Change Your Image
monastiraki
Reviews
Oppenheimer (2023)
Only a good film, not the definitive film about the subject
It is very long, unnecessarily. There are too many irrelevant scenes, too many time jumps that don't help to the development of the film. I'm interested in the subject, and that helped me not to fall asleep, but it could be explained all that in half of the time.
And, in all that time, it seems that the development of the bomb was an easy job. You can watch "Shadow makers" to see this in detail. It's a better film, from my point of view.
I will not explain much more, but at the end, like in many American films, the developer of a weapon that could be considered by itself a war crime, it's not prosecuted by a government who wished use this weapon to dominate the world, but by a man who hated him for personal reasons. Remember, the system works! (repeat it, if you need it).
How different would it have been, if it was the nazis, or the soviets, the ones depicted in the film! (a man trapped in an evil system...)
The Trial of the Chicago 7 (2020)
Interesting film that ends being just propaganda
OK, the film is well acted, the development and timing right, but...
...a film that reviews historical faits must be accurate. But this one presents the facts acceptable for everyone, including conservative-minded people, and forces the viewer to be on the side of the accused.
Goods and villains, the problem is not the system but a mad judge. This one also makes bind and muzzle the black man indicted. After that, the policemen ask him if he could breathe (black lives mattered int that time more than today?). And, of course, at the end we know that this judge was sanctioned. Remember, THE SYSTEM WORKS.
How can a radical hippy be nice to the eyes of the conservative white spectators? Showing the demonstrations withe people raising a US flag, this hippy one knowing the bible better than the rest of the people on the court, and making the lead roles remembering the fallen soldiers of the USA, and not the vietnamese ones, and, of course, not condemning the war, every war, like it would probably be defended by anti-Vietnam war demonstrators.
Prishelets (2018)
It's not a good movie, but...
...I'm almost sure that some of the people who gave a low rate to this film, consider that "The martian" is a good movie, very "realistic". And it's not a good movie and even less, realistic.
And, to go on comparing the two films, at first I thought it would be a russian copy of that one, for russian audiences. Many countries start to make american style films with local actors to make them more attractive and close to the viewers, specially teenagers. I think this is a mistake, because you can add your own ingredients to a film at keep it interesting. But I guess that the target for this films is an american food consumer.
No, this is not a copy of "The martian". It's a mix between this and "The Truman Show", a little bit critic with the media and the politicians. The story of the man trapped in Mars is not important for anyone. But in "The martian" the only important thing are the thoughts of the main character, who spends apparently all day recording videos like a youtuber. Of course, he had nothing more to do, like trying to survive. At least, the russian seems to me a more probable scenario than the other one.
But it's not a good film, unfortunately.
Terra de canons (1999)
Story of "maquis" in the postwar Spain
This film develops between the spanish civil war and the first years of the Franco regime. Some of the pro-republic fighters keep trying to combat the dictatorship in the mountains and also in the city. The police, the well-known "guardia civil" had the responsability to pursue (and kill, if it was "necessary") this maquis.
In the film, the main roles are a young landowner, leftist, his wife, who ignores what's doing her husband at night, and an ancient militian who has the mission to kill Franco.
Victòria! 2: La disbauxa del 17 (1983)
The second part of a trilogy
Well, it's not a trilogy, but very long film cut in three parts.
I wrote the critic in the first part section. But essentially I consider this film too confusing, because there are meny characters, it doesn't explain anything useful and it is required to have a knowledege of this film era.
Victòria! La gran aventura d'un poble (1983)
Too long and difficult to watch
Even the history of this years (it's situated in 1917) is very interesting in any country, but also in Spain, the film is very irregular and there are a lot of characters. Sometimes is difficult to know who is the people who appears or what is it happening.
I guess that for someone not knowing the history of Spain this will be almost impossible to understand.
Palabras de amor (1968)
If you like the music of Joan Manuel Serrat, only
The film is not a great film. It's useful to see images of Barcelona in the sixties. But the script is poor, there are some unexplained things and the acting is not good.
But you can hear Joan Manuel Serrat, playing his guitar and singing some of his songs. I have to say that some of them are in catalan, not much accepted in the time of the dictatorship of Franco, based on a excluding spanish, as if it were the only language in Spain.
Stalag 17 (1953)
That's not a good film
I was convinced, after seeing the film and before reading the reviews, that it would have a good rate. It seems that a lot of people only needs to read the director's name to qualify a film.
I read the arguments of some of this people, but I could not find any valid reason for this high qualification.
It is not representative at all of a POW camp, even I know the camps for allied prisoners were very different from the eastern ones. Anyone can believe that the prisoners could disguise like Hitler and the guards would laugh about it?
The comedy level is that of a Jerry Lewis film. Maybe funny if you were born in 1928, but not now.
Fetih 1453 (2012)
Is it realistic? No. But what about other films so well rated here?
Would you understand that someone rates "Saving private Ryan" with a 1, because it depicts germans like evils and morons?
This film has many problems, but it's not more manichaeistic than western (american) films about christians, WWII or Vietnam's war.
And it's worth to see it at least because it's a different subject, from another point of view.
Arctic (2018)
Only a survival film
Even I find some unrealistic details, like a man walking in the snow easily, without sinking, or having snow blindness, after a long time surrounded by snow and ice, the film is much more believable than many of this type.
A man struggle for survive after a crash accident in a frozen landscape. We don't know who's that man, where he is, why he was flying alone in that place, why his plane crashed, why nobody seems to look for him... that doesn't matter. He only tries to survive and that's the story of the film.
And we don't have to lose time with familiar flashbacks or with scenes showing his voyage to madness.
Of course, in that situation any of us will think about our lives, miss our beloved ones, maybe we would talk to a volley ball, but a survival film can be too long if the director takes time of the film to make us empathize with the character. He is in a very difficult situation and wants to survive; I don't need any other thing to empathize with him.
In that way, it's similar to "All is lost" or "Touching the void".
And, for me, much better than "Stowaway", because the moral problems that the crew of a spaceship have with a concrete decision don't make me forget the absurdity of the situation.