Monkey Man (4 Stars)

Dev Patel plays Kid, a man whose mother was killed in racial violence. All his life he's wanted revenge on the corrupt police chief who was responsible. He's now a wrestler who wears a monkey mask and calls himself Monkey Man. He's paid to lose fights. Someone has to do it.

He finally has a chance to get close to the police chief. Kid gets a job as a waiter in a high class brothel that the police chief frequents. Are his wrestling skills enough to get him past the armed guards?

The film contains a lot of religious elements, different Hindu cults. A key figure is the monkey God Hanuman, of whom Kid learnt as a child.

It's an exciting film with a lot of action, but I have to criticise the cinematography. In the close-up scenes it's often difficult to see who's hitting who. Films like "John Wick" show that it can be done better.

Success Rate:  + 1.5

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

Boy Kills World (unrated)

This is the tenth film in the Stuttgart Nights Festival.

It's not often that I decide not to rate a film. There's a lot in "Boy Kills World" that annoys me, but there's also a lot that I like. If I'd just averaged the film out with a three star rating, it wouldn't have accurately expressed my feelings.

The whole film has a post-apocalyptic feeling to it. It takes place in an American city that's controlled by Hilda Vanderkloy. Once a year she holds a ceremony called the Culling, in which she publicly executes anyone who opposes her rule. Bill Skarsgard plays an unnamed young man whose family was killed in a culling ceremony. He's been training all his life so that he can kill Hilda.

What I like about the film is the incredible fight scenes. They're a joy to behold. What I don't like is the film's post-apocalyptic premise and the stupid look on Bill's face. It's annoying. There are other things that annoy me which I can't reveal without giving away spoilers. Nevertheless, I'll watch the film again when I get the chance. Maybe I'll rate it next time.

Beast (3½ Stars)

Idris Elba plays Dr. Nate Samuels, a man trying to reconnect with his teenage daughters. A year earlier he and his wife separated, but shortly afterwards she developed cancer and died. Nate's daughters are bitter with him for not being at his wife's side in her final months. Now he's taking them to South Africa to visit the village where she was born.

Nate and his friend Martin (played by Sharlto Copley) visit a wild life reserve. What they don't know is that poachers stole lion cubs the previous day. As a result a lion has gone wild and is killing every human he can find, men, women and children. After a surprise attack by the lion, Martin is stranded and Nate crashes his jeep. They have to fight for survival while being hunted by the lion.

This is a terrifying story, realistically told. At several points in the film I jumped in my seat when the lion attacked. But somehow I had the impression Idris Elba wasn't getting into his role. He's one of my favourite actors, but in "Beast" his performance seems flat. The emotional background to the story could have been played better. In contrast, Sharlto Copley's performance was excellent. Overall, the film was disappointing. It didn't live up to my expectations.

I'm planning to see another new film with Idris Elba later this week. Maybe you can guess what it is. I hope it's better.

Ted K (4½ Stars)

This is the 32nd film in the Stuttgart Fantasy Film Festival.

The Ted K in the film title is Theodore Kaczynski, better known as the Unabomber. He planted bombs and sent bombs by mail for 17 years, from 1978 to 1995. His motivation was that he despised modern society. He lived in a cabin in the woods in Montana with no electricity or running water. Some of his targets were high ranking citizens, such as airline executives. Others were relatively unknown, such as computer salesmen.

He's a man about whom I knew almost nothing, except for his name. I didn't even know why he was called the Unabomber. It's short for University and Airline Bomber. He's commonly called a terrorist, although I personally don't think the word applies to him. A terrorist makes attacks on large numbers of random individuals, but Ted Kaczynski always picked specific targets. It would be more accurate to call him an assassin, or simply a killer.

Ted Kaczynski was a brilliant man. He went to Harvard University at the age of 16, and at 26 he became a Mathematics Professor. He quit his job at the university after only one year. He was a virgin, about which he often expressed regret. The furthest he ever got with girls was first base, i.e. kissing.

Sharlto Copley does a good job of bringing the character to life. We don't feel sympathy with him, but I doubt that was intended. He was an unpleasant character.

Chappie (5 Stars)

Sometimes I don't understand myself. I've watched this film four times and only given it 4½ Stars each time. There's usually a reason why I deduct half a star from an otherwise perfect film. In this case, I don't remember what it was. This is a beautiful film about a robot that crossed over and became conscious. His artificial intelligence was advanced enough to be called real intelligence. Is that something that's possible in my lifetime? Maybe, maybe not. The goal is to create artificial intelligence that doesn't just imitate natural intelligence, it has to act, think and reason just like a human being. The example given by Chappie's creator is that an intelligent robot would be able to look at a painting and be able to say whether it likes it or not. My example is that an intelligent robot would be able to watch films and write my blog for me. That would be fascinating.

Chappie, the police robot that's given artificial intelligence, starts from the beginning. He has to learn how to talk. He has to learn moral values. He learns (as a necessity) what it is to have people lying to him. Yolandi loves Chappie as if she were his mother, and she wants him to grow up and live a decent life. Ninja wants Chappie to become a gangster and make lots of money. Which way will he develop?

The film should have been the first part of a trilogy. It's sad that the plans for the other two films have been abandoned. Several hooks were added for a sequel. "Chappie" has enough potential to lay the groundwork for first class sequels.

Success Rate:  + 0.1

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

Gringo (3 Stars)

Families are overrated. I started writing this review two hours ago, as I can see by the time stamp, but apart from inserting the photo I've done nothing. For the last two hours family members have been walking in and out of my room, talking and squawking, not letting me get on with it. Sure, I love my family, but at this time of night I deserve a little peace.

End of rant. Now let's get on with my review.

"Gringo" is a film I wanted to see when it was in German cinemas last year. It features Charlize Theron and Amanda Seyfried, two of my favourite actresses. Add Joel Edgerton and Sharlto Copley, and you can expect a brilliant film.

Unfortunately, a film's quality isn't the sum of its actors. "Gringo" skids out of control with too many subplots weighing down the film. Oops, I'm mixing my metaphors, but I think you know what I mean. I'm sorry to say that Amanda Seyfried is completely superfluous. The film would have been tighter and more enjoyable if she'd been written out.

Harold Soyinka (David Oyelowo) is an employee in an American pharmaceutical company that's about to begin to sell medical marijuana. It's not clear what he actually does in the company, but his boss refers to him as middle management. The vagueness is deliberate. His boss, Richard Rusk (Joel Edgerton), is a personal acquaintance who obviously just wants someone to blame when things go wrong. Harold probably just writes reports that nobody will ever read.

The company is in Chicago, but the production is in Mexico. While waiting for approval for the sale of marijuana pills in America, the company has been selling them to a drug lord in Mexico. Off the books, of course. Now that the official sales have begun, Richard wants to break his connection with the drug lord. That's not as easy as he thinks. The head of the Mexican factory is tortured. During a business trip Harold is mistakenly thought to be the company boss, so the drug lord wants to kidnap him. Richard sends his brother Mitch (Sharlto Copley), an ex-mercenary, to retrieve him. Or kill him. If he dies while on a business trip the insurance will pay the company five million dollars.

If that plot summary were everything, the film would have been much better. Now come all the subplots. Harold's wife is having an affair with Richard. But Richard is also having an affair with his business partner, Elaine Markinson (Charlize Theron). Charlize could also have been written out of the story. Harold isn't just kidnapped in Mexico, he also tries to stage a fake kidnapping to get ransom money from his boss. And then there's Amanda Seyfried as Sunny, an innocent young woman who's talked into going to Mexico to pick up drugs with her boyfriend. There's also an undercover DEA agent. I'm sure I've forgotten other things. Honestly, too much is going on.

Harold is a tragically comic character. He believes the best of everyone. He considers his boss to be his friend, not realising that he would rather kill him than pay ransom money. He doesn't suspect for a moment that his loving wife is having an affair. Harold is naive to the point of stupidity, stumbling from one crisis into another. I didn't know whether to pity him or laugh at him.

It was difficult for me to take the characters played by Joel Edgerton and Charlize Theron at face value. They're both so downright evil that they're like caricatures. Joel plays basketball with his employees after work and ridicules the other team when he wins; he always wins, because they're afraid they'll be fired if they beat him. Charlize is a sexual predator; while sitting in a bar with a potential buyer for the company's pills, she tells him to take his penis out. "If I like the look of it we can go back to my place and have sex. If not, we'll just do business". Do women like that exist in the business world? I've never met anyone who even comes close.

The film's talent is wasted. More effort should have been invested in the screenplay.

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

Elysium (4 Stars)

I'm not sure why I've waited so long to watch this film. When the Birmingham Film Group went to see it in the cinema I decided not to go, even though I'd enjoyed the first film by the director Neill Blomkamp, "District 9". Maybe it's because of my feelings towards Matt Damon. I don't dislike him in the way I dislike Tom Cruise, and he's definitely not a bad actor, I just feel some sort of antipathy. I don't feel warm towards him when I see him on screen, whatever role he plays. I almost didn't buy this film, and even after buying it I waited a long time before watching it. I bought it as part of a "10 Blu-rays for 50 Euros" offer from Amazon.de in November 2016, probably the 10th film that I needed to complete the order. I watched the other nine films soon after, but "Elysium" has been sitting on my shelf unwatched for the last 14 months.

Now I've finally watched it, and I enjoyed it, as my rating shows. It's a science fiction film set in 2154, but it refers to the situation in America today. It's all about the situation between the haves and have nots.

In the 22nd Century the world is overpopulated and suffers from terrible pollution. A large space station called Elysium has been built with artificial gravity, an artificial atmosphere and a full artificial eco-system. The richest people from Earth live on Elysium, enjoying luxury and parties without end. The citizens of Elysium don't work, apart from a few who maintain the space station. There are also political leaders, but whether what they do can be considered work is a matter of opinion.

There have been amazing medical advances in the 22nd Century. Ageing has been cured. Nobody needs to die of natural causes. Death is only possible by accident or by murder. Everyone on Elysium has free health care and is potentially immortal. Nobody on Earth is eligible for this treatment. The Earth is over-populated, so death is useful to stop the world getting even more crowded.

The story's hero is Max Da Costa, a factory worker in Los Angeles. As a child he dreamt of moving to Elysium one day, but now he's an adult the bitter reality has set in and he makes do with what he has. After several convictions for car theft he's decided to go straight, which is difficult because every time the robot police officers scan him they repeat a list of his offences.

Max is exposed to radiation in a factory accident. He's told he has only five days to live. Desperation drives him to extreme measures. The only way he can be cured is by going to Elysium, and since he can't travel legally he has to use illegal methods. If he's killed in the attempt it doesn't matter, he has nothing to lose.

Everything we see in the film is an exaggerated version of today's life. There's prejudice against ex-criminals, however sincerely they want to reform. There is insufficient protection of workers. There's an unbreachable chasm between the few who are rich and the many who are poor. Worst of all is the health care. The rich enjoy health care as a right, whereas the poor are left to die.

The film was a moderate box office success and received praise from critics, but the director has expressed disappointment with the film.

"I feel like, ultimately, the story is not the right story. I still think the satirical idea of a ring, filled with rich people, hovering above the impoverished Earth, is an awesome idea. I love it so much, I almost want to go back and do it correctly. I just didn’t make a good enough film. I feel like I executed all of the stuff that could be executed, like costume and set design and special effects very well. But, ultimately, it was all resting on a somewhat not totally formed skeletal system, so the script just wasn’t there; the story wasn’t fully there".

I guess it's true that artists are their own worst critics. I like the film.

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

Chappie (4½ Stars)

When "Chappie" was made it was intended to be the first film in a trilogy. After initial vague responses the director Neill Blomkamp has clearly stated that the sequels will never be made. His reason is that it didn't perform well enough at the box office. I don't understand that. It earned more than double its budget at the box office, which means that the film at least broke even.

Maybe Neill Blomkamp's personal cut wasn't enough to buy the new Porsche he was eyeing in the showroom. Whatever the reason, he's made up his mind, so there's no use in trying to persuade him. Maybe as time passes he'll think differently when he sees it growing in esteem as a cult film, but nothing that you or I can say will make any difference.

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

Chappie (4½ Stars)

This is yet another brilliant film that has been unjustly savaged by the critics. Sometimes I get the impression that there's a secret conspiracy to persuade the public to stay away from good films in the cinema. The rest of the time I just think that the critics are stupid.

"Chappie" was intended to be the first film of a trilogy. The director Neill Blomcamp says he already has plot summaries for the other two films, but he doesn't yet know if he'll be able to make them. I blame the critics.

Chappie (4½ Stars)

Warning! This review contains spoilers!

People who only watch films on streaming services miss out. Today I watched "Chappie" on Blu-ray for the first time. The special features menu listed an alternate ending, and I had to watch it. Deleted scenes don't usually add much to the enjoyment of a film, but alternate endings fascinate me, especially if they put a different twist on a story. For instance, "Scott Pilgrim vs The World" has an ending that's better than what we see in the film. Edgar Wright made the wrong choice in what he put into the film. The film "Chloe" has several alternate endings, which all highlight the story's conclusion from a different angle, and watching them one after another adds to the enjoyment. "Joy Ride" also has several alternate endings, but these give a totally different resolution to the story.

In the case of "Chappie", I found the alternate ending on the Blu-ray so hilarious that I had to laugh out loud. In the official ending Chappie's life is saved by uploading his consciousness to the closest robot. In the alternate ending Chappie's life is saved by uploading his consciousness to every robot, resulting in hundreds of Chappies walking around Johannesburg.

I prefer the alternate ending, but I suspect that the director Neill Blomkamp wanted to end the film on a serious note. Apart from this, the official ending is a better hook to a sequel. Originally "Chappie" was intended to be the first part of a trilogy, but it received unfavourable reviews, so it's unlikely the other two parts will be made. That's unfair. I find "Chappie" brilliant.

Watching "Chappie" on Blu-ray today something seemed strange to me. The picture was somehow sharper than what I'm used to from other films. That's not meant as a criticism, it just looked unusual. It wasn't until half way through the film that I recognised what was different. Usually when a film is shown the foreground is in focus, and the background is slightly blurred. That mimics the way we see with our eyes; we focus on one point, and everything else is less clear. "Chappie" is filmed differently. When there's a city scene, everything is in focus, whether it's in the foreground or far in the background.

Hardcore Henry (4 Stars)

This is a very unique film made in Russia. It was directed by Ilya Naishuller, the singer of the Russian indie rock group Biting Elbows. His only previous directing experience was a music video for his band, the song "Bad Motherfucker". This video was greatly praised for being shot in POV (point of view) mode, like a video game. Click here to watch the music video on YouTube, where it has more than 33 million views. Inspired by its success he decided to make a full length feature film in POV.

I know that the plot is less important than the POV gimmick itself, but this is roughly what the film is about. A man wakes up on an operating table, where he finds his limbs being replaced. He can't remember how he got there. A woman in the room tells him his name is Henry and she is his wife Estelle. In an attempt to jog his memory she puts his wedding ring back on his new hand. Before they can get better acquainted the laboratory is invaded by soldiers who kill the scientists. Only Henry and Estelle escape, but soon after Estelle is kidnapped. Henry spends the rest of the film trying to find his wife.

I was well aware that the film had received poor reviews. One comment was that "it's as much fun as watching someone else play a video game". For me that's not much of a problem. I enjoy watching other people play video games.

One other warning that I was given by Rebecca, a member of staff at the Cineworld cinema where I watch most of my films, is that customers had complained of motion sickness after watching the film. I scoffed at this, but when I watched it I understood what she meant. My eyes had difficulty in adjusting to the film for the first half hour. I think the problem is that I was looking through my own eyes, but in the large cinema my eyes were a long way in front of me. This disoriented me. After this I grew used to it. Then I left the cinema, and as I walked out I felt slightly unreal. It's difficult to explain what I mean. My feet felt as if they were far away. My whole world seemed out of sync. It took about 15 minutes before I felt normal again. I expect that this sensation will only be experienced by people who see the film in a cinema. Watching it at home on Blu-ray shouldn't produce the same effect.

I have to say, the film was enjoyable. Strange, quirky, but good fun. I can recommend it to my readers.

The most famous POV video game is "Doom". For me, I associate POV with Sierra's "Hero Quest", later renamed "Quest for Glory" after a copyright battle with Milton Bradley who had a game with the same name. Milton Bradley's game was released two years later than Sierra's game, but Milton Bradley had the better lawyers. Sierra's "Hero Quest" was released in 1989, but I bought it in 1990, when I had my first PC at home. It was actually a mixed mode game. When the hero walked around we saw him from a third person viewpoint, but when he engaged a creature in battle it changed to POV. Four sequels were made, Quest for Glory 2 to 5, but I only bought 2 to 4. When Quest for Glory 5 was released I already had my first Internet account, so I'd moved on from offline gaming.

Chappie (4½ Stars)

I finally went to see this film in the cinema, after being busy arranging my move for the last few weeks. I don't think I've mentioned it in my blog yet. I'm in the middle of moving house. I've never liked the house that I live in. I moved here because the last house I was renting was sold in 2008 and I had to move in a hurry. I cried when I moved here. Literally, I cried. It's so much smaller than the house I was living in until 2008, and as a result I had to throw away a lot of my furniture. My four-poster bed and my wall-sized wardrobe had to be left behind. It was heart-breaking.

Now I have to move again. Last year my landlord attempted to increase the rent, and I refused to pay more because I couldn't afford it. Now he's finally lost his patience and given me notice. I was told to leave within two months unless I pay the new rent. My previous rent was £510 per month, now he wants £600. Last year I went to the council office to get advice. In my street all the houses are identical, as is typical for streets in England's industrial cities. I was told that I could appeal against the rent increase, because the average rent in my street is £400. In addition, I spoke to two of my neighbours who live in my street; one of them pays £350 per month rent, the other pays only £220. They were both shocked that my rent is so high for a house the same as theirs, and even more shocked that my landlord wants more.

I suppose I could take my landlord to court over his proposed rent increase, and I would probably win the case, but I don't want the stress of years of arguments while I'm living here in this poor quality house in which the unused fireplace has only been closed by taping plastic bags over the hole in the wall. I was lucky enough to be recommended a new house by my next door neighbour. The quality of the house is better, it's slightly cheaper (£500 per month) and it's in a quieter street. The disadvantage is that it's slightly smaller than the house I'm in now. I have to downsize again. Sigh..... At least this time I don't have any beautiful furniture to take with me. My previous house, where I lived from February 2002 until April 2008, was a home which I felt comfortable in, where I liked to invite my friends, and I would gladly have remained in it for the rest of my life. My new house (May 2008 to March 2015) is just four walls around me, nothing more, nothing less. I don't live here, I survive. My bedroom doubles as a storage room, and even if I were dating a girl I would feel ashamed to take her into my room. I'm fortunate that my dating days are behind me.

Will I feel better in my new home? Ask me again a few months from now. Somehow I can't imagine remaining there for the rest of my life. I'll try to make it look cosier than than the hole I've been in for the last seven years, but I don't think of it as a place for living a long time. At the moment my daughter Fiona is still living with me. When she moves out I'll start looking for something more suitable for myself. Slowly. As long as I have a roof over my head I'll be in no rush. I won't invest in any attractive new furniture, but at least I'll make an effort to keep my bedroom tidy.

I almost forgot that I'm supposed to be writing about a film. Despite the bad reviews from critics, I consider this to be director Neill Blomkamp's best film so far. He's taken a risk by setting the film in the near future, claiming that it will happen in South Africa in 2016. That will already be the past by the time most people watch it on Netflix. A company called Tetravaal has created police robots that it has sold to the Johannesburg police force. The rest of the world is looking on to see whether the experiment will be successful. But the robots' creator, Deon Wilson, doesn't want to stop there. Instead of just programming a machine to act like a police officer, he wants to give a robot real artificial intelligence and the ability to learn.

Deon takes a broken robot home to experiment with his new software, but he's hijacked by a criminal gang and the robot is stolen. The two gangsters Ninja and Yolandi take it upon themselves to educate the robot, that they call Chappie. Ninja wants to use Chappie as a tool to aid him in his robberies, but Yolandi has motherly instincts and wants to bring him up as a child.

The real stars of the film are Ninja and Yolandi, members of the South African group Die Antwoord. They're usually described as a rap group, but their music includes elements of 1990's Europop, and the lyrics are laced with dark humour, meaning they have more in common with goth music than other rappers. They're difficult to pin down to any music genre, and that's the way they like it. Neill Blomkamp is a fan of the group, and he asked them to just be themselves rather than act. Their characters in the film even use their real life names, or at least the stage names that they use as musicians. As a fan of Die Antwoord I immediately noticed that Yolandi was wearing the same outfits that she's worn in her music videos. Several of Die Antwoord's songs are used in the film soundtrack.

According to an interview with Neill Blomkamp, the film was devised as the first part of a trilogy. That's exciting. I know that the critics have panned "Chappie", but I love the film, and I hope that it makes enough money at the box office to justify the other two parts being made.

Maleficent (4 Stars)

This is a film claiming to tell the truth behind the fairy tale "Sleeping Beauty", written by Charles Perrault in the 17th Century and later retold by the Brothers Grimm. It would be more accurate to say that it tells the truth that was hidden behind the lies in the 1959 Walt Disney film with the same name. What I mean is, the 1959 film changed a lot of the details of the fairy tale. In particular, that film was the first time the evil fairy was named Maleficent. In turn, children's books written in the last 50 years have told the tale based on the film, not on the older stories. I think it would be fair to say that most people today know the Walt Disney version of the story.

I would rather not say too much about the new truths revealed by the film, since it's still in the cinemas, and that would spoil it for my readers who haven't seen it yet. It's a beautiful story of myth and magic, which I can strongly recommend. I was pleasantly surprised that the 3D effects looked so good. Angelina Jolie looks magnificent when she flies through the sky with her brown wings.

District 9 (4½ Stars)

I didn't watch this film until months after it had been released. Sure, I'm a big sci-fi fan, but I didn't expect to like it. Then it was broadcast on television one day... I watched it... and immediately loved it. The semi-documentary filming style adds to the film's impact. This film is an answer to those who complain that alien invaders always arrive in Manhattan.