D.Moore

It's not entirely bad, but it's not entirely good, either. If I understand correctly, given the year of production 2014 mentioned in the credits, this is a pilot episode of the ultimately unfilmed series, which Czech Television decided to broadcast this year. I'd be quite interested to see what such a series would be like - The Office inspiration is obvious (aha, maybe that's it - the admitted remake of The Office got the nod after all?), but it could have turned into something likeable if the creators had focused on the story instead of caricatures of typical office types in the later episodes, if they had cut the length of the episodes in half and built on something more interesting than an argument about air conditioning, for God's sake. Of the cast, I was particularly pleased with the precise Ivana Uhlířová with her permanent poker face and the endearingly confused Eva Josefíková, both of whom have comedic talent to spare.

Love is a dream. A Touch of Butterfly is concentrated poetics in an enchanting performance by Juraj Herz with the beautiful Jana Brejchová and heavenly music by Luboš Fišer. It was said to be the first and probably the last time Herz had the music written first and then filmed to it. The result shows that everything is subordinated to this beautiful melody. And that's a good thing.

It lacks the "something extra" I found in the recent The Grey, and the last five minutes are downright annoying, but otherwise The Shallows is more than a good - above all - spectacle. Blake Lively, colored by nature like in a travel agency catalogue, and the great shark (not shown much, not because it was difficult to make it, but because of the tension, which is good) were a joy to watch. The film goes by quickly, it's fast-paced and entertaining, the direction knows what to do to make sure there is not too much of anything (I liked one off-screen feast a lot) and the soundtrack by Marco Beltrami is definitely one of the best things to come out of film music this year. Pure four stars.

It's not really a return to Bourn(e)s roots, it's more of a new offshoot, which fortunately isn't as ordinary as people say it is. Bourne play an interesting role here of an involuntary puppet, whose strings are pulled by many people, and I'm glad that there was still a story to tell about him, and especially that Paul Greengrass is telling it again. Thanks to him and, of course, thanks to Matt Damon, amazing things are happening in movie theatres again - like the London chase or the final car chase (I probably won't see better on the big screen this year).___P.S. The Bourne Legacy, which was useless four years ago, now seems to be even more useless.___P.P.S. Unfortunately, Kateřina Hámová and her subtitles traditionally full of mistakes did not disappoint. Like when one character says, "Put everything on the table..." but the subtitles read "Everything's on the table." Or when the computer command "Run" according to the subtitles does not mean "launch" the program, but "browse".

Fun first and foremost. I really started looking forward to Suicide Squad when the trailer came out, backed by Queen's “Bohemian Rhapsody" - it was funny, playful and at the same time a bit grittier than the other comic book trailers. Fortunately, that's exactly what the film is. Of course, anyone who foolishly expected the main "heroes" to be Deadpool-style thugs must inevitably be disappointed. But that Deadshot, Harley Quinn, Boomerang and others are softies, definitely not. I liked how naturally the script was able to introduce and connect them all, I liked how they did what they wanted to do and didn't want to do, or didn't do what they wanted to do. And the plot suited it all nicely - nothing too complicated, more of a straightforward "go there, do this and do that" affair with a few surprises along the way. The cast is flawless, the action scenes clear and imaginative, the humor knows no bounds... And every second with the Joker or Batman is priceless.

I don't have a good feeling about the new Ghostbusters at all - apart from the feeling that the film is completely useless. It didn't impress me, didn't offend me, I liked the female cast quite a bit, but they had nothing to act with, and the humor was so strangely tasteless and odorless that you couldn't even tell what the writers had come up with and what was improvisation gone wrong. The opening scene was good, as was the team's first encounter with the ghost, but the longer the film got, the weirder it got, the more awkward the humor became, and even every cameo role the actors from the original Ghostbusters had in it was a pointless addition (especially Bill Murray). For me, it's just not a good comedy, but there was a dad sitting in front of me in the movie theatre with two teenagers (who obviously knew Ghostbusters, as they recognized the references to the original and danced in their seats whenever the familiar musical theme was played) and they laughed almost all the time. I believe that even this film will find its fans. Three and a half stars.

I actually liked this movie on TV despite the crappy dubbing and cropped image, but it wasn't until I saw it in its original form (even with 16 extra minutes) that I realized how great it really is. The straightforward story is driven forward by the races of the super-sympathetic Lee Van Cleef and the all-greased Thomas Milian, Ennio Morricone's foot-stomping score and Sollima's direction, which does its own thing. The final chase culminating in a triple fight is one of the best I've ever seen in spaghetti westerns.

"Grandpa got it from Stalin." - "In our country we pronounce it Stallone." I honestly didn't expect such a good comedy and I tip my hat to the filmmakers for not just riding the wave of poking fun at Kim Jong-un all the time (although of course that's what they're all about), but that in fact a lot of the good jokes are not about him. I'm also glad that it went pretty well without feces and the only body fluid used was blood (the finger biting amused me perhaps most of all).

This is an excellent production that tells us everything about Mendel and leaves room for reflection on the battle between science and faith, which is far from over. Karel Höger is excellent and the untried Brno faces in the supporting roles (especially Zdeněk Hradilák as Benedikt) keep up with him.

This Hitchcock film is hugely damaged by its Cimrman (or perhaps Monty Python) excessiveness, which tries to surprise with new twists and turns, but at best makes it laughable, at worst downright ridiculous. If it weren't for all the "shocking" revelations and the almost constant barrage of unnecessary dialogue, Number Seventeen could have been even better.