It was the reason why I watched "Deep Throat" in the first place. I learned a lot about the most profitable film ever yet I didn`t really learn why it was so popular in 1970s. I learned a lot about the stars of the film yet I didn`t learn what`s the difference between them and other porn stars. Oh, maybe on difference is clear - Linda Lovelace and her technique are unique for sure. The funniest part of the film is Linda`s change of attitude and becoming a feminist - c`mon who`d buy the whole "every time people watch this film they are watching me being raped"? Yeah, sure. I`m not so sure what was the message the makers of this documenatry were trying to pass over? Do they tell you that Gerard Damiano was a revolutionary, a rebel that "Deep Throat" was some sort of an artistic statement? I certainly can`t understand why that should be true. A rebellious porn director? Sure, and when a fellow told in the film that Damiano went for dirty pictures so he could get laid more easily he probably meant it metaphorically? I`m not sure whether I am or am not a morally conservative person but I`m absolutely sure that you usually don`t need group sex to make an artistic statement (unless we`re talking about the band "Circle Jerks" that did have an album titled "Group Sex"). So - how good is the documentary? It`s pretty entertaining but a bit pointless, so that makes the rating of 6.5 (now you know how I rate things).

It`s amazing to follow how far I`ve sunk. When I first started this factoid I wrote about Umberto Eco and "Abre los ojos". Nowadays I`m only capable of outing my thoughts on a porn movie. A hardcore porn movie to be more specific. How did this happen to me, you may ask. The thing is - I had to watch "Inside Deep Throat" which will be running in cinemas in Latvia quite soon. But who on earth would watch a documentary about a film he hasn`t seen? I certainly wouldn`t. So I decided to download and watch the godmother of all porn movies - "Deep Throat" with Linda Lovelace and Harry Reemes. Story: Linda can`t get an orgasm from sex and a wacky doctor tells her that her clitoris is bizarrely located deep in her throat. So she has to perform deep throat oral sex in order to get pleasure. I don`t suppose that I can really evaluate this film by any criterias - how would I know a good dirty picture from a good one?

It`s been a while since I last saw a war movie. And it`s been a while since I last wanted to see a war film. If I had it my way I`d never watch this film at all. Why not? I`m not particulary interested in the Soviet war in Afganisthan, nor do I have a need to see Russians fighting each other all the time. The film was so boring that I couldn`t really force myself to watch it. The film is trivial as an empty set - it starts with few young guys that have just joined the army sent to a boot camp, which is full of the beautiful experience Russians call "dedovshina" - you`re told that you are shit and that you are only good enough for dying. Then they go to war, and in the end only one of them survives after heroically performed a mission that noone really needs. It`s a bit similar to me - I watched this film and that was a pain in the ass, but nobody really needed me to overgo it.

I am slowly turning into a computer nerd. Some may think that I am one already but watching films about the youth of Bill Gates surely is a sick thing. Anyhow Bill Gates isn`t really the main star of this film. It`s Steve Jobs, the man that created "Apple" we want to see. And no wonder - in comparison to the pale dorky Gates Jobs looks like a Jesus-like creature, a very complex person with its good and bad sides but certainly a Man and not a mouse. The film didn`t have a big budget and it surely didn`t have a perfect script. The actors are quite good though and I won`t even complain about the fact that the computer freaks look too much like hippies to me. The funny thing that Bill Gates is played by an actor whom I`ve only seen in "Freddy got fingered". In case you don`t know Tom Green is also connected with Bill Gates - he once swam across a lake that the wealthiest man in the world owns. Update: I found out that Anthony Michael Hall also appears in "The Breakfast Club", one of the most famous films of 1985 where he plays a dorky kid. I don`t know why anyone who doesn`t care for computers would want to see this film but I learned a lot from it. For instance, that not "Windows" wasn stolen from the Macintosh but that the Mac itself was just a copy of what people at "Xerox" were doing at the same time. Yeah, and DOS also wasn`t created by good ol` Bill and his pals but bought for 50 grand off a weirdo.

I`m not exactly the most romantic person in the whole wide world. But that doesn`t necesserialy imply that I can`t enjoy a good film "for ladies only". "The Notebook" is a typical example of such a film. An old man reads a romantic story to a woman that has lost her memory. The whole thing happens in a nursing home. It`s no big wonder to learn that the characters in the story and the old pair are the same people. Yet once again you don`t really need to be surprised. It`s interesting to watch even if you know what`s going to happen. This film ain`t flawless for sure - and I doubt that any melodrama in the whole wide world is. And it`s not a film that I would want to watch over and over again (not that were are many films I would). You can`t say that too many famous actors are involved in this film but that`s no problem either. So - watch it if you want to shead a tear while watching a film. In case you don`t and in case your eyes are hurting from sitting at a computer all day long - don`t. I`m going home, that`s for sure. And there`s no use stopping me.

Wild thing - you make my heart sing! That`s the song you most probably know The Troggs for. And you`ve also heard a cover of their another song - "Love is all around" was done by "Wet Wet Wet". But none of these tracks can be found in a "Mixed Bag". No, Mr. Mister! But that doesn`t mean that you won`t find anything useful in this bag. If you happen to be a romantic person you`ll probably find something in "You can cry if you want to" which goes in the same vein as "Love is all around". "Say Darlin`" is dumb but fun. "Marbles and some gun" is a typical song for an oldies collection. So is "Little Girl". "Purple shades" is a bit better than the two songs preceeding it. "Heads or Tails" is the most likely candidate for being the best song on the record, although it is also primitive like hell. "Hip Hip Horray" is good, although dumb once again. Yet who would await anything else from some troggs?

This is crap! Johnny Knoxville and Sean William Scott are two idiots living in the South of the US of A and they know how to have a good time - selling illegal alcohol and being chased by mad fathers with guns after they`ve made out with the daughters is the perfect plan for the Duke brothers. They also have a cousine named Daisy who`s played by pop star Jessica Simpson and that should only do porn movies - big tits she has, acting talen`t she hasn`t. Man, was her acting lame! Willie Nelson and Burt Reynolds also take part in the film but they are only better than Jessica. As a matter of fact no one would be worse than her. Only Pamela Anderson probably. There`s nothing more to say than this is a bullshit film for rednecks. I am not a redneck, so I say - it`s worse than bad, it`s worse than worse than bad. Even Sean William Scott has participated in better films, and he ain`t no Johnny Depp for sure.

I`m far from the most enthusiastic fans of Latvian literature. I don`t follow who writes what, who was seen performing a hand job upon whom etc. Therefore this novel by Jochan Korin was a huge surprise for me. I expected this book to be either a luscious tale of women in the country or a stale story about WW2 where the great patriotic Latvian nazis fight the nitty commies with great passion and results. But it proved to be an excuisite crime story that is a riddle itself. It seemed to be a book done especially for me - a book of logic riddles, a book with a huge emphasis on playing cards and cracking codes. The most important thing about it is the fact that the riddles are interesting, memorable and fun. Quite unlike the ones in "The da Vinci Code". The central story goes around Matiss Ziemelis, a guy who has mostly only interest for crossword puzzles and playing cards but who`s also capable of some other things. He is asked by his friend from the university to help the local police to fight car stealers, but the whole book is much more about different stuff than just thievery. And I don`t mean masons by that - it`s a perfect book for a quest game, and a good game for sure - I have no doubt at all that something like "Monkey Island" could come out of this. And can you imagine anything better than "Monkey Island"? I can`t.

Less (that`s a name) is a young man/boy living in the GDR of 1980s. After a brief encounter with his cousine Radost he goes to Eastern Berlin to live with his uncle Wanja (who`s full name is Werner, so he ain`t no Russkie). Anyhow it`s a bit of a change for a young man from a tiny town somewhere in the country. He gets to meet an anarchist philosopher, a crappy and boring poet and a punk named Beck. He also has relationships with two girls - one of them a nice girl named Irene and another - a cool chick named Dani. The most remarkable thing about the book is the fact that choruses of famous punk rock songs of the era sometimes appear in the text. So are people that like "The Exploited" or some other half-obscure punk bands among the characters. I presume this book could be best described as hip. Yet not being a particulary hip person myself I found it to be kinda dumb and not particulary interesting. Therefore goodbye and thanks for all the fish!

Why do people still make new films after William Shakespeare`s plays? Maybe because they`re really good. Maybe not. I don`t know. I`m not a fan of good ol` William`s work. For instance I haven`t even read the play on the jew of Venice. This film has Al Pacino in the role of Sheilok, the jew. Who were the other actors I don`t remember. Some people claim this film to be antisemitic. I claim those people are out of their minds. Ok, they may go and crucify good ol` William Shakespeare, but it won`t change a lot. The film was done quite professionally, without having too much of political correctness and the wit of Shakespeare was still there. Probably I could have enjoyed it more were I a huge fan of classical literature. Yet since I`m not I can say that despite being a good costume film it wasn`t much more than that - a good cast + a good script don`t make a great movie. You need some magic in order to feel the touch of god in a piece of cinematography.