Off-Topic: The Euro Confusion

In 1999 a new currency was introduced, the Euro. Actually, it was introduced in two stages, as a virtual currency for online transactions only on 1st January 1999, and as a real currency when Euro banknotes and coins were distributed on 1st January 2002. In this article I don't want to discuss the currency itself, but the symbol used to represent it, as shown above.

The Euro symbol was first made public on 12th December 1996, after the European Commission held secret sessions to pick from a selection of 30 designs. The 29 rejected designs were kept secret to avoid public discussion about the symbol after its release. I can't help admitting that I'm curious. Someone somewhere must have a list that's been lying in his desk for the last 30 years.

The symbol is supposedly a letter E with two horizontal bars. I don't see the resemblance to an E. It looks much more like a capital C. Maybe there's a slight resemblance to a small E, but even so it looks more like a capital C.

At first it was requested that the symbol should be used exactly as shown above, but typeface designers protested. Their argument was that all other currency symbols, such as the American dollar and the British pound, vary from one typeface to another in order to retain the typeface's style. The European Commission was sensible enough to allow artistic renderings of the Euro symbol.

Here are examples of the Euro symbol in five common fonts. Note that the C in the Euro symbol has been squashed in every case except for Courier New, a monospace font.

Since I moved to Germany I've been confused to see the Euro currency symbol written both before and after the number, either €25.99 or 25.99 €. Today I finally checked which one is correct. Germany's official writing guidelines, DIN 5008, is clear on the subject. The Euro symbol has to be written after the number with a separating space. The only exception is that banks and financial institutions are allowed to put the symbol before numbers. Anyone who puts it before the number in other contexts is wrong.

What about the other European countries? Ireland, Malta, the Netherlands and Cyprus put the symbol before the number, all others put it after the number. So much for European unity! But there's one more rule that makes it even more confusing. Any document written in English, such as a tourism brochure or a restaurant menu at an airport, must place the Euro symbol before numbers regardless of national rules.

This is a mess. Is it too late for the European Commission to send a letter to all the European Union's member states, telling them to do it one way only?

Thunderbolt (3 Stars)

Please don't get this film confused with "Thunderbolts", which I watched last week. "Thunderbolt" is a Hong Kong sports film starring Jackie Chan, made in 1995.

It's one of Chan's strangest films because it sidelines the very thing that made him famous. Instead of wall to wall martial arts, the film spends most of its running time on high speed car racing, leaving fans waiting far too long for the action they came to see.

Chan plays Chan Foh To, a gifted mechanic whose driving skills attract the attention of both the police and an infamous street racer known as Cougar. After helping the authorities catch a criminal, Foh To becomes the target of Cougar's revenge. The ruthless racer kidnaps Foh To's sisters and forces him into a series of increasingly dangerous races, knowing that defeat could cost innocent lives.

The film builds towards a climactic race rather than a climactic fight. The final showdown is an extended, high stakes motorsport spectacle featuring exotic cars, spectacular crashes and dangerous stunts. The racing is undeniably well executed, but it leaves martial arts fans short changed. Apart from a handful of brief fights scattered throughout the film, Jackie Chan has surprisingly little opportunity to showcase the acrobatic combat that made him an international star.

Viewed purely as a racing thriller, "Thunderbolt" is entertaining and technically accomplished. Viewed as a Jackie Chan film it's a disappointment. The cars get far more screen time than Chan's fists, making it one of the least satisfying entries in his Hong Kong career for fans of his trademark action style.

That's three films in a row that I've watched which star Jackie Chan. I'm taking a short break now. I already know what I'm going to watch next, because the Blu-ray is already in my player. You'll have to wait until tomorrow to find out what it is.

Rumble In The Bronx (4½ Stars)

"Rumble in the Bronx" (1995) is the film that finally made Jackie Chan a star in America, even though it was originally made for the Hong Kong market. New Line Cinema gave it a wide US release in 1996, and audiences who'd never seen Chan before were amazed by his breath-taking stunts, acrobatic fight scenes and effortless comic timing. Overnight, Hollywood realised it had been ignoring one of the world's greatest action stars.

The film itself is surprisingly uneven. It takes almost half an hour to get going, with too much dull chatter and a paper thin plot before the action really kicks in. Even then, much of its version of New York feels like a collection of Chinese stereotypes about America, complete with cartoonish street gangs and exaggerated culture clashes. Fortunately, once Jackie gets moving, the film comes alive. The spectacular shopping centre fight, rooftop leaps and the unforgettable hovercraft chase in the streets of New York are among the most inventive action scenes of the decade. "Rumble in the Bronx" may not be Jackie Chan's best film, but it was the one that finally introduced his extraordinary talents to America, and cinema was better for it.

Drunken Master 2 (5 Stars)

Despite its title, "Drunken Master 2" (1994) isn't a sequel to "Drunken Master" (1978). The only connection is that Jackie Chan is once again playing the legendary folk hero Wong Fei-Hung and using the famous "drunken boxing" style. The stories are completely unrelated, the tone is different and even the characterisation of Wong Fei-Hung has changed. In the original film, Wong is a mischievous teenager learning discipline from the eccentric Beggar So. Here, he's an accomplished martial artist whose greatest challenge comes not from learning kung fu but from balancing respect for tradition with doing what's morally right.

Set in early twentieth century China during the final years of the Qing Dynasty, the film takes place at a time when foreign powers were exploiting the country's political weakness. Rather than telling a simple revenge story, "Drunken Master 2" uses this historical backdrop to explore the theft of China's cultural treasures by corrupt officials and foreign interests. National pride runs throughout the film, but it never overwhelms the action or the humour.

What sets "Drunken Master 2" apart is Jackie Chan's astonishing physical performance. Every fight builds on the last, combining comedy, breath-taking acrobatics and bone crunching stunt work with almost impossible precision. The final battle against Ken Lo is one of the greatest martial arts fights ever filmed, ending with a spectacular sequence in a steelworks that pushes Chan's willingness to risk serious injury to unbelievable levels.

More than thirty years later, "Drunken Master 2" remains the high point of Jackie Chan's career. It's not a true sequel to "Drunken Master", but it surpasses the original in almost every way. Funny, exhilarating and technically astonishing, it's one of the greatest martial arts films ever made and the film that finally convinced the world that Jackie Chan was a once in a generation talent.

Downsizing (4 Stars)

"Downsizing" has one of the most brilliant science fiction concepts in recent years, then spends the next two hours trying to avoid it.

The opening act is wonderfully inventive. Scientists discover how to shrink human beings to five inches tall, promising a future where overpopulation, climate change and financial inequality might finally be solved. Matt Damon's everyman sees downsizing as a chance to escape his ordinary life, and the film initially feels like a sharp satire of consumerism and modern economics.

Then it changes its mind.

What begins as a social comedy becomes a marital drama. That soon gives way to a fish-out-of-water story, before turning into a romance, then a critique of wealth inequality, then a meditation on global poverty, followed by an environmental apocalypse and finally a philosophical search for the meaning of life. Each new theme pushes aside the previous one, leaving the fascinating central premise increasingly forgotten.

The result is a film that feels less like a carefully constructed narrative and more like several unfinished screenplays stitched together. Every time "Downsizing" finds an interesting idea, it abandons it in favour of another. The miniature world itself, arguably the film's greatest attraction, becomes little more than a backdrop for subjects that could have been explored without shrinking anyone at all.

The real disappointment isn't that "Downsizing" has too many ideas. It's that it refuses to develop any of them fully. Rather than exploring the social, political and ethical consequences of its extraordinary premise, it keeps jumping to the next big theme before the previous one has had time to breathe.

"Downsizing" is an ambitious film that deserves credit for thinking big, but its constant thematic detours prevent it from becoming the great science fiction satire it could have been. It shrinks its characters, but never quite decides what it really wants to say.

Success Rate:  - 1.2

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de

Rush Hour 3 (4½ Stars)

I watched "Rush Hour" and "Rush Hour 2" back to back in 2022, but I waited four years to watch the third film. It was a mistake to wait so long, but maybe it was wise to have a gap. The first two films are masterpieces. The third film is good, I'd say very good, but in a direct comparison with the first two films it falls short.

Instead of building on the strengths of its predecessors, "Rush Hour 3" settles for repeating the formula with less energy and lower stakes. The only thing in its favour is that there are more laughs. It's still watchable thanks to its stars, but it's easily the weakest entry in the trilogy.

Success Rate:  + 0.1

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de

The Housemaid (4 Stars)

Before it was even released, "The Housemaid" had all the ingredients of a guilty pleasure thriller. A bestselling novel, an attractive cast and a premise built around secrets, lies and shifting loyalties promised something in the vein of "Gone Girl". The result is an entertaining psychological thriller that delivers plenty of tension, even if it doesn't quite reach the heights it could have.

Amanda Seyfried gives the film its strongest performance. She walks a fine line between elegance, vulnerability and menace, constantly making you question her true intentions. It's a layered performance that keeps the audience guessing from beginning to end. Sydney Sweeney is equally compelling as Millie, bringing warmth and determination to a character who could easily have been reduced to a typical thriller heroine. Her chemistry with Seyfried gives the film much of its dramatic power.

Where "The Housemaid" falls short is in its screenplay. Some of the twists are telegraphed too early, while others arrive so quickly that they don't have enough time to breathe. The final act is exciting, but a little more restraint and psychological ambiguity would have made the revelations more satisfying. The supporting characters are also somewhat underdeveloped, making them feel more like plot devices than fully realised people. Would the film have lost anything without the gardener Enzo?

Even so, the film remains an absorbing watch. The stylish direction, strong atmosphere and committed performances ensure that the suspense rarely fades. It may not become a classic of the genre, but thanks to Amanda Seyfried and Sydney Sweeney, "The Housemaid" is a polished, entertaining thriller that keeps you invested until its final twist.

Success Rate:  + 9.4

Fantastic Four: First Steps (5 Stars)

Marvel's "The Fantastic Four: First Steps" is easily one of the MCU's strongest films in years. Instead of relying on endless cameos and multiverse chaos, it tells a confident, self contained story with genuine heart. The retro futuristic 1960's setting gives the film its own identity, Pedro Pascal, Vanessa Kirby, Joseph Quinn and Ebon Moss-Bachrach make an instantly believable family and Galactus finally feels like the cosmic threat fans have waited decades to see.

So why wasn't it a box office sensation? The biggest problem wasn't the film itself. Years of uneven Marvel releases have eroded audience trust, making many viewers wait for streaming instead of rushing to cinemas. Superhero fatigue has also become a real factor, and the Fantastic Four have never had the mainstream popularity of Spider-Man or the Avengers. By the time "First Steps" arrived, it was trying to win back audiences who'd already stopped paying attention.

Ironically, one of Marvel's best recent films became a victim of the franchise's weaker years. "The Fantastic Four: First Steps" proves the MCU can still produce exciting, character driven blockbusters. It just arrived after too much damage had already been done.

Success Rate:  + 0.9

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de