|
Money matters:
Graham Macdonald MBMG International Ltd.
Caveat Emptor
With due deference to the folks at Market Watch, we’re taking
inspiration from one of their long-standing columns and launching our own
feature - the latest ‘dumb investment ideas’ of the month. If this caveat emptor
prevents just one investor making a bad decision with their hard-earned cash,
we’ll consider it a worthwhile public service!
It’s not really a new one but rather an old dog that stubbornly refuses to die
although it keeps taking on slightly different guises. It emerged as viaticals
(which were sold with pictures of grateful looking terminally ill people so that
investors felt that not only were they getting a good return but they were also
contributing to the greater good - this was handy for the salesmen of such
products as it made it awkward for prospective investors to decline to invest or
even haggle about terms). It re-surfaced as Traded Life Policies (TLPs) - you’ll
be surprised how many three letter acronyms (TLAs) you see before the end of
this article! - and now is re-emerging under the different identity of Senior
Life Settlements (SLSs).
The basic idea of both is to release capital before the policy holders die that
will eventually come to holders of whole of life policies in the form of death
benefits. The law of big numbers says that if you buy enough policies (and
generally these are being pooled into offshore funds - if someone tried to get
you to buy an individual policy then the alarm bells should really start
ringing) and the quality of information is good enough then, on average you’ll
achieve expected maturities - some helpful policy holders will die earlier than
they are meant to, a very few bang on time and some awkward ones will outlive
their expectancies BUT overall it should wash.
In which case the issue simply becomes one of calculating an acceptable interest
rate, which is deducted upfront from the amount paid to buy each insurance
policy - for instance, if someone had a life expectancy of one year and the
simple interest rate were to be 10% then you would pay $90 for every $100
insured and the actual interest rate achieved would be determined by the actual
period until the death claim - if the insured dies within 6 months the rate of
return is twice the amount expected but if the insured lives for 2 years then
the rate is effectively halved. Our problem is that we have a very different
view of what is an acceptable return in this market. Let’s look at the risks:
1) Credit worthiness of the institution - because there is an efficient
process in most developed markets for securitising high quality life policies
(individuals can borrow against them - institutions regularly trade them to each
other - even Warren Buffet’s insurance interests trade second hand life policy
liabilities) the stuff that comes onto the market for offshore SLS funds is
generally not the best. In reality, they are nothing more than a hodgepodge of
local insurers that tend to be just about investment grade. Just about
investment grade doesn’t cut it with us right now with even the biggest
insurers’ abilities to met claims being downgraded. By buying a pool of polices
then the risk of default/failure becomes a percentage that should be factored in
to the return. For every $100 invested, don’t expect $100 back - something like
$96 might be more appropriate.
2) Fraud - search life insurance policy fraud on yahoo and there are a
staggering 27.1 million entries! Admittedly not all relate to the TLP/SLS market
but a frighteningly high proportion do. This sector has suffered all kinds of
frauds over the years - fraudulent applicants withholding information on their
applications with the result that claims are subsequently refused, fraudulent
statements from medical practitioners about the life expectancy of their
patients which result in having to wait longer than expected before claims are
met and a great many practitioners within the life policy trading industry
engaging in fraudulent or dubious practices - most recently the failure of the
Mutual Benefit Corporation. This is now evidenced by the fact that many American
states have now outlawed the practice which is what has largely driven the
industry offshore to less regulated pastures. With such a huge fraud rate you
should prudently set aside at least 5% of the capital invested for such losses,
taking the ultimate return of capital down further to say $91.
3) Claim refusal - even in the event of a non-fraudulent application
there may be valid grounds for an insurance company to refuse to pay out
depending upon the circumstances of the insured’s death. We have never seen any
TLP/SLS fund make any provision in advance for this but 1% should be considered
a bare minimum, taking the return of capital down to 90%.
4) Extended life expectancy - the experience of such funds offshore thus
far seems to have been a survival age higher than originally expected. As
mentioned earlier this negatively impacts the rate of return. Even a one year
added life expectancy makes a significant difference to the actual return
achieved.
What this means for investors is that despite advertised ‘target rates’ as high
as 11% we believe that sterling, euro or dollar investors would do well to
achieve in excess of 4.75% per year in return for the risk of further loss and
for locking their capital away for an indeterminate period.
I can think of far better returns that come with greater guarantees, more
certainty, higher liquidity and far less risk. The latest twist that we have
seen pairs these policies with structured products - potentially the toxic waste
type vehicles in which many of the liabilities of the credit crisis reside.
Stunned by the sheer ingenuity of sticking 2 equally appalling investment ideas
together and presenting them highly polished as though somehow the one adds
lustre to the other, we have no hesitation in presenting the inaugural ‘Dumb
Investment of the Month Award’ to this breathtakingly stupid concept.
|
The above data and research was compiled from sources
believed to be reliable. However, neither MBMG International Ltd nor its
officers can accept any liability for any errors or omissions in the above
article nor bear any responsibility for any losses achieved as a result of any
actions taken or not taken as a consequence of reading the above article. For
more information please contact Graham Macdonald on
[email protected]@mbmg-international.com.com
|
Snap Shots: by Harry Flashman
The photography 15
I was reminded by the Pattaya Mail management that
the fifteenth anniversary of the Pattaya Mail was this year (and
this issue if my mathematics is correct), so I got to thinking just what
the number 15 means in photography.
 F15
fighter
The simplest is shutter speed, and almost every camera ever made has a
setting called “15” which stands for 1/15th of a second. This is
probably the most underused shutter speed ever, and yet it can help make
your photographs very much better.
There seems to be an idea in the photographic world that anything slower
than 1/60th of a second cannot be hand-held, and you must use a tripod.
This is tripe - unless you have some medical condition resulting in
uncontrolled shaking spasms.
The reason to use 1/15th is to expand the light range in which you can
take shots without flash, such as sunsets for example, or to bring out
the background, even when using flash. You know the shots taken at a
function where you get someone looking like a startled rabbit in
blackness, where if you had used a 1/15th shutter speed you would have
got a nice mellow background to soften the picture.
Of course there are a few tricks to hand-holding at the slower shutter
speeds. The first is to steady yourself and that can be done easily by
leaning against a wall or a pole (preferably not a chrome one attached
to a go-go dancer). The second is to hold the camera firmly in both
hands, take a breath in and hold it and then gently depress the shutter
button. I have even shot at ½ a second by holding the camera firmly
pressed down on the back of a chair. Take a few as some will have
obvious camera shake, but you will get at least one good one.
Still on the number 15. There is a theoretical f stop which could be
called f 15. F stops after all are only a way of measuring the
diameter of the aperture inside the lens, to bring it to its simplest
terms. As you go through the usual f stops of f 8 to f 11
to f 16, you are actually cutting the light down by one half each
time. The f stop scale is also an inverse ration, as the bigger the
number, the smaller the diameter. There is a good mathematical reason
for this, but just believe me.
If you really want to get technical, for example, f/16 means that
the aperture diameter is equal to the focal length of the lens divided
by sixteen; that is, if the camera has an 80 mm lens, all the light that
reaches the film passes through a virtual disk known as the ‘entrance
pupil’ that is 5 mm (80 mm/16) in diameter. The location of this virtual
disk inside the lens depends on the optical design. It may simply be the
opening of the aperture stop, or may be a magnified image of the
aperture stop, formed by elements within the lens.
The f stop scale is a sliding one, allowing for fractional
differences in the light allowed through to the film (or the digital
sensors). Most old cameras had an aperture scale graduated in full stops
but the aperture was continuously variable allowing the photographer to
select any intermediate aperture, and thus it would be possible to shoot
at f 15.
The continuously variable aperture cameras slowly disappeared with
‘click-stopped’ aperture becoming a common feature in the 1960s; the
aperture scale was usually marked in full stops, but many lenses had a
click between two marks, allowing a gradation of one half of a stop.
On modern cameras, especially when aperture is set on the camera body,
f-number is often divided more finely than steps of one stop or
half a stop. Steps of one-third stop (1/3 EV) are the most common, since
this matches the ISO system of film speeds. Enough technical details!
Time to just believe me again.
Finally, a rather obscure photographic 15. The AA lithium batteries that
power many cameras and flash units weigh 15 gm. Happy 15th Pattaya
Mail.
Modern Medicine:
by Dr. Iain Corness, Consultant
‘Chemo’, cancer and croaking
“Cancer” is still a word which induces fear. And in many
cases, rightly so. Cancer can be a killer, but not always so. There are many
people who have had cancer and lived to tell the tale. My dear old Mum had
cancer of the womb and ended up having a hysterectomy before she was 50
years of age. She is now 91, so I think we can safely say the operation was
a success!
The treatment for cancer is classically surgery, chemotherapy and
radiotherapy. Much depends upon the type of cancer, and how long it has been
growing, and how far it has spread. This can be a single modality, or
combined. There is also much work being done with the immune system and
cancers, with a vaccine for some types of cancer on the horizon.
However, I came across an article the other day referring to advanced breast
cancer survival rates and compared two similar kinds of cytotoxic drugs. The
end result of the study was that Drug A was more effective than Drug B, but
had significantly more side effects as well. Reading further, it was
reported that Drug B extended life by 13 point something months, while Drug
A had the sufferer living 15 point something months; however, the downside
to these two extra months included mouth ulcers, infections and low blood
counts. However, the researchers had come to the conclusion that Drug A was
best.
I ask you, best for whom? In my book, it wasn’t the patient! Yes, it’s my
old hobby horse - the Quality of Life. What is the point of saying you can
have Drug A, to give you two extra months of life, when that is a life of
misery? One thing is for sure, I will put my last baht on the fact that none
of the research team took either drug! At least the famous medico John
Hunter gave himself syphilis to try to find the cure. And it wasn’t the
‘fun’ way, but self administered syphilitic pus. You won’t find that kind of
dedication today, even though some people would call it foolishness.
We must never forget that in all our research we are not dealing here with
body cancers - we are dealing with patients that have cancer! We, the
medical profession, must treat the whole person, not the disease.
Now I mentioned breast cancer at the start of this item for a couple of
reasons. One is the fact that screening tests can be done, and I would
suggest that all you ladies over the age of 40 (or over the age of 30 if
your mother or a maternal aunt died of breast cancer) should consider annual
mammograms in addition to your monthly Breast Self Examination.
The second reason I mentioned breast cancer is that it is not, as many
western women think, the greatest killer of women. For many 10 year groups
of women, heart disease is the greatest killer. Yes, heart disease, the
greatest killer of men is now firmly entrenched in women’s medicine.
I’m sorry to say this, but along with your quest for equality and work
opportunities, you also picked up male disease patterns as well. Heart
disease in particular. One of the reasons is of course the western diet high
in animal fats, well documented as a precursor of heart disease. Cholesterol
deposits in the coronary arteries and subsequent coronary artery bypass
grafts are all now women’s diseases too.
So what can you do about this? The simple answer is to take a leaf out of
the Eastern ladies’ handbooks on living. An Asian diet, which is high in
vegetable content and low in animal fats is a good start. More of a Thai
‘jai yen yen’ approach to life’s problems also helps. Use the ‘family’
network to get problems solved, and in fact the family approach to living,
with each member helping when necessary, is another good example from the
Asian book of life. And finally, the Buddhist practice of moderation, the
middle way, applies to the women folk as well the men.
Think well, and stay well.
 Heart to Heart with Hillary
Dear Hillary,
I have a ‘thing’ for women’s underwear. I particularly enjoy taking upskirt
photographs of women’s underwear, which I then post on an adult website. All the
photos are staged, nothing illegal, and I usually get bar girls to ‘model’ for
me after I have purchased the underwear. The problem I have is that I recently
asked my Thai girlfriend to model for me, all I wanted to do was take some
harmless upskirt photos of her wearing underwear, then post them on the website.
Well, after slapping me, she has left me, and she won’t even return calls or
messages I leave on her phone. She has even left most of her personal
possessions in our unit. I just don’t understand, it’s not as if the photos
revealed her face or anything, just a harmless, upskirt shot of her underwear,
which is a perfectly normal and main stream fetish. Can you please give me some
advice on how to woo her back because I really love the girl.
Thanks Hillary,
Stig
Dear Stig,
Are you the large chap in a raincoat and felt hat that was standing next to me
at the underwear counter last week wearing a bandit’s mask and holding a whip? I
think you are going to have some difficulty convincing me that what you have is
a “perfectly normal and main stream fetish.” The concept of “perfectly normal”
and “fetish” are something of an oxymoron, my Petal. A swift visit to a good
dictionary produced “fetish, a thing abnormally stimulating or attracting sexual
desire.” Perhaps your Thai girlfriend read the same dictionary and decided you
definitely weren’t “normal”. From my scant knowledge of the upskirt subject, I
was led to believe that the fun was in taking shots that the subject did not
know were being taken. Your “staged” photos of bar girls wearing the undies you
have bought for the shoot would seem to indicate that your problem is fairly
deep-rooted. Did you perhaps wear your mother’s gussies when she was out
shopping? That might explain it. No, Stig, your idea was far from “harmless” and
the end result was your girlfriend grabbing her undies and scampering with her
skirt on. You should develop your photographic interest into “main stream”
without the “fetish”.
Dear Hillary,
I picked up one of those tourist magazines the other day and it had listings of
places to go for the tourists. The interesting thing was the dual pricing which
was plainly printed for the tourists to see that they were going to pay
something like twice the price of the Thais. I thought it was against the policy
to have dual pricing. We certainly don’t have that in the UK. What is the real
situation?
Peter
Dear Peter,
Dual pricing is not something I agree with, but it is found in many countries,
not just Thailand. The original concept was to make the attraction affordable
for the Thai tourists, but charge more for the foreign tourists as they can
afford higher prices. In countries like Thailand where there is a large
discrepancy between foreign tourists’ spending power and that of the local
people, I can understand why dual pricing exists. However, instead of publicly
doubling the Thai entrance price, it would be so much better to state one
‘standard’ (foreign) admission price, but offer a 50 percent reduction for
Thais. This idea of locals getting a 50 percent discount is more understandable
than doubling the price for non-Thais. Of course, there will always be the
problem of resident ex-pats who will not be happy at being asked to pay foreign
tourist prices. For that group, some form of registration of the fact that they
are living here should be enough to convince the girl on the cashier’s desk, but
it may take some sweet talking by a Thai partner. Best of luck.
Dear Hillary,
Why do Thai women continue to wear such silly platform shoes and high heels?
They are dangerous and many countries have already banned them. There is nothing
wrong or not-sexy wearing sensible shoes. What is your opinion, or do you wear
such ankle breakers?
Charlie
Dear Charlie,
When you are only 1.5 meters tall and ride a motorcycle you can’t get your feet
on the ground when you stop at the traffic lights. So all the young ladies have
only two choices. Wear platforms and be able to stop or ride straight through
against the red light. Next time you are looking at young ladies legs on
motorcycles take note of the ones who go straight through. They are the ones
wearing ‘sensible’ shoes that you want to put everyone in. So the platforms are
not as “silly” as you think, my Petal. There are usually good reasons behind the
way the Thais do things.
Dear Hillary,
I have to thank you for bringing an air of normality to our community. There is
so much BS in the bars and so many newbies get taken in by it all. I loved the
British Standard Duck Test and if this were strictly applied then half the
heartache will not happen, and the buffaloes might have to fend for themselves.
Thanks again.
Don
Dear Don,
I am so glad it wasn’t Donald and the Duck Test. Thank you for the nice words.
Next time wrap them around some Belgian chocolates!
Learn to Live to Learn: with Andrew Watson
Multiculturalism versus identity
In The Times of Saturday April 3 2004 Britain’s race relations
chief reportedly called for the abandonment of “the policy
pursued by successive governments since the 1960s of building a
‘multicultural society’.” The problem was that nobody knew what
it meant.
Perhaps one of the central, enduring and growing problems in UK
society is that still, nobody seems to understand what it means.
Some seem to think it means revering cultural relativism, with
its offshoots of “positive discrimination” (an oxymoron if ever
there was one) whereby, for instance, the BBC becomes
disproportionately populated by members of ethnic minorities, so
that each accent can be celebrated, heard and perhaps inevitably
in some cases, misunderstood. To others, it means celebrating
the fact that we have so much diversity in the UK - and that’s
it; that’s as far as it goes. The fact that different racial
groups live in de-facto ghettoes (in effect disproving
multiculturalism) has no bearing on their views.
Others seem to believe that the ghettoes themselves are proof
that multiculturalism is alive and well. Perhaps they have a
point, if multiculturalism means, “the preservation of different
cultures or cultural identities within a unified society, as a
state or nation” (Dictionary.com). But what has happened in the
UK, as opposed to France, or indeed Turkey, both of whom adopt a
“state first, culture second” approach, seems to me to be a
rather grotesque fragmentation of values, which threatens to
become an unbridgeable chasm of cultural differentiation,
sanctioned by the state. It is certainly not the fault of any
one group, other than perhaps successive governments, who seem
to wilfully ignore the advice of experienced civil servants.
To digress for a moment, the BBC is a funny old animal, to be
sure. Through the eyes of BBC director Samir Shah, broadcasters
have overcompensated for their lack of executives from ethnic
minorities by putting too many black and Asian faces on screen.
Shah said this had led to a “world of deracinated coloured
people flickering across our screens - to the irritation of many
viewers and the embarrassment of the very people such actions
are meant to appease”.
He went on, “We urgently need to break the cultural hegemony
that has dominated broadcasting in Britain if we are to tap
into, and not lose, the creativity among all our people. It’s
time to force the change, before the change is forced upon you.”
Ah, we begin to get to the bottom of it. It wasn’t that the
“minorities” were under represented, it was that they were
under-represented at Director level; he proving an ironic
exception, we might presume. He went on to decry the fact that
most of the BBC’s upper echelons are populated by Oxbridge
alumni. Mmmm, I’m thinking about this, wondering whether it
might not be the goal of any organisation to recruit staff from
top universities, and if Oxford (second) and Cambridge (first)
are the best in the UK (and probably the world) shouldn’t a
recruitment policy which reflects this, in turn reflect well on
the BBC? What does Shah want? Sharia law in the BBC?
It’s not quite a leap as you might think. Lord Phillips, the
most senior judge in England and Wales, recently said there was
no reason why Sharia law’s principles could not be used in
mediation in the UK. I’m not sure I yet understand the link
between Sharia and mediation. No matter, the Lord Chief Justice
has gone as far as to say that the Principles of Sharia law
could play a role in some parts of the legal system. Which
parts, I wonder? The parts which no other law can reach? I
suspect that if every minority, however small, was allowed to
apply their own interpretation of rules for living on the
majority, then, well, heads would roll.
Having just returned from Israel and its manifestations of
oppression, I am relieved to rediscover sense in the words of
the ever sagacious Jonathan Sacks, Chief Rabbi of the UK, who,
in a direct response to accusations that “multiculturalism has
failed” urged unity in “shared citizenship”. To many,
multiculturalism encourages “separateness” between communities -
in the sense that some people think it means that you can do
what you wish in the name of your culture.
As British-born Muslims burnt the Union Jack on the streets of
London Rabbi Sacks said there was an urgent need to “assert a
core of Britishness” across society; “We should be talking about
how we reach an integrated society, a society where there are
some common values, a shared citizenship. People talk about
ordinary British folk as if they are terribly afraid or bigots.
We have forgotten how good we are at handling diversity, we have
been good at it for a thousand years.”
All people living in Britain, no matter what their ethnicity or
religion, according to the Chief Rabbi, had to learn to speak a
first language of “common citizenship”. People have to learn to
be culturally bilingual if Britain is not to become “a society
of conflicting ghettoes”. Bilingual? What does it mean? “In a
complex society we have to be bilingual. There is the second
language that we each have of history and identity. Jews have
one language and Muslims another and Sikhs another and obviously
Christians have another. But there must be a first language of
common citizenship. Because wherever we come from, we have now
landed up in this same place together. We must each do our share
in making sure that we build something which encompasses us
all,” (Chief Rabbi Dr. Jonathan Sacks, 2004).
Considering the internecine unpleasantness currently decimating
Zimbabwe and South Africa, perhaps I’m lurching unapologetically
into the semi-romantic as I reach out to Archbishop Desmond
Tutu, who spoke of “Rainbow People”; “At home in South Africa I
have sometimes said in big meetings where you have different
races together, ‘Raise your hands!’ Then I’ve said, ‘Move your
hands,’ and, ‘Look at your hands - different colours
representing different people. You are the rainbow people of
God.’ The rainbow in the Bible is the sign of peace. The rainbow
is the sign of prosperity. In our world we want peace,
prosperity, and justice, and we can have it when all the people
of God, the rainbow people of God, work together.”
You don’t have to relinquish your identity to be truly
multicultural.
Next week: I grew up in a Yellow country
Let’s go to the movies:
by Mark Gernpy
Now playing in Pattaya
The Dark Knight: US Action/ Crime/ Drama/ Thriller – The
reviews so far have been universal in their acclaim for this film,
directed by Christopher Nolan and starring Heath Ledger and Christian
Bale. Some examples: Variety – “Enthralling ... An ambitious,
full-bodied crime epic of gratifying scope and moral complexity, this is
seriously brainy pop entertainment that satisfies every expectation
raised by its hit predecessor and then some.” Time Magazine –
“Beyond dark. It’s as black - and teeming and toxic - as the mind of the
Joker. Batman Begins, the 2005 film that launched Nolan’s series,
was a mere five-finger exercise. This is the full symphony.” I can
hardly wait!
In this episode, set within a year after the events of Batman Begins,
Batman, Lieutenant James Gordon, and new district attorney Harvey Dent
successfully begin to round up the criminals that plague Gotham City
until a mysterious and sadistic criminal mastermind known only as the
Joker appears in Gotham, creating a new wave of chaos. Batman’s struggle
against the Joker becomes deeply personal, forcing him to “confront
everything he believes” and improve his technology to stop him. A love
triangle develops between Bruce Wayne, Dent, and Rachel Dawes.
Hellboy II: The Golden Army: US Action/Fantasy – Again directed
by Guillermo del Toro and again starring Ron Perlman as Hellboy, this
presents a dark and difficult fantasy world full of fantastical
creatures that will leave you amazed and dazed. Almost too much of a
good thing, but see it for sure. The imagination of this movie is
unparalleled. Generally favorable reviews.
Red Cliff Part 1: China Action/Adventure – This $80-million film,
directed by John Woo, is being shown here only in a Thai-dubbed version,
and that is a real shame. It is a grand and glorious spectacle, designed
by China to be released just before the Olympics to soften the hearts
and minds of everyone towards China.
This, the most expensive film ever produced in Asia, tells a story that
is known by heart by probably billions of Chinese, and which they never
tire of. It depicts the first setup episodes for one of the world’s
greatest battles, the Battle of Red Cliff, to be seen in the second
part, scheduled for release toward the end of the year. It is really
thrilling, and well-done in the way only China and its tremendous
resources can command.
The film revolves around events in third century China, as the Han
Dynasty is facing its death, and the emperor raises a million-man army
against two kingdoms that are hopelessly outmatched. Starring Tony
Leung.
Hancock: US Action/Comedy – There’s no doubt about it, Will Smith
has a lot of charisma for a majority of moviegoers, including me. Here
he plays an unsympathetic character, and has to work to gain our good
will. Reviewers have widely diverse views on this one. I was only
minimally amused. Smith here plays a different kind of superhero: edgy,
conflicted, sarcastic, and misunderstood. He gets the job done and saves
countless lives, but he also seems to leave an awful lot of collateral
damage as well. The people of Los Angeles have had enough.
Wanted: US Action/Thriller – If you think you’ve seen it all in
violent and bloody action films, you haven’t yet seen this one: it
raises the bar to a whole new level! Visually I think it’s fascinating –
there are scenes which I really could not believe I was seeing – and I
would say it’s about as exciting as a movie can get. This is a
fast-paced thrill ride, with a dazzling mix of state-of-the-art visual
effects, adrenaline-fuelled action sequences, and nail-biting terror.
A young man (the very versatile actor James McAvoy) discovers his father
is an assassin, and when his father is murdered, the son is recruited
into his father’s organization and trained by a strangely-hypnotic man
(Morgan Freemen) to follow in his dad’s footsteps, and in the process is
transformed from a drone into a dark avenger. Also starring Angelina
Jolie and Terence Stamp. Rated R in the US (and richly deserved) for
strong bloody violence throughout, pervasive language, and some
sexuality. Generally favorable reviews.
Scheduled for July 24
Journey to the Center of the Earth: US
Action/Adventure/Fantasy – Starring Brendan Fraser, Josh Hutcherson, and
Anita Briem. During a scientific expedition in Iceland, visionary
scientist Trevor Anderson, his 13-year-old nephew and their beautiful
local guide, are unexpectedly trapped in a cave from which their only
escape is to go deeper and deeper into the depths of the Earth.
Traveling through never-before-seen worlds, the trio comes face-to-face
with surreal and unimaginable creatures – including man-eating plants,
giant flying piranha, glow birds, and terrifying dinosaurs from days
past. The explorers soon realize that as volcanic activity increases
around them, they must find a way back to the earth’s surface before it
is too late. Mixed or average reviews for the 3D version.
|
