Tetris (5 Stars)

This is a film that I thought I wasn't going to see. Trailers were shown in my cinema last year, but then the release date came and the film itself wasn't shown. I did a little research, and I found out that it was being shown exclusively on the Apple TV streaming service. Oh no! That means at best a long delay before it'll be released on Blu-ray, at worst it'll never be released at all. After waiting ten months I've been getting impatient. Then today I found it listed on a dodgy website. I shan't tell you the site's address, because I don't support illegal downloads, except in the case of an emergency. Believe me, this was an emergency. I found it by googling, so you can probably find it too, if you must. I was happy to find that the picture is in perfect 1080p quality. What more could I wish for?

The film stars Taron Egerton, practically unrecognisable with a moustache, as the Dutch businessman Henk Rogers. He was the owner of Bullet-Proof Software, a computer game company based in Tokyo. In 1988 he discovered Tetris at the stand of a rival software company at the CES (Consumer Electronics Show) in Las Vegas. He was so enthusiastic about the game that he fought to acquire the rights to sell it himself.

That's the story behind the film. Tetris was a game written in Russia after hours by an employee in a government-owned company called ELORG. Technically, the game belonged to ELORG. That's where it gets complicated. The American businessman Robert Stein claimed to have bought the rights for Tetris from ELORG, and he had sold them to Mirrorsoft, an English company owned by Robert Maxwell and his family. Henk found out that Robert Stein only had the rights for the PC version and had sold the rights to other versions illegally. I need to make notes the next time I watch the film. It's difficult to keep up with who actually owned what.

Henk has to travel around the world to get what he wants. His efforts are blocked by Russia's KGB, who object to Russian software being sold to a foreigner. Many other factors tie in, such as the bankruptcy of Robert Maxwell and the first release of Nintendo's Game Boy. It's an exciting film, with car chases, missiles and tanks. Taron Egerton admits that some parts have been over-dramatized, but overall it's a true story. And it's a great story! The film isn't a comedy, but I had to laugh at several scenes. Russian bureaucracy was so stupid in the 1980's. Is it any better today?

Before I watched the film I played an online version of Tetris. It's been years since I last played, and I'd forgotten how addictive it is. After an hour I was bleary eyed and needed to make an effort to watch the film.

Tetris (the film) is at the top of my to-buy list, if it ever gets a Blu-ray release. I don't know if I can wait that long, so I might return to the dodgy site or even take a seven day free trial of Apple TV, but there's no way I'll subscribe. Apple TV only has a small selection of films, compared with Netflix, Amazon Prime and Disney Plus.

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (4½ Stars)

A funny thing happened to me on the way to the cinema.....

I arrived early, so I was sitting on the steps opposite the cinema eating an ice cream. A beggar came up to me, holding his hand out to ask for money. In an attempt to be sarcastic I held my hand out to ask him for money. He gave me three cents, and then he threw the rest of his money on the floor and stormed off in a rage, saying something I didn't understand. What was he doing? If it was an attempt to give me a bad conscience, it didn't work. As soon as I finished my ice cream I gathered up his money from the floor, another 12 cents. It's possible that it was more money, because the coins might have rolled away. The net result of this encounter is that I became 15 cents richer.

I said it was an attempt to be sarcastic, because I don't understand sarcasm. It's happened several times in my life that someone said something to me, I replied, and then the person said "I was being sarcastic".  So I gave the wrong reply. I should have interpreted the statement as meaning the opposite of what was said. But how was I to know that it was a false statement?

I've looked up definitions of sarcasm online, but I still don't get it. In order to understand sarcasm, I've tried to be sarcastic myself. If I understand correctly, I have to tell a lie, but it has to be a lie that the other person knows is a lie. Should that make people laugh? For instance, I told a friend that I like Donald Trump. She knows that I don't like him, so she should have laughed. Instead of that she just said "I thought you didn't like him". I replied, "I was being sarcastic", and she just looked at me as if I was being crazy. That's the same way that I react when people are sarcastic with me. Is that the intention? Is sarcasm supposed to be a joke that nobody understands? So what's the point of it?

Today I pretended to be a beggar. That was my way of being sarcastic. Was it successful? It made the man angry, so yes, maybe that is what sarcasm is supposed to achieve.

So I proceeded to Gloria, where I was greeted by Indiana Jones himself. That was my first impression. A closer look told me it was my fellow film fan Thomas Daake dressed up as Indiana Jones. It's an amazingly accurate costume. The only inaccuracy is that there's no gun in his holster. Thomas told me that he has a fake gun as part of the costume, but he chose not to wear it because it looks too genuine. I understand. He's standing in front of a poster of Barbie. I wonder if he'll dress up as Ken next week.

The film starts in 1944, when Indiana Jones is attempting to steal the Antikythera, the Dial of Archimedes, from the Nazis. It's rumoured to be able to predict fissures in time and allow limited time travel. In 1969, a former Nazi who's become an American wants the Dial so that he can go back in time and change the result of World War Two.

The film is an enjoyable adventure romp, despite not being directed by Steven Spielberg. It's supposed to be the last film in the Indiana Jones series. Never say never.

Archive (2 Stars)

This is an English science fiction film made in 2020. It was originally planned for cinema release, but it was released straight-to-video because of the Coronavirus lockdowns.

The film takes place in 2038. Archive is the name of a technology that extends a person's consciousness after death. The body of a dead person is preserved in cold storage and connected to a computer system that allows people to communicate with him via video calls. Depending on the rate of decay, this is possible for between a few days and a few months. As soon as the communication stops, the body has to be buried.

Theo James is an expert in artificial intelligence. He's given a job to build a life-like robot with full artificial intelligence. He has to work alone in a large laboratory in Japan. Shortly before he begins the job his wife is killed in a car accident. He takes her body with him and keeps in contact with her using Archive.

Instead of creating a completely artificial intelligence, Theo hacks into the Archive system and finds a way to copy his dead wife's brainwaves. He uses her brain pattern as the template for his robots. He hides this from his employer, because it's illegal.

The first robot, which he calls J-1, is only a partial success. It has the mental development of a five-year-old. His second attempt, J-2, has his wife's personality, despite being somewhat immature. Theo estimates that she has the mental development of a 15-year-old. This prompts him to build a third robot, J-3, with a humanoid form. She'll be a full replacement for his wife.

Well, almost a full replacement. She still needs some makeup and a good wig.

Theo is working against the clock. He has to finish J-3 before his wife's body decays and her consciousness is no longer available in Archive. Added to his problems, J-2 is in love with him and wants to prevent J-3 replacing her.

There are also problems with his employer suspecting his deception.

This is a very intelligent science fiction film. Unfortunately, I don't like it. The trouble is that the film has too many ideas. Too many things are happening. There are too many new technologies vying for the viewer's credibility. A film doesn't have to be complicated to be good.

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

Atomic Blonde (4½ Stars)

As I've stated in the past, this is an almost perfect film. The only reason I haven't given it five stars is because of the excessive smoking. I don't like smoking. It was cigarettes that killed my father when he was only 53. If you think I'm wrong to penalise the film for one trivial detail like this, so what? This is my blog, and I'll do what I like with it. If you don't like it, write your own blog.

One of the things that makes the film so good is the director David Leitch's selection of 1980's songs, which perfectly give the feeling of Berlin in 1989.

• Queen: Under Pressure (1981)
• After the Fire: Der Kommissar (1982)
• A Flock of Seagulls: I ran so far away (1982)
• David Bowie: Cat People (1982)
• Nena: 99 Luftballons (1983)
• Peter Schilling: Major Tom (1983)
• Re-Flex: The Politics of Dancing (1983)
• Siouxsie & the Banshees: Cities in Dust (1985)
• Til Tuesday: Voices Carry (1985)
• Depeche Mode: Behind the Wheel (1987)
• George Michael: Father Figure (1987)
• New Order: Blue Monday (1988)
• Public Enemy: Fight the Power (1989)

There's also "London Calling" by the Clash. That's actually a 1979 song, but I'll forgive the director for adding it, because it's very appropriate when it's used in the film.

The Berlin Wall shortly before reunification in 1989. A lot of people don't realise how close the Wall was built to the houses on either side.

This is a film that establishes Charlize Theron as an action heroine. She looks incredible even when she's just been fighting KGB agents to the death. A sequel has been promised, but like so many other films, it's been delayed by the Coronavirus.

Success Rate:  + 1.3

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

Atomic Blonde (4½ Stars)

After watching this film in the cinema three years ago I'm finally returning to it. I don't know why I waited so long. It's an almost perfect film. I would have given it five stars, but I deducted half a star because the smoking in the film is excessive. If smoking doesn't bother you, there's no reason not to watch it.

Charlize Theron plays the MI6 agent Lorraine Broughton, who's on a mission in Berlin in the final week of the Berlin Wall, from 2nd November to 10th November 1989. Well, the demolition of the Wall didn't actually begin until 13th June 1990, so the images of people hitting the Wall with hammers are incorrect. What actually happened is that the border checkpoints opened on 9th November, allowing people to pass through without showing their passports. The film "Bornholmer Straße" tells this story. In my review of "Goodbye Lenin" I've listed the dates of the most important occurrences.

When Lorraine arrives in Berlin on 2nd November, Western intelligence services already assume that the opening of the Wall is inevitable, but there's something more dangerous. There's a list of all the spies in Berlin, western and eastern, that's been hidden on microfilm inside a watch. It's expected that whichever government receives this list will assassinate all the other spies and secret agents. Initially it's in the hands of a Russian spy, but instead of delivering it to his country he's attempting to sell it to the highest bidder.

Lorraine's has to work with David Percival (James McAvoy), the head of MI6 operations in West Berlin. He's an efficient agent, but very eccentric. Following the mission's guideline, "Don't trust anyone", he tells Lorraine as much as she needs to know, but lies about everything else. He warns her about an infamous double agent codenamed Satchel, who will do anything to stop the list being made public.

Bill Skarsgard plays a young man called Merkel. He's active in organising demonstrations in East Berlin, but he also assists the CIA if necessary. I hardly recognise him without his face paint.

This is a film that has everything: action, suspense, espionage and nail-biting intrigue. It's a shame about the smoking. Is that supposed to make the film more realistic? If there had been no smoking at all, nobody would have complained.

Rumours have been floated that a crossover between "Atomic Blonde" and the John Wick franchise is planned. That's interesting, but how would it work? "Atomic Blonde" took place in the 1980's, whereas the John Wick films take place today. Or do they? They have very old-fashioned technology, so it's difficult to date them. Lorraine Broughton couldn't possibly be a member of John Wick's organisation, because it stands above international politics. Or maybe she could join later after leaving MI6. She would be an excellent recruit. There are so many questions open, but in principle it's a good idea.

Success Rate:  + 1.3

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

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (4 Stars)

This is not a review. It's just an acknowledgement that I watched the film today. I don't have enough time to write about it.

Success Rate:  + 5.7

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

St. Trinian's 2: The Legend of Fritton's Gold (4 Stars)

"Girls are far more intelligent than boys".

That must be true. It's in the newspapers.

I had to get that out of the way before I start the review.

This is a sequel to "St. Trinian's", made two years earlier in 2007. Since the first film things have moved on. The new girl, Annabelle Fritton, has become the head girl. The previous head girl, Kelly Jones, has joined MI7, a British spy organisation so secret that not even MI6 knows it exists.

Unfortunately Kelly Jones only appears in a short portion of the film, when Annabelle asks for her help. That's a shame, but I admit that I'm biased. I can never get enough of Gemma Arterton.

The film's biggest fault is that it's even less saucy than the first film. It presents the pure chaos of wild schoolgirls, but there are only the slightest hints of sexuality. Where's Frankie Howerd when we need him? The film's greatest strength is David Tennant. I don't think I've ever seen him in any role where his presence doesn't elevate the quality of an otherwise mediocre film.

This is what Liverpool Station in London looked like before the Coronavirus lockdown. Those were the good old days. I'd be dancing in the middle of them. How many of you can spot Jodie Whittaker in the picture? It's easy if you've seen the film, but almost impossible if you haven't.

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

St. Trinian's (4 Stars)

The last time I watched this film I only gave it three stars. That was unfair. It's a better film than that. I think I penalised the film because it wasn't what I expected. The original St. Trinian's films, especially the ones made in the 1960's, were saucy, with a lot of sexual innuendo. The 2007 St. Trinian's girls are bad girls, but not in a sexual way, apart from occasional short skirts,. There's only one hint of sexuality in an early scene, when a half naked boy runs out of the school after a party.

In a manner reminiscent of American high school movies, the girls are divided into their tribes: the Chavs, the Emos, the Geeks and the Posh Totties. There aren't any real Mean Girls in the school, even if the Posh Totties look like them. The girls in the school aren't mean to one another, they stand united against the rest of the world. Well, they're mean to the New Girl, Annabelle Fritton, but it's just a test to see if she's worthy of joining the school. After surviving two days of humiliation she's accepted as one of the girls.

Maybe another reason for my low rating last time is the casting of a man, Rupert Everett, as the school's headmistress. I don't like to see men dressing up as women, even less than women dressing up as men, but I can understand the reason. In the original films a man was also cast as the headmistress. I'll try to close my eyes to it.

And one last criticism which I even mentioned in my last review is that Gemma Arteron isn't given a chance to look sexy. She wears a long skirt and looks almost (but not quite) goth. That's a disappointment that I have to get over. This was her first film, and at 21 it was her last chance to appear as a schoolgirl.

The film's glamour is provided by the Posh Totties, Chloe, Chelsea and Peaches. Do they really call girls Peaches? They're not such bad girls. They like to pray.

And they pray more than once in the film.

But I have to admit, if I were their teacher I'd be looking up their skirts in every lesson. I'd try to resist the temptation, but it would be much too hard.

Is it just me, or do the girls look even hotter with glasses?

Take another look. Tell me what you think.

Yes, that's Jodie Whittaker flirting with Stephen Fry. She won't get very far. Doesn't she know he's gay? She needs to try again after she's regenerated as a man.

I'll probably rewatch the sequel to this film in the next few days. Probably. I'm not going to promise, because I break my promises too often. I also want to rewatch the original five St. Trinian's films. It must be at least 40 years since I last saw them. It's time for some 1950's and 1960's nostalgia.

Success Rate:  + 2.2

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

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (4 Stars)

Watching this film today, I noticed for the first time that it has parallels with the second film, "Jurassic Park: Lost World". In addition, the two films have parallel developments from their previous films.

It starts with Jeff Goldblum's appearance, a cameo pleading for dinosaurs to become extinct for a second time, for the good of humanity. This is like the cameo appearances of Richard Attenborough in the second film.

Then we have the development of Claire Dearing from a businesswoman in "Jurassic World" to a conservationist in "Fallen Kingdom". This is similar to the development of John Hammond between the first two films.

The young man acting against the wishes of the older leader is a theme repeated from the second film. Also the matter of soldiers acting against the ones who befriend dinosaurs. In both cases the levels of the actions are stepped up. In "Lost World" Peter Ludlow didn't go as far as to kill John Hammond. In "Lost World" the soldiers didn't leave Nick Owen to die. In these respects "Fallen Kingdom" is an exaggeration of "Lost World".

There may be other parallels that I've missed. I need to watch all of the films again back to back, including the disastrous "Jurassic Park 3". I'll wait until the release of "Jurassic World: Dominion", the sixth film that will round off the second trilogy. Its release was planned for June 2021, but I fear that it won't be completed on time because of the Coronavirus restrictions. Let's wait and see how things turn out.

Success Rate:  + 5.7

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

Captain America: The Winter Soldier (5 Stars)

This is the ninth film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, released in April 2014. I consider it to be the best film in the MCU so far, although it's difficult to decide. The best MCU films are all very good, so I might change my mind when I watch them all again in order.

Stan Lee's cameo scene lasts 16 seconds, of which we see him on screen for 14 seconds, making it one of his longest cameos. He plays a security guard in a Smithsonian museum. (I'm not sure whether the museum is in Washington DC or in New York. Maybe one of my readers can help me).

There's an exhibition with life size models of Captain America and his Howling Commandos, wearing realistic replicas of their uniforms. When Captain America lost his modern uniform he sneaked into the museum and stole (or rather borrowed) the replica of his old uniform. When Stan Lee saw that the uniform had been taken on his watch he moaned, "I am so fired". Poor Stan.

This film is a key part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, with implications for the following films and the television series "Agents of SHIELD". It's revealed that Hydra infiltrated SHIELD when it was formed, and it has lain dormant for 70 years waiting to strike. Now is the time. An assassination attempt is made against Nick Fury. He goes into hiding by pretending to be dead.

This is Nick Fury's gravestone. Note the Bible quote, "The path of the righteous man...". If you check your Bible you might be confused. This is the text of Ezekiel 25:17 from the most common modern translation, the New International Version (NIV):

"I will carry out great vengeance on them and punish them in my wrath. Then they will know that I am the Lord, when I take vengeance on them".

There's nothing about a righteous man in the verse. Indeed, there's nothing about a righteous man in the whole of the chapter. Only attentive film fans will understand what's happened. In the film "Pulp Fiction" the hit man Jules, also played by Samuel L. Jackson, says that he's memorised Ezekiel 25:17, and he always recites it before he kills someone:

"The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee".

If he quoted that to his teacher in Sunday School he would get a Fail. The last part of his quote approximately matches what the Bible says, but the beginning is a pure invention. It's better not to quote the Bible at all than to quote it incorrectly, especially if the misquote is used as a justification for killing people.

"Captain America: The Winter Soldier" introduces a new member of the Avengers, the Falcon, played by Anthony Mackie. I know very little about him as an actor, but he puts on a memorable performance in this film. I ought to know him, because he appears in six non-MCU films in my collection. I'll have to watch them again. Eventually. At the moment I don't want to make my to-watch list any bigger.

Here's another snapshot of Stan Lee from his cameo scene. Just because I can.

Success Rate:  + 2.0

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

Captain America (4½ Stars)

This is the fifth film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, released in July 2011. Now Marvel has introduced four of the Avengers, Thor, Iron Man, the Hulk and Captain America. (There were two Iron Man films).

Stan Lee appears in a three-second cameo as a general watching Captain America being welcomed as a war hero. Or at least, he would have watched Captain America if he had turned up. Steve Rogers aka Captain America is more interested in fighting the war than in wasting time at stupid ceremonies.

That's not the way his career starts out. After being injected with the super-soldier serum he's sent on tour with chorus girls to whip up support for America's war effort. This is a good cause. Wherever he goes large donations are gathered, but it's not enough for him. Steve Rogers would rather be in Europe fighting Nazis. Eventually he runs away from the tour and goes behind enemy lines to rescue captured American soldiers. That's why Captain America was a war hero and I'm just an Internet blogger. I'm not a fighter. I would have preferred to spend every evening on stage with sexy chorus girls.

I find it difficult to believe that I didn't like this film much when I first reviewed it. I enjoy it more every time I watch it. I know that I criticised Captain America carrying a gun when he went into action with the Howling Commandos, but even that seems acceptable now. It was his first active service, so he hadn't yet found his style. It was in his later years that he relied entirely on his shield.

That isn't the case for Agent Peggy Carter. She was never biologically enhanced, so she has to rely on a gun when doing battle.

It doesn't matter where she is. She even has her gun ready in the middle of a New York Street.

When you're looking down the barrel of her gun it's time to surrender.

If your hands aren't raised high in the air by now it's too late.

The whole of the Marvel Cinematic Universe is leading up to Thanos acquiring the Infinity Gauntlet, so we're introduced to the Infinity Stones (which don't all look like stones) early on. The Red Skull finds the Space Stone, which he calls a tesseract, even though it's only shaped like a cube. He uses this stone to power his weapons.

The Infinity Stones were first introduced into Marvel's comics by Jim Starlin and Steve Englehart in the late 1980's. The combination of the stones was described as the ultimate weapon, making a person an omnipotent God. In recent years Marvel has become obsessed with these stones, and inferior authors have written many stories about them. Technically, the stones belong to the post-canon years, but the Starlin and Englehart stories, culminating in the Infinity Gauntlet saga, are among the best Marvel stories ever written. The story of the stones in the films is watered down, but I grudgingly accept that it's a necessity to portray them this way in the film medium.

Success Rate:  - 0.3

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