Halloween 2 (4½ Stars)

"Don't you know what happens at Halloween?" – "Yeah! We get candy!"

This is a direct sequel to "Halloween". It was made three years later, in 1981, but it starts immediately after the events of the first film. It's more accurate to say that the films overlap, because the first three minutes of "Halloween 2" is a repeat of the last three minutes of "Halloween".

Michael Myers was shot six times, but after falling out of the window he got up and walked away. Dr. Sam Loomis (Donald Pleasance) is determined to catch him before he can kill anyone else.

Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) received a stab wound in the first film, so she's taken to Haddonfield Memorial Hospital. Michael Myers follows her to the hospital. He stalks the corridors, killing person after person while searching for her.

This film reveals why he wants to kill Laurie. Unknown to her, she's Michael's sister. She was adopted when her parents died. He killed one of his sisters, now he wants to kill the other.

"Halloween 2" isn't quite up to the standard of the first film. Almost, but not quite. Nevertheless, it's a film that tidily rounds off the Michael Myers saga. Michael is burnt to a crisp and couldn't possibly survive. John Carpenter intended it to be the end of the character, but the studios thought differently.

Success Rate:  + 8.2

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

Halloween [1978] (5 Stars)

I didn't watch a horror film every day this month, but I'm keeping to my tradition of watching the original version of "Halloween" every year on 31st October. It's a relatively new tradition; this is only my third year. This year I'm making it a double bill, watching "Halloween" and "Halloween 2" back to back. I don't know if I'll do that every year from now on. Maybe. They go well together, because the action continues seamlessly from the first film to the next.

I'm not going to write a review of the film. I assume everyone knows it, unless you've been hiding under a rock for the last 45 years.

Success Rate:  + 213.4

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

Five Nights at Freddy's (4½ Stars)

I watched the trailer for "Five Nights at Freddy's" twenty-five times before I went to see the film. That's not an estimate. I watched it exactly twenty-five times. I know the exact number, because it was shown before every film at the Fantasy Film Festival last month. That's how many films I watched.

Having said that, the trailer gave me the wrong impression. It looked like a security guard taking his daughter with him to work at an abandoned fairground, where he was attacked by killer robots. But that's not what happens in the film. First, it isn't his daughter, it's his (much) younger sister. Second, it's not a fairground, it's a pizza parlour. Third, the robots aren't killers. Not all of them, anyway.

Mike Schmidt is a socially awkward young man. He's done a series of jobs, but he's always fired within a few weeks. After the death of his parents in an accident he's taking care of his younger sister Abby. Her age isn't stated, but the actress who played her was seven at the time of filming. Abby is distant, maybe due to the loss of her parents. She spends all her time drawing pictures or talking to an imaginary friend.

Mike is offered a job as a night watchman at a disused pizza parlour called Freddy Fazbear's. It needs protection against vandalism. The pizza parlour is full of still functional pinball machines, and there are also giant animal robots that play music. When it's least expected they come to life. Abby makes friends with the robots and plays with them every night.

So there's no danger? Of course there is, but I'm not going to give away everything. All I'll say is that Mike is haunted by dreams of his brother being abducted when they were small children. These dreams are somehow connected with Freddy's Pizza Parlour.

Based on what I've read, critics don't like the film, but it's been a commercial success with the public. The fans are right, the critics are wrong.

Veneciafrenia (5 Stars)

I watched "Veneciafrenia" two days ago, but after waiting so long to see it I had to watch it again as soon as possible. It's an incredible non-slasher film. What's most shocking is that the Jester can kill his victims in public, because the tourists think it's all a show. When Arantza lies dying on the bridge everyone applauds, saying that the blood looks realistic.

Two days ago I watched the film in Spanish with English subtitles. Today I watched the film dubbed into English. It was awful! The voices of the older characters sound much too young, and there's no emotion in any of the voices. Did they pick up strangers from the street as voice actors? They should be ashamed of themselves.

In a way, it's a shame that the film isn't a real slasher movie. The character of the Jester is so terrifying that I'd like to see him again.

The Five Obstructions (2003) [Guest Writer] (3½ Stars)

In the year 2000, Lars von Trier, the 'enfant terrible' of cinema (and chief provocateur at many a Cannes film festival) challenged his Haiti-based fellow-Dane mentor/poet/director Jørgen Leth to remake a 13-minute surreal short film 'The Perfect Human' (1968)... not once, but in five different 'obstructed' variations. The film opens with the two colleagues chatting casually in Lars's dingy living room adorned by a dusty old school CRT TV. "The Perfect Human is a little gem that we're now going to ruin" says Lars with a glint of mephistophelean mischief in his eyes.

The tone of 'The Five Obstructions' (90 minutes of Blu-Ray) is one of dry, deadpan barely-humour and joyful underproduction. Lars instructs the cameraman to continue filming Jørgen while he takes two minutes to think silently.  "I want you to make a crap film. I want to banalize you," Lars tells his cinematic forebear with a sadistic yet loving level of control and authority. The two directors share the occasional smile as if operating on a buddy mentality, both acknowledging the tongue-in-cheek nature of the experiment. 

Let's start with a brief background: Lars Von Trier was the of pioneer of the avant-garde Dogme 95 movement together with Thomas Vinterberg. They spawned a signed declaration introducing self-imposed restrictions on their film-making. The aim was to preserve purity of intent and artistic integrity (story, acting and theme), and to prevent the churning out of shallow films where technological trickery would steal the limelight. The only Lars von Trier film to follow the movement 'to a tee' ended up being the provocative 'Idiots' (1998), but all of his subsequent works have featured elements of self-restraint in the use of artificial special effects. The timing and motivation of 'The Five Obstructions' are both byproducts of the same school of thought. 

'The Perfect Human' 1968 shows Claus Nissen's character jumping, dancing, and eating. We see close-ups of human knees : it is a clinical investigation into human perfection, set against a fully white background. Maiken Algren plays the perfect woman. "Here is a human ear... and here is an ear again." says a detached narrator voice. The main character is sorrowful about lost love while eating a lavish dinner, and expects to understand an existential thought he had, but only two days in the future. The film is open-ended and awkwardly poetic.

Lars proposes five different improvised-on-the-spot obstructions to his flustered colleague, Jørgen:

1) The first film needs to use choppy 12-frame edits, needs to be filmed in Cuba (an improvised rule due to Jørgen smoking a cigar at the time of asking) but needs to answer all of the original film's questions. Cuban dance and flickering imagery follow. The documentary follows the mundane, strange and awkward insights that Jørgen experiences on his travels. Low-key shaky cam musings reveal moments of raw insecurity and self-doubt.

2) Lars wants to push his colleague further with a second film. He instructs Jørgen to travel to the most wretched place on Earth and to play the main character himself. Jørgen chooses the deprived red light district in Mumbai, the most miserable place he remembers visiting. He sets up a transparent screen on a busy street and dressed up in a black-tie suit, performs jumping jacks and feasts on a succulent piece of fish, explaining that such a gourmet meal warrants a glass of Chablis and the finest silverware. Behind the screen, the bemused local folk stare at the opulence while the diner hums : "Why is joy so whimsical? Why is happiness so brief?"

The striking Mumbai film is a triumphant and thought-provoking interpretation of human 'perfection', one would assume? Not so, according to Lars. "I'm very disappointed in you," he says. The film is too good. The locals were not supposed to be shown, only Jørgen himself, to adequately verify whether the wretchedness of the location rubbed onto his friend's demeanour. To resist putting the local sights in the film was supposed to be the real challenge. Lars asks what would be an adequate punishment for misapplying the rules. Jørgen says he'd rather not decide what to do, so Lars says that either Jørgen needs to go back to Mumbai to film against a white wall or he faces the punishment of getting no rules to work with for the next film. Since Jørgen did not want to be left to his own devices, that is precisely what he gets.

3) The next film has French-speaking actors and English narration: it is a dreary film with daydreamy imagery of train tracks, chimneys and loud hotel sex in Brussels. At one point, Jørgen gains inspiration from eavesdropping on rowdy times in the hotel hallway. It is not clear whether the scene is scripted or spontaneous. This is the least entertaining film.

4) The fourth film needs to be a cartoon. "But I hate cartoons," Jørgen complains. "Me too, I f**king hate cartoons," Lars agrees. But he wants Jørgen to squirm. The poet-director explains that although a crap film is what Lars expects, he is too proud to succumb to mediocrity. Poetry matters to him too much. With the help of a Texan animation company, a polished and lyrical animated film is produced. It incorporates animated editions of the other film variations and elicits sentimentality about the human in a subtle way: a man dresses into a jacket multiple times in succession, never comfortable in his perfect skin. Lars is pleased. It is a cartoon. The feedback is short and to the point.

5) For the final film, Lars wants Jørgen to do nothing but to read a narration that Lars has prepared, and to falsely assume director credit for work that he did not do. In the narration, Jørgen expresses his displeasure in Lars forcing him to read words that are not his own. Except that those words are also written by Lars. Are you confused yet? Jørgen is made to declare his depressive traits and vulnerabilities. The real obstruction was the opposite way around:Jørgen inflicted it on Lars by not allowing any film leave a true mark on himself (by hiding his true self). The narration is set on a mellow backdrop of scenes from the documentary itself. 

'The Five Obstructions' is a memorable and unique personality study that veers into vacuous musings and airy pretence at times. It uses 'torturous awkwardness' as a tool to explore what art and inspiration mean. It is a fascinating watch for fans of cinema who are not easily distracted by experimental/meta constructions and who have patience to be challenged. The friendship and gentle respect between mentor and apprentice comes through, despite the jokingly sadistic nature of the asks. Films 2 and 4 were the highlights, as well as the clips from the original 1968 classic, dispersed throughout the runtime of the documentary. While watching, you will learn many 'indispensable' facts about life: for example, that caviar should be consumed using a bone spoon rather than a metallic one. 

Extra remarks:

The Blu-Ray is part of Curzon Cinema's beautiful new collection (2023) of von Trier films. The box is sturdy, has two 7-disc serpentine jewel cases with lush art, a book of essays (left-leaning Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek reviews Melancholia, making the case for it being a tool for understanding clinical depression) and there are four special art posters for collectors (including the famous Dogme 95 declarations, if you fancy hanging it on your bedroom wall). The film 'Dancer in the Dark' is missing (rumour is that the HD version was of poor image quality), and another omission is The Kingdom (Riget) series. 

The disc for 'The Five Obstructions' contains a rare 36-minute experimental black-and-white film by a 22-year old Lars von Trier from 1978: The Orchid Gardener. The film starts with several minutes of ticking emanating from what looks like a birdless cuckoo clock. The disc also contains five minutes of well-spoken musings by film-maker Ari Aster (Midsommar, Hereditary). 

Wikipedia reveals that Jørgen Leth lived in Haiti until an earthquake destroyed most of his belongings in 2010. He continued to live there with friends for half of the year until 2013. He got into media trouble for admitting (in graphic detail) his sexual relations with the 17-year old daughter of his Haitian cook in an autobiography called 'The Imperfect Human'. Amid the controversy, Lars (who himself was accused of sexual harrassment by Björk) was supportive of the release of Erotic Man in 2010 and acted as executive producer. I choose not to speculate on specifics of such matters. 

Thank you to Mike for inviting guest reviews. I look forward to contributing more of these in good time.

- Nicholas Korpelainen

Trolls Band Together (4 Stars)

The five trolls Floyd, John Dory, Spruce, Clay and Baby Branch are in a highly successful boy band called Brozone. They disband after a concert that goes wrong. It's not just the band that splits up. The five brothers go their different ways.

15 years later Branch is no longer a baby. He's in a steady relationship with Queen Poppy. He hears that Floyd has been kidnapped by giant trolls, referred to as bergens. Floyd is trapped inside a diamond that channels his singing ability into the wearer. The only thing that can break the diamond open is perfect family harmony, so he goes on a quest to find his brothers and sing a song to free Floyd.

As you can tell from my brief description, it's a whimsical tale, but it has an overwhelming charm, especially for children. My grandson Oliver loved it, but the biggest reaction was from a girl two seats away. She was leaning forward on her seat for most of the film, and she couldn't stop laughing. I didn't laugh out loud, but I still found the film amusing.

The songs were sung by Justin Timberlake and various boy bands. That's not my sort of music. Normally I would have turned away, but in the context of the film it was perfect. Heavy metal wouldn't have been suitable.

It's a film I want to see again.

Veneciafrenia (5 Stars)

Amazon Friday #37

This is a film that I've been struggling to see for more than 18 months. The difficulties highlight the stupidity of Amazon. It was made in 2021 by Alex de la Iglesia, one of my favourite directors. I waited in vain for it to be released on Blu-ray. Finally I read that it's an Amazon original film, so it wouldn't be released on Blu-ray. That's disappointing. The film was being streamed on Amazon Prime Video in Spain, but without subtitles. Earlier this year I found out that it's now available on Amazon Prime Video in America. If it had been offered for free I could have watched it with a VPN, but it's only available to Buy or Rent, and my German credit cards are refused. Today I found a solution at last, with the help of a very good American friend. I sent her $9.99 by Paypal to buy the film. Then I used a VPN to log into her account. I downloaded the film from Amazon using the excellent software AnyStream. It's not cheap, but it's an essential tool for me as a blogger. Finally I had the film on my hard drive, ready to watch.

Why is Amazon so foolish? If Amazon Studios really intend to boycott the physical media market for their films, they should at least make them available for streaming all over the world. If I hadn't paid more than $150 for my software tool and hadn't had a friend who trusts me with her password, I would have been blocked from seeing this excellent film. That's not right. I hope that an Amazon employee somewhere reads this post and passes on my complaints to his superiors.

When "Veneciafrenia" was released it was described as a slasher movie. That's what it looks like, especially in the opening scenes, but I don't like to give it that title. It doesn't follow the rules of the slasher genre. If you're expecting a crazed killer with supernatural abilities, you'll be disappointed. It's closer to a political satire, but it's a political satire with a lot of killing.

Five Spanish tourists are on holiday in Venice. They arrive in the middle of a protest against cruise ships and the tourists they bring. I can understand this. Venice is one of the most beautiful cities in the world, but it's ruined by tourists. The delicate bridges and narrow alleyways are clogged with foreigners taking photos. The native population of Venice rises up against this threat. Most are happy to stand at the harbour and wave banners, but there's an extremist fringe that wants to kill the tourists.

This is a beautiful film, typical for Alex de la Iglesia. It deals with a mundane scenario, unwelcome tourists in a foreign land, but it escalates into scenes of utter madness. It's a film that everyone should watch in the Halloween week. If they can.

The Conference (3½ Stars)

Netflix Thursday #34

It makes a change for me to watch a Netflix Thursday film on a Thursday. I ought to do it more often.

This is a Swedish slasher film, added to Netflix just in time for Halloween. A company is going to build a shopping mall just outside a small Swedish village called Kolarängen. It's a real village, check it out. They promise to bring prosperity to the community, but the villagers aren't persuaded. A few days before the building begins the company's nine employees arrive for a last-minute conference. They stay at a holiday camp made up of small cabins. I wonder if this holiday camp really exists. They're given relaxing activities to prepare them for their work, such as building a raft and sack jumping.

Not all of the employees agree with the building. Some are shocked to find out that the farmer wasn't paid for the land that will be used. Is that legal? Signatures were forged to get planning permission. But someone wants revenge. A masked figure is prowling the holiday camp, slaughtering the occupants.

It's a reasonable film, but I was disappointed by the lack of character development. Some are young, some are old, some are men, some are women, but they're hardly distinguishable. I couldn't sympathise with the victims. Some of my readers might like the film. Give it a try. It's worth watching at least once.

Four's a Crowd (5 Stars)

I don't hesitate to buy any film made by Alex de la Iglesia. He's a reliable director who can't do anything wrong. His films always start off quietly and escalate. "Four's a crowd" is no exception. Anyone who's flicking around a streaming service for a random film might watch the first five minutes and think "This is boring". Be patient. This is one of the funniest films I've ever seen. I was laughing out loud as the action turned from one ridiculous extreme to another.

The original Spanish title is "El cuarto pasajero", i.e. "The fourth passenger". In this case, the official English title is an improvement, because the third passenger is just as relevant as the fourth.

Julian is a middle-aged businessman who lives in Madrid and works in Bilbao. Every Friday he drives home, and he returns to Bilbao on Monday. To make some money, he offers his services on a car-sharing app, taking three people with him. Lorena, aged 29, is a regular who travels with him every week. The other two passengers are different every week.

Julian has fallen in love with Lorena, but he's too shy to admit it. He's afraid she'll reject him because he's 20 years older than her. This Friday he's finally plucked up the courage to tell her. He's rehearsed a speech. The problem is his extra passengers; the third and fourth. The third is an extroverted man who won't stop talking. Additionally, he says he gets carsick on the back seat, so Julian can't sit next to Lorena. The fourth is a tall handsome man with a guitar, and Lorena is obviously attracted to him.

That's the setting. A simple enough story, a romantic comedy road movie. In the hands of any other director it really would have been boring. Alex de la Iglesia never does what's expected. His films are totally unpredictable. Maybe the film poster I've included above is a spoiler. But the car crash isn't the end of the story, it's just one of the many amusing episodes.

The Blu-ray has only been released in Spain, but it has English subtitles. Click here to buy it.

Climax (4½ Stars)

This is a film that's impossible to describe in words. It's hypnotic, first in a beautiful way, and then it dips into chaos. So much of the film is ugly, and yet it fascinates me. I almost feel guilty when I say how much I like it.

The first time I reviewed the film after seeing it at the Fantasy Film Festival, I recommended that it should be watched while you're slightly intoxicated. Tipsy, not drunk. I didn't do that today. I should have. It's a film to be watched while you're slightly out of control, so that you can lose yourself in the chaos. Also make sure you're in a dark room with the volume turned up as loud as you dare. The alcohol will make you take more risks.

Success Rate:  - 1.5

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

Killers of the Flower Moon (3 Stars)

This is my biggest disappointment of the year. I don't mean the worst film of the year. That was "Skinamarink". What I mean is that I expected so much after seeing the trailer. It looked like an exciting action film. Instead, it was a dreary tale of murders and conspiracies that dragged on for three and a half hours. I might have enjoyed the film if it had only lasted 90 minutes.

I didn't realise until the film started that it was a true story. I'm sympathetic to the uneven pacing of true stories, but in this case it wasn't uneven, it was slow throughout.

The film takes place in the Osage Nation, a reservation belonging to the Osage tribe. In 1897 oil was discovered on their land. The even distribution of wealth made everyone in the tribe rich. Due to murky laws, the oil could only be traded by white businessmen, so a large number of white people moved into the reservation. William Hale (Robert De Niro) was a wealthy rancher who was much loved by the Indians. He helped them with the building of shops and schools. What they didn't know is that he was secretly conspiring to kill Indians and get the money into his own hands. In 1919 his nephew Ernest Burkhart (Leonardo di Caprio) returned from the war and assisted his uncle. The strategy was simple:

Marry an Indian woman. Kill her. Inherit her wealth.

Ernest married an Indian woman, and so did a lot of other white men.

That's all that happens for the whole film. First the murders, then the investigations, then the trial. William Hale is a terrifying man. He honestly thinks he's a good man. After all, he's a 32nd degree Freemason, so he must be a good man. Leonardo DiCaprio's character is annoying. He's simple minded, and he doesn't seem able to differentiate between right and wrong. He swears that he loves his wife, even though he's poisoning her.

If you have the patience, sit through the three and a half hours. Try not to fall asleep.

TV Series: Ms. Marvel

Last week I read that it's important to watch the "Ms. Marvel" series before going to see "The Marvels" in the cinema next month. That's unfair. It's being streamed on Disney Plus, a streaming service that not many people have. Relatively speaking. It has 140 million subscribers, which is only half as many as Netflix. I have Disney Plus, so maybe I shouldn't complain too loud. I've watched the six episodes of the Ms. Marvel mini-series over the last three days.

First I'll say that in my opinion it's not essential to watch the series before seeing the film. I'll tell you everything you need to know in a short paragraph:

Kamala Khan is a 16-year-old girl from Jersey City. After putting on a bracelet inherited from her great grandmother she has the power to create solid light. Supposedly the power comes from within her, but she needs the bracelet to channel it. Her great-grandmother was a Djinn, and Kamala has some of the Djinn properties. Kamala's costume is similar to the costume of Captain Marvel (Carol Danvers) because Kamala is a cosplayer who likes to dress up as her. There's no obvious connection to Captain Marvel herself until a brief after-credits scene in the final episode when Kamala disappears and is replaced by Captain Marvel.

That's it. I'm not putting you off if you want to subscribe to Disney Plus, but there's no rush.

My opinion of the series is mixed. The new Ms. Marvel (why not Miss Marvel?) is an interesting character, but the series is somehow childish. Kamala and her friends are 16, but based on the way they talk and act they could just as well be 12-year-olds. It's Marvel for kids. The first three episodes, which take place in New Jersey, are very superficial. The following episodes, which take place in Pakistan, have more substance. That's just my gut feeling. You'll see what I mean if you watch it yourself.

Now I'll sit and wait for "The Marvels". I hope I shan't be disappointed. I've been reading posts on forums, and many Marvel fans says that the MCU films should have ended with "Avengers Endgame", followed by a reboot. I agree. It's time to start again.

Suicide Squad (4 Stars)

I've often said that I like bad girls. I need to clarify what I mean.

This is the sort of bad girl I like. She's bad, and she lets everyone know she's bad.

This is the sort of bad girl I don't like. She's bad, but she pretends to be good.

Let me test my readers, to see if you've been paying attention. Here are photos of two more bad girls. I like one, and I don't like the other.

Do I like this one?

Or do I like this one?

Success Rate:  + 2.3

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

Prisoners of the Ghostland (3 Stars)

I gave this film a good rating the first time I saw it. Now I have to change my mind. I was biased towards it because it was made by my favourite director, Sion Sono, and it starred Nicolas Cage. Another positive factor is that it features two of the world's most beautiful actresses, Sofia Boutella and Yuzuka Nakaya, pictured above.

The strength of Sion Sono's films is that they're mad, but they always make sense. Maybe 54 schoolgirls hold hands and jump in front of a train, but there's a logical explanation. Maybe a serial killer replaces his victims' limbs with mannequin limbs. There's always an explanation. Except in "Prisoners of the Ghostland". It's a post-apocalyptic film, and in post-apocalyptic films ridiculous things are thrown together. People are holding on to the hands of a clock because they think they can prevent a catastrophe by stopping time.

Sion Sono faithfully follows the rules of the genre. But it's a genre I don't like. Nicolas Cage called "Prisoners of the Ghostland" the wildest film of his career. Maybe it is. But it's not his best film, and it's one of Sion Sono's weakest films. I doubt I'll watch it again.

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

Missing [1982 film] (5 Stars)

This is a true story, a powerful political thriller based on the book "The Execution of Charles Horman". I saw it in the cinema in 1982 with my good friend, the eccentric Ceuan Clement-Davies. It was a time in my life when I rarely went to the cinema, but I remember him gripping my arm and telling me it was a film I must see. So I accompanied him to Gloria in Stuttgart.

The film begins with two Americans, Charles Horman and his wife Beth, living in Chile. Charles is a dreamer. He says he's doing research into making an animated film about a giant duck. Why Chile? He works translating articles from American newspapers into Spanish for an independent newspaper called Fin. It's considered a left-wing magazine, but the articles he translates are from mainstream newspapers like the New York Times.

Charles visits the coastal town of Vina Del Mar with his friends, leaving Beth behind in Santiago. He's surprised to find a lot of high-ranking American military officers in Vina. He mixes with them in the hotel, and one of them gives him a lift back to Santiago. When he returns home (11th September 1973) a military coup has broken out.

It's chaos. The army is shooting random people in the street. Women wearing trousers have their clothes cut because they're only allowed to wear dresses. Most sinister of all, soldiers are burning piles of books in the street.

Charles and Beth want to leave the country, but the airport is closed. The American Embassy is also closed. They stay a night in a hotel before attempting to travel north, away from the violence. They get separated. Charles is never seen again.

Two weeks later Charles's father, Ed Horman, a businessman from New York, travels to Santiago to look for his son. He speaks to various people at the American Embassy. They're polite and promise to assist him, but the more he talks to them, the more frustrated he gets. They introduce him to members of the local police force. They tell Ed that his son is in hiding, but Beth says it's a lie.

The army allows Ed and Beth to visit rooms where corpses are being stored. The picture above is just one of four rooms where they have to step over dead bodies. They don't find Charles, but they find one of his fellow workers on the newspaper.

One of the things that keeps the film from being bogged down in the political intrigue is the relationship between Ed Horman and his daughter-in-law. When he arrives he's angry with her, he blames her for Charles moving to Chile. As the film progresses and Ed realises that the Embassy staff is lying to him, he grows closer to Beth.

Eventually Ed is told that Charles was executed. More to the point, the American Embassy gave permission for him to be executed. Charles was one of the few people who knew that the American government was involved in the coup. He had to die.

When he returned home Ed Horman sued various American officials, including Henry Kissinger, for complicity in the murder of his son. After years of litigation the lawsuit was dismissed, because the evidence needed for the case was sealed as top secret.

I was lucky to see the film in 1982. In 1983 it was banned due to a lawsuit by Nathaniel Davis, the former US ambassador to Chile. He objected to being portrayed as a criminal. After 13 years the case was dismissed because, you guessed it, any evidence that supported his case was top secret.

The film was nominated for four Academy Awards: Best Film, Best Actor (Jack Lemmon), Best Actress (Sissy Spacek) and Best Adapted Screenplay. It only won the Best Screenplay award.

Success Rate:  - 0.3

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

Carrie [1976] (5 Stars)

I decided to watch "Carrie" again this evening after hearing about the death of Piper Laurie, who played Carrie's mother, Margaret White. I didn't know Piper very well. She made many films, but I only ever saw her in "Carrie" and "Twin Peaks". Her performance in "Carrie" was a work of genius. She plays an evil woman who sends shivers down my spine. She's a Christian who's convinced she's doing the Lord's work, while she's actually following the Devil. Margaret White reads the Bible. She probably knows the Bible well. Christians fall astray when they believe things that aren't in the Bible. These extra beliefs usually take priority over what the Bible says. Margaret repeatedly says that "the first sin was intercourse". How can anyone who knows the Bible believe something as stupid as that? In Genesis 1:28, before Adam and Eve fell into sin, God said "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the Earth". In other words, God commanded them to have intercourse. The first sin was disobeying God, which is described in Genesis 3. I've heard theologians argue about whether Adam and Eve had intercourse before sinning. I assume they did, but it doesn't matter. If it had been important, it would have been described in the Bible.

It's shocking to see Margaret White make the sign of the cross with a knife. She can no longer distinguish between good and evil. She can praise God and commit murder at the same time. Piper Laurie has the ability to realistically portray a truly evil person. She was nominated for an Oscar as Best Supporting Actress. She should have won.

Piper Laurie
January 22, 1932 – October 14, 2023

Mandy (5 Stars)

When I watched "Mandy" last month I mentioned that a friend of mine had told me it's a film that only looks good on an OLED television. I tried desperately to find a friend with an OLED television for me to check it out, but none of my friends who live locally have such a television. The Amazon Prime Day Deals were coming up, so I waited for a special offer, and I found one.

This is the television I chose, an LG OLED48A29LA, reduced from 1549 Euros to 717 Euros. That's a price reduction to be taken seriously. As I've said in the past, I only buy LG television sets. I believe my brand loyalty is justified. Samsung televisions are slightly cheaper, but they don't live up to the same quality. The only other brand that comes close is Philips.

The first picture was a catalogue picture. The second is a snapshot of my new television on my desk. Doesn't it look beautiful? It's thinner than my old television, only 6 inches instead of 8.5 inches. Despite being so thin, the sound from the internal speakers is adequate. I wouldn't say it's good enough for listening to music, but it's more than sufficient for a typical film. I have a BOSE soundbar, so I shan't be using the internal speakers often, but I'm still impressed.

I received the television on Saturday evening, but I didn't have time to unpack it until Sunday after coming back from "Das Fliegende Klassenzimmer". By the time I was finished I was too tired to watch a film, so I just watched a short video, the one pictured above. Does anyone recognise the young lady? This morning I watched "Mandy". My last viewing was recent enough for me to be able to tell the difference.

Wow!

What else can I say?

Wow!

Non-OLED televisions corrupt the picture. I can see that now. I might not have immediately seen a difference with other films, but "Mandy" has special cinematography that needs a special television. If any of my readers are unsure whether the extra price of an OLED television is worth it, watch "Mandy". I'm still able to compare. My 32 inch computer monitor (LG, naturally) is good quality, but not OLED. I watched about ten minutes of "Mandy" before I started this review, flicking forward from scene to scene, and it looks disgusting in comparison. "Mandy" needs OLED.

I'm sure that cinephiles will notice improvements with other films. Subtle improvements. But "Mandy" is the best film for a direct comparison. Maybe you have a bigger room than me and have space for a 65 inch television. I would have bought a bigger television if I'd had a better room. The experts say that the ideal distance from a television is 1.6 times the size of the television. That means I should be sitting 77 inches away from my 48 inch television. I actually sit 74 inches away, which is close to the optimal distance. I'd have to sit 104 inches away from a 65 inch television. I don't have enough room.

Success Rate:  - 5.5

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

Das Fliegende Klassenzimmer (3 Stars)

The title of this German film means "The Flying Classroom". The poster shown above gives the wrong impression. There are no floating children in the school.

The film is based on a children's book with the same name written by Erich Kästner in 1933. Judging from a synopsis I've read of the novel, it deals with several semi-unrelated episodes of things that happen in the school. I say semi because it's the same children in each episode. The film concentrates on one of the episodes. Apart from that, the film has been set in the modern world. The children have mobile phones.

Martina is a 13-year-old girl in Berlin. She's been offered a free grant to go to an elite boarding school, the Johann-Sigismund-School, in Kirchberg in South Tyrol (the German speaking area in northern Italy). She has a two week trial before the summer holidays, and if she's accepted she'll be a full time school student after the summer holidays.

From the beginning she's caught up in the rivalry between the internals and the externals. Half of the children live in the school, the other half are the children of local residents and just visit the school for lessons. Martina's grades are poor, so she has to take extra lessons to catch up, but she still has time to put on a play about the classroom of the future.

Just as important as her school activities is the relationship between the strict head of the school, Justus Bökh, and a drop-out called Robert who lives in a railway waggon on top of the hill. They both went to the school as children and became friends, even though Justus was an internal and Robert was an external. For reasons that the film doesn't make clear the two men haven't spoken for ten years. Martina attempts to bring them back together.

There are a few things in the film that don't make sense. Why would a family in Berlin want to send their daughter to a boarding school in another country? A rich family might do this, but Martina's family isn't rich. Why is Martina given a grant? And the biggest problem I have is the time frame. How can Martina cram so much into such a short space of time? If they'd said six weeks or even four weeks I could have accepted it.

The film didn't really interest me. I couldn't relate to Martina's school problems. The story of the two old friends reuniting was more interesting, but it was spoilt by Robert being a chain smoker. It's supposed to be a joke, because Robert lives in a non-smoking waggon, but I didn't find it funny. Is that the sort of character that should be shown in a film for children?

The film didn't appeal to Oliver either. He was bored. After the first 20 minutes he kept bugging me, asking how long the film had to go.

It's curious that this is the fourth time the story has been filmed. The book was filmed in 1954, 1973 and 2003. That's a sign that it must be a good book. The previous three versions must have been better.

Cars (3 Stars)

Disney Wednesday #22

After watching "Planes" a few weeks ago, my grandson Oliver said he wanted to watch "Cars". Have any of my regular readers noticed that I've added his name as a label to all the films he's watched with me? It helps me keep track of his viewing history, although he's started watching films with other family members.

"Cars" is an animated film made by Pixar Studios for Walt Disney in 2006. It takes place in a world populated by intelligent speaking cars. It's about a newbie racing car called Lightning McQueen who wants to win the prestigious Piston Cup. The first race is a three-way draw with the reigning champion Strip Weathers and the arrogant Chick Hicks. A second race is scheduled in Los Angeles a week later. On the journey Lightning falls out of his transport truck. He races towards California, but he's stopped for speeding and has to do community service in the small town of Radiator Springs. It lies on Route 66 and used to be a busy community, but now that Interstate 40 has been built it's practically a ghost town. The residents roll around complaining about the good old days. Lightning was always a loner, but he begins to make friends with the cars in Radiator Springs.

I have mixed feelings about the film. The story is interesting, but I'm put off by the constant fast, hectic dialogue. Apart from that, the concept of talking cars doesn't appeal to me. Oliver liked the film a lot, so maybe I should try to see it more from a child's perspective.

There are several well known actors who provide the voice for the cars, including Owen Wilson as Lightning McQueen. Why? I don't see the point in hiring successful Hollywood actors for voice roles. It must make the film more expensive. For me as a viewer it just makes me scratch my head when I hear a voice. "Is that <fill-in-the blank>? It sounds like him". I'm sure there are lesser known voice actors who can do just as good a job.

Success Rate:  + 1.9

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

Don't worry, Darling (4 Stars)

This is the second film I've watched this week that I gave five stars in the cinema but have downrated it now. They were both films that overwhelmed me in the cinema, but I was better able to judge them sitting at home in the comfort of my own room.

Jack and Alice live in a perfect world. The sun is always shining, and everyone gets on with one another. The men work in a company called Victory, and the women spend their time taking dance lessons or idling by a pool. The only problem is occasional mild earthquakes. Judging by the technology, such as rotary phones and black and white televisions, it seems to be the 1950's. But things aren't always what they seem.

None of the men, Jack included, tell their wives what they do. When Alice starts to ask questions, she realises that she's trapped in an elaborate prison. She can't trust anyone, especially not Jack. He knows exactly what's going on, but his loyalties lie with Victory, not his wife.

I wrote more about the film's plot, but I deleted it. The film is new enough for me to avoid spoilers. This is the sort of film I like, about a world with hidden secrets, but while watching it a second time I realised that there are unanswered questions. I might go into them next time I watch the film.

Success Rate:  + 0.5

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

Smallville 3.07 - Magnetic

Click here to watch the podcast.

Michael Rosenbaum and Tom Welling have been selling merchandise to support the Talkville podcast with many beautiful items. This is what I'd like most: a Smallville snow globe. In the episode "Magnetic" the snow is replaced with meteor rocks, so it's green instead of white. Maybe I should call it a meteor globe.

Of all the items currently in the Talkville store, what attracts me the most is the "Damn! Who's That?" shirt with a picture of Sam Jones III. The only thing that puts me off is the high price for customers outside America. But maybe I'll give in and buy it eventually.

Lana Lang and Chloe Sullican find the meteor globe on sale at the fairground in Lowell County. Lana finds it tasteless. The meteors killed her parents.

There's a mildly enjoyable pop rock band performing on stage. It's the sort of music that I'd like for the ambience of a fairground, but I wouldn't sit and listen to it at home. Tom and Michael don't know who it is, but it's Josh Kelley and his supporting band. All they know is that it's the first band performing live in "Smallville" that doesn't have a bald singer.

Enter the freak-of-the-week, Seth Nelson. He's a boy in Lana's class who's helping out at the fair. He's actually Lana's lab partner. Chloe points out that he's had a crush on Lana since fifth grade. That's a recurring theme. Almost every boy we see in the series has a crush on Lana. I would have had a crush on her as well.

Anyone who hits a floating ball wins a meteor globe. Lana tries her luck anyway, just for fun, even after Seth warns her that the game is rigged. There are magnets that prevent a direct strike. Lana makes two attempts and fails, but lovestruck Seth gives her a meteor globe anyway. This makes another man angry, because he also missed and didn't get a prize. To stop the argument, Lana gives him her meteor globe, but the man's still angry. He's probably had a few beers, and he doesn't want to look bad in front of his girlfriend. He smashes the globe over Seth's head, giving him a nasty cut. Fragments of meteor rocks are lodged in his wound. He's taken for an MRI scan at the Smallville Medical Centre. The kryptonite in his blood makes the MRI machine short circuit. After this Seth discovers that he can move metal objects with his mind. So that's how easy it is for a 16-year-old boy to become a freak.

The meteor rocks have given him a second power. When he touches a woman she becomes attracted to him. There's a pseudo-scientific explanation about how metal particles in the bloodstream can be affected by magnets. It's not very convincing. It's also unconvincing that Seth immediately knows what he can do. He touches Lana, and she falls in love with him. What's worse is that he does this in front of Clark, who immediately gets jealous. He has no right to feel jealous. Lana has repeatedly tried to get closer to Clark, but he's always turned her away. Eventually she'll say Yes to one of the dozen or more boys who have a crush on her.

Seth takes Lana for a ride on the Ferris wheel at night, using his magnetic powers to open the gate and turn on the wheel. I've got to admit, that's romantic. He doesn't need his powers to attract Lana. He reveals his powers to her (the magnetic powers, at least), and she accepts him. She doesn't consider him a freak. I'm sure she would have accepted Clark's powers as well.

Clark has followed them to the fairground. Lana accuses him of stalking her. That's a valid accusation, even if Clark suspects something is wrong.

The next day Clark takes Chloe with him to break into the hospital and look at Seth's medical records. They find that Seth has abnormal electromagnetic activity in his body. They're interrupted by a doctor entering the room, so Chloe throws herself against Clark to pretend they were making out. Hot damn! Clark doesn't stand a chance.

What does a horny 16-year-old boy do when a hot girl like Chloe is pressing herself against him? Does he push her away? No, he embraces her and enjoys the kiss.

I've often said that I find both Lana and Chloe attractive. I think this scene helps me make a better decision. They're two very different girls. Lana is (probably) more attractive, but Chloe has more sex appeal. Lana would never have pressed her body against Clark like this. Chloe has more self confidence. If I'd been in Clark's position, I would have chosen Chloe.

Look at Clark's red face after the kiss. That's not acting. Tom Welling is genuinely flushed with embarrassment after Allison Mack threw herself against him. Clark has to straighten his clothes and awkwardly follow Chloe out of the room.

The next day Seth persuades Lana to leave Smallville with him. She takes all the money out of the Talon's cash register. Lex sees her and calls the police. He follows her outside just as Seth arrives in a stolen yellow Mustang.

There's a lot of talk about this in the podcast. Michael Rosenbaum goes on and on about how much he hates yellow cars, especially expensive yellow cars. He says that when he was young he always used to shout "Yellow!" when a yellow car went by. I honestly don't understand what his problem is. My first car was a mustard yellow 1977 Volkswagen Passat. It was a beautiful car. I wish I had a photo of it. A good idea for a new Talkville shirt would be Michael Rosenbaum shouting "Yellow!"

Clark runs ahead and melts the road out of Smallville with his heat vision. This allows the police to catch up with them. We see Sheriff Nancy Adams very briefly. Seth escapes by jumping onto a passing truck, clinging to the side. Lana is arrested and put in jail. It doesn't last long. Seth breaks her out, easily overcoming the guards and forcing the doors open.

Clark tracks Seth down by using a compass. Is there any reason why Seth himself should be magnetic? And even if he were, how would Clark know? There's so much about this episode that doesn't make sense. Lana pulls a gun on Clark, a gun that Seth stole from a guard when he broke her free. Clark backs away, and Seth takes the gun. He shoots Clark and sees that he's bulletproof. Seth picks up a roller coaster car and hurls it at Clark, pinning him against the wall. Clark grabs an electrical line and electrifies the coaster car. Seth is pulled off his feet, attracted to the car. I don't understand the physics of this activity, but when he makes contact he receives a shock that puts him in a coma.

Lana goes back to normal, but she has to do community service for stealing the yellow car. The sentence would have been harsher, but Lex got her a good lawyer. And she's allowed to carry on working in the Talon.

The subplot concerns Chloe's investigations into Lionel Luthor. After the threats he made to fire her father, she's been investigating Lionel's past to find information she can use against him. When questioned by Lex she declines to use the word blackmail, even though this is definitely what she means. Lex warns her that she's living dangerously.

The next day Chloe finds the Torch office ransacked. The culprit is still in the room. It's Officer Mason, who we saw in last week's episode. He's working for Lionel Luthor, and he's investigating the death of Lionel's parents. He's discovered that Chloe is also investigating Lionel, so he takes her computer. Chloe thinks that he was sent by Lex, so she visits the mansion to complain. Lex says that it was nothing to do with him, but Officer Mason is already dead. He takes Chloe to the morgue to show her his body. He died of natural causes, supposedly. Nobody believes that. But who was responsible, Lionel or Lex? Nothing is said in the episode, so I have to make my own deductions. I see no motive for Lionel killing Mason. He was only doing his job. It must have been Lex who killed Mason to protect Chloe. Lex offers his future protection, but it comes with a cost. He wants to know everything she discovers about his father.

Chloe tells him that Lionel Luthor used to be close friends with the gangster Morgan Edge, who was seemingly killed in the episode "Phoenix". We, the viewers, already knew that, but it was news to Lex.

In this week's podcast Michael Rosenbaum was ranting more than ever before. It wasn't just about yellow cars. He said that he's a snob, so he refuses to watch "Barbie". He's been told that the film has a serious message, which is true, but he refuses to go. I think he needs a wife to straighten him out. Can't Bryce arrange a blind date for him?

Always hold on to Smallville

and...

Bring back the Blu-rays.