A cautionary tale about the dangers of unprotected promiscuity among heterosexuals, this story chronicles the exploits of three good friends. Pepe is the playboy of the bunch: despite having a lovely girlfriend, he finds a way to have sex with as many women as possible. His buddies from time to time exchange girlfriends with him. Though they are by no means the lothario he is, they do quite enough bed-hopping to get into trouble. When it becomes obvious that Pepe has gotten AIDS, his buddies, afraid for themselves, get mean. Continue reading
Description: The uncompromising director Věra Chytilová, well-known for her harshly mocking attacks on people’s failings and foibles, has created a new filmic parable on human weakness with Vyhnání z ráje (Expulsion from Paradise, 2001), her most recent film. Although fully within the Chytilová tradition of biting moral fable, the film has had a lukewarm reception from Czech and international critics.
The main story of Vyhnání z ráje concerns Rosta, a film director (Bolek Polívka), who is shooting a film at a nudist beach. Everyone in the film crew has different ideas about the genre and style of the film being shot: The director tries to create an artistic work, an experimental metaphor about Adam and Eve; the Russian producer Igor (Milan Šteindler) hopes to see an erotic lovestory produced; and the screenwriter (played by theatre director and dramatist J A Pitínský) aims to express his positive philosophy about humanity through the film. Continue reading
senses of cinema wrote:
The form of the film was really derived from the conceptual basis of the film. Because the concept of the film was destruction, the form became destructive as well.
– Věra Chytilová (1)
I wanted to use colour concepts to disparage a lot of things. I had no intention whatsoever of arousing an aesthetic impression of beauty. But somewhere, early in the game, it turned out that the structure of things with respect to each other created aesthetics whose results I didn’t expect at all. Continue reading
Vera Chytilova wrote and directed this two-part story that took the Grand Prix at the Mannheim Film Festival. Part one deals with the rigorous training of Olympic champion gymnast Eva Bosakova. She contemplates retirement as she goes through a gruelling training schedule known only by world-class athletes. The second story concerns a housewife who is unappreciated and ignored by her husband. Done in a combination of feature and documentary styles, this is the first full-length effort from Vera Chytilova. —allmovieguide Continue reading
One of the defining works of the Czech New Wave was the portmanteau film Pearls from the Deep (Perlicky na dne, 1965). Not only did it bring five key directors of the Wave (Chytilova, Jires, Menzel, Nemec and Schorm) together in one film, making it the Wave’s official “coming out” as a group, but it tied them to a writer, Bohumil Hrabal, whose ability to capture the rhythms and refrains of everyday spoken Czech was highly influential on the Wave’s direction.
Jiri Menzel (Closely Watched Trains), Jaromil Jires (Valerie and Her Week of Wonders), and three other directors from the 1960’s Czechoslovak New Wave contribute witty, entertaining shorts, each based on a different story by legendary writer Bohumil Hrabal. The anthology showcases the groundbreaking styles and bold new themes of a new cinematic era. These young directors took advantage of a more liberal political climate to make films that were daring in both content and style. Includes Mr. Baltazar (Jiri Menzel), The Swindlers (Jan Nemec), House of Joy (Evald Schorm), The Globe Buffet (Vera Chytilova), and Romance (Jaromil Jires). Continue reading
review by Daniel Bird- you can find more HERE :
Věra Chytilová’s Ovoce stromů rajských jíme (Fruit of Paradise, 1969) is an audacious combination of allegorical narrative and the avant-garde. Above all, it plays with the idea of searching for “truth” and questions our ability to accept it. It is a reflection on the nature of the film itself, as well as a personal testament of its reputedly “cynical” director’s commitment to “telling the truth.” It is a vivid testimony to the role of the “avant-garde” in 1960s Czechoslovak cinema. It is an ascendant of what Eisenstein described as “intellectual cinema.”
However, montage is more or less dispensed with, in favour of a plethora of visual associations and mental juxtapositions that are orchestrated through a succession of semi-improvised “happenings.” As Peter Hames has acknowledged, it boldly defies any “realistic” interpretation, yet encourages “active interpretation,” demanding that the viewer construct his or her own meaning. Continue reading