cassieeM

Let's just say, I had a very high expectations about this movie. Trailer looked very promising, as well as a cast and the name of Edgar Right above all of that. Three Flavours Cornetto trilogy, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World (a literal masterpiece in my opinion), Baby Driver - I liked these movies very much and I always have a great time rewatching it time to time. So, I've been waiting for it, since the first trailer came out. And when it hit movie theatres, I without any consideration went to the movies. I didn't even check the ratings (it wouldn't help anyway) or anything as I do quite often. I'd seen it and it was bad. Like very very bad, starting with absurdly stupid plot and ending with horrible cgi effects. We will get back to it later, because, after the watching, when I went to see the ratings I was very very surprised with the generosity of the both, viewers and critics. 7/10 on IMDb, 65% on Metascore, 75% (omg) on Rotten Tomatoes from critics and 89% (unbelievable) from audience. I still cannot believe that this is real, that people liked that movie so much, because this movie is generally bad and here is why.

Firstly, the plot. Oh boy, oh boy, it starts so well and ends up so so horrible. The main character Eloise (Thomasin McKenzie) is an aspiring fashion designer, who is obsessed with the 60s style, music, life (in London). She just got to the university of her dreams in London and moves there from her village, where she lived with her grandmother. Her mother killed herself due to mental illness, when Eloise was very young, and the father was simply never there. Based on the conversations between Eloise and grandmother and the fact that Eloise sees her dead mother in every mirror, we can assume that she herself had/still have some mental problems. So, she eventually ends up renting a room from an old lady in the old house in London. The room is very old-fashioned as well, which is perfect for Eloise. But, obviously, some weird stuff starts to happen with her in this room. When she falls asleep, she sees a life from a perspective of a very beautiful and charming young woman Sandie, who lived in the 60s and dreamed about being a famous singer. She had everything: beauty, talent, persistence, but no right people around her. She meets a man Jack, who is very nice to her at first and promises her everything she ever wanted if he would be her agent. Obviously, everything turns up to be a lie and Sandie, thanks to Jack, became not a singer but a cabaret dancer and a prostitute. Throughout this several nights spend with Sandie, Eloise started to realise, that this is not just a dreams, that Sandie was real and something horrible have happen to her and Jack is probably the one, who is responsible for that. So we follow Eloise falling into this madness, getting lost between reality and dreams, which can sound really fascinating and intriguing, BUT it is not.

The first part of the film is really good, it is full of nostalgia, very atmospheric and mysterious, I've probably can give it a solid 8/10. While the second part is... well, full of disappointment and ruined expectations. That is the part, where whole story starts to fall apart tremendously and irrevocably. Nothing makes sense anymore and the ending is absolutely ridiculous, I was literally laughing, because I didn't know how to feel myself, I was so confused. And the special effects (there were many of the at the second part) did not make it a better experience. I felt that it was too many (some things could be easily done without them) and very poorly made like it was some film academy student movie, not a 43 000 000 dollar one. Not that it is a major problem, if everything else was great I've probably never brought it up. One very big positive thing in "Last Night in Soho" is the soundtrack. It is amazing, catching, and perfectly fits in the story, makes it more authentic and immerse into the narrative.

Acting was okay, I guess, got no major complains about that. Anya Taylor-Joy was stunning as always, Matt Smith and Thomasin McKenzie did a good job, what about the rest of the cast, they were okay, nothing really extraordinary. Same goes about cinematography, it was good, not without some questionable decisions, but overall good.

Summing up, "Last Night in Soho" is okayish movie, which you watch once with your friend and forget. It is trying to be complex, innovative, not-like-others, but fails due to poorly thought out story (especially the end of it, which was very sweet and happy and corny in a clichéd Hollywood style). I just surprised so many people gave it such a high rating, when there are thousands of movies way better, who have like 6/10 audience score and 50% from the critics, which is kind of sad. So, if you want just chill in front of a screen, that movie is for you, but if you wanted some positive cinematic experience, I suggest you to skip this one.

I love movies like this. Where there are very few locations (most of the time all the action set in one room) and two or three main characters. This is something in-between the movie and the theatre play, which makes it even more fascinating. No special effects, stunts, breath-taking shots and locations, everything fully relies on the dialogues and actor's performances. And this is why sometimes it is quite a hard task to make that kind of movie dynamic, grab viewer's attention at keep it till the very end.

However, the debutant Daniel Brühl did it immaculately. "Nebenan" is funny, intriguing, tense and sad. I can't say it is a comedy or thriller or drama, it is everything and anything of that at the same time. It is a movie about love, family, people, their mistakes and sorrows, their lies and secrets, it is also a movie about uneasy past of the country, of never ending conflict of interests and views, it's about social inequality, fame and wealth and poverty, it slightly touches almost every aspect of life, showing different prospects of view on the themes.

The main character of the movie Daniel, played by the one and only Daniel Brühl, is a very successful actor, who needs to go for an important audition for a super-cool-very-expensive-very-big-and-popular superhero movie (hmm, what that can be about?). Big money is at stake with the mind-blowing wave of popularity and recognisability and thousands of new fans. He is very nervous (obviously), so he decided to go and wait for his flight at not very luxurious (more accurately very not from high class) bar. There he meets another visitor of the bar (played by Peter Kurh), who is become to be not just a random stranger. Not to spoil anything let's just say he is a little bit rude and knows too much about Daniel. The whole movie is just a verbal confrontation between them with some unexpected twists. But it made in a way you will be wanting to be invented with the story it tells you

The acting is unconditionally good. Both actors did a great job, the main characters have chemistry between each other, which is vital, when you have nothing, but dialogues too keep audience interested. Speaking about directional part, I also have no claims. I really liked the cinematography of the movie. Even though there are only three or four different locations, the shots are very aesthetic, colourful and quite creative at times. The ending scene (the one that is at the bar) is my favourite, the music, camera movement, exposition creating very moving and memorable ending of a story.

So, if you are also a fan of this Chekhov-style small movies, you will definitely enjoy this one. The only reason I did not give 10/10 to it, is the fact that it is not something extraordinary, this movie is good, but it is very loyal to its genre and not trying to be revolutionary, which is not a bad thing. For Daniel Brühl it is a solid directional debut, confirming his versatility and talent in the field. And I am really looking forward to seeing his development as a director in the future.

To be honest, I don't really watch modern Russian movies, maybe one/two in a year, mostly due not very good reputation of the Russian film industry (the biggest, most expensive, advertised movies are quite often unforgivably bad and poor acted), but this one grabbed my attention. Firstly because it went to the Cannes, secondly because it sets in my hometown (Yekaterinburg) and after Cannes was premiered here earlier that anywhere else. So, I heard about this movie everywhere and the synopsis only increased my interest. I went to the cinema with a fear that I will be very very disappointed (again), BUT, to my big pleasure, Petrov's Flu is a very fine movie.

The story (which is based on novel by Alexey Salnikov) is mainly about a typical family, all members of which caught flu just before the New Year celebration. The plot is a mix of every-day-life situations, fantasies, hallucinations, flashbacks involving vampires, aliens, bloody killings, everything what a delirious mind could think of.

This movie astonishes you by it's craziness and unpredictability, but yet remains truthful to the what it represents. Serebryakov skillfully draws a picture of the middle and lower class people living in the provincial Russian city. Scenes in public transport are especially authentic, showing to audience the variety of characters and it's behaviours (a little bit exaggerated ones) distinctive for Russian realities. There are plenty of humorous and absurd situations mixed up with a philosophical "kitchen" talks about life, family, religion, politics, every other aspect of human existence, which so ingenuously conveys unique nature of nation.

Can't help but mention the cinematography, it's immaculate, so many interesting transitions, you can see an own well-developed author's style. The landscapes of the city are kind of theatrical, exaggeratedly dark, poor and dirty as if this is some made up city in a comic book like Gotham, what perfectly connects with the grotesqueness of the events shown in the movie.

Last, but not least, the acting. This part in modern Russian movies upsets me most often and I can't always tell why I didn't like a particular performance. At the first sight everything is fine, but something is off, like, you don't see real people, you see actors do their job and you just can't empathise with their characters because you fully aware that this is fiction and the magic of the cinema just disappears. !! BUT!!this movie is another case. For the first time IN A WHILE I really believed every word spoken, every move made on a screen. And that was the best feeling ever, knowing that there are some good actors and filmmakers left in this country.

That kind of movie for sure will not leave anyone indifferent. It's authentic, provoking, unique experience I 100 pro-cent recommend you to try.

Not entirely a movie, not entirely a stage play, a great mix of both, which gives this version of Romeo and Juliet such uniqueness and freshness. Considering, that the play takes place in the modern world, the characters age shift works perfectly fine. The language is still poetic and old-fashioned, but everything looks natural and alive. Especially I liked the close-ups shots, that makes viewer more involved, as we ourselves are not a distant bystander, but participant of the events. Jessie Buckley and Josh O'Connor give outstanding performances, although these characters were played by many many other actors, they succeed to make their Romeo and Juliet relationship special and memorable. I loved the diversity of the cast and a brief lgbtq+ representation, both of which fully meets modern realities. If you watch it with open heart and mind you will 100% enjoy it. Art is eternal because of the many ways it can be interpreted and remain actual even after a five hundred years. I highly recommend this piece to everyone, who loves Shakespeare, theatre and not afraid of experimentations and interpretations of classics.