The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford: Why America treats thieves and murderers as heroes?

It's been ages since I saw this film. Time is the best test on a film's quality. If after some months a film has still a intense impression on you then it had something to offer. On the other hand, if it has faded away completely it wasn't worth seeing in the first place.
The only thing that I remember from "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford” is a golden atmosphere and good acting from the leading actors.
In Greece it got rather enthusiastic reviews and some were even saying that it managed to renew the genre of western. But was it really a western? Instead of gun shooting and action scenes the film relied mostly on scenes that explained the tensions and the relationships between the characters. Its’ pace was slow. The shots were majestic in an effort to resemble Fords masterpieces. The acting was intense. Still the film didn't manage to over pass the level of mediocre-acceptable.
The story is already known to most western funs or American history lovers. The strong elusive thief Jesse James is betrayed and killed by one of his own Robert Ford. It has been presented in film over and over again. It had its appeal when we were children. In this film a story that is a teenage (at the most) action story is supposedly presented in an adult way. And that is the problem. We are supposed to be taken in by the tragedy and the drama of the life and death of Jesse James and see him as a hero. Is that possible for a healthy adult? How can one seriously identify with a thief and a murderer? Of course most of us can identify with James Bond or with Ocean's group of thieves. In these examples, though, we are never encouraged to take the films seriously. We are there just for the fun. We indulge in a fantasy world where everything is sparkling and ingenious and we can even be above the rules of society. Sometimes we have (for example the Bond films) the limp moral justification that we are fighting against evil. Other times we are thieving just because we are clever enough (thieving is not as bad as murder in any case). In the Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford though the story is supposed to be taken seriously. The realistic scenes, the great acting, everything in the film leads us into taking a serious adult stand towards the story. Then the film presents murderers as heroes and tries to introduce us to a code of honour that is above society and human life. How can this work? Unfortunately American history and culture has learned to glorify a code of honour between men that justifies murder (if there is a proper moral cause or if it is against some Other or if the murder is clever enough to remain uncaught and become famous). Why though should we accept this unchallenged.
The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is a well executed technically film. It is an attractive package with a problematic soul.

Cinema Gossip: Atonement dress

If one has read my review on the Atonement will probably remember how much I loved the green dress that Keira Knightley wore at the "notorious" love scene of the film. It seems that iwas not the only one that felt that way. Recently I discovered that the dress was auctioned and sold to the highest bidder (Lauren) for 46.000 $. Now if someone wants this dress but is not willing to pay quite as much one can always got to a store that copies the dress and sells it. Some how, though, it doesn't look quite the same does it? I guess you get what your money is worth since it costs only 238$. The strange thing is that the film will probably be completely forgotten in a few years time. On the other hand it seems that the dress will be remembered since it had such an

impact. I can visualize it standing in fashion or costume museum and no one will recall who the hell was the young and beautiful Keira Knightley.

Juno; humour on serious stuff, my cup of tea

It's been months since I saw Juno (and since i wrote on my blog too but lets skip that part). Recently, however, someone bought me its soundtrack. The music reminded me vividly the film.
Juno is a film about a problem that seems to rattle America: teenage pregnancy. The film however instead of portraying a dramatic situation it takes the subject lightly and presents it with a great sense of humor. Juno is a teenage girl that decides to try sex with a friend. She is not in love she doesn't even have a boy friend she is just curious about sex. When she discovers that she is pregnant she tries to get an abortion. She is too afraid of the doctors to do it and she decides to give berth and the give the child for adoption to another couple. This is truly a modern film. There is not a single trace of conservatism in this film. Parents instead of freaking out and lecturing prove supporting and understanding. The friends do the same. Juno manages to live all the period of her pregnancy in a protective shell formed by the couple that wants to adopt the child, by her parents and her friends. If voices of prejudice, conservatism and religious hysteria appear in few instances are treated by the film with such contempt that are easily stumped out.
The direction of the film is subtle and efficient. There are no ingenious shots and intricate camera movement. On the other hand colors, cuts and camera views serve perfectly the story with it's lightness and optimism. The film leans heavily on the young actress Elen Page. She does an excellent job and supports the clever script of Diablo Cody. In X-men where she appeared she was at the least mediocre in her role. Here, though, the film offers her the opportunity to prove that she can be a great actress.
The film chooses to look only on the bright side of the situation no mater the few setbacks it presents -just for the shake of suspense. Some can say that it is naive and over optimistic. The tragic effects of teenage pregnancy have been discussed in so many other films and even more soap operas. This film chooses to say to a teenager that: ok! you made a mistake and you are pregnant. This is not the end of the world nor the end of your life. You can still have a life a future and dreams. It chooses to teach not through fear and terror but through humor compassion and intelligence. And that is an achievement.

Michael Clayton : An honest film

Michael Clayton is definitely not a masterpiece, nor a film that will reside in your mind forever. Since it is over two or three months that i saw it myself I can testify that the images have faded away. Even more the details of the case are easily forgotten. Still Michael Clayton is a film that has good intentions. An interesting script, good acting, honest even if not singular directing. It is a small film that keeps you interested , leaves you satisfied and most important of all does not insult your intelligence.
The hero, George Clooney (now here is an actor and an aspiring director that has managed to gain my respect!) is a lawyer in a big firm called the "fixer". He never goes to court but does all the little dirty jobs that are needed for out of court settlements. His life is a mess. Single father with a brother that gabbles and owns money to the wrong people. He is called in a case where a friend lawyer has suddenly abandoned their client and started helping the adversaries. When his friend is murdered he become entangled in a story with big company interests and he also becomes a target. In the end he manages to entrap the leader of the conspiracy, to turn her over to the police revealing the truth.
Big international companies pray on the poor and the weak in order to gain profit. This is the meaning of the film. If you consider the film as an expose I would say that it not very interesting or shocking as it should be. Most people are already fairly suspicious about big companies. We already know how most of them function and how they buy their way out of trouble. The film though manages to bring something fresh into the topic. Michael Clayton is not a hero that decides one fine day to take up big interests and bid companies and find justice. He is a little man working within this corrupt system. What is interesting here is that this little man that could easily have been bought with a career opportunity rises up to the occasion only when he is cornered and his life is threatened. This is much more realistic and thus interesting than an idealistic hero that fears no consequences and rushes on only in order to get to the truth for the greater good. Still this little man which has no respect from others and he feels no pride for himself manages to pull up a scheme and get the truth and justice. Even if he only does it to protect himself he finds a dignity in the process because that he realizes that he can bed only so far, that there is a limit that he will not cross. Michael Clayton is a common man and function as a regular man would do. He acts heroically when he can do nothing else. This is what makes the film an honest effort and a film with its own even small value.

Comment1: Many films have been done on the same subject. Three examples Erin Brochovits, Syrianna, and my personal favorite Constant Gardener

Comment2: Once more I am in a position where I have to apologize for neglecting my blog . I will try to make amends. Thanks for your patience

Oscars : Everything is about glamour

Two years now that I am writting this blog I ' ve never mentioned Oscars. It seems so pointless to me. I dont usually agree with who wins the award of best film or script or best actor. People who read this blog have probably understood that i have my own criteria and that I am not so pro for Hollywood. Don't take me wrong. Hollywood can do a film technically perfect, but that doesnt necessarily mean that it will also be interesting. Moreover I think that the Academy is all about Hollywood. Rarely a minor film reaches the nominations and the awards. To make things worse even through the Hollywood film that will get there the Academy usually awards the more conservative ones. Under these circumstances Oscars have become a mere curiosity for me. They dont even function as the starting point of a discussion any more. All my friends that are into films agree with me on this point and if everybody agrees where is the fun to the argument? As a result I am not bothered even to find out the results. Usually my frind John who is more into gossiping informs me a few days later on. When I get a sunday newspaper and there is womans' magazine along with it I get to admire the gowns of the celebrities. In the end that is what the Oscar celebration is for me a glamorous fashion show.
For those that still want to know the results of the Oscar awards here is the link in the imdb:http://www.imdb.com/features/rto/2008/oscars
the official site is : http://www.oscar.com/ And for those who wish to see the fashion side of it the official site of oscars has covered that aspect too. http://oscar.com/redcarpet/ Enjoy!

The Atonement: Hollywood epic as usually is glamorous and meaningless

Hollywood can produce technically perfect pictures. Great acting, lustrous directing and photography and even a good script make a film that easily can be watched but can it really move you or even touch you. These films have no peculiarity, are perfectly balanced and therefore are heartless.

Atonement is one of these films. It has everything going for it. An interesting script from a book that is already famous. A tragic love story, a misunderstanding that complicates everything, a war to make things even more dramatic and still the script doesn’t manage to get you really involved. Directing is well done. It even has an interesting idea. In the beginning it shows the story form the point of view of both sisters. In this way it is very clear from the beginning the tragic confusion that spears the narrative of the film. On the other hand, it might have been a more compelling film if everything was not thus so well explained. If for example we watched all the film through the point vies of the little sister. I this way there would be a small mystery on why the elder sister is so much in favor of the man. Is she in love with a rapist, how can that be? As the little girl grows up and gets a better understanding of the situation the spectator would come to understand the truth with her. In this case though Keira Knightley would have a far smaller part and those who went to see the film just for her would be heavily disappointed.

All actors have done an excellent work and that is probably the most important plus of the film. Vanessa Redgrave as the elder Briony (younger sister) proves that even few minutes are enough for an actor to prove himself. Saoirse Ronan is also very good, even her competence has been overstated due to her youth. Still there too many scenes during the film that the actors have a mesmerized look on their faces. First the young Briony, then Cecilia confronting the tragic events and then again when Briony realizes what she had done. You don’t notice while watching the film but when remembering it you come up with too many scenes that different actors have the exactly same blank expression on their faces. Considering this I can only reach the conclusion that it must have been some guide line given form the director. To say nothing more it was a directing that ruined some parts of an overall successful acting.

In conclusion Atonement doesn’t manage to take the extra step that would carry it from being another without spirit Hollywood film to the grand epic (like the English Patient) that had ambitions to be.

Comment:

I am in love with the green gown that Keira Knightley wears in the most crucial scene of the film. It was dress that advertised the film all by itself. On the other hand, if you end up commenting the dress in a film, the film is probably a lost cause.

My Blueberry Nights: the aesthetics of city blues and jazz

A film by Kar Wai Wong is always stylish. Is it also meaningful though?
After the gorgeous In Mood for love and 2046 he is coming back with My Blueberry nights. This time he distances himself from the aesthetics of his origin and manages to create a completely different atmosphere .My Blueberry nights is actually a stylistic tribute to jazz and blues. The story is about a girl who finds out that her boyfriend is cheating her. Since she can’t imagine her life without him she leaves New York to travel around America working as a waitress in various places in order to forget him. Before starting her trip she meets a guy that owns a coffee shop. She talks to him confessing in him and they become friend. The guy falls in love with her and waits her to return. In her trip she sends him postcards describing her adventures and the people she meets. In her trip she meets people who in a way are the embodiment of various feelings. Arnie is obsessed with a woman that doesn’t love him back. Sue is becoming the personage of guilt and remorse. Leslie is a trickster that doesn’t believe in sincerity. The protagonist manages to define herself by contrast to others. She chooses who she wants to be by comparing herself to the people she meets. In this way she chooses not to base her existence on someone that doesn’t love her back and not to loose faith in people. In this way she manages to resolve the issues that drove her to this adventure. She mends her heart. A year later she comes back ready to start a new relationship with the owner of the coffee shop that awaited her. The story is menial an excuse to develop the blues atmosphere. The dinner shop wit the painted glass, the often shots of the lighten train. The night aspects of the city and the noise of a busy city are emblems of a jazz aesthetic. , The characters of the film like the alcoholic policeman, the Vegas gamblers also contribute to the blues-jazz atmosphere.
The film is well shot and it has a distinctive atmosphere and images. This great advantage makes the film interesting and saves it from its somewhat banal story. It is a small cute film that you can easily watch. Some shots are so beautiful that manage to mark your memories. It lacks though all the grandeur of a good script. Not exactly without a point but also not exactly with a meaning either.

Comment
It is not a lucky coincidence that Kar Wai Wong chose Norah Jones as his leading lady. A jazz –blues singer and composer for a Jazz blues film

American Gangster: A gangster film that even if it bears the signs of the directing mastership of Ridley has few things to offer

A black man manages to import the purest cocaine from Vietnam and sell it in America. His enterprising spirit and the teaching of his old boss (the previous black mafia chief) help his ascend to the higher levels of the social ladder and to gain the status of the most important gangster of America. His organization combines elements of both Italian mafia and crime in the black ghetto. From one hand he bases his works on his family as Italians do, and he claims territories as smaller criminals do. In the end he is discovered and arrested by an incorruptible policeman. He decides to cooperate with the police and help bring to justice not only his fellow criminals but also the corrupted policemen.
Ridley Scot manages to build a film that is fairly interesting even if it is not arresting or special. The spectator can easily watch that film even id he doesn’t really get involved in the story. The script is well enough written, coherent and with good character building but with no twists and turns and no big surprises. It remains rather flat throughout the whole duration of the film rendering rather slow. Both leading actors, Denzel Washington and Russell Crowe do a really good acting job and this is one of the serious plus of the movie
In Ridley’s Scot mob film the super gangster the chief –surprise, surprise-is black. Would any one believe that racism could effect the preconceptions about a gangster? It actually does. Somehow no one would expect the biggest gangster to be black. In American film black are small time crooks they are not into organized crime. Italians as (supposedly) more sophisticated are specialized in this. The Denzel Washington character even if is a major drug dealer and a ruthless killer somehow is presented in a light almost positive. He follows the American ideal by being hard-working, inventive, loyal to family and friends, humble and in some peculiar way even just. After all these good elements the spectators are pleased to find out that the cop that arrested him and made a deal with his ended up defending his in court and getting him out of prison sooner that the court had decided in the first place. How can a gangster a killer can end up as a persona that the spectator can relate to and sympathize with is a thing beyond my comprehension.
All and all American gangster proves that even a great director and two actors don’t always make a great movie. The delicate balance of a masterpiece or even of a great movie is hard to achieve.

The Orphanage:Juan Antonio Bayona does a horror film that mixes beautifully the tricks of the horror tradition and the twists of modern films.

As usual I read the reviews about this film before going to the cinema and as sometimes happens this was a mistake. The critics were very enthusiastic about his film and praise was freely given. As a result as soon as the film finished I felt a disappointment. I had expected too much. Many times before I have claimed that a good film stays with you getting stronger by day. In the case of The Orphanage I realized that my initial disappointment was false. The next two days after the film images kept creeping on me and surprising me. Then after a week it finally faded not into a haunting memory but into at least to a fond one.
What makes a good horror film? Most of all and above all its atmosphere. In a nightmare what scares people is the feeling in the air. When one is trying to explain what made him uncomfortable in his nightmare he finds it difficult to explain. He usually has to result to the phrase: “you had to be there”. Orphanage manages to create threatening pictures of simple incidents and built up the anxiety of the spectators. The first sequence of the film is not only very cleverly shot but is an ingenious motif that is repeated at one of the most terrifying and intense scenes of the film. Nothing is more innocent than a children’s play. Still Juan Antonio Bayona manages to transform it into a sinister experience. The children play a game that is known to all the nations of the world. Someone is counting and the others are moving. When he stops counting he turns to look. The others must stop and remain completely still. This goes on until one of the children approaches enough to touch the child that counts. The he runs and the counting child must catch all the other children in order to win. In the first scene of the film a small girl is counting on the bark of a tree. The other children are approaching but the director keeps then out of frame. In this way the spectator doesn’t see who is approaching until the very last moment and the anxiety keeps increasing. Later on the grown up heroine plays the game with the ghosts of the children. She counts and in the beginning she can’t see her playmates. As noises are heard the spectator knows that the ghosts are there. Counting over and over again she and along with her the spectator sees the dead children approaching. We are forced to keep our breath since we know that in the end the ghost will have come close enough to touch the heroine. This touch is something that the spectator completely intoned with the heroine both wishes and dreads. A child’s play takes a whole new meaning. In many scenes we see and hear the wheel squeaking and turning. This image of a child’s’ toy emphasizes the lack of children in the yard, their absence firstly and their supernatural presence later on.
The images are intense but they are not entirely new. They belong to the long tradition of the horror film. In the Nightmare of the Elm Street, for example a kids’ song about the boogie man of the dreams takes a terrifying meaning in world where Freddy Cruger stalks the dreams. In Fritz Lang’s M the balloon a toy again becomes the symbol in the begging of the kid’s presence and then of it’s disappearance and murder.
Other tricks up Juan Antonio Bayona’s sleeve are the chilling scenes. A door is banged on the fingers of the heroine making her finger nails break and bleed. Even if this is a minor wound most people reflexively find this incident disgusting. The deformed child with the covered head is another fear factor. Killers and paranoids the cinema has taught us that are freaks heavily deformed usually masked. The car accident and the sudden death of the strange woman are used to provoke a shock to the spectator.
The new thing in the recent horror films is that the power that traditionally is threatening proves to be not only innocent but even helpful and sympathetic. Dead people and ghosts are not the threat as seen in Sixth Sense or the Others. The gravest threat and the source of evil are people. Beyond death there seems to be no hatred and no wish for revenge only a different set of rules. Orphanage is following this new lead proving that a stupid incident and not the ghosts of the children leads to the devastating end.
When someone analyses the ways the director used to create the atmosphere he realizes that orphanage takes advantage of the usual ideas of the horror genre without really offering something new. Even its twist and turns are something fairly used in the latest horror films. On the other hand it has a clever script, great actors intelligent directing a terrifying atmosphere and arresting images. Asking for more than that might just be avarice. I might just as well admit it: Some times over education spoils all the good old fun.
Comment:
Favorite phrase and scene: Unos des tres, tocca las pares

The phenomenon of Cinema Series

With the opportunity of Golden Compass I want to discuss a new cinematic phenomenon: the series. The return Of Jedai was probably the first film that didn’t have an ending but prepared the spectators for the next episode. Nowadays, there are more and more series on the screen. The three films on middle earth (The Fellowship of the Ring, The two towers, The return of the King) seem to have created a new trench. Now we have the MatriX trilogy, Narnia, Harry Potter, Golden Compass, Xmen and so on. These film are a little bit different from the James Bond Series or the horror series of the 80’s (Nightmare on the Elm Street). They were conceived from the beginning as series. Sometimes the film does not have an ending. Spectators have to wait for the next film to have a satisfying end. On the other hand James Bond or horror series got a new episode only because they were successful in their first attempt. They were not preconceived as series. Moreover these films have an ending even if it is an open one that will allow some continuance. I wonder how the film companies decided to take the risk of creating a film with no ending. Didn’t they think that the spectators would be annoyed? I remember someone telling me that he chose not to see the trilogy of the ring until all films were finished and out so that he could see them all together. Since then though I have heard no other complaining about the no ending thing.
Series offer a sense of security. When you go to see a film you take a risk. I am not talking about the risk of not liking the film you chose to see. The more grievous risk is whether this film will make you comfortable or create an anxiety. Will you be able to take it in and handle it or will it unbalance you more than it should? In a series you have a feeling of security. More or less you know what you will see. You are already familiar with the heroes and the situation. There is no risk involved. It is like getting your old slippers on. They are comfortable and warm and cozy. An episode is already safe and familiar but has the advantage that will offer something new, a development on the same old story. You don’t have to take any risks. You don’t have to make the extra effort to get to know the character and recognize them. You don’t have to invest emotionally into them all over from the beginning.
On the other hand art (and cinema is art) should be dangerous so that there is some edge and clarity at the experience it offers. And there are so many different options, characters to get to know, new experiences to live through fantasy and film .Why should you stuck to the same over and over again? In film you are already on the side of the security since it’s the hero that suffers the consequences not you. You have the chance to live his experiences without any real suffering. Why would the extra safety net of the series be needed? Is our world so exhausting emotionally that we don’t manage to do even that: invest in different films with various characters and plots? Do we need the safety of security provided by series and even remakes? The big brains of Hollywood have found the new lure. We go to cinema in order to get re united with people we already know facing the problems that faced the previous year and the year before. Then we complain that our daily life is repetitive and dull. Isn’t that strange?

The Golden Compass: if you "need" to see it wait for the dvd

Philip Pulmans’ trilogy imitates the style of Tolkien and Lews. It is only logical that after transferring Middle Earth, Narnia and Hrry Potter’s world into the screen some Hollywood brain would discover the trilogy of the world. I wonder who will be genius enough to remember Jordan’s Wheel of Time (12 books hopefully) or Kind’s Sword of Truth (9 books). In this way spectators will be able to watch cinema series for the rest of their lives.
I am the first to admit that I have read all these series of epic fantasy and even more and that I will be the first to be tempted to see them on the screen even if I know before hand that the film won’t be good. This is the case of the Golden Compass. I knew that the film would be bellow mediocre but somehow I couldn’t resist seeing my fantasies and the images of the book alive. I am so angry with myself for being such an obedient victim of –a not so clever- marketing but here it is.
The film was all covered with a golden dust that supposedly managed to create the magical atmosphere of the book and raise the admiration of the spectator. Well not really! If everything is golden the result is not magical just kitsch. The scenario was coherent and slightly interesting only for those that had already read and liked if not loved the book. Great actors like Nicole Kidman do as always their best. They manage to render some credibility in the whole effort but little more.
In conclusion next time I feel an urge for junk food I will try to restrain myself and watch the film on tv. Such films find their way into dvd or tv channels quite soon.

Persepolis: An adult cartoon worth seeing

Persepolis narrates the story of a young Iranian girl. By telling her story it also narrates the recent history of the Iranian country. Iran from a liberal country has ended up as one of the more strict non-liberal muslin countries. And who is to blamed about this development? The west! Bravo!
Don’t get fooled by the fact that Persepolis is a cartoon. The film has nothing childish into it. The script rapidly explains the recent history of Iran so that the spectator can understand the weird twists and turns the life of a little girl takes. She begun her life in a liberal, influenced culturally by the west environment. She gets into her teens and the regime has grown strict, religious and totalitarian. The freedom of speech is withheld, her favorite uncle gets executed and she buys the new Airon Maiden album at the black market. As she can’t stop being rebellious, her parents sent her to Europe. She is an underage political refuge and she has to face all the misconceptions that the “superior” Europeans have for her country. Even more she is a teenager that tries to find her place in the world.
The nice thing about the script of Persepolis is that it proves that even in the most difficult situations human don’t stop being human. Wars and dictatorships do not make the typical problems of a teenage woman more menial. Beside the fact that she had relatives killed by the regime and she is a refugee, she still has to accept herself, fell in love, have her heart broken and face many more mishaps in the process of growing old. when she returns to Iran the government is more totalitarian than ever which forces her into a wrong marriage and then into a divorce. As a result she has to leave her country once more.
The bad thing about the script is that it is trying to convey too much in a too little time. As a result the spectator is not completely immersed into the film. He\she doesn’t identify with the girl that even if she has to face all the problems that most people face while becoming adults.
Two phrases have stuck into my mind from this film. The heroine says that even if two wars and a dictatorship in her country didn’t manage to kill her a simple banal thing like love almost did. This phrase manages summarize all the meaning of the film. In one of the last scenes of the film her parents tell her to leave Iran for a second time. Her mother tells her that she forbids her to ever come back. Iran is not for her. When she says that, she knows that she will never see her daughter again. She still has the courage to offer her daughter the most precious gift, freedom. Leaving your country and being a refugee, means leaving back the people you love. In Persepolis the protagonist has done exactly that.
Persepolis script is strong and intense because it has much to say. On the other hand if someone expects to find the exquisite perfection in the technique of design that characterizes the films of Disney or Dreamworks or Pixar will be severely disappointed. The design of Persepolis is coarse. In its simplicity however, manages to become enchanting. The plastic perfection and the illustrious pictures of the American cartoon would probably not fit this darker and much more adult cartoon and people should realize that before criticizing the lack of quality in design. All and all judging back on the films that I have seen since the beginning of the film season I would say that Persepolis is probably one of the most interesting films. Even if it has its weaknesses it remains an amenable effort and a worth seeing film.

An Apology

I feel the need to apologise to the (probably few) people that are reading this blog. Even if I still go to the cinema and watch films it takes me a really lot of time to write about them. So I have seen Persepolis, The Golden Compass, The orphanage, My bluberrry nights but I have not managed to write my opinion on any of these films. My only excuse is that I have started writting my phd. And I have given up my day job. As a result the only thing I do day after day is writting on my computer about films. Imagine now that I want to take a break from that! What should I do now? Lets write some more on my computer about films! Well you see my point! Still I kind of miss my blog and after of two years that i am writing it, it has become something like a "project". I am thinking that if i keep doing this in some years time i will have written all the reviews of the films that i will have seen. It will be quite something! Besides some read these reviews and amazingly enough think them usefull. Having paid such a compliment how can I ever let you down. Therefore I solemny swear that i will try to write my reviews more on time. Stay tuned and thanks for all your patience.
yours'
Helen