The Toxic Avenger [2025] (4 Stars)

This is the sixth film in the Stuttgart Fantasy Film Festival.

What a beautiful film! I wouldn't say it's perfect, but it's a breath of fresh air after the poor films today. It's not meant to be a serious or meaningful film. It's just 90 minutes of unashamed violence, although the violence is so unrealistically that it made everyone laugh.

It's pitched as a remake of the 1984 Toxic Avenger film, but there are brief references to the characters in the first film. What I especially like is that the film was obviously made with a large budget, but a deliberate effort has been made to make it look cheap. It could have been made in the 1980's. Pete Dinklage is the perfect actor to play the Toxic Avenger, and a sequel is promised after the credits. I can hardly wait!

The Faculty (4 Stars)

This is a film I haven't watched for a long time. I remember renting it from Lovefilm when I lived in Mansel Road, so it must have been 2008 or earlier. Lovefilm was a company which allowed DVDs to be rented by mail. There was no rental period, I could keep a DVD as long as I wanted, but I was only allowed to have three DVDs at a time, so it was in my own interest to watch and return as quickly as possible to get the next film. As it was, I used to make a copy of any films I liked. I made a copy of "The Faculty", which I still have today, but I never watched the copy. Silly me. Lovefilm was bought by Amazon in 2008 and continued its rental business for a few years.

My memories of the film were vague before finally watching it again today. I remembered that it was written by Kevin Williamson, but I'd forgotten that it was directed by Robert Rodriguez.

The film takes place in a small town in Ohio, mostly in Herrington High School. A small creature is found which on the sports field that the Biology teacher can't identify. At first he thinks it's dead, but when he drops it into an aquarium it revives and starts to swim. It even duplicates itself.

That's just the start. The creature is a symbiotic parasite. It enters the body of its victims and takes control. It's not just a random occurrence. The creatures want to take over the whole world, starting with the teachers, then the students, then the rest of the town. It's never explained where the parasites come from. Only six students resist the invasion. They have a secret weapon. The high school student Zeke is a drug dealer, selling powder that he makes in his home laboratory. This powder kills the parasites. So the main hero is a drug dealer?

My close friends already know my taste in girls. If I were in school, would I have dated the beautiful cheerleader played by Jordana Brewster?

No way! I would have preferred Stokeley, the goth girl played by Clea DuVall. She's an outsider. Everyone assumes she's a lesbian, but I wouldn't have been put off by the rumours. I would have tried my hardest to date her. I've always had a weakness for goth girls, even though there's nothing goth about me. It's the black clothing and the moody looks that attract me. The only thing I don't like about goth girls is their piercings, but Stokeley was metal free. As girls should be. One of my slogans is "A girl should never have metal in any place that I want to kiss, lick or suck".

The film isn't perfect. I never thought I'd say this, but it could have been improved by adding jump scares. Also, the effect the parasites have on their victims is inconsistent. Some people become rigid and have a weird stare, whereas others act normally and blend in with their friends.

I wish film makers would pay attention to details. Look at the front page of the school newspaper, the Hornet Weekly. You can click the picture to enlarge it. The first paragraph is a summary of the characters, a reasonable article apart from misspelling "whose". But then the text is repeated in the second paragraph. That's sloppy.

Success Rate:  + 2.2

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

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (5 Stars)

This is my last film of the year. It's one of the best films I know, in third place in my top 100 films list. I had another film in my list planned, but I changed my mind after hearing about the death of Tom Wilkinson yesterday. The cause of his death hasn't yet been named, but his family says that it was unexpected. A heart attack? Maybe.

The eulogies are already pouring in. They name his memorable films, usually starting with "The Full Monty". Most of them don't even mention "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind". That's unfortunate, since it's his best film, but it's understandable, because he didn't play the main role. Or is it understandable? He only had a supporting role in "The Full Monty" as well.

I've written about "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" seven times, but I haven't included photos of him in any of the reviews. I'll make up for it now. It's a twisted love film between Joel Barish (Jim Carrie) and Clementine Kruczynski (Kate Winslet), but there's also a love story between Howard Mierzwiak (Tom Wilkinson) and Mary Svevo (Kirsten Dunst), most of it off screen.

Dr. Howard Mierzwiak has invented a machine that can selectively erase memories. He uses it to help people forget loved ones. He's had an affair with Mary that almost wrecked his marriage, so he used the machine to make her forget their affair. The procedure works, even though Mary still works in his practice as his assistant. What he didn't consider is that if she forgets that she was attracted to him she might fall in love with him a second time.

Is a one-way memory erasure enough? When she adoringly looks at him, how can he not be reminded of the hours of passion he shared in her arms?

It's a wonderful film, one of the best films I've ever watched. The trouble is that it's a complicated film. I remember seeing it the first time in the cinema in 2004. It took me about half an hour to understand what was happening, and it wasn't until I watched it again on DVD that I began to understand the subtleties. It's two stories being told at the same time, one in the correct order, the other in reverse chronology. These two stories interact with one another, making the film even more complicated. I could tell by my son Benjamin's reactions that he didn't understand the film. I'll have to watch it with him again.

Tom Wilkinson
5 February 1948 – 30 December 2023

Farewell to a grand actor. He's sadly missed. I'll have to watch some more of his films next week. Maybe even "The Full Monty".

Success Rate:  + 1.6

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

Deep Impact (4 Stars)

I was feeling lazy this evening. I still am. I watched "Deep Impact" late in the evening, and since I'd written a good review when I watched it in 2016 I thought I wouldn't write anything tonight. I decided to generate a review with ChatGPT. The ChatGPT reviews are samey, as I realised when I generated a dozen reviews a few months ago, but if I only use it to create occasional reviews nobody will notice. So I made two attempts:

"Write a detailed review of Deep Impact".

"Write a detailed plot description of Deep Impact".

I was horrified. Both reviews, especially the second, contained factual errors. For instance, ChatGPT says that the reporter Jenny Lerner gave up her place in the underground shelter to remain with her lover. Bong! No, she doesn't have a lover in the film. It's also claimed that Jenny's parents had arranged for her place in the shelter. No, it was the other way round. Jenny was selected by the government, and she attempted to get a place for her parents as well.

So please, dear readers, don't expect artificial intelligence to take away your jobs. Based on the poor results I saw today, it'll be years until it gets that far. If you use artificial intelligence to assist you in your work, you need to check everything it's written.

So I'll have to write the review myself, but I'll keep it brief. As I said, I'm feeling lazy tonight.

A teenage astronomer called Leo Biederman, played by Elijah Wood, discovers a comet in the night sky. He passes on the information to Dr. Marcus Wolf, who realises that it's on a collision course with the Earth. It's about seven miles long, so the impact will be great enough to destroy all life on Earth. The scientists call it an Extinction Level Event (ELE).

Two steps are taken to prepare for the impact. First, a spaceship called the Messiah is sent to intercept the comet and use nuclear weapons to destroy it, Secondly, in case the Messiah fails, an underground shelter has been built in Missouri to hold one million people for at least two years.

The film doesn't properly start until after the first half hour. The film begins with little stories that are irrelevant to the story itself. Dr. Wolf dies in a car crash when he's on his way to report his findings. My condolences, but it's not relevant. After receiving faulty inside information, Jenny Lerner misunderstands ELE and thinks the president has a mistress called Ellie. Amusing, but also irrelevant. The first half hour could have been trimmed to five minutes.

"Deep Impact" and "Armageddon" were both released in 1998, only two months apart. They were both successful. Would they have earned more money if they hadn't been competing against one another? Or did the success of "Deep Impact" (May 1998) encourage more people to go to see "Armageddon" (July 1998)?

By the way... wouldn't you like to have Morgan Freeman as president?

Success Rate:  + 2.4

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

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (5 Stars)

Netflix Thursday #16

It's Thursday again? I asked that question when I watched my last film, but the answer is different this time. It really is Thursday. What a coincidence!

This is one of my favourite films, third in my top 100 list. I've watched and reviewed it a few times. In the past I've concentrated on the film's philosophical aspects. Today I'll apply it to myself.

In 2002 I married someone, a beautiful young woman called Nicola. It was my second marriage, and I expected things to be better the second time round. I was wrong. It was Hell. We had one year of happiness and three years of suffering. It was all about drugs. A year after the marriage one of Nicola's friends stayed with us for a few days. Her boyfriend, Alexis Thomas, was a drug dealer. He said that Nicola should try crack, just once, to see what it's like. When it comes to drugs there's no such thing as "just once". She was hooked immediately.

At first she enjoyed smoking crack. After a while she realised it was harmful to her, and she wanted to stop, but she couldn't. I felt it was my duty to help her, but I couldn't. Her setbacks became my setbacks. In late 2006 there was a turning point. One evening she rang Alexis to tell him she wanted to buy crack from him. I locked the doors, took away her key, and I said I wouldn't let him in. She threatened to call the police and tell them I'd hit her. I thought she was bluffing, but she really did it. When the police came she was lying on the floor in the living room, saying she was too injured to get up after I'd been beating her.

The police arrested me. I was put in a cell briefly, but then they let me out and said that it was obvious from the start that I hadn't hit her. There were no bruises, and the telephone cable (landline) was too short for her to reach from her position lying on the floor. They'd only arrested me to keep the peace. The police station was too far away from my home, so I had to stay until morning. I sat playing chess with a police officer all night. When I got home Alexis had already left, but she was high on crack.

That incident scared me. If it happened again, the police might believe her next time. I didn't want a criminal record, so I gave up trying to help her and planned to leave her as soon as possible.

That brings me to the film. Would I want to forget Nicola? Would I want to erase her from my memory? (I'm assuming that my readers have seen the film and know what I'm talking about). My answer is a clear No. We had some beautiful times together, times which I never want to forget. Admittedly, the good times were few, but I'd like to hold on to them.

What about the bad times? There were many, many bad incidents in our marriage. The one I named above wasn't even the worst, even though it was the one that persuaded me to leave her. Some of my friends know more details, and they're shocked. Nicola made me suffer terribly, and I consider marrying her to be the worst mistake of my life. But do I want to forget what happened? In a way I do. They were things that no man should have to experience. On the other hand, remembering these experiences protects me from similar mistakes in the future. If I'd erased Nicola from my memory, I might have met her again a year later and got into a relationship with her again. Or maybe not. As far as I know, she's never overcome her addiction to crack. I would never have fallen in love with a drug addict. But I still like to remember the bad times as a warning. I try not to think about them. I push the memories into the back of my mind, but they're still there if I need to remember.

In 2012 my friend Brian Farmer was murdered. Four suspects were arrested, three men and a woman, but they weren't named until the trial began. One of my friends said to me, "I think the woman is Nicola". As it turned out, it wasn't her, but it shows how bad her reputation was.

In the film Mary Svevo (Kirsten Dunst) begins as a strong supporter of the memory erasure technique, and she ends up rejecting it. She was right to change her mind.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (5 Stars)

Dancer's Top Films #3

Today is the 11th of September. The day is most commonly known as 9/11, based on the (illogical) American order of Month-Day-Year. Most people are talking about the event that took place 20 years ago today. I acknowledge it, but I prefer not to dwell on bad things in the past. I want to concentrate on positive things, such as films. I posted something about the 9/11 attack on the 10th anniversary, but I deleted the post a few months later because I was getting abusive anonymous comments. It's one of the few blog posts that I've ever deleted.

I don't know how well known this film is among my younger readers. It was a box office success when it was released in 2004, but nowadays it's rarely shown on television. That's a question I'd like to ask any of my readers under 30: have you seen this film? Leave your answer in the comments box.

The name is quite a mouthful, unusually long for a film title. The longest title in my personal collection is "The Incredibly Strange Creatures who stopped living and became Mixed-Up Zombies". In Germany the title has been shortened to "Don't forget me". I admit that the German title is more relevant to the film's content, but the screenwriter Charlie Kaufman wanted a long title. It's claimed that his first title suggestion was 18 words long, but I haven't been able to verify this. The final title is a quote from Alexander Pope's poem "Eloisa to Abelard", spoken by Kirsten Dunst as Mary Svevo in the film:

How happy is the blameless vestal's lot!
The world forgetting, by the world forgot.
Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind!
Each prayer accepted, and each wish resigned.

I prefer her other quote, by Friedrich Nietzsche, even though it contradicts the film's message:

Blessed are the forgetful, for they get the better even of their blunders.

At its core, "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" is a love story, despite its underplayed science fiction background. If you've never seen the film before, you're in for a treat. The opening credits are delayed for almost 18 minutes. In the pre-credits sequence Joel Barish (Jim Carrey) spontaneously takes a day off work to spend a day on the beach in Montauk. It's Valentine's Day 2004. He's approached by Clementine Kruczynski (Kate Winslet), who blatantly forces herself on him. She talks to him in the train and doesn't even stop when he tells her he would rather be left alone. That evening she invites him home for a drink and leans against him romantically. She says that they should get married.

Stop!

If that happened to me I'd think that I'm dealing with a mentally deranged person. I'd run as fast as I can.

It's true that Clementine is eccentric, but she's far from deranged. The story unfolds after the credits.

The film is an emotional roller coaster. It's best known for its surreal special effects, but concentrate on the tragic young couple. All relationships have problems, some more than others. Walking away and forgetting your partner is the coward's way out. Love will find a way.

Clementine believes in love. It's written on her shirt. I've been unable to identify the shirt, because the text is hidden beneath her breasts. Some people claim it's "Love is a magic carpet ride", but the picture doesn't match that shirt.

Obviously. Does anyone have the right answer? Once more: use the comments box!

Success Rate:  + 1.6

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

Maniac [2012] (2 Stars)

This is a remake of a film with the same name made in 1980. I've read that the original is considered to be a cult film, but I haven't seen it, so I was able to watch the remake without any bias.

Elijah Wood plays Frank, a young man who owns a mannequin shop that he's inherited from his mother. Is there a market for mannequins? Obviously not, because his mother had to make money from prostitution. Seeing her with her clients traumatised him, so he eventually killed her. Now he drives round the city at night to pick up girls. He murders them, then scalps them and uses their hair to make his mannequins look more realistic.

I find the film awful. I don't like films in which women are slaughtered. I admit, there are other films that I like in which women are killed, for example "Scream", but "Maniac" is different. The killings are too realistic and too brutal. I felt sick watching them.

"Maniac" is mostly shown through Frank's eyes, in the style of "Hardcore Henry". This could have worked if it had been done consistently. In the first half hour Frank repeatedly looks at himself in mirrors. There are mirrors wherever he goes. It's as if the director wanted to show us that he has an A-List actor on board. These glimpses of Elijah Wood add nothing to story. Later in the film the camera sometimes swings back and shows Frank. That spoils the artistic effect.

What we see through Frank's eyes isn't always what's happening. He sees and hears things that aren't there. He's a schizophrenic in the true meaning of the word. This makes the film more interesting, but it's unsettling. I didn't like it.

I don't think I can ever watch this film again. It's not good for me.

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

Come to Daddy (3 Stars)

This is the 38th film in the Stuttgart Fantasy Film Festival.

When Norval was five years old his father left home. There was no contact for 30 years. Suddenly a letter arrives in which his father invites him to his lakeside house. Things don't go well. The father badly insults his son.

That's all I'll say. The film has some surprises, and it escalates into an action-packed finale. It's not a bad film, and I'm sure many of my readers will like it, but it doesn't speak to me personally.

Open Windows (2 Stars)

When I wrote my first review of "Unfriended" I called it outstandingly original as the first film in a new genre, which I called the real-time computer screen genre. A friend of mine said that it's not original, because it had already been done in a film called "Open Windows". That made me curious, so I would have bought it straight away, but it wasn't available. So I forgot about it.

Until now. I discovered that it's available on Amazon Prime, so I had to watch it.

Let me answer my friend first. "Open Windows" was made in 2014, a year before "Unfriended", but it's difficult for me to watch it without comparing it to "Unfriended". If "Unfriended" had been made first, "Open Windows" would be a poor copy, attempting to copy the atmosphere of the new genre but missing the mark.

"Open Windows" is a film that takes place in real time, and a lot of it takes place on computer screens, but that's it. Notice I said screens in the plural. The first hour takes place on one computer screen. Then we switch to another. Then there's a sequence that takes place in point-of-view mode, imitating a mobile phone's camera view, except it isn't. Finally there's a scene which isn't on a computer screen, but it's broken up into frames as if it were.

To concentrate on the first hour, we never see the whole computer screen, just one or two windows side by side, i.e. an excerpt of the screen. These aren't familiar applications, like Facebook, YouTube or Skype. They're artificial apps, videos planted on the screen by a hacker called Chord. They show things happening simultaneously at different places, so the camera jumps from one video to another. Whereas the computer screen is an essential part of "Unfriended", in "Open Windows" it's a superfluous gimmick. It could just as well have been a real-time film without using a computer screen. In fact, the film would have been better without the computer screen. The computer is just a distraction.

Now let me describe the plot itself. Nick Chambers is the webmaster of a fan site dedicated to the actress Jill Goddard. He's won a contest, for which the prize is a dinner date with the actress herself. When he arrives in the hotel he's told by Chord, who claims to be Jill's manager, that she doesn't want to meet him. Chord tells Nick that he has hacked into Jill's computer, her mobile phone, the hotel security cameras and many other devices, so he can arrange for Nick to watch Jill having sex with her boyfriend. This never happens. The boyfriend discovers that Nick is watching him and comes to his hotel room, where Nick knocks him unconscious with a taser.

Nick flees, while Jill is kidnapped by Chord, who she's never seen before. There are exciting car chases, or at least they would be exciting if they were shown normally instead of through the webcam of Nick's laptop on his passenger seat.

It's difficult to explain just how bad the film is. Apart from the (deliberately) poor cinematography, the level of the hacking is ridiculous. At the end Chord takes control of every computer in the world that's connected to the Internet. What? And the hacker can turn the light in Nick's bedroom on and off. Is that connected to the Internet as well? The hacker can also open a hotel door. Are the door hinges connected to the Internet? It's all too stupid for words. The director should have hired a computer expert to advise him on what's possible now, what might be possible in the near future and what will never be possible.

On the plus side, Elijah Wood is a good actor with his big blue eyes, and the gratuitous nudity from Sasha Grey is enjoyable. That's it.

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

Sin City (5 Stars)

I watched "Sin City" years ago, but for some reason I thought I didn't like it. All I could remember is seeing Elijah Wood jumping around, nothing else. That was enough reason to watch it again. Wow! I was mesmerised. I can't write much about the film because of being short of time, but I'll promise to return to it and write more next time. Whenever that is. I don't break my promises, I just need a long time to keep them.

Success Rate:  + 2.0

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

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (5 Stars)

First of all, I have to make an apology to my regular readers. I'm being visited by two of my children for the next three weeks, so I expect I shall have less time to write my blog. I'll be watching as many films as usual, because they'll be watching films with me, but I shan't have as much time for myself as I usually have. I'll still be writing about every film I watch, but my reviews will be shorter.

I don't have a full viewing schedule for the next three weeks, but I already know what I'll be watching for the next three days. While chatting with my son I found out that he hasn't yet seen my three favourite films, so I'll be watching them with him in reverse order. "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" is my third favourite film.

It's a mind-bending science fiction story, but more than anything else it's a moving love story. It's a very untypical role for Jim Carrey. It's not his only serious film, but it's the film in which we see the least of his comic personality. The only comic relief in the film is supplied by Kate Winslet.

Does the film have a message? The message that I take from it is that it's better to remember than forget, but there any many other angles from which it can be watched. Maybe another message is that it's only possible to discover the value of what you have by starting again from the beginning.

The film only one one Academy Award, for the Best Original Screenplay. It should have won more.

Success Rate:  + 1.6

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

The Oxford Murders (4 Stars)

I could easily describe the plot of this film in a single sentence, but I shan't do it because that sentence would give away the film's ending.

"The Oxford Murders" is a slow-moving murder mystery that takes place in the intellectual community in Oxford. It's a unusual film for the director Alex de la Iglesia. It's also a strange choice of subject. As a Spanish director making his first film in English for 12 years it's remarkable that he's presenting a film that's very untypical for him.

Elijah Wood plays Martin, an American student who arrives in Oxford in 1993 to do a PhD. He's chosen Oxford because he's fascinated by the eccentric professor Arthur Seldom, who has written books on the philosophical implications of number theory. The film opens with Professor Seldom quoting from Ludwig Wittgenstein's "Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus" to prove that Philosophy is dead. I read the Tractatus in my first year of university, and I can state categorically that it was never Wittgenstein's intention to kill off philosophical study. All he wanted to do was instate rules to govern philosophical debate, adhering to the school of logical positivism. Interestingly, Wittgenstein rejected a large part of the Tractatus in his later life, but many philosophers still consider the Tractatus the pinnacle of philosophical thought.

Shortly after his arrival Martin's landlady is killed. This is the first in a series of murders, for which the killer leaves clues in the form of patterns from number series. Martin is one of the prime suspects. Together with Professor Seldom he attempts to solve the case.

The film isn't just about Philosophy and Mathematics. There are also sexual intrigues. Martin is torn between two women, both of whom are connected to Professor Seldom. They're fascinated by his intelligence, he's fascinated by their bodies. As Martin's landlady states before her murder, "Arthur suffers from the same weakness as all men; he likes young women". Is that really a weakness? If it is I must be weak as well.

The film has been criticised by critics for being too boring. I disagree. I find the intellectual atmosphere of the film fascinating. The Inspector Morse series was also set in Oxford, but it was just a backdrop. In "The Oxford Murders" university life is an essential part of the story. Maybe the critics never studied Philosophy at Oxford University, so the film is too foreign for them to understand?

Nevertheless, I don't consider this film to reach the high standards of Alex de la Iglesia's other films. It's too different. It's not as mad, not as chaotic as his Spanish language films. It's the total opposite, a murder case that has to be solved by mathematical logic.

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

Deep Impact (4 Stars)

This is the fourth film starring Leelee Sobieski, made in 1998. She was 14 at the time, but her character in the film must be older, because she is shown getting married. She certainly looks older than 14. She's aged a lot since "Jungle 2 Jungle", which she made a year earlier in 1997. She's now a lot taller and bustier. Some girls are early developers.

"Deep Impact" was made in the same year as "Armageddon", a film with the same premise of a comet hitting the Earth. Both films were large box office hits. "Armageddon" made more money, but "Deep Impact" was praised by critics for its greater scientific accuracy and its better written screenplay with multi-faceted subplots.

It isn't stated in what year the film takes place, but it's presumably the near future, a few years after 1998. There's now a black president. Was that even thinkable in 1998? The director probably wanted to shock the audience. On the other hand, the president is played by Morgan Freeman, who must be the most reassuringly calm father figure of any colour. He's someone I would like to be my president, if I were American. It's not stated what party he belongs to, but that's typical. In films where we see an American president we're never told what party he belong to, because he's simply the president. That's all we need to know.

A comet is on a collision course with the Earth, threatening to cause an E.L.E. (Extinction Level Event). A spaceship is sent to destroy the comet with nuclear explosives. The mission fails, simply dividing the comet into two pieces which are both headed towards the Earth. Drastic survival measures are needed to save the human race. Since it's expected that all life on the Earth's surface will be destroyed, a huge underground camp is built underground in Missouri, large enough to house a million people. 200,000 people are pre-selected, mostly scientists, politicians and security forces. The other 800,000 are picked at random by a national lottery. Only people under 50 are picked. As an arbitrary age limit I find that too high. 30 would be a lot more sensible, because the survivors have to be of good child-bearing age to repopulate the Earth. And wouldn't it be more sensible to restrict the lottery picks to people with college degrees? Evolution needs a helping hand.

That's where Leelee Sobieski comes into the story. She plays Sarah Hotchner, a young girl in love with Leo Biederer (Elijah Wood). Leo is picked to be saved, Sarah isn't. For this reason they get married, because the marriage partners of people who have been picked are also saved.

Overall, this film is a lot darker than "Armageddon". Whereas "Armageddon" is a film about averting a disaster, "Deep Impact" is about the disaster itself. Several stories are told in parallel about people who never meet one another. There's the spaceship crew, an investigative reporter, and of course Leo and Sarah, the young lovers. The acting is superb throughout.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (5 Stars)

30 films to watch before you die, #26

I need to write this down before I forget it.

This film was written by Charlie Kaufman. It was directed by Michel Gondry, but that's of lesser relevance. Films written by Charlie Kaufman have a distinctive style, whoever the director is. He enjoys a unique role in today's film culture. Most people who watch films can name the most popular actors. Serious film fans can name their favourite directors. But how many people can name screenwriters (not including the directors who write their own scripts)? I can only name one: Charlie Kaufman.

My memory is beginning to fade.

The film may have confused people when it was made. It stars Jim Carrey in the lead role, and at the time the film was released people still thought of him as a comedy actor, despite his serious roles in "The Truman Show" and "The Majestic". This led to the film being incorrectly labelled a comedy, even on the cover of the American DVD box. If anything, "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" is the most serious role he has ever played. The only small hint of his humorous self is the way he gets stuck in train doors in the pre-opening credits sequence.

It's all getting so difficult to remember. Let me name another few films written by Charlie Kaufman before it's too late:

• Being John Malkovich (1999)
• Adaptation (2002)
• Synecdoche, New York (2008)

I'm sure there was something else I wanted to say. Let me check my notes, if I can remember where I put them.

I'm sorry, I can't remember what film I was writing about.

The Last Witch Hunter (3½ Stars)

The premise of this film is that witches are a different race that live on Earth alongside humans. In the past witches were powerful and threatened to conquer the world, either destroying or enslaving humans, but there were elite bands of witch hunters who fought against them. After the defeat of their queen in the 13th Century the witches grew weaker and their power was diluted, presumably by intermarriage with humans. The witch hunters were disbanded, and a secret society called the Axe and Cross took its place. Witches are allowed to exist, as long as they don't harm humans. Vin Diesel is the only remaining witch hunter. He was the one who killed the witch queen in the 13th Century, but before her death she cursed him to live forever. He now lives in modern day New York, even though his missions take him all over the world.

There are many different types of films. Some are true stories, some are science fiction, some are supernatural stories, some are fantasy, etc. There are different rules in each type of film that dictate what's allowed and what isn't. In a vampire film we don't see spaceships firing at each other, in a Victorian period drama we don't see mobile phones, etc. Every film that we watch uses the first five to ten minutes to lay out, usually implicitly, what the rules are. The viewer needs to be acclimatised. He needs to know what sort of a film he's watching. That's where "The Last Witch Hunter" fails. The opening scenes are totally confusing. We see Vikings, followed by confusing special effects. This disorients the viewer. By the time we get to the present day the rug has already been pulled from under our feet.

The problems deepen as the film continues. The film relies too much on special effects. It's often difficult to see what's happening. If the film had toned down the special effects it would have been more enjoyable.

Vin Diesel's acting pleasantly surprised me. He puts on a reasonable performance as the hardened fighter. He has a tender side that he suppresses, and this inner conflict is played out in his facial expressions. On the other hand, his love interest Chloe, played by Rose Leslie, is a very weak character. It's not just her acting, she's poorly introduced to us. After seeing her in the bar scene she's just a caricature. The same is true of the bad guy, Belial. He's just a random monster, and it leaves us cold when he's destroyed. The best films make us feel sympathetic for the bad guys, and we have a twinge of pity when they're killed. There's none of this in "The Last Witch Hunter".

It's not a bad film, but it's not a good film either. It's very forgettable. The film's ending loudly hints that there will be a sequel, but please, we don't want one.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (5 Stars)

Over the last week I've watched a lot of disappointing films. Five films with 3 stars or less. I needed something good today to cheer me up. This is one of my favourite films ever.

If you want to know more about it, look for my other reviews in this blog. Or take my word for it and buy it. You won't regret it.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (5 Stars)

Okay, after watching "I love you, Phillip Morris" yesterday I had to watch another film with Jim Carrey, and this was the best choice I could make. "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" is one of the best films I've ever seen. It's definitely in my top five. The screenplay by Charlie Kaufman is mind-blowing.

Click here to read my last review. That includes the facts about the film, and I can't improve on what I wrote, as far as the facts are concerned. I'd just like to add something about the underlying philosophy. Forgetting the past is criticised in no uncertain terms. That's something everyone should take from the film. However painful a person's memories might be, it's better to remember them than to forget them. To quote the famous words of George Santayana, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it". We see this in the film in the case of Mary Svevo, but I won't say anything more about it here because it would be a spoiler.

Mary changes her attitude once she realises what she's forgotten. She begins by saying, "Blessed are the forgetful, for they get the better even of their blunders". This quote from Friedrich Nietzsche is so important to her that she says it twice during the film. My regular readers know that I have a low opinion of Nietzsche, so I'm glad that she rejected this philosophy by the end of the film.

Let me quote Nietzsche's "Midnight Song". I've added my own translation, which is more accurate than the official poetic translations:

O Mensch! Gib Acht!	O man! Listen!
Was spricht die tiefe Mitternacht?	What is the deep midnight saying?
"Ich schlief, ich schlief.	"I was asleep, I was asleep,
Aus tiefem Traum bin ich erwacht.	I awoke from a deep dream.
Die Welt ist tief,	The world is deep,
Und tiefer als der Tag gedacht.	Deeper than day could know.
Tief ist ihr Weh —	The world's woe is deep,
Lust — tiefer noch als Herzeleid.	And the world's longing is deeper than heartache.
Weh spricht: Vergeh!	Woe tells it to cease,
Doch alle Lust will Ewigkeit,	But all longing wants eternity,
Will tiefe, tiefe Ewigkeit!"	Deep, deep eternity."

Night knows secrets that day doesn't. We can conclude that night keeps the secrets from day, jealously concealing the knowledge gleamed from dreams. The night is the messenger of forgetfulness. The world is torn between two extremes: longing for the future and heartache for the past. Nietzsche sees woe as a negative element that tries to hold back longing. Woe is the ally of heartache and wants to preserve it. Woe wants to keep the world centred on the past, but longing strives forward to eternity. This might not seem bad in itself, but we see the consequences in the context of Nietzsche's other writings. By striving towards the future we abandon the past completely. This means that in the quest to become the Übermensch, the Superman, the weak ones of the past are trampled underfoot.

That's a very brief explanation of the poem, I know. Philosophy students have written whole theses about this poem, not always agreeing with one another in their expositions.

A balance is needed between the past and the future. As a certain eccentric film fan once said:

"Live in the present, fight for the future, remember the past".