Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
Or go to my moronic blog. Just Google "Vjetropev" and you'll find it.
Za one koji traze YU/srpske filmove sa recenzijama na srpskom, evo ove liste.
Au revoir. Be going soon. Rvmeeejadrkcmen.
I have decided not to include any politicians because everyone already knows that they always speak the truth.
This list will be gradually expanded, because there are so many truth-tellers out there. If you can offer me any suggestions, please do.
The purpose of this list is to correct the often lousy and inaccurate appraisals of individual episodes by some fanatical but deluded MST3K fans. People who set up MST fan-sites get a lot of it wrong, so I figured it's time to set the record straight and give you a much better idea of which episodes to seek out and which to avoid or leave for later. The unusual nature of the show means that the quality sometimes varies drastically from episode to episode.
There are a handful of MST3K fan sites with extensive and detailed info about all the episodes, including ratings. While their effort is duly noted and appreciated, most of the rabid MST3K fans tend to favour the more childish type of riffing, which is more to be found during the Joel era, i.e. the earlier seasons. Pop-culture references are all they're interested in, sending them into fits of hysteria, and they even place great importance on the skits. But this is just a general rule.
I prefer the more dry, sarcastic approach found prevalently in the later seasons with Mike, rather than the more "tee-hee-hee" type of humour from the Joel era. So if your favourite episode is the badly-riffed "Eegah", you might as well skip this list altogether - or reverse the order, i.e. make the worst-rated episode here the one that should interest you most.
There are two ratings per entry:
RIFFING - reflects the quality of the gags/comments; anything above a 2/5 is a successfully riffed episode
MOVIE - rates the so-bad-it's-good fun factor the movie provides on its own i.e. this grade does not only reflect the level of badness or incompetence of the movie's makers but whether the film itself is colourful/fun or monotonous/bland
Skits i.e. "host segments" do not factor in at all, nor do I mention them in my comments. While some of them are quite good, they are not the reason I watch the show.
Movie shorts also don't affect the ratings, and are very rarely mentioned. They would require a separate list.
I've chosen to list the shows in the (approximate) order of the RIFFING quality, but the MOVIE rating is also fairly important in the overall enjoyment of each episode.
Considering what drivel most TV audiences go for, it was nothing short of miraculous that MST3K went on for 10 seasons. I am amazed they weren't cancelled after just a dozen episodes, given that the show is intelligent and contains a number of obscure references none of which the average MTV airhead will be able to figure out.
The surprising longevity of the show also means that I simply haven't had the time to watch all of the episodes yet. More will be added gradually. Listed are the ones I have seen so far, i.e. at the moment 130/177.
Included are the Comedy Central and Sci-Fi eras, plus the feature film.
Prvo da napomenem da ja nisam sad bas neki veliki obozavaoc domace kinematografije, stoga cete od mene dobiti iskrenija misljenja tj. u neku ruku "objektivnije" komentare nego od raznih zaludjenika koji uzdizu velik broj domacih filmova u cesto nezasluzena nebesa, kao da YU i srpski film mogu da se takmice sa SAD, Francuskom ili Britanijom odnosno sa svetskim vrhom. (Mada smatram da na polju glume Srbija ne zaostaje iza najboljih, barem sto se tice starije garde.) Neki od tih provincijalaca gledaju iskljucivo domace filmove pa nisu ni svesni cega sve ima na internacionalnom nivou.
Za stvaranje filmova je realno potrebna ogromna lova, a na Balkanu toga vrlo retko ima na raspologanju. Filmove je tesko finansirati na Zapadu, a kamoli kod nas. Kod nas je, primera radi, dug niz godina bio standard da se skoro nikada ne snimaju scene vise od jednom zbog skupoce filmskog materijala - sto naravno drasticno koci i rezisera i glumce u teznji ka savrsenstvu (kada takve teznje uopste ima). Vec taj podatak u vecoj meri objasnjava zasto domaci filmovi nisu na visokom nivou cesto - a da ne govorimo o tome da je decenijama Partija uglavnom trazila samo propagandne, anti-cetnicke, pro-komunjarske filmove odnosno sam kvalitet cesto nije bio na vrhu prioriteta mnogih rezisera vec samo da shire neku debilnu politicku ideologiju zarad love, karijere i napretka u Partiji.
Jos jedan veliki problem domaceg filma - pogotovo u poslednjih par godina - je naravno rastuci nepotizam. Tesko je ocekivati jaku kinematografiju kada reziseri i producenti (koji su cesto i sami izgradili svoje karijere preko rodbinske veze) angazuju skoro iskljucivo decu prijatelja, njihovu i svoju rodbinu, i/ili neku (mahom netalentovanu) decu politickih elitista. Pravim audicijama se retko ko bavi vise; ali ko ne trazi mlade talente nece ih mozda ni naci. Odnosno ako trazis perspektivne mlade pisce i glumce iskljucivo medju decom svojih kolega, ti onda sebi - a ujedno i srpskom filmu - ogranicavas potencijal drasticno, jer sa osrednjom ili cak totalno netalentovanom decom nekih tamo kosarkasa, partijaca, scenarista i glumaca ne mozes da ocekujes stvaranje filmskih klasika. Pogotovo ne kod komedija koje zahtevaju pravi talenat a ne banalno kreveljenje neukih laika.
Ali je vise nego ocigledno da trenutno u Srbiji deca iz naroda (tj. bez rodjaka u svetu filma) slabo koga zanimaju u filmskoj eliti. Ko zna koliko glumackih i scenaristickih talenata sedi neiskorisceno po citavoj zemlji jer etablirana garda smatra da su samo njihova deca predodredjena za film, tj. da su genetski nasledila sav njihov talent - sto je naravno budalastina. S jedne strane laprdaju u intervjuima do besvesti pretenciozno kako je njima (tj. rediteljima i glumcima) glavni cilj stvaranje umetnosti - a ovamo gledaju uvek da uguraju neke svoje pajtose i rodbinu u glavne uloge i kao pisce sto znaci da ih NE zanima umetnost, bar ne kao primarni cilj u toku stvaranja filmova.
Cast izuzetcima, naravno, jer su se neki glumci ciji su roditelji iz tog miljea stvarno pokazali, ali to je manjina. Niti ja sugerisem da je nepotisticki podmladak u Srbiji neka razmazena i obesna bagra kao u Holivudu, jer kod nas glumci uglavnom zaradjuju skromno, znaci mnogi od njih stvarno idu u taj biznis jer to vole a ne da se obogate.
To sto gotovo nikome u Srbiji vise ni ne smeta sto je nepotizam toliko zavladao medijskim profesijama (guglirajte nepotizam u srpskom filmu, necete nista naci iako je sve-prisutan) govori koliko se nas narod navikao na korupciju i dekadenciju kao NORMALAN nacin zivota. A nepotizam jeste korupcija.
Kad se sve ovo uzme u obzir, ne moze i ne sme da cudi da nema mnogo odlicnih domacih filmova, jer je u tako koruptnoj (anti-)stvaralackoj atmosferi pa jos bez mnogo love tesko proizvesti kvalitet.
S druge strane, YU filmovi (i dobri i losi) imaju neku specificnu atmosferu koja se ne moze naci kod stranih filmova. Ja ne mogu ni da zamislim kako oni deluju stranim, a pogotovo zapadnim gledaocima; verovatno bizarno i zbunjujuce. Bez obzira na sve prepreke, i finansijske i stvaralacke prirode, Jugoslavija je uspela da proizvede izvestan broj dobrih filmova - a za to su uglavnom zasluzni odlicni YU glumci, a manje scenaristi koji se ne mogu pohvaliti velikim ucinkom; malo njih se istaklo na nekom visem nivou. Da je pisanje bilo na nivou glume, Jugoslavija bi imala daleko bolju filmografiju.
Filmovi su rangirani po kvalitetu, od najboljih.
OCENE: Domaci korisnici, kao i mnogi strani, imaju tendenciju da daju maksimalne ocene filmovima koji im se svidjaju. Ali ja 10/10 ne dajem za dobre filmove vec za genijalne filmove. To i objasnjava delom zasto toliko domacih filmova ima nesrazmerno visoke proseke od npr. americkih filmova na ovom sajtu. Ja ocenjujem drugacije od vecine korisnika sa Balkana:
10 - skoro savrsen film ili savrseno zabavan 9 - super 8 - odlican 7 - veoma dobar 6 - dobar 5 - OK, nije los 4 - mediokritet, gledljiv, ali mnogo felenki 3 - los film 2 - uzasan film 1 - zna se vec
Inace, evo vam mali savet kako da dodjete do objektivnijih ocena za domace filmove, ali i filmove uopste, na ovom sajtu. Kada ste na strani nekog filma, idite na statistiku odnosno demografsku podelu glasaca, pa vidite koji je prosek dat od "top 1000 voters". Ta ocena je bliza objektivnoj prosecnoj oceni nego kada racunamo sve glasove, jer ti ljudi su gledali daleko vise filmova te imaju jace kriterijume.
Mislim da je sramota sto velika vecina domacih filmova nemaju plakate (tj. slike) ubacene na ovaj sajt, i da je prilicno jadno sto su biografije domacih glumaca tako oskudne a ponekad i nepostojece. Uopste receno, na internetu ne mozes doci do nekih bitnijih i/ili detaljnijih podataka ni o domacim filmovima ni o glumcima. Eto koliko Srbi cene svoju kulturu. Vole da masu zastavama i da vicu "SRBIJA!" ali kada treba nesto konkretno da urade za svoju zemlju (ili u vezi nje) nema ih ni od korova.
Sto se tice "plot summaries" domacih filmova na IMDb, mahom su lose napisani, odnosno na losem engleskom sa puno gramatickih gresaka i sa konfuznim, jadno prevedenim frazama. Pa ne moze sa Google Translate da se odradi dobar tekst. Dobrovoljno se javljam da ih ispravljam.
If I were to make a list of all the celebs that are liberal/left-wing/Marxist, it would be a mission of a lifetime, something I haven't got time for. The IMDb computers would probably all explode, in a spectacular chain reaction, for lack of capacity to handle so much data.
So I thought it'd be much easier to point towards those celebs that aren't liberal.
The term "non-liberal" means just that, people who aren't liberal. This does not mean that all the people listed here are right-wing or share the same views, or that they're all hardcore anti-Leftists or anything like that. After all, the Right wing of the political spectrum is far more varied than the mostly uniform and one-dimensional Left. Besides which, there is a certain thing call "Center". Quite a few centrists are listed.
This list is by no means intended to serve as a mindless glorification of the individuals on it. There are people here whose views by-and-large do not correspond with mine.
Nevertheless, even though celebrity glorification is a hobby that lacks any merit and isn't something I ever encourage, one has to give the individuals on this list at least some credit, especially since certain actors and directors here have been victims of "Red-Listing". It takes courage to go against the grain in Hollywood - especially politically.
"Red-Listing", i.e. blackballing, involves making life difficult for those who do not subscribe to the Left's dogmatic and fierce political correctness; it includes career-hindering and such.
The names are listed in no particular order.
Think again. This list doesn't include any such estrogen-starved ladies. It's real women only.
Keep in mind that I didn't choose these photos. Obviously, some of the pictures of the older generations of actresses do not show them when they were young i.e. at their best. (Why anyone would place a photo of Anne Bancroft aged 98 on her page - beats me!)
The criteria used is primarily the face, and then charisma and sex appeal.
For a complete listing and descriptions of all the women from the first 23 seasons of "The Real World":
Not listed in any particular order.
There has been an ongoing, persistent and dirty propaganda campaign by all left-wing elements to discredit capitalism (hence democracy and freedom) in every way imaginable. Nit-picking through its flaws (because capitalism isn't perfect) - plus making up blatant lies about it: these are the basic methods used.
Marxists realized that the only way to fight something that works in practice is to smear it in theory - or fantasy, in this case: on the big and small screen. Film and television offer the best platforms for disseminating nonsense and fallacies: you simply make a claim, without having to prove it. A perfect vehicle for anyone whose sole aim is to mislead. Western Marxists will NEVER be appeased until they help bring about the fall of Capitalism and democracy. They are on a mission. It's up to us viewers whether or not this decadent propagandist machine, fueled by sociopaths, quasi-intellectuals and other misanthropes, will eventually bring about this long-awaited negative change and instability - two things Marxists long for with all their hearts. Economic downfall comes right after moral disintegration and all-encompassing dumbing-down, two more elements Marxists work at ceaselessly. The goal? Destroy the Capitalist/democratic West from within, and then take over once there is economic chaos i.e. when there is a fertile ground for political extremism.
And then? Establish a hardcore dictatorship in which a selected elite of psychopaths will walk all over millions in order to expand their own wealth - under the guise of "creating a new man". Btw, this laughable notion of creating "a new man", i.e. this hopeless undertaking of making gigantic artificial evolutionary leaps, is pretty much what the Nazis had envisioned as well. Just one of many parallels between National-Socialism and Marxism, i.e. one of many similarities between the two extremes which Western left-wing propaganda prefers to keep quiet about - with good reason.
Just to avoid any misunderstandings, the list includes blatant propaganda films disguised as "objective" documentaries i.e. fiction pieces, but it also includes "harmless" entertainment flicks that hadn't been made with the sole and expressed purpose of promoting Leftist ideology, but into which the filmmakers threw in more hidden i.e. less obvious messages and occasional jabs at the Right (and I don't mean the extreme Right).
What the vast majority of Western left-wing propaganda film-makers fail to realize is that even when they have some valid points to make (which is admittedly rare), they make it very difficult for any intelligent or sane viewer to take them seriously because they overload their films with excessive bias and utter nonsense. They use anti-logic, fact-twisting, misquoting, half-truths, manipulative editing, music as over-dramatization, and other simple propaganda tools that make their films the useless sources of information they are.
It's called overkill, and when you exaggerate too much you end up achieving very little. Too greedy. Most of the "documentaries" listed here are so heavily biased that they fail on almost every level (except in exposing the film-maker's ignorance and dishonest intentions), even when their criticism is valid (which, again, is rarely the case).
I welcome all suggestions and criticism. If you are a liberal and feel you must label me a "Fascist" just because I don't share your views, it's your choice. But keep in mind that I have omitted all movies whose primary focus is sending a clear anti-Nazi message, such as "Blood In The Face", even when they were made by Marxist directors. If you can convince me that a movie or TV series is here by mistake, I will remove it.
Any movies you find missing here you will quite likely find on my other propaganda list.
The order is VERY DELIBERATE, which means that the difference between the top 10 and the last 10 is substantial, i.e. the list starts off with 10-star movies and ends with 7-star comedies. I didn't rank them merely in terms of which made me laugh the most, but also how entertaining, interesting, unique or even visually excellent they are. But yeah, the laughs are the deciding factor, just not the only one.
These are movies that play around with reality, or the lack of it. Movies in which one or multiple characters might be hallucinating, in some kind of an induced state of delirium, and/or are unaware of the reality of their surroundings, i.e. that they are stuck in a different dimension, a different world, and usually are trying to figure out what that dimension or place is.
It is not a list of mystery movies. Obviously, the mystery factor is always there, but the puzzle to be solved isn't who murdered whom but what kind of a world does the character or the characters inhibit, and whether that what we see on the screen is real or not.
The it-was-all-just-a-dream end-twist films such as "Wizard of Oz" are not included. In such films reality is never questioned, and plays no role in the mind of the central character(s). There has to be an element of confusion regarding reality.
Lister in order of quality, with ratings.
Sesir profesora Koste Vujica (2012)
Not exactly "Kill Bill Vol. 3".
This movie was a bit of a surprise, considering it was directed by Sotra who had bored me so much with "Zona Zamfirova" and "Ivkova Slava" especially taking into consideration the fairly similar comedic and historical aspects of all three of these films, and that they were all filmed within a relatively close time-frame.
However, the very fine choice of actors (Bercek, Bikovic, Brstina, Cvijanovic, Cetkovic and several others), the phenomenal photography and scenography (never better in Serbia especially for a TV production), very nice music, an original premise, an interesting period in Serbia's history, fun dialog, and the general relaxed and cheerful nature of the film were combined with competence into something quite classy. It goes without saying that this makes "Sesir" a superior product to nearly all of those awful costume dramas, all that hollow chick-flick nonsense that's been coming out of Hollywood in recent decades, infested with nepotist zeros such as Emma Thompson or Keira Knightley. Serbia is neither known for having proper movie budgets nor for stylish productions, so the fact that Americans could produce so few movies that are anywhere nearly as good as this one speaks volumes about the rapid downfall of Tinseltown, at least in terms of quality. (Box-office-wise, Americans will always lead the way because they have the creation of mega-selling garbage down to a science by now.)
Obviously, "Sesir" isn't for movie-goers who consider Tarantino's films the height of artistic expression, or for those who consider his dialog to be semantic art. Nor is it for kids (and child-like young adults) who spend 5 hours a day on PlayStation. People who start fidgeting in their seats whenever 5 minutes pass without someone having their throat cut can also calmly and without hesitation delete this movie from their watch-lists. I don't want to sound like a snob, because I'm anything but, yet I have to warn all those who say "ej brate brate" in every sentence (the Serb equivalent to "yo bro" and "like, stuff") that they will be terribly bored with this film. Brain-damaged football fans and blood-thirsty city hillbillies (an exponentially growing demographic in Belgrade) will struggle to get anything useful or entertaining out of these characters and from the things they say. There are no scenes here whatsoever of characters smashing each other's brains in front of river discos while shouting obscenities and waving with their guns into the air ("j***m te u tri lepe p***e materina" and the like).
I am not referring to the various quotes from Schiller, Goethe etc, of which there are many here. I am referring to the nostalgic, not overly sentimental, and somewhat (suitably) romanticized depiction of a bygone era, one that existed long before Paris Hilton pleasured her first celebrity penis. How times have changed THAT message could be seen as the most relevant by-product of this movie, amongst all the other themes and points. "Sesir" is about intellectuals, the leading minds from Serbia's late 19th/early 20th century period. The professors are just as interesting though, if not more so; all of them. Fortunately, the decision was made to tell these stories as humorous anecdotes, not as a soppy costume chick-flick drama, as Americans would have done it. I could just see the likes of Sean Penn and Tom Cruise being miscast to play the professors, while the younger crop of even dumber, even less talented Tinseltown nitwits fill the roles of the students. Can American film-makers be trusted with ANY good story anymore?
Some Serbian high school kids will watch this with bewilderment, because they will be shocked that there actually existed an age in which (some) professors and their students had a very friendly or at least cordial relationship, unlike these days when it's hard to measure whether the teachers hate the students more than that students hate the teachers. Of course this is a somewhat romanticized depiction; after all this is a movie not a documentary, but it is based on some documented facts. Those kids with the tiniest vocabularies (from the utterly useless "brate brate" generation) might nervously snicker at this film, trying to poke fun at its expense in their typical inferiority-complex, insecure way. Later on, these kids will wave their Serbian flags at weddings and football matches, shouting "Serbia!", because in this country quasi-patriotism is extremely popular and "proof" of one's moral high ground.
On the other hand, I don't want to give the impression that "Sesir" is something only for the older viewers. Young viewers, at least those that aren't complete morons, will find a lot to identify with despite some obvious differences between the old and the new mentalities, because Kosta's students although very committed to self-advancement and education also display a large dose of playfulness and teenage exuberance. Besides, the voters' demographics on IMDb reveal that "Sesir" is much more liked among younger than older viewers although part of the explanation for this unusual fact is that young viewers tend to give much higher marks than older viewers, i.e. younger movie-goers are less critical i.e. many lack criteria.
"Sesir" isn't perfect, but it doesn't have any notable flaws. Perhaps the only criticism is that the female part of the cast is inferior, as usual (in Serbian movies/TV), but that's hardly relevant since it is the male characters that dominate this story. I do recommend the TV series more though, which I believe includes all of the scenes from the movie, because it is far more detailed hence more entertaining.
Al seems bored, and the script is silly.
Al Finney looks positively bored. He moves through the scenes like a bored man, knowing full well that this script isn't worth the effort. If there ever was an example of a good actor signing up just for the money and deciding that he'd replace effort with apathy, it's this.
I am frankly a little amazed that Michael Crichton wrote such a pedestrian script. There is a small measure of originality, sure, but the plot is full of logic-holes and unfolds more like a comic-book than a movie intended for adults expecting a little more than pulp fiction.
I was amused at the idea of female "perfection" being symbolized by wafer-thin fashion models with no boobs or asses. Evidently, these computers were programmed by pedophiles and gay designers.
I am still confused about the matter of police corruption: were the cops bought by Coburn or not? This is just one of several inconsistencies in a script that is muddled rather than concise.
Montevideo, Bog te video! (2012)
Very entertaining overall, but sometimes better scripts were needed.
I have already reviewed the first movie separately (in English, and in Serbian on my "YU/Serbian Movies" list), so I won't be touching on the same basic subjects I mention there. This comment will focus on the three seasons as separate entities, especially S2 which doesn't have its own movie.
Generally, there is quite a difference quality-wise between the segments directly related to the delegation (and the game of football) and the various sub-plots concerning non-football side-characters such as family, girlfriends and politics. This discrepancy is especially obvious in S2 which is hence wildly uneven. For this reason there are two different ratings per season.
SEASON 1: INTRO & PREPARATIONS. Football-related scenes: 7/10. Other stuff: 5/10.
While people who liked the movie were definitely pleased to have a TV series come out as well, I have to point out that most of the best material is in the movie anyway, and that S1 isn't as good as the feature film. The reason for this is mainly the non-football side-characters who get a lot more undeserved space. The romantic sub-plots, which were essentially the movie's weakest point, are expanded; the plot-devices utilized to artificially STRETCH Tirke's and Mosha's affairs are even more annoying, and quite frankly too far-fetched, even for a comedic TV show. Valeria's character which was so absurd and irritating in the movie now gets to annoy a lot more, and by the 3rd or 4th episode I had a strong urge to fast-forward every scene with her in it.
Considering that this is supposed to be somewhat of a family picture, a feel-good movie about a nostalgia-evoking by-gone era, I was very disappointed by that very cheap, sleazy, utterly unconvincing, unsuitable lesbian kiss between Valeria and Rosa. I do not doubt for a second that Dragojevic is the writer responsible for this ugly screw-up, given his tendency toward lewdness. Valeria slips Rosa a kiss and remember that Rosa is a totally naïve country girl from 1930 in an absurd manner at an absurd time, and yet Rosa reacts with a smile. I half-expected her to burst out into Katy Perry's "I Kissed a Girl". The writers/directors/producers should have known better than to inject their own porn-inspired personal obsessions into a story that is supposed to be about innocence.
SEASON 2: THE TRIP. Football-delegation-related scenes: 8/10. Other stuff: 3/10.
If the gap between the football plots and the non-football plots seems fairly obvious in Season 1, wait till you get to Season 2 when that difference in quality makes this series almost schizophrenic in the sense that one gets the feeling one is watching two different TV shows: on one hand a very entertaining sports-comedy TV series about a group of footballers traveling to a tournament, and on the other hand a fairly dull, stupid and even annoying soaper about their relatives and girlfriends, most of whom are burdened with a script that emphasizes their stupidity more than anything else. This other totally inferior half of the series even includes a needless, baffling sub-plot about a Russian terrorist that bored me senseless. Kiril has absolutely zip/zilch/nada to do with football, and is thrown in just so he can romance Tirke's awfully confused, somewhat dim girlfriend, and in order for the writers to throw in some politics.
The writers used commonplace, very cliché plot-devices which served to throw a wedge in the Tirke-Rosa relationship; over and over and over. The writers were unable to make the romance iffy in a natural way, so they forced the issue with lame shticks. If it wasn't one thing, it was another. But that I mean: if it wasn't one daft misunderstanding, it was another daft misunderstanding: wrong people receiving letters and telegrams, messages being misunderstood, communication problems, etc the usual TV nonsense, and it all gets old pretty quickly because it reminds me of cheap farce. By the time Tirke receives Karadzic's nonsensical telegram about "Rosa being lost", I had stopped caring whether Tirke marries this wishy-washy country bumpkin or not. To make things worse, the girl can't act that well. She is practically the only attractive female in S1 & S2 in a cast of disappointing-looking, mostly nepotist, third-rate actresses and that IS something but she is incapable of conveying emotions in such a way as to draw the viewer in. Certainly, she is as much a victim of her one-dimensional character as her lack of talent.
As I mentioned, the female cast is mostly sub-par, appearance-wise, with the exceptions of Rosa and Erzi. Especially that "American" with the un-American accent whose skirt every player starts chasing.
SEASON 3: MONTEVIDEO. Football-delegation-related scenes: 8/10. Belgrade scenes: 7/10.
The first 6-7 episodes of S3 are excellent, but then a lot of nonsense sinks the quality drastically.
The "how-are-things-back-home" scenes are almost entirely related to football itself and much better than in S2. The soppy romantic interludes in Montevideo are more easy-going and less relevant than in the previous seasons, so the romantic stuff/fluff isn't a burden for the viewer anymore.
Due to the nature of the location, S3 is also the most colourful one, and there is an even stronger emphasis on humour. The women are better-looking, though not stunners. Additionally, there is more of an authentic feel because of native Spanish-speaking actors, as opposed to Serbian actors playing foreigners. The one obvious exception to this is "Frenchman" Dragan Nikolic who is badly dubbed, but he is a minor character so this is only a small criticism.
Armand Assante's laughably over-the-top mumble-pose performance is a minus, as is the entire hostage-crisis segment which belongs more in a soaper or a cartoon. There is much needless exaggeration in the 2nd half of S3.
A interesting idea not carried out that well.
The first half-hour is interesting, but then the film starts gradually stagnating, repeating itself somewhat. It's as if the writer didn't know where to go with the plot after the Montenegrin bit. The scenes in Montenegro are good, but the Commie's return to the village of his birth doesn't lead to any particularly notable developments or amusing situations.
The latter section then leads us to the unnecessarily lengthy political speech by Stevo Zigon, who reprises his real-life speech/involvement in the 1968 student "protests" which were much more like a sham than real protests against a dictatorship. If the 1968 hippie protests in the West were an absolute circus (i.e. quite like a bad, cynical joke), they were even more nonsensical in Yugoslavia. If these "protesting" Belgrade students hadn't been left-wing extremists themselves, Tito would never have allowed them to last longer than an hour. Everyone involved would have been arrested before they could say "burek". It seems that the word "protest" gets a little abused and misunderstood now and again. The script misses an opportunity to openly mock these quasi-protests, which essentially amounted to nothing more than Marxists "protesting" against Marxists, i.e. it was more like inane ideological bickering between different interpretations of Marxism than an actual attempt at radical, real criticism. Here the director switches gear somewhat from comedy to drama. He didn't succeed in that.
It is commendable to show how easily a disgruntled misfit is drawn to Socialism. Like many other people, especially in the Balkans, Bata needs to find something or someone to blame for his problems and failings, so he picks capitalism to lump all of his frustrations onto, ignoring the fact that capitalism allows anyone to make money - provided they are willing to work and aren't blithering idiots. The have-nots very easily fall into this cunningly set Marxist trap, especially have-nots such as Bata, who are lazy and suffer from a case of class-envy. Nevertheless, the idea behind a movie is not enough.
Bata Stojkovic plays the role of the self-infatuated, self-righteous, deluded Marxist quite well, but it's a bit of a one-joke premise, because his fanaticism makes him a little too linear, not complex enough. His Communist babbling becomes less interesting with time, making it all seem a bit too much of a one-joke film that over-relies on that one shtick which it then milks. Seka Sabljic is amusing as Bata's no. 1 fan and easily-lead bimbo.
Montevideo, Bog te video! (2010)
A long-lost era before football became overrun by corruption, mobsters and rugby-like tackling.
This movie's theme (and period setting) is too interesting to not be successful. A really clueless amateur would have been needed to make a bad film with this solid budget (in Balkan terms) and this fun premise. Dragan Bjelogrlic isn't a particularly gifted director, but with the help of a solid script and a very decent acting crew, the result is fairly entertaining.
The first positive thing I'd point out is that this isn't yet another modern Serbian production in which the same, predictable, and generally not particularly good stable of actors dominate. In other words, Dragan himself isn't in it (not a bad actor, but hardly an acting great); the overrated Srdjan Todorovic only has a minor role, and he doesn't find the opportunity to clown around in it (as he usually does, and badly); Djuricko is even quite solid because he'd toned down his overacting as well; only Sergej Trifunovic gets more screen time than I'd prefer, even though his role is also fairly marginal. Sergej is highly overrated, unlikable, uncharismatic, and even though he is suitable to be cast in the role of an arrogant jerk, I believe many other domestic actors could have done the job better than him. It doesn't surprise that Mima Karadzic, Marko Nikolic and the guy playing the barber are among those who offer the best performances in this cast of mostly young actors. Although to be fair, the roles of the football players have been quite well cast, which I didn't expect. It seems that nepotism and other such forms of you-scratch-my-back-I'll-scratch-yours didn't dominate the casting process nearly as much as they usually do in Serbian TV or movie productions. Hence a much better film than one would normally expect.
It's also positive that female roles were also not necessarily allocated according to the increasingly domineering rules of it's-who-you-know-not-how-good-you-are. (No Katarina Radivojevic, just to mention one of many inferior nepotist Serb actresses.) On the other hand, the TV-series version of the movie does feature a lot of sub-par actresses many of whom obviously have family connections to thank for starting movie careers. I guess Bjelogrlic tried to save the best for the big screen.
The story unfolds well. The only criticism I have is the exaggerated and unrealistic love-square between the team's two star players, Rosa, and the sleazy artist wannabe. That whole commotion centered on the "love letters" didn't make much sense. Plus, the character of the femme-fatale night-club floozy is over-the-top, her behaviour being even more absurd in the TV series.
Period detail is kept as well as the budget allowed. The only minor criticism is of the lyrics of the song performed in the hipster night club; I believe they might be too racy for the 20s. I realize that this night-club represents the height of sleaze of that period and that such people were already pushing the boundaries of good taste, but the sexual nature of the song seems out-of-place i.e. out-of-time, especially since this song is then played again during the credits. I also doubt that regular waitresses of the period showed nearly as much cleavage as Tirke's love-interest Rosa does. She works in a regular café, not a night-club. Perhaps the writers, the costume department or the director got a little carried away, forgetting that this is set in Yugoslavia's post-WWI period.
There is a certain amount of political commentary, which may or may not be justified. Certainly, looking for the King to finance the trip to Uruguay automatically has to involve a degree of politics, and if the team's main defense player really was an outspoken Commie, then that's perfectly valid to mention as well. The important thing is that the script offers differing viewpoints on the dominant hot-potato issues of the day, and doesn't take sides. Personally, I would have kept the ideological subtext to a minimum, because this is a sports comedy, essentially.
Any movie that shows football as it used to be ("rich people watching poor people play" which is slightly exaggerated by has some ironic truth to it) and as it's supposed to be is welcome. While the match and practice scenes may be a tad inundated with over-skillfulness (which doesn't bother me, i.e. a legitimate cinematic exaggeration), they show a beautiful game that was a far cry from the injury-faking, the acting-out (fake emotions, players performing as in a Greek theater), the unnecessary brutal tackles that slow down the game, the lack of goals, all the tattooed morons with moronic haircuts i.e. all that stuff that pollutes modern football, making it so appealing to blood-thirsty plebs. The modern version of this once-great game has turned into a gladiator sport in which the outdated, easily-bent rules are subject to global misuse by mobsters and corrupt politicians who rule FIFA and UEFA like dictators. This is part of the movie's charm; reminding not just of a more innocent time culturally, but football-wise, as well.
I would like to know how true the film is historically, as far as the accuracy of how events leading up to the World Cup unfold, and how many liberties the screenwriters took when it comes to the football characters and those around them.
All in all, a well-made movie which never gets boring in spite of its length of well over two hours, which is a success in itself.
Jagoda u supermarketu (2003)
Absurd Fascist propaganda - from a Marxist director.
It's as clear as the large hole in Sean Penn's head what this dumb comedy is really about and what kind of people are responsible for this immoral, unfunny, badly written farce. For viewers so apolitical that they couldn't even detect this kind of in-your-face political propaganda, an explanation follows.
This anti-western/anti-capitalist/anti-globalist/anti-democratic (i.e. communist/fascist) nonsense was produced by Emir Kusturica, a highly-respected charlatan director of "arty" Euro-trash (i.e. overrated, festival-darling surrealist malarkey), but less known for being a communist-fascist (yes, I know it makes no sense, but that's his political "orientation"). In the West, he wears a Che Guevara shirt (because that's considered PC), but while at home in Serbia he assumes the role of the flag-waving ultra-nationalist (because that's popular there). So yes, he does get to have his cake and eat it too; although, in all fairness, communism and fascism are hardly very different from one another you know, centralized authority, concentration camps, one-party system and all that other wonderful stuff. Kusturica supported the Milosevic regime and all of the ugly "little" Balkan wars which actually helped to destroy Serbia, which makes him the last person to moralize to anybody. For Emir, Hague tribunal war criminals are heroes, whereas the 5th October revolution is a despicable event. You might know the type; there are many of those like him in the Balkans. They are the ones who shout loudest but have the least education or common sense.
That's why JUS features an ultra-fictitious (in spite of its pathetic satiric pretensions) and ultra unrealistic chain of American supermarkets which in a most laughably B-movie manner - is supposed to symbolize the "decadence" of western commercialism (as if Emir himself doesn't get excited every time he purchases a BMW or rents a large yacht during a Southern European film festival). The movie even implies that Djindjic and DOS were marionettes of the U.S., which is such preposterous nonsense, the kind which only the most die-hard, brainwashed Serb Far-Right-wingers could possibly fall for. Not to mention the hypocrisy of Emir and his communist-fascist Balkan buddies being 100% marionettes of that other world power, Russia. If Putin ever needed any propaganda in the Balkans (and he doesn't), he'd need look no further than JUS.
The "Serbia" shown here has little to do with the Serbia I know first-hand. (Unlike Emir, I am here almost constantly, whereas he spends a lot of his time in the cozy, "rotting" West.) This is some fictitious, fake, made-up Serbia that resembles some personal "Utopia" i.e. a vision of Serbia the way certain criminally insane minds fantasize about.
This quasi-Serbia is just as absurd as that ridiculous chain of highly improbable supermarkets which is even stupidly advertised as "Yugo-American" (with stars and stripes!), only a few years after NATO bombardment of Serbia which the vast majority of Serbs equate with American "aggression", as if no EU countries had anything to do with it.
Equally absurd is Karanovic's over-the-top supermarket manager; so needlessly exaggerated that she speaks a kind of baffling English-Serbian that I've never heard before and which I'm sure has never been applied in reality. Is she supposed to be American? Half-American? What is she? This kind of dumb farcical shtick is used in "Police Academy" movies and other such crap. Nevertheless, the stamp of Emir's approval (as this turkey's producer) might lead the more clueless viewers to mistake this for "clever satire"; such is his clout in the film world. Sure, if the wittiest thing you'd ever seen was Mr. Bean, then anything in JUS might appear as brilliant social commentary. Does any Belgrade resident know any McDonalds bosses who are American? Which use English words in their daily vocabulary? What utter hogwash.
Similarly idiotic is the fairy-tale depiction of the street mob. They gather around the embattled store and 100% of them root for the nationalist/terrorist moron/loser while booing against the cops who want to free hostages and restore order. "Dog Day Afternoon" almost looks like a documentary next to this. The mob behaves, chants and shouts just like the 2008 football hooligans who had stormed the U.S. embassy in Belgrade. Interestingly enough, Kusturica was present there as public speaker egging on the bald-headed rabble toward violence and destruction of private and public property. Such a humanitarian.
JUS is how Emir IMAGINES "ideal" Serbia, one in which the people are all retarded and look with nostalgia to going back to the hungry, war-torn 90s. Naturally, while the Balkans burned for nearly a decade, Emir had it nice in various Western hotels and Beverly Hills mansions, totally disinterested in the suffering of others. Emir's street rabble is a mirror image of himself: primitive, hateful, violent and confused. As if real Serbs don't fantasize about a better life like any other normal people, which implies a free market and social liberty things Emir never cared for, because he'd always been too enchanted by Marx and "Das Kapital". He is a typical wannabe revolutionary (messy hair, "rebellious, that whole phony rock image) without understanding anything about the subject; or he simply ignores all those evils because that allows him to keep romanticizing its icons and flawed ideology.
The script even manages to throw in anti-GM food propaganda. Suitably, Serbian Far Right groups had the same stance; in Belgrade one could find many posters attacking this allegedly "fake"/"poisonous" food, plastered by such extremist organizations.
Even without all the political claptrap, JUS would have still been mediocre at best, because it uses cheesy gags (such as Todorovic slipping over and over and over) and vulgarities instead of actual wit. "Less is more" isn't a comedic concept this writer/director or his producer are aware of. Extremely moronic is Branka Katic falling in love and so quickly with Todorovic, who is about as sexy as my underwear after I'd wiped my nose with it. This romance lacks any credibility and is quite predictable hence cliché.
This is not a drama, unless you have no sense of humour.
This is an easy-going, enjoyable comedy, not a drama as is mistakenly labeled on this site. Samardzic and Stimac make a great pair; there is chemistry between them, solid and amusing dialogue, and also interesting situations. One of Mihic's better scripts, partly because a lot of his typically sentimental writing isn't in this. Besides, he seems to have made an effort this time around, whereas some of his movies are rushed jobs done without much interest.
Samardzic plays an honest, cheerful, likable ex-boxer whose integrity gets in the way of his success outside the ring. It is a typical role for Ljubisa, and the sort he plays with great ease and brilliance. From the start, we find out that he plays a character who is very law-abiding which makes him almost fictitious in the Balkans. Through a chance meeting (an amusing one) he gets to know a young, adventurous thief (Stimac) whom he soon decided to take under his wing, i.e. assumes the role of his mentor, trying to put him on the straight and narrow. However, things don't quite work out as he'd planned.
Moj tata na odredjeno vreme (1982)
Yet again, a terrific YU cast has to deal with a weak(er) script.
These excellent actors and the very entertaining characters they play deserved a better script than this one. Not that the script is quite bad or anything, but the plot relies heavily, too much in fact, on plot-devices such as chance meetings and the comedy of misunderstanding. As a result, we have here too many exaggerated situations that make this sequel less realistic than the first part, which was more based in reality hence funnier and more engaging. Exaggerated comedy is often a way to avoid having to write a clever script.
The majority of the coincidental meetings were thrown in just to forcibly spoil the romance between Ljubisa and Milena, a romance that realistically should have no reason to flail which is why the writer decided to throw a wedge into their relationship by any cheesy means necessary, just to force "comedic conflict". The first such case, when they bump into one another in the hotel, lacks logic because it turns out that Samardzic might be a shady character who on purpose omits to mention to Neda that he's already engaged, and even accepts her flirtation without a whole lot of hesitation, like some horny alpha-male which he never was in the first movie. I have to say, this isn't good writing. The intention of this segment was to have the audience see a misunderstanding between the two love-birds, i.e. that Milena wrongly understood the situation of the half-naked running through the corridor i.e. Ljubisa is supposed to be a victim of circumstance and bad luck. He is supposed to be innocent, but considering that his behavior leading up to the corridor scene was not all that kosher, it becomes unclear even whether the viewer is supposed to root for the romance to resume. Are we supposed to hope the two make up and resume their relationship? At this point in the film, Milena's character was clean, Ljubisa's was stained (which is a mistake) hence we're lead to think more along the lines that he doesn't deserve her.
And all of this just because the writer wanted a "funny" sit-com moment which would advance the plot. Well, maybe it does advance the plot, and maybe some people find the hotel scene funny, but it contradicts what we already know (or thought we knew) about Ljubisa's morality. He is supposed to be a lovable "loser", not a calculating cheat.
However, Milena's clean-slate character is also unwisely - put into question by fault of the weak script. At the end of the movie, Milena runs out of her building, chasing Ljubisa and the way this was written leads us to think that the only reason she ran after him was because her ex-husband Dvornik had betrayed her trust yet again. In other words, Ljubisa is sort of like the "spare wheel" for her, merely plan B. Yet, we already know from the first movie that neither Milena nor Ljubisa are sleazy, devious opportunists but that they're honest people with integrity, who love each other genuinely. The story was written in such a way as to not respect character consistency. You can't just write a sequel to a comedy that was largely character-driven and then re-shape the characters at will. During the writing process, the story took precedence over the characters, which is the false - and perhaps lazy - approach in a comedy of this type.
Some gags aren't (that) good simply because the film almost slips into absurdity and farce even. For example, when Voja Brajovic splits his travel group into hotels according to sex, which is so unrealistic that it isn't funny. Voja's character is absurd i.e. badly written. But at least Ljubisa's flat-mates and family are still basically the same, which is why a lot of the funnier stuff revolves around them.
A more down-to-Earth script should have been written, with funny dialogue rather than not-so-funny situations. If nothing else, the characters and the acting crew are so strong that they managed to make something fairly entertaining even out of a weak script. I like the fact that Kojo speaks and behaves fairly normally for his age, rather than dish out beyond-his-years wisdom an annoying cliché which many script-writers like to do with kids often, something that is especially found in weak American movies in which most kids are written as some sort of smart-Alec geniuses. On the other hand, it's unrealistic that Kojo plays a younger kid than he was at the time. Almost all of his playground buddies are smaller than him, and seem to be 2-3 years younger; at least that's the impression I get.
The Flintstones (1994)
A dreary mess.
Alright, I admit it: the only reason I watched this merchandise-selling spielbergian fluff was to trash it here afterwards. Guilty as charged. (And not the first time, either.) I remember well the mega-hype, the incessant advertising surrounding this crap 20 years ago, and knew (as any sane person did) that this celluloid junk wasn't to be considered even as a potential time-waster on the dullest rainy afternoon.
Did I have ANY hopes at all that this garbage based on a mediocre kiddy cartoon could possibly surprise me? Of course not. Any movie that expects us to laugh at or with Rosie O'Donnell and Liz Taylor (ironically, the only genuine-looking large lizards) is doomed from the start. Not to mention that even as a kid I'd considered nearly all Hanna-Barbera cartoons as vastly inferior to Disney, Warner Brothers, MGM and others.
In a sense, though, the movie was better than I'd expected: I'd foreseen giving a 0/10 film but ended up dishing out a generous 1/10 rating instead. Naturally, this is only due to IMDb's rating system. IMDb is to blame that I can't allocate the appropriate number to this utterly useless pile of "comedic" debris. Normally I'm quite content with the 1 as the lowest rating given that even a 3 signifies horse-manure - but I can't get rid of this ugly feeling of insulting all the 1-rated movies by giving this bull-manure a number larger than Nirvana.
TF is fascinating though. It is absolutely fascinating how a bunch of Hollywood dummies managed to get together and get EVERYTHING wrong. (Not that any film-maker could have made a good live-action movie out of the "The Flintstones"; this was CLEARLY mission impossible.) No aspect of this embarrassing "comedy" had not been brought down to the level of a school play: from the mostly abysmal casting to the grotesque/ugly (as opposed to cute) creatures to the unsuitable story-line to the cringe-worthy Porky's-level "humour"; this mega-turkey flops on every conceivable level.
"Supply and demand corporate embezzlement street protests " Did I dream it? How many kids understand these terms? There is even a lynch mob scene, complete with a noose: is this the stuff of family pictures? I admit that my last viewing of the TV show was back when I was around 8, but I don't recall any episodes in which Wall Street terminology was being thrown around. Clearly, some money-obsessed Hollywood yuppie must have written this script, completely neglecting to consider themes and topics that kids are interested in and familiar with. Even the B-grade writers who concocted all those inferior stories in the overrated TV original knew better than to make corporate fraud the central premise of a dumb lowest-common-denominator caveman comedy. That Spielberg would actually OK this plot plus the totally irrational casting of Rosie as Betty speaks volumes about what an overrated film-maker he is.
Then again, TF isn't really a family picture. Usage of the term "family picture" presupposes that adults can enjoy the movie as well as kids. Speaking of which, TF isn't for kids either; I doubt there are many 5 year-olds daft enough to laugh at this uninspired collection of bargain-basement "gags". No; even they are too old for this crap. The only demographic group that might be suitable for this garbage is infants. They fulfill all the criteria: 1) their brains are light-years from being on par even with Sean Penn; 2) they haven't yet opened their eyes which spares them the badness of the visual "gags" especially the incessant mugging; 3) they don't yet understand English which spares them the anguish of hearing and understanding all the awful dialog. Infants are almost ideally suited as an audience for trash such as this.
The only way this forgettable franchise could have been transplanted onto the big screen with any measure of non-badness would have been to do it as an absurdist comedy in the ZAZ vein. Even then it would have been a tall order, even for the best writers, to make it work. But for the WORST Hollywood writers this was a ridiculously impossible task. Nevertheless, this pile of chicken droppings managed to rake in tons of money at the box-office, reminding us that idiocracy didn't start in this century.
As of this writing, I've seen around 800 comedies. I wouldn't hesitate for a second to rank this malarkey in the Top 10 of the Worst Hollywood Comedies Ever Made. Rosie & co make Adam Sandler look like Chaplin. Even Jack Black fumbling about in a wrestling ring becomes high art next to John Goodman going "ya-ba-dubba-doo".
The Pink Panther 2 (2009)
Modern-day Clouseau is a genius.
Bumbling like a clown while solving a case doesn't make you Clouseau; it makes you an idiot savant. Why on Earth these nincompoops from 21st-century Hollywood studios would want to transform Clouseau from a dim-witted loser to a detective genius is beyond me. Perhaps their writers are too lazy of incompetent to conceive a plot that allows Clouseau to be clumsy AND solve a murder mystery by accident as he always does.
The film has the same formula as the 2006 movie; it goes into brief sentimentality after the first hour and then Clouseau inexplicably solves the case yet again on his own, thereby rendering him a genius, not a buffoon. So what's supposed to be so funny in a genius solving a case?
The director holds some blame as well. He is clueless about how to do comedy. Even with a top cast he doesn't get good scenes often, partly because he keeps cutting away to other actors' faces after every dumb thing Clouseau says or does as if by watching their "perplexed" faces (but more bored-looking than confused) the gags will gain in weight. Their faces are often inexpressive, which, if anything, hurts the comedic momentum when there is any to begin with. Clearly, the actors didn't get much guidance from a director who doesn't know anything about actors. Either that, or he just went through the motions, not particularly concerned about how this movie would end up looking once it's edited and ready for viewing.
Martin has the right to change the character a bit to suit his own style. After all, he is so different from Sellers, nobody expects him to do a cheesy imitation. However, does that include talking like a gay man? Occasionally, he talks like he's gay. I'm not even sure he's aware that he doing that. Perhaps that's how he perceives a stereotypical, exaggerated Frenchman i.e. all affected and limp-wristed.