Independence Day-Come on Guys Talk to a Scientist!

Those of you who have read other of my reviews realize I am rather focused on the budget of a film. The budget tells you much more than many initially realize. For example, it illuminates how much the studio believed in the project at hand. By this I mean did they use every dollar wisely, did they hire people that made the most of the money? If the film is a big budget extravaganza did the CG artists, prop makers, art directors and so forth, go that extra mile?

Often, when results seem to exceed the budget at hand it is partly due to the fact that the army of talented people that work under a director respected that director and went that extra mile. Any “boss” can force his people to rise to a particular standard to appease him but people usually only go beyond expectations or demands when they respect the person in charge and have been treated with respect. Often, all of this information can be gleaned from the money that went into a project and the results on the screen. This ratio speaks volumes about all involved.

Yes, with all that said, Independence Day is campy summer fun, but one must keep this in mind, the budget was $70-$80 million dollars and yet the film feels much larger than the dollar amount that went into it. Director Roland Emmerich of Stargate fame, must of had the respect of those working with him on Independence Day. There are quite a few folks on this project that deserve special nods, Karl Walter Lindenlaub, who served as director of photography on the project and art director William Teegarden both made outstanding contributions as did visual effects supervisor Volker Engel.

The story is a summer movie at its best. Aliens show up in big ships and kick the stuffing out of earth. Our weapons are useless due to the force fields around the alien crafts. We also learn that we’ve known that “they” were out there for quite a while and this evidence was being kept at Area 51 which plays a vital role in the film. On July 4, mankind strikes back, thus the name, and a bit of a spoiler, but not too much.

Bill Pulman as President Whitmore does a great job with the role, as does Will Smith who plays Steven Hiller a Marine officer and pilot who plays a pivotal role. Other performances will probably get on some people’s nerves in particular Judd Hirsch and Jeff Goldblum. Both of their respective characters are just too much together and it added too much campiness at times. But overall, the acting is good within the confines of a movie that is smart enough not to take itself too seriously.

Logic errors and science errors abound and are well documented. Which does bring up one of my “pet peeves” as I am constantly annoyed by how often massive logic errors slip pass the writers of large Hollywood scripts. Part of the way to solve this problem is to consult with scientists regarding the logical and scientific feasability of a given technology or situation. The increase in budget would be very minimal and this simple step would prevent much embarrassment and criticism.

Yes, it is called show “business” and a film should be treated as such, as a business, meaning you take care, patience and due diligence when producing a product that will be consumed by the public. As professionals, it is vital that entertainment industry executives demand accuracies in what they portray on screen. Hiding being the “its Hollywood baby, its all about illusion,” is fine, but not at the expense of logic, doing so is simply pandering to the lowest common denominator and nullifies any attempts to claim that Hollywood is seeking to not only make money but promote a given social agenda. In other words, treating some films “seriously” and other films as fluff, especially when large budgets are involved is a little hypocritical and short sited, especially when one considers the tiny increase in budgets that adding a technical consultant would cost.

That said, I do not want to create a misunderstanding that the scientific and logic errors found in Independence Day are somehow exceptionally bad, as that is not the case, for this is an epidemic within the entertainment industry and a sad one. As more and more people are becoming scientifically aware and savvy the industry is placing its overall credibility at risk.

Independence Day, overall, delivers exactly what you expect, it is good escapism and fun for a couple of hours. The budget to product on the screen ratio is very high, which no doubt played a key role in the wildly successful numbers at the box office. I only wish that writers Dean Devlin and Roland Emmerich would have went the extra mile and consulted scientist before putting the last dot on the page.

Story C-
Acting B+
Visuals A (Some top notch visuals.)
Originality/Innovation C
Enjoyability Grade B+
Home Theater/HD Factor A
Overall Grade B

Scooby-Doo- Like a Scooby Snack Made out of Glass…

Once more studio executives show not only there contempt, for you the person that pays for their hookers and coke, but disdain for you as well with the absolute crapfest that is Scooby-Doo. Just don’t watch this movie, its crap and all involved should have said NO to the project. What’s it about? It doesn’t matter does it? Scooby-Doo is one of those unfortunate films that thinks it is some sort of brilliant social commentary disguised as mass consumable pulp. “We’re going to change people’s way of thinking man and they won’t even know it man, its f-ing brilliant-man.” The writing team of Craig Titley and James Gunn just don’t hit the mark. Given, writing a Scooby-Doo movie that is good sounds like no small feat. I am sure there was some pretty tough restrictions placed upon what the writers could do, or at least I hope for their sake there was some sort of studio interference, because this script sucks.

Then, there is the issue of the casting. Now in all fairness this is a tough live-action film to cast, as IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN MADE. Looking beyond that, casting Freddie Prinze Jr was a mistake, Sarah Michelle Gellar as Daphne, sort of mistake, Matthew Lillard as Shaggy, well that was kind of frighteningly good. Then there are two mysteries. One is Mark McGrath. Okay, Mark McGrath shouldn’t be in anything, period. The second mystery is Rowan Atkinson. How did Rowan Atkinson get roped into this project? Rowan is a talented guy, did he read the script? Have you already burned through all that Bean money?

Do yourself a favor, don’t see this movie. It pains me to tell you this film had a budget of over $80-$90 million dollars. It pains me further to tell you that they used the positive memories many have of Scobby-Doo from their childhoods to scam $200 million plus hard earned dollars out of the pockets of movie fans. Does Scooby look good? Why are you asking that? It doesn’t matter if Scooby was the best visual effect magic ever, seriously.

Story F
Acting D
Visuals C
Originality/Innovation F
Enjoyability Grade F
Home Theater/HD Factor C
Overall Grade F (Like a Scooby snack made out of glass, this film hurts.)

Smilla’s Sense of Snow-Its Not A “Movie-cchino”

Smilla’s Sense of Snow is one of those films whose unfortunate name choice cost it dearly at the box-office and probably derailed the cult classic status it should have received. In short, this is a exceptional film, especially for those of you who are bored with mainstream Hollywood’s Crapomatic Factory. On every level this film is outstanding: it is a unusual script, the acting is excellent, the cinematography is often wonderful and if you go into the film not knowing where it is all headed you will be surprised by the twists and turns, especially at the end. Many may be thrown off by the fact that the movie masterfully switches gears on the audience as it nearly transforms itself from one film to another. Some may find this to be a little much to handle, but I think it is well worth the ride.

I will be vague on facts and simply encourage you to take a chance, especially if you have Netflix or Blockbuster Online. The story follows Smilla who is investigating a child’s death in Copenhagen but the film goes in some truly unexpected directions and Smilla is thrown into a shocking conspiracy. Smilla’s Sense of Snow, does a great job of setting up smart asses who know the ending to most movies they see and can usually out maneuver the talentless hacks thrown at them by Hollywood’s cookie cutter script factory.

It is truly a shame that more people haven’t seen this flick, for Gabriel Byrne and Julie Ormond each give amongst the very best performances of their respective careers. Overall, the acting in the film is outstanding and adds greatly to the impact of the films.

Based on the book by Danish author Peter Hoeg, Smilla’s Sense of Snow was a box-office disappointed and was unfortunately one of those rare films that might of actually lost a modest amount of cash. While hard and fast numbers are a little hard to discern, the film’s US box office was almost non-existent and its global take somewhere around $10-$20 million. The budget was approximately $30-$40 million, which for what is ultimately on the screen, was a little too high as, while the film is often beautiful and very well done, this relatively large budget is not reflected in the final product. I regret saying anything negative about the film, but there is little doubt that the budget could have been used more efficiently. In short, what you see on the screen, while excellent, could have been achieved with a lower budget. Thus, director Bille August’s only true failure came on the budget end.

Smilla’s Sense of Snow is simply a undiscovered gem. One of those films that may someday be discovered and appreciated greatly by a wide audience, or perhaps remade with, god only knows, what outcome. This is a must see for fans who truly appreciate movies, the pacing and acting are both top notch as is the script. Smilla is unconventional but the producers and studio deserve credit for putting a film out there that is not run of the mill, not conventional and not some sort of movie-ccino with a extra shot of high-fat butter flavoring.

Story A
Acting A
Visuals A
Originality/Innovation A
Enjoyability Grade A
Home Theater/HD Factor A (There are many rich scenes that will look awesome in high-definition and next-generation DVD.)
Overall Grade A

X-Men-The Ultra Bizarre Love Triangle

Most of the longtime fans of the X-Men comics were so excited to hear there was going to be an X-Men film that they wetted their pants, then turned and wetted the pants those nearby. These “drive-by wettings” as they officials started calling them, were indeed considered assault and numerous self proclaimed geeks, nerds and dorks actually served some jail time and long hours of community service. The film has earned well over $250 million worldwide while having a budget of only about $60-$70 million. This, of course, prompted executives at Twentieth Century Fox which released the film, to also begin wetting their pants and the pants of others. Of course, there will be sequels–many sequels.

The story itself centers around, not surprisingly, the X-Men, a group of do-gooder mutants out to stop injustice and preserve mutant kind. Most of the activities of the X-Men centers around the group’s founder Charles Xavier who is a powerful telepath. He has formed a school, named the Xavier Institute, no ego there, for wayward mutant teens that need to learn to control their powers. Interestingly none of this youngsters have any drug problems, no teen pregnancies or alcoholics, just the ability to shoot lightning and the such. Who has time to try “X” if you are already in the X-Men. You would think there would be at least one guy saying, “dude I am so screwed up on X right now and I am in the X-Men, that is so screwed up, watch what I do to this beer bottle,” Doesn’t happen, go figure.

Charles Xavier, played with his usual flare by Patrick Stewart, believes that the mutants can live in peace with mere mortals, however, his long time friend and likely former boyfriend Magneto, who yes has magnetic power over metal and so forth, believes this is highly unlikely and is not too found of non-mutants. Now, we can sort of give old Magneto, played brilliantly by Ian McKellen, a pass on this one due to some rather unpleasant events centering on a Nazi concentration camp. Add to this mix a federal government highly concerned about keeping the general public safe from mutants and you have the making of a ultra bizarre love (well I guess hate) triangle.

Director Bryan Singer does a marvelous job with the film. X-Men has a great look, captivating visual effects and action sequences, strong lead performances by Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellen and Jack Hughman as Wolverine and decent amount of overall character development, all of which combine elegantly to make X-Men a winner. X-Men is a lot of fun, especially if you just sit back and say, “hey this is a superhero flick, I know that guy Wolverine has metal blades that pop out of his forearms, but it’s a superhero flick.” That said there is a problem, the message is a good one–a great one, don’t be a racist jerk, but its so heavy handed at times that it becomes laughable. I will not ruin it, but lets just say keep your eye out for the Statue of Liberty. Yes, I am serious. Aren’t you sick of how often the Statue of Liberty is used as a prop in films? The French have to be so pissed that they don’t get a piece of that action. Truthfully, all studio executives should be leary of any, ANY writer that comes at them with a Statue of Liberty scene. But, ignore its flaws and you can find many. Ignore its logic errors, and just have a good time.

Story B
Acting B+
Visuals A-
Originality/Innovation B
Enjoyability Grade A-
Overall Grade A-

Stumble It!

A Bug’s Life-A Nice Change of Pace

Guess what? Today I am reviewing a film I actually like A Bug’s Life

Often, big-budget Hollywood animated films are full of messages that many parents, if they had the time or inclination, would probably not want their children watching. Usually these films are loaded with messages of conformity and blind obedience to authority. (In the case of Monsters Inc. for example, the concept and central theme is about how fun it is to work in a factory.)

A Bug’s Life is a very welcomed change of pace and Pixar is to be congratulated for producing a fine film that is mostly lacking the reoccurring message of conformity.

A Bug’s Life centers on bully grasshoppers pushing around a colony of ants who are forced to give up part of their crop in a sort of protection money set up. One brilliant inventor ant named Flik is given the task of raising an army to fight off the bully’s and he sets out to see if he can recruit the needed warriors. Unfortunately, he mistakes a group of circus bugs and thus sets up a series of comedic episodes. However, Flik’s inventive nature helps solve many of the tough situations that he and the ant colony face. This is just a great script, with great messages, especially when contrasted against some of the other big budget Hollywood offerings, which are fine if you don’t want your child to be a free-thinking, inventive individual. If that sort of “thing” doesn’t concern you then any of Hollywood’s major offerings, including, or perhaps excluding, A Bug’s Life will be fine.

I sincerely wish that all of director/producer John Lasseter’s films held as fine a core message as A Bug’s Life, but some of his other works, such as The Incredibles and Monsters Inc. have more troubling messages, depending on your perspective of course. Still Lasseter must be given great credit for the consistent body of work that he has produced.

The quality of the animation in A Bug’s Life is fantastic, especially by 1998 standards and is a must have for those with a high-def set-up and small children. Hopefully among the first titles to be released on HD-DVD will be A Bug’s Life, which will look absolutely stunning in high-definition.

Every aspect of A Bug’s Life is quality and entertaining. The voice-acting is, for the most part, passable. Dave Foley does a great job as Flik and Kevin Spacey is fantastic as the evil grasshopper imaginatively named Hopper. However, many of the other casting choices are a bit more painful, Phyllis Diller and David Hyde-Pierce, well, we could all do without that. Unfortunately, studio executives feel as though they must absolutely pack a big-budget animated Hollywood films with as many recognizable names as possible. In reality 2 or 3 well-known names will get the job done and confirm for the audience that they are indeed seeing a “real” movie. Would it really be too painful to throw a few talented no-names a break every now and then every now and then?

Small issues aside, A Bug’s Life has great animation with a unusually positive message for younger viewers and is definitely worth a rental as some of the bonus features are fun as well. When A Bug’s Life comes out on next-gen DVD this is a must buy as the film will certainly pop in high-definition.

Story A (A straight forward story that is entertaining and has great messages for kids, if only Pixar would be more consistent on this point we would all benefit.)
Acting B (A mixture of good voice acting and bad at times makes the acting in A Bug’s Life a bit inconsistent, but the acting is solid overall.)
Visuals A (A Bug’s Life is loaded down with some fine animation and will be a real treat for anyone who has a good home theater system.)
Originality/Innovation A (While not a perfect film, A Bug’s Life is refreshing and a safe pick for parents who are concerned about conformist messages in other big-budget Hollywood films.)
Enjoyability Grade A
Home Theater/HD Factor A (This is a must have as soon as it is available in high-def.)
Overall Grade A (A special nod should be given to the “budget to screen” aspect of A Bug’s Life as the film cost a mere $40-$45 million to produce and surpassed the $300 million dollar mark. One thing is for certain, Pixar knows how to make a chunk of cash.)

Stumble It!

movies I hate

In honor of the release of Oceans 13 recently, I thought I would post my reviews for the first two movies.

Needless to say, I think I will wait to catch the third installment on video

Ocean’s Twelve-Audiences Should Avoid This One Like Vampires Avoid Garlic

I thought Ocean’s Eleven was often problematic. Oh my. Ocean’s Twelve is one of the worst films I have ever seen. Very sadly it was still profitable, just less so than the first mediocre film. It takes the “Hollywood smug-I have an easy job for life” attitude to an entire other level. This is less of a movie and more of a bunch of friends using the cover of a movie to get together and party-that is the real heist–the one they all pulled on the studio and then on us the dummies that were conned via the star power into going to see this movie.

The acting is some of the worse I have ever seen. Its all a big joke to everyone involved, in fact, shockingly so. Every seen is very much like, “who gives a s**t?” This attitude carries over into the way the film is shot. Awkward shots abound. These weren’t artsy shots or we are trying something new shots. They were the “we don’t care shots,” and “we’ll just say that was the look we wanted, documentary stylish.” There is a plot, but it meanders in its own chaos to the point that you don’t care. Truly a dog of a script. Like the first film, Oceans Eleven, Oceans Twelve glorifies the thief, a reoccurring theme in Hollywood films…

I don’t need to write a long or detailed review to tell you to avoid this turkey. I almost walked out several times, review or not, that should tell you something. The lack of respect for the audience showed by this gangling of Hollywood deities was truly unexpected. One of the worse films of year and of recent memory. Please no mas. Keep this kind of crap up and we won’t just be driving foreign cars.

Story F
Acting F (Inside joke time kids.)
Visuals F
Originality/Innovation F
Enjoyability Grade F
Home Theater/HD Factor D+
Overall Grade F (Note, I rarely give scores this low. What garlic is to vampires this film should be to film fans.)

Stumble It!

Oceans 11- Another Remake Oh Joy!

Why does Hollywood do these remakes? Because people keep going to them! Just say no, man. Just say no. Ocean’s Eleven, which is loaded down with star power, is a remake of a 1960’s film. Honestly, at times I feel as though Hollywood is attempting to murder me. When will this sequel, television adaptation, video game translation madness end? As frequent readers know, I bitch a lot, a whole lot about the MBAs and lawyers that run the show in Hollywood. To these guys the film is no different than toothpaste or tampons, except that there are annoying creative types that make it harder for them to make money. Enough said, I have that off my chest, maybe I can actually review the film.

Ocean’s Eleven centers upon robbing a casino, which in and of itself is a pretty fun idea, have the money flow in reverse for once. The core concept is pretty brilliant–30 years ago when it was done the first freaking time! Nice, you’ve got to love that. The ridiculous level of star power includes one Brad Pitt, Julia Roberts, Matt Damon, George Clooney, the under rated and under appreciated Don Cheadle, Elliot Gould and two of the least talented “actors” you will ever see in a big budget movie, Scott Caan and Casey Affleck.

I really wish Clooney would stop being in movies, because he always plays one character George Clooney, it is annoying. However, Scott Caan son of James Caan and Casey Affleck, brother of the dreaded Ben Affleck make Clooney look like some sort of transcended being. They might be great guys seriously, but man cut your acting teeth in a lower profile film for Christ sakes. I have to blame director Stephen Soderbergh, he should not have let them anywhere near a camera once the slate had been lifted end of story. And if someone at the studio made this happen, for shame, would you do that with your money, sport? I didn’t think so. So many of these quarter-ass (not even half-ass) decisions are made because folks are playing with other people’s cash.

Overall, the film is entertaining and is one the best films by the wildly over-rated Soderbergh to date. Some of the casting decisions are, however, horrifically atrocious and he should have stepped in and literally said, “No way.” That is unless, they were his decisions.

Again, it is an entertaining film that took 5 chaps to get on paper, and audiences loved it, due in no small part, to all the celebrities and famous faces contained within. Its pretty sad when you actually think about it. The same film, the exact same film frame for frame with a group of unknown actors, does a small fraction of the box office take of Oceans Eleven.

We should all expect more originality out of Hollywood. Why not? Just because we haven’t expected it before? If we stop going to see sequels, if we stop buying their inferior product, they will overhaul it, worry more about the scripts that get made, who directs them and who stars in them.

Story C
Acting B
Visuals B-
Originality/Innovation D
Enjoyability Grade C-
Home Theater/HD Factor B
Overall Grade C+

Stumble It!

Poseidon-The Inbred Duckbill Platipus of 2006

I grew up in an area that had this mysterious smell that was truly horrific and no one could discern what it was, where it was coming from and who was doing it. Now, this wasn’t just a local event, in fact in blanketed a fairly large section, encompassing several neighborhoods. But this smell was driving me insane and I was far from being alone. With that said you now know how I feel about Poseidon. Dear God, seriously dear God! This movie is so stupid, so bad, so full of logic errors and silliness that it would actually have been periodically interesting as a Unintentional Hollywood Disaster film if it wasn’t for the fact the a ridiculous and whopping $150-$170 million dollars was plopped down on this duckbill platipus of a flick. Yeah, this thing is that bad. Director Wolfgang Petersen really pissed away a vast fortune of other people’s money on this aquatic turd. This film fails on so many levels and in so many ways it is hard to even check mark them all.

First and foremost, this silly remake should have never, ever, ever been greenlighted. Period. Not only is the concept not a interesting one–a big cruise ship flips over due a mean old ambushing killer wave, but we’ve seen it all before. This is one very unnecessary film. Horrible concept and an even worse script from Akiva Goldsman who was responsible for the freakin’ flaming poo storm that was Batman and Robin, but he also worked on A Beautiful Mind, so go figure, he is wildly inconsistent. This had, “give me my pay check” written all over it. Still this script should end his career, but of course, it won’t.

The second big disaster in this disaster film is Wolfgang Petersen. What the hell is it with Hollywood throwing more and more money at this guy? His films are just sub par, I submit the goofy redneck sea adventure “The Perfect Storm” as my evidence. Obviously, that screen gem pointed the way for a studio executive to say,“we’re doing this horrible ocean based movie, let’s get Wolfgang, he has experience pissing away money in the water.”

The third reason: Wolfgang. Don’t hire guys named Wolfgang, it automatically conjures up images of the Third Reich.

There must be something of value in the film. No. No, there is little of value. Well, a $150-$170 million dollar budget must have meant some really awesome visual effects right? No. The visual effects are uninteresting and have been seen a million times before. The sets are mostly uninspired and far from impressive. In fact, most of the “sets” are really just the cast running from semi-flooded tube or tunnel to another flooded tube or tunnel. Boring. Boring. Boring. Yet, it should be pointed out that the flawed concept and script did not call for any really interesting or cutting edge visual effects.

Reason number five that this film was an unintentional disaster: Josh Lucas. The entire film is really just a device to make “Lucas” into a Hollywood superstar and action hero. No matter how many times we the audience say no, they will just keep throwing him at us until it sticks. Attrition warfare Hollywood style. A) He can’t act, B) he is wildly unlikeable and C) he is too smug perhaps even by LA standards. Need I say more. This is just uncool, give me one Mr. Paulie Shore any day.

So should you see this film? Sure if you like stupid scripts that insult your intelligence and don’t even try, if you like truly boring and redundant clichefests, if you like having Josh Lucas forced down your throat, then sure give this a try, you’ll love it!

Story A+ (JUST KIDDING THIS IS A “F” all the way.)
Acting D (Kurt Russell seems pained by having to pass the “action hero torch” to Lucas but that might just be my imagination, I will admit it.)
Visuals F (Considering the size of the budget, Poseidon stands out as one of the greatest failures in the history of cinema in the visuals department. In fact, I can not think of a worse use of money in recent years. A couple of visually interesting minutes on the front of the film doesn’t make up for sinking $150-$170 million dollar budget.)
Originality/Innovation F
Enjoyability Grade F
Home Theater/HD Factor D
Overall Grade F (Consider this if you actually bypass this review and watch this debacle. $150-$170 million dollars exceeds the budget of any of the Star Wars films. Does it show on the screen? $150-$170 million is nearly enough to produce at least one and half Lord of the Rings films. What were they thinking?)

Stumble It!

Runaway Bride-Ground Breaking—Ground Breakingly Painful

Oh dear God, make it stop, make it stop. No man should be subjected to such torture.

Much like a frat boy waking up naked with several of his friends, Runaway Bride is something that should not be talked about-ever. But, millions of women and tortured boyfriends, husbands and ex-husbands blindly marched into the theaters to buy their tickets for yet another pointless Julia Roberts vehicle. Here is the brilliant story, she keeps leaving guys at the alter. Yep, that’s it, oh and Richard Gere is in it, because you know how much most guys love movies with Richard Gere in them, well not Richard Gere IN them, just movies that have Richard Gere as an actor in the movie.

I am going to try and restrain myself and focus on the facts of the situation. One fact, this movie had a budget that was somewhere between $60 and $70 million dollars. Okay, that is seriously ridiculous, as there is NOTHING to this film. Apparently, that was all salary, that is ridiculous, but Julia Roberts could make a movie about cleaning out her garage and it would probably sell a million tickets to women who thought it was making some statement about domestic servitude or something. Runaway Bride reunites Gere and Roberts again from their wonderful, magical, precious, Pretty Woman days, and, yes that also sold tickets. Don’t get me started on Pretty Woman. The point is that this is one absurdly expensive film for what you get. Absurdly.

If you are in to these kind of films, stop reading my reviews, seriously. Why torture yourself, I am just going to knock these fluffy moronic films around like some sort of rag doll. And women, if you really love or even like the guy you are with, don’t make him go to these things. That is just not cool and you are not cool if you do it. Its the equivalent of a guy forcing a woman to go hunting with him or a Trekker or Trekkie or whatever, forcing a woman to watch a Star Trek marathon or go to one of those whacked out Star Trek Conventions. Yes, yes it is the same, whether you want to hear it or not. Show some humanity ladies, you’re supposed to be better than us.

Story F (A complete failure of the human spirit and imagination.)
Acting C
Visuals A (Far too much teeth which only serves to make inexplicable paycheck all the more, glaringly painful.)
Originality/Innovation F (Original, yeah, like cancer.)
Enjoyability Grade F
Home Theater/HD Factor N/A (Who has a real home theater and then watches something like Runaway Bride? Who does that?)
Overall Grade D- (I am just a bad, bad man who has no heart, what can I say. Yet, I deserve some credit, not one gerbil joke. Okay, just one, the gerbil can consider itself lucky as long as it didn’t have to watch this film.)

Stumble It!