Connect with us

Movie Reviews

‘Tiny Lights’ Review: Empathetic Czech Drama Sees the World Through a Child’s Eyes

Published

on

‘Tiny Lights’ Review: Empathetic Czech Drama Sees the World Through a Child’s Eyes

If you’re lucky enough to remember memories from your early childhood, you’ll know they tend to be fragmentary, skewed from an outlook incapable of fully grasping the adult world. Czech filmmaker Beata Parkanova captures that feeling beautifully in her film receiving its world premiere at the Karlovy Vary International Film Festival. Related entirely through the viewpoint of a six-year-old girl, Tiny Lights emerges as a small gem.

It helps that the little girl, Amalka, is played by adorable child actress Mia Banko, possessing wide, saucer eyes that are endlessly expressive and long red hair of which Heidi would be jealous. In the opening scene, Amalka hears voices emanating from a closed-door room and, naturally curious, attempts to listen. She hears her grandmother angrily say to her mother, “Happiness? Save it for the fairy tales,” but she has no idea of what it means.

Tiny Lights

The Bottom Line

Skillfully observed.

Advertisement

Venue: Karlovy Vary International Film Festival
Cast: Mia Banko, Elizaveta Maximova, Marek Geisberg, Veronika Zilkova, Martin Finger
Director-screenwriter: Beata Barkanova

1 hour 16 minutes

So she goes to play with her very submissive cat, apparently named Mr. Cat. But she tests Mr. Cat’s patience by putting him inside a wooden chest, from which her grandfather (Martin Finger) soon rescues him. She returns to the room, and when she opens the door, the adults grow silent. “I’m bored,” Amalka says petulantly, and her grandmother (Veronika Zilkova) tries to assuage her by promising that she’ll take her to the lake that afternoon.

After naughtily picking flowers that we later learn came from a neighbor’s garden, Amalka has soup for lunch, unaware of the tensions surrounding her. Her grandparents live up to their promise by taking her to the lake, where her grandfather teaches her how to dive. They hike in the woods and pick blueberries, but Amalka throws a tantrum when told they have to leave.

Advertisement

And so the film goes, with Amalka trying to amuse herself as the adults seem to be engaged in tense confrontations, especially when her mother (Elizaveta Maximova) shows up with a strange French man and announces that she’s going with him to Prague. Amalka, of course, doesn’t comprehend what’s happening except when it relates to her, as when her father (Marek Geisberg) gently upbraids her for picking the flowers and tells her that she’ll have to apologize to the neighbor. As the day ends, she goes to bed, unaware of the fissure in her parents’ relationship, and her father wearily reads her a bedtime story that she’s heard a thousand times before but clearly still finds fascinating.

Even with its brief running time, Tiny Lights demands a certain degree of patience with its intense focus on banal childhood preoccupations. The filmmaker also indulges in stylistic flourishes — principally quick inserted shots that look like they were captured on 8mm and feature a series of close-up views of objects and facial features ­— that are more distracting than illuminating. The strained attempts at artiness just feel self-conscious.

But for most of the film’s running time, Parkanova maintains tight control over her material, making us fully identify with little Amalka and her preoccupations. The film presents things from her viewpoint, even physically; DP Tomas Juricek often places the camera low down, aligning with her diminutive size. The story takes place over the course of a single day, and its poignancy derives from the fact that we, if not Amalka, are fully aware that her life is going to change, possibly forever.

Or maybe she does realize it, as evidenced by the haunting, lingering final shot, in which we see the silhouette of her body as she peers through the large windows of her bedroom, as if trying to see the world beyond her limited perspective.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Movie Reviews

Hyperreal Film Club Review – ‘SHARP: Moving Picture II’

Published

on

Hyperreal Film Club Review – ‘SHARP: Moving Picture II’

Vague Visages’ SHARP: Moving Picture II review contains minor spoilers. This article covers the films Obsidian, Over Herd and Burn. Check out the VV home page for more film criticism, movie reviews and film essays.

In the city of Austin, keeping it “weird” is the name of the game. The coroner’s report on the counterculture’s demise is indeed fake news based on my recent screening of SHARP: Moving Picture II, a showcase of 20 experimental shorts, video art and non-narrative works from up-and-coming artists/filmmakers via the Hyperreal Film Club. This cavalcade of ambitious eccentricities and diasporic dreamers isn’t after your validation, nor should it be considered “main character energy.” Superficiality takes a back seat as the artists, in most cases, communicate their beliefs with mere glimpses and “flickers.”

Joseph Gonzalez of The Austin Chronicle nails the SHARP: Moving Picture II vibe, characterizing the filmmakers as having “something different to say about jagged edges of experience.” Nowhere is this truer than in the work of Jay aka j4_qv and his meditative one-shot Obsidian (2026). In under five minutes, the filmmaker allows viewers to ruminate on their own sharp edges and half-dreamt truths. To amplify this spiritual energy, Jay uses three massive indigenous monoliths, whose aura evokes not an inhospitable presence but rather a beguiling prologue for additional works to come. If one finds a fault in the work, it’s the diehard, fanboy nature of it all. Key shots throughout evoke “The Final Messenger” episode of Neon Genesis Evangelion (1995-96), while the music and backdrop resemble Toluca Lake of the Silent Hill video game franchise. All are admirable choices, and yes, the sound mixing rocks. Yet the cost of Jay’s approach is the lack of a distinct vantage point. Nevertheless, the artist’s thought-provoking and druid imagery hints at a breakout that’s to come.

SHARP: Moving Picture II Review: Related — Short Film Review: Marcellus Cox’s ‘Jamarcus Rose & Da 5 Bullet Holes’

Advertisement

The midsection is where several films’ themes, though vivid and suggestive, begin to lose focus and become repetitive. Several vignettes appear under variations of SHARP, such as Sharps or Shaaarrrrp, which weakens the sense of uniqueness. The inclusion of miscellaneous cartoon cat videos is perhaps an effort to bolster the broader theme of transition. One notable short, Burn, near the end of this section, follows a man who is not yet ready to confront or reveal his identity. In the course of roughly 10 minutes, Burn immerses viewers into his internal struggle, approaching the subject in a distinctly Kafkaesque way. The camera remains in a fixed point-of-view position, while various objects of torture — kitchen torches, rough plastics and cigarette butts — are used to evoke the sense of an itch that just can’t be scratched. Parallel shots of a silhouette and an array of women interrupt these tortuous images. There’s a lack of emotional connection to the subject and zero continuity with the events that transpire, rendering the whole episode a booming cry for help that’s stifled by the lack of internal or external dialogue. Viewers simply receive a brief glimpse of the protagonist’s inner torment.

SHARP: Moving Picture II Review: Related — Review: 2026 Oscar Nominees for Animated Short Film

The film presentation ended in a typical Generation Z-type scenario, not with an emo millennial scoff but with a stare. Henna Chou’s smart stroke Over Herd (2026) circumnavigates the typical deer-in-headlights, coming-of-age lecture, but rather than spoofing these situations, the director allows their featured friend to remain anonymous, by way of a bison serving as the avatar. The whole conversation of their complex and queer-coded relationship/friendship with their boss evolves as a mash-up of MTV’s Girl Code (2013-2018) and Cartoon Network’s Tim and Eric Awesome Show, Great Job! (2007-10). The deal seals itself largely because of the deliberate distortion of the vocal audio track. One can never be quite sure whether the audio comes from the bison or a non-diegetic source.

SHARP: Moving Picture II Review: Related — Borscht Belt Film Fest Review (Short): Joel Perez’s ‘Villa Encanto’

In the May 2026 issue of Time, Christopher Nolan suggests that all directors remain anonymous. Art should speak for itself and personalities should not overshadow the message. Given the lucrative yet superficial nature of Hollywood, such a statement may be wishful thinking. SHARP, however, may just hit the mark. The combination of teasing glimpses and the absence of titles and/or character names conveys the notion that “This is who I am — deal with it.” This isn’t to say that the feature creators are off the grid. The names of the artists/filmmakers can be found on the Hyperreal website, but the art trumps the personalities. In the spirit of philosopher John Locke, these individuals are not uniquely defined by their physical bodies but rather by their own conscious awareness and experiences. They should not need to round off any edges to suit others.

Advertisement

Peter Bell (@PeterGBell25) is a 2016 Master of Arts – Film Studies graduate of Columbia University School of Arts in New York City. His interests include film history, film theory and film criticism. Ever since watching TCM as a child, Peter has had a passion for film, always trying to add greater context to film for others. His favorite films include Chinatown, Blade Runner, Lawrence of Arabia, A Shot in the Dark and Inception. Peter believes movie theaters are still the optimal forum for film viewing, discussion and discovering fresh perspectives on culture.

SHARP: Moving Picture II Review: Related — Review: 2026 Oscar Nominees for Live-Action Short Film

Categories: 2020s, 2026 Film Reviews, Drama, Featured, Film, Movies, Short Films

Advertisement

Tagged as: 2026, Drama Movie, Film Actors, Film Actresses, Film Critic, Film Criticism, Film Director, Film Essay, Film Explained, Film Journalism, Film Publication, Film Summary, Journalism, Movie Actors, Movie Actresses, Movie Critic, Movie Director, Movie Essay, Movie Explained, Movie Journalism, Movie Plot, Movie Publication, Movie Summary, Peter Bell, Rotten Tomatoes, SHARP: Moving Picture II, Short Film Essay, Streaming

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

TODAY Film Critic Gene Shalit Dies After ‘100 Years of an Amazing Life’

Published

on

TODAY Film Critic Gene Shalit Dies After ‘100 Years of an Amazing Life’

Gene Shalit, the popular film critic who spent decades with TODAY, has died. He was 100 years old.

In a statement to NBC News, Shalit’s family said he “passed away peacefully today after 100 years of an amazing life.”

Born March 25, 1926, Shalit was an instantly recognizable personality. Along with his distinctive handlebar mustache, poofy hair, eyeglasses and bow ties, he is best remembered for his love of puns while doing reviews on the show’s “Critic’s Corner” segment.

A graduate of the University of Illinois, Shalit became a part-time TODAY personality in 1970 and was elevated to a full-time role in 1973, replacing Joe Garagiola. He remained with the show until he retired in 2010. “It’s enough already,” he said in a statement announcing his retirement.

In addition to his reviews, Shalit interviewed scores of celebrities during his TODAY tenure. His 1979 sit-down with Carol Channing is best remembered for the actor telling a story about having trouble understanding the British accent that left him in tears from laughing so hard.

Advertisement

“What’s the matter with him?” a smiling Channing said as Shalit tried to gather himself.

His movie reviews were often punctuated by his use of puns, which became his calling card.

Shalit made regular appearances on classic game shows “What’s My Line?” and “To Tell the Truth” and wrote for a wide range of newspapers and magazines, including The New York Times, Cosmopolitan, Glamour and TV Guide. He also wrote and broadcast a daily piece called “Man About Anything” on NBC’s radio network for over a decade.

In addition, he authored the 1987 anthology “Laughing Matters: A Celebration of American Humor.” He also compiled the book “Great Hollywood Wit” in 2002.

“Shalit has performed with the Boston Symphony Orchestra in Boston’s Symphony Hall and Tanglewood, played his bassoon on stage in Lincoln Center, and conducted the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra in a full concert of classical music. In none of these venues has he ever been invited back,” read a cheeky bio of Shalit in the 2007 book “Mazel Tov: Celebrities’ Bar and Bat Mitzvah Memories.”

He also lent his voice as a character named Gene Scallop in a 2007 episode of “SpongeBob SquarePants.”

He became pop culture fodder, often being lampooned on “Family Guy” and portrayed by Horatio Sanz on “Saturday Night Live.”

Shalit had six children with late wife Nancy, one of whom, Emily, died in 2012 from ovarian cancer.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Gene Shalit, longtime Today show movie critic, dies at 100

Published

on

Gene Shalit, longtime Today show movie critic, dies at 100

Gene Shalit, a movie critic and arts reporter for the Today show over four decades who was known for his puffy hair, oversized handlebar mustache and affection for groan-inducing puns, has died. He was 100.

Shalit’s family announced the death Friday to NBC News, saying in a statement that he “passed away peacefully today after 100 years of an amazing life”.

Shalit joined Today as a contributor in 1970 and became arts editor in 1973, later settling in for his segment, Critic’s Corner. When he left the show in 2010, he was one of the last high-profile film critics on a major network.

“What resonated above his unusual appearance was his incredible wit, his remarkable intelligence. But he didn’t pound you over the head with it. He amused you. He enlightened and amused whatever subject he was on,” Guy Ludwig, Shalit’s producer for more than 20 years, wrote in an essay.

It was no coincidence that Chicago critics Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel’s local “thumbs-up, thumbs-down” movie-review program, Sneak Previews, went national on PBS in the late 1970s and that Today show’s ABC rival, Good Morning America, hired Joel Siegel to be its movie critic in 1981.

Advertisement

“Shalit was instrumental in changing the balance of critical power in America. When he began his ‘Today’ tenure, newspapers and magazines were the primary sources for movie reviews. That’s where cinematic opinion was sparked and shaped,” the Plain Dealer wrote in 2010, calling Shalit “Daniel Boone in a bow tie and Groucho glasses”.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending