POMO

Runner Runner is listless. There are loads of similar genre movies that are more captivating and ingenious and I usually give them three stars, because even though they might not be ambitious, they at least provide me with sufficient entertainment for two hours. Runner Runner failed to do that. It has a weak script and non-existent chemistry between the actors, who were not good casting decisions.

Gravity is not about its story, which is practically non-existent. We learn minimum information about the only two characters and we’re able to build an emotional connection to only one of them. Gravity is about conveying a feeling. It’s a space survival drama where you dodge flying debris, save oxygen and try to get hold of something. It is a distinctive and unique film in the filmmaking respect, one of a kind. But how long will it resonate within us given that it lacks a more powerful message or a more surprising ending? Thanks to Sandra Bullock, who acts as if her life depended on it, it resonates longer than it would have without her. There is no sense in seeing Gravity anywhere but on the big screen.

Tom Cruise’s carbon copy and Kate Hudson, who comes across as rather vain, star in this romantic flick for the ladies, which full of all kinds of clichés averagely mixed together. Ginnifer Goodwin is cute, but a little awkward in her role. The only solid performance comes courtesy of John Krasinski.

A sclerotic look back at a love life in which fragments of memories and feelings are purposefully arranged into some meaningful plot. It’s a long cinematic journey from gushing over a beautiful introduction, through atmospheric levitation in the middle of a bison herd, to a gradually growing test of the audience’s patience. At least Olga Kurylenko and Rachel McAdams are bewitching and the music is nice.

“Look how I can get you with something you’ve seen a hundred times before!” the talented James Wan said to himself. Brilliant filmmaking, especially the long introductory shots. The 1970s atmosphere, which best suits haunted houses, is well depicted. The Conjuring has quality actors and great sound, making it a grade-A horror movie that Warner Bros. can be proud of. But the ending could have offered more. The first [Rec] set a real high bar for final escalation.

Ron Howard’s perfect craftsmanship with soul and a nice message. The director proves that he knows both his craft and people. The focus is not on the races but on the characters. The two main characters are diametrically different but equally respectable madmen. Both embody the archetypes of today’s favorite film heroes – a wild guy who enjoys parties and women versus a level-headed, introverted and ambitious intellectual. What unites them is adrenaline and the desire for victory. And a strange form of friendship. They compete while inspiring each other. Thanks to Howard’s direction, you can enjoy every scene they appear in, whether separately or together. The script is said to contain factual errors and I missed the first race when Hunt recognized Lauda as a threat. But these are forgivable flaws of a beautifully rendered film about rivalry with the smell of burning rubber, which you simply cannot dislike. Daniel Brühl delivers one of the best acting performances of the year.

After its cool reception in the US, I found this movie a pleasant surprise. It does not deal with Jobs’ private life, but with his role in Apple’s establishment and the first phase of the company’s existence. It delves into his personal life only marginally, for a quick outline of his character by showing his approach to unexpected life events (which he did not address in an exactly typical manner). The main focus of the narrative is his approach to professional events: his passion for his work and adamant belief in his vision. This, along with the profound ideas he continually expresses, makes this film inspiring and energetic; something that can give you a nudge in the right direction. Plus, it shows “how it really happened”, which will be relatable to all ambitious garage-based startup founders, who also struggle with their creativity being misunderstood by profit-seeking investors. Jobs is a pleasant and useful little film on the level of the “TVlike” Hitchcock, but of course it’s not as good as The Social Network, which is more refined in its screenplay and direction. Ashton Kutcher’s good. The fourth star in my rating is purely personal – I understood his every decision, urge and move, and even the glass table in his office was similar to mine. :-)

A case of cinematic megalomania that is not self-serving and over the top, but is the very essence of the target concept, the blood in the heart of the film. A simple storytelling template, perfect visual effects and super-cool action scenes (Hong Kong Harbor rules), redesigned visuals of mecha-robots and sea monsters. Astonishment over the epic power of the opponents (the Japanese will piss their pants). Plus Guillermo del Toro-like enthusiasm for slime, skin parasites and Ron Perlman. The characters and their interaction, however, are not too impressive and the dinosaur idea is very contrived. That’s a pity. The 3D is better than usual (but still only converted from 2D in post-production). I wonder whether it’s a coincidence that the mad scientist looks exactly like J.J. Abrams.

A Hijacking is authentic, sober and well played. But it lacks more dramatic moments, and some scenes slow it down unnecessarily, while others that are needed to complete the story context are missing. We could learn more about the cook’s family and, most importantly, the CEO was supposed to discuss the ransom amount with shareholders when they were so proactive that they wanted to replace him due to lengthy negotiations. Let’s see what Paul Greengrass can think up with Tom Hanks on board.

Don’t expect an adventurous eye-candy epic like John Woo’s Red Cliff. Here the characters speak cryptically about political contexts that the ordinary viewer cannot understand. The film leaps through historical periods, exchanging characters around the central couple, and relating to anyone’s drama or understanding the meaning of their journey is for invited guests only (among whom I am not). It can’t be compared to Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, where we had three characters, a subtle depiction of their relationships, a slow, poetic narrative, and the irresistible, exotic magic of the Far East. The Grandmaster is completely different. But as always with Kar-wai Wong, it has excellent music (I appreciated the variation on Ennio Morricone’s motif from Once Upon a Time in America at the end) and decent fight scenes.