Search
Search results
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated When Patty Went Away in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can be found on my blog <a href=http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>.
The blurb intrigued me a lot. This was a book I really wanted to read. However, I was a bit disappointed when I finally got a chance to read it.
The title definitely fits the book for at least the second half. (I'll go into more detail about that later). The title reminds me of someone who checks out of reality though.
I like the serene look of the cover. I don't really know how it ties into the book though. The cover made me think more of a holiday romance type.
I can't really fault the world building. I thought it was done rather well and very believable. From a historic viewpoint, the facts and events were all correct. It was interesting that Ms. Burt chose to narrate through the point of view of a man. She did a great job of making it work though. There was one or two times I felt a bit confused, but I put it down to just a personal thing like maybe I wasn't paying as much attention as I should've been. The only thing that bothered me was when the narrator of the book would suddenly start talking about a memory. It was too sudden, and I didn't know if it was happening in present time or if it was indeed a memory. I felt as if a memory could've had a better introduction so the audience was aware that it happened at another time in the book.
I felt that the pacing was too slow for about the first two-thirds of the book. It seemed to drone on and on about a topic I wasn't that interested in (farming). I realize that Ms. Burt was setting up a back story, but there was too much focus on the whole farming aspect of the book and not about Patty disappearing as the title and the blurb would suggest. Once the main character goes to Montreal, the pacing picks up decently, and it becomes a book that I had a hard time putting down.
The whole story line was a bit weak, I felt. First off, it reads like two books. The first two-thirds of the book is about a family who has lost their farm due to a bad storm. The reader then takes a journey into finding out how this family struggles to survive without their means of income. I found it a bit tedious because I don't really care about farming, and this book used a lot of farming terminology. The last third of the book is when Jack goes to Montreal to look for Patty. This explores the seedy side of Montreal (which could be just about anywhere) and prostitution involving runaways. I thought the story line was strong during this bit.
I felt that Jack was a well developed character and very likable. It was easy to feel what he was feeling and to feel sorry for him with all that he was going through. Molly is a strict God fearing woman. However, I felt that there was too much focus on her being overweight which was uncalled for. I didn't really like how Christianity was portrayed when it came to Molly. I'm sure there are people in the world like her, but there were times when I just felt a bit offended. I would've loved to know more about Patty and Edie as individuals. I just felt like they didn't get enough time throughout the book, Patty especially. I found it a bit hard to care about Edie and Patty especially as I felt like I didn't have enough information on them to care.
The dialogue fit this book very well. However, I think a lot of people will struggle with the farming terminology and have a hard time relating to the whole farm scenario. As I've said before, this book reads like two books in one. To further prove my point, even the dialogue is different. During the whole family losing their farm scenario, the language isn't vulgar nor is there any swearing (that I could remember). Once Jack gets to Montreal, the language turns a bit vulgar, and there is some swearing.
Overall, When Patty Went Away is just an alright read. The plot could've been better and the merging of ideas could've been smoother. Saying that, the main character is very likable and the world building was good.
I'd recommend this book to those 18+ who know something about farming or those who want a book that will last awhile.
<b>I'd give When Patty Went Away by Jeannie Burt a 2.5 out of 5.</b>
(I received a free paperback of this book from LibraryThing for free in exchange for a fair and honest review).
The blurb intrigued me a lot. This was a book I really wanted to read. However, I was a bit disappointed when I finally got a chance to read it.
The title definitely fits the book for at least the second half. (I'll go into more detail about that later). The title reminds me of someone who checks out of reality though.
I like the serene look of the cover. I don't really know how it ties into the book though. The cover made me think more of a holiday romance type.
I can't really fault the world building. I thought it was done rather well and very believable. From a historic viewpoint, the facts and events were all correct. It was interesting that Ms. Burt chose to narrate through the point of view of a man. She did a great job of making it work though. There was one or two times I felt a bit confused, but I put it down to just a personal thing like maybe I wasn't paying as much attention as I should've been. The only thing that bothered me was when the narrator of the book would suddenly start talking about a memory. It was too sudden, and I didn't know if it was happening in present time or if it was indeed a memory. I felt as if a memory could've had a better introduction so the audience was aware that it happened at another time in the book.
I felt that the pacing was too slow for about the first two-thirds of the book. It seemed to drone on and on about a topic I wasn't that interested in (farming). I realize that Ms. Burt was setting up a back story, but there was too much focus on the whole farming aspect of the book and not about Patty disappearing as the title and the blurb would suggest. Once the main character goes to Montreal, the pacing picks up decently, and it becomes a book that I had a hard time putting down.
The whole story line was a bit weak, I felt. First off, it reads like two books. The first two-thirds of the book is about a family who has lost their farm due to a bad storm. The reader then takes a journey into finding out how this family struggles to survive without their means of income. I found it a bit tedious because I don't really care about farming, and this book used a lot of farming terminology. The last third of the book is when Jack goes to Montreal to look for Patty. This explores the seedy side of Montreal (which could be just about anywhere) and prostitution involving runaways. I thought the story line was strong during this bit.
I felt that Jack was a well developed character and very likable. It was easy to feel what he was feeling and to feel sorry for him with all that he was going through. Molly is a strict God fearing woman. However, I felt that there was too much focus on her being overweight which was uncalled for. I didn't really like how Christianity was portrayed when it came to Molly. I'm sure there are people in the world like her, but there were times when I just felt a bit offended. I would've loved to know more about Patty and Edie as individuals. I just felt like they didn't get enough time throughout the book, Patty especially. I found it a bit hard to care about Edie and Patty especially as I felt like I didn't have enough information on them to care.
The dialogue fit this book very well. However, I think a lot of people will struggle with the farming terminology and have a hard time relating to the whole farm scenario. As I've said before, this book reads like two books in one. To further prove my point, even the dialogue is different. During the whole family losing their farm scenario, the language isn't vulgar nor is there any swearing (that I could remember). Once Jack gets to Montreal, the language turns a bit vulgar, and there is some swearing.
Overall, When Patty Went Away is just an alright read. The plot could've been better and the merging of ideas could've been smoother. Saying that, the main character is very likable and the world building was good.
I'd recommend this book to those 18+ who know something about farming or those who want a book that will last awhile.
<b>I'd give When Patty Went Away by Jeannie Burt a 2.5 out of 5.</b>
(I received a free paperback of this book from LibraryThing for free in exchange for a fair and honest review).
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Escape Plan (2013) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
80s action stars Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone have teamed up to power a 21st century prison break in the new film “Escape Plan”. The film was originally to be called “The Tomb” but underwent a title change during production.
Stallone plays Ray Breslin, a former prosecutor who now runs a company that evaluates the security of maximum security installations throughout the country. As such Ray has himself incarcerated under an assumed identity and devices ways to escape from the institutions so they can better understand flaws in their security systems.
Ray is very good at what he does and has been able to escape from every facility that he has tested. While this does not make him popular with Warden’s he is in high demand and as such charges a premium for his services.
Following his most recent escape, Ray and his associated are approached by the government to test a new ultra security facility, one that houses the most dangerous and undesirable elements the world has to offer. Ray is told that the inmates in the facility are there to essential disappear as they would be game changers to security if they should ever find freedom.
Despite the concerns of his staff, and buoyed by the double his usual fee payment, Ray agrees to be taken to the facility under the guise of an explosives maker.
Ray is soon captured in New Orleans and has his tracking chip removed before he blacks out and awakens in a glass walled prison with no windows to locate his position.
During his orientation with a brutal guard named Drake (Vinnie Jones) who killed an inmate during his trip to the facility and sadistic warden named Hobbs (Jim Caviezel), Ray learns that he is in serious trouble as he attempts to trigger his removal from the facility by uttering his extraction code to the Warden. What should have resulted in an immediate removal from the prison is instead greeted by scoffs as Ray is informed that he is there as the people who put him there do not want him ever to see the light of day again.
Enter Emil Rottmayer (Arnold Schwarzenegger), a fellow inmate who takes an interest in Ray and eventually wins over his skepticism. Emil is in the facility as he was a top lieutenant for a crime figure and the Warden is convinced that if he leans on Emil hard enough, he will give up the location of his boss and former associates and thus usher in a huge payday for the Warden.
Despite the bleak, brutal, and seemingly hopeless life in the prison, Ray and Emil work with one another to devise a plan to escape from the facility and the dangerous Warden and his minions before it is too late.
What follows is a tense thriller with some good action in the final act as the two veterans deliver what they have been known for. The film is more a drama than an action film as aside from a few prison fights, there is not much action until the finale when the guns come out.
Faran Tahir does some very good supporting work to the film as a fellow inmate named Javed and it was refreshing to see a person of Middle Eastern origins play a criminal for something other than terrorism. He is a very interesting character who despite having a past and a dangerous side to him is a man of faith who never lets the bleakness of his situation undermine his faith.
Caviezel is very good as the cold and evil Warden who places profits over the lives of his inmates as he is truly a loathsome individual who is every bit the match for the stars.
Stallone and Schwarzenegger seem to be having a great time working with one another and there is some humor filled moments in the film especially during some of their disagreements where jokes are bantered back and forth which seem to also play upon their age and action images.
The audience went crazy during the finale when in trademark style; Schwarzenegger grabbed a massive gun in slow motion, and with a knowing smirk, mowed down waves of bad guys. He is very aware of what audiences expect from his characters and he wanted to ensure that he is still up to the task of piling up the body count.
Sam Neill is sadly underused in the film as the facilities doctor. He has a small part and my wife and I had to wonder why he took the part when an actor of his stature would likely not be interested in something that small.
While action fans may be disappointed with having to wait for the big guns to come out, the film is a very good drama than gets good performances from its stars and supporting cast and is a very enjoyable outing which shows that the two stars still have gas left in the tank.
http://sknr.net/2013/10/18/escape-plan/
Stallone plays Ray Breslin, a former prosecutor who now runs a company that evaluates the security of maximum security installations throughout the country. As such Ray has himself incarcerated under an assumed identity and devices ways to escape from the institutions so they can better understand flaws in their security systems.
Ray is very good at what he does and has been able to escape from every facility that he has tested. While this does not make him popular with Warden’s he is in high demand and as such charges a premium for his services.
Following his most recent escape, Ray and his associated are approached by the government to test a new ultra security facility, one that houses the most dangerous and undesirable elements the world has to offer. Ray is told that the inmates in the facility are there to essential disappear as they would be game changers to security if they should ever find freedom.
Despite the concerns of his staff, and buoyed by the double his usual fee payment, Ray agrees to be taken to the facility under the guise of an explosives maker.
Ray is soon captured in New Orleans and has his tracking chip removed before he blacks out and awakens in a glass walled prison with no windows to locate his position.
During his orientation with a brutal guard named Drake (Vinnie Jones) who killed an inmate during his trip to the facility and sadistic warden named Hobbs (Jim Caviezel), Ray learns that he is in serious trouble as he attempts to trigger his removal from the facility by uttering his extraction code to the Warden. What should have resulted in an immediate removal from the prison is instead greeted by scoffs as Ray is informed that he is there as the people who put him there do not want him ever to see the light of day again.
Enter Emil Rottmayer (Arnold Schwarzenegger), a fellow inmate who takes an interest in Ray and eventually wins over his skepticism. Emil is in the facility as he was a top lieutenant for a crime figure and the Warden is convinced that if he leans on Emil hard enough, he will give up the location of his boss and former associates and thus usher in a huge payday for the Warden.
Despite the bleak, brutal, and seemingly hopeless life in the prison, Ray and Emil work with one another to devise a plan to escape from the facility and the dangerous Warden and his minions before it is too late.
What follows is a tense thriller with some good action in the final act as the two veterans deliver what they have been known for. The film is more a drama than an action film as aside from a few prison fights, there is not much action until the finale when the guns come out.
Faran Tahir does some very good supporting work to the film as a fellow inmate named Javed and it was refreshing to see a person of Middle Eastern origins play a criminal for something other than terrorism. He is a very interesting character who despite having a past and a dangerous side to him is a man of faith who never lets the bleakness of his situation undermine his faith.
Caviezel is very good as the cold and evil Warden who places profits over the lives of his inmates as he is truly a loathsome individual who is every bit the match for the stars.
Stallone and Schwarzenegger seem to be having a great time working with one another and there is some humor filled moments in the film especially during some of their disagreements where jokes are bantered back and forth which seem to also play upon their age and action images.
The audience went crazy during the finale when in trademark style; Schwarzenegger grabbed a massive gun in slow motion, and with a knowing smirk, mowed down waves of bad guys. He is very aware of what audiences expect from his characters and he wanted to ensure that he is still up to the task of piling up the body count.
Sam Neill is sadly underused in the film as the facilities doctor. He has a small part and my wife and I had to wonder why he took the part when an actor of his stature would likely not be interested in something that small.
While action fans may be disappointed with having to wait for the big guns to come out, the film is a very good drama than gets good performances from its stars and supporting cast and is a very enjoyable outing which shows that the two stars still have gas left in the tank.
http://sknr.net/2013/10/18/escape-plan/
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Spider-Man 3 (2007) in Movies
Jul 1, 2019 (Updated Jul 3, 2019)
"None of that matters now, you're my friend"
After the worldwide success of the first two "Spider-Man" films, director Sam Raimi and the cast decided to take a break. The first two had been shot almost back-to-back, with very little "down time" in between. So, in late 2005, about 18 months after the release of "Spider-Man 2", Raimi began fleshing out ideas for a third storyline. For this chapter, the director wanted to teach Peter Parker about forgiveness; to do so, he'd need a villain with personal ties. The problem was that, besides the Osborn family and Otto Octavius, no villains in the comics had such a huge connection. Raimi didn't want to contradict a well-established character, so he sought one out whose backstory had never been fully realized: the Sandman, whose literary incarnation was little more than a random thief. Connecting the character to the death of Ben Parker gave Peter a huge obstacle that needed facing. Wrapping up Harry Osborn's story was also necessary, since Marvel wasn't sure if James Franco would agree to more chapters in the franchise. The addition of Gwen Stacy (who in the comics, was Peter's first love) was done mainly for the fans, and to create a conflicted love triangle with Peter & Mary Jane. Satisfied with his concept, Raimi told his plans to Marvel Comics; the result was less than expected.
Therein lies my biggest problem with "Spider-Man 3". I liked the Venom character as a kid, but in all honesty having 4 villains in the same film (Harry, Marko, the black symbiote itself, and eventually Venom) was just too much at once. From the standpoint of a fan, I'd have preferred that Venom be saved for a future entry, so he could have taken center stage. By having him alongside both Marko and Harry Osborn, the story became rather confusing for many fans, and the film's box office suffered as a direct result. Overall, this film made less money across the board than its predecessor...all because of corporate greed.
That being said, I still enjoy the film on many levels, but knowing what caused the multi-arc story makes some moments bittersweet. The actors clearly enjoyed this ride, but something in general seemed a bit lacking. Looking back, I realize it was the Venom character. The fact of it essentially being forced into the narrative only made the tale confusing and hard to follow. It became one of those films many people have to watch more than once, just to understand it...and these days, audiences don't have a lot of patience for films with too many angles. Rightfully so, in my opinion.
Tobey Maguire, slipping into the spandex suit for a third try, really shows his acting range here, even more so than his diverse performance in "Spider-Man 2". From intense love to seething hatred (and everything in between), he really brings his game up to a whole new level. Kirsten Dunst shines again as Parker's star-crossed love, Mary Jane Watson. I liked her performance very much, and her singing in the film is beautiful. She's less helpless than in either prior entry, and far more confident. Bryce Dallas Howard (daughter of acclaimed director Ron) makes her first apearance in the franchise as the bubbling, exuberant, and gorgeous Gwen Stacy. I liked her character, but felt she didn't have much to do in the long run.
James Franco does an equally-remarkable turn, finally completing the journey that began at the end of the original film. He gives Harry a blend of jealousy, mystique, and severe determination. He also revisits the lighter tones of his role, for the scenes where Harry has amnesia. And in the finale, he shows that in his heart, Harry was truly a hero. Thomas Haden Church gave Marko both sentiment and menace, and turned what was originally a two-bit thug into a far more interesting character. Topher Grace played the "creepy" card as Venom, and gave Eddie Brock a know-it-all arrogance that makes you almost feel disgusted.
Aside from the criticisms surrounding Venom, I honestly didn't have a lot for this entry. Mary Jane is no longer in a water-drenched position (thank God!), so I was very relieved. I guess my main concern was that there were too many villians should of just stuck with Harry and Venom or Harry and sandman. And for anyone who asks why i haven't put the dancing scenes as a negative. I get a kick out of them what can i say?
Therein lies my biggest problem with "Spider-Man 3". I liked the Venom character as a kid, but in all honesty having 4 villains in the same film (Harry, Marko, the black symbiote itself, and eventually Venom) was just too much at once. From the standpoint of a fan, I'd have preferred that Venom be saved for a future entry, so he could have taken center stage. By having him alongside both Marko and Harry Osborn, the story became rather confusing for many fans, and the film's box office suffered as a direct result. Overall, this film made less money across the board than its predecessor...all because of corporate greed.
That being said, I still enjoy the film on many levels, but knowing what caused the multi-arc story makes some moments bittersweet. The actors clearly enjoyed this ride, but something in general seemed a bit lacking. Looking back, I realize it was the Venom character. The fact of it essentially being forced into the narrative only made the tale confusing and hard to follow. It became one of those films many people have to watch more than once, just to understand it...and these days, audiences don't have a lot of patience for films with too many angles. Rightfully so, in my opinion.
Tobey Maguire, slipping into the spandex suit for a third try, really shows his acting range here, even more so than his diverse performance in "Spider-Man 2". From intense love to seething hatred (and everything in between), he really brings his game up to a whole new level. Kirsten Dunst shines again as Parker's star-crossed love, Mary Jane Watson. I liked her performance very much, and her singing in the film is beautiful. She's less helpless than in either prior entry, and far more confident. Bryce Dallas Howard (daughter of acclaimed director Ron) makes her first apearance in the franchise as the bubbling, exuberant, and gorgeous Gwen Stacy. I liked her character, but felt she didn't have much to do in the long run.
James Franco does an equally-remarkable turn, finally completing the journey that began at the end of the original film. He gives Harry a blend of jealousy, mystique, and severe determination. He also revisits the lighter tones of his role, for the scenes where Harry has amnesia. And in the finale, he shows that in his heart, Harry was truly a hero. Thomas Haden Church gave Marko both sentiment and menace, and turned what was originally a two-bit thug into a far more interesting character. Topher Grace played the "creepy" card as Venom, and gave Eddie Brock a know-it-all arrogance that makes you almost feel disgusted.
Aside from the criticisms surrounding Venom, I honestly didn't have a lot for this entry. Mary Jane is no longer in a water-drenched position (thank God!), so I was very relieved. I guess my main concern was that there were too many villians should of just stuck with Harry and Venom or Harry and sandman. And for anyone who asks why i haven't put the dancing scenes as a negative. I get a kick out of them what can i say?
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Potion Explosion in Tabletop Games
Jan 6, 2020
Your senior year at Horribilorum Sorcery Academy for Witty Witches and Wizards is almost at an end, but one thing stands between you and graduation – final exams! You’ve passed everything with flying colors, and now it’s time for your final exam in Potions class. Do you have what it takes to brew the most difficult and impressive potions? Or will amateur mistakes result in inaccurate recipes and ultimate failure? The time for studying is over, and the time for potion making is NOW!
Disclaimer: There are several expansions for this game. I do not have any of them, nor do I have any gameplay experience with any of them. If and when I do get them added into my base game, I will either amend this review or write a new one! – L
Potion Explosion is a game of set collection in which players are trying to complete potions for end-game VPs. To start the game, each player takes two beaker-shaped potion tiles to be kept in their desk (play area). On your turn, you will select one marble from the dispenser and play it to one of your potions. Easy enough. The marbles are housed in an angled dispenser, so when a marble is removed from one of the tracks, the rest roll down to fill in the gaps. Neat, right? But there’s a catch. If the marble you take causes two marbles of the same color to collide as they move down the dispenser, you have triggered an explosion! That means that you are allowed to take all marbles of the same color that were involved in the explosion on that same track. Sometimes, by removing all the marbles involved in an explosion, a second explosion may be triggered! In that case, you take all of those marbles as well!
Once you’ve taken a marble (or multiple, depending on any explosions), you immediately play those onto your active Potion Tiles. You have the option of keeping up to three marbles in the Ingredient Pool on your desk to be played in later turns. Extra marbles that cannot fit on your Potion Tiles or in your Ingredient Pool are returned to the dispenser. If you complete a potion on your turn, return its corresponding marbles to the dispenser and place the Potion Tile beneath your desk, to be scored at the end of the game. Then you select another Potion Tile from the available stacks to be added to your desk. You will always have two Potion Tiles on your desk. Your turn is now over, and play continues with the next player. The game ends when a certain number of Skill Tokens (earned for completing sets of 3 identical potions, or for completing sets of 5 different potions) have been awarded to players. Play continues until everyone has had the same amount of turns, and then VPs are counted. The player with the most VP is the winner!
I’ve got to lead this off by saying that one of the things I love most about Potion Explosion are the components. The Potion Tiles are nice and thick cardboard, and the marbles are just so much fun to fiddle with throughout the game. Yeah, I may accidentally roll some off the table every once in a while, but they’re a neat addition to the game. I’ve heard that the cardboard dispenser doesn’t hold up after many plays, but I have yet to see that issue, and know that lots of people are now 3D printing dispensers for themselves to circumvent this problem.
So how does it play? Potion Explosion is relatively fast to play, and requires more strategy than meets the eye. You’re selecting and playing marbles, but you’ve also got to keep an eye on any explosion possibilities. Maybe you need 4 blue marbles – are any of the dispenser tracks loaded with blues so that you could strategically trigger an explosion? Or is your neighbor really going for red marbles, so you trigger a red explosion just to keep those from them? The marble placement in the dispenser may be random, but your manipulation of the available marbles is not. Strategy is everything here, because one mistake in marble selection could end up handing your opponents the game.
I thoroughly enjoy Potion Explosion. It’s fast to teach, fast to learn, and fun to play with all ages! The mechanism of the marble dispenser is pretty neat, and it adds an extra element to the game. This game keeps me engaged the entire time because it is just so fun to watch the marbles moving down the tracks and potentially triggering multiple explosions. Although it requires good strategy, it’s a light enough game to give your a break in between some heavier brain-burners. If you haven’t had the opportunity to try Potion Explosion yet, I would highly recommend it. Purple Phoenix Games gives it a bubbling 14 / 18.
Disclaimer: There are several expansions for this game. I do not have any of them, nor do I have any gameplay experience with any of them. If and when I do get them added into my base game, I will either amend this review or write a new one! – L
Potion Explosion is a game of set collection in which players are trying to complete potions for end-game VPs. To start the game, each player takes two beaker-shaped potion tiles to be kept in their desk (play area). On your turn, you will select one marble from the dispenser and play it to one of your potions. Easy enough. The marbles are housed in an angled dispenser, so when a marble is removed from one of the tracks, the rest roll down to fill in the gaps. Neat, right? But there’s a catch. If the marble you take causes two marbles of the same color to collide as they move down the dispenser, you have triggered an explosion! That means that you are allowed to take all marbles of the same color that were involved in the explosion on that same track. Sometimes, by removing all the marbles involved in an explosion, a second explosion may be triggered! In that case, you take all of those marbles as well!
Once you’ve taken a marble (or multiple, depending on any explosions), you immediately play those onto your active Potion Tiles. You have the option of keeping up to three marbles in the Ingredient Pool on your desk to be played in later turns. Extra marbles that cannot fit on your Potion Tiles or in your Ingredient Pool are returned to the dispenser. If you complete a potion on your turn, return its corresponding marbles to the dispenser and place the Potion Tile beneath your desk, to be scored at the end of the game. Then you select another Potion Tile from the available stacks to be added to your desk. You will always have two Potion Tiles on your desk. Your turn is now over, and play continues with the next player. The game ends when a certain number of Skill Tokens (earned for completing sets of 3 identical potions, or for completing sets of 5 different potions) have been awarded to players. Play continues until everyone has had the same amount of turns, and then VPs are counted. The player with the most VP is the winner!
I’ve got to lead this off by saying that one of the things I love most about Potion Explosion are the components. The Potion Tiles are nice and thick cardboard, and the marbles are just so much fun to fiddle with throughout the game. Yeah, I may accidentally roll some off the table every once in a while, but they’re a neat addition to the game. I’ve heard that the cardboard dispenser doesn’t hold up after many plays, but I have yet to see that issue, and know that lots of people are now 3D printing dispensers for themselves to circumvent this problem.
So how does it play? Potion Explosion is relatively fast to play, and requires more strategy than meets the eye. You’re selecting and playing marbles, but you’ve also got to keep an eye on any explosion possibilities. Maybe you need 4 blue marbles – are any of the dispenser tracks loaded with blues so that you could strategically trigger an explosion? Or is your neighbor really going for red marbles, so you trigger a red explosion just to keep those from them? The marble placement in the dispenser may be random, but your manipulation of the available marbles is not. Strategy is everything here, because one mistake in marble selection could end up handing your opponents the game.
I thoroughly enjoy Potion Explosion. It’s fast to teach, fast to learn, and fun to play with all ages! The mechanism of the marble dispenser is pretty neat, and it adds an extra element to the game. This game keeps me engaged the entire time because it is just so fun to watch the marbles moving down the tracks and potentially triggering multiple explosions. Although it requires good strategy, it’s a light enough game to give your a break in between some heavier brain-burners. If you haven’t had the opportunity to try Potion Explosion yet, I would highly recommend it. Purple Phoenix Games gives it a bubbling 14 / 18.
CCNA Routing and Switching ICND2 200-105 Official Cert Guide
Book
Trust the best-selling Official Cert Guide series from Cisco Press to help you learn, prepare, and...
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Odin's Ravens (second edition) in Tabletop Games
Sep 8, 2021
Getting the group together for game nights has always been a struggle – especially now (at time of writing) in this Covid world. So finding good games for 1-2 players has become a priority for me recently. Enter Odin’s Ravens, a 2-player race across the world. Does this game soar to meet my expectations, or does it fall flat in the end? Keep reading to find out.
Odin’s Ravens is a light game of strategy and hand management in which 2 players are racing to be the first of Odin’s ravens (duh) to travel around the world. To setup the game, shuffle the land cards and place a line of 16 cards directly between the two players. Land cards are divided into two halves, each depicting a different landscape. This line of Land cards acts as the route around the world for both Ravens. Players choose one end to be the start/finish lines, and place their Raven meeple on their corresponding side of the starting Land card. During play, the Ravens will travel down their side of the Land cards, and will switch to the opponent’s side for the flight back to the finish. Each player receives a set of 25 Flight cards and 8 Loki cards, to be shuffled and kept separate from each other. Both players then draws 5 cards into their hand, in any combination of Flight and Loki cards. Choose a starting player, and the game is ready to begin!
On a typical game turn, you will play as many cards from your hand as you want, either Flight cards, Loki cards, or combinations of the two. Flight cards allow you to move your raven down the path. In order to move your raven, you must play a Flight card that matches the landscape of the next Land card on your path. (Ex. if the next space is a Forest, you must play a Forest Flight card). If you have no Flight cards in hand that match the next card on your path, then you may discard any two flight cards of the same type to move forward one space. Loki cards allow you to perform Trickery actions, which alter the flight paths of both players. Some actions include rotating Land cards, moving ravens forward/backward a number of spaces, swapping Land cards, etc. It is important to note that once a Loki card has been played, it is removed from the game entirely – you only have 8 Loki cards total, so use them wisely! After you have played all the cards you wish on your turn, you will then draw 3 cards (in any combination of Flight/Loki cards), and end your turn. You may never have more than 7 cards in hand. Play continues in this fashion until one player has reached the end of their flight path – resulting in victory!
Seems simple enough, right? Well, it is and it isn’t. The overall gameplay itself is simplistic – draw and play cards to move your raven towards victory. The implementation of Loki cards adds a strategic twist to the game that keeps each player on their toes. Flight cards alone leave you at the mercy of the luck of the draw, but Loki cards give players a little more control over their game strategy. They provide ways to alter the flight path to benefit yourself or inhibit your opponent at various points throughout the game. Add in the fact that each player only has 8 Loki cards total, and that ups the strategy as well . You only have a finite amount of trickery to pull, so you have to be sure to use it at the perfect time. Was your opponent able to counteract your attempted trickery, or did you execute it perfectly for them to fall into your trap?
The components of this game are pretty standard and straightforward. The cards are good quality and are easy to manipulate, and the wooden raven meeples are big and chunky. Nice and simple! The artwork of the game, although clear and effective, is pretty basic and leaves much to be desired. It is clear in the way that it is easy to identify each type of landscape and determine the actions of Loki cards, but overall it feels a little too simplistic and not as immersive as it could be.
Odin’s Ravens is a decent 2-player game, although not my favorite. If I needed something simple, light, and relatively fast for 2 players, it is definitely one that I would pull off the shelf. But I have other 2-player games that I would rather play instead. Will it stay in my collection forever? Hard to say, but for the time being it has a spot on my shelves. If you are looking for something that is relatively simple, but has opportunities for strategy, check out Odin’s Ravens. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a flighty 13 / 18 – you just gotta keep your eye on that Loki…
Odin’s Ravens is a light game of strategy and hand management in which 2 players are racing to be the first of Odin’s ravens (duh) to travel around the world. To setup the game, shuffle the land cards and place a line of 16 cards directly between the two players. Land cards are divided into two halves, each depicting a different landscape. This line of Land cards acts as the route around the world for both Ravens. Players choose one end to be the start/finish lines, and place their Raven meeple on their corresponding side of the starting Land card. During play, the Ravens will travel down their side of the Land cards, and will switch to the opponent’s side for the flight back to the finish. Each player receives a set of 25 Flight cards and 8 Loki cards, to be shuffled and kept separate from each other. Both players then draws 5 cards into their hand, in any combination of Flight and Loki cards. Choose a starting player, and the game is ready to begin!
On a typical game turn, you will play as many cards from your hand as you want, either Flight cards, Loki cards, or combinations of the two. Flight cards allow you to move your raven down the path. In order to move your raven, you must play a Flight card that matches the landscape of the next Land card on your path. (Ex. if the next space is a Forest, you must play a Forest Flight card). If you have no Flight cards in hand that match the next card on your path, then you may discard any two flight cards of the same type to move forward one space. Loki cards allow you to perform Trickery actions, which alter the flight paths of both players. Some actions include rotating Land cards, moving ravens forward/backward a number of spaces, swapping Land cards, etc. It is important to note that once a Loki card has been played, it is removed from the game entirely – you only have 8 Loki cards total, so use them wisely! After you have played all the cards you wish on your turn, you will then draw 3 cards (in any combination of Flight/Loki cards), and end your turn. You may never have more than 7 cards in hand. Play continues in this fashion until one player has reached the end of their flight path – resulting in victory!
Seems simple enough, right? Well, it is and it isn’t. The overall gameplay itself is simplistic – draw and play cards to move your raven towards victory. The implementation of Loki cards adds a strategic twist to the game that keeps each player on their toes. Flight cards alone leave you at the mercy of the luck of the draw, but Loki cards give players a little more control over their game strategy. They provide ways to alter the flight path to benefit yourself or inhibit your opponent at various points throughout the game. Add in the fact that each player only has 8 Loki cards total, and that ups the strategy as well . You only have a finite amount of trickery to pull, so you have to be sure to use it at the perfect time. Was your opponent able to counteract your attempted trickery, or did you execute it perfectly for them to fall into your trap?
The components of this game are pretty standard and straightforward. The cards are good quality and are easy to manipulate, and the wooden raven meeples are big and chunky. Nice and simple! The artwork of the game, although clear and effective, is pretty basic and leaves much to be desired. It is clear in the way that it is easy to identify each type of landscape and determine the actions of Loki cards, but overall it feels a little too simplistic and not as immersive as it could be.
Odin’s Ravens is a decent 2-player game, although not my favorite. If I needed something simple, light, and relatively fast for 2 players, it is definitely one that I would pull off the shelf. But I have other 2-player games that I would rather play instead. Will it stay in my collection forever? Hard to say, but for the time being it has a spot on my shelves. If you are looking for something that is relatively simple, but has opportunities for strategy, check out Odin’s Ravens. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a flighty 13 / 18 – you just gotta keep your eye on that Loki…
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Misbehaviour (2020) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
A film guide on how to sit on the fence.
It’s only 50 years ago, but the timeframe of Misbehaviour feels like a very different world. Although only 9 years old in 1970, I remember sitting around the tele with my family to enjoy the regular Eric and Julia Morley ‘cattle market’ of girls parading in national dress and swimsuits. We were not alone. At its peak in the 70’s over 18 million Britons watched the show (not surprising bearing in mind there were only three channels to choose from in 1970… no streaming… no video players… not even smartphones to distract you!)
The background.
“Misbehaviour” tells the story of this eventful 1970 Miss World competition. It was eventful for a number of reasons: the Women’s Lib movement was rising in popularity, and the event was disrupted a flour-bombing group of women in the audience; the compere Bob Hope did an appallingly misjudged and mysoginistic routine that died a death; and, after significant pressure against the apartheid regime in South Africa, the country surprised the world by sending two entrants to the show – one white (Miss South Africa) and one black (Miss Africa South).
The movie charts the events leading up to that night and some of the fallout that resulted from it.
A strong ensemble cast.
“Misbehaviour” has a great cast.
Leading the women are posh-girl Sally Alexander (Keira Knightley) and punk-girl Jo Robinson (Jessie Buckley). I’m normally a big fan of both of these ladies. But here I never felt either of them connected particularly well with their characters. In particular, Buckley (although delivering as a similar maverick in “Wild Rose“) always felt a bit forced and out of place here.
On the event organisation side is Rhys Ifans, almost unrecognisable as Eric Morley, and Keeley Hawes as Julia Morley. Ifans gets the mannerisms of the impresario spot-on (as illustrated by some real-life footage shown at the end of the film). Also splendid is funny-man Miles Jupp as their “fixer” Clive.
Less successful for me was Greg Kinnear as Bob Hope. Hope clearly has such an unusual moon-shaped face that it’s difficult to find anyone to cast as a lookalike.
Just who is exploiting who here?
There’s no question in my mind that the event, in retrospect, is obscenely inappropriate – even though, bizarrely, it still runs to this day. But my biggest problem with the movie is that it never seems to pin its colours to any particular mast. It clearly illustrates the inappropriateness of Hope’s off-colour jokes and the instruction from host Michael Aspel (Charlie Anson), asking the swimsuit models to “show their rear view” to the audience, is gobsmackingly crass.
However, the script then takes a sympathetic view to the candidates from Grenada, South Africa, etc. who are clearly ‘using their bodies’ to get a leg-up to fame and fortune back in their home countries. (Final scenes showing the woman today, clearly affluent and happy, doesn’t help with that!)
As such, the movie sits magnificently on the fence and never reaches a ‘verdict’.
The racial sub-story.
Equally problematic is the really fascinating racial sub-story: this was an event, held in a UK that was racially far less tolerant than it is today, where no black person had EVER won. Indeed, a win was in most peoples’ eyes unthinkable. This was a time when “black lives didn’t matter”. Here we have Miss Grenada (an excellent Gugu Mbatha-Raw) and the utterly captivating Miss Africa South (a debut performance by Loreece Harrison) threatening to turn the tables . There was surely potential to get a lot more value out of this aspect of the story, but it is generally un-mined.
Perhaps a problem here is that there is so much story potential around this one historical event that there is just too much to fit comfortably into one screenplay. The writers Rebecca Frayn and Gaby Chiappe end up just giving a few bursts on the liquidizer and getting a slightly grey mush.
Nostalgia – it’s not what it used to be.
All this is not to say the movie was a write off. It’s a perfectly pleasant watch and for those (like me) of a certain age, the throwback fashions, vehicles and attitudes deliver a burst of nostalgia for the flawed but rose-coloured days of my first decade on the planet.
But it all feels like a bit of a missed opportunity to properly tackle either one of the two key issues highlighted in the script. As a female-led project (the director is Philippa Lowthorpe) I really wanted this to be good. But I’m afraid for me it’s all a bit “meh”.
If asked “would you like to watch that again?”… I would probably, politely, show my rear view and decline.
The background.
“Misbehaviour” tells the story of this eventful 1970 Miss World competition. It was eventful for a number of reasons: the Women’s Lib movement was rising in popularity, and the event was disrupted a flour-bombing group of women in the audience; the compere Bob Hope did an appallingly misjudged and mysoginistic routine that died a death; and, after significant pressure against the apartheid regime in South Africa, the country surprised the world by sending two entrants to the show – one white (Miss South Africa) and one black (Miss Africa South).
The movie charts the events leading up to that night and some of the fallout that resulted from it.
A strong ensemble cast.
“Misbehaviour” has a great cast.
Leading the women are posh-girl Sally Alexander (Keira Knightley) and punk-girl Jo Robinson (Jessie Buckley). I’m normally a big fan of both of these ladies. But here I never felt either of them connected particularly well with their characters. In particular, Buckley (although delivering as a similar maverick in “Wild Rose“) always felt a bit forced and out of place here.
On the event organisation side is Rhys Ifans, almost unrecognisable as Eric Morley, and Keeley Hawes as Julia Morley. Ifans gets the mannerisms of the impresario spot-on (as illustrated by some real-life footage shown at the end of the film). Also splendid is funny-man Miles Jupp as their “fixer” Clive.
Less successful for me was Greg Kinnear as Bob Hope. Hope clearly has such an unusual moon-shaped face that it’s difficult to find anyone to cast as a lookalike.
Just who is exploiting who here?
There’s no question in my mind that the event, in retrospect, is obscenely inappropriate – even though, bizarrely, it still runs to this day. But my biggest problem with the movie is that it never seems to pin its colours to any particular mast. It clearly illustrates the inappropriateness of Hope’s off-colour jokes and the instruction from host Michael Aspel (Charlie Anson), asking the swimsuit models to “show their rear view” to the audience, is gobsmackingly crass.
However, the script then takes a sympathetic view to the candidates from Grenada, South Africa, etc. who are clearly ‘using their bodies’ to get a leg-up to fame and fortune back in their home countries. (Final scenes showing the woman today, clearly affluent and happy, doesn’t help with that!)
As such, the movie sits magnificently on the fence and never reaches a ‘verdict’.
The racial sub-story.
Equally problematic is the really fascinating racial sub-story: this was an event, held in a UK that was racially far less tolerant than it is today, where no black person had EVER won. Indeed, a win was in most peoples’ eyes unthinkable. This was a time when “black lives didn’t matter”. Here we have Miss Grenada (an excellent Gugu Mbatha-Raw) and the utterly captivating Miss Africa South (a debut performance by Loreece Harrison) threatening to turn the tables . There was surely potential to get a lot more value out of this aspect of the story, but it is generally un-mined.
Perhaps a problem here is that there is so much story potential around this one historical event that there is just too much to fit comfortably into one screenplay. The writers Rebecca Frayn and Gaby Chiappe end up just giving a few bursts on the liquidizer and getting a slightly grey mush.
Nostalgia – it’s not what it used to be.
All this is not to say the movie was a write off. It’s a perfectly pleasant watch and for those (like me) of a certain age, the throwback fashions, vehicles and attitudes deliver a burst of nostalgia for the flawed but rose-coloured days of my first decade on the planet.
But it all feels like a bit of a missed opportunity to properly tackle either one of the two key issues highlighted in the script. As a female-led project (the director is Philippa Lowthorpe) I really wanted this to be good. But I’m afraid for me it’s all a bit “meh”.
If asked “would you like to watch that again?”… I would probably, politely, show my rear view and decline.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Red Sparrow (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Good Lord! How much sex and violence is acceptable for a UK-15 film?
I recognise that it’s a “thing” that I get into periodic ‘ruts’ of ranting about particular aspects of cinema. But it’s not spoilers in trailers this time! No, the most recent rut I’ve been in is concerned with the correctness or otherwise of the BBFC’s rating of UK 15-certificate films, which seems to have been the rating of every cinema film I’ve seen recently! In my view both “Phantom Thread” and “Lady Bird” should both have firmly been 12A’s to attract a broader teenage audience. But here’s a case on the other side of the balance.
“Red Sparrow”, the latest film from “Hunger Games” director Francis Lawrence, has Jennifer Lawrence (“Joy“, “mother!“) as Dominika Egorova, a Russian ballerina, who after a horrific accident (cringe) is forced to serve the State in order to keep her mother (Joely Richardson, “101 Dalmations”) in their Bolshoi-funded apartment and with the necessary medical treatment. She is sent to a spy “whore school”, ruled over by “matron” (Charlotte Rampling), to learn how to use sexual and psychological means to ‘get in the pants’ (and therefore the minds) of foreign targets.
Always elegant. Charlotte Rampling back on our screens as “Matron”.
And she turns out to be very good and – without nepotism of course, given that her creepy uncle Egorov ( Matthias Schoenaerts, “Far From The Madding Crowd“) is high up in the special services – she is sent on a mission to Budapest to try to uncover a high profile mole, who’s CIA handler is Nate Nash (Joel Edgerton, “The Great Gatsby“, “Black Mass“). Supervising Egorov’s operation are his two line managers General Korchnoi (Jeremy Irons, “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice“) and Zakharov (Ciarán Hinds, “Harry Potter”). Sucked into a web of intrigue, Dominika needs to use all her skills and charms to complete her mission… which equates to keeping herself and her mother alive.
Now on the tarmac, Joel really wans’t looking forward to his Ryanair flight.
This is an extremely uneven film. In places it is quite brilliant, particularly the twist in the ending which leaves you thinking (like “Life“) that the film is actually better than it was. In fact – subject to a couple of severe reservations discussed below – the script by Justin Haythe (“A Cure for Wellness“) and based on a book by Jason Matthews, is quite sharp. But – man – in its direction the film seriously takes its time. In my book, a film needs to have a pretty good reason to extend its stay past 2 hours, and this outstays its welcome by an extra 20 minutes. Many of the scenes are protracted – leisurely walks across streets etc. – for no particularly good reason.
Pwoaahh – look at those. (I’m referring of course to Joel Edgerton’s buns in those speedos).
And so to those major reservations: the sex and the violence.
I’m no prude when it comes to sex, but some of the scenes in the ‘whore school’ left me feeling like this was less about a “Times Up” initiative of empowering women and more about providing an array of sordid titillation on the screen that just help entrench mysoginistic views about women. (Did anyone else hear Kenneth Williams saying “Oooooh, matron” to Charlotte Rampling’s character?) There were men and women attending this training camp, but did we see – later in the film – any of the men subjecting themselves to sexual humiliation or subjugation in the field: no, we did not. I love a really good erotic film… but this just left me feeling dirty and used.
Who wants to go to the f***ing party? No one seems to have remembered to bring a bottle.
And then there’s the violence. I’m definitely not a fan of the sort of violent-porn of the “Saw” type of films, but heavens – if there was a reason to make this an 18 certificate it was the violence involved. Violent rape, a vicious revenge attack, extreme torture, skinning alive: was there nothing in here that the censors thought, “hang on a minute, perhaps I don’t want a 15 year old seeing this”. I have seldom seen and heard more flinching and whimpering from women in a cinema audience than during this film. If you are adversely affected by screen violence, this is really one best to avoid.
“The Cold War hasn’t ended – it has splintered into thousands of dangerous pieces” intones the matron. Similarly, this film has potential but splinters into many pieces, some good but far more sharp and dangerous. With similarities in tone and content to “Atomic Blonde“, there’s a good ‘post cold war’ spy film in here trying to get out. Unfortunately, it never quite gets both legs over the wall.
“Red Sparrow”, the latest film from “Hunger Games” director Francis Lawrence, has Jennifer Lawrence (“Joy“, “mother!“) as Dominika Egorova, a Russian ballerina, who after a horrific accident (cringe) is forced to serve the State in order to keep her mother (Joely Richardson, “101 Dalmations”) in their Bolshoi-funded apartment and with the necessary medical treatment. She is sent to a spy “whore school”, ruled over by “matron” (Charlotte Rampling), to learn how to use sexual and psychological means to ‘get in the pants’ (and therefore the minds) of foreign targets.
Always elegant. Charlotte Rampling back on our screens as “Matron”.
And she turns out to be very good and – without nepotism of course, given that her creepy uncle Egorov ( Matthias Schoenaerts, “Far From The Madding Crowd“) is high up in the special services – she is sent on a mission to Budapest to try to uncover a high profile mole, who’s CIA handler is Nate Nash (Joel Edgerton, “The Great Gatsby“, “Black Mass“). Supervising Egorov’s operation are his two line managers General Korchnoi (Jeremy Irons, “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice“) and Zakharov (Ciarán Hinds, “Harry Potter”). Sucked into a web of intrigue, Dominika needs to use all her skills and charms to complete her mission… which equates to keeping herself and her mother alive.
Now on the tarmac, Joel really wans’t looking forward to his Ryanair flight.
This is an extremely uneven film. In places it is quite brilliant, particularly the twist in the ending which leaves you thinking (like “Life“) that the film is actually better than it was. In fact – subject to a couple of severe reservations discussed below – the script by Justin Haythe (“A Cure for Wellness“) and based on a book by Jason Matthews, is quite sharp. But – man – in its direction the film seriously takes its time. In my book, a film needs to have a pretty good reason to extend its stay past 2 hours, and this outstays its welcome by an extra 20 minutes. Many of the scenes are protracted – leisurely walks across streets etc. – for no particularly good reason.
Pwoaahh – look at those. (I’m referring of course to Joel Edgerton’s buns in those speedos).
And so to those major reservations: the sex and the violence.
I’m no prude when it comes to sex, but some of the scenes in the ‘whore school’ left me feeling like this was less about a “Times Up” initiative of empowering women and more about providing an array of sordid titillation on the screen that just help entrench mysoginistic views about women. (Did anyone else hear Kenneth Williams saying “Oooooh, matron” to Charlotte Rampling’s character?) There were men and women attending this training camp, but did we see – later in the film – any of the men subjecting themselves to sexual humiliation or subjugation in the field: no, we did not. I love a really good erotic film… but this just left me feeling dirty and used.
Who wants to go to the f***ing party? No one seems to have remembered to bring a bottle.
And then there’s the violence. I’m definitely not a fan of the sort of violent-porn of the “Saw” type of films, but heavens – if there was a reason to make this an 18 certificate it was the violence involved. Violent rape, a vicious revenge attack, extreme torture, skinning alive: was there nothing in here that the censors thought, “hang on a minute, perhaps I don’t want a 15 year old seeing this”. I have seldom seen and heard more flinching and whimpering from women in a cinema audience than during this film. If you are adversely affected by screen violence, this is really one best to avoid.
“The Cold War hasn’t ended – it has splintered into thousands of dangerous pieces” intones the matron. Similarly, this film has potential but splinters into many pieces, some good but far more sharp and dangerous. With similarities in tone and content to “Atomic Blonde“, there’s a good ‘post cold war’ spy film in here trying to get out. Unfortunately, it never quite gets both legs over the wall.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Tides of Madness in Tabletop Games
Dec 7, 2021
As you know, the world of board games is quite vast – there are so many games out there, I feel like I can barely keep up! So oftentimes when I come across a game, it’s not necessarily a new one. Enter Tides of Madness. It maaaay sound familiar, and that is because it is a reimplementation of Tides of Time (which we have reviewed before). Is this just a Cthulhian re-theme of the same game, or does it alter the gameplay at all? Keep reading to find out!
Tides of Madness is a game of card drafting and set collection in which 2 players are trying to amass the most points by the end of 3 rounds. To setup for a game, shuffle the deck and deal 5 cards to each player. Place the rest aside as a draw deck, and place the Madness tokens within reach. Each of the 3 rounds is broken down into 3 phases: Drafting, Scoring, and Refresh. During the Drafting phase, each player will choose one card from their hand to keep, and place it face-down in front of them. Once both players have chosen their card, they will be revealed simultaneously and placed in your tableau. Take the remaining cards from your hand and pass them to your opponent. You now draft another card from this new hand, and will then pass the cards again. Drafting continues in this fashion until both players have no cards remaining in hand.
The next phase, Scoring, now begins. Players check their tableau and take a Madness token for each card with a Madness icon. The player with the most Madness this round can choose to gain an additional 4 VP or heal (discard) one Madness token. An important note – if at any time a player receives 9 or more Madness tokens, they immediately lose the game! So keep an eye on those cards, and know when to heal. Next, players will score the cards based on printed objectives – sets of suits, majority of a suit, etc. Points are tallied on the score pad. Finally, the Refresh phase gets you ready for the next round. Each player collects their tableau and selects one card to keep for the next round, and another card to discard from the game. Players simultaneously reveal their kept card and it starts the round already in their tableau. Players will draw 2 new cards to total 5 in hand, and the next round is ready to begin. Play ends either if a player has 9 or more Madness, or after a total of 3 rounds. After the 3rd and final round, all points are added up and the player with the highest score wins.
So if you’re thinking this game is basically Tides of Time, you’re pretty much correct. The only difference between the two is the concept/mechanic of the Madness tokens. And honestly, I think the inclusion of the tokens elevates the strategy a bit. In Tides of Time, it really is all about set collection. But with Madness tokens, you’ve got some risk/reward balance to play with. Do you take a card to complete a set even though it gives you a Madness token? Or do you leave it for last so your opponent is forced to take it? The same applies to the extra step in the Scoring phase. Do you risk keeping all your Madness to snag 4 extra VP or is it better (and safer) to heal 1? It just adds another element to the gameplay that makes it feel a little more engaging and exciting than simple set collection.
To touch on components for a minute – this game consists of 18 oversized cards, a bunch of cardboard Madness tokens, a score pad, and small pencil. The artwork on the cards is appropriately thematic and dark, and the text is clear and easy to interpret. The Madness icon on certain cards is a bunch of tentacles on the side of the card, and it is easy to see which cards are affected and which are not. The tokens and score pad are both decent quality as well. Although not 100% necessary, I appreciate the inclusion of a score pad just to help you remember points between rounds. All in all, good production all around.
I have to say that of the two, I prefer Tides of Madness over Tides of Time. You may have noticed that I have rated both games at a 4, but the Madness element in this one just pushes it over the top for me. Both are good games, don’t get me wrong! Either work as a good set collection/drafting game, and are quick to learn and play. Tides of Madness just engages me a little more and that makes the overall gameplay more enjoyable for me. So all in all, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a maddening 4 / 6.
Tides of Madness is a game of card drafting and set collection in which 2 players are trying to amass the most points by the end of 3 rounds. To setup for a game, shuffle the deck and deal 5 cards to each player. Place the rest aside as a draw deck, and place the Madness tokens within reach. Each of the 3 rounds is broken down into 3 phases: Drafting, Scoring, and Refresh. During the Drafting phase, each player will choose one card from their hand to keep, and place it face-down in front of them. Once both players have chosen their card, they will be revealed simultaneously and placed in your tableau. Take the remaining cards from your hand and pass them to your opponent. You now draft another card from this new hand, and will then pass the cards again. Drafting continues in this fashion until both players have no cards remaining in hand.
The next phase, Scoring, now begins. Players check their tableau and take a Madness token for each card with a Madness icon. The player with the most Madness this round can choose to gain an additional 4 VP or heal (discard) one Madness token. An important note – if at any time a player receives 9 or more Madness tokens, they immediately lose the game! So keep an eye on those cards, and know when to heal. Next, players will score the cards based on printed objectives – sets of suits, majority of a suit, etc. Points are tallied on the score pad. Finally, the Refresh phase gets you ready for the next round. Each player collects their tableau and selects one card to keep for the next round, and another card to discard from the game. Players simultaneously reveal their kept card and it starts the round already in their tableau. Players will draw 2 new cards to total 5 in hand, and the next round is ready to begin. Play ends either if a player has 9 or more Madness, or after a total of 3 rounds. After the 3rd and final round, all points are added up and the player with the highest score wins.
So if you’re thinking this game is basically Tides of Time, you’re pretty much correct. The only difference between the two is the concept/mechanic of the Madness tokens. And honestly, I think the inclusion of the tokens elevates the strategy a bit. In Tides of Time, it really is all about set collection. But with Madness tokens, you’ve got some risk/reward balance to play with. Do you take a card to complete a set even though it gives you a Madness token? Or do you leave it for last so your opponent is forced to take it? The same applies to the extra step in the Scoring phase. Do you risk keeping all your Madness to snag 4 extra VP or is it better (and safer) to heal 1? It just adds another element to the gameplay that makes it feel a little more engaging and exciting than simple set collection.
To touch on components for a minute – this game consists of 18 oversized cards, a bunch of cardboard Madness tokens, a score pad, and small pencil. The artwork on the cards is appropriately thematic and dark, and the text is clear and easy to interpret. The Madness icon on certain cards is a bunch of tentacles on the side of the card, and it is easy to see which cards are affected and which are not. The tokens and score pad are both decent quality as well. Although not 100% necessary, I appreciate the inclusion of a score pad just to help you remember points between rounds. All in all, good production all around.
I have to say that of the two, I prefer Tides of Madness over Tides of Time. You may have noticed that I have rated both games at a 4, but the Madness element in this one just pushes it over the top for me. Both are good games, don’t get me wrong! Either work as a good set collection/drafting game, and are quick to learn and play. Tides of Madness just engages me a little more and that makes the overall gameplay more enjoyable for me. So all in all, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a maddening 4 / 6.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated The Housemaid (The Housemaid #1) in Books
Nov 9, 2022
I had been in a book funk for awhile especially when it came to psychological thrillers. I love psychological thrillers, but I am very picky about which ones I'll read. When I came across The Housemaid by Freida McFadden, the synopsis really caught my attention. I decided to give it a read and ended up loving it!
The Housemaid tells the story of Millie, a young woman down on her luck. With a prison background, getting a decent paying job has been hard to find. Millie's been living in her car for awhile after being let go from her most recent job. When a high paying job arises working for the Winchesters, Millie can hardly believe her luck when she's offered the job. All she has to do is keep the house clean, take care of the Winchesters' daughter Cecelia, and cook for them. It's not too bad considering how much she's being paid. Plus, she'll be able to finally sleep in a bed! However, things drastically take a turn for the worst on Millie's first day. Nina Winchester, the wife, is constantly berating Millie and leaving big messes for her. She's gaslighting Millie at every turn. Is there a method to Nina's madness or is Nina really out to get Millie?
I loved the plot of The Housemaid. I was definitely scratching my head trying to figure out what was going on at first. While I have read similar stories to this one, Freida McFadden adds varying elements to keep her story line original. There were plenty of twists and turns throughout. In fact, one twist happens within the first few chapters. Nothing is as it seems when it comes to the story line of this novel. I was sucked into the world McFadden had created. I felt like I was a character hiding in the shadows watching all the drama unfold. While there is a small cliffhanger, I feel like The Housemaid is a book that can be read as a standalone despite it being part of a series. I say this because all my questions and wonderings I had throughout reading The Housemaid were tied up nicely by the end of the book. (Although I would have liked to know a bit more about how Andrew Winchester, the husband, had amassed such a large fortune.)
Every single character main and secondary character in The Housemaid was well written. It was actually quite easy to picture each character in my mind. Each character's personality shown through with each page. I never knew what to expect with Nina. I kept trying to figure out why she was one way while interviewing Millie yet a whole different person from the very first day Millie started her job. I couldn't figure out why she kept gaslighting Millie and why she would hire her only to ridicule and belittle her at every given opportunity. I did like reading about Nina though and to finally get her perspective on why she was the way she was to Millie. Andrew seemed like a nice guy. He was always wanting to protect Millie from Nina's craziness, and I did keep finding myself wanting Andrew and Millie to become a couple as there was so much chemistry between them. I also thought Nina didn't deserve Andrew with how mean she was. Millie seemed like a sweet young woman that had been handed some bad cards throughout her life. I was wishing nothing but the best for Millie throughout the book. It was obvious that she was trying to get her life on track after all the bad she had endured. Enzo, the gardener, was the wild card. I never knew if I should trust him or not. While he seemed oblivious to everything around him, I was always left wondering if he knew more than he let on. One character I would have liked to know more about was Cecelia. She came across as a bit of a brat, and it becomes obvious why she would act that way, but I would have liked to know more about her life growing up in the Winchester residence such as what she would go through while she was away and what not. Saying all that about the characters, I will say that no one in this book is quite as they seem. What you see is not what you get with the people in The Housemaid.
Trigger warnings for The Housemaid include gaslighting, blackmail, profanity, torture, violence, murder, and captivity.
Overall, The Housemaid is a solid story that will leave you guessing which each page read. You won't know which character to trust or what is real. It will be all too easy to stay up late into the night to finish this book because it's just that good! I would definitely recommend The Housemaid by Freida McFadden to those aged 18+ who love being fully immersed in whatever they are reading. This book will suck you right into its pages from the get go. It'll also leave you with a distrust of attic rooms at the top of stairs!
The Housemaid tells the story of Millie, a young woman down on her luck. With a prison background, getting a decent paying job has been hard to find. Millie's been living in her car for awhile after being let go from her most recent job. When a high paying job arises working for the Winchesters, Millie can hardly believe her luck when she's offered the job. All she has to do is keep the house clean, take care of the Winchesters' daughter Cecelia, and cook for them. It's not too bad considering how much she's being paid. Plus, she'll be able to finally sleep in a bed! However, things drastically take a turn for the worst on Millie's first day. Nina Winchester, the wife, is constantly berating Millie and leaving big messes for her. She's gaslighting Millie at every turn. Is there a method to Nina's madness or is Nina really out to get Millie?
I loved the plot of The Housemaid. I was definitely scratching my head trying to figure out what was going on at first. While I have read similar stories to this one, Freida McFadden adds varying elements to keep her story line original. There were plenty of twists and turns throughout. In fact, one twist happens within the first few chapters. Nothing is as it seems when it comes to the story line of this novel. I was sucked into the world McFadden had created. I felt like I was a character hiding in the shadows watching all the drama unfold. While there is a small cliffhanger, I feel like The Housemaid is a book that can be read as a standalone despite it being part of a series. I say this because all my questions and wonderings I had throughout reading The Housemaid were tied up nicely by the end of the book. (Although I would have liked to know a bit more about how Andrew Winchester, the husband, had amassed such a large fortune.)
Every single character main and secondary character in The Housemaid was well written. It was actually quite easy to picture each character in my mind. Each character's personality shown through with each page. I never knew what to expect with Nina. I kept trying to figure out why she was one way while interviewing Millie yet a whole different person from the very first day Millie started her job. I couldn't figure out why she kept gaslighting Millie and why she would hire her only to ridicule and belittle her at every given opportunity. I did like reading about Nina though and to finally get her perspective on why she was the way she was to Millie. Andrew seemed like a nice guy. He was always wanting to protect Millie from Nina's craziness, and I did keep finding myself wanting Andrew and Millie to become a couple as there was so much chemistry between them. I also thought Nina didn't deserve Andrew with how mean she was. Millie seemed like a sweet young woman that had been handed some bad cards throughout her life. I was wishing nothing but the best for Millie throughout the book. It was obvious that she was trying to get her life on track after all the bad she had endured. Enzo, the gardener, was the wild card. I never knew if I should trust him or not. While he seemed oblivious to everything around him, I was always left wondering if he knew more than he let on. One character I would have liked to know more about was Cecelia. She came across as a bit of a brat, and it becomes obvious why she would act that way, but I would have liked to know more about her life growing up in the Winchester residence such as what she would go through while she was away and what not. Saying all that about the characters, I will say that no one in this book is quite as they seem. What you see is not what you get with the people in The Housemaid.
Trigger warnings for The Housemaid include gaslighting, blackmail, profanity, torture, violence, murder, and captivity.
Overall, The Housemaid is a solid story that will leave you guessing which each page read. You won't know which character to trust or what is real. It will be all too easy to stay up late into the night to finish this book because it's just that good! I would definitely recommend The Housemaid by Freida McFadden to those aged 18+ who love being fully immersed in whatever they are reading. This book will suck you right into its pages from the get go. It'll also leave you with a distrust of attic rooms at the top of stairs!