A Czech agricultural student, Šimon Plánička, arrives at the small South Bohemian town of Hoštice, and joins the local JZD (agricultural co-op) with the intention of trying out his experiment regarding the "Milk yield of cows in regards to a cultured environment". He runs into difficulty with the directorship of the JZD, but he finds them eager to help once they hear he's the son of the local agricultural commissioner, as his last name is also Plánička. Blažena Škopková is given the task of finding out how things are looking. However everything is complicated by the jealousy of Blažena's boyfriend Venca. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
You may also like
Slunce, seno, jahody torrent reviews
Luigi A (ca) wrote: Raw and heartbreaking but yet hopefully this documentary tells the true story of something most people don't want to talk about
Tanya J (it) wrote: I liked it. Good ending.
Paul Z (au) wrote: It is about various completely separate men battling hero worship to become their own heroes in their own lives, since no one else seemed to them to want the position. Some of them worship God and Jesus. Some of them worship Cane on Kung Fu. Some of them worship their father. And they all have to somehow fight betrayal and cruelty and find the strength to be completely and purely honest with themselves. Apparently, this parallels Euripidean dramatic structure, as many actions narrated by the film's subjects are recounted by expressive wooden puppets on a puppet-sized Greek stage, and these men's stories do not necessarily display clear-cut origins to motivate things, episodes of the plot are spaced out and the activity displaced, though working as crucial aspects. The nature of what these men experience and become lies beyond the clarification of science and leans toward the chance turns of the cosmos and civilization alike, the inexplicable compulsions which continue to function regardless of common insight and the impartial alignment of rationality.The notion of a protagonist here is not one of a hero who takes it upon himself to, as he always has and will, save the day. It is of a more personally inspirational nature than that. All these subjects were victims at some point. Whether they become any sort of savior or hero in society or not is no matter because they become that for themselves. Actually, society is in every case the antagonist by some degree of separation.I do not know how Jessica Yu, the writer-director of this purely original and very creative documentary, found her subjects, whether or not she had already known something of their lives enough to see that they applied to her theme, if she knew some of them beforehand, if she conducted interviews with various prospects before finding those who applied the best and thus narrowed it down to them or what. It is the approach behind the subjects of any documentary, but the central theme here is purely cerebral, nothing you can put out an add for or scout a certain region for. It requires an extra amount of shrewdness and insight. Yu's emotionally cued interspersions of puppets on a stage, as well as all other visual parallels, depend on the circumstances of each of them. Errol Morris would be proud of her achievement.What it becomes for us---as we become enthralled with each episode, are then taken out of it all for a second when the film shifts to another of the "protagonists," and then get enthralled all over again---is a meditation on the idea of a story's central character. It takes us awhile to put together all the pieces of a given one of them, and once that happens, we don't have to like what we see. So why do we continue to look? Because we hope for a change, whether for them or their situation. It is not their responsibility to make sure we like them, but to be honest with themselves about who they are and what they want, so that we can fully understand why we like them, or why we don't. Personally, I found something endearing about each of the four men. It's not a matter of how well a protagonist meets our standards; it's a matter of exercising our ability to accept.
Joanna M (br) wrote: A fun action flick that the whole family can enjoy. The storyline was fairly decent and engaging, and Stephen Fung did a great job directing. The only thing wrong with this film is that the villain wasn't menacing enough... oh well, I guess they didn't want to scare the kiddies :P
Critic M (de) wrote: A captivating murder mystery that is driven by powerful performances from Brody, Affleck & Lane. "Hollywoodland," is a fascinating film that is half biography and half detective story. I was blown away with how enthralling this film turned out to be and would watch it again gladly.
Wasima R (jp) wrote: it was alright movie, the only reason i watched it was coz of my salman khan, simply hate the rest of star cast
Beck S (gb) wrote: This movie is just not good even by 1999's standards. Before Rogue One was released, this was the only Star Wars movie I haven't seen (spin offs not included). I do not remember much about episode 2, but it's definitely worse than episode 3 from memory (I'll go over both movies when I get the chance to watch them again). The characters are bland, some actors sound bad or monotone, the effects look like they're out of an animated movie and not real (the CGI might have been good for back then), there's a lack of tension, the pod race was boring, jar jar binks was not funny (although I didn't get annoyed by him), and there was too much cluttered stuff. Oh yeah, the plot is all over the place and has holes. I great example of this is the council warns about Anakin possibly being evil and they later just accept. What?
Lilah K (nl) wrote: Such a funny movie. I love the ending.
Freeman M (us) wrote: Terrible, and not even so-bad-it's-funny. Just BAD.
Zach M (de) wrote: Another beautiful movie from Miyazaki. A sea plane pilot who has become a pig, is a bounty hunter who gets attacked by an American pilot hired by pirates.Gets his plane fixed and becomes a man again.
Juli N (de) wrote: Breathtaking cinematography befitting a noir of this high caliber!
Joey I (nl) wrote: It's hard to rate this appropriately given the fact that it was made in 1920 and is a silent, black and white film. For the time period, the way it is shot and presented is certainly more dynamic than anything else available. The finale was actually pretty cool, considering it looked like the actors actually were on water and floating platforms. Even so, I fell asleep during the middle of the film for about 20 minutes.