Search
Search results
This is a bit of a story of two parts. Aaron Falk returns to his childhood home town to the funeral of his friend and his wife and son. His friend is purported to have murdered his family and then killed himself. Aaron is not so sure, and neither is his friend, Luke’s, parents. They ask Aaron to investigate for them (Aaron is a federal police officer). However it isn’t as easy as all that. Aaron left town under a cloud and the townsfolk suspected that he was involved in the death of a girl before he left.
Great characters, a very involving story, that once I became involved in, I really didn’t want to put down.
Very exciting towards the end, well worth a read!!
Great characters, a very involving story, that once I became involved in, I really didn’t want to put down.
Very exciting towards the end, well worth a read!!
Barry Newman (204 KP) rated Eye In The Sky (2016) in Movies
Jan 28, 2020
This thought provoking drone strike thriller is a tense and exciting watch with some excellent work from Helen Mirren, Aaron Paul and the much missed Alan Rickman. I liked how the film satisfyingly explores the political, ethical and emotional implications of ending a human life thousands of miles away from behind a computer screen. It was quite disturbing and sadly very realistic to see politicians arguing over the positives of murder. Well worth checking out.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Pretty Little Wife in Books
Jan 7, 2021
Slow to start, but ultimately an intriguing and unique thriller
Lila Ridgefield's husband is missing. A beloved high school teacher, his boss, colleagues, and brother cannot believe that Aaron Payne would just disappear. He's certainly not the type to simply not show up for work one day. As for his wife, Lila is known more for her cold and quiet demeanor (and, let's be honest, her beauty). She's also pretty confused, because the last time she saw Aaron, she was rather convinced she was looking at his dead body. So where's his car she left behind--and the body? Investigator Ginny Davis is called to look into Aaron's disappearance. At first it seems unrelated to that of a missing local student. But the more Ginny digs, the more she starts to wonder. And the more Lila digs, the more she fears her husband is still alive.
"Despite all her careful planning, he was gone. She had to find Aaron before he found her."
Well, this was quite a book. The beginning was a bit slow for me--it took too long to get to the exciting part, and it was repetitive. It felt like bits and pieces were rehashed over and over. I wanted to shake Lila and tell her to get on with it!
But, once everything gets moving, this is quite an exciting thriller. The last fourth of the story especially is incredibly electrifying and, for the most part, keeps you guessing. (I had a decent idea about whodunnit, but it didn't diminish my enjoyment at all.) I loved the concept of a mystery where the woman kills her husband, yet the main story is, surprise: he disappears anyway. The dynamic between cunning Lila, whom you're never sure you can trust, and Ginny, who is a straightforward and honest investigator, is excellent. I enjoy a book with strong female protagonists and these two are excellent.
Overall, even though this dragged for a bit, it's certainly worth a read. For one thing, it's different, which is so refreshing in the thriller genre. It's also dark, intriguing, and surprising. 3.5 stars, rounded to 4 here.
I received a copy of this book from HarperCollins Publishers and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.
Lila Ridgefield's husband is missing. A beloved high school teacher, his boss, colleagues, and brother cannot believe that Aaron Payne would just disappear. He's certainly not the type to simply not show up for work one day. As for his wife, Lila is known more for her cold and quiet demeanor (and, let's be honest, her beauty). She's also pretty confused, because the last time she saw Aaron, she was rather convinced she was looking at his dead body. So where's his car she left behind--and the body? Investigator Ginny Davis is called to look into Aaron's disappearance. At first it seems unrelated to that of a missing local student. But the more Ginny digs, the more she starts to wonder. And the more Lila digs, the more she fears her husband is still alive.
"Despite all her careful planning, he was gone. She had to find Aaron before he found her."
Well, this was quite a book. The beginning was a bit slow for me--it took too long to get to the exciting part, and it was repetitive. It felt like bits and pieces were rehashed over and over. I wanted to shake Lila and tell her to get on with it!
But, once everything gets moving, this is quite an exciting thriller. The last fourth of the story especially is incredibly electrifying and, for the most part, keeps you guessing. (I had a decent idea about whodunnit, but it didn't diminish my enjoyment at all.) I loved the concept of a mystery where the woman kills her husband, yet the main story is, surprise: he disappears anyway. The dynamic between cunning Lila, whom you're never sure you can trust, and Ginny, who is a straightforward and honest investigator, is excellent. I enjoy a book with strong female protagonists and these two are excellent.
Overall, even though this dragged for a bit, it's certainly worth a read. For one thing, it's different, which is so refreshing in the thriller genre. It's also dark, intriguing, and surprising. 3.5 stars, rounded to 4 here.
I received a copy of this book from HarperCollins Publishers and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Eye In The Sky (2016) in Movies
Sep 9, 2018
An interesting but slightly dull morality tale
The politics and morals behind this film are what keep you watching, as the plot is so relevant to today’s current political climate. You don’t doubt for a second that this is how issues like this play out, especially if you’re like me and know how horrendous government and public sector politics are. The problem is that all the to-ing and fro-ing of the politics doesn’t exactly make for an exciting film. It tries to build a little tension, but for me this doesn’t come across as well as it could and parts of the film ended up a little dull. 2 hours is a long time for politics like this.
There are some great performances in this from Helen Mirren and Aaron Paul, and of course it’s great to see the late Alan Rickman in his last ever film. Sadly he isn’t in this film as much as I’d like, it could’ve done with a lot more Rickman! Overall it isn’t a bad film and is worth watching for it’s very relevant storyline, but it isn’t exactly thrilling.
There are some great performances in this from Helen Mirren and Aaron Paul, and of course it’s great to see the late Alan Rickman in his last ever film. Sadly he isn’t in this film as much as I’d like, it could’ve done with a lot more Rickman! Overall it isn’t a bad film and is worth watching for it’s very relevant storyline, but it isn’t exactly thrilling.
Lou Grande (148 KP) rated Latter Days (2004) in Movies
Jun 20, 2018
Contains spoilers, click to show
I saw this movie back when it was released fourteen years ago, when I was still young and had faith in things. I picked it up again to see if it held up, and you know? It's not bad. Usually romantic comedies don't do much for me, gay or straight, but I have a thing for Mormons--what can I say?
So Christian is a gay party boy livin' it up in LA, but ultimately lacking in purpose and drive. Aaron is a Mormon missionary from Iowa, who experiences culture shock and desire for the first time, because of course they become neighbors and hijinks ensue. Fun fact! This movie also stars Joseph Gorgon-Levitt as a total butt, which is quite a contrast to his role in Mysterious Skin, another gay-themed movie which came out in the same year.
The acting is actually not as horrible as you would think from the production value/budget, and the story is typical romantic comedy fare. Still, I think it would strike a chord with anyone who is queer and was brought up in a religious household. It doesn't shy away from how agonizing it can be to be betrayed by family, especially fourteen years ago. And you know, some of the dialogue is actually really poignant. If you can get over the vaguely "afterschool special" feeling of this movie, it's definitely worth a watch.
(It has a happy ending!)
So Christian is a gay party boy livin' it up in LA, but ultimately lacking in purpose and drive. Aaron is a Mormon missionary from Iowa, who experiences culture shock and desire for the first time, because of course they become neighbors and hijinks ensue. Fun fact! This movie also stars Joseph Gorgon-Levitt as a total butt, which is quite a contrast to his role in Mysterious Skin, another gay-themed movie which came out in the same year.
The acting is actually not as horrible as you would think from the production value/budget, and the story is typical romantic comedy fare. Still, I think it would strike a chord with anyone who is queer and was brought up in a religious household. It doesn't shy away from how agonizing it can be to be betrayed by family, especially fourteen years ago. And you know, some of the dialogue is actually really poignant. If you can get over the vaguely "afterschool special" feeling of this movie, it's definitely worth a watch.
(It has a happy ending!)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Trial of the Chicago 7 (2020) in Movies
Oct 24, 2020
The epic ensemble cast (1 more)
The direction from Aaron Sorkin
“Trial” is a less wordy triumph for Sorkin
So, "The Trial of the Chicago 7" is one which I was unfortunately unable to catch on its short "Oscar-nom" cinema release, but is now on Netflix. And boy, for older viewers who prefer historical drama over wham-bam action, this is definitely worth the watch.
I know a decent bit of 20th century history, but this is a story I knew nothing about. At the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago, anti-Vietnam protests resulted in a violent and brutal confrontation with the police. Eight of the ring-leaders were rounded up and charged with inciting the violence. What happens in the court with the eight convicted men, in front of an old and partisan judge (the wonderful Frank Langella), is simply amazing.
There's a nice wiki article on the history you can look up. But its worth watching the movie blind, since it's a great rollercoaster ride.
If you read my blog regularly, you'll know that one of my favourite of the awards in award season is the "Ensemble Cast" award from the Screen Actor's Guild (SAG). I think a good measure of which movies might be good candidates for this award is when you find it difficult to single out particular actors for an individual award when they all work so well together. For this is a cast to die for:
- Sacha Baron Cohen, as Abbie Hoffman: an intelligent 'straight' role, poles apart from Borat and Bruno, that he delivers on 100%;
- Jeremy Strong as Hoffman's buddy Jerry Rubin, doing an enormously entertaining turn;
- Eddie Redmayne as the apparently 'sensible one' Tom Hayden. A bit similar to his role in "Les Miserables", but diving off in a different direction at a key point;
- John Carroll Lynch as the genuine 'boy scout' David Dellinger, so good in "The Founder" and here as the only family man under the judgmental stare of his wife and son;
- Yahya Abdul-Mateen II as Black Panther member Bobby Seale - the "minus 1" from the title - in an astonishingly powerful performance;
- Joseph Gordon-Levitt as the prosecutor Richard Schultz - always quietly dependable;
- And the fantastic Mark Rylance as the defense attorney William Kunstler. I appreciate I am having a tendency to gush in this review, but Rylance expresses such a range of frustration and disgust here that his performance is nothing short of electrifying.
There's also a cracking cameo from Michael Keaton playing the former US Attorney General, Ramsey Clark.
I would think that any of these performances might be Oscar-worthy (somewhere in the Actor/Supporting Actor categories) but my personal choices would be Rylance for Best Actor and Baron Cohen and Langella for Best Supporting Actor nods.
One of my issues with the scripts of Aaron Sorkin is that they tend to be overly dense and wordy. In epic TV like "The West Wing" he could spread the dialogue over a whole series, but in a feature film it can become very dense and verbose. I found that in both of his last two films - "Molly's Game" and "Steve Jobs".
Here, in "The Trial of the Chicago 7", even though there's a lot of speechifying, to me it never felt over the top. Although an epic courtroom drama (akin to his debut script "A Few Good Men") the characters are given time to breath between the lines. And many of those lines are real zingers, particularly out of the mouth of stand-up anarchist Abbie Hoffman (Sacha Baron Cohen).
Aside from the script being a zinger, the direction here from Aaron Sorkin is also top-notch. If you thought a courtroom drama was going to be static and boring, think again. The camera never rests, and inserted flashbacks (excellent film editing from Alan Baumgarten) maintain the momentum of the story.
Overall, this is a movie tour-de-force from Sorkin, and a fantastic watch. Could this be a writing/directing double Oscar nom for Sorkin?
(For the full graphical review, check out the bob the movie man review here - https://rb.gy/y6bxtf . Thanks.)
I know a decent bit of 20th century history, but this is a story I knew nothing about. At the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago, anti-Vietnam protests resulted in a violent and brutal confrontation with the police. Eight of the ring-leaders were rounded up and charged with inciting the violence. What happens in the court with the eight convicted men, in front of an old and partisan judge (the wonderful Frank Langella), is simply amazing.
There's a nice wiki article on the history you can look up. But its worth watching the movie blind, since it's a great rollercoaster ride.
If you read my blog regularly, you'll know that one of my favourite of the awards in award season is the "Ensemble Cast" award from the Screen Actor's Guild (SAG). I think a good measure of which movies might be good candidates for this award is when you find it difficult to single out particular actors for an individual award when they all work so well together. For this is a cast to die for:
- Sacha Baron Cohen, as Abbie Hoffman: an intelligent 'straight' role, poles apart from Borat and Bruno, that he delivers on 100%;
- Jeremy Strong as Hoffman's buddy Jerry Rubin, doing an enormously entertaining turn;
- Eddie Redmayne as the apparently 'sensible one' Tom Hayden. A bit similar to his role in "Les Miserables", but diving off in a different direction at a key point;
- John Carroll Lynch as the genuine 'boy scout' David Dellinger, so good in "The Founder" and here as the only family man under the judgmental stare of his wife and son;
- Yahya Abdul-Mateen II as Black Panther member Bobby Seale - the "minus 1" from the title - in an astonishingly powerful performance;
- Joseph Gordon-Levitt as the prosecutor Richard Schultz - always quietly dependable;
- And the fantastic Mark Rylance as the defense attorney William Kunstler. I appreciate I am having a tendency to gush in this review, but Rylance expresses such a range of frustration and disgust here that his performance is nothing short of electrifying.
There's also a cracking cameo from Michael Keaton playing the former US Attorney General, Ramsey Clark.
I would think that any of these performances might be Oscar-worthy (somewhere in the Actor/Supporting Actor categories) but my personal choices would be Rylance for Best Actor and Baron Cohen and Langella for Best Supporting Actor nods.
One of my issues with the scripts of Aaron Sorkin is that they tend to be overly dense and wordy. In epic TV like "The West Wing" he could spread the dialogue over a whole series, but in a feature film it can become very dense and verbose. I found that in both of his last two films - "Molly's Game" and "Steve Jobs".
Here, in "The Trial of the Chicago 7", even though there's a lot of speechifying, to me it never felt over the top. Although an epic courtroom drama (akin to his debut script "A Few Good Men") the characters are given time to breath between the lines. And many of those lines are real zingers, particularly out of the mouth of stand-up anarchist Abbie Hoffman (Sacha Baron Cohen).
Aside from the script being a zinger, the direction here from Aaron Sorkin is also top-notch. If you thought a courtroom drama was going to be static and boring, think again. The camera never rests, and inserted flashbacks (excellent film editing from Alan Baumgarten) maintain the momentum of the story.
Overall, this is a movie tour-de-force from Sorkin, and a fantastic watch. Could this be a writing/directing double Oscar nom for Sorkin?
(For the full graphical review, check out the bob the movie man review here - https://rb.gy/y6bxtf . Thanks.)
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Bleed For This (2016) in Movies
Aug 11, 2017 (Updated Oct 25, 2017)
Incredible true story (4 more)
Eckhart & Teller are brilliant in the lead performances
The supporting cast are great too
Tight script
Good direction
One Of The Most Remarkable Comebacks In History
If this movie wasn't based in true events, it would be ridiculed for being too far fetched. Don't get me wrong, I am sure that, (as is with the case with all movies based on a 'true' story,) some aspects of the film have been exaggerated for dramatic purposes, but even still, this is an incredible story about triumph over adversity.
The cast are all great, Miles Teller at this point is up there with Christian Bale and Jake Gyllenhaal as a young character actor at the top of his game in my eyes. He is fantastic as Pazienza and does a brilliant job conveying the pain and tragedy that Vinnie faced and the 'nothing will stop me,' attitude that Vinnie possessed. Aaron Eckhart goes from Hollywood heart-throb, to past his prime shlub in this role and he sells it convincingly, he truly is one of the most underrated character actors working today in my opinion.
The rest of the ensemble cast are great. The production is also of an immensely high quality, the sets, sound design and abrupt editing all make up an equally grim and glamorous world that feels realistic and lived in.
Overall this film is definitely worth a watch, whether you are a boxing fan or not, it is a hugely inspirational story that has been brought to life masterfully and is a story that should be witnessed by everybody.
The cast are all great, Miles Teller at this point is up there with Christian Bale and Jake Gyllenhaal as a young character actor at the top of his game in my eyes. He is fantastic as Pazienza and does a brilliant job conveying the pain and tragedy that Vinnie faced and the 'nothing will stop me,' attitude that Vinnie possessed. Aaron Eckhart goes from Hollywood heart-throb, to past his prime shlub in this role and he sells it convincingly, he truly is one of the most underrated character actors working today in my opinion.
The rest of the ensemble cast are great. The production is also of an immensely high quality, the sets, sound design and abrupt editing all make up an equally grim and glamorous world that feels realistic and lived in.
Overall this film is definitely worth a watch, whether you are a boxing fan or not, it is a hugely inspirational story that has been brought to life masterfully and is a story that should be witnessed by everybody.
James P. Sumner (65 KP) rated Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019) in Movies
Jun 4, 2019
Visuals (1 more)
Action
A true monster of a movie!
This sequel to the 2014 reboot of Godzilla is an enjoyable movie. It doesn't follow the common trend of "less is more", not wasting any time showing you the visually stunning monsters in all their glory.
The plot is simple enough: Godzilla has been absent since the last movie five years ago. More monsters (called Titans here) have been discovered around the world and the mysterious Monarch group are studying them. Needless to say, it doesn't take long for things to take a turn for the worst, and when a big, bad monster is revived and starts destroying things, our old pal Godzilla returns.
This is one of those movies where you leave your brain and the real world at the door, and just enjoy it for what it is. There's a lot of criticism aimed at modern movies for overusing CGI, but this film needs it and uses it very well. The monsters look incredible, and genuinely look massive. The battles and subsequent destruction look amazing, too. It's a real treat for the eyes, packed with many WOW! moments.
Is it perfect? No. As graphically stunning as it is, the plot leaves a lot to be desired. Riddled with tiny (and the odd large) plot holes, it's a pretty basic storyline. But then, it doesn't need to be overly complex in a movie like this one.
No one comes to a Godzilla movie expecting Oscar-worthy performances and Aaron Sorkin-esque screenplays. They come to be entertained. And you will be here. Well worth stepping away from life for a couple of hours. Don't forget your popcorn!
The plot is simple enough: Godzilla has been absent since the last movie five years ago. More monsters (called Titans here) have been discovered around the world and the mysterious Monarch group are studying them. Needless to say, it doesn't take long for things to take a turn for the worst, and when a big, bad monster is revived and starts destroying things, our old pal Godzilla returns.
This is one of those movies where you leave your brain and the real world at the door, and just enjoy it for what it is. There's a lot of criticism aimed at modern movies for overusing CGI, but this film needs it and uses it very well. The monsters look incredible, and genuinely look massive. The battles and subsequent destruction look amazing, too. It's a real treat for the eyes, packed with many WOW! moments.
Is it perfect? No. As graphically stunning as it is, the plot leaves a lot to be desired. Riddled with tiny (and the odd large) plot holes, it's a pretty basic storyline. But then, it doesn't need to be overly complex in a movie like this one.
No one comes to a Godzilla movie expecting Oscar-worthy performances and Aaron Sorkin-esque screenplays. They come to be entertained. And you will be here. Well worth stepping away from life for a couple of hours. Don't forget your popcorn!
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Paycheck (2003) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
In the year 2007, memories can be erased almost as easily as they can be created. With corporate security being of top concern, this technology is in high demand for corporations who hire people to work on sensitive projects.
Michael Jennings (Ben Affleck), is a master of technology, and as such, is in high demand for his ability to reverse engineer technology. Companies hire him to work in private to unlock technological secrets of their competition and upon completion of his work; Jennings has his memories of his work and time at the company removed. This arrangement protects the companies, as they do not have to disclose how they came about the new technologies and the only person who can attest to the source of the work has no memory of it making the claim valid, and keeping him from being able to recoup long-term profits from the company.
Jennings is well paid for his work, and has recently completed a two-month job when his friend Rethrick (Aaron Eckhart), asks Michael to come work on a secret thee-year project for his company. Michael is told only that it deals with optics and that he will be paid with stock options worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
After thinking about the deal, Michael agrees to the job and sets out to complete the task ahead of him.
In what seems like a few minutes to him, Michael comes to in the office of Rethrick and is stunned to learn that he has completed his work and that it was a huge success.
Pleased, Michael sets out to collect his payment but is surprised to learn that he forfeited his stocks four days earlier and sent himself an envelope containing various mundane items such as paperclips, ball bearings, matches, and keys.
Before long, Michael is running for his life and attempting to unravel the mystery of the missing three years in his memory.
Based on the short story by renowned Sci-Fi author Phillip K. Dick, and directed by famed action helmer John Woo, “Paycheck” is a pleasant and entertaining surprise. The previews do not do this film justice, as it is an entertaining and engrossing film with good supporting work by Uma Thurman and Paul Giamatti.
There are a number of twists and turns to the story and some good action and humor along the way. Affleck does solid work as a man desperate to solve the mystery and struggling to cope with his life spun out of control.
While the ending was a bit to Hollywood for me, “Paycheck” is a solid and entertaining film and worth seeing.
Michael Jennings (Ben Affleck), is a master of technology, and as such, is in high demand for his ability to reverse engineer technology. Companies hire him to work in private to unlock technological secrets of their competition and upon completion of his work; Jennings has his memories of his work and time at the company removed. This arrangement protects the companies, as they do not have to disclose how they came about the new technologies and the only person who can attest to the source of the work has no memory of it making the claim valid, and keeping him from being able to recoup long-term profits from the company.
Jennings is well paid for his work, and has recently completed a two-month job when his friend Rethrick (Aaron Eckhart), asks Michael to come work on a secret thee-year project for his company. Michael is told only that it deals with optics and that he will be paid with stock options worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
After thinking about the deal, Michael agrees to the job and sets out to complete the task ahead of him.
In what seems like a few minutes to him, Michael comes to in the office of Rethrick and is stunned to learn that he has completed his work and that it was a huge success.
Pleased, Michael sets out to collect his payment but is surprised to learn that he forfeited his stocks four days earlier and sent himself an envelope containing various mundane items such as paperclips, ball bearings, matches, and keys.
Before long, Michael is running for his life and attempting to unravel the mystery of the missing three years in his memory.
Based on the short story by renowned Sci-Fi author Phillip K. Dick, and directed by famed action helmer John Woo, “Paycheck” is a pleasant and entertaining surprise. The previews do not do this film justice, as it is an entertaining and engrossing film with good supporting work by Uma Thurman and Paul Giamatti.
There are a number of twists and turns to the story and some good action and humor along the way. Affleck does solid work as a man desperate to solve the mystery and struggling to cope with his life spun out of control.
While the ending was a bit to Hollywood for me, “Paycheck” is a solid and entertaining film and worth seeing.
Micah Ulibarri (79 KP) rated Star War #44 in Books
Mar 15, 2018
A Strong start to a new story
Contains spoilers, click to show
A new story begins in Marvel's flagship series for the Star Wars universe. After the destruction of the Death Star, the Alliance's greatest heroes; Leia, Han, and Luke, must convince the Mon Calamari to join their rebellion and donate their great capital ships to the cause.
Readers familar with the Star Wars galaxy will understand how important this never before told story is to the universe. The rebellion has few warships at this time and decide to ask their friend and everyone's favorite Star wars meme, Admiral Ackbar, to call in a favor from his planet. In a time when Star Wars comics has been criticized for being irrelevant in the grand scheme, this story is one worth telling and with real stakes on the galaxy.
Don't worry. You're faborite Star wars characters are written with great respect to who the characters are while still keeping them fresh and interesting. I particularly found myself enjoying Han in this issue.
While the previous arcs had been somewhat episodic and disjointed, this one seems to make sense and includes reveals from the previous issue, leading to a more cohesive overall feel to the series since Kieron Gillen took over from Jason Aaron.
The main thing holding the issue back from being great is its need to exposit and introduce what the next arc will include. A couple times the exposition can be a bit cumbersome.
Finally, my hope is that this series will bring another tie-in from The Clone Wars animated series. They seem to be telegraphing the return of Mon Cal king Lee-Char. I would be quite tickled if we got to see a more wisened version of him in this series.
Conclusion: A fun and strong start with just a couple hiccups in the set up and a great place to junp on for the curious.
Readers familar with the Star Wars galaxy will understand how important this never before told story is to the universe. The rebellion has few warships at this time and decide to ask their friend and everyone's favorite Star wars meme, Admiral Ackbar, to call in a favor from his planet. In a time when Star Wars comics has been criticized for being irrelevant in the grand scheme, this story is one worth telling and with real stakes on the galaxy.
Don't worry. You're faborite Star wars characters are written with great respect to who the characters are while still keeping them fresh and interesting. I particularly found myself enjoying Han in this issue.
While the previous arcs had been somewhat episodic and disjointed, this one seems to make sense and includes reveals from the previous issue, leading to a more cohesive overall feel to the series since Kieron Gillen took over from Jason Aaron.
The main thing holding the issue back from being great is its need to exposit and introduce what the next arc will include. A couple times the exposition can be a bit cumbersome.
Finally, my hope is that this series will bring another tie-in from The Clone Wars animated series. They seem to be telegraphing the return of Mon Cal king Lee-Char. I would be quite tickled if we got to see a more wisened version of him in this series.
Conclusion: A fun and strong start with just a couple hiccups in the set up and a great place to junp on for the curious.