DaViD´82

Summer 1996. I’m a teenager and I want to go see an honest to goodness action movie. Dad’s paying, I’m choosing. Eraser with Arnie is playing at the Lucerna (and I know that my dear parent would rather go to that). There’s something by some guy called Bay playing at the Světozor, but it’s with Connery and Cage. Hmm, what’s the better investment? If I’d known back then that “some guy called Bay" was the very same Bay who made Bad Boys, I wouldn’t have hesitated a moment. But then I was in two minds. Very much so. In the end I decide on The Rock. It was longer. You get almost 140 minutes of action for the same money. Neither of us regrets the choice to this day. About six months later I nearly killed my dad when he rented this complete load of codswallop that takes itself far too seriously on VHS against my specific instructions not to do so. Back then the grapevine was saying that it wasn’t even worth the 40 crowns rental fee. And they were right. The day after we had to rent The Rock to get rid of the foul aftertaste, there was nothing else we could do. Nothing.

A cold Hollywood calculation “for one week" without any other ambitions than earning money fast and being forgotten even faster? Unarguably. On the other hand, it could have made good viewing. Yes, Caruso evidently likes Hitch, probably saw Space Odyssey and just loves movies like Enemy of the State. Which shows that he has taste, but says nothing about his talents. The beginning isn’t at all bad, but Caruso’s sprint runs out of breath half way through already. And during the true American finish, Eagle Eye commits harakiri at a moment when the end isn’t yet in sight. Shia is excellent as always, even though he was playing exactly the same role for about the seventh time over. But there are a few moments where I gets going (in the first half), so for a very forgettable, almost solid routine movie it’s just enough. By a very narrow hair’s breadth.

“The Liar" depends mainly on the performance of Thalia theatre award winner Vondráček in the role of Lelio and a set rich in scenery and costumes. The filmmakers captured the atmosphere of Venice surprisingly well - both those “wearing a mask" for the tourists, and those ordinary people hidden down some back lane. Lots of director’s ideas that brighten up the movie - especially the tourists went well. But despite updating the story to present day, these are still typical members of the comedia dell’arte. It’s full of confusion, mistakes, love and situation comedy. Which wouldn’t matter if it were funny - which it is, but only when Vondráček is on set. When he is watching his servant’s attempts to find love, then it’s almost unbearable. It needed to show a bit of courage and to break the rules of the aforementioned genre and get rid of this typical character. He is clearly superfluous in this play and in the end his story sort of trails off. Proof that even the very best production design and one actor can’t perform miracles at the drop of a hat.

The first twenty minutes, Watson is waiting for Godot, walking backward and forward. With the arrival of Godot (and a very stylish entrance, I must say) everything returns to the same well-intended, lightened-hearted rut. But, like in the preceding episode, I rate Sherlock most at the moments when he tries to solve unsolvable cases. And certainly not if he tries to unravel a network of conspiracy in London’s underworld. On the other hand, he is so pleasantly eccentric that he’s great to watch. So: “Do svidaniya at Baskerville, Comrade Holmes!"

Absolutely the best episode of the first two series. But, unfortunately for me, it is about the fight between Holmes and his nemesis. And I don’t like this part even in book form. I like Sherlock when he’s solving cases. And not when he marches around in a hero’s pose during duels with the origin of everything evil, Professor Moriarty (he is visually cast incredibly true to the original illustrations by Paget). The first time I saw it, I didn’t really like the light-weight mood, which was a little too much in places - it was different in past episodes. But, as I wrote, this is the best episode. If only for the obscure fight at the end. Far better than any King Kong vs. Godzilla.

This could have been an excellent episode, if it weren’t for the drawn-out passage about the robbery. It only gets interesting toward the end of it in the study. But watching the preceding almost quarter of an hour of the main duo’s escapades either in the yard or in the greenhouse is more irritating than entertaining. On the other hand, it’s nice that the creators went their own way, while still remaining faithful to the book it’s based on.

An ingeniously designed minimalist set that made full use of the advantages of a small stage and close quarters with the audience. Great actors, perfect, poignant dialogs and very topic. All this in a play that shifts seamlessly from joy with a comic tone through sobering up to almost psychological drama at the end. In other words, the same as many a relationship. A welcome surprise from South Bohemia. P.S.: Seen live; it’s true that TV doesn’t do the production justice.

Who would have ever guessed that the Russian-speaking dude from Moscow would make such a convincing Sherlock Holmes? And the same applies to Watson, too. And together they hit it off like a house on fire. Just a shame that this renowned series begins with an ordinary, while certainly good, episode. It’s as if we aren’t meant be interested so much in the case, but in those two, the case taking back seat. And that’s bad, however legendary the central duo is. It’s partially because the first half is an adaptation of the beginning of “A Study in Scarlet" while the second part is the “Speckled Band" already. In the interiors this has the perfect feeling of good old England, but the exteriors are less convincing. But trying to pass off dachas as English stately homes strikes me a little stupid. But the background music is outstanding.

Marchal once again puts his experience in the police force to use and creates a world full of assholes and even bigger assholes through one filter after another. Auteuil proves again and again why he is the best actor in continental Europe. Bruno Coulais managed to deliver a composition of a lifetime, and the screenplay is not nearly as run-of-the-mill as it may initially seem. And if you can find a more sensual femme fatale than Olivia Bonamy in France today, then I’d really like to meet her. But this all pales in comparison with one aspect. The atmosphere. It engrosses you right from the opening title sequence of the bus “hijacking". That scene is literally everything a viewer (like me) could ask from this kind of movie. And the best part? That it didn’t end there, but continued like that for the rest of the movie, even though the pace was a bit slow in places (although this time it kind of worked for me). If Marchal’s 36th Precinct revived the classic French crime movie and brought it to the threshold of the 21st century, then The Last Deadly Mission gives us hope that it wasn’t just a shot in the dark.

Perhaps even fewer good westerns have been made over the past ten years than there are directors of Leone’s caliber walking the Earth. Apart from The Proposition, nothing springs to mind in the new millennium. Until now with 3:10 to Yuma. It’s kind of sad, really, because it is nothing more than “just" a good western. Nothing more, nothing less. Which isn’t to say I didn’t thoroughly enjoy those two dusty hours. I did, even though I’m someone who could’ve done without suffering the last five minutes. I consider the musical theme you can hear in the main menu and during the finale to be the biggest positive of the movie. I listened to it like fifty times already and will listen to it many times more. It makes me want to reconsider the one missing sheriff’s star in my rating. ♫ OST score: 4/5