Cinemundane-II

Yesterday, Jupiter moved from the sign of his detriment Capricorn into Aquarius. Jupiter’s transit in Capricorn took more than a year, and as I wrote earlier, I expected his influence on cinema to be rather disappointing: this was time to make money rather than create masterpieces.

One can hardly recall a masterpiece among all those hancocks of 2008, and even Mamma Mia, with great ABBA songs and ugly voices of the actors, was an artificial production whose main aim was to earn (certainly very favourable for ABBA sales).

All the major blockbusters came out to be too dark, secondary and unimpressive. In the BBC annual film review, I noticed phrase “failed to make much of impression”, which is quite indicative.

I might have called a masterpiece the film released last week, “The Reader”, but even this one is an illustration of the Jupiter in Capricorn: Cardano says on this constellation in aphorism 2.45 of Lilly’s edition about “power under pretence of justice” with “unfortunate issue” – come and see the film to understand how true this is.

Now, as Jupiter is in Aquarius (and weak, being peregrine yet), look at the oncoming movies to find which of them are weird enough to indicate the planetary change…

Update of February 23. I was glad to see Kate Winslet finally - and so well deserved - collecting this year's Bafta, Golden Globes and, today, the Oscar. Well done to her Venus on Regulus, at last!

Cinemundane

On December 18, 2007, Jupiter moved from own house, warm sign Sagittarius into dry and cold sign of its detriment Capricorn. This caused not only noticeable change of weather (very unusual cold here, probably other manifestations in warmer/colder places), but also brought first confirmations of my hypothesis about influence of Jupiter on cinema: two films released on December 21, Alvin and St Trinian’s, although very different, are equally irritating and weak. Either one sees all those skulls and silly (funny, but silly) jokes of St Trinian’s, or that unattractive animation and weak performance in Alvin, it all is very disappointing and second rate.

What is ahead? Anticipating boring Alien vs Predator, dark Sweeney Todd, sick I am Legend, plain sequels of Narnia and Harry Potter… No fun. Capricorn likes dark style – and money. Do not be surprised to get this kind of films in the nearest future.

How long will this period last? As long as Jupiter will be moving through zodiacal sign of Capricorn, till January 2009. Yes, 2008 will be full of dark/annoying/disappointing films, but this does not mean the end of the art! Later Jupiter moves into Aquarius (promising rise of sci-fi again) and then, one year later, into Pisces (that will be good time for melodramas).

Here comes trouble, but only for one year. And, well, St Trinian’s has that weird and enjoyable English humour, very Capricornian…

Enchanted

Just as I expected [yes], both Beowulf and Golden Compass were great presents of strong Jupiter in Sagittarius, but the best present of the transit came as a surprise, and in the evening when Jupiter was in the last seconds of the sign

The present is the ready-classic “Enchanted”, which continues and renews the best traditions of the Disney art. It is a musical as they used to be in the time of young Julie Andrews (and she is here too, as Narrator).

Amy Adams, who is 33, plays an innocent and naïve fairytale princess developing into a real - but still pure – mundane girl. Without giving a spoiler, I just mention the fantastic scene where little girl teaches the princess about the adult life – that’s real fun!

Adams’ own life is a kind of fairytale: one of seven children of a military officer, she was born in US base in Italy, raised in Colorado, worked in a chain restaurant and then had a TV career – to be elevated in her 30s, whereas most of TV stars remain where they started. Why? Because this Leo girl has Sun and Mercury on Regulus

To understand why she is similar in appearance to Nicole Kidman, just look at their Venuses in Leo (and other coinciding natal points).

Elizabeth: The Golden Age

Just as I expected, this film is a precious gift of the current transit of the strong Jupiter in Sagittarius. The story is too well known to repeat it here, and I can only say - watch it and give your eyes and heart true cinematographic pleasure. Cate Blanchett is the right actress for this role, even after Bette Davis and Helen Mirren.

In the film, which is quite accurate historically, with those royal processions and views of the Cambridge King’s Chapel, the authors included the line of the court astrologer John Dee who advised the Queen throughout her reign. Unfortunately, the medieval master is shown too uncertain about his science, which is rather unconvincing, given his skills and fame. For instance, Elizabeth comes to him to consult whether she would win over enemies, and John Dee says something about his doubts, etc. Believe me, was he so weak in his art, he would not be granted his privileges in the XVI century. Even with my modest skills, I can assure you that Elizabeth, with her Saturn in 7th house having dignity in the ascendent, was bound to be a winner, whichever endeavour she pursued. Girolamo Cardano, in his aphorisms on nativities, says the following: “Infortunes peregrine in the seventh house, having dominions in the ascendent, denote the deaths of the native’s wives or enemies”. Here is the Elizabeth's chart to confirm the aphorism:

In fact, it was very silly of Spanish to attack the queen with such a chart. Very ignorant.

But the other side of this constellation is, indeed, solitude. It can be caused by death of a partner, by a very old partner, by a partner who is cold, adverse, stubborn, etc. One can speculate over her virginity or lovers, but this Saturn is never joyful in partnership. For instance, in her teens Elizabeth had a “tender friendship” (whatever it was) with Thomas Seymour, 1st Baron Seymour of Sudeley, who was 25 years older (and who was later executed) – the plain manifestation of the Saturn in 7th house.

This dual constellation deprives of happiness in any kind of relationship – and as a consequence develops strength close to invincibility. As she says in the film, “God gave me strength to bear my freedom”.

I know this myself. I too have Saturn in 7th.

Stardust

Today “Stardust” reminded me the recent post that I wrote about the influence of Jupiter on cinema. Now Jupiter is not retro, but swift and direct in own sign, and instead of good sequels we get very good original films. In fact, this strong Jupiter signifies an exceptional period in cinema, when the genre reaches a new stage, combining visual and humanistic achievements. This highly favourable period will continue till the middle of December, and look what we get ahead, before Jupiter movies into Capricorn: Elizabeth, The Golden Compass, and Beowulf. They are expansive, majestic, and sumptuous, just as the children of strong Jupiter should be. In Capricorn, where Jupiter is in its fall, this will turn into something different. Will see…

The world release of the film happened in Russia, on August 9, although the pre-screen took place in a Moscow multiplex on August 7, and the chart of this evening premier is indeed successful:

It has the benefic in the ascendent for own dignity, Moon in the 7th house for popularity, and royal fixed stars for luck. I should note that for me seeing world premiers happening in Russia means something bigger than promotion, because I remember well the times when foreign movies were rare and eagerly awaited.

Stardust is an unconventional fairytale. Its plot could be smoother and less impulsive, but it is fun to bump into all those unexpected giggles. However, the most important thing is not the plot, not the great cast (Pfeiffer!), and not the special effects (whatever costs that flying ship). The movie reminds us that we are human because we gaze at the stars. And stars gaze at us and see the love which makes them shine.

Harry Potter

As Harry Potter book series has been finished this week (and next film has been released), this is an opportunity to think again over the phenomenon of stardom. Just as in case with Edit Piaf, J.K.Rowling does have influence of royal fixed star in her chart: the Mercury, which signifies writing, is exalted and in conjunction with Regulus:

Would it be surprising to see the same star accented in the chart of Mr Radcliffe? To receive the royal role, an actor should be supported by royal stars – and his Venus is on Regulus too.

Is this luck or is this a destiny to be lucky?

Veronica Lake

To keep the promise given in the “Sequel” post, I ordered a black-and-white movie of one of my favourite French film directors, Rene Clair. “I married a witch”, with Veronica Lake and Frederic March, was shot in the US in 1942, and one should be surprised to see how fresh and cinematographically modern is this movie. Clair was an innovator in cinema techniques, and this can already be seen in his early mute movie “Entr’acte” (1924), which is surprisingly entertaining.

In “I married a witch”, the story is about a couple of medieval sorcerers, father and daughter, who were burnt and buried, sending curses to the offender for the following centuries: to him and his descendants to be ever unhappily married. Some centuries later, in modern times, the tree over their grave gets burnt by a lightning, at last releasing their spirits. The plot produces some special effects, which are fun to watch even 60 years after filming. The following love story could be predictable if it was not shot by Clair! Not to mention the final scene where the drunken father’s spirit is locked in a bottle of whisky till the end of his immortal life (because of too restless behaviour).

Veronica Lake is terrific in her beauty, remarkably warm voice, and comic talent - no wonder she was a diva in the 1940s (in LA Confidential, her cult image was reproduced by Kim Basinger).

I wanted to learn more about her life – and discovered a very sad story. Her career wasted away very fast, her family life was disastrous, her health was weak, and later she became a heavy drinker. She lost her Hollywood position, had only occasional roles, and worked as a bartender. When later her TV career started developing, she broke her ankle and had to quit. She died of hepatitis at 53.

I found that there existed a controversy about her birth year. Some sources claimed 1922 and others 1919. I cast both charts:

Firstly, having taken into account her perfectly feminine appearance, manners, and voice, the Venus in Libra in 1919 chart looks believable. Then, Rahu on Algol explains those life extremes. The headless creature on the headless star - this is a black hole. If the chart is cast with those two malefic, close to each other Mars and Saturn, in 7th house, they explain her four husbands, first (John Detlie) being older than her for 12 years, and second (Andre de Toth) – with Sun on Algol in sextile with detrimented Mars in Cancer. Even the nice Venus couldn’t overcome this. The other chart, of 1922, has Venus retro peregrine on Antares, which should provide, according to V.Robson, “insincere, energetic and able but selfish” character. Unfortunately, Veronica Lake was nothing like that.

Therefore, I suggest that the correct chart is that of 1919.

The film is a jewel, real classics and pure fun. Clair’s Moon in Libra certainly knew the secrets of the art…

Stardom

When filming a portrayal movie, matching actor and personage, in both character and appearance, is essential. People of cinema find such matches intuitively, sometimes after a long and painful cast. The result might be successful or not, depending on the luck of director, actor, and not the least the personage.

In “La Vie En Rose”, the personage is incredible Edith Piaf, with her rises and downfalls of extreme amplitude, which can well be explained astrologically.

As Dorothy Kovach correctly wrote in her post on AngelicusMerlin Yahoo group, this chart has indications of remarkable voice (ruler of 2nd Jupiter in 5th in own sign Pisces) and public elevation (ruler of ascendent Mars in Leo in midheaven, on major royal star Regulus). However, one should remember that the nature of fixed stars is so variable and unstable that extreme luck is followed by extreme losses. An immediate example is Napoleon, who had Sun in Leo in midheaven on Regulus, with very similar picture of life fluctuations, from royal position to exile. Fixed stars have power to elevate – and to destroy.

Marion Cotillard, who performed Edith Piaf, is not just a talented actress similar in appearance under proper make-up. She is too a Regulus-person, with her Venus on the same royal star.

Since Venus is far less violent than Mars, one can expect her career to be smoother than that of Piaf – luckier, and still as pronounced. In addition, she has Mercury on another royal star, Spica. To be chosen for the role immediately bringing stardom, the actress should possess both talent and luck, and this is where fixed stars are so important. Talent without luck is bound to disappear unnoticeable.

Director Olivier Dahan said, “From the very beginning I had her in mind. There were some other actresses who called me - some really good actresses - but I was really sure of Marion without even knowing her. I don't know why."

I can tell why – because of Regulus and Spica. The story of great singer should be told by similar people. What seems to be spontaneous coincidence, in fact is a part of grand plan, which sometimes can be observed with our modest knowledge.

Sequels

This summer, the overwhelming number of sequels makes producers rich and happy; not sure about the public.

Fantastic Four with Silver Surfer, who is just a twin of the liquid-metal guy in the Terminator; Pirates, who try to shake the world for the third time; ever-sticky Spiderman; ever-inventing Ocean-Number-Next – they are flying, jumping, burning, drawing, freezing, and make audience rather confused. Brand new movies look too familiar to be fun and too similar to make proper impression. I admit Pirates are more distinctive among them, but after a month, the thing I remember the most is the dwarf with grenade discharger. That was a good joke!

Four films were released within two month, under strong retrograde Jupiter (Pirates – 19 May, Disneyland; Spiderman – 16 April, Tokyo; Silver Surfer – 13 June, Middle East; Ocean – 24 May, Cannes). This is good period for Big Repetitions, because Jupiter signifies expansion, and retro-motion signifies return to the previous. Sequel Time!

The difference between four charts is in position of faster planets (Mars, Venus, Mercury, and luminaries). All have dignified Mars, which is good for action. The best Moon is in the chart of Pirates: it is in own house, waxing, and applying to Venus. In fact, Pirate’s chart is the strongest among four, taking into account such Moon and four planets in own houses (Jupiter, Mars, Moon and Mercury). Note also Mercury on Rigel, which explains unusual visual tricks. Spiderman has a lucky chart, but the Moon is too weak; the same about Silver Surfer. These two are good at earning money, but not at being outstanding. Ocean13 has Moon in Virgo in conjunction with Dragon Tail – conjunction of the luminary with own node is an affliction, leaving the Moon without power (and public without bright impression). This affliction is slightly compensated by the strong dispositor, Mercury in own house, which makes the movie intellectual. Indeed, Moon in Virgo makes Ocean different from Pirates, with its childish Moon in Cancer.

I think I have eaten fill of blockbusters and need some cinema diet. Black and white mute films of the 1920s could probably help to recover. Or just stop watching sequels, unless they have five or six planets in own houses.

P.S. News from the screen. Until Jupiter will turn direct in August, we get eight more sequels: third Shrek, yet another Harry Potter, Hostel-2, DieHard4.0, RushHour3, yet another Bourne, Evan Almighty (sequel of Bruce Almighty), and Are we done yet? (sequel of Are we there yet?) Cinema has its niche in the mundane astrology...

Zodiac

Under this title, I expected something mystical and maybe even star-related. No, the film was a disappointment: overlong, filled with details crime plot, finally giving an expected answer. Many minor personages appear and disappear, confirming it is a true story – too true to be artistic. One should mention good work of design team which accurately reproduced all the vending machines, street lights, and cars through more than 20 years – it was certainly one of the concerns of the director. Also, the episode in the basement is a nice piece of horror – unfortunately, the only one.

I do not quite understand why people become obsessed with such crimes – obsessed enough to think about it, to write about it, and to make a movie about it. There should be great love for justice – and for detail. There are so many tragedies and injustices in this world, that a particular maniac, who even died long time ago, seem to be a pointless figure.

To film the story written by Robert Graysmith, director David Fincher should have something in common with him - and he does. The guys are both Virgos (sign of detail lovers), with Suns aspected by very strong Jupiters (which gives love for justice). Also, Fincher got Venus in Libra and Mercury in Virgo, whereas in Graysmith’s chart Mercury and Venus are in reception in Libra and Virgo.

Justice is worth fighting for it, even for 20 years, yes. But when details become dominating, good intentions turn into boredom.

What's "Next"?

I watched this film with professional interest. The movie is about foreseeing future – quite an astrological topic. The plot is rather chaotic, and nuclear terrorism reminds those numerous movies of the Cold War time, but the film states interesting philosophical questions. What if we know what happens next? Shall we change it? And if we change it, what was that what we saw as future? And what is destiny then?

Nicolas Cage is perfect for such roles: his face is dramatic and smart. He starts aging, and this makes him only more handsome – this is typical for Capricorns. They are also inclined to prophecy, due to their slow and wise ruler Saturn, - good for performing a magician and seer.

The choreography of the scences where he employs his superpower is magnificent. I just do not envy the brain which has only a few minutes to find a solution, while the present is being alternated every moment – what an overwhelming task! Seems life is easier to live blindly.

As my own attempt of clairvoyance, I wanted to find who is an Aquarius in this enterprise: the story is pretty much Aquarian. I started searching the web, found three screenplay writers (Gary Goldman, Jonathan Hensleigh, Paul Bernbaum), and finally realised that the story was written by sci-fi author Philip Dick who died in 1982. There are some other stories of his which were implemented in famous films: “Blade Runner”, “Total Recall”, “Minority Report”, and “A Scanner Darkly”.

So, guess what I have found in Aquarius in his chart? The Moon.

If Philip Dick was still alive, I would have to disillusion him: although the future can be foreseen, it cannot be changed. If it was not so, the future couldn’t be foreseen: each time of ‘free will’ people would make the following events unpredictable. And we know they are predictable, don’t we?

Sunshine

We are told that the Sun is an average star in the infinite universe, but it is so beautiful and captivating, that even such a plain movie as “Sunshine” makes an impression.

The film is well-founded scientifically, but artistically is quite boring - even its thrill is as known and seen before. Instead of creating artificial horror, they would better show more Sun – more and more. I understand the film couldn’t be just an astronomical shot, but really, I liked the Sun images better than those strange variations of the plot.

It is all fantasy, but how comes that such an expedition is launched without a spare source of oxygen? And that burnt mad guy – how could he find his preys, where were his eyes if his entire body was grilled?? I am asking consultants??

OK, enough of physics and biology. Better guess, in a film about the Sun, how many actors, out of eight, should be born with Sun in Leo, which is the house of the Sun? According to the probability theory, less than one, right? In the “Sunshine”, four out of eight are Leos. And the movie was “born” in the Fantasy Filmfest in Bochum under exalted Sun in Aries! Here is the chart (cast for usual first screen in the Bochum filmtheatre, 15.00):

Very expressive, isn’t it? Strong Venus in the midheaven, the ruler of ascendent is, of course, Sun - in the house of science, 9th. Detrimented Saturn in ascendent in opposition with Mars – the thrill for the poor public… And creative Jupiter in 5th…

Well, I love the Sun. Although I see some weaknesses of this film, I am grateful to its creators for the show.

This is Sparta!

"300" movie has changed my opinion that the golden era of cinema has gone. No, it hasn’t: although increasing amount of cinematographic production delivers more weak movies, still there are talents potent to create true art.

In this film, each moment is visually and emotionally overwhelming – how else, when one sees pure beauty and pure heroism? The cast is perfect, the art direction is perfect, the plot has been perfect since the battle of Thermopylae: the blameless story of human spirit sacrificing itself for Motherland.

It is not easy to define the only “parent” of this masterpiece: is it Frank Miller and Lynn Varley whose graphic novel was implemented, or director Zack Snyder, or the art direction team (which is the same as in “Fountain”, so one can draw conclusions about the source of the merit of that movie as well) - or maybe in the epoch of industrial cinema there is no point in seeking the main author? These days, great blockbusters are born by teams to influence society…

The being, the movie - when was it born then? It happened at peculiar Butt-numb-a-thon annual film marathon in Austin, Texas, which started on December 9, 2006. The movie, however, was the last in the list of 12 surprises, so the actual time of the premier was December 10.

Look at that stellium of five planets in Sagittarius, covering 10th and 11th houses – this is the fame and the income from the fame. Look at the Moon in 7th on Regulus – this is the amazed public – in conjunction with heavily afflicted Saturn ruling ascendent: the movie isn’t that easy for watching, it is brutal indeed. Twelve movies were shown in the marathon, but “300” got the best time for birth.

Note Lena Headey as queen of Sparta. People talk about ‘non-celebrity’ cast, but I have noticed this lady already in “The Brothers Grimm” – I believe she will be a celebrity, and quite soon.

Smilers

Although I expected much of "The devil wears Prada", the final impression was just a bit more than average. Yes, Meryl Streep is as magnificent as ever, and her young companion Anne Hathaway demonstrates comparable performance, but something is not exactly right there. Something that makes the film not quite believable. Of course, I believe that one can leave the fashion industry for more relaxed journalism, and I believe that one can come back to beloved boyfriend despite all bright attractions of the glamour world. The thing I couldn’t believe was Anne Hathaway herself.

She is, indeed, a talented actress, both in comedy and melodrama. What I couldn’t believe were her transformations: neither was she so simple in the beginning, when entered the fashion business, nor was she natural when left it. She is far too glamourous to believe that. This is not her fault, but rather a casting mistake: let’s say, Renee Zellweger would be perfect for this role, some years back…

Also, I was thinking that two ladies, Anne Hathaway and Julia Roberts, with smiles being their “trademarks”, should be similar astrologically. Looking at their charts, one can see they both have Sun in Scorpio influenced by Jupiter (sextile and conjunction), in sextile with exalted Mars in Capricorn, - and afflicted Venuses.


Their sex appeal might have been not an easy gift.

Not funny

“Norbit” has already got lots of bad reviews, and mine is only an addition to that. The film fulfils the dream of Eddie Murphy who said once: “I'd like to produce, direct, write, score, and star in a film in exactly the way Charlie Chaplin did.” The result of this dream is a boring, unsmart, sometimes even disgusting ‘comedy’ which makes nobody to laugh.

In Murphy’s chart, the ruler of ascendent is exalted in 9th house, and Rahu is on the cusp of 2nd house. This is good for success and prosperity: Sun strengthens personality - but still, it is not enough for the quality of mind. The responsible luminary, the Moon, is detrimented, as well as the Mercury; nothing helpful from their dispositors: they are not dignified either. That powerful Sun helps create so different faces of three personages performed by the same actor, but there is nothing to fill their characters: the Moon is too weak.

Hollywood, with its excellent funding and professional production, sometimes creates this kind of strange movies, employing the lucky with money. This is how the cinema industry fails, if not supported by a thoughtful talent.

Jane Austen

‘Becoming Jane’ is one of those English cinematographic jewels which leave no point for criticism. It has been made by first-class professionals and is affectionate – this makes it a masterpiece. In two hours, one can enjoy the biography of the famous writer, excellent performance of the cast, non-trivial evolution of the plot, beautiful pictures of English countryside, excellent dialogs – and maybe even forgotten popcorn.

The unhappy love story caused Jane Austen to lead the life of a poor spinster, writing being her only joy. No wonder, her novels are happy love stories: how else could mind pacify the pain of the reality?

In her chart, Venus is in detrimental state, and its only aspect is the wide sextile with Mars. Instead of marital happiness, this chart possessed opposition Jupiter-Mercury with reception and delicate melancholic Moon in Libra affected by exalted Saturn. At her birth, everything was ready to produce a lonesome dreamer.

She was criticised by Charlotte Bronte and Mark Twain, her stories were a bit schematic and predictable, but her style was exactly what England needed, with so many hearts full of sensibility which was forbidden by sense. Nobody knows how many girls cried over own lives reading those novels, while the arranged marriages were building the prosperity of the nation.

Would Jane Austen become as famous if she happened to live in XXI century? Would those moral values be applicable? I believe so. I want to believe.

Illusionists

This film is a spectacular show about a showman. No wonder, the story was written by Leo Steven Millhauser and performed by Leo Edward Norton (I suspect director Neil Burger too has some point in Leo, but his info is unavailable).

Since the whole film is about the story, the storywriter is of the main interest here. Steven Millhauser was born in New York on 3 August 1943, and his career is an interesting plot in itself. He never completed the pursued doctorate at Brown University, but won Pulitzer Prize in later years. For such oddity in career, one needs influence of fixed stars.

Mercury on Regulus and Jupiter on Praesepe. Well, show me a chart where our art does not work…

This beautiful story about illusions is well-shot and has properly surprising final. I just do not quite understand why Crown Prince was pushed to suicide if there was no real reason to blame him? Ah yes, we Leos do not care about details…

Ghost Rider

The story of a sold soul, although not quite new, is exciting for the man. I find the variant with ill father a respectable reason for fall, and Nicolas Cage’s face of a sufferer, together with good special effects, is convincing (if a diabolic story can be named so). At times, the plot is too predictable and Eva Mendes’ performance is too simple, but there is one thing which I love, being an astrologer. This is the film line of four astrological elements - Fire, Water, Air, and Earth.

Watery guy is wet, earthy guy looks like a bulk of soil, windy guy flies fast - and they are all evil, whereas the hero is merrily fiery. Never mind that he crashes city asphalt and occasionally burns cars and stores – who cares about property when the sins have been punished? Note that he never acts violently himself – he just activates the inner evil of the sinners to destroy them from inside. And yes, fire finally destroys those three – evaporating water, burning earth and tornadoing wind, the last clearly showing which element is the most compatible with fire.

Honestly, this film is the best compliment for my Sun in Leo. No, I haven’t sold the soul, but I know the pain which takes to learn how to manage own power. And I know well how destructive can it be if lost control. And I understand why Ghost Rider didn’t give up his abilities at the end. The ruthless power of fire, if managed properly, is a rare gift.

For philosophical symbolism - and for the moment when Rider is flying over the illuminated city down there – and for the fiery Cowboy - four stars out of five.

Music, lyrics & luck

As the Sun has come into Pisces, it is time to meet Pisces actresses, and this week I met two, Drew Barrymore and Michel Morgan. Additionally, both of them have Moon in Cancer - and both are great at performing [showing, playing] emotions.

Michel Morgan’s film of the week is ‘Fallen Idol’ (1948), where she is just 28 and as beautiful as a precious statuette, with surprisingly mature performance techniques. It reminds me once again about her unblemished, highly-dignified and well-aspected Moon.

Barrymore’s ‘Music and Lyrics’ is a nice, skilfully performed comedy - fun to watch, although not much to remember. Drew Barrymore is great at comedy, which is well explained by her Gemini ascendent (the birth time is declared as precise, and it is believable).

Ms Barrymore is as a sweet as one can expect from Pisces with strong Jupiter and exalted Venus. She could probably be a happy wife, but the list of her boyfriends and husbands is already too long for her age. This is because not only Venus is participating in love affairs: look at the affliction of the Moon by exalted Mars and detrimented retro-Saturn.

The girl she performs in the film is very much like her – and this helps! The same has happened to Mr Grant, who performs a bored celebrity.

Look how lucky is his chart: five planets in own houses! With this luck and Sun in Virgo, it is not surprising that guy is bored and criticising everything, whether it is kissing Julie Roberts (‘Very big-mouthed! Literally, physically, she has a very big mouth. It is a very big mouth. When I was kissing her I was aware of a faint echo’) or own profession which brought him fame and wealth (‘I think film acting's just a miserable experience. It's so long and so boring and so difficult to get right’).

I am wondering is it really a good thing, luck?

Number 23

Young screenwriter Fernley Phillips isn’t the one who invented the paranoid idea of Number 23. It appeared much earlier, in the works of ‘futurist and anarchist’ Robert Anton Wilson.

As the film carelessly claims that fate does not exist, I feel obliged to show it does. No, it is not in counting digits and finding those numbers in life events. This is easy and leads nowhere except to the asylum. There are more convincing ‘coincidences’ which do prove.

Fate is in inborn mental patterns which thus can be predicted. Look at Robert Anton Wilson. The 23 idea is heavy and damaging, and who could we expect to develop it? Somebody with a heavy and afflicted Sun.

Right, heavy in itself, Sun in Capricorn is besieged by a very heavy combust Saturn and Mars. He was a writer whose goal was “to try to get people into a state of generalized agnosticism, not agnosticism about God alone, but agnosticism about everything”. A very nice credo. The film attempts the same and obviously fails - the initial pseudo-mystic attitude is sick, and when it transforms into plain insanity, one feels nothing but relief. Maybe some members of the public will enjoy the colours and good camera work. A well-wrapped mediocrity.

Robert Anton Wilson was not born on ‘23’, but he was buried on the same date as he was born, January 18. And Jim Carrey, who perfectly performed the paranoid character, was born on January 17, with the same Sun in Capricorn, combust Saturn, and Moon in Gemini.

Coincidences?..