Sympathy For Delicious (4 Stars)

A wheelchair-bound DJ discovers that he has the power to heal other people, but not himself. That's the straightforward part of "Sympathy for Delicious". The less straightforward part is figuring out what the director, Mark Ruffalo, is actually trying to say with it.

The clue is in the title. "Sympathy for Delicious" is a play on the Rolling Stones song "Sympathy for the Devil", but the film also has a much closer connection to "You Can't Always Get What You Want". Dean desperately wants the one thing his miraculous power cannot give him: the ability to walk again. Instead, he gets the opportunity to heal other people, and promptly turns his gift into a way of making money, gaining fame and getting involved with a rock band.

And that's really the point. Dean spends most of the film wanting the wrong thing. His physical disability is only part of what needs healing. The real journey is learning to accept what he cannot change and discovering that helping somebody else can be more important than getting something for himself.

It's a good idea, and once I understood what Ruffalo was getting at, I appreciated the film considerably more. But I have to admit that I didn't fully get it while I was watching it. There are so many different elements competing for attention – religion, faith healing, rock music, fame, poverty and Dean's own bitterness – that the message is buried.

So don't expect a conventional story about a man who discovers he can perform miracles. The miracles are really there to ask what "healing" actually means. And as the Stones already told us, you can't always get what you want. Sometimes, if you're lucky, you get what you need.

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.de

Spider-Man: Brand New Day (5 Stars)

"Spider-Man: Brand New Day" is a good film in its own right, with plenty of action and an entertaining story. It works well as another chapter in Spider-Man's increasingly complicated life, even if the ever-expanding Marvel universe sometimes threatens to overwhelm him.

My biggest problem is the introduction of Jean Grey. The X-Men film chronology was already a mess, and this makes matters worse. More importantly, this Jean Grey bears little resemblance to the character I remember from the comics, particularly in the way her mutant powers are portrayed. I enjoyed the film, but as an old-school X-Men fan I found some of its choices difficult to accept.

Mickey 17 (3 Stars)

Normally I try to avoid knowing too much about a film before going to see it in the cinema. I never watch trailers at home before going to the cinema. I often see trailers in the cinema for upcoming films, but in most cases they don't give away too much information. This was an exception. The trailer gives away so much of the plot that while watching the film today I breathed a sigh of relief every time something happened that wasn't in the trailer.

A spaceship is leaving Earth to colonise a new planet called Niflheim. Mickey Barnes is desperate to leave Earth, because he's being hunted by a loan shark. There are hundreds of applicants for positions on the space ship, so Mickey applies to become an Expendable. He doesn't know what it is, but he's been tipped off that it's a job nobody wants.

On the ship he finds out that an Expendable is someone doing dangerous work who's expected to die. And he does die. But there's a cloning technique to bring him back to life for his next job. He dies over and over again. When his 17th iteration goes missing it's assumed that he's dead, but he shows up again to meet Mickey 18.

Multiples aren't allowed. This is an idea that's been copied from the film "Dual". The difference is that in "Dual" only one of the multiples has to die, whereas in "Mickey 17" both multiples have to die.

The film's greatest strength is the acting by Robert Pattinson. He's fast becoming one of my favourite actors. He's come a long way since being a dopey vampire in "Twilight". The film's greatest weakness is the annoying stupidity of the character played by Mark Ruffalo. He's supposed to be funny, but he just made me grown. There are other things I don't like which I can't discuss because they're spoilers, things not shown in the trailer. The film has a lot of promise, but the overall impression is disappointing.

Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (5 Stars)

There are people who don't watch super-hero films on principle. I can understand them. There have been good super-hero films in the past, but in recent years Marvel's films have become progressively worse. As a dedicated Marvel fan I go to see every film in the cinema and buy it on Blu-ray a year later, but I'm not blind to Marvel's faults.

However, "Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings" (I prefer to shorten the title to "Shang-Chi") is a masterpiece. And do you know what makes it so good? It doesn't look like a super-hero film. It's a martial arts classic, complete with fantasy creatures. If someone sat down to watch it after the opening credits, he wouldn't even recognise that it's a Marvel film.

It's a tragic film. Shang-Chi's father is a ruthless warlord, and he doesn't want to follow in his footsteps. His father tries to change and become a good man, but after his wife's death he reverts to his old ways. He has an organisation called The Ten Rings that supports or topples governments. But his greatest wish is to get his wife back from the dead. He hears her calling to him, telling him she's trapped in a cave in her home village of Ta Lo. What he doesn't know is that it's really a monster imitating her voice, a monster that wants to devour the world. Shang-Chi has to fight against his father to stop him. Father versus son is a tragic conflict in any culture. Tony Leung is an incredible actor, and the look on his face is heart-breaking when he finally realises he was wrong.

A second Shang-Chi has been promised. Can it be as good as the first? I hope so.

Success Rate:  + 0.9

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

Poor Things (2 Stars)

This is a film that's been nominated for many awards, including eleven awards for the upcoming Baftas. So it has to be good. Right? Wrong. To sum it up, the film starts badly, it gets worse in the middle, and towards the end it becomes only slightly better.

The film begins with a Frankenstein-ish character in Victorian London. A disfigured surgeon, also a university lecturer, has discovered how to bring people back to life. He witnesses a pregnant woman committing suicide by jumping off a bridge. He retrieves her body and revives her, but because of her head trauma he removes her brain and replaces it with the brain of her unborn baby. The result is a fully grown woman with childlike intelligence and naivety.

So far it sounds good, but I can't explain the film's problems without giving spoilers. So if you don't want spoilers, stop reading now.

Are you still with me? You were warned.

As the woman, named Bella by the surgeon, grows older she becomes more intelligent, but she remains naive. I forgot to mention that the surgeon's name is Godwin Baxter, but he lets everyone call him God. One of God's students falls in love with the childlike woman and proposes to marry her. She agrees, but a short time later she decides to have an affair with God's lawyer, a last fling before her marriage. They go to Lisbon, where they spend their days having wild sex.

On the way home Bella sees poor children and is so moved that she gives all of their money to them. Bella is broke when she arrives in Paris, so she becomes a prostitute. She does this for a while –  Months? Years? – but eventually returns to London to marry the student.

I'll stop there. I've already given more spoilers than I usually do.

As far as the film's message goes, it's a mess. It shows a woman trying to stand on her own two feet, resisting the men who try to keep her prisoner. That's admirable, but can a woman really find freedom by becoming a prostitute? Her naivety, which she retains throughout the film, is her greatest weakness. She's not a feminist role model, far from it. There are other random things I need to criticise:

Why is the surgeon disfigured? It adds nothing to the plot.

And why does he call himself God? That's rather plump.

There are alternating sequences in colour and black and white. I couldn't detect a logical reason for the differences.

Bella sees blimps flying overhead in Lisbon. I thought it was an anachronism, but after googling I found that the first blimps were invented in 1852. It still looks strange.

The film is just a random mess. Some reviews call "Poor Things" a comedy, I don't see anything funny about it. It's just ridiculous. How could anyone like it, let alone nominate it for awards?

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

Where the wild things are (3 Stars)

This film is based on a children's book written by Maurice Sendak in 1963. The director Spike Jonze insists that he made the film for children, but many critics claim it isn't suitable for young children.

Max is a nine-year-old boy who has difficulty fitting in. He prefers to play alone. He builds an igloo outside his house, but his sister's friends demolish it. He's angry with his sister for not telling them off. Later that evening he wants to spend time with his mother, but she ignores him when her boyfriend visits. Dressed in a wolf suit, he runs round the house throwing things on the floor. When she scolds him, he runs away.

At the side of a lake he finds a small boat. He gets in it, and the wind blows him far, far away. He arrives at a island so far away that it's no longer winter. It's inhabited by seven large furry monsters who're in the middle of an argument. When Max goes to speak with them they want to eat him, so he says that he's the king of a far-off land, and he has magical powers that will make them happy. They agree to make him their king.

For a while they're contented, until they start to believe he's a fake.

I haven't read the book, so I can only judge the film on its own merits. I don't fully understand it. Does Max really travel to a magical land, or is it just a child's fantasy? He spends a long time on the island, many days, but when he returns home it seems like only a few hours have passed.

Spike Jonze has directed four films. The other three are "Being John Malkovich". "Adaptation" and "Her". They're all films that I like a lot, but I found difficulty relating to "Where the wild things are".

Success Rate:  - 1.0

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

Thor: Ragnarok (4½ Stars)

Disney Wednesday #14

How many Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) films have been made so far? I guessed that it was 32, but I had to check before I continued writing. I was right. Thirty-two films. It looks like even more then I write 32 in words. I couldn't put them in the right order. To help myself, I've put a little green sticker with the number on the spine of my MCU Blu-rays.

While I'm in England I'll be watching the Marvel films (MCU or otherwise) in random order. My son-in-law Mehdi hasn't seen them all, so I'll leave the decision up to him what comes next. "Thor: Ragnarok" is a good choice.

Success Rate:  + 2.7

	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.

TV Series: She-Hulk

I spent this evening watching the whole series of "She-Hulk", or to give it its full name, "She-Hulk, Attorney at Law". It's a cosy evening's viewing, because the episodes are so short. If you strip away the final credits, each episode only lasts 25 minutes. That's less than four hours in total. In the first few episodes I felt frustrated that they didn't last longer, but as the series progressed I accepted it. They said all that they had to say, and no additional padding was needed.

"She-Hulk" is a comedy series. I don't mean in the way that Marvel films have comedy mixed in with the action. (Often too much comedy, but that's a different matter). The whole She-Hulk series is intended to be funny, and there are only occasional action scenes thrown in. I'd call this a Marvel series for people who don't like Marvel, although I'm sure Marvel fans would appreciate it more.

The series deviates from the Marvel canon of what's written in the comics, but only in minor ways that don't spoil the story. In the comics Jennifer Walters' personality changes when she transforms into She-Hulk. As a normal woman she's quiet and reserved, but as She-Hulk she's outgoing and flirtatious. We don't see that in the series. She's always the same woman, and if she flirts as She-Hulk it's because it's what she's always wanted to do as Jennifer. It's a subtle distinction, and it's practically hidden behind the humour.

"She-Hulk" repeatedly breaks the fourth wall. In every episode there are scenes where Jennifer/She-Hulk turns to the camera and addresses the audience. This is an alienation technique that can be annoying if it's done badly, but in "She-Hulk" it enhances the series. There are cameos by characters from the Marvel films in almost every episode, so viewers who've seen the first 22 Marvel Cinematic Universe films will be at an advantage, but non-MCU-fans should pick things up quickly. There's no reason not to watch "She-Hulk", even if you've never watched a Marvel film or series before.

One of the first things I did after finishing my binge was to check whether there will be a second season. Evidently not, which is a shame. The series was intended to introduce the She-Hulk character, and she'll be in the films from now on. I can only hope that the fans will shout loud enough to make the Marvel creators change their minds and give us more seasons.

The series is available on Disney Plus. I doubt it will be made available on disc. Wait and see.

Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (5 Stars)

Despite having nothing to do with the Shang-Chi character from the comics, this is an excellent film in its own right. It captures the essence of Chinese fantasy films, so it's wrong to call it a superhero film. It's the 25th film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), but it's the furthest from being a superhero film so far. Maybe there should be a Millie the Model film to step even further away from the Marvel superhero cliché.

Tony Leung plays Xu Wenwu, one of the most fascinating villains in the MCU so far. Is it even right to call him a villain? He's a Chinese warlord who's over a thousand years old. He gained power when he discovered ten mystical rings in a crater. They granted him eternal life and great power. He went on a series of conquests across China. He never made himself emperor, although he had enough power to do it. He was satisfied being a smaller leader. In the modern day he became more low key. He created an organisation called the Ten Rings which acted for him, while he stayed in his room and studied. He became aware of a mythical land called Ta Lo, probably based on K'Un-Lun in the 1970's comics. He read that the residents of Ta Lo had a superior form of martial arts, as well as possessing other knowledge. He became determined to conquer Ta Lo.

Things didn't turn out as he expected. Ta Lo was defended by the single warrior Ying Li, and he was unable to overcome her. But strange things happen. He fell in love with Ying Li, so the two of them left Ta Lo and lived a simple life. He even gave up using the ten rings, putting them in a box and forgetting about them. Together they had two children, Shang-Chi and his sister Xialing. When Shang-Chi was seven his mother was murdered by Wenwu's former enemies, which he could easily have prevented if he hadn't taken off his rings. He put on the rings again and killed the gang members, apart from the one who'd killed his wife. He trained Shang-Chi as an assassin and sent him to kill his mother's murderer when he's 14. Shang-Chi accomplished his mission, but he was so traumatised that he didn't return to his father.

So Wenwu was a villain, then he retired, and then he became a villain again for a short time before retiring again. But that wasn't the end of his development. He heard his wife's voice telling him that she wasn't dead, she was trapped in a cave Ta Lo. He calls his children back and asks for their help in freeing her. They don't want to help him, because they don't believe she's still alive. And they're right. The cave contains an ancient creature called the Dweller In Darkness. It's been imitating Ying Li's voice to tempt Wenwu to free it.

Shang-Chi and Xialing travel to Ta Lo, where they meet Ying Li's sister, their aunt Ying Nan. Together they fight against Wenwu when he attacks Ta Lo. There's poignancy itself in children having to fight against their father, but Wenwu isn't really evil. He's just been misled by an evil creature. He's not a villain at all, whatever he might have been in his past.

That's an over-simplified plot summary, but it should be enough to show the depths of this film. It's one of the best films in the MCU. My top 100 films list doesn't contain any MCU films, but maybe "Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings" deserves a place. I'll think it over. Some of my friends don't watch Marvel films on principle. I admit that there have been a few turkeys lately, but each film should be judged on its own merits. This is a film that deserves to be watched.

Success Rate:  + 0.9

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

Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (5 Stars)

Disney Wednesday #6

I'm going to watch films on streaming services for the next three days. After that, I'll see what I want to do. I have about 70 films on my to-watch list, 20 true stories and 50 others. I really need to catch up. It's difficult, because every few days I think "I really must watch <fill-in-the-blank> again soon", and I add yet another film to my list.

I'll shorten the film's title to "Shang-Chi". When I watched "Shang-Chi" in the cinema in September I was shocked that it had absolutely nothing to do with the Marvel comics character. Today I watched the film with no prejudices, only thinking of it as a Chinese fantasy film, and I was overwhelmed. It's one of the best MCU films so far, maybe even the best, so it deserves a good place in the next version of my top 100 film lists.

Does it qualify as a wuxia film? I'm not sure about the terminology. Wuxia films usually take place in the past, but "Shang-Chi" is in the present, though in a world that looks like the past. There are fantasy creatures, including monsters and dragons. If wuxia is the wrong name for the genre, please let me know.

The film starts with Wu Wenwu (Tony Leung) discovering ten rings that give him immortality and other godlike powers. He founds an organisation called the Ten Rings. Apart from having his own private kingdom, he influences world history from afar. But eternal life and limitless wealth gets boring after a while. He meets a beautiful woman, Ying Li, and settles down to a happy family life. He even stops using the ten rings, so he isn't distracted from his happiness. He has two children, Shang-Chi and Xialing.

When Shang-Chi is seven, his mother is murdered by a gang seeking revenge on Wu Wenwu. He puts on the rings once more and massacres the entire gang, except for the leader. He lets Shang-Chi assassinate the leader when he's 14. Killing someone traumatises Shang-Chi, so he runs away to Los Angeles to hide from his father. His father observes him from afar for years (godlike powers, etc), but there's no contact between the two.

In the present day, Wu Wenwu hears his wife's voice calling to him. She says she's trapped in a cave in the hidden village of Ta Lo. What he doesn't know is that the voice comes from a creature called the Soul-Eater, a creature capable of devouring the world, which has been trapped by the people of Ta Lo and guarded for centuries. Shang-Chi and Xialing unite to stop their father making a big mistake.

This is Shang-Chi, played by the Canadian stuntman Simu Liu.

The film's characters are so rich and multi-faceted. I don't know the director, Destin Cretton, but if all his films are as good as "Shang-Chi" he has a long, successful future ahead of him.

Wu Wenwu is played by Tony Leung, who needs no introduction.

Shang-Chi's mother, Ying Li, is played by the Chinese actress Fala Chen.

Xialing is played by Meng'er Zhang, a Chinese actress appearing in her first film.

Ying Nan, Shang-Chi's aunt, is played by the wonderful Michelle Yeoh.

In case you thought all the actors are Chinese, Razorfist is played by the German actor Florian Munteanu.

Shang-Chi's best friend Katy, who accompanies him on his quest, is a fascinating character in herself. She's a Chinese American who's lost connection with her roots. She has a Chinese name, Chen Ruiwen, but she doesn't use it. She doesn't speak Chinese. She has no obvious skills, but she insists on fighting alongside the warriors of Ta Lo, because it's the right thing to do. The actress Awkwafina says she can relate to her.

Ben Kingsley plays Trevor Slattery, who doesn't join in the battle. He lies on the ground pretending to be dead. If you don't know who Trevor Slattery is, go back and watch the last 24 MCU films.

Success Rate:  + 0.9

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

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

Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (4½ Stars)

We're used to the way that Marvel characters are adapted for films. The character is moved from the 1960's to the present. His costume is changed to look more realistic. In many cases the skin colour is changed to blackwash the character and make the film more appealing to people of colour. If the person has super-powers, his powers are toned down to stop him looking omnipotent.

That's not what we have with Shang-Chi. The character in the film has nothing to do with the comic book character. Nothing except for the name. He's just a Chinese fighter. Even his ethnicity is changed. In the comics his father is Chinese and his mother is a white American, but in the film both parents are Chinese.

Usually I list the differences between the comics and the film, but in this case I can't do it because everything is different. I'll just say a few things about his family. In the comics his father is the master criminal Fu Manchu. He doesn't have a sister, although he has several half-brothers and half-sisters. Marvel Studios wanted to make a Chinese fantasy film, and they've succeeded in making a good film. There was no need to call the character Shang-Chi. It's not Shang-Chi. They could have called him Johnny Wong, Charlie Chan or anything at all.

By the way, why are they called the ten rings? Shouldn't they be called the ten bracelets? In the comics the Mandarin's rings really are rings, objects of alien origin that were once used to power a starship.

That's the way they should look, as drawn by George Tuska.

Please let me know your thoughts on the film.That's what my comments box is for.

Captain Marvel (4½ Stars)

This was the first Marvel Cinematic Universe film to be released after Stan Lee's death. It begins with a tribute to Stan Lee built into the opening credits. The words "Thank you, Stan" at the end of the credits are a massive understatement. His contribution to modern culture can't be overestimated. My three-year-old grandson doesn't yet know the name Stan Lee, but he knows Spider-Man. He wears a Spider-Man jacket. Stan Lee's name will be remembered long after Martin Scorsese is forgotten. I would go as far as to call him the greatest man of the 20th Century. He will live in the hearts and minds of his fans forever.

The film contains a brief cameo that was filmed before his death. He's sitting on a bus attempting to learn the line for a film script. The line for this very film? Maybe. Captain Marvel walks past him and smiles down at him.

This is out of character. There's no logical reason for Captain Marvel to pay attention to an old man on the train when she's in the middle of a battle with a Skrull. This is Brie Larson smiling at Stan Lee. She loves him. Who doesn't? Every actor who ever appeared in a film with Stan Lee was in awe of the great man, a giant towering above normal mortals.

This film tells the origin of Carol Danvers as Captain Marvel, but in a way it also tells the origin of Nick Fury. In 1989 he was a young agent, new in his job at SHIELD. He didn't believe in aliens from other planets until he saw one with his own eyes.

Captain Marvel has spent the last six years believing she's a Kree. Now she finds out that she's a human. She's had dreams about Earth, but now she finally discovers why. The dreams have been revealing to her the secrets buried deep in her mind. She comes to Earth to pursue the Skrulls, the arch-enemies of the Kree, but she discovers that she's been fighting on the wrong side of the war. The Kree have been the bad guys all along,

In the comics themselves it wasn't so clear. Both the Skrulls and the Kree are evil races, determined to conquer the universe. In the film the Skrulls aren't conquerors, they're just refugees fighting to survive. The Skrull leader, Talos, admits that he has blood on his hands, but it was in the past. Now he just wants to spend time with his family.

"Captain Marvel", the film, is yet another example of how Marvel has adapted the comics for the big screen. Random names are copied from the comics, but they're completely different characters. For instance, in the comics Mar-Vell is a male Kree warrior who comes to Earth and adopts the identity of Dr. Walter Lawson, a scientist who he witnesses being killed. In the film, Mar-Vell is a female Kree scientist who lives on Earth, calling herself Dr. Wendy Lawson. I frequently complain about the MCU getting the skin colour of its characters wrong, but mixing up the gender is a whole different level of blunder. Usually the word blunder is reserved for accidental mistakes, but I call this mix up a blunder, even though it's deliberate. I understand that it was a deliberate decision, intended to make "Captain Marvel" even more of a feminocentric film. All the major characters are female, and Captain Marvel herself is the most powerful character in the MCU. I'm surprised Nick Fury didn't turn into Colonel Nicola Fury. What about casting Octavia Spencer as Colonel Fury? Hmmm..... somehow that doesn't seem so bad.

That's a nice shirt, but don't you think it would look better without a bra? Aren't the women in the Kree Empire liberated enough to burn their bras?

Success Rate:  + 5.4

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

Thor: Ragnarok (4½ Stars)

Normally when I rewatch a film I read my old review(s) first. I failed to do that today. After watching the film I sat down, wrote a few sentences, then finally checked what I wrote in January. Oops! I was writing the same things all over again. I don't want to bore my readers, so I scrapped it and started again. Let's write something new!

This is a very good film. At first I thought it was lightweight, compared to the other MCU films, but that's not the case. The film has a complex plot, but it seems light due to the amount of humour.

In this review I'll just treat you with photos of Cate Blanchett as the Goddess of Death and ignore all the minor characters. Death has never looked so good.

And she has a cute dog. My dog always used to sit on my lap when I was watching films, but I don't think the Hellhound would be so affectionate. I hope not.

Was Hela killed in "Thor: Ragnarok"? Seemingly. I don't see how it could be permanent. You can't kill death. I'd like to see her in a future MCU film.

Which reminds me... when will the MCU be rebooted? I'm not saying that I want a reboot, but it's inevitable. The actors are getting older and have to quit their roles. There can be new phases with younger actors playing new super-heroes, but this can't carry on indefinitely. The core characters of the Marvel universe can't be allowed to disappear. Spider-Man, Daredevil, Captain America, Thor, just to name a few. Marvel wouldn't be Marvel without them.

Success Rate:  + 2.7

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