Barbie (5 Stars)

It is literally impossible to be a woman.

We have to always be extraordinary, but somehow we're always doing it wrong.

You have to be thin, but not too thin. And you can never say you want to be thin. You have to say you want to be healthy, but also you have to be thin.

You have to have money, but you can't ask for money because that's crass. 

You have to be a boss, but you can't be mean. You have to lead, but you can't squash other people's ideas.

You're supposed to love being a mother but don't talk about your kids all the damn time.

You have to be a career woman, but also always be looking out for other people.

You have to answer for men's bad behaviour, which is insane, but if you point that out, you're accused of complaining.

You're supposed to stay pretty for men, but not so pretty that you tempt them too much or that you threaten other women because you're supposed to be a part of the sisterhood. But always stand out and always be grateful.

But never forget that the system is rigged. So find a way to acknowledge that but also always be grateful.

You have to never get old, never be rude, never show off, never be selfish, never fall down, never fail, never show fear, never get out of line.

It's too hard! It's too contradictory and nobody gives you a medal or says thank you!

And it turns out in fact that not only are you doing everything wrong, but also everything is your fault.

I'm just so tired of watching myself and every single other woman tie herself into knots so that people will like us.

Success Rate:  + 9.3

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

Despicable Me 4 (4 Stars)

No review today. I'll wait until my writer's block passes.

Although, to be honest, it's not writer's block preventing me from writing anything. It's writer's distraction, if there's such a thing. My daughter Fiona is visiting me with her children for the next two months. That leaves me little time to watch films, and even less time to write about them. I had to see "Despicable Me 4" in the cinema today, because my grandson Oliver was desperate to see it. Now that I'm back home my other grandchildren are running around shouting "Opa! Opa! Opa!" Blogging is tough!

Barbie (5 Stars)

"Barbie" isn't in my top 100 films list at the moment, but I'll add it the next time I revise my list. That's a promise. It only became eligible for my list today. I only put films in my list that are available for me to watch whenever I want. That usually means that I own the film on Blu-ray or DVD, but I also accept films of which I have a digital copy. I bought "Barbie" today as a special offer for 99 cents.

"The Marvels" was criticised for having too much emphasis on a message. But look at "Barbie". The message is laid on thick for the whole film, but it's still an excellent film, because it also has a good story. I don't care about messages, unless it's a message that I'm violently opposed to. I want a good story, and that's something that "Barbie" has. It was the biggest box office success of 2023, and deservedly so. We need more films like "Barbie". We need more Barbie (and less Ken).

In Germany there were complaints about the film's age rating. It's allowed to be watched by children from the age of 6, but many people consider it unsuitable for children, in particular unsuitable for young girls. They say the film brainwashes young girls to look down on men. So what? We live in a new age. After thousands of years of being suppressed, women are learning that they don't need men. They can live their own lives, with or without a man. Insecure men are taking the path of claiming to be women in men's bodies to raise themselves to women's level. I'm sorry to say it, but no amount of putting on women's clothes or cutting off parts of your body will ever make you a man. You'll never be a Barbie, the best you can be is a Ken.

Success Rate:  + 9.3

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

Barbie (5 Stars)

Today was the eighth day that "Barbie" is being shown in the cinema, and it's still sold out. Almost. When I booked a ticket, there were only three seats to choose from, but in the cinema there were four empty seats in front of me. It's possible to reserve a seat online and collect the ticket 30 minutes before it starts.

What was noticeable is that there were hardly any men in the audience. I looked around before the lights went out, and I could only see three other men. That's understandable, since it's a film about a doll for girls, but it's still unfortunate. Men are the film's target audience. It's a film all men should watch and learn from. As other reviewers have pointed out, every man in the film is stupid, a bigot or a pathetic loser. Those three categories aren't mutually exclusive. There hasn't been a film that puts men down so much since the days of Russ Meyer, who divided men into two categories:

The first type of man is weak and stupid, but sexually capable.

The second type of man is strong and stupid, but sexually impotent.

The women are all strong, intelligent and sexually demanding.

The difference in "Barbie" is that sex doesn't play a role. Or does it? Ken (Ryan Gosling) is embarrassed when Barbie (Margot Robbie) tells men at a building site that he doesn't have a penis. Barbie doesn't have a vagina, but that doesn't bother her. Women are able to do without men. There's a running joke in the film that Ken wants to be Barbie's boyfriend, but she turns him down. She wants them to be just friends. The modern Barbie doesn't need a man.

In the film the universe is divided into two worlds: Barbieland and the Real World. (The capitals are deliberate). Barbieland is ruled by women, who are intelligent and powerful and party every day. In the Real World there's supposedly equality of the sexes, but in practise it's ruled by men, who are stupid and bigoted.

The film highlights the problem with women's equality, a movement which came to public notice in the early 20th Century. The women who led the suffragette movement had good intentions, but they were doomed to fail. Women's equality is impossible, as the last 100 years have shown. If women say "We want to be equal", the men will grin and say Yes, giving them a figment of equality. In large companies like Mattel a few women are promoted to high positions to hide the fact that almost all the bosses are men. The suffragettes didn't go far enough. It wasn't enough that women should be allowed to vote, men should be forbidden to vote. The suffragettes said, "You've been suppressing us for the last 3000 years, so let's forget about it and be equal partners". They should have said, "Now it's our turn to suppress you for the next 3000 years".

"Barbie" contrasts the two systems: women rule Barbieland and men rule the Real World. Is Barbieland a perfect world? Not quite. The film shows the rise of toxic masculinity in Barbieland. The men should be happy to be Just Ken. It's not a bad life.

Eurovision: The Story of Fire Saga (4½ Stars)

Netflix Thursday #11

Did I hear someone say it's not Thursday today? I know it's Sunday in Germany and most other countries, but there are different time zones. It's still Thursday in Iceland. Now stop complaining!

After being disappointed with the film I saw in the cinema this afternoon, I needed to watch something better. It's been two years since I last watched "The Story of Fire Saga". I remembered it when I saw "Stranger Than Fiction" earlier this month, and I was waiting for a chance to watch it again.

The film might seem ridiculous, but it's no more ridiculous than the real Eurovision Song Contest. It's a strange mix of music styles, from Finnish heavy metal to camp Russian ballads. It's very rare that I watch the contest or even listen to the winning song afterwards. The closest I come is reading the article about the contest on the BBC web site.

I was surprised that Dan Stevens has such a powerful singing voice, until I read that his songs are performed by the Swedish singer Erik Mjönes. "Lion of Love" is such a ridiculous, over-the-top song, but as I said above, it's no more ridiculous than songs sung in the real contest.

Supposedly the film had been planned for years before Will Ferrell finally wrote it. After the first time he saw the Eurovision Song Contest on television he wanted to make a film about it. People in Europe take the contest for granted because they've grown up with it, but when an American sees it he's amazed. Shocked and amazed. How can such a thing be possible?

One thing that makes the film so powerful is the beautiful Icelandic scenery. The first half of the film is set in Husavik, a fishing town with 2300 inhabitants on the north coast of Iceland. After the film was made a Eurovision Museum was built in the town, attracting tourists to a place that previously no one had ever heard of.

Stranger Than Fiction (4½ Stars)

I'm returning to this film only nine days after I last watched it. Do I have an excuse? More to the point, do I need an excuse? It's an incredible film. I first saw it at a friend's house. I knew straight away that I had to see it again, so I ordered it on Ebay before I went to bed. It took a week to arrive because the seller was in England. Now I have the Blu-ray in my hands.

Even more than the first time I watched "Stranger Than Fiction", I've been thinking about the philosophical implications of the film. What if my life were being scripted not by a master being (God) on another plane of existence, but by a neurotic writer who lives just a few miles away? Would I even want to know? It seems like a freak of nature that allows Harold Crick to hear Karen Eiffel's voice narrating his life. It's a book she's been writing, on and off, for ten years, so she's been watching over his life for a long time, long before he became conscious of it.

I know Emma Thompson, of course, but this is the first film in which I've ever really paid attention to her. Her performance as the writer Karen Eiffel is outstanding. She's unaware of the power she has over life and death. She's already written eleven novels, and in each book the main character died. Were all of them real people whose deaths she unwittingly caused? That's suggested, but not followed up. If that happened to me, I would be traumatised. I wouldn't be able to live with the knowledge that I've caused one person's death, let alone eleven. On the other hand, being the victim of an all-powerful novelist wouldn't bother me. I'd just ask her to give me a good death.

Harold Crick has to die. The whole novel has been leading up to his death. It's too late to change it, without spoiling the ending. How can he spend the last few days of his life? He can learn to play the guitar, or he can fall in love. He should forget the guitar. That's not something he can do in a few days. Falling in love only takes a moment.

Success Rate:  - 0.2

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

Stranger Than Fiction (4½ Stars)

I've known about this film for years, but I never bothered watching it. It stars Will Ferrell, so it must be a comedy, and I've never liked his type of comedy. Putting it simply, I don't find him funny.

Today the film was presented in a group where we watch films together once a month, and my friend Anna called it one of her favourite films. So I watched it, and I realised that I'd got it all wrong. It's not a comedy at all. I'm not sure what genre it belongs to. Could it be deemed a supernatural fantasy? I'm not sure. It depends on the way the film is interpreted.

Will Ferrell plays Harold Crick, an aloof but highly disciplined IRS auditor. His life follows a strict schedule, for instance he goes to bed at 11:13 pm every night. He lives alone, and he doesn't have any friends, apart from people he talks to at work.

One day he starts to hear a voice narrating his life. The voice isn't talking to him, it's talking about him, telling unknown listeners what he's doing. It's unsettling, so he visits a psychiatrist, who tells him he's suffering from schizophrenia. Harold isn't happy with this diagnosis, so he asks if any other specialists could help him. After putting the psychiatrist under pressure, she finally advises him to visit a literary expert. He seeks help from Jules Hilbert, a literature professor. Based on the formulation of the narration he takes Harold seriously and says he's a character in a book. It's now up to him to find out what type of story he's in, a comedy or a tragedy.

Finally he meets the author Karen Eiffel, who's writing a novel about Harold and is unwittingly controlling his life. In her book Harold has to die, but she can't decide how he should die.

I'll stop the description there. It's a powerful film with deep philosophical ramifications. If we accept the premise that it's possible for someone to control the life of another person with his typewriter, how should the author and the character deal with it? How would I personally deal with it if it happened to me? My tendency would be to sit down with the author to discuss how I want to die, but that's not what happens in the film.

This is an amazing film that I want to see again. Soon.

Success Rate:  - 0.2

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

Eurovision: The Story of Fire Saga (4½ Stars)

When I logged into Netflix I was told that "Eurovision: The Story of Fire Saga" is the #1 film in Germany today. By watching it I've added my vote to the list.

Maybe I like the film for the wrong reason. I expected it to be a parody of the Eurovision Song Contest, something I've hated as long as I can remember it. I was surprised to see that it was quite respectful to the contest. The butt of the jokes is the Icelandic entry, Fire Saga, made up of Lars Erickssong and Sigrit Ericksdottir. They're ridiculously inept at performing on a big stage, but there's no criticism of the other performers, neither stated nor implied.

The film is a love story. Lars and Sigrit have had a platonic relationship for more than 40 years. Sigrit wants their relationship to move to the next level (the first level?) while Lars is only interested in winning the Eurovision Song Contest.

For me, the film's strength is in the music and the presentation of the Song Contest. The romantic aspects of the film interest me less, even though they're the film's backbone. If I were to summarise the film in one sentence, I'd say that it begins and ends great, but it sags in the middle. The Icelandic scenery is also breathtaking. The main reason that the film sags in the middle is that the romance is in the foreground. Okay, the romance is also emphasised in the final scenes, but that works out well, because it's accompanied by big musical numbers.

This isn't a film that will make you cry, but it's a film that will make you laugh. I enjoyed it, and I'll probably watch it again.

P.S. There's a brief guest appearance by Netta Barzilai, the winner of the 2018 Eurovision Song Contest. She deserves the red carpet for her entrance. I wish we could have seen more of her.

The Lego Movie 2 (3 Stars)

This film begins immediately after the last film ends, at the point where Finn's younger sister Bianca is allowed to play with the Lego pieces in the cellar. Then we fast forward five years, which was probably only done because the sequel was made five years later and the actor who plays Finn looks much older now. During this time Bianca hasn't just played in the cellar, she has also carried Lego pieces up to her room. She's also brought her own Duplo pieces downstairs and has mixed them with Finn's Lego creations.

That's the real world. Inside the Lego universe chaos has broken out because of Bianca's damage to their world.

After highly enjoying the first film, I have to say that the new film doesn't reach the same level. Both films quote other films repeatedly, such as "The Matrix", "Jurassic World", "Back to the Future" and various DC films. The difference is that the first film followed the philosophy of the films it referenced, whereas the second film just quotes them anecdotally. The result is that the second film is most definitely a children's film, which couldn't be said of the first film. The only subject of any philosophical importance was Emmet's future self returning from the future with a different attitude and trying to influence the present day Emmet to make sure he developed into himself. That's a topic that Jim Starlin used in his 1980's comics, when Warlock's future self, the Magus, came back in time to help him develop into the Magus. Why? Because he remembered how he'd once been Warlock and he'd needed the Magus' assistance to become himself.

There was a young boy sitting next to me in the cinema today, probably about 10 years old, who was talking a lot. Normally I don't like people talking in the cinema, but he impressed me. He was explaining what was happening to his mother. He seemed very knowledgeable, because he recognised most of the references to other films. It looks like he has the makings of a real film fan. Maybe one day he'll have a blog like mine.

One thing I'd like to mention is the amazing song being sung during the credits. The song was about the credits, praising the credits as the best part of the movie. I haven't yet figured out who was singing the song, but I loved it.

The Lego Movie (4 Stars)

The Lego Movie is awesome. It's so awesome that everyone needs to see it. Everyone who's an adult, at least. It isn't a children's film, far from it. It deals with topics that young children couldn't even begin to understand. The Lego Movie has a G certificate in America, meaning there are no age restrictions, but the film has many references to other films which do have age limitations. That means young children are allowed to see the Lego Movie, but they're not allowed to see the films that would explain what it's about.

There's a sequel in the cinemas at the moment which I intend to watch, if my health allows it. I hope that it retains its adult nature and hasn't been dumbed down for children.

I've written more about the film in the past. If you're interested in the Lego Movie, please click here to read my last review.

Success Rate:  + 5.8

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

Austin Powers: The Spy who shagged me (4½ Stars)

I admit it. The main reason why I decided to watch the Austin Powers trilogy this week is to remember Verne Troyer, the actor who played Mini-Me and died last month. The exact cause of his death isn't clear. Early reports claimed that it was suicide, but the official cause of death has been recorded as alcohol poisoning. The truth is probably a mixture of the two.

Some epitaphs written online say that it's wrong to concentrate on his size, he should just be judged as a man. I understand what they're saying, but it's impossible to write about him without mentioning his size. At 2'8" (81 cm) he was the world's smallest actor. Peter Dinklage (4'5", 135 cm) is a giant in comparison. Verne Troyer's height is what he'll be remembered for. That's an undeniable fact. But we should also remember him as a good actor. After seeing him at his audition Mike Myers was so impressed with Verne's acting ability that he rewrote the script to give him more screen time. How many actors can say that about themselves?

The first film takes place in the 1990's (1997), while the second film takes place in the 1960's (1969). Dr. Evil has invented a time machine, with which he travels back in time to steal Austin Powers' mojo while he was frozen. This mojo is the essence that makes Austin what he is, including his charm, his sexual prowess and his skill as a secret agent. Austin Powers travels back in time using a Back-To-The-Future-ish car to challenge Dr. Evil. He's at a disadvantage because he's already lost his mojo, but he receives assistance from Agent Felicity Shagwell, a swinging, free-loving sixties girl who is the exact female equivalent of Austin himself.

In the first film Mike Myers played two characters, Austin Powers and Dr. Evil. In this film he also plays the evil henchman Fat Bastard. Yes, that's his name. Yes, that's really Mike Myers. He's hardly recognisable under all that make up, body padding and whatever else was used to disguise him.

Because Dr. Evil's son Scott wasn't evil enough to be the successor to the Evil Empire a clone has been made from Dr. Evil's DNA. The clone is Mini-Me, played by Verne Troyer, identical in every respect except for his size. Dr. Evil immediately appoints him his successor. This annoys Scott, who now wants to try to be more evil, but it's too late.

I made a mistake in my last review of "The Spy who shagged me". I claimed that it was a blunder that Mustafa and Number Two magically reappeared after being killed in the first film. I should pay more attention. Mustafa was killed in 1997, so it's not a mistake to see him in 1969. It all makes sense. As for Number Two, he's thrown into a fire pit in the first film, but we never see him die. When he returns in this film he has burn marks on his cheek, so we can assume that he was somehow rescued from the pit. He might have burn marks in other places that his fine suits hide from sight.

Overall the film is just as good as "International Man of Mystery", but I have a few small problems with it. I find the humour with the Fat Bastard character unnecessarily vulgar. I also find it strange the way Elisabeth Hurley's character is removed from the film by the revelation that she was always a fembot. If you watch the first film you can see that this was impossible.

Verne Troyer
January 1, 1969 – April 21, 2018

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

Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery (5 Stars)

This is a brilliant spy spoof, maybe one of the best parody films ever made. It was written by the comedian Mike Myers, featuring himself in the two main roles. The film makes fun of 1960's spy films, primarily the James Bond films. For fans of the old films it's an opportunity to sit and spot references, but even for the younger generation who have only limited knowledge of the old films it's hilarious. It's also a comedy about the English hippy culture of the 1960's.

Now to the plot. Austin Powers was England's best secret agent in the 1960's. His nemesis was Dr. Evil, a megalomaniac who wanted to rule the world. Isn't that what they all want to do? After failing in an attempt to kill Austin Powers Dr. Evil flees into space. He puts his body in deep freeze, so he can return when Austin Powers is dead or too old to stop him. Austin foils his plan by also letting himself be frozen, ready to be thawed when Dr. Evil returns.

The return is in 1997, the year when the film was made. While the two opponents prepare to clash we see Austin trying to adjust to the modern world. His biggest problem is that free love is no longer practised. He expects women to have sex with him – he uses the word "shag" – immediately after meeting him. It's not so easy these days. He has to be charming and polite and work hard to get women into bed.

Dr. Evil, also played by Mike Myers, has less problems adjusting. He was never interested in free love. All he wanted to do was rule the world. His biggest problem is building a relationship with his son Scott, who was born during his absence using his frozen semen.

A lot of the humour revolves around Austin Powers' social ineptness, but it's wrong to compare him with Johnny English, who is also inept as a spy. When it comes to his job Austin Powers is highly skilled. He knows exactly what he's doing. He rushes into action to take on his enemies with his trusty Walther PPK/S in his hand. This is one of the film's few errors. He's shown using the gun in 1967, but it wasn't designed until 1968.

Austin Powers is a skilled spy, but he has one fatal weakness. When he meets beautiful women he's too confused to think straight. That's understandable. I would have the same problem.

This film was followed by two sequels, both of which were almost as good as the first film. In 2008 he tried to continue with his success by starring in another self-written comedy film called "The Love Guru", but it didn't have the same magic as the Austin Powers films. Let's see if he's able to get his mojo back one day.

If you want to buy this film you'll have a difficult choice. The full version is only available in England. The American version has cut several scenes, some of which are included as "deleted scenes" in the extra features, but not all. In particular, Christian Slater's scene has been removed entirely from the American version. The American Blu-ray release has the film in its original 2.35:1 ratio, but the DVD releases on both sides of the Atlantic present the film in a cropped 2:1 ratio. In England the film has never been released on Blu-ray.

If you've never seen the film before your best choice is to buy the American Blu-ray. It's the best quality you can get for your money. If you're a fan of the film like me – I saw it in the cinema when it was first released – you'll be annoyed by the missing scenes, so you'll be better buying the English DVD.

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

Zoolander 2 (4 Stars)

Normally I would groan when a sequel is made 15 years after the original film. It seems too much like an act of desperation to get people into the cinemas. However, I do have faith in Ben Stiller, especially as a director. He's someone who takes risks and gets things right. I even like "Cable Guy", which is generally considered to be his worst film. Apart from this, I read that Ben Stiller wanted to make "Zoolander 2" for years, but he didn't do it because he was waiting for a suitable script.

It seems that not many people have the same faith in Ben Stiller's judgement as me. Only four members of the Birmingham film group decided to see the film with me. Actually there were five, but one of them didn't turn up because he fell asleep on the sofa. Life is hard.

I don't think that "Zoolander 2" is quite up to the quality of the original, but it's still a very good film. When a sequel is made to a comedy film the temptation is to repeat the same jokes. See the second Austin Powers film for an example of this.This was only partially the case with "Zoolander 2". A few of the original jokes were repeated, enough to make me feel comfortable and accept it as a sequel, but most of the humour was new. Overall, the film went in a new direction. The first film was all about exposing the shallowness of the fashion industry. In the second film this subject is only mentioned in passing. Instead of this we have an epic battle between good and evil.

That's all I'll say about the plot. My recommendation to my readers is that if you enjoyed "Zoolander" you'll probably like "Zoolander 2" as well, even though it's a different film. If you didn't enjoy "Zoolander" this probably isn't a film for you, but give it a try anyway, you might like it. If you've never watched "Zoolander" I suggest that you watch it first. There are enough references to the first film to make "Zoolander 2" slightly confusing if you don't know the original.

Zoolander (4 Stars)

"I'm pretty sure there's more to life than being really, really good looking".

The fashion industry is so shallow that it's difficult not to make fun of it. Sacha Baron Cohen did it in "Bruno" (2009). But before then Ben Stiller did it just as effectively in "Zoolander" (2001).

Ben Stiller stars as Derek Zoolander, a man who has been named the Male Model of the Year four years in a row. When he fails to win the award the next year, the prize going to his rival Hansel (Owen Wilson), his world falls apart. He's vulnerable to attacks from people who want to exploit him. The fashion company executive Jacob Moogberg (Will Ferrell), better known as Mugatu, hires him to assassinate the Prime Minister of Malaysia, who wants to abolish child labour in his country. Without child labour Mugatu's clothes can't be manufactured as cheaply and his profits will fall.

The film features cameos from a multitude of celebrities appearing as themselves. One of them is David Bowie. Rest in peace.

Another is Donald Trump, who is now campaigning to become the American president. He has gained a lot of support by populist rhetoric, aided by the current fear of terrorism by Islamic extremists. He over-generalises when he judges people, as all populists do. He also polarises opinions sharply. People love him or they hate him, there's no middle ground. Recently one of my oldest friends unfriended me on Facebook because I called Donald Trump stupid. Maybe I was wrong to use that word, I'm sure he's a highly educated man, but he has many viewpoints which I consider to be stupid. For instance, he says that in order to protect America from terror attacks no Moslems should be allowed to enter the country. Judging everyone who carries the label "Moslem" is an act of bigotry. Not all Moslems are terrorists, and more importantly, not all Moslems are Moslems. What I mean by that is that Islam is part of the racial identity of many people, for instance Pakistanis. I have many Pakistani friends who don't read the Koran or visit a mosque. They have no interest in religion at all, but they carry on calling themselves Moslems because it's what they think is expected of them. This is in contrast to British people in England who have no problem in saying they aren't Christians. Donald Trump doesn't understand this.

I first watched "Zoolander" with my friend Tamara, and I'll always associate the film with her. We were lying entwined on her sofa watching the film, but like a good film fan I didn't let myself get too distracted. We've known each other for nine years. I've always liked her, but she's temperamental and frequently turns against me, later forgetting what she was angry about. I'd do anything for her if she needed me. We still talk occasionally, but we're not as close as we used to be. I don't know if she reads my blog. In case she does, she should leave a comment on this post to tell me what she thinks of me.

Daddy's Home (3½ Stars)

"Most of what Dads do is take shit. It's what we do".

"Daddy's home" is a film that deals with a very serious subject in a comical manner. Will Ferrell plays Brad Whitaker, a hard-working radio executive, an all-round good guy. He marries Sara, a divorcee with two children. Sara was abandoned by her first husband, Dusty, because he wasn't willing to take responsibility. Dusty was a bad boy who liked to party hard. To sum things up, Sara's first husband was Mr. Excitement, and her second husband is Mr. Responsibility.

Sara is happy with Brad. There may have been a time in her life when she preferred Dusty, but now that she has children her priorities have shifted. She doesn't want a man who parties every day, she wants a man who will drive her children to and from school and other events.

Now Dusty comes back to visit his children. He does love them, even though it's too much of a hassle driving them around. Dusty's first impression of Brad is that he isn't good enough for his children and ex-wife. He pretends to be friendly, but he's secretly scheming to drive Brad away and win Sara back. As for the children, they love Dusty most as their real father.

That's the crux of the matter. It's something that every man who marries a woman with children has to deal with. In almost all cases children love their real father more than their step-father. It's natural. The step-father can never take first place in their hearts however much he tries. The best he can do is come a close second.

As already mentioned, this is a comedy. We see both men trying to be something they aren't. Dusty tries to take responsibility, but he isn't mature enough to succeed. Brad tries to impress his children by being as wild as Dusty, and he just makes a fool of himself in the process. Apart from that, Brad's attempts at being wild alienate his wife, because she doesn't want a man like that.

As a comedy, the film is packed with jokes that veer between slapstick and farce. I found myself laughing out loud at some of the humour, but mostly I was left cold. Maybe the subject matter is something that's difficult to laugh at? I'm not sure. Overall I was more impressed by Mark Wahlberg's serious acting than Will Ferrell's comedy performance.

The Lego Movie (4 Stars)

This is a confusing film. What I mean is that the film's target audience is confusing. On the surface it seems to be made for young children, but the film's underlying messages are so deep that they can only be understood by adults, or at least by intelligent teenagers 14 and upwards.

Emmet is a construction worker who lives his life according to the instructions given to him. He sleeps when he's told to, he wakes up at the correct time every day, he works according to the rules, he watches the recommended television shows, he even listens to the same music as everyone else. The turning point in his life comes when he falls down a hole in a construction site and finds a previously unknown Lego block, the piece of resistance, which attaches itself to his back and can't be removed. This identifies Emmet as the prophesied master builder who will save the world.

The message early in the film is obvious, to adults at least. Emmet lives in a society where everyone is assigned a role and does what is expected from him. I almost called this a Fascist society, but it's also the principle by which Communist countries are run. It's any country with a strong ideology which refuses to let anyone think differently, and it even applies to our western countries which use subtle persuasion to tell us what to think. Emmet doesn't question what he's told. He accepts the world that is presented to him, and he accepts its ideologies unquestioningly. He only progresses from being generic to becoming special when he opens his mind and begins to think for himself, without the instructions.

As the film continues we see much wider visions. It isn't just a matter of the ideologies of the world about him, he has to question the reality of the world that is presented to him. The world around him seems to be real, but he's living inside the Matrix. Without being aware of what's happening in the real world he can't battle the enemy forces in his own universe. The Lego Movie borrows so heavily from "The Matrix" that it's possible to figure out who represents who in the two films.

However, the film goes one step further, exploring a path uncharted in "The Matrix", apart from hints in "The Matrix: Revolutions". We see destiny. We see the hand of God guiding the universe, even controlling the success or failure of Emmet in his attempt to change the universe. Emmet saves the world because God wants him to. But the question that's left open in the Lego Movie is whether God only decides to save the universe because Emmet is so determined to do it. Is there a symbiosis between God and His creatures? Can God change his mind, influenced by the creatures that He has created?

But it doesn't end there. What is the nature and the morality of God Himself? Let's assume for a moment that the Bible's Old Testament is true in its portrayal of God. We see that God created the universe, then He created man in His own image, and then He gave laws telling man how to conduct himself. God defined what was right and wrong in the commandments He gave to Moses. Effectively, He defined good and evil. Good is what God wants, evil is what God doesn't want. If we are true believers we follow God's instructions because they're awesome. We do what we're told and we go to Heaven. If we don't obey we go to Hell. It's as simple as that.

Today it's become common for people to reject the biblical concepts of good and evil because they don't believe the stories are true. But let's carry on assuming that the stories really are true. Should those who believe that God exists automatically accept everything that God says? To take just one example, the Bible says that homosexuality is wrong, that it is evil. It's the responsibility of believers to stand up to God and tell Him that He made a mistake. He should think it over and put things right in a Third Testament.

As the Lego Movie shows us, the first person to challenge God's authority is a male, representing the Devil. The film ends on a cliffhanger as a female enters who challenges both God and the Devil.

Austin Powers: The Spy who shagged me (4¾ Stars)

"The spy who shagged me" was the second and most successful film in the Austin Powers trilogy. Despite its box office success it was judged less favourably by the critics than the first film. The main criticism is that it was less original and repeated the same jokes. I'm sorry, dear critics, you just don't get it. Sequels to comedy films always repeat the same jokes. That's what the public expects.

Nevertheless, there are some changes from the first film. They're actually logical progressions. In the first film the actor/comedian Mike Myers played two characters, Austin Powers and Dr. Evil. In this film he plays a third character, the Scotsman Fat Bastard. In this film a new enemy is introduced, the miniature clone of Dr. Evil, Mini-Me. The relationship between Dr. Evil and his son Scott is further explored.

That's not to say that the film doesn't have faults. Mustafa and Number Two both died in the first film, but they magically re-appear in this film without explanation. It's not a problem that Austin's wife Vanessa turns out to be a fembot, but it's dissatisfying that Basil Exposition says that he knew all along she wasn't human. Strange. I find the character Fat Bastard so disgusting that he almost puts me off the film. Despite all this, the faults are only enough to merit the deduction of a quarter star. It's still a very good film.

Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery (5 Stars)

No other film shows the difference in the sense of humour between countries. In America this film was enormously successful and was one of the biggest box office hits of 1997. In England the film was also a success, but there were mixed opinions, many people saying they found the humour silly. The reception in Germany was the most extreme. Whereas the Americans were laughing throughout the film, the Germans sat in icy silence. Whenever there was something they perceived to be a joke they cautiously looked left and right to see if anyone else was laughing. In Germany the public and the critics held a consensus was that that the film was dreadful.

The differences can be explained by the type of humour. "Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery" is primarily a spoof of the early James Bond films, in particular the first five films in which Sean Connery played the leading role. Dr. Evil is an almost exact copy of Blofield, Random Task represents Odd Job, Alotta Fagina represents Pussy Galore, etc. These parodies automatically include making fun of England in the 1960's, which went through a cultural revolution very different to the hippy movement of America in the 1960's. That is probably what piqued the English audiences. The English are usually able to laugh at themselves, but they're sensitive when they think Americans are making fun of them. That wasn't the intention of the film, far from it, but that's what it looked like.

In the case of Germany it's slightly different. First of all, the Germans have a great love for the English, a love they don't feel for America. I don't know where this comes from, but I experienced it personally as an Englishman in Germany, and it's existed for more than a hundred years. In "Mein Kampf" Adolf Hitler described England as Germany's natural ally, and he was shocked when England declared war on Germany in 1939. For the Germans the Second World War was an unnatural affair of brothers fighting, they thought England and Germany should have been allies waging war against Russia and France. Secondly, the Germans hold the James Bond films in high reverence. The Germans considered it disrespectful to make fun of James Bond.

Shortly before the film appeared in the cinemas there was a 60-minute special shown on MTV called "The Electric Psychedelic Pussycat Swingers Club", the name of Austin Powers' favourite London nightclub in the 1960's. This programme presented Austin Powers in the style of a "Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In" episode. Clips from the programme are even shown during the film, including the dancing girls and Ming Tea's performance of "BBC" during the final credits. I taped the programme at the time, but I no longer have it. It was brilliant, at least as good as the first Austin Powers film, maybe even better. I've tried in vain to get a copy of it ever since. It ought to be a DVD extra, but it isn't. I'd certainly buy it if it were ever released as a standalone disc. Does anyone know if I can find it online? I've looked, believe me, I've hunted for it.

I've been told that the scenes in which Christian Slater appears as a rather stupid looking security guard have been omitted from the American version of the film. Can anyone in America please confirm this for me?

The Lego Movie (4 Stars)

I don't usually bother with animated films. Not modern CGI films, anyway. I enjoy the old Walt Disney cartoon films from the 1940's up to the 1990's. I know that "Toy Story" (1995) was the first computer generated animated film from Walt Disney, but I think they made a few more films in the traditional way after that. I don't know what the last hand-drawn film was that they made. Maybe someone can tell me.

Anyway... after seeing the highly amusing trailer for "The Lego Movie" I decided to give it a chance. I sat down not knowing what to expect, but I highly enjoyed it. In the first half of the film, maybe more than half, the action was breath-taking. It hardly slowed down for a minute. It was chock-a-block with parodies of other recent films, made comical by the way they were mixed. I noticed references to "The Matrix", "Terminator", "Batman", "Star Wars" and "Lord of the Rings". There were probably others that I missed.

The film begins with the ruler of the Legoverse, Lord Business, discovering a super weapon called the Kragle. The wizard Vitruvius prophecies that one day a special person will find the only device able to counter this weapon, the Piece of Resistance. A few years later a simple construction worker falls into a hole in the ground and discovers this piece. It connects itself to his back and becomes part of him. Together with an assortment of heroes, including Batman, Green Lantern, Wonder Woman and Gandalf, he has to battle against the forces of Lord Business.

The film is so unique. It's a breath of fresh air in today's film world. Within the first week of its theatre release it has made $120 million profit, and we can expect this figure to rise higher. Bring on the sequel!

Casa De Mi Padre (4 Stars)

Sometimes I forget one of my favourite films for years. Other times I have to keep returning to a film. Despite a few negative points I love this film. Will Ferrell's stony face and rigid delivering of his lines carries the film. Please pronounce his name correctly, the emphasis is on the "-ell". At first I thought he was just parodying spaghetti westerns, but his demeanour has more in common with John Wayne.

Click here to view the trailer.