On The Buses (5 Stars)

In America, British sitcoms such as "Are You Being Served", "The Vicar of Dibley" and "Goodnight Sweetheart" have built loyal followings. Strangely, one of Britain's funniest sitcoms has never enjoyed the same success. "On The Buses" was a huge hit in the UK from 1969 to 1973, yet somehow it slipped under the American radar. Perhaps the early black and white episodes put people off. Whatever the reason, they're missing a comedy classic.

Hammer Films brought the series to the big screen in 1971, and unlike many television spin-offs, it feels completely at home as a feature film. The setting has changed and the buses wear different colours, but Stan Butler, Jack Harper and Inspector Blakey are exactly as fans remember them. More importantly, the film doesn't abandon the formula that made the television series such a success.

The title tells you everything you need to know. It's a film about buses. Stan is a driver, Jack is a conductor and Blakey is the long-suffering inspector. Even when the story wanders into Stan's chaotic home life or his hopeless attempts to impress attractive women, the buses are never far away. Every few minutes another bus rumbles across the screen, reminding you that this is a working comedy built around everyday life rather than glamorous adventures.

The main story concerns the arrival of female bus drivers, a prospect that horrifies Stan and Jack. Today the idea seems wonderfully old-fashioned, but that's part of the film's charm. The comedy isn't making a serious statement about gender politics; it's poking fun at men whose attitudes were already becoming outdated. Stan may spend his time chasing pretty conductors and bus drivers, but he's so hopelessly awkward that his romantic escapades are innocent rather than predatory. Reg Varney's natural likeability keeps the character on the right side of lovable.

The cast couldn't be better. Reg Varney and Bob Grant have effortless chemistry, while Stephen Lewis steals every scene as the permanently exasperated Blakey. Their performances capture everything that made the television series so popular.

Critics dismissed "On The Buses" as crude and unsophisticated, but audiences had the last laugh. It became one of the biggest British box office hits of 1971, outperforming the James Bond film "Diamonds Are Forever" at the UK box office.

What makes the film so enduring isn't just the laughs. It captures a Britain that has largely disappeared. Stan and his family live in a modest working-class home where money is always tight, overtime is essential and life's little pleasures mean everything. It isn't a world of glamour or wealth, but one that feels warm, familiar and authentic. For anyone who grew up in a similar environment, these characters don't feel like sitcom creations; they feel like neighbours, friends or even members of your own family.

That's why "On The Buses" remains such a joy to watch. Beneath the jokes and the flirtation is a wonderfully affectionate portrait of everyday working-class Britain. It may never have conquered America, but for those who remember that world, it's one of the finest sitcom spin-offs ever made.

Success Rate:  + 25.8

Black Sabbath - Paranoid

There are songs you listen to because you like them. Then there are songs that become part of your daily routine. For me, Black Sabbath's "Paranoid" falls into the second category.

Every morning my Echo Studio wakes me with Tony Iommi's unmistakable guitar riff. If I'm in a hurry I'll silence it before Ozzy Osbourne has a chance to sing a word. On a more relaxed morning I let the whole track play before getting out of bed. It's become such a habit that I can't imagine waking up to anything else.

Of course, "Paranoid" deserves its place in rock history. Released in 1970, it was written almost as an afterthought to pad out the album, yet it became Black Sabbath's signature song. Clocking in at under three minutes, it's one of the shortest songs they ever recorded, but it captures everything that made the band unique. Tony Iommi's unforgettable riff, Geezer Butler's driving bass, Bill Ward's energetic drumming and Ozzy's unmistakable voice combine to create a song that still sounds fresh more than fifty years later.

I've heard "Paranoid" literally thousands of times, yet I never tire of it. Perhaps that's because I rarely sit down and choose to play it. Instead, it arrives at exactly the same moment every day, announcing that it's time to stop sleeping and start living.

Not many songs can claim to have changed the history of heavy metal. Even fewer can claim to have got me out of bed every morning.

Who am I (3 Stars)

Today's the first time I've seen "Who Am I?", and I have to admit I was disappointed. This isn't really a Jackie Chan film; it's a spy thriller that just happens to star Jackie Chan.

The story is interesting enough. After a military operation in Africa goes disastrously wrong, Jackie survives but loses his memory. Unable to remember even his own name, he sets out to discover who he is while being hunted by the people who betrayed him. The plot is surprisingly similar to the Jason Bourne films, mixing amnesia with an international conspiracy.

The problem is that Jackie rarely gets to do what he does best. The film spends so much time on espionage, journalists and corporate villains that the martial arts seem almost like an afterthought. Whenever a fight breaks out, it feels as though it's been added to remind us we're watching a Jackie Chan film rather than because the story needed it.

That's not to say the action is poor. The final rooftop fight is excellent, and Jackie's famous slide down the side of the Rotterdam building remains one of the greatest stunts of his career. I only wish there had been more moments like these.

As a spy thriller, "Who Am I?" is perfectly enjoyable. As a Jackie Chan film, I wanted more. It's worth seeing once, but I don't think it'll ever become one of my favourites.

Mr. Nice Guy (5 Stars)

Note that this is the first film with Jackie Chan that I haven't flagged as Chinese. It was filmed in Australia, and almost all the dialogue is in English. Practically the only Chinese dialogue is private conversations between Jackie and his girlfriend Miki.

Why do so many critics dismiss "Mr. Nice Guy" (1997)? I honestly don't get it. They complain that the plot is paper thin, the villains are cartoonish and the humour is childish. Well, yes... but none of that matters. This is Jackie Chan at his absolute peak, delivering one astonishing action sequence after another. If you're expecting a deep, meaningful screenplay, you're watching the wrong film.

The real genius behind the film is director Sammo Hung. Few action directors understand pacing as well as he does. There's hardly a quiet moment in the entire running time. Every chase, fight and stunt flows effortlessly into the next, yet the film never becomes exhausting because Hung constantly changes the setting and the style of the action. One minute Jackie is improvising with kitchen utensils, the next he's racing through Melbourne on a bicycle or hanging from a speeding crane. It's a masterclass in keeping an audience entertained.

Jackie Chan is, as always, phenomenal. His comic timing is perfect, his stunts are breath-taking, and his ability to turn everyday objects into weapons remains unmatched. The spectacular finale, with a gigantic construction vehicle tearing through buildings, is exactly the kind of over-the-top climax that Hong Kong action cinema does better than anyone else.

Perhaps critics wanted a darker, more sophisticated crime thriller. If so, they completely misunderstood what Sammo Hung and Jackie Chan were trying to achieve. "Mr. Nice Guy" isn't about realism. It's about excitement. It's about keeping you on the edge of your seat while wondering how on earth Jackie survived another impossible stunt.

Sometimes cinema doesn't need to be profound. Sometimes it just needs to be brilliantly entertaining. "Mr. Nice Guy" understands that better than most action films. It's one of Jackie Chan's finest achievements and one of Sammo Hung's most underrated films as a director.

Police Story 4: First Strike (3 Stars)

"Police Story 4: First Strike" (1996) is a strange entry in Jackie Chan's most famous series because it barely resembles a Police Story film at all. The gritty Hong Kong police work of the previous films has disappeared, replaced by an international spy adventure involving the CIA, Russian agents, nuclear warheads and globe-trotting locations from Ukraine to Australia. It's closer to a light-hearted James Bond film than anything suggested by the title.

The biggest problem is the screenplay. Jackie spends the film chasing one person after another, yet it's surprisingly difficult to understand who's working for whom. Double-crosses, secret agents and smugglers are introduced so quickly that the story becomes little more than an excuse to move Jackie from one spectacular stunt to the next. Even by the end, many viewers may struggle to explain exactly why half the fights happened.

Fortunately, Jackie Chan's action choreography is as inventive as ever. The ladder fight in the warehouse is one of his greatest comic action sequences, the underwater shark encounter is unforgettable and the film rarely goes more than a few minutes without another dazzling stunt. Stanley Tong directs the action with tremendous energy, even if the plot never catches up.

"First Strike" is entertaining if you stop worrying about the story and simply enjoy Jackie Chan risking his life for your amusement. As a spy thriller it barely makes sense. As a Police Story film it feels completely out of place. It's an action spectacle held together almost entirely by the charisma and athletic brilliance of its star.

Cocorico 2 (3 Stars)

I went to see this film as my cinema's sneak peek. Once a week a film is shown before its official release date, but we're not told what it will be. Today the film was a French comedy, "Cocorico 2". I didn't see the first film when it was released in 2024, so I was at a disadvantage. All I'm willing to say is that it's about the friendship of two middle-aged men.

Frédéric Bouvier-Sauvage (Christian Clavier) is a wealthy, proud aristocrat who owns a grand wine estate in Bordeaux. Snobbish, conservative and fiercely protective of his family's social status, he looks down on the Martins as beneath him. DNA test results challenge both his sense of identity and his deeply held prejudices.

Gérard Martin (Didier Bourdon) is a cheerful Peugeot car dealer from a solidly middle-class background. More down-to-earth and outspoken than Frédéric, he's equally proud of his own values and doesn't appreciate being patronised. His rivalry with Frédéric provides most of the film's comedy, as the two men constantly clash over class, culture and family.

Go For It (4 Stars)

"Go For It" (1983) is one of Bud Spencer and Terence Hill's most enjoyable 1980's comedies, even if it takes a frustratingly long time to get going. Rosco Frazer (Terence Hill) and Doug O'Riordan (Bud Spencer) are two petty criminals on the run from the police. After stealing a pair of airplane tickets, they're mistaken for secret agents and unwillingly sent on a dangerous mission.

The first half hour is the film's weakest point. Watching Bud and Terence flee from the authorities lacks the charm and energy of their best work, and the story doesn't really come alive until the mistaken identity plot begins. Once the duo become accidental spies, the film transforms into an affectionate spoof of James Bond and "The Man from UNCLE". High-tech gadgets, eccentric villains, glamorous locations and increasingly absurd action scenes provide the perfect playground for Bud's thunderous punches and Terence's acrobatic trickery.

The humour is consistently inventive, with the pair's complete incompetence as secret agents creating one ridiculous situation after another. Rather than trying to be a genuine spy thriller, "Go For It" delights in poking fun at the genre while never losing sight of the easy-going chemistry that made Bud Spencer and Terence Hill international stars. Their effortless comic timing carries the film through every explosion, chase and fistfight.

It may not be on the level of "They Call Me Trinity", but once the spy adventure begins, "Go For It" becomes one of the duo's funniest later collaborations. If you can sit through the sluggish opening, you're rewarded with an entertaining and highly amusing adventure that proves Bud and Terence could still make audiences laugh well into the 1980s.

Double Trouble (3 Stars)

"Double Trouble" (1984) is the 15th film that Bud Spencer and Terence Hill made together. They're united for a mistaken identity comedy, with two millionaires hiring lookalikes to take their places after becoming targets of assassins. It's a premise that promises plenty of confusion and comic chaos, but the film never makes the most of it.

The biggest problem is the pacing. Despite the constant swapping of identities, the story unfolds surprisingly slowly, with long stretches where very little happens. The jokes are repetitive, the action lacks the spark of the duo's best films and even the trademark brawls feel routine rather than inventive. Bud Spencer and Terence Hill are as likeable as ever, but their effortless chemistry can't disguise a tired script. Compared with their classic collaborations, "Double Trouble" is one of their dullest and most forgettable outings.

All the Way, Boys (4 Stars)

I watched this film today dubbed into German. The German title is "Zwei Himmelhunde auf dem Weg zur Hölle", i.e. "Two Heaven Dogs on their way to Hell". It's the seventh of 17 films that Bud Spencer and Terence Hill made as a comedy duo. It's sometimes incorrectly claimed that they made 18 films together. They both appeared in 1he 1959 film, "Hannibal", but they had no screentime together.

"All the Way Boys" arrived at exactly the right moment in Bud Spencer and Terence Hill's careers. After the phenomenal success of "They Call Me Trinity" and "Trinity Is Still My Name", audiences wanted more of the pair's effortless chemistry. Instead of another western, director Giuseppe Colizzi threw them into a modern adventure full of planes, treasure hunters, missionaries and, of course, spectacular fistfights. It proved that Bud and Terence weren't just stars of comedy westerns; they could entertain in almost any setting.

The story follows the pilots Plata and Salud, whose latest job is to deliberately crash an ageing aircraft for an insurance scam. Instead, they find themselves stranded in the Amazon rainforest, where a legendary treasure, ruthless criminals and a remote mission turn a simple fraud into a full-blown adventure. The plot is really just an excuse to throw Bud and Terence from one comic set piece to the next, and that's exactly what the film needs.

What makes the film so enjoyable is the relaxed confidence of its two leads. Terence Hill supplies the charm, quick thinking and acrobatic movement, while Bud Spencer is the immovable force who solves problems with a thunderous punch. Their comic timing has never been sharper. By this stage they understand exactly how to play off each other, making every argument, prank and fight feel completely natural.

The action also marks an important step in their evolution. The famous slapstick brawls are larger and more polished than ever, mixing genuine stunt work with cartoon humour. Instead of violence, the fights deliver laughter, a formula that would become the trademark of nearly every Bud Spencer and Terence Hill film that followed.

Although it isn't usually ranked alongside their greatest classics such as "They Call Me Trinity",  "All the Way Boys" is one of the films that secured their future as Europe's biggest comedy duo. It proved they weren't tied to one genre and could carry a modern action comedy just as successfully as a western. For millions of fans, this was the beginning of the classic Bud and Terence formula that would dominate the rest of the 1970's.

It's a lightweight adventure, but it's also an important milestone. Without "All the Way Boys", Bud Spencer and Terence Hill might have remained remembered as western heroes. Instead, they became one of cinema's most beloved comedy partnerships, and this film helped them spread their wings far beyond the Wild West.

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

Thunderbolts (4 Stars)

B-O-B.

Spell it backwards. What does it say?

The same motherfucking shit.

Success Rate:  + 0.1

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

Dragons Forever (4 Stars)

There's an irony in the film's title that might not be obvious to modern viewers. It's not just an exciting name for an action film. In reality, it's a tribute to Jackie Chan, Sammo Hung and Yuen Biao, the legendary "Three Dragons" of Hong Kong cinema. Having trained together at the China Drama Academy under Master Yu Jim-yuen, the trio spent years redefining martial arts films with their unique blend of breath-taking stunts, comedy and flawless fight choreography. The title suggests that the Three Dragons would make films together forever.

However, "Dragons Forever" was the last film to feature all three stars together in leading roles. Although they continued to collaborate in different combinations, this was the end of an extraordinary partnership that had dominated Hong Kong action cinema throughout the 1980s.

The film cleverly avoids making its heroes instant friends. Jackie plays a charming lawyer working for a corrupt chemical company, Sammo is a scruffy private investigator, and Yuen is an eccentric inventor whose bizarre gadgets rarely behave as intended. Their conflicting personalities create plenty of comedy before circumstances force them to unite against a common enemy.

As always, each Dragon brings something different. Jackie supplies his effortless charisma and fearless stunt work, Sammo provides both the comic timing and the emotional heart of the story, while Yuen reminds audiences why he's one of the greatest physical performers the genre has ever produced. Together, they create a chemistry that no other trio has ever matched.

The plot, involving industrial pollution and corporate corruption, is stronger than many Hong Kong action comedies of the period, but it's really just a framework for spectacular action. The unforgettable finale, culminating in Jackie's ferocious showdown with Benny Urquidez, ranks among the finest fight sequences ever filmed.

Looking back, "Dragons Forever" feels like a fitting farewell. Its title turned out to be prophetic. The Three Dragons may never have headlined another film together, but their influence has never disappeared. Their films continue to inspire filmmakers and thrill audiences around the world. In that sense, the dragons really are forever.

Toy Story (3 Stars)

Disney Wednesday #30

I've rarely felt so ashamed to give a film a low rating. While watching "Toy Story" with my granddaughter Evelyn I could objectively accept that it's a good film, but it didn't excite me. Usually when I watch children's films I try to see them through a child's eyes, but this time I couldn't. I've made an effort to write a fair review, but my three star rating will will remain unchanged.

Evelyn laughed out loud while the film ran. What did she see that I didn't? She saw a world where her greatest wish is true: her toys really are alive.

To a young child, Woody isn't just a cowboy doll and Buzz Lightyear isn't just a plastic spaceman. They're friends with their own hopes, fears and adventures, carrying on secret lives whenever grown ups aren't looking. It's an irresistible idea that encourages children to see their own bedrooms as places of endless possibility.

The story is simple enough for young viewers to follow, yet exciting enough to keep them on the edge of their seats. There are funny characters, colourful settings and just enough danger to make Woody and Buzz's journey thrilling without becoming frightening.

Most importantly, the film celebrates imagination. After the credits roll, children don't just remember the story, they return to their own toys and continue it themselves. That's the real magic of "Toy Story". It doesn't end when the television is switched off; it inspires hours of make believe long afterwards. Few films understand childhood quite so well.

Success Rate:  + 11.4

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

Jurassic Park III (3 Stars)

"Jurassic Park III" proves one thing beyond any doubt: Steven Spielberg was the real star of the franchise. Strip away his direction and you're left with a noisy monster movie that completely misunderstands what made "Jurassic Park" a masterpiece.

Joe Johnston throws dinosaurs at the screen almost non-stop, confusing relentless action with genuine suspense. Spielberg made audiences hold their breath before unleashing his creatures. Here, every five minutes there's another chase, another roar and another narrow escape until the dinosaurs become little more than oversized theme park attractions. The magic has vanished.

Sam Neill returns as Alan Grant and remains effortlessly likeable, but even he can't rescue a script that reduces him to escorting one of the most irritating families ever to stumble onto Isla Sorna. The emotional intelligence, memorable characters and sense of discovery that defined the first film have all but disappeared.

The introduction of the Spinosaurus perfectly sums up everything that's wrong with the sequel. Instead of creating a memorable new predator, the film simply has it defeat the Tyrannosaurus  Rex in a desperate attempt to convince audiences that bigger means better. It's an empty gimmick that feels less like storytelling and more like marketing.

To be fair, "Jurassic Park III" isn't boring. The aviary sequence is genuinely thrilling and the special effects remain excellent. But impressive effects can't disguise the fact that this is the moment the series stopped being intelligent science fiction and became a generic dinosaur action franchise. Without Spielberg's eye for wonder and suspense, "Jurassic Park III" is little more than a loud reminder that anyone can film dinosaurs, but only Spielberg knew how to make you believe in them.

If anything, "Jurassic Park III" is the franchise's first warning sign. The dinosaurs survived, but the soul of "Jurassic Park" didn't.

Success Rate:  + 2.0

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

Jurassic Park: The Lost World (5 Stars)

Steven Spielberg faced an impossible task with "The Lost World" (shortening the title). How do you follow one of the greatest blockbusters ever made? Instead of trying to recreate the magic, he made a darker, nastier and more chaotic film. Sometimes it works brilliantly. Sometimes it reminds you exactly why the original is untouchable.

The biggest difference is the tone. "Jurassic Park" was full of awe and wonder. Every dinosaur reveal felt magical, and even the terrifying moments were balanced by humour and a sense of adventure. "The Lost World" strips most of that away. Isla Sorna is a much harsher place, where humans aren't simply trying to survive but are exploiting the dinosaurs for profit. The film feels less like an adventure and more like a survival thriller.

Jeff Goldblum steps into the lead role as Ian Malcolm, and he carries the film with his trademark sarcasm and nervous energy. Malcolm is a very different hero from Sam Neill's Alan Grant. Grant gradually became brave because he had to. Malcolm spends most of the film desperately trying to convince everyone else that they're making a terrible mistake. Goldblum is entertaining throughout, but Grant remains the more satisfying protagonist.

The dinosaurs are even more convincing than before. Advances in CGI and animatronics make the creatures feel heavier, faster and more dangerous. Spielberg stages several unforgettable set pieces, especially the trailer hanging over the cliff and the attack through the long grass. These scenes rank alongside anything in the first film for pure suspense.

Where "The Lost World" struggles is its characters. Too many exist simply to become dinosaur food, and few leave much of an impression. The first film gave us characters we genuinely cared about, making every close encounter more suspenseful. Here, the spectacle often takes priority over emotional investment.

The final act remains the film's most controversial decision. Bringing a Tyrannosaurus Rex to San Diego turns the film into a giant monster movie, echoing King Kong and classic creature features. It's undeniably entertaining, but it also feels disconnected from everything that came before. Personally, I love its audacity, though I'm aware that others think differently.

Ultimately, "Jurassic Park: The Lost World" is bigger, louder and more action-packed than its predecessor. The dinosaurs are better, the action scenes are more elaborate and the danger feels more relentless. Yet it loses the sense of discovery, believable characters and perfect balance that made "Jurassic Park" a masterpiece.

It's an excellent sequel that dares to be different instead of repeating the original. That's admirable. But while it delivers some of the series' greatest action sequences, it never captures the wonder that made us fall in love with dinosaurs in the first place.

Success Rate:  + 6.5

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

Jurassic Park (5 Stars)

As most of you know, Sam Neill passed away this morning. I've decided to watch two of his films to remember him, "Jurassic Park" and "Jurassic Park III". He doesn't appear in the second film, but I'll watch it anyway. It's in my top 20 films, meaning it's a film which deserves to be watched repeatedly.

If there's one performance that defines Sam Neill's career, it's Dr Alan Grant in "Jurassic Park". Neill had already built an impressive filmography before Steven Spielberg's dinosaur epic, but this is the role that made him a cinematic icon. Decades later, it's still impossible to think of Sam Neill without picturing the moment he removes his sunglasses in stunned disbelief as dinosaurs once again walk the Earth.

Neill is the emotional anchor that keeps "Jurassic Park" grounded. Grant begins as a brilliant but emotionally distant palaeontologist who'd rather spend his life digging up fossils than dealing with children. Over the course of the film, Neill subtly transforms him into a reluctant protector, and every stage of that journey feels completely natural. Whether he's awestruck by the sight of a living Brachiosaurus, desperately outrunning a Tyrannosaurus Rex or quietly comforting two terrified children, Neill never lets the spectacle overwhelm the humanity of the character.

Spielberg's ground-breaking visual effects still hold up remarkably well, but they only work because the cast reacts with absolute conviction. Neill's expressions of wonder, fear and determination make the impossible believable. His chemistry with Laura Dern and Jeff Goldblum gives the film warmth and humour, while his fatherly bond with Lex and Tim provides its emotional heart.

"Jurassic Park" remains one of the greatest blockbusters ever made because it balances breath-taking action with unforgettable characters. At the centre of it all is Sam Neill, delivering the performance of a lifetime. He's enjoyed a long and distinguished career, but this is the role that made him immortal. For generations of film fans, Alan Grant isn't just Sam Neill's greatest character; it's the performance that will always define his legacy.

Sam Neill
14 September 1947 – 13 July 2026

Success Rate:  + 14.4

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

Citizen Vigilante (3 Stars)

The Scandal

Over the last few weeks there's been a lot of talk about this film in the German press. It's the latest film by the infamous German director Uwe Boll. He's been complaining about the film being banned in Germany, although the authorities say it hasn't been banned, because Germany doesn't have censorship. So what's the truth?

In Germany films are given an age rating (0, 6, 12, 16 or 18) by the FSK (Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle), an independent organisation. All films that are distributed in Germany, whether in cinemas, on physical media or streaming platforms need an FSK rating. The FSK charges the film studios for the rating, based on the film length. It's common for films to be rated more than once. If a studio is unhappy with its rating, cuts can be made to get a lower rating, usually by re-editing or removing violent scenes.

If a film is denied an FSK rating, it can't be distributed in Germany at all, in cinemas, physical media or streaming. This is rarely done, usually in the case of extreme violence. Examples are "Rampage" (2009), "I spit on your grave" (2010) und "Maniac" (2012). In all these cases cuts were made to get an FSK 18 rating. That sounds suspiciously like a ban to me, but since it's carried out by a non-government organisation it doesn't count as a ban. They're arguing about words.

In all the cases of FSK denial, less than a dozen cases in the last 20 years, a compromise could be easily reached. It was always about violence. "Citizen Vigilante" is different. The violence isn't excessive. As Uwe Boll himself has said, it has less violence than "John Wick". "Citizen Vigilante" has been denied an FSK rating because of its political content. It allegedly incites people to violence against immigrants. Boll denies this, but nobody is listening to him.

The film won the attention of Elon Musk. He's long accused Germany of censorship, so when he heard about the film he posted it on his personal X account. It was only online for 48 hours, but that was long enough for copies to be made. Quiver Distribution, the company that has acquired the international distribution rights for the film, has aggressively ordered takedown notices for online copies. In all my years on the Internet I've never known any film be so aggressively protected.

The Film

The film was made in Zagreb, but the dialogue is in English. The on-screen text us that the film takes place in "Europe", but no attempt is made to hide street signs in Croatian. The film is about Michael Sanders, an American who's taking an extended vacation in the unnamed European city after leaving the US Army. He's inherited property from his recently deceased father. He's disturbed by the number of crimes being committed by illegal immigrants, so he decides to take the law into his own hands. He visits the victims of violent assaults and asks them, "What should be done with your assailants?" In every case the answer is that they should die. Sanders takes care of the executions with ruthless precision.

It's a far from perfect film. I would never have watched it if it hadn't been for the scandal.

The film could have been written better. We're thrown into the middle of a story. Michael Sanders is already active. Nobody knows who he is, but he's praised as a hero on social media. I would have preferred to see his development. If we'd seen his arrival from America and the steps that led to him becoming a vigilante, we could have more sympathy with him. As it is, he's an unstoppable force, like an inhuman Terminator.

There's no character arc. Sanders starts the film as a killer and remains a killer until the final credits. It would have been better to see him have problems that made him question what he was doing. Assuming he's a hero, or at best an anti-hero, we need to get under his skin. Uwe Boll has never been good on character development, but this is a film where it's essential.

I hesitated a long time before I rated the film. Maybe three stars is too generous. In its favour, the cinematography is excellent, but the screenplay is lacking. Boll has already promised a sequel for next year. I hope he can do it better.

Exte (5 Stars)

If you've seen Sion Sono's films, you'll know horror is rarely his main goal. Even when he's dealing with mass suicide, cults or psychological collapse, he's more interested in social satire, surrealism and existential questions than simple scares. That's what makes "Exte" such an oddity. It's the closest Sono has ever come to making a straight horror film.

The premise is gloriously bizarre. Hair removed from the body of a dead woman and used for hair extensions begins to grow and develop a murderous life of its own. It sounds ridiculous, and in less capable hands it would have been nothing more than an extended joke. Instead, Sono embraces the absurdity, mixing grisly body horror with moments of black comedy and genuine unease. The result is Japanese horror at its most eccentric, where beauty and revulsion become impossible to separate.

The film's outstanding star is Chiaki Kuriyama. She's best known for playing the deadly schoolgirl Gogo Yubari in "Kill Bill", but "Exte" is the film in which she delivers the finest performance of her career. As Yuko, a young hair stylist suddenly burdened with caring for her neglected niece while battling a supernatural nightmare, she's completely believable. She brings warmth, vulnerability and determination to a film that could easily have collapsed under its own outrageous concept. Even when giant masses of living hair are attacking people, she keeps the emotional core firmly grounded.

"Exte" may not have the spiritual depth of "Suicide Club", "Noriko's Dinner Table" or "Strange Circus", but that was never Sono's intention. He's having fun with horror conventions while still injecting enough eccentricity to remind you whose film you're watching. It's outrageous, inventive and frequently revolting, yet surprisingly heartfelt beneath the gore.

For fans of Japanese horror, "Exte" remains one of the strangest films of the 2000's and a reminder that even when Sion Sono sets out to make a conventional horror film, he can't resist making something wonderfully, gloriously weird.

Obsession (4 Stars)

I'd already seen this film in April as the opening film of the Stuttgart Nights Festival. I didn't intend to see it again, but one of my friends praised it so highly that I needed to go back and check if my four star rating is high enough. After careful consideration, I'm leaving my rating unchanged.

The film is about a shy boy called Bear who doesn't have the courage to approach a woman called Nikki that he's had a crush on for years. Honestly, he's so insecure that I feel like slapping him. But this isn't a fault that I find with the film. The world is full of insecure young men who're afraid to approach women.

Bear uses a mystical artefact called a One Wish Willow. After breaking it he can make a wish. His wish is for Nikki to love him more than anyone else in the world. Even when she comes on to him, Bear backs away, but she won't take No for an answer. We soon see that her love for Bear isn't healthy; it's an obsession. To take just one example, she refuses to let him talk to other women.

What disturbs me about the film is that Nikki does other strange things that have nothing to do with her obsessive love for Bear. For instance, she cooks his dead cat for him. That's just silly. If things like this had been omitted from the film I could have given it a five star rating.

Righting Wrongs (5 Stars)

If you've ever wondered whether Yuen Biao deserves to stand alongside Jackie Chan and Sammo Hung, "Righting Wrongs" is the answer. Corey Yuen's brutal vigilante thriller gives Biao the chance to prove he isn't just an incredible martial artist; he's arguably the greatest acrobat Hong Kong cinema has ever produced.

Like Jackie Chan, Biao performs every stunt himself, with astonishing speed and absolute commitment. He flips through windows, dives between moving vehicles, crashes through glass and launches himself into gravity-defying aerial manoeuvres that still look unbelievable today because they're real. There's no CGI, just breath-taking athleticism and fearless stunt work. His movements are so fluid that even the most dangerous sequences seem effortless.

Then there's Cynthia Rothrock, who more than holds her own. Rather than simply playing the token female action star, she's presented as an equal. Her crisp karate techniques perfectly complement Biao's acrobatic kung fu, creating one of Hong Kong cinema's greatest hero versus hero fights. Rothrock's kicks are lightning fast, her timing is impeccable and her screen presence is commanding. She also gets a spectacular showdown with Karen Sheperd, making this one of the rare 1980's action films where the women deliver some of the movie's best fights.

The plot, about a prosecutor driven to vigilantism after the legal system fails, is darker than most Hong Kong action films of the period and becomes increasingly ruthless as it builds towards its famously bleak finale. Comedy appears occasionally, but the film never loses its hard edge.

"Righting Wrongs" isn't remembered because of its story. It's remembered because it contains some of the finest martial arts choreography and practical stunt work ever filmed. Yuen Biao and Cynthia Rothrock perform at the very top of their game, creating an action classic that leaves modern productions looking tame.