Gone Girl

(SPOILERS!)

On the day of their fifth wedding anniversary Nick Dunne (Ben Affleck) comes home to find opened front door, shattered glass table and his wife Amy (Rosamund Pike) missing. Once Nick notifies the police the investigation and media circus begins and people quickly come to conclusion that Nick had something to do with Amy's disappearance. What happened to Amy Dunne?

Casino

There is a certain problem one has to deal with while reviewing movies you absolutely adore. Instead of writing about them, you should just watch them again. But since I said I'll review Casino for RorschachReviews and on the odd chance there are those out there who haven't seen that splendid movie and I have the opportunity to encourage them to do so, I shall now review one of my all time favorite films. And I'll probably see it again afterwards.

Public Enemies

44/100 (140 min, 2009)

Plot: The Feds try to take down notorious American gangsters John Dillinger, Baby Face Nelson and Pretty Boy Floyd during a booming crime wave in the 1930s.

Director: Michael Mann
Writers: Ronan Bennett (screenplay), Michael Mann (screenplay),
Stars: Christian Bale, Johnny Depp and Marion Cotillard

 The case of missing script

I remember when back in 2009 I went  to see "Angels and Demons" and "Terminator Salvation" with no expectations and I left the cinema amazed because they turned out to be decent and quite entertaining pictures. Before watching "Public Enemies" for the first time I had very high expectations and when I left the theatre I felt like someone had crashed them completely. Now that I saw the movie for a second time it turns out that it doesn't get any better or worse - it's simply a very forgettable movie and horribly wasted opportunity.

I am disappointed because, as most people, I loved Michael Mann's "Heat" were Al Pacino and Robert Deniro had terrific showdown. The only scene they have together in this movie was powerful and filled with such tension everyone who saw the movie was amazed and years after its release, they are still naming it one of the best sequences in the history of cinema. When I heard that Johnny Depp, fine actor who is not bad to look at and Christian Bale, for whom I'd probably give up my own kidney share just one scene in that film I thought "wow this is going to be exciting!". It wasn't. It was one of the dullest scene of their careers, actually and the point where I begin to wonder whether or not watching this movie is actually worth of my time.

Strange Days

(145 min, 1995)
Director: Kathryn Bigelow
Writers: James Cameron (story), James Cameron (screenplay)
Stars: Ralph Fiennes, Angela Bassett and Juliette Lewis

Never fade away

“See... I can get you what you want, I can. I can get you anything, you just have to talk to me, you have to trust me. You can trust me, 'cause I'm your priest, I'm your shrink... I am you main connection to the switchboard of he soul. I'm the magic man... Santa Claus of the subconscious. You say it, you think it, you can have it.”

Lenny Nero (Ralph Fiennes) deals in dreams. Formerly an LAPD vice cop, he now deals in illegal 'squid' recordings - recordings made directly from the cerebral cortex of the participant, which allow the viewer to feel and experience everything the participant experiences as if they were there. One of life's perpetual losers, he ekes out a lonely, miserable existence at the end of the millennium, still pathetically yearning for his beautiful ex-girlfriend Faith (Juliette Lewis), a beautiful singer, and is dependent on his friend Macey (Angela Bassett). But Lenny's life is about to be shattered; when he is anonymously sent the recording of the brutal rape and murder of a prostitute, he and Macey soon find themselves reluctantly embroiled in a dark web of murder, blackmail and intrigue amid the civil unrest surrounding the suspicious death of an influential, politically active rap singer.

What's the best thing about memories? The fact you can replay them in your head, long after the event you're recalling took place. And what's the worst part? It's that they fade away. With time, as with videotapes that have been used too many times, the details dissolve in time – you can't remember the color of someone's eyes, you can't recall anything about the background. The sound of voice escapes your memory, the sense of being there is with you no more. What if you could play the same memories, over and over again, feeling what you felt when you experienced them, in the loop, on repeat, as many times as you like?

The Tourist

(103 min, 2010)
Director: Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck
Writers: Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck (screenplay), Christopher McQuarrie (screenplay)
Stars: Johnny Depp, Angelina Jolie and Paul Bettany

Catch them if you can.

Elise (Angelina Jolie) sits next to an American tourist, Frank (Johnny Depp), on a train going to Venice. She has chosen him as a decoy, making believe that he is her lover who is wanted for police. Not only will they need to evade the police, but also the mobster whose money her lover stole.

“The Tourist” is one of the most criticized movies of last year. When it received three Golden Globe nominations – for best motion picture – comedy, Angelina Jolie and Johnny Depp it also got a tremendous amount of backlash from the public. The movie failed in box office and many reviewers complained that the film is boring and that it contains Johnny Depp's worst performance. Was it all deserved? After watching the movie I have to say no.

I had very low expectations – in fact I just wanted to watch this film to check if it's as bad as everyone keeps saying and to stare at lovely Jolie, who in my mind is one of the most strikingly beautiful actresses to ever grace cinema screen with their presence. What I saw was not a bad movie – it was fun, entertaining and despite quite a weak script, very watchable and far from being boring.

Red Dragon

(124 min, 2002)
Director: Brett Ratner
Writers: Thomas Harris (novel), Ted Tally (screenplay)
Stars: Anthony Hopkins, Edward Norton and Ralph Fiennes

All things truly wicked start from an innocence.

FBI Agent Will Graham (Edward Norton) has been called out of early retirement to catch a serial killer, known by authorities as "The Tooth Fairy" (Ralph Fienes). He asks for the help of his arch-nemesis, Dr. Hannibal "The Cannibal" Lecter (Anthony Hopkins), so that he can be able to catch "The Tooth Fairy" and bring him to justice. The only problem is that "The Tooth Fairy" is getting inside information about Graham and his family from none other than Dr. Lecter

“The Silence of the Lambs” is a legendary movie. Right there, Anthony Hopkins created one of the most fascinating and terrifying villains in the history of cinema. More than a decade later Ridley Scott made sequel to the story - “Hannibal”. The film was very disappointing and instead of focusing on the nature of evil, exploration of dark places of characters' minds and building chilling atmosphere it served its audience ridiculous amount of senseless gore, weak script and overall grotesque (in a bad sense of this word) experience. Finally, with “Red Dragon” came a movie with rich characters, interesting story and Hannibal Lecter once again playing his sophisticated, devilish games.

Are some of the people born evil or do they simply become it along their way? Is evil hiding in all of us? Are we all capable of unimaginable violence, the cruel infliction of pain and monstrosity? We'll probably never know what really lies in the bottom of our soul and what our nature truly is. Both the beginnings of Hannibal Lecter and the story of the killer in “Red Dragon” - Francis Dollarhyde - seem to hint that the evil is born when other people unleash it on us.

Michael Clayton

(119 min, 2007)
Director: Tony Gilroy
Writer: Tony Gilroy
Stars: George Clooney, Tilda Swinton and Tom Wilkinson
 

Without Negotiations

"There is no witness so terrible, no accuser so powerful as conscience which dwells within us.”
- Sophocles

„Michael Clayton” is one of the most important movies of 2007, nominated for Academy Award, among others, for best picture of the year and included on top ten lists of many critics. It is also one of my favorite movies, intense thriller telling the story of the „fixer” in law firm, former district attorney who has to deal with a crisis when his friend Arthur, brilliant lawyer who handles the case of 3 billion dollars class action lawsuit against massive copany as its defense lawyer has a nervous breakdown. The intrigue involves ambitious lawyer working for their company Karen Crowder (Tilda Swinton) and its boss Marty Bach (Sydney Pollack).

The characters are perfectly constructed – we know seemingly little about them, but it's enough to have impression of how their lives must look. Clayton has a young son, who he doesn't get to see often, nor does he has time to have real discussion with him, he is divorced. He has drug addicted brother because of whom he lost business and faces bankruptcy. Worse of all – he is addicted to gambling and has just got back on his feet again. He is alone, grim, frustrated. But he is good at his job and it seems to be everything in his life – not that it would make him happy.

Clooney's performance is truly the best one in his career. He was excellent in „Up in the Air”, „Burn After Reading” and „Solaris” but his work here is exceptional. He seems perfect – elegant suits, great manners, always there for his company, but underneath there's rage, same rage expressed by Arthur. Emptiness, wasted life. Frustration for living every day as a fixer, doing something he really doesn't want to do, but has to because by some miracle he is good at it. With private life in pieces, with nothing to look forward to. That's why after he wins in the end he still looks defeated in this cab. And that's why it's so remarkable and full of hope that even a man who is destroyed, who has no reason to go on, can stand up and do the right thing. When you think of how lawyers are portrayed in the cinema you probably think of Richard Gere in “Primal Fear” or Keanu Reeves in “Devil's Advocate” - cynical, successful, poised, content. And here is a lawyer who not only has financial problems, who is not only not surrounded by beautiful women, but who also, with every day, falls more and more into emptiness and nothingness of his existence. He is far from being hot-shot lawyer cinema always presents – he is almost invisible and what's even more interesting – his job requires him to be like that. He is a “janitor”, he cleans up other people messes. He is the first one on the line – dealing with frustrated clients and employees. The juiciest part of lawyer's job omits him – he finds the best possible people to the job he really wants to do himself (the scene where he tells Mart he wants to go back to court).

Fight Club

(139 min, 1999)
Director: David Fincher
Writers: Chuck Palahniuk (novel), Jim Uhls (screenplay)
Stars: Brad Pitt, Edward Norton and Helena Bonham Carter

Breaking the Pattern

  

Warning: If you are reading this then this warning is for you. Every word you read of this useless fine print is another second off your life. Don't you have other things to do? Is your life so empty that you honestly can't think of a better way to spend these moments? Or are you so impressed with authority that you give respect and credence to all that claim it? Do you read everything you're supposed to read? Do you think every thing you're supposed to think? Buy what you're told to want? Get out of your apartment. Meet a member of the opposite sex. Stop the excessive shopping and masturbation. Quit your job. Start a fight. Prove you're alive. If you don't claim your humanity you will become a statistic. You have been warned
- Tyler.

„Fight Club” by David Fincher is a masterpiece.
I doubt if there is anyone out there who wouldn’t agree with that statement above. The movie is so complex, unique, fascinating, brilliant, honest and outstanding. I have been trying to write the analysis for 3 years now, I started reading the book, then I finished it and I realized it can’t be used here - the movie is a separate organism in that case, much like with “American Psycho”, the movie, which whilst is one of the most daring and bravest mainstream movies I saw, contains maybe 1% of book’s necessary gore and profoundness.

There are so many things shown here.
The human basic need to express its anger – we are angry. why? Tyler has the answer for that:

In Bruges

(107 min, 2008)
Director: Martin McDonagh
Writer: Martin McDonagh
Stars: Colin Farrell, Brendan Gleeson and Elizabeth Berrington

Hell, Heaven and Purgatory...In Bruges.

(spoilers)

The mind is its own place,
and in itself can make a Heaven of Hell,
a Hell of Heaven.
- John Milton

Two hitmen are sent to Bruges. It's in Belgium. One of them, Ray, hates the place and calls it a 'shithole', the second, Ken is enchanted by its beauty and enjoys sightseeing. Lovely and simple isn't it?

No it isn't. Ray, whilst being on hist first 'mission' was supposed to kill a priest and he did. The problem is, the bullet reached a little boy and killed him aswell. Ray cannot live with his overwhelming feeling of guilt. He isn't a bad person, he's charming, a little bit shy and lost guy, simple person who is crashed emotionally by one tragic event. For Ray Bruges is hell - he is being hauned by the memory of that horrible event when he sees happy kids. He is bored out of his mind, he hates sightseeing, he has nothing to do with his thoughts and ultimately he can't stand this anymore. He decides to kill himself, on playground, but is stopped by Ken, who sents him away and tells him to keep a low profile. Ray would probably try commit suicide again, but because of chain of hilarious and unexpected events he gets back to Bruges and again meets the girl he went on a date once, Chloe. They walk around the town, they kiss and seem happy. And maybe it could stay like that. Maybe Ray's hell could have become heaven for him, once he delt with his guilt. But remorse and absolution came in different form. Ray's boss Harry kills him because of his conviction that the person who killed a little kid cannot live. Ray dies surrounded by people he met in bruges, on a film-set crowded with people in surreal masks, snowflakes falling from the sky. The movie's ending isn't ambigious as many think - Ray is dead and we as the audience see the last thing he sees.

To Die For

(106 min, 1995)
Director: Gus Van Sant
Writers: Joyce Maynard (book), Buck Henry (screenplay)
Stars: Nicole Kidman, Matt Dillon and Joaquin Phoenix

All she wanted was a little attention.

“You're not anybody in America unless you're on TV. On TV is where we learn about who we really are. Because what's the point of doing anything worthwhile if nobody's watching? And if people are watching, it makes you a better person.“

Suzanne Stone Maretto (Nicole Kidman) knows exactly what she wants. She wants to be a television newscaster and she is willing to do ANYTHING to get what she wants. What she lacks in intelligence, she makes up for in cold determination and diabolical wiles. As she pursues her goal with relentless focus, she is forced to destroy anything and anyone that may stand in her way, regardless of the ultimate cost or means necessary.

I like when the events behind the movie mirror the story we see in it. After reading the script, Nicole Kidman was so determined to land the lead role in this movie that she tracked down Gus van Sant's personal phone number and rung him at home. She spent 40 minutes talking to him on the phone about her thoughts on Suzanne and how to play her. Van Sant called back 2 hours later to tell her she'd got the part. It's funny that she actually had to fight for that role (Meg Ryan turned down the movie after she wasn't happy with the salary offer) - in the novel on which the movie is based, Suzanne states that she would like to see "that actress that just got married to Tom Cruise in real life" play her in a movie about this. Kidman who, sadly, has her best roles behind her nowadays (apart from her recent good work in “Rabbit Hole”) delivers one of her best performances here. Channeling a bit of Catherine Deneuve in “Belle de Jour” she is icy, fascinating and reserved. But since “To die for” is a dark comedy Kidman manages to make her character adorably silly and devilish. She may look sweet and innocent, but this girl with serious look in her eyes has a plan on how to get what she wants. No matter what.

The American

(105 min, 2010)
Director: Anton Corbijn
Writers: Rowan Joffe (screenplay), Martin Booth (novel)
Stars: George Clooney, Paolo Bonacelli and Violante Placido

Alone.

Alone among assassins, Jack (George Clooney) is a master craftsman. When a job in Sweden ends more harshly than expected for this American abroad, he vows to his contact Pavel that his next assignment will be his last. Jack reports to the Italian countryside, where he holes up in a small town and starts constructing weapon for another assassin.

We meet Jack (or Edward) as he sits in the house with a naked woman. He has serious expression, he looks very sullen and detached. And that is how he will remain for most of the movie. He is a professional, he doesn't really have a life apart from his job, he doesn't have any friends. For his new assignment, he is sent to Italy. All he does there is drinking coffee, working out, hanging out with a priest who took an interest in him, visiting a brothel where he has sex with a prostitute named Clara and constructing weapon for Mathilde (Thekla Reuten) which is his new assignment.

Swimming Pool

(102 min, 2003)
Director: François Ozon
Writers: François Ozon (screenplay), Emmanuèle Bernheim
Stars: Charlotte Rampling, Charles Dance and Ludivine Sagnier

Author's journey.

(spoilers)

“Every secret of a writer's soul, every experience of his life, every quality of his mind is written large in his works. “
- Virginia Woolf

“Swimming Pool” focuses on Sarah (Charlotte Rampling), a rigid and conservative, yet successful English mystery writer. Sarah's personal life and new novel take a dramatic twist when she meets her publisher's sexy, free-spirited daughter Julie (Ludivine Sagnier) at his gracious mansion in the French countryside.

The movie is a great thriller, but also can be viewed as a meticulous study of author's mind and creative process – the plots, the events, the characters, that after a while start shaping into a book. “Swimming Pool” greatest assets include fantastic acting and intriguing story, which in the end, will turn out to be something completely different from what you assumed in the beginning.

Sarah is a middle aged woman, who writes mystery novels filled with sex and blood, although she lives peaceful life. She is not very fond of people – when her fan asks her for autograph on the subway, she pretends she isn't a famous author. She keeps her interactions with people short and distant. Sarah lives her life alone, depriving herself of many joys – she eats healthy meals, she doesn't have a boyfriend, she doesn't live a wild life. We may suspect she did once, but now she settled for peaceful existence. But her mind is still where it was when she was young – creating crime stories, using its vivid imagination to create complicated plots and colorful characters.

Sarah stays in her editor's house where she meets his daughter Julie, a complete opposite of her. Julie has casual sex, eats whatever she wants, swims in the pool naked and uses life to its fullest. As the time passes two women start to bond, Sarah is fascinated to hear about Julie's life and starts to write book about her. She is also borrowing a little from her lifestyle, but still decides to intervene when Julie goes too far in her encounter with men, feeling somewhat protective of her.

The writer is fond of Julie enough to help her cover up a certain incident that will take place next to a pool. We find out at that point of the movie, that Sarah would wish her life was just as her novels, filled with danger and excitement and she doesn't have a problem with morally reprehensible deeds – she doesn't experience second thoughts or guilt, she just does what needs to be done.

By the end of the movie a very clever twist arrives – Sarah is leaving her publisher's office, after informing him she found new one and plans to publish the book she always wanted to write, that differs significantly from her previous work. When she is on her way out, his daughter, Julia appears. She looks similar to the one we met in France, but she is clearly not the same person. Sarah is not surprised, she and Julia don't even exchange quick “hello”. Why? Because Sarah imagined Julie, her personality, her story, the events that took place in the mansion. Her look in the end of the movie is a playful expression that author has when he is confronting the view of a person she carried in her mind with the real Julia. She's not insane or anything like it – she's well aware that Julie was her imagination – she is dedicating the book to her because she is thanking her for inspiration.

“Swimming Pool” is a fantastically constructed film, something that is indispensable in the thriller – I loved how the director used colors and other devices to suggest a little bit about characters. Sarah's coldness is reflected in blue color, Julie's passion and youth in red. The book Sarah writes in the end is entitled “Swimming Pool” - red letters on blue background. I believe because of that book Sarah finally let the playful, joyful side of her outside and now she lives a happy life. The plot also includes many red herrings and false leads, for example the phone call to the mansion from the publisher. It is impossible to figure out the ending before director decides it's the right time for it.

The Machnist

(101 min, 2004)

Director: Brad Anderson
Writer: Scott Kosar
Stars: Christian Bale, Jennifer Jason Leigh and Aitana Sánchez-Gijón

Nightmares of the guilty.

(spoilers)
“I am denial guilt and fear
and I control you
I am the prayers of the naive
and I control you
I am the lie that you believe
and I control you”
- “Mr. Self Destruct”, Nine Inch Nails

Trevor Reznik (Christian Bale) is a lathe-operator who suffers from insomnia and hasn't slept in a year. Slowly, he begins to doubt his sanity as increasingly bizarre things start happening at work and at home. Haunted by a deformed co-worker who no one seems to think exists, and an ongoing stream of indecipherable Post-It notes he keeps finding on his fridge, he attempts to investigate what appears to be a mysterious plot against him and, in the process, embroils two women in his madness.

This could have been a great movie, but for me – it's only good. I don't like movies from my own country but when a Polish film dealing with the subject of crime and guilt (“Dług” - “The Debt” in English) tops foreign production – then believe me, it's bad. The movie failed in the crucial thing – the character. Trevor is brilliantly portrayed by Christian Bale, his character is very well developed. But I didn't care about him, at all. Why? I am an empathetic person and I can relate to many things in movies, but seeing an asshole who, out of sheer stupidity, kills a child and then runs away is something I will never (I hope) be able to relate to. I should be sad about what's happening to Trevor – he looks so harmless and sad, but when the truth is revealed I was a bit sorry his arm was rescued in one of the scenes. Killing someone by accident is awful, but understandable. Killing someone because you are not looking at the road while you are driving is not an accident – that kind of stupidity must have been growing for years. No, I definitely can't feel sorry for someone like that.

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

(103 min, 2005)
Director: Shane Black
Writers: Brett Halliday (novel) (in part), Shane Black (screen story)
Stars: Robert Downey Jr., Val Kilmer and Michelle Monaghan

 

Harmony in chaos.

A petty thief posing as an actor (Robert Downey Jr.) is brought to Los Angeles for an unlikely audition and finds himself in the middle of a murder investigation along with his high school dream girl (Michelle Monaghan) and a detective (Val Kilmer) who's been training him for his upcoming role

It's almost impossible to label this one. Crime? Comedy? Black comedy? This is the movie were Robert Downey Jr. hangs from the bridge, holding on to dead guy's hand sticking out of the coffin, tiny dog swallows severed fingers, Val Kilmer plays gay detective and Laurence Fishborne provides voice for bear in the commercial and the movie ends with song sung by Downey Jr. himself, which feels very out of place and that's the whole point. It's insane, fast and very memorable. And also – it's a great film.

“No, she's just resting her eyes for a minute. Of course she's fucking dead, her neck's broken.”

The story is complex, filled with twists and turns and everything is here – aspiring, adorable actress, charming thief and loser in life being hopelessly in love, hilarious detective, city of sin, crazy Russian roulette scene and insane amount of quotable dialogues. It's difficult not to get lost in that labyrinth of plots and jokes, intrigues and lies, but if you pay close attention you will be rewarded in the end with thank you message from Robert and Val themselves. How often does this happen in movies?

Revolver

(115 min, 2005)
Director: Guy Ritchie
Writers: Luc Besson (adaptation), Guy Ritchie
Stars: Jason Statham, Ray Liotta and Vincent Pastore

Well, fuck me, Guy. What have you been reading?

After seven years in solitary, Jake Green (Jason Statham) is released from prison. In the next two years, he amasses a lot of money by gambling. He's ready to seek his revenge on Dorothy (Mr. D) Macha (Ray Liotta), a violence-prone casino owner who sent Jake to prison. He humiliates Macha in front of Macha's lieutenants, leaves, and keels over. Doctors tell him he has a rare disease and will die in three days; Macha also puts a hit out on him.
After you see this movie you're gonna experience two things – headache and a feeling you saw wonderfully directed mess. After you read a little bit about the movie, you're still gonna have a headache and you'll discover something which will make it worse – there is no key, which is guaranteed to work, to unlock the secrets of this movie.

Apparently, to understand the plot you have to have rather wide knowledge about enlightenment and Buddhism. I have neither of those, because I don't particularly care. Don't get me wrong – I think every religion is interesting and I love reading about them but I hate when a movie, a separate art form, requires me to read books to understand it. I read “if you don't understand the movie don't worry, just read few books about Buddhism” in the opinions of people who actually got the movie. Well, I neither have the time nor “Revolver” is interesting enough for me to dwell in the religion and books to look for meanings. If I wanted to read a book about religion, It'd be a book about my religion. So apparently, Guy Ritchie made his movie for a very small number of people comparing to all the movie goers there are, and everyone else may be in pain during this spectacle.

Lost Highway

(134 min, 1997)
Director: David Lynch
Writers: David Lynch, Barry Gifford
Stars: Bill Pullman, Patricia Arquette and John Roselius

The case of too many "?"

When Fred Madison finds a video tape on his doorstep that shows the interior of his house, he's convinced that someone has broken in and calls the police. Things get really complicated when he finds another videotape showing him killing his wife, and the police arrest him because his wife really was murdered! Then he disappears from the prison and we start watching the life of a young man who works in a garage

Let me tell you a little about me and David Lynch movies. After I saw “Blue Velvet” I couldn't get rid of certain images from it, like Isabella Rosselini singing, lit by this amazing blue light on stage for years. When I was watching Twin Peaks, I couldn't wait to see what happens next and few times I nearly got a heart attack. When I saw “Wild at Heart” it was so good I actually enjoyed the movie that contains both Nicolas Cage and Willem Dafoe in it. And after I saw “Mulholland Dr.” I most likely read every single thread on imdb about it. That's how much those movies moved me – I had to find answers, I couldn't stop thinking about them. You know what I did after I saw “Lost Highway”? I made myself a cup of tea and started reading Newsweek on the balcony.

Because I don't care. So far every movie I saw made by Lynch was made with this amazing passion, with this love for making movies. This one as much as still being wonderfully written and inspired is just dull. It features all of Lynch's best moves – one story suddenly changing into another, blue light, red curtains, individual outstanding scenes (like the moment Pete sees Alice for the first time, love scene, transformation scene), but it just didn't feel “alive” to me. I see characters yell, cry, smile but I can't feel emotions in it. I couldn't get interested with this movie, I kept waiting for something to happen and blow my mind away and it never happened.

But there are some great things in “Lost Highway” - very dark and curious use of music (except for Rammstein which doesn't go with Lynch surrealistic world at all), nice choice with casting of Bill Pullman and Patricia Arquette, couple of goofy detective and their awesome and hilarious exchanges (“Fucker gets more pussy than a toilet seat.”) and already mentioned, outstanding scenes and insanely disturbing and creepy moments. There are huge minuses, though - Balthazar Getty who plays Pete is awful and the story doesn't make much sense. I'm sure if you devote enough time you can get to the bottom of this, but it's not because I actually see the signs of any sense in “Lost Highway”. I believe in Lynch – if “Mulholland Dr.”, “Twin Peaks” and other of his films made sense, this one must be as meticulously constructed too, especially that Lynch said something about it he doesn't say often - “there is one correct answer”. I looked a little and there are theories – doppelgangers, the Devil, the loop – as interesting as they sound, they don't make sense and can be easily abolished. With “Mulholland Dr,” one interpretation explained it all. Here it barely explains half of the stuff we see on screen.

The acting is all right, but nothing spectacular. Arquette mostly just wanders on screen, but has some good moments, particularly the one where she strips for mister Eddy. Pullman is very good, but the best performance is Robert Blake's Mystery Man – one of the creepiest characters in Lynch's movies. However nobody apart from Blake stands out – everything is very forgettable.

I can forgive Lynch making a movie that is boring and too complex. But the movie is forgettable and that is something inexcusable. It had all the right elements but it failed. As much as I admire story that carefully crafted I think Lynch overestimated his viewer. With “Mulholland Dr,” we care enough about the characters to dig deep. But here? Why should I care about crazy jealous man and cheap whore? I didn't. The characters here don't have life in them – they are Lynch's puppets in his theater of grand confusion. And this time I simply don't wanna play.

60/100

Snatch

(104 min, 2000)
Director: Guy Ritchie
Writer: Guy Ritchie
Stars: Jason Statham, Brad Pitt and Benicio Del Toro

Oh, nothing, Tommy. It's tiptop.

It's hard to review a perfect movie. It's difficult to write about something you love, when it's so much better to just watch it again. And again. And Again.. I lost count how many times I saw "Snatch”. More than 10, less than 50. But given how often I watch this movie, maybe 50 will be the number I reach one day. I'm writing the review, because there are still people out there who haven't seen this film. And if you are one of those people don't waste time reading - just go and watch it.

Turkish (Jason Statham), an unlicenced boxing promoter is pulled into trouble when he becomes involved in big time criminal Brick Top (Alan Ford), who wants him to arrange a fight and fix it. Meanwhile, a diamond theft goes down but the 84 karat stone goes missing. This leads Avi (Dennis Farina), the boss who was supposed to receive the stone, to come to England to search for it, with the help of his cousin, Doug The Head (Mike Reid) and Bullet Tooth Tony (Vinnie Jones). As events twist and turn, the two situations blend into one with a chain reaction of events carrying on for each and every character.

The script for the movie is brilliant – Guy Ritchie was heavily inspired by “Pulp Fiction” and die hard Tarantino fans keep yelling “There wouldn't be Snatch without Pulp Fiction!”. And as much as this is the truth and as much as I love Tarantino's film and it truly is a masterpiece, “Snatch” is better – the characters are more likeable – we want all the best for Turkish, Tommy, Mickey, Tyrone and even Tony, the dialogues are funnier (“- What's in the car? - Seats and a steering wheel.”), you can watch it dozens of times and you will always laugh, always react the same way you did the first time - “Pulp Fiction” whilst being a superior movie when it comes to craft of movie making can be tiring at times. Both films are 10/10 but it's Snatch that I'll give 100/100, not “Pulp Fiction”. Because there is no line which would blow my mind as much as the jam from the doughnut dialogue or any of Avi/Doug conversations.

The movie has well deserved cult status – it is one of the most addictive movies ever made. There is no way you can only see it once. It's insanely quotable and the genius of the lines lies in the fact that even in the real world, without the connection to the movie whatsoever, they will still be hilarious. Almost each line is pure gold, it's not that during watching “Snatch” you burst into tears 'cause you are laughing so hard. You never even stop laughing (maybe for few seconds during sequence with “Angel” by Massive Attack in the background).

The films mixes great lines with hilarious situations and despite having rather low budget, no shiny cinematography and other glamorous things it's perfect. The story is about gangsters, boxers, thieves – the visual side fits the story. The editing is great, though – there are some fantastic sequences like car accident scene, the hare chase or final boxing fight, the best scene of the movie (by the way fans of Snatch should check out the homage paid to it in one of “South Park” episodes).

Guy Ritchie is known from being rather...interesting persona on set (there were fines for mobile phones ringing, arriving late, taking naps during shooting, being "cheeky", being unfunny, and/or moaning and complaining) and he has great eye for casting people. For “Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels” he found his actors on the street and some of them return in “Snatch” to even better effect. Jason Statham, who is now an action star, is perfect as Turkish. He narrates the movie with ironic sense of humor, remains cool and calm through most of the events which only makes his delivery of certain lines funnier. If a little gold fish swam to me and ask “Pretty Sati what is your one wish? What should change in the movie world?” I would ask for Statham and Ritchie to do movies together again. Jason's too good for movies like “Crank”.

Vinnie Jones is perfect as Tony and he delivers one of the most memorable monologues I've heard and Alan Ford creates fantastic villain as Brick Top. Brad Pitt, who reportedly was the one who approach Ritchie wanting to be in his movie so badly plays one of his best roles as Mickey, skinny, pretty, mumbling boxer. Pitt is absolutely excellent and plays a role nobody would suspect him of playing. I also enjoyed Benicio Del Toro's performance in this film, I didn't think he can be funny, especially that funny.

I love soundtrack from “Lock, Stock...” but this one is even better. I love how clever Ritchie is in choosing songs for scenes – he uses a song that is light and corny and then plays it in the background for violent scenes as in the scene where we see Tony's flashback and hear “Lucky Star” by Madonna. The soundtrack also features “Viva Las Vegas” which, I'm pretty sure, is the first song you think about when someone mentions the movie to you, and awesome “Fuckin' in the bushes” by Oasis in the final fight scene – even If I wanted to, I would not find better song for that scene.

I cannot believe my eyes whenever I go to metacritic and see the rating for this movie (55/100) and the fact no one of the reviewers gave it 100/100. It's an embarrassment. I don't get many things, but rating movie that good, that brilliant below 8 is unimaginable. I understand that maybe people didn't get all the jokes, but whenever I see the review of this film that says it's “boring” or “not funny” I'm seriously starting to think whether those critics live in some dungeon surrounded by filth and misery. One of the reviewers actually wrote the words "characters fade from memory shortly after the movie's last frame". Now, I found her reviews amusing for a while now and seeing that she gave 30/100 for "Inception" only makes me want to see it more.

And the movie has a lot of fans – everyone whom I know and saw it, loved it. It's not the kind of movie that is silly and under appreciated by critics but the people love it. “Avatar” gets love from critics but “Snatch” doesn't? For shame!

“Snatch” is the most hilarious comedy I've seen. It never gets boring, it never gets too confusing. The movie is entertaining and even if you are in terrible mood it will cheer you up. The performances are fantastic, the dialogues are smart and amusing, the story is clever and Ritchie knows how to guide audience so they wouldn't get lost due to the complexity of the plot. There is only one reaction to “Snatch” no matter if you are watching it for the 1st or 100th time – unstoppable laughter and that wonderful feeling of watching a movie, in which you wouldn't change a single thing.

98/100

Sherlock Holmes

(128 min, 2009)
Plot: Detective Sherlock Holmes and his stalwart partner Watson engage in a battle of wits and brawn with a nemesis whose plot is a threat to all of England.
Director: Guy Ritchie
Writers: Michael Robert Johnson (screenplay), Anthony Peckham (screenplay)
Stars: Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law and Rachel McAdams

Deduction, Seduction, Destruction.

Sherlock Holmes is known everywhere – the iconic brilliant detective, the main hero of countless books and movies. Is there anything less in tone of Guy Ritchie movies? I thought not. And I was most likely right. But Ritchie is so good he actually manages to sneak his own style into a classic tale of detective and his sidekick making it a unique film, unlike anything I've seen before.

I was surprised when I first heard Ritchie is set to direct the movie about the most famous Baker Street inhabitant. Ritchie, let's call him faithful Tarantino disciple, has shot 2 terrific movies about ruthless mobsters, money and freak occurrences - “Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels” and of course, one of my favorite movies of all time “Snatch”. Then it was only way way worse, during his marriage to Madonna he shot movies that don't even deserve to be seen. But apparently after the marriage, or as I call it kiss of coma for his directorial talent was over, he returned to his senses and made very good “Rock'n'Rolla”. But Sherlock Holmes? When I first saw the trailer, as thrilled as I was to see Downey Jr's wit and nakedness, it was a bit freaky. The movie seemed to be packed with mindless slapstick comedy and tons of fighting and explosions. Luckily, trailers are misleading.