The Saint 11 July 2017, Not Rated. We need a little history on this one. The Saint was originally written in 1920. This is important because other writers used this as a base for their books, Batman (1930), James Bond (1951) are two of them. Simon Templar, The Saint, watches his parents murdered in their mansion. He is raised an orphan of course, which is where this version of the movie fails. In the books, everything is explained, but they took that out of the movie.

This is not the first book written with this theme, as we can go back in history and see many books of the same genre’ however this is the first book to get a worldwide audience in a short amount of time. Leslie Charles Bowyer-Yin known by his pen name Leslie Charteris wrote this, and I for one found it fascinating. This movie lets you see how writers mimic each other when they don’t have original ideas, and based on Vampire stories alone, I prove my point.

As for the movie, it was exciting, the acting was great, the photography was great. but there were problems with the movie. The script writers need to learn how things are done in real life, it lacked in that department. For instance, there are wounded or dead people around and when the police arrive they pay no attention to those people. Odd to say the least since those people had automatic weapons and if still alive could hurt a lot of people, not to mention they may have needed first aid.

Simon Templar is a modern-day filthy rich good guy that does some not so sweet things. He only kills when trying to survive, but his actions show that he does not need to kill at all, and two, he steals only from bad guys, and then only to pay for his cars and mansion, well and sometimes he donated to organizations to help others, but based on this movie, it was only when there was an agreement for it.

This movie and several of the books have been remade several times over the years with actors including Roger Moore (1962) and Val Kilmer (1997). This is without a doubt a modern Spy movie, without the spies.

I rate this movie 4 out of 5 stars taking off for the bad script writing.

The Kid Who Would Be King 25 January 2019, Rated PG. According to the Legend Artur (The original name of Arthur Pendragon), was fifteen when he pulled the sword from the stone, however, that is not logical. At the time twelve-year-old boys and girls would marry, fifteen-year-olds ran their own businesses, and most had served in the military and were quite capable of a bar/pub fight or killing for that matter. There was nothing glorious or new about any of it. When you realize that most did not live to the age of twenty-two, and those over thirty-five were considered ancients, it does make sense. Talk about old!

Joe Cornish wrote and directed this piece. Although I cannot tell you it was 100% logical (which by the way is my bane for any movie) I can tell you it was full of action and suspense. The CGI on this film was excellent. Although the story line was weak, it was fitting for a modern audience – you.

Granted this movie was made for children of our era, I think if viewed by the ancients, they would point out a zillion errors. Yet if nothing else the lead character Artur, played by Louis Serkis was very good, but the bad guy and girl at the beginning of the film were right on queue as bad people.

I rate this film a very strong 4 out of 5 stars, and keep in mind, it was written for modern audiences, and not as realistic as if it was made pre medieval. I have to point out that some movies ironically have Artur as a 30-45 year old when he pulls that sword out. So ridiculous it is not funny, since the original short story was made for children.