.

But unfortunately it didn't offend me at all. Nor was it a mockumentary. I would classify it as a collection of overused trash jokes hidden under the disguise of a low-cost TV parody about cyclists. Yet I'm giving it points, because still there were things I honored: +1 for the Pantani figure. That one I liked, even though I was a huge Pantani fan back in the days - but that's what I wanted to see from such a production! I hope if someone decides to make an actual mockumentary about the cycling world, will invite Orlando Bloom to cover that role. I hand out 1 star for the vintage dress designs. Hey, I appreciate the details paid to them... And 1 more for the homoerotic reference. Though I'm not sure that was intentional towards cycling - in that case it goes for the "Once Upon a Time...Life" reference (the french educational about how human body works).

Sadly, that's all. Everything else that can be said about this shorty is only negative. I just don't understand how they managed to make such a horrible TV movie about this topic, cycling and doping seems like the perfect mixture of a mockumentary. Strange subculture of people who steered far from everyday reality - mocking them made the great ones like Best in Show or This is Spinal Tap. But here the script and directing didn't even seemed to want to offend them, it's just a selfish 41 minutes of VHS-style effects (I know it made Kung Fury look cool, but I see no reason why it could work here), celebrities whom's management wants a bit more spotlight, penises, annoyingly amateurish background actors and an avalanche of other low-cost and off-topic clichés.

Still, I wouldn't give it such a bad rating if it were from some random American junk channel, but as for HBO - that's below expectations by a mile.

War Machine (2017)

Not awful, but it isn't going to be your movie of the year

[5/10 · 22 June 2017]

I never thought a war movie with Brad Pitt can go wrong. Well, it did. But let's start with the good things! War Machine is a unique movie. It is unique in storytelling, acting, viewpoint - which makes it a refreshing experience in the world of superhero movies. There are a few well-done scenes that will make you think about this whole damn thing in Afghanistan - which is probably what the creators wanted to achieve. A few could argue about whether they remained neutral in the topic, but there are signs showing that they tried - so no bad point there either.

On the other hand, just by taking the risk of being unique, they weren't able to translate this to winning aspects. I could find the fun in the ridiculous running of Brad Pitt, which is just like the original US Army general portrayed (I have a friend who runs just like that and still went for an army career, no idea why people with bad running technique have military-obsession). Even his gray hair and over-sized clothes made sense (although you could feel that they were a bit overdone even for satire). But why the heck did he had to alter his voice just for playing Glenn McMahon?! You don't do that at professional level, who thought it's going to work? He's goddamn Brad Pitt - if he fits the role, he can fit it even with his own voice! The rest of the cast remained a bit out of spotlight for the whole runtime and I'm not sure that introduction scene at the beginning was a good idea - it's too much information at once and the viewer will have no experience about the characters, just a few narrated sentences. It wouldn't be a problem if it's really a political movie, but as for being a strange crossover between political and war movie I don't think it worked.

I think Netflix tried to bite too big for a first big feature film. There are some points in the movie where you can see that they tried to save the situation, but overall I'd book War Machine as a failure.

A nyomozó (2008)

Art thriller, with luckily only limited art

[8/10 · 15 May 2017]

I was very surprised by this little gem, because Hungarian movies are often accused of bad acting and low budget clichés. Well, this movie has them too - but they somehow managed to turn these weaknesses into strengths, therefore creating the perfect antisocial hero: Tibor Malkáv. I mean his character is built up perfectly - we only know the most important things, that he shares with others. Which is not much. But at least nobody get's confused by long discussions. It's just enough to keep the viewer interested throughout the movie. Also some "art" scenes appear from time to time - but don't let this keep you away -, they didn't overdo it: it's perfectly enjoyable even for people less interested in symbolic mindbogglings. Music, story and script also great. Unfortunately some less talented acting also appears in minor roles - won't ruin the show, but a bit irritating. A bigger issue was costumes and sets. They captured Eastern European reality well with Tibor's flat, car or the dissecting room, but it got a bit more confusing towards the end. I know most people won't notice, but there are situations when it looked dumb. This movie could have really earned at least 0,5 star more if the creators had the money.

The Battle of Neretva (1969)

Yugoslav war story

[7/10 · 15 May 2017]

My first thought was that this is the Yugoslavian edition of...well, basically any western WWII movies. But this would not be 100% true, plus every war story is unique, and we must respect that. So I'm reviewing Bitka na Neretvi as if it wasn't influenced by other WWII titles (which again: isn't the reality either). So it's the partisans (communist rebels) facing off against the Germans and their allies. As a background information, we must know the fights against the civil population on the Balkans really got nasty in the war. If someone from the locals threw a hand grenade killing a soldier, multiple civilians got massacred by the Nazis. It means the Yugoslavs had a good reason for wanting to glorify their heroes. It must have been very annoying to see all the western movies being released about various world war deeds, but they didn't have their own (though they had numerous stories about total war to tell). All these feelings manifested in this movie, a superproduction of the time. They contracted a handful of worldwide stars for the main roles, and they did well! Sergey Bondarchuk felt so natural in every sketch as "father" of the soldiers. Then there is Hardy Krüger, the German general - the most German man they could find on the piece of Earth (actual Nazis unfortunately died or were too old by the time of filming). Brynner, Dawson, Welles also were magnificent: I'm sure money wasn't the sole reason motivating them to take part in the creation of this movie. However, the Yugoslavian actors...some of them were fine, but the more minor the role got, the stupider they looked on the screen. At some crowd scenes you can clearly notice something is wrong...the people just wander around like in a zombie movie. Unless it's a crowd scene with horses - those are breathtaking without a doubt. Speaking of horses, I'm not sure this would qualify for the "no animals were harmed in the making" stamp - lots of brutal battle scenes and fantastic control of the animals, not to mention the bridge - I really appreciated that, can't see action like that in today's films. Costumes and sets are fine, as far as I can tell they looked authentic. I don't know if they had luck with the snow and weather during filming, but even with the mediocre cinematography the locations seem rather beautiful. One thing: the woman protagonist's makeup and hair. I don't want to disclose too much info, to avoid spoilers, but it was a big negative for me - it's like she stepped out of some kind of '60s shampoo advert, not a WWII production. Again: something that shows the Yugoslavs inexperience with feature films. The main line in the storytelling is rather straightforward and easy to follow, but the side stories sometimes get a bit shaky. I'm not sure it was a good decision to try and feature all off these aspects in this short playtime. Still, in the end I stood up satisfied: this is a war movie to watch for any war movie enthusiast and probably the best one about the Balkan battlefield.