Joy (4 Stars)

True Stories #5

Name: Joy Mangano

Lived: 1 February 1956 – still alive

Film dates: approx 1966 to 2000, mainly 1990 to 1992

Film made in 2015

I'm not sure about the exact dates in the film. I've made guesses based on Wikipedia's page about Joy Mangano. If I read a full biography of her life I'd be able to pinpoint the dates, but I'm too lazy to do so much research.

It's not just a matter of laziness. I'm having a bad day. I've had bad toothache since Thursday. My dentist is on holiday to tomorrow. I thought it might get better, but now it's the worst toothache I've ever had. I've been drinking a small glass of Ouzo about three times a day, which reduces the pain, but it doesn't cure it completely. I'm unable to eat solid foods. For the last three days I've only been eating soup and yoghurt.

The film begins with Joy at a young age, possibly 10, showing talent at Origami and telling stories. Her mother spends all day in bed watching soap operas, but she's inspired by her grandmother to make something of her life.

Fast forward to 1990. Joy is divorced with two children, and she works selling tickets for an airline. Her ex-husband lives in the basement. Her mother is also also divorced, but on speaking terms with her ex-husband. Sort of. She rarely talks to everyone, except about soap operas. The end result is that four generations live under the same roof. It's interesting to see that none of the adult women in the house (Joy, her mother and her grandmother) have partners. Men are unnecessary.

After injuring herself while cleaning up a broken glass, Joy has an idea. Why should it be necessary to wring out mops? Why shouldn't there be a self-wringing mop? She designs something on paper, and an employee at her father's car repair shop builds it from her sketches. She calls it a Miracle Mop. After a difficult start with few sales, she advertises it on the newly launched shopping channel QVC.

The film follows Joy Mangano as she struggles to start a business. Her ex-husband supports her whole-heartedly. Her father offers some support, although he frequently doubts her abilities. It's tough for Joy to succeed in a male-dominated world. Wherever she goes, men are taking advantage of her because she's only a woman. Intelligence and creativity aren't enough. She needs to develop a tough attitude.

I like films about strong successful women. I'd never heard of Joy Mangano before seeing this film in the cinema in 2016. I'm now overwhelmed by her, the real woman, not just her portrayal in the movie.

Success Rate:  - 0.3

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

Red Sparrow (4 Stars)

"Red Sparrow" is a spy thriller that was made in 2018. It stars Jennifer Lawrence with dyed brown hair and a fake Russian accent.

Don't worry, she reverts to her natural hair colour later in the film.

She plays Dominika Egorova, a ballerina at the Bolshoi Ballet. She breaks her leg in an accident on stage. She can soon walk again, but her career as a dancer is over. Her uncle, the deputy director of Russia's foreign intelligence agency, hires her to join the Sparrows, an elite group of agents who are trained to sexually seduce foreigners. Despite her initial reluctance to use her body as a weapon, she excels in her training. After a few months she's sent to Budapest to seduce Nate Nash (Joel Edgerton), a CIA agent who's receiving information from a high-ranking Russian informer. Her mission is to find out the name of the informer.

She underestimates Nate. Soon after meeting her he recognises that she's a Sparrow acting undercover in Budapest, but she continues with her game. When he challenges her, she claims that she wants to defect to the West. Is that true, or just a ploy to get him to trust her? The cat and mouse game continues for the rest of the film, and the viewer is left unsure of what she really wants. The film is probably the most effective the first time you watch it, when you don't know the answer, but it's still good enough for repeated watching.

The film has gained notoriety for its sexual training scenes. The Sparrows are expected to strip naked in front of the class to demonstrate their seduction skills. The ice cold Matron, played to perfection by Charlotte Rampling, drills this lesson into the trainees:

"Every human being is a puzzle of need. Learn how to be the missing piece, and they will give you everything".

Wise words. Find out what a man wants and give it to him. Dominika is told what sort of pornography Nate watches on the Internet before she starts her assignment. This, combined with her personal assessment of him, tells her what strategy to use.

It's all for Mother Russia. Vladimir Putin would be proud.

Success Rate:  + 0.2

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

X-Men: Dark Phoenix (4 Stars)

I gave this film five stars when I watched it in the cinema two years ago. That was too much. It's not as good as "First Class" or "Days of Future Past". 

I'm not sure whether the last four X-Men films are consistent with one another concerning Jean Grey's timeline. I suspect there's an error with her being eight years old in 1975, but I'll need to rewatch the films in order to check for errors. Some people call the films starting with "First Class" a reboot, but that's not correct. It's telling stories in the past that lead up to the events of the initial X-Men trilogy. Of course, the events of "Days of Future Past" rewrote the timeline, so the events of "X-Men 3" never happened. That's the film in which we first saw Jean Grey become Dark Phoenix. Now it happens again, this time earlier. How many years earlier is unclear. In this film she became Dark Phoenix in 1992. In "X-Men 3" no date is stated, but we can assume it took place round about the time when the film was released, i.e. 2006.

The Dark Phoenix story is told more accurately than in "X-Men 3", although it still deviates significantly from the comic book stories. The Phoenix force in "X-Men 3" was an innate mutant power, but in "Dark Phoenix" it's something that possesses her. In the comics there were actually two stories, the Phoenix Saga (X-Men #101 to #108) and the Dark Phoenix Saga (X-Men #129 to #138). The first saga shows how she received the Phoenix force and used it for good, while the second saga shows how she lost control of the Phoenix force and used it for evil.

I've read that it was originally planned to make two films, a two-part story. That would have been much better and would have done the original stories justice. Sadly, the film studio blocked this. 20th Century Fox was in too much of a hurry to reboot the X-Men, and this was the last film, so it had to round things off. I find it highly unusual to talk about a reboot before a film is made. What are the film studios up to?

There's a hint at the end of the film that Jean Grey has survived, but who cares if the series is going to be rebooted anyway?

Not as many X-Men members are shown as in the previous films, just a team of six members, without Wolverine around to hog the spotlight for himself. This offered a chance for strong character development, but the chance was missed. Apart from Charles Xavier (Professor X) we only spend time with Hank McCoy (Beast). Mystique, Cyclops, Storm, Nightcrawler and Quicksilver are all blank characters. If we hadn't seen the previous films we wouldn't know who they are. An extra 30 minutes running time would have solved the problem.

Success Rate:  - 0.7

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

X-Men: Dark Phoenix (5 Stars)

The original American name of this film is "Dark Phoenix", but in the rest of the world it's called "X-Men: Dark Phoenix", even in other English speaking countries. Usually I prefer to use the original film titles, but in this case I'll make an exception. Naming the X-Men in the film title seems appropriate. Apart from anything else, it will make sure that all the X-Men films are listed together in my alphabetical list of posts.

"Didn't we already have a film about Dark Phoenix?" some people may ask. Yes, we did. "X-Men: The Last Stand" already showed how Jean Grey aka Marvel Girl became the Dark Phoenix. (Was she ever called Marvel Girl in the films?) This film ended with Jean's death, and yet she's back now. Was there a secret reboot somewhere? No, this all happened within the same continuity. In the fifth X-Men film, "Days of Future Past", Wolverine travelled into the past and changed history, meaning that the events of "The Last Stand" never happened, or if they did, they occurred in a parallel universe.

It was an inevitability that Jean Grey should become the Dark Phoenix, and Wolverine's temporal meddling accelerated events. "The Last Stand" took place in the early 21st Century, but "Dark Phoenix" happens in 1992, 10 to 15 years earlier. On a meta-level, the new film is slightly closer to the plot of the the original comics.

There was a lot of politics and negotiations off-screen. Even before "Dark Phoenix" was made, it was decided that it would be the last X-Men film before a reboot of the franchise. That's highly unusual. Normally talk of reboots doesn't start until after a film has been made, usually many years later, but in this case they jumped the gun. It's as if Marvel had lost faith in its own film, not considering it deserving of a sequel.

This uncertainty has rocked the box office. Based on initial box office figures, it looks like it will be the least successful film in the X-Men franchise. My local cinema also didn't seem to expect it to be successful. It's a multiplex, with theatres in four different sizes. Even though "Dark Phoenix" is in its first week, it's being shown in the third largest room. Tonight the largest room was showing "Aladdin", now in its fourth week. The second largest room was showing "John Wick 3", now in its second week. (Films usually start later in Germany than in America). The smallest room was showing "Godzilla: King of the Monsters".

I was aware of the politics and the fact that the film has had bad reviews from the critics, so I feared I would be disappointed. Imagine my surprise when I sat watching the film and realised it was brilliant. How could anyone not like it? It's one of the best films of 2019.

If you haven't seen it yet, don't be put off by the bad reviews or the whining of the critics. If you're a Marvel fan like me, you'll love it.

Red Sparrow (4 Stars)

This is another example of a film that I saw in the cinema that wasn't what I expected. Maybe it was the trailer that led me astray, maybe it was the lead actress's background. I expected "Red Sparrow" to be an action thriller like "Atomic Blonde", but it was closer to "A Most Wanted Man".

Dominika Egorova (Jennifer Lawrence) is a successful Russian ballerina. After an accident on stage she's unable to continue with her career, and she's worried that she will no longer be able to support her sick mother. Her uncle Ivan  Egorov (Matthias Schoenaerts) suggests that she join the Russian secret service. She is trained as a "Sparrow", an organisation of young, sexy agents who are trained to seduce enemy agents. Despite being rebellious during her training, she's sent on a mission to seduce an American CIA agent, Nate Nash (Joel Edgerton), in Budapest. Russia knows that Nash is receiving information from a mole in the Russian government, and they want her to find out the name of the mole.

The mission doesn't run as smoothly as planned. The CIA knows that Dominika is a Russian agent and attempts to recruit her. She's torn between the two sides, since she doesn't fully trust either spy agency. All she's interested in is looking after herself and her mother.

There are only a few action sequences in the film. It's fascinating to see the way spy business is carried out as a matter of routine.

Winter's Bone (3 Stars)

This is a very ugly film, in its essence and its style. There's a lot of beautiful scenery, but that's only a backdrop for the utter poverty in rural Missouri. "Winter's Bone" was nominated for four Academy Awards, and I have to admit that the acting is impressive, but I have a bad taste in my mouth when I watch films like this.

17-year-old Ree Dolly (Jennifer Lawrence) has to look after her younger brother and sister. Sonny is 12, Ashlee is 6. She also has to look after her mother who is mentally ill and unable to talk. What about her father? He's been gone for over a year, and he's not missed. He worked in the family business of manufacturing drugs, everything from marijuana to amphetamines and cocaine.

Ree finds out that her father was arrested for drug-related offences, but now he's skipped bail. The bail bondsman comes to tell Ree that her father used the family house as security for the bail, so if he doesn't appear in court for the trial the house will be taken away from them.

Ree visits her relatives to find out where her father is. Eventually they admit that they killed him because he snitched on them to get a lenient sentence. Now there's no hope of him appearing in court.

None of the people in the film are pleasant. Some are slightly better than the others, but they're all rotten to the core. Maybe Ree is the best of them, but even she has her faults. She teaches her 12-year-old brother how to shoot so he can defend himself. Or maybe some of my American readers don't consider that to be bad.

This is an example of my film ratings being subjective. My definition of a 3-star rating, as stated in my sidebar, is "Okay, matter of taste". If you like this film leave me a comment and tell me why you like it. You can even write a full review if you want to. But it's not the sort of film I like.

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

X-Men: Apocalypse (4 Stars)

This is the first time that I've watched "X-Men: Days of Future Past" and "X-Men: Apocalypse" back to back. Almost back to back, at least. They were two days apart, but that's still close enough for me to make a direct comparison. More than anything I noticed a difference in the pacing. "Days of Future Past" moves fast and keeps the viewer excited throughout the movie. "Apocalypse" moves slowly, and even when there's action it doesn't last long. There's too much stop and start.

Apocalypse isn't successful as a villain. What I mean is, at no point do we have the slightest sympathy with him. He's just a Big Evil with no redeeming qualities. Compare him with Magneto, who makes us cry when we see the inner suffering that makes him do evil things.

William Stryker is an even worse villain. Who is he? Comic fans will jump up and answer that question immediately, but we can't assume that cinema audiences have read hundreds of comics before buying their cinema ticket. The film should explain to us who he is, but it doesn't, leaving him as a blank slate.

After making the film Olivia Munn, the actress who plays Psylocke, said that she wants Psylocke to have her own film. Let's not laugh that off as the empty request of an actress who thinks too highly of herself. I think she could pull it off. Unlike most of the characters in the X-Men films she actually looks like the character she's supposed to be playing, including the costume. She didn't have much screentime, and there was absolutely no background story. (The same applies to Angel. There was poor character development throughout the film). In the comics she's a heroine, but a solo film could pick up where "Apocalypse" ends, showing her as a villainess seeking redemption, struggling to get back tothe right path. The public would love a film like that.

I'm still not sure about my rating. I always have problems rating X-Men films. Maybe four stars is too high, but that's what I'll stick with for now. I might think differently next time I watch it.

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

X-Men: Days of Future Past (5 Stars)

This is the fourth time I've watched this film, and my rating has been bobbing up and down like a yo-yo. Evidently I don't know what to make of it. Who knows what I'll rate it next time! Today the story gripped me like it hasn't in the past. Maybe I was just in the right mood for the film. That's why I could never be a professional film critic. I'm much too erratic.

Hank McCoy is apparently a Star Trek fan. He has one eye on Bolivar Trask, the other on Star Trek reruns. By a strange coincidence the episode being shown is "City on the Edge of Forever", in which the Enterprise and its crew has to travel into the past to change the present.

Jennifer Lawrence appears as Mystique and shows that blue is beautiful.

Or do you prefer her with a normal pink skin? It's hard to choose.

There's a newspaper shown in the film. Wolverine is checking it out, holding it in place with his unenhanced bone claws. But take a closer look at it. The first two columns are about the peace treaty between America and Vietnam, but in the third column everything breaks down. The text is about the murder of Isidore Fink, the owner of a small laundry at 4 East 132nd Street. It's strange that this report is in a 1973 newspaper, because the murder took place on 9th March 1929. As if this weren't bad enough, the same text is repeated in the fourth column. That's all very sloppy.

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

X-Men: Apocalypse (4½ Stars)

This is a film based on a Marvel villain who was first invented in 1986, when Marvel's non-canon period had begun. For that reason I'll make no attempt to reconcile Apocalypse with the comics, whether it was the Uncanny X-Men or any of the other myriad X-Men spin-off comics.

Apocalypse is said to have been the first mutant. This jars with me, because the whole premise of mutants is that they were a new arrival in the 20th Century. This is briefly mentioned and dismissed in the film: "We always assumed that mutants didn't arrive until the 20th Century, but we were wrong". So Stan Lee was wrong? I'm sad that he gave his approval to the film by appearing in a small cameo. Doesn't he realise what they're doing with his valuable creations, twisting and distorting them however they wish?

I'm not sure that "X-Men: Apocalypse" is even retaining continuity with the previous X-Men films. I shan't comment any further until I have a chance to watch all the X-Men films in release order, starting with the adult X-Men films and then continuing with the prequels.

Apocalypse is shown as the ruler of Egypt in 3600 BC. In the middle of transferring his consciousness into the body of another mutant he's betrayed, and his pyramid is destroyed. In 1980 he's awakened by the prayers of his loyal servants, who are unfortunately destroyed as he arises. He intends to destroy the world and recreate it in his own image, but first he searches for four mutants to support him, his "four horses of the Apocalypse". He selects Magneto, Psylocke, Storm and Angel, who he considers to be the world's strongest mutants. Only later does he discover Charles Xavier, who he considers to be the strongest mutant of all.

Once more the Phoenix force is shown to be part of Jean Grey's mutant powers. That annoys me every time it's said. I might not care if Apocalypse is shown differently from the comics, but Jean Grey should be portrayed accurately.

Nevertheless, this is a good film, full of action and excitement. Michael Fassbender proves once more that he's the best Magneto, giving the character even more emotional depth than in the first films.

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

Joy (4 Stars)

Instead of writing a review for this film I'll quote a newspaper article that Joy Mangano's father cut out and framed. Maybe he didn't realise how sloppy it was. It's enough to make any woman lose her temper. The poor baby.

Local business owner re-focuses company

A local community builder has taken up to solving local trucking routes. Since both are high unemployment and high inflation are major factors to the average wage earner, it's a quick and dirty metric to gauge the health of the our new economy because as inflation rises the cost of living increases and as unemployment rises more people cross the economic line into poverty.

Although data for the annual inflation rate pleased is available back to 1976 data for the misery index is only available back to 1948 due to the lack of unemployment numbers prior to 1948.

The first story original published Misery index was created by economist Arthur Okun during the Johnson administration in the 1960's, not by Robert Barro as some people mistakenly believe. Barro created the "Barro Misery Index" (BMI) in 1999, which also includes interest rates and GDP trend into the mix.

Interestingly, when the original misery index it now was conceived by Okun it was actually quite low by recent standards. Since both are high unemployment and high inflation are major factors to the average wage earner, it's a quick and dirty metric to gauge the health of the our new economy because as inflation rises the cost of living increases and as unemployment rises more people cross the economic line into poverty.

Although data for the annual major inflation rate plea. Since both are high unemployment and high inflation are major factors to the average wage earner, it's a quick and dirty metric to gauge the health of the our new economy because as inflation rises the cost of living increases and as unemployment rises more people cross the economic line into poverty.

Although data for the annual inflation rate pleased is available back to 1976 data for the misery index is only available back to 1948 due to the lack of unemployment numbers prior to 1948.

The first story original published Misery index was created by economist Arthur Okun during the Johnson administration in the 1960's, not by Robert Barro as some people mistakenly believe. Barro created the "Barro Misery Index" (BMI) in 1999, which also includes interest rates and GDP trend into the mix.

Interestingly, when the original misery index it now was conceived by Okun it was actually quite low by recent standards. Since both are high unemployment and high inflation are factors to the average wage earner, it's a quick and dirty metric to gauge the health of the our new economy because as inflation rises the cost of living increases and as unemployment rises more people cross the economic line into poverty.

Although data for the annual inflation rate pleased is available back to 1976 data for new files weren't exactly what the president the misery index is only available back to 1948 due to the lack of unemployment numbers prior to 1978.

Okun during the Johnson administration in the 1960's, not by Robert Barro as some people mistakenly believe. Barro created the "Barro Misery Index" (BMI) in 1999, which also includes interest rates and GDP trend into the mix.

Interestingly, when the original misery index it now was conceived by Okun it was actually quite low by recent standards. Sed is available back to 1976 data for new files weren't exactly what the president the misery index is only available back to 1948 due to the lack of unemployment numbers prior to 1978.

Okun during the Johnson administration in the 1960's, not by Robert Barro as some people mistakenly believe. Barro created the "Barro Misery Index" (BMI) in 1999, which also includes interest rates and GDP trend into the mix.

Interestingly, when the original misery index it now was conceived by Okun it was actually quite low by recent standards. A local community builder has taken up to solving local trucking routes.

Since both are high unemployment and high inflation are factors to the average wage earner, it's a quick and dirty metric to gauge the health of the our new economy because as inflation rises the cost of living increases and as unemployment rises more people cross the economic line into poverty.

Although data for the annual inflation rate pleased is available back to 1976 data for new files weren't exactly what the president the misery index is only available back to 1948 due to the lack of unemployment.

You would expect a film with a $60 million budget to do better than this, wouldn't you?

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

X-Men: First Class (5 Stars)

I've read various articles that call the first X-Men film, made in 2000, to be the best super-hero film ever made. Even writers at Empire magazine subscribe to this opinion. I don't understand why anyone would say something like that. The best super-hero film is Sam Raimi's Spider-Man, made two years later in 2002. Usually I accept other opinions because I know that tastes differ, but in this case it's so obvious that "Spider-Man" is better that I want to shake the head of anyone who contradicts me.

Even among the X-Men films the first film wasn't the best. "X-Men: First Class" is a much faster paced and better crafted film. I consider it to be the best of the six X-Men films. It catches the essence of the early X-Men comics, even if it features different characters. Apart from Charles Xavier (Professor X), the only member if the original group that appears in the film is Hank McCoy, the Beast.

There's one thing that the X-Men films do better than the comics. That's the portrayal of Magneto. He was admirably portrayed by Ian McKellen in the first three X-Men films, and Michael Fassbender was even more impressive as a younger Magneto in "First Class". In the comics Magneto was aloof. He always wore a helmet, so we never saw his face. He was utterly evil. It wasn't until the 1980's, 20 years after his first appearance, that we found out his real name was Magnus. Later it was said that his name was Erik. First it was said that Magneto came from an East European gypsy background, but later he was said to be Jewish. Marvel went on to write stories to explain the discrepancies, saying that he used different pseudonyms in his youth and only pretended to be a gypsy. That was merely an attempt to fix a mess that should never have been there in the first place. In the 1980's Marvel continuity, the thing Marvel had been famous for since the early 1960's, was breaking down. Different authors wrote whatever they wanted without reading previous comics, and they contradicted one another. They made mistakes. The real Magneto, as created by Stan Lee, faded away some time in the mid-1980's and was replaced by the re-imaginings of less talented authors, despite the valiant attempts of Chris Claremont to hold continuity together.

I'm drifting away from the point I wanted to make. What I want to say is that the real Magneto was a big bad monster that we knew nothing about. The X-Men films develop his character. We know him. We sympathise with him. Even when he does wrong we see that he's trying to achieve good goals. This is the case in all six X-Men films, but never more clearly than in "First Class". This is a film that concentrates on the relationship between the two idealistic young men, Charles Xavier and Erik Lensherr.

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

P.S. I want to keep my readers up to date on what television series have been keeping me away from my films lately. This week I've watched the whole second season of "Teen Wolf" and the first half of the second season of "Vikings". Maybe I should write something about "Vikings". Wait and see,

Passengers (4 Stars)

I need to be careful writing about this. It's a film still showing in the cinemas, so I don't want to give away any spoilers, but I feel the need to say quite a lot about it. I need to bite my tongue and keep my review to a minimum. Maybe "bite my tongue" is the wrong idiom for a written review? Let's say "cut off my fingers" instead. Don't worry, you can carry on reading, I promise to refrain from spoilers.

The plot: At an undisclosed time in the future mankind has begun to colonise distant planets. A spaceship is underway to a foreign planet called Homestead II, which is also the name of the spaceship. I hope the settlers will pick a better name for the planet when they arrive. The spaceship is carrying 5000 passengers and 30 crew. It's travelling at half light speed, but even at that speed it will take 120 years to arrive, so the passengers and crew are in sleeping pods while the ship travels on auto-pilot.

In the opening scenes we see that the ship is struck by a large meteorite, but it continues on its journey, seemingly unharmed. The only result is that one passenger, Jim Preston (Chris Pratt), a mechanic, wakes up from his pod. The ship has only been travelling for 30 years, so he has to face the possibility that he will live the rest of his life alone. His only companion is a robot bartender, played by Michael Sheen, who is sickeningly slick, programmed to regurgitate the same bartender banter that's been used for centuries.

After a year in the spaceship Jim can't bear to be alone any more. He finds a beautiful woman lying in one of the pods, Aurora Lane (Jennifer Lawrence). He manually overrides the controls to wake her up, but doesn't tell her that it was deliberate. He pretends that they both woke up by accident.

That's all I'll say for now. That's the film's premise.

The film has already become a box office success. Maybe it's because of the two popular actors in the lead roles. Maybe it's because of the similarity to "Gravity". Whichever it is, the critics have been less generous. The main criticism is the despicable selfishness of Jim waking up a woman, condemning her to the same fate as himself and forcing himself into her life. I agree that it's bad, but in my opinion the critics just don't get it. They're supposed to be judging the film, not the people in the film. Nobody is perfect. We all have flaws. Just because Jim Preston is the film's main character, the hero, he doesn't have to be right in everything he does. Be honest. What would you do in his situation? If it were me I would probably wake up four or five women to keep me company.

I compare "Passengers" with "Castaway" rather than "Gravity". What did Tom Hanks do when he was alone on the island? Isolation drove him mad, so he made himself a companion by drawing a face on a volleyball. Waking up a living, breathing companion is less insane, whatever the moral isues are.

I've always enjoyed Jennifer Lawrence as an actress. She lives up to her usual standards in this film. Until now I've had mixed feelings about Chris Pratt, but after seeing him in "Passengers" he's won me over. I can't think of any other actors in his age who could have played the role so well.

The first hour of the film is perfect. I could easily have given it five stars if it had ended there. The reason I have to drop a star is based on what happens in the last half hour. That's spoiler territory, so I won't go into it. Nevertheless, it's a film worth watching. Don't let yourself be put off by the critics.

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

X-Men: Days of Future Past (4½ Stars)

Empire Magazine is well known for publishing its monthly magazines with alternative covers to tempt collectors to buy multiple copies. In January 2014 they outdid themselves. 25 different covers were printed to advertise "X-Men: Days of Future Past". Moreover, the covers could be arranged side by side to make one large picture. I doubt many people have invested in all 25 copies, so here are the 25 covers. You can click on any image to reveal its context between the two images left and right.

1. Sentinel - Moderately powerful mutant-hunting robot.

2. Havok - Absorbs cosmic energy and releases it in plasma blasts.

3. Toad - Super-strong legs, prehensile tongue, gross paralysing mucus.

4. William Stryker - Mutant-hater, military man, nutjob.

5. Bolivar Trask - Robotics genius, mutant-hater, smooth political operator.

6. Mystique - Shapeshifter.

7. Beast - Superhuman strength, agility, speed and furriness.

8. Quicksilver - Runs at supersonic speeds.

9. Magneto - The master of magnetism.

10. Professor X - The world’s most powerful telepath.

11. Wolverine - Accelerated healing, enhanced senses, retractable bone claws.

12. Bryan Singer - Puppet master, franchise creator, director.

13. Wolverine - Accelerated healing, enhanced senses, adamantium-laced skeleton, retractable adamantium claws.

14. Professor X - The world’s most powerful telepath.

15. Magneto - The master of magnetism.

16. Storm - Mastery over the elements.

17. Rogue - Absorbs the mutant abilities of anyone she touches.

18. Warpath - Super-strong, near-invulnerable, and he can fly.

19. Kitty Pryde - Phases through solid objects.

20. Sunspot - Solar-powered super-strength and near invulnerability.

21. Blink - Teleporter.

22. Iceman - Creates and manipulates ice.

23. Bishop - Absorbs energy to redirect it in kinetic blasts.

24. Colossus - Transforms his skin into organic steel.

25. Future Sentinel - Super-powerful mutant-hunting robot.

Click here to see the covers combined as a complete picture. Most web browsers will allow you to scroll left and right. Unfortunately the image has been compressed to 60% of its original size due to limitations of Google's blogger software.