Reviews

The Nine Lives is a memorable movie. The powerful images it presents will keep circulating in your mind for some time. However, if I try to dig deeper into the imagery, I find very little what I could call 'profound'. The lives and situations that the film presents are just too mundane.

Garcia tells us 9 short stories of ordinary people and he tells it with style. The camera work is stunning and effective at the same time - I read about it before I saw the film - I was afraid it would be a gimmick, but I was really impressed. The acting is probably the most important part of the film. It's what carries the film and makes it so memorable.

However the situations themselves, while emotionally charged through the top notch acting and the direction, are just banal. People not getting over old relationships for years, people disagreeing, people living their lives. Some may enjoy watch a sketch of ordinary lives of ordinary people. For me it was simply not interesting enough. I am already living an ordinary life and I don't need to go to the movies to watch people disagreeing and people crying over their ex-es.

I really wanted to like this film. It deals with a topic of great importance and generally propagates ideas that I agree with - like the dangers of corporate behavior, the threat to biodiversity that GM products pose and the absurdity of patenting life.

So what's the problem? Let me sum it up:

• most of the movie is comprised from old footage cuts accompanied by a rather dull commentary. Not very captivating.

• the commentary is badly written. It's repetitive and often fails to make a point. For instance, it cites three methods for genetic modification of a cell. Dramatic music, the 'expert' says that the procedure is very invasive to the cell and that it mimics the behavior of a virus and... nothing more. I wanted to know what problems can arise from the treatment but there was no explanation. Is it really surprising that overwriting the DNA is 'invasive' to a cell? Yet, this treacherous 'invasivness' is mentioned several times through the film (with no additional information).

• important information is left out. For example, the movie mentions the Supreme Court's decision on the Monsanto vs. Schmeisser trial but fails to mention the Court's reasoning that sheds a different light on the severity of the ruling. On top of it the court denied any compensation to Monsanto. This clearly didn't fit the film's agenda.

• the choice of the talking heads is poor. When compared to the respectable lineup that producers of other documentaries were able to accumulate (e.g. The Corporation, The Power of Nightmares) I can only assume the creators of The Future of Food just didn't make their homework. Where are (ex)employees of the bioengineering companies, politicians that took part in creating the regulations for GM and where are the representatives of the regulatory government bodies?

Would you like some western?

Well, let's take some wild west small town sceneries, a bad guy with his gang, a greedy businessman looking only for his own goals, a defenceless beauty, an unnamed invincible hero with mysterious past and a tough but good-hearted rogue buddy. Mix it with a revenge motive, add a dramatic stand-off in the end and that should do it.

I almost heard you saying "What a crap!". There were times when I thought the same about westerns full of cliches and a thin plot. But it has all changed when I saw Once Upon a Time In the Wild West. Sergio Leone appereantly decided to put all western cliches into one movie in such a way that it makes sense. And it makes more than that. This movie leaves one hell of an impression!

Leone doesn't narrate. He exerts a slow pace motion picture and lets you think about all the implications and explanations of what is being showed. From every single motive and scene he makes a special encounter for the viewer. Instead of words he lets the actor's faces and the musical score to tell the story. He gives additional dimensions to the characters - suddenly you feel sorry for the businessman, respect to the bad guy and understanding for the beauty. You catch yourself looking two minutes into a man's face without being bored or annoyed. And you don't want this movie to end.

It's not just a boring art film for weirdos. In fact, I know a lot of guys who like only action packed block-busters and still were amazed by this movie. It's the essence of it - somehow all the things needed for a good film crossed in one point. Everything fitts in its place. The music by Morricone has already become legendary and the few harmonica tones have become an expression so often cited in other movies. Henry Fonda looks like he should have only played bad guys from the beginning of his career, Bronson is simple and accurate as the revenge itself and Claudia Cardinale shows how a struggle-to-survive look like with a sense of virtuosity.

Leone shows respect to the viewer - he doesn't think the viewer is dumb. He lets the story to unravel in an intricate, almost a detective-story like way. He will let you wonder what drives the characters to their actions and he explains some events only after a considerable time in a stylish Leone(TM)way. I firstly saw this movie as a child and I didn't understand everything that happened there but still I was thrilled and charmed. I always get annoyed by the exaggerated pause when the moderator says "And the academy award goes to..." But here Leone lets you enjoy the thrill. The final stand-off scene lasts 8 minutes - it merely consists of two man watching each other, impressive music and a final shot. And it tastes like enjoying a glass of good wine for a wonderfully extended moment instead of dipping it in all at once. Like, in fact, all the rest of this movie.

Go see it - no matter if you have seen it before or not.

A small italian town in the early 40's. Renato - a sensitive teenager who is eager to be accepted amongst the adults - falls in love with Malena - the local beauty. Malena seems to be the center of all townsfolk's attention. She is an every man's dream, but also the object of hate of all the women who envy her for her beauty. Renato keeps following her and he begins to realize how much pain she takes because of her appearance.

That seems like a nice basis for a story about the human relationship, life in an italian town during the war and about the problematic maturing of a teenager. But there is the main problem of the film - it simply doesnt get any farther. The characters are too flat - they do not develop throughout the film (except the fact, that Renato starts to bear the Malena's suffering in the beginning of the movie). The 'evil' crowd just gets meaner, the 'suffering' Malena just takes more portions of pain and the 'sensitive' Renato just gets more moved by Malena's fate.

It surely is an interesting point to start with but the authors will beat it into your head for two hours instead. As the film advanced, I was just wondering what more cruelties did the writers prepare for the poor girl and how far will they let her fall untill she finally reaches the bottom - whatever it will mean to her. The monotony of the characters is also the reason why I couldn't hang on empathising with them although they were described sou beautifully in the beginning. The cast is a problematic topic for this film. Monica Belucci did a fine job presenting Malena - she managed to give a lot of depth to a character which is rather flat in the script. Through the way she moved and talked you could really sense her essence. She is pulling the movie very much from the misery. Unfortunately the other actors were not so successful with this almost impossible task. You could describe Giussepe Sulfaro's expression throughout the film as 'caring face number 7' and the males surrounding Malena are crippled into slobbering hornies just like the women into jealous and cruel vixen.

This movie will quickly describe the scene and then it will try to squeeze out the last drop of compassion from you. If you like this kind of entertainment then it is a good choice for you. You might also like to see some nice acting performance by Monica Belucci. Otherwise don't bother yourself with this movie.

Three middle-aged go for a vacation into the mountains with their children. How will they cope with their youngsters every-day needs without their wives? It seems like a many times told story but the way Polednakova approaches to the subject is simply charming. It truly is one of the most original sit-coms I've ever seen. Every character has got all the ingredients of a common man you meet on the street. They are not just one-dimensional comic figures (as it happens in most of the sit-coms). Polednakova will introduce every one of them in an inobtrusive way through many hilarious scenes. And you will love them with all their good and bad sides. Also the actor's performance is wonderful - it seems like they are not acting - they are living it through. Especially Julius Satinsky is cute.

The film was awarded as the best Czech comedy ever made. That award is rather contradictional since the comedy is the Czech top genre - but it surely is one of the best. It just doesnt have a blind spot - there is always something funny happening there. And the humor is built on the swift dialogues and original situations rather than on various odiousnesses which so often replace the humor in the modern movies. I highly recommend this movie to everyone who likes the situation comedies!