The Story of Edgar Sawtelle (David Wroblewski, 562 pages)

Don't believe the hype or you, too, may be sucked into the lie that has made TSOES an "international best seller". Despite Oprah's Book Club recommendation and Stephen King saying he'll reread it, the truth is that this is an over-long, pointless and somewhat turgid tales that leaves you feeling cold.

The story is about young Edgar, only child in a family of dog breeders who is born mute. Why mute? I can only guess it's because Wroblewski couldn't be arsed writing dialog or using the " symbol. Edgar's muteness adds only annoyance to the story, plus an unhealthy detgree of unbelievability. But no matter, Wroblewski decided the little bastard was to be mute and that's all there is to it, pointless as the decision was.

Edgar lives an idlyic life raising dogs until Uncle Claude shows up. His father, Gar, and Claude fight a lot, Gar mysteriously dies, Edgar believes Claude was responsible but his mother, Trudy, shacks up with him nonetheless. After accidentally killing the vet (and father of the local cop), Edgar goes bush for a couple of months before returning for a showdown with Claude. And you ask yourself: Why? Why does Claude kill Gar? ops, gave it away!) Why did he even buy the poison in Korea in the 50s in the prologue in the first place? Why did Edgar go bush for so long? And why does it take 500 pages to cover this?

None of these critical plot points is explained, which is surprising when so many pages are given over to excrutiuating detail and plain drivel. The first 120 pages, for example, are taken up with family history and setting an idylic scene in which NOTHING HAPPENS.

In the end, the climatic showdown between boy and uncle turns out to be formulaic and the attempted heart-string puller of Edgar finally talking falls flat. And yet surprisingly this book was not too hard to read. Something made me keep turning the pages and I believe it was the belief that some of the questions raised would be answered.

They weren't. I wasted several hours of my life. Don't make the same mistake. 2/5

Rockandrolla - Zero Money Trains

If any doubt remained about the film making ability of Guy Ritchie, then Rockandrolla (Rockanrolla?) dispels it forever: Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrells was either stolen or a total fluke and Guy Ritchie has no talent whatsoever.

Once again, here is a film about London gansters who get caught up in an intricate situation with lots of murder, violence, rhyming slang and characters drawn worse than a Scoobee Doo villain. (And named worse, too: One Two; Tank and others so bad I forget, but probably along the lines of Fingers, Septic, Bacon, and Pink Eye Johnny. Speaking of pink eye, see Knocked Up: great film!!)

The plot... well, I'm not sure there is one. Something about a stolen painting, with a subploit of ripping off Russian mafia, with another subplot of gay best friend, with another subplot of errant step son and another subplot of love interest. As usual, Ritchie tried to tie these together in such a way as to be "clever" but makes more of a mess with it than he did with Snatch, and so ties it together in such a way as to be "stupid", "unlikely", "ridiculous", "frankly annoying" and just plain "dumb".

In the end, Tom Wilkinson's villain gets his just desserts (earned for overacting worse than an Italian footballer); Thandy Newton's double crossing femme fatale has something bad happen to her (I was on a plane so that bit was cut); and the "heroes"; bad actors one and all... you know, I don't even remember what happened to them. They probably got shot or got away or something. Don't really care.

This film is APPALLING - do not watch it. It isn't even funny drunk. Guy Ritchie is the Joe Dolce of cinema.

Zero Money Trains.