Czech Dream (2004)

Best movie of this year hands down!

good film but with many flaws

Excellent, a Must See

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

The idea for this movie is actually really good. 'We advertise for a fake company and see how many people fall for it'. The only problem with this movie is that the production is pretty unprofessional and sometimes quite annoying. Of course I understand that it's produced by two students but it's not commensurate with the large budget.The difference between shots are too big, some shots are filmed really steady and look professional, other shots are filmed with a handy cam by someone who apparently has some sort of Parkinson. They rather invested more money into a camera crew than all that money for the advertisement campaign.Well, overall it's not a bad movie. The guys are funny, the concept is good but the production annoyed me a bit. Do you want to enjoy a massive high-priced prank? Watch this movie, it won't disappoint you.

I don't want to waste too much time on this review, as the film itself was already time wasting enough.First of all, nothing happens. The picture of the film makers being chased on the front cover was bogus, they weren't chased, they weren't attacked -- some people argued with them at the end of the 'prank' in an extremely non-threatening way and that was all.Secondly, the film was extremely poorly made. It's honestly hard to make a documentary this boring, everything about the production was poor and not even up to a decent amateur standard. It's amazing how poorly edited and selected the cuts that they used were. Just really, really, woefully poor film making.In the end, when pressed on the issue, the film makers admitted that they got the money for this big hoax as a grant from the Czech government. Apparently, they are privileged boys with some connections. It's actually quite sickening when you think about a relatively poor nation like the Czech Republic having their tax dollars squandered in this way so that two unusually dim witted brats can play a big joke on a couple thousand people.And I have to say, considering the time and resources involved, getting what looked like at most 2,000 people to show up for the joke is not very impressive. These guys are underachievers all the way to the finish.Boring, offensive, poorly made, waste of time. End.

Like most people I was intrigued when I heard the concept of this film, especially the "film makers were then attacked" aspect that the case seems to emphasize, what with the picture on the cover of the film makers being chased by an angry mob.Then, to watch the film and discover, oh, what they mean by "the film makers were attacked" was some kids threw rocks at a sign and a number of people complained loudly and said "Someone should beat those two kids up." The picture on the cover, "the chase" as it were? Total fabrication. Which I guess ties in with the theme of the film, lying and manipulation to satisfy vain, stupid children with more money and time then sense.I have no idea what great truth the viewer is supposed to take away from this film. It's like Michael Moore's "Roger & Me", but if "Roger & Me" was Moore mocking the people of Flint. It's completely misdirected and totally inane. Wow! Can you believe that people who suffered under the yoke of Communism would be really excited to have markets full of food? What jerks! And it's not so much, "Look at the effects of capitalism and western media blah blah blah", since it wasn't just that their fake market had comparable prices to the competitors, it was that, as many people in the film say, the prices were absurdly low, someone mentions that they should've known it was fake by how much they were charging for duck. That's not proving anything except that people who are poor, will go to a store that has low prices, bravo fellas, way to stick it to the people on the bottom.Way to play a stupid practical joke on elderly people. You should be very proud. How about for your next movie you make a documentary about Iraq and show how people there will get really excited for a house without bullet holes in the walls and then, say, "HAHA! NO SUCH HOUSE EXISTS! YOUR SO STUPID AND LOVED TO BE LIED TO BY THE MEDIA!".Morgan "Please Like Me" Spurlock unleashed this wet fart of a film and it's no surprise since Spurlock as One Hit Wonder prince of the documentary world seems to throw his weight behind any silly sounding concept to stay relevant in a world that really has no need of him.Avoid like the plague.

The main problem with the documentary "Czech Dream" is that isn't really saying what it thinks it's saying.In an audacious - I hesitate to use the word "inspired" - act of street theater, Vit Klusak and Filip Remunda, two student filmmakers from the Czech Republic, pulled off a major corporate hoax to serve as the basis for their movie: they deliberately fabricated a phony "hypermarket" (the Eastern European equivalent of Costco or Wal Mart Super Store), built an entire ad campaign around it - replete with billboards, radio and TV spots, an official logo, a catchy theme song and photos of fake merchandise - and then waited around to see just how many "dopes" would show up to their creation on opening day. They even built a makeshift façade to convince people that the store itself actually existed.One might well ask, "Why do such a thing?" Well, that's a very good question, but the answer the filmmakers provide isn't all that satisfying a one. Essentially, we're told that the purpose of the stunt was to show how easily people can be manipulated into believing something - even something that's not true - simply through the power of advertising. And the movie makers run for moral cover by claiming that the "real" (i.e. higher) purpose for the charade is to convince the Czech people not to fall for all the advertisements encouraging them to join the European Union. Fair enough - especially when one considers that the actual advertisers who agree to go along with the stunt declaim against the unethical nature of lying to customers, all the while justifying their collaboration in the deception by claiming it to be a form of "research" into what does and does not work in advertising. In a way, by allowing themselves to be caught on camera making these comments, these ad men and women are as much dupes of the filmmakers as the poor unsuspecting people who are the primary target of the ruse.But, in many ways, the satirical arrow not only does not hit its intended target, it ironically zeroes right back around on the very filmmakers who launched it. For it is THEY THEMSELVES and NOT the good-hearted and naturally trusting people who ultimately come off as the unethical and classless ones here, as they proceed to make fools out of perfectly decent people, some of them old and handicapped and forced to travel long distances on foot to get to the spot. And what is all this supposed to prove anyway? That people are "greedy" because they go to the opening of a new supermarket looking for bargains? Or that they're stupid and gullible because they don't suspect that there might not be an actual market even though one has been advertised? Such vigilance would require a level of cynicism that would make it virtually impossible to function in the real world.No, I'm afraid this smart-alecky, nasty little "stunt" only proves what complete and utter jerks the filmmakers are for making some really nice people feel like idiots. And, indeed many of them, when they finally discover the trick that's been played on them, react with a graciousness and good humor I'm not sure I would be able to muster were I to find myself in their position.I'm not saying that the movie isn't gripping - something akin to witnessing a massive traffic accident in action - but, when the dust has finally settled and all the disappointed customers return red-faced and empty-handed to their homes, we can safely declare that they are not the ones who should be feeling ashamed.