Reviews

13 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1/10
What you need to know (but probably don't want to hear)
6 September 2022
Say the phrase GMO to many in the English speaking world and they instantly say, "Monsanto" and yet we've been producing mutagenic GMOs since the early 20th century (Monsanto was formed then) but it didn't start transgenic GMO until the mid 1980s. When a film contains interviews from Dr. Vandana Shiva (unless she's being shredded by an actual scientist, which never happens because she won't consent to that sort of interview) you know that's it's either 100% propaganda or a product of sloppy research.

"Industrialised agriculture is a war against the Earth because it's a war against all species. Because you're bring more chemicals into food production and all they're doing is Killing" says Shiva.

She's preaching a false narrative that hasn't been the case for over 10,000 years. The only reason you're able to read this is because of industrialised farming. From the clothes on your back to the fact you have electricity and heat in your home. Everything, and I mean everything, in our world can only be achieved with farming: it's literally the bedrock of humanity; the single most important development mankind has ever created; more even than fire. More chemicals she says? Water, sugar and salt are chemicals - so this sort of non-specific terminology is a deliberate red-herring. Lead and arsenic are chemical elements and not just toxic heavy metals, but they are also allowed in organic agriculture.

Rosario Dawson is a wonderful human being, I'm sure, but in Executive Producing and narrating this propaganda she's doing herself and everyone a disservice with this stunning ignorance. The problem is that if we follow this advice (and many are) we're accelerating toward our own demise. We don't have time to run this experiment, it's already been producing results for centuries, and we know from those results that it doesn't work well enough; but Dawson keeps pushing this false narrative. It's like the (well-meaning people) in the 1980s who protested nuclear power are now the parents and grandparents to people who are protesting GMO and "big Ag.".

Nuclear has its problems, I'd be a fool not to admit that, but the fact we didn't invest heavily in when we had the chance, we're in an extant fight for our energy future. Renewables are often ugly, not that efficient and don't work 100% of the time. Coal, oil, gas and nuclear do - but only one of those doesn't push billions of tonnes of CO2 and other crud into the atmosphere - tens of thousands (albeit in poorer nations) every year and causing the Earth to warm up. So no, global warming isn't a hoax and the well-meaning of yesteryear are indirectly responsible for it.

We're deeply divided between what people want to believe, that everything organic is naturally healthy, and what's actually true that science is an evolving process but without it we are in trouble. If words like mutagenic and transgenic go over your educational level, then you're precisely the sort of person that this documentary is aimed at. If you don't know the difference, which is crucial by the way; and just two examples of how GMO is performed, you'll easily fall into the quicksand that is "organic".

Organic farmers make many claims but the reality is that most cannot be verified by scientists - because if they were, farmers the world over would be using them. In fact, this already happens, not from organic farmers, but from actual scientists and engineers who test their ideas until they deliver or break. Rinse and repeat. When Sri Lanka went 100% organic in 2021, its entire food crop failed leaving the population at risk of starvation and the country left begging from the IMF.

Dr. Shiva holds a doctorate, but it's not a science doctorate. The distinction here is clouded with phraseology behind "philosophy" but there are detailed explanations if you look with an open mind. People who call out Dr. Shiva aren't always scientists, though many are academics and the bottom line is that she isn't qualified to opine in the fields that she does. In fact, she's so ignorant (or at least hopes her audiences will be) that she suggested that so-called "terminator" GMOs, which are sterile by design, could somehow jump to other species through cross pollination. You can't fertilise a living organism with sterile gametes: the clue is in the word.

The film also features another infamous talking head, Jeffery "Jeffery's fine" Smith. This seems like an odd phrase, but Smith doesn't have a doctorate, or any formal education in biology or a related field that I've been able to divine. So when Smith was asked during a fairly heated GMO debate, "Do I call you Dr. Smith?" He smiled and replied, "Jeffery is fine."

Of course it's fine but why didn't Smith admit right there and then (like any honest person would do) that he didn't hold a PhD? Be honest, if someone put you under oath and phrased a similar question, you'd happily admit that you weren't a doctor. We call this lying by omission but it's still lying and it calls into question Smith's entire narrative which I won't bore you with here.

The claim that GMOs are somehow dangerous is writ many different ways, but in each case it's invariably fallacy of the argument from emotion. "GMOs will kill us", "GMO will give you cancer", "GMO are drenched in glyphosate (Roundup) which gives you cancer" and so on.

But as I've already stated, we've been eating GMOs all of our lives - or at least have been exposed to them. In fact, transgenic GMO happens in nature all of the time, a bacteria called "agrobacterium" is nature's microscopic genetic surgeon, we just harnessed it and used it by design rather than the haphazard "take gene X from plant A and put into plant B" we've said, take the gene that produces Bt Toxin (a naturally occurring insecticide) and put it into maize for example.

But it's toxic right? Not unless you're an insect with an alkaline digestive system. Bt toxins are used widely in organic agriculture and no one bats an eyelid. Even if it were toxic to humans, the amount to have any effect on us would be immense compared to the target organisms (typically invasive, crop destroying moths).

Mutagenesis, the first human form of direct gene manipulation, occurred back in the 1900s and we have many results of that today, with the canonical example being the ruby-red grapefruit. At the time, no one knew what the mutagenic effect had changed in the plant's genome, only that the flesh changed from a yellow to a deep, appealing red that customer's wanted on their plates and were willing to pay for.

The cancer claim is another red herring. Most farmers use pesticides, those that do not are very limited to what they can grow and the production levels are poor. Put simply, this system does not scale with the technology we have today although it does show promise. Cancer is an umbrella term for a huge number of related diseases (over 200) but the mechanisms and causes are different for each one. Roundup also called glyphosate due to the active ingredient has taken a pounding in the American civil courts after the French-based IARC (part of the WHO that operates independently) declared it to be probably carcinogenic. But the IARC does not assess risk and even if it did, there's no risk from the almost immeasurable amount we're exposed to.

Ms. Dawson is rich and thanks to her looks has enjoyed a fairly charmed life. She can afford to pay the extra 20-30% demanded by organic produce. But this is supply and demand, as demand goes up, supply will go down (organic isn't that efficient) and so the price will rise.

This prices people out of the nutritious food they need and the result is horrifying. In the West we're already facing a crisis of obesity that's exploded since the 1980s and obesity causes many cancers. But malnutrition is far worse than cancer. Children born to malnourished parents suffer a horrific laundry list of life-long conditions and can only pass those on to their own offspring, continuing that downward spiral.

I've seen this in the children born to the poor farmers in the tobacco-growing regions of Argentina to the impoverished families in drought-ridden Ethiopia. Other documentaries have blamed GMO, while ignoring the albeit more complex issues of poverty, consanguineous marriage and limited diets. The factors that are really at play here are nowhere near as simple as this travesty of a documentary, written and directed by actor, Rob Herring tries to portray.

From now on I'll be calling him "Red" because this is full of them but they fly so thick and so fast, most viewers (and this is clear from the reviews] won't even spot them as they whistle past their heads. Don't be one of them, ask a qualified scientist - many lurk on Twitter and aren't funded by Big Ag. But they all have one thing in common, they will tell you the scientific facts, not cosy untruths that you might want to hear.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Brazen (2022)
3/10
BTECH thriller
22 January 2022
Weak, predictable writing on what amounts to a very low (or wasted) budget that is more akin to soap opera than full-length feature fare.

Truly excruciating even for fan of the cast.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Capsule (2015)
1/10
10/10 for effort, 0/10 for results.
9 December 2016
Warning: Spoilers
It's hard to write a review of capsule explaining why it's bad and yet not giving too much away that might be regarded as a spoiler. To this end, I'm going suggest that there might be a spoiler here and leave others to judge if there isn't (best be safe and all that - I hate spoilers even for films that are several years old.) This is, ostensibly, a low-budget film but budget must never be an excuse. We're quick to judge big-budget films on storytelling but somehow we let low-budget off the hook. A BBC reviewer described my first short film (made for practically nothing) had interesting effects but lacked a story. 40 years on those words stay with me because they are the truth.

Capsule has a terrible case of a great idea that's been stretched beyond its own meagre abilities.

POSSIBLE SPOILERS FOLLOW: From the get-go, we're asked to believe that the Brits. had managed to get a guy into space before the Americans or Russians. This is patently ludicrous because it's never really explained how (even in the 1950s) a a tiny country could build and launch a rocket of sufficient power to get a guy into orbit without a single soul noticing.

It's tough to suspend that sort of disbelief because, while it's central to the wafer-thin plot, it's too close to home. We allow for aliens, spaceships and time warp in science fiction because we have never seen them. We have seen NASA put men on the moon and we've seen the size of rockets used to put even small payloads into orbit.

If we allow the filmmakers that one - and the awful systems design - there is worse.

Kingsley's character hasn't got so much of the Right Stuff: he's got all the wrong stuff. The man is a weed: a bag of nerves who I wouldn't trust to change a fuse or fly a remote controlled plane, let alone go solo into space.

Now if that sounds harsh, it's important to realise that we're being asked to imagine a seasoned pilot who is not only skilled but brave. This character is neither and no attempt to explain it away with the effects of hypoxia is going to convince me otherwise.

The "twist" isn't so much a twist as an explanation of why this entire convoluted plot unfolded as it did. In effect, what you have here is a fairly run-of-the-mill short story that's been stretched out to a full-length film. I think Hollywood Verge, in describing it as "a gripping tour de force" must have been watching a different movie!

The responsibility for this dire affair rests entirely on the shoulders of the writer/director and especially the producers It would be unfair to criticise the actors or crew. For a low-budget film, it's skillfully crafted and shot. That it doesn't look amateurish is probably what saved it from being savaged by other critics. Little wonder this went direct to DVD... and mine is direct to eBay.
10 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Mum (2016–2019)
9/10
Warm, funny, hilarious... and cringeworthy!
18 June 2016
I watched "Mum" on a whim and I was hooked from the opening credits (the "Cup" song is both catchy and apt for this series - you'll see why),

I'm familiar with both lead actors Peter Mullan and Lesley Manville and they bring heavyweight class ability to the rolls of divorcée and widow respectively. Now add in some younger talent, great writing, direction and production values and you know you're in the for a treat. While "Mum" is often dry and wryly observed, it's equally laugh-out-loud funny.

TL;DR version (there are lots of long reviews) if you like beautifully-observed, family dynamic comedy of the type only the Brits are good at, this is a a delight. With a colourful cast of larger-than-life oddballs, Manville and Mullan lead us through a year in the life of the world's most tolerant widow.

Just be thankful you're not there and please, do make your tea in a pot!
21 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Downfall (2004)
10/10
Uncompromising, unflinching, unflattering, unforgettable!
14 October 2014
Downfall tells the story of Hitler's last days through the eyes of a real person - his secretary; a young girl plucked from obscurity. This film sends such a powerful message to the future, it's difficult to describe.

It's said that those who forget the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them and yet, we are faced with new fascists like Hitler almost everyday.

As others have noted, this is based on historical fact, and while being German production, it views history through the eyes of a historian - and not the usual, rose-tinted criticism that could be levelled at many other historical re-tellings.

Without doubt, this is one of the most powerful anti-war films that has ever been made; or perhaps, even could be made. Exposing the brutality of war; and the unlikely compassion of a man the world has rightly come to despise.

It's a visual treat with Hitler's role never excused or forgiven; a portrait of a man crazed with psychopathic tendencies and yet, apparently capable of warm emotion: which makes him all the more real and all the more terrifying. It's left an uncomfortable impression on me; I feel simultaneously sick and awed at the same time.

Politicians and political pundits should be made to watch this over and over until it sinks in. War is not the answer!

10/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Break out the popcorn, Momma!
10 August 2013
While the title may fail to clue you up on what this riotous comedy from the writer/director of Zombieland, the IMDb score might.

Unlike many movies of the difficult horror-comedy/black comedy genre, Tucker and Dale really delivers with an intelligent script and a genuine heart; lovingly sending up the classic typecasting of Hillbilly/Rednecks we came to fear in Deliverance and Southern Comfort.

It's hard to imagine that Eli Craig has not been influenced to some extent by the classic Ealing comedies, although I can't know that for sure, because his characters are infused with qualities that both surprise and delight.

Lavine and Tudyk clearly revel in portraying the title characters, playing for laughs with a deal of poverty-stricken pathos as they are seemingly, despite their best efforts, dragged deeper into a convoluted, but never overly contrived plot, filled with blood, gore, mayhem and belly laughs.

This is jet-black comedy at perhaps its very best.

Break out the Pepsi and Popcorn, Momma - yeee-haa!
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Genre Bending (in a bad way)
10 August 2013
If you know what deus ex machina means in storytelling, you'll probably know that it's a bad thing used by lazy writers to get themselves out of ridiculous plot holes.

So, now you know what it means, you'll begin to understand why I've titled this review the way I have. It's play on the horror genre that probably seemed like a really good idea before someone put proverbial pen to paper.

From a curious start with, for me a least, a WTF the moment in Act I that I never really recovered from, the movie winds its way badly between horror, suspense and waves absurdities at us that even Monty Python's team would have felt too silly.

But this is no comedy; no black comedy either.

It's a film that really doesn't seem to know what it is or why.

And that deus ex? Well, watch it for yourself and if you can't spot them (there are several) you might actually enjoy this.

As for me... I'll stick to something more plausible, like, say, Airplane.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Great idea, badly executed.
21 July 2013
No pun intended in the title there but seriously, Dominic Purcell really attend acting school?

I'm no fan of Uwe Boll either so I found myself questioning why I was even watching this - but I did sit through it all; marvelling at the waste of respectable talent (John Heard, Keith David, even Michael Pare) while Dominic Purcell mumbles his way through banal dialogue and predictable - even poorly paced plot with predictable outcomes.

A better director (Boll's screenplay has the right idea) and a believable star could have made this a half-decent film with a powerful message.

As it is, Purcell just menaces his way from shot to shot and delivers a cringe worthy performance that is so bad it makes Steven Segal look like a classically trained Shakespearean player. He really is that bad.
14 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Awful. Just awful
5 February 2012
There is little qualify this disaster as a movie other than the high production values presumably driven by the success of Gavin & Stacey. Unfortunately, this dire attempt at comedy sees James Corden playing a childish fatty with a penchant for expletives and chummed up with poor Mathew Horne as the straight guy.

Presumably this was supposed to be a homage to some Morecambe and Wise farce with lashings of low-budget Hammer Horror thrown in for good measure.

What we find is a cast struggling with below par dialogue and a script that must have seemed funny down the pub over a gallon or two of high-strength lager.

Horne and McGann (what was Paul McGann thinking?) try their best with inadequate plotting and dire fight choreography and despite some passable cinematography, James Corden manages to drag this almost passable farce into a grave where it should have remained buried, playing "Smiffy" all over again.

I watched all six episodes of Horne and Corden expecting it to get better - it didn't; and this is even worse. Die hard fans will, doubtless overlook the film's weakness and have a good chuckle. Good luck to them.

Everyone else (and producers in particular would do well to take note) that success in one genre does not necessarily travel to others. Gavin and Stacey was romantic, charming and occasionally laugh-out-loud funny.

No wonder our film industry is in such a state.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Contagion (2011)
7/10
Open your mind - this might change it.
25 December 2011
There are several reasons I don't like Damon, Paltrow, Law and Winslet. They're rich, good looking and powerful (hey, I didn't say they were good reasons) but this film is not one of them.

In this rare cinematic event, Steven Soderbergh, directs this ensemble of wonderful talent in a gripping and quite disturbingly realistic apocalyptic vision penned with believable precision by Scott Z. Burns (Bourne Ultimatum, The Informant! Both also featuring Damon; The Informant directed by Soderbergh).

Without giving anything away, the movie alone is pretty of the genre. Soderbergh does away with expensive SFX and brings the characters into a sharp focus against a gritty and frightening possibility placing these usually beautiful people into "ordinary Joe" dressed down look with everyday failures.

Yet it never feels contrived. Damon in particular shuffles through each scene as a dishevelled dad with unwashed hair and unkempt facial hair; never quite knowing what the hell is going on. Law and Winslett provide brilliant support as equally flawed, but entirely believable characters who are moved by rather than move the story, or worse, are just there for as eye candy.

While not a movie for the feint of heart, the hard science in Contagion exposes some interesting questions for us all. The archetypal Damon/Paltrow/Law and Winslet fans are likely to be disappointed (for the wrong reasons) but true movie lovers are in for a nightmarish treat - but the nightmares will come after the credits are a distant memory.
0 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The best was worth the wait
5 December 2011
There's a lot of "sniffiness" around the Harry Potter franchise - perhaps because of its history as a children's fantasy book; and I feel tiny pangs of guilt even now in recalling going to see "another fnarring kids film" way back when the first film hit our screens.

The plot was paper thin, sure, but what it lacked in intellectuality, Sorcerer's Stone (2001) more than delivered in pure, unadulterated fun; and it kept on doing so for the next five features! Fast forward 10 years and the magic is still fresh - bouyed by a closely knit team of professionals and great acting talent of all ages, without question, although I've enjoyed every film in the series, Deathly Hallows Pt 2 is by far and away the best.

If I had one request to make, it would be that a future Blu-Ray (DVD) release stitches the final two films seamlessly simply because they belong together and the the financial prerequisite of run-time isn't a problem.

Even if you're not a Potter fan - this film stands alone or in sequence head and shoulders above the typical Superhero drudgery being peddled by the studios; and I believe it will stand the test of time.

Thank you cast and crew for making me believe in cinema again.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Mamma Mia! (2008)
9/10
Beautifully Inspired Madness
3 October 2008
Much as I have to hang my head in shame, I can't help but admire this wonderful bit of cheerful madness.

My receptionist went four times and insisted it was marvellous but (especially not being an ABBA fan) the idea of hearing Piers Brosnan singing filled me with dread - the bloke was James Bond in a previous life. Plus, I don't like musicals. No wait, I detest them.

Whatever would possess a writer to contrive to story around a bunch of jaunty little ditties that really never had any real connection bemuses me, but musicals are usually written with the music.

My wife dragged me kicking and screaming (while I was still whooping from Dark Knight's brilliance) but I have to admit I was both uplifted and entertained.

Not really a bad word to say - definitely a Christmas DVD buy.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
What are people thinking?
20 February 2008
Quite what the studio were thinking when they funded this utter tosh is beyond me. The whole movie has about as much charm as the "replacements" Black and co. are filming on their VHS camcorder. Commanding a half-decent cast of Black, Def, Farrow and Glover, you could be forgiven for thinking this would be an original comedy. Well, it's original all right and probably destined to be one of those oddball cult movies that everyone has heard of but few have actually sat through.

The audience of a few hundred people around me barely tittered (with the exception of one guy who seemed able to laugh at his popcorn) as most of the cast looked confused, disoriented or just embarrassed to be there. The rest of us, my children included sat in dismay and just wished for the credit roll. Come back Matrix III all is forgiven.

This is the first time and IMDb user rating has let me down. I hope it's the last.
10 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed