Search
EverRun - Legend of the Horse Guardians
Entertainment and Games
App
Run endlessly across beautiful lands with the eight horses of Everbloom! Budge Studios™...
Phonics Genius
Education and Games
App
"WOW... over 6,000 words grouped by phonics sounds. This app is awesome to teach phonic awareness!"...
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Cryptocurrency in Tabletop Games
Apr 2, 2020
Money. Who knew that paper bills and small metal coins would hold such an important role in our society? In today’s day and age, though, with so much reliance on technology, we’ve managed to create digital currency called cryptocurrency. By buying, mining, and trading various cryptocurrencies, you just might turn yourself into an overnight millionaire! That is, if you’ve got the strategy required to outwit other traders…
You are the CEO of a fin-tech startup company. Leading a team of specialized experts, you will evaluate, trade, and mine different cryptocurrencies. Strategy is key, as you must stay ahead of the trend to maximize your earnings from the market. Can you solve the right algorithms and manipulate the network to help create the most wealth for your company? Or will you be scammed into buying worthless cryptocurrency? Play to find out!
Disclaimer: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This game is available to purchase, so the components seen in the pictures are what come with the game. I do not intend to rehash the entire rulebook in this review, but rather provide the basic ruleset and general gameplay overview of the game. Feel free to pick up a copy of the game directly from the publisher or your FLGS! -L
Cryptocurrency is a game of commodity speculation, action points, trading, and a little push your luck in which players are trying to amass the most amount of money over 5 rounds. To setup the game, place the Cryptocurrency Info Boards in the center of the play area, and place the Market Board next to them. Prepare and distribute the Rumor cards, and create the Ongoing Transactions deck. Each player receives a player reference card, 3 Intern Expert cards, and a total of 6 Wonga (the currency of the game). The game is now ready to begin! Each round is broken up into 4 phases: Prep, Action, Upkeep, and Rumor. During the Prep phase, each player (in turn order) must draw a Rumor card, and may hire a new Expert or take a loan. Experts are hired (purchased) from the Job Seekers pile, and often provide special abilities or increased Action Points. Hired Experts must replace one Expert from their existing team. Your team can only have 3 Experts, so choose wisely who to hire and fire! A loan can be taken to immediately gain 8 Wonga, but interest must be paid for the loan later in the round. After each player has performed these actions, play moves to the second phase.
During the Action phase, players take turns performing one of two actions: Mining or Trading. These actions are performed by spending Action points – each Expert offers a certain number of points to spend. Once you use an Action Point, that Expert is exhausted and can no longer work in this phase. To Mine, players choose one of the 4 available cryptocurrencies to mine (research), and will either Succeed or Fail in this endeavor. If you succeed, you create and earn coins from that specific cryptocurrency, as well as any extra money earned from completing ongoing transactions. If you fail, your turn immediately ends. To take the Trade action, players will either Buy or Sell coins to/from the Market. You are only allowed to buy/sell the same cryptocurrency each turn, and you may buy/sell up to 4 coins each turn. For every 4 coins bought, the Market Board shifts to increase that currency’s price by 1 Wonga. For every 4 coins sold, the Market decreases by 1 Wonga. Once every player is out of Action Points, this phase is over.
In the Upkeep phase, players refresh all Experts, pay interest on any Loans, or completely pay off a Loan. The final phase, Rumor, moves in counter-clockwise order. Players take turns adding their secret Rumor card to the Rumor Track of one of the 4 cryptocurrencies. The market values are adjusted based on the Rumors played, and any face-down Rumor cards will affect the end-game value of the currencies. Play then returns to the Prep phase, and continues until 5 rounds have been completed. Players determine which cryptocurrency was a scam, sell any remaining coins, and then count up their money. The player with the most Wonga is the winner!
I have to admit that Cryptocurrency surprised me. After reading the rules and getting the game setup, I was feeling a little overwhelmed. I was prepping myself for a complicated, quasi-educational game in which I would be relatively unengaged and going through the motions each turn. What I got, however, was the complete opposite. Yes, there is a lot going on in this game, but it offers so many different mechanics and strategies for success that you’re always thinking one step ahead. There’s the aspect of bluffing when it comes to Rumor cards and manipulating the market through those means, there’s drafting of new Experts and shedding your hand of lesser-powered cards, there’s push your luck in the Mining action as the more Action Points you spend, the more opportunity you have for success. There’s not one sure strategy to win, and you are changing and adapting on every turn. You also have to be paying attention to your opponents! Although there’s not really any direct player interaction, everything you do on your turn could throw a wrench in the plans of your neighbor. Can you figure out how they’re trying to play the Market? Or will you try to fly beneath the radar and throw them off your trail?
My biggest issue with this game has to do with components. The cryptocurrency boards and the market board all work together, but they are all their own separate components. So it just makes set-up/tear-down a little more involved because instead of laying out 1 big board and adding components to it, you have to lay out and populate 5 individual boards. It just makes it a little more tedious than I would like, but honestly it has no bearing on the gameplay at all. The quality of the components is pretty good overall, the artwork is tech-influenced and fun, and the cardboard coins are nice and sturdy. So all in all, a pretty good production quality.
So what are my thoughts on Cryptocurrency? I actually liked it more than I thought I would. It’s engaging and strategic, yet relatively simple enough that it doesn’t feel like too much of a brain burner. I am no cryptocurrency expert by any means, but I feel like after playing this game, I have a better understanding of it and how it works. So mission accomplished, Captial Gains Studio – you have a fun AND educational game here. Is it one I will pull out at every game night? No. But it’s one that I am looking forward to playing again in the future. Purple Phoenix Games gives Cryptocurrency an economic 8 / 12.
You are the CEO of a fin-tech startup company. Leading a team of specialized experts, you will evaluate, trade, and mine different cryptocurrencies. Strategy is key, as you must stay ahead of the trend to maximize your earnings from the market. Can you solve the right algorithms and manipulate the network to help create the most wealth for your company? Or will you be scammed into buying worthless cryptocurrency? Play to find out!
Disclaimer: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This game is available to purchase, so the components seen in the pictures are what come with the game. I do not intend to rehash the entire rulebook in this review, but rather provide the basic ruleset and general gameplay overview of the game. Feel free to pick up a copy of the game directly from the publisher or your FLGS! -L
Cryptocurrency is a game of commodity speculation, action points, trading, and a little push your luck in which players are trying to amass the most amount of money over 5 rounds. To setup the game, place the Cryptocurrency Info Boards in the center of the play area, and place the Market Board next to them. Prepare and distribute the Rumor cards, and create the Ongoing Transactions deck. Each player receives a player reference card, 3 Intern Expert cards, and a total of 6 Wonga (the currency of the game). The game is now ready to begin! Each round is broken up into 4 phases: Prep, Action, Upkeep, and Rumor. During the Prep phase, each player (in turn order) must draw a Rumor card, and may hire a new Expert or take a loan. Experts are hired (purchased) from the Job Seekers pile, and often provide special abilities or increased Action Points. Hired Experts must replace one Expert from their existing team. Your team can only have 3 Experts, so choose wisely who to hire and fire! A loan can be taken to immediately gain 8 Wonga, but interest must be paid for the loan later in the round. After each player has performed these actions, play moves to the second phase.
During the Action phase, players take turns performing one of two actions: Mining or Trading. These actions are performed by spending Action points – each Expert offers a certain number of points to spend. Once you use an Action Point, that Expert is exhausted and can no longer work in this phase. To Mine, players choose one of the 4 available cryptocurrencies to mine (research), and will either Succeed or Fail in this endeavor. If you succeed, you create and earn coins from that specific cryptocurrency, as well as any extra money earned from completing ongoing transactions. If you fail, your turn immediately ends. To take the Trade action, players will either Buy or Sell coins to/from the Market. You are only allowed to buy/sell the same cryptocurrency each turn, and you may buy/sell up to 4 coins each turn. For every 4 coins bought, the Market Board shifts to increase that currency’s price by 1 Wonga. For every 4 coins sold, the Market decreases by 1 Wonga. Once every player is out of Action Points, this phase is over.
In the Upkeep phase, players refresh all Experts, pay interest on any Loans, or completely pay off a Loan. The final phase, Rumor, moves in counter-clockwise order. Players take turns adding their secret Rumor card to the Rumor Track of one of the 4 cryptocurrencies. The market values are adjusted based on the Rumors played, and any face-down Rumor cards will affect the end-game value of the currencies. Play then returns to the Prep phase, and continues until 5 rounds have been completed. Players determine which cryptocurrency was a scam, sell any remaining coins, and then count up their money. The player with the most Wonga is the winner!
I have to admit that Cryptocurrency surprised me. After reading the rules and getting the game setup, I was feeling a little overwhelmed. I was prepping myself for a complicated, quasi-educational game in which I would be relatively unengaged and going through the motions each turn. What I got, however, was the complete opposite. Yes, there is a lot going on in this game, but it offers so many different mechanics and strategies for success that you’re always thinking one step ahead. There’s the aspect of bluffing when it comes to Rumor cards and manipulating the market through those means, there’s drafting of new Experts and shedding your hand of lesser-powered cards, there’s push your luck in the Mining action as the more Action Points you spend, the more opportunity you have for success. There’s not one sure strategy to win, and you are changing and adapting on every turn. You also have to be paying attention to your opponents! Although there’s not really any direct player interaction, everything you do on your turn could throw a wrench in the plans of your neighbor. Can you figure out how they’re trying to play the Market? Or will you try to fly beneath the radar and throw them off your trail?
My biggest issue with this game has to do with components. The cryptocurrency boards and the market board all work together, but they are all their own separate components. So it just makes set-up/tear-down a little more involved because instead of laying out 1 big board and adding components to it, you have to lay out and populate 5 individual boards. It just makes it a little more tedious than I would like, but honestly it has no bearing on the gameplay at all. The quality of the components is pretty good overall, the artwork is tech-influenced and fun, and the cardboard coins are nice and sturdy. So all in all, a pretty good production quality.
So what are my thoughts on Cryptocurrency? I actually liked it more than I thought I would. It’s engaging and strategic, yet relatively simple enough that it doesn’t feel like too much of a brain burner. I am no cryptocurrency expert by any means, but I feel like after playing this game, I have a better understanding of it and how it works. So mission accomplished, Captial Gains Studio – you have a fun AND educational game here. Is it one I will pull out at every game night? No. But it’s one that I am looking forward to playing again in the future. Purple Phoenix Games gives Cryptocurrency an economic 8 / 12.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008) in Movies
Mar 28, 2020
Holds up well - worth your time
I remember really liking THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON when it first was released in 2011. It made me a fan of Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchette, Tilda Swinton, Taraji P. Henson, Jared Harris and Director David Fincher - and I defended this film to those that did not have as high an opinion of this movie than I did. So when my daughter recommended we re-watch this film (a film I haven't watched in 5 or 6 years), I was excited to revisit it.
And...I'm glad I did...for I re-fell in love with the portions of the film that I remembered fondly while I was also able to see the flaws (mostly in pacing) that drops this film down a peg.
Based on the short story by F. Scott Fitgerald, THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON tells the tale of a man who ages backwards. His life is chronicled from his birth (right after the "Great War" ended in the 1919) and follows right up to his death.
As played by Brad Pitt in an Oscar nominated turn, the titular character is earnest, honest, somewhat naive and (as he gets younger) very attractive to look at. I've been a fan of Pitt's acting since the days of FIGHT CLUB and 12 MONKEYS (and think he deserved his Oscar for ONCE UPON A TIME IN HOLLYWOOD) and he does not disappoint in this film, especially since he has quite a few strong performers to play against (even while under heavy make-up).
Jared Harris, Taraji P. Henson (in an Oscar nominated performance) and Mahershala Ali all bring strong, winning performances but is the performances of 2 strong actresses that drew my attention to them from this point forward. Tilda Swinton (SNOWPIERCER) brings a sense of longing to her portrayal of a woman that Benjamin has a brief affair with. Their scenes together are touching and poignant with a sense of sadness that had me rooting for Swinton's character throughout.
But, it is the appearance of Cate Blanchette (THOR: RAGNAROK) that elevates this film for me. I had been a fan of Blanchette's since her Oscar winning role of Katherine Hepburn in THE AVIATOR, but this performance raised her abilities in my eyes and I eagerly await everything that she is going to appear in (including CAROL, a film that I loathe).
Director David Fincher (Se7EN, FIGHT CLUB) was also Oscar nominated for his work in this film and he blends a lifelong love story with events of the day while mixing in some wonderful CGI that helps age (or de-age) Benjamin as the film unfolds. This film, for me, was a departure for Fincher who I came to admire for his trippy films, but he brings a human-ness to the proceedings that helps ground the fantastical into reality.
Upon this viewing, I did find that this film does drag a bit at times - it is as if Fincher (and the cast) fell so in love with the characters and the scenes, that they lose track of the pacing, letting the film bog down from time to time. The film runs 2 hours and 46 minutes...and I think I could help find spots to trim about 20 minutes out of it.
The film did win in 3 of the 13 categories it was Oscar nominated in (it was nominated for BEST FILM, but did not win that award). The Oscar wins were all for special effects of some sort - and I kept looking to see if I could spot the tricks and Special FX in the film - and I could not. A good sign that this film is holding up 9 years later.
Take a trip through time (backwards) with Benjamin Button, it's is worth it.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars out of 10 (and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
And...I'm glad I did...for I re-fell in love with the portions of the film that I remembered fondly while I was also able to see the flaws (mostly in pacing) that drops this film down a peg.
Based on the short story by F. Scott Fitgerald, THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON tells the tale of a man who ages backwards. His life is chronicled from his birth (right after the "Great War" ended in the 1919) and follows right up to his death.
As played by Brad Pitt in an Oscar nominated turn, the titular character is earnest, honest, somewhat naive and (as he gets younger) very attractive to look at. I've been a fan of Pitt's acting since the days of FIGHT CLUB and 12 MONKEYS (and think he deserved his Oscar for ONCE UPON A TIME IN HOLLYWOOD) and he does not disappoint in this film, especially since he has quite a few strong performers to play against (even while under heavy make-up).
Jared Harris, Taraji P. Henson (in an Oscar nominated performance) and Mahershala Ali all bring strong, winning performances but is the performances of 2 strong actresses that drew my attention to them from this point forward. Tilda Swinton (SNOWPIERCER) brings a sense of longing to her portrayal of a woman that Benjamin has a brief affair with. Their scenes together are touching and poignant with a sense of sadness that had me rooting for Swinton's character throughout.
But, it is the appearance of Cate Blanchette (THOR: RAGNAROK) that elevates this film for me. I had been a fan of Blanchette's since her Oscar winning role of Katherine Hepburn in THE AVIATOR, but this performance raised her abilities in my eyes and I eagerly await everything that she is going to appear in (including CAROL, a film that I loathe).
Director David Fincher (Se7EN, FIGHT CLUB) was also Oscar nominated for his work in this film and he blends a lifelong love story with events of the day while mixing in some wonderful CGI that helps age (or de-age) Benjamin as the film unfolds. This film, for me, was a departure for Fincher who I came to admire for his trippy films, but he brings a human-ness to the proceedings that helps ground the fantastical into reality.
Upon this viewing, I did find that this film does drag a bit at times - it is as if Fincher (and the cast) fell so in love with the characters and the scenes, that they lose track of the pacing, letting the film bog down from time to time. The film runs 2 hours and 46 minutes...and I think I could help find spots to trim about 20 minutes out of it.
The film did win in 3 of the 13 categories it was Oscar nominated in (it was nominated for BEST FILM, but did not win that award). The Oscar wins were all for special effects of some sort - and I kept looking to see if I could spot the tricks and Special FX in the film - and I could not. A good sign that this film is holding up 9 years later.
Take a trip through time (backwards) with Benjamin Button, it's is worth it.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars out of 10 (and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
The Poetry Deal
Book
"The Poetry Deal: San Francisco Poet Laureate Series No. 5 gives us di Prima's vision as she looks...
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated The Neighbor in Books
Apr 13, 2021
I can not get enough of London Clarke's books. I have not read a bad one yet, so when I saw that she had released a new book entitled The Neighbor, I knew I had to read it. To say I was blown away is an understatement. The Neighbor has now become my favorite London Clarke book so far.
The plot of The Neighbor was definitely frightening. However, I could not put this book down. I kept trying to find opportunities when I had free time to read it. I was terrified for Claire and her four girls. I found myself wanting to protect them from whatever evil had invaded their house. I loved how the supernatural element of the story did not feel forced or cheesy. It was very believable so much so that I kept having to check for shadows as I read this book! The pacing was done perfectly. Although there are some parts of the story that are a bit predictable with how they will play out, I felt that it didn't take away from the narrative at all. I will say all the demon encounters were the spookiest though! However, London Clarke writes them in a way that won't leave you too scared to continue reading. She writes them in a way that will leave you wanting to know more. By the end of the book, all loose ends had been tied up, and there were no cliff hangers.
All of the characters in The Neighbor were fleshed out perfectly even the supporting characters. I really connected with Claire the most, not because she was the main character, but because we are both mothers. While I have two boys instead of four girls, my youngest, funnily enough named Levi (if you read The Neighbor, you'll find out why I find it funny), is the same age as Claire's youngest daughter named Paris. My oldest isn't much older than Claire's oldest daughter Annalen. Plus, Claire and myself are very close in age. I was behind Claire 100 percent, and it annoyed me when her ex-husband, Gunnar, thought she was just losing her mind instead of trying to help her out. I found Clair to be a very strong female character, and I felt so much admiration for her for what she chose to go through for her girls. (I know that most parents would have done the same though.) I also felt bad for Claire that one decision is what caused this whole supernatural mess. Steel was a definitely an interesting character that I did not trust from the very beginning. He is written perfectly, and even though I didn't trust him very much, he was still fun to read about. I found myself trying to figure him out all the time! Whitney was another character that I liked but didn't trust. It was so weird how her life seemed to mimic Claire's.
Trigger warnings for The Neighbor include profanity, violence, murder, death, suicide, alcohol, pedophilia (though not graphic), sex scenes (not very graphic), demons, and the occult.
Overall, The Neighbor is one heck of a rollercoaster ride, so be sure to strap yourself in tight. With it's terrifying plot and interesting characters, this book sucks you in from the very first page and won't spit you back out until it's had its wicked way with you. This is one book that needs to be made into a movie now. I would definitely recommend The Neighbor by London Clarke to those aged 18+ who love their spooky novels with a big helping of terrifying on the side. You will not be disappointed, that's for sure!
The plot of The Neighbor was definitely frightening. However, I could not put this book down. I kept trying to find opportunities when I had free time to read it. I was terrified for Claire and her four girls. I found myself wanting to protect them from whatever evil had invaded their house. I loved how the supernatural element of the story did not feel forced or cheesy. It was very believable so much so that I kept having to check for shadows as I read this book! The pacing was done perfectly. Although there are some parts of the story that are a bit predictable with how they will play out, I felt that it didn't take away from the narrative at all. I will say all the demon encounters were the spookiest though! However, London Clarke writes them in a way that won't leave you too scared to continue reading. She writes them in a way that will leave you wanting to know more. By the end of the book, all loose ends had been tied up, and there were no cliff hangers.
All of the characters in The Neighbor were fleshed out perfectly even the supporting characters. I really connected with Claire the most, not because she was the main character, but because we are both mothers. While I have two boys instead of four girls, my youngest, funnily enough named Levi (if you read The Neighbor, you'll find out why I find it funny), is the same age as Claire's youngest daughter named Paris. My oldest isn't much older than Claire's oldest daughter Annalen. Plus, Claire and myself are very close in age. I was behind Claire 100 percent, and it annoyed me when her ex-husband, Gunnar, thought she was just losing her mind instead of trying to help her out. I found Clair to be a very strong female character, and I felt so much admiration for her for what she chose to go through for her girls. (I know that most parents would have done the same though.) I also felt bad for Claire that one decision is what caused this whole supernatural mess. Steel was a definitely an interesting character that I did not trust from the very beginning. He is written perfectly, and even though I didn't trust him very much, he was still fun to read about. I found myself trying to figure him out all the time! Whitney was another character that I liked but didn't trust. It was so weird how her life seemed to mimic Claire's.
Trigger warnings for The Neighbor include profanity, violence, murder, death, suicide, alcohol, pedophilia (though not graphic), sex scenes (not very graphic), demons, and the occult.
Overall, The Neighbor is one heck of a rollercoaster ride, so be sure to strap yourself in tight. With it's terrifying plot and interesting characters, this book sucks you in from the very first page and won't spit you back out until it's had its wicked way with you. This is one book that needs to be made into a movie now. I would definitely recommend The Neighbor by London Clarke to those aged 18+ who love their spooky novels with a big helping of terrifying on the side. You will not be disappointed, that's for sure!
Read4Kids - Kids learn to read in 20 easy lessons
Education and Book
App
Read is a 20-lesson program designed to help kindergarten and elementary school age children (4–8...
7 Wonders
8.3
Rate It
Tabletop Game Watch
You are the leader of one of the 7 great cities of the Ancient World. Gather resources, develop...
BoardGames
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Denial (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Jewry Trial.
It’s the mid-90’s and Deborah Lipstadt (Rachael Weisz, “The Lobster“), an American professor of Holocaust studies at a US university has written a book naming and shaming David Irving (Timothy Spall, “Mr Turner”) as a Nazi-apologist who denies that the Holocaust ever happened. Filing a law suit against Penguin Books and Lipstadt in the UK, Lipstadt chooses to fight rather than settle and takes the case to the High Courts in a much publicised trial.
Help is required and Lipstadt is assigned a hot-shot solicitor (if that’s not an oxymoron) in the form of Anthony Julius (Andrew Scott, “Sherlock”) and top barrister Richard Rampton (Tom Wilkinson, “Selma“). The stage is set for an epic legal battle that will establish not just legal precedent but also historical precedent affecting the entire Jewish people.
This film’s trailer really appealed to me, and I was looking forward to this film. And that view clearly also got through to people of my age bracket (and older) since the cinema was pretty full. But ultimately I was disappointed by the film.
But first the good points.
The cinematography by Haris Zambarloukos (“Thor”, “Mamma Mia”) is memorable, particularly for the Auschwitz tour which is done in an impressively bleak way on an astoundingly bleak winter’s day.
Andrew Scott, so woefully miscast as “C” in “Spectre“, here is a nice shoo-in for the cocksure but aloof expert. And Tom Wilkinson, who can seldom put a movie foot wrong, is also perfectly cast as the claret-swigging defence-lead: passionless and analytical even when facing the horrors of a trip to Auschwitz.
Timothy Spall’s Irving is well portrayed as the intelligent and articulate – albeit deluded – eccentric he no doubt is.
There are also some nice cameo performances, including John Sessions (“Florence Foster Jenkins“) as an Oxbridge history boffin and Mark Gatiss (“Sherlock”) as an Auschwitz expert.
However, these positives don’t outweigh the big negative that the broader ensemble cast never really gels together well. The first time this is evident is in an office meeting of the defence team where the interactions have a sheen of falseness about them that is barely hidden behind some weak script and forced nervous laughter. Tea can’t help.
In particular, attractive Kiwi actress Caren Pistorius (“The Light Between Oceans“) seems to have been given a poor hand to play with as the junior member of the team. A late night interaction with her boyfriend, who whinges at her for having to work late, seems to be taken from a more sexist age: “the 70’s called and they want their script back”.
None of this is helped by Rachel Weisz, who I’m normally a fan of, but here she is hindered by some rather dodgy lines by David Hare (“The Reader”) and an unconvincing (well, to me at least) New York accent. For me I’m afraid she just doesn’t seem to adequately convey her passion for the cause.
While the execution of the court scenes are well done, the film is hampered by its opening five words: “Based on a True Story”. This is something of a disease at the moment in the movies, and whilst in many films (the recent “Lion” for example) the story is in the journey rather than the result, with “Denial” the story is designed to build to a tense result that unfortunately lacks any sort of tension – since the result is pre-ordained.
This is all a great shame, since director Mick Jackson (“LA Story”, in his first feature for nearly 15 years) has the potential here for a great movie. Perhaps a more fictionalised version (“vaguely based on a true story”) might have provided more of a foundation for a better film?
Help is required and Lipstadt is assigned a hot-shot solicitor (if that’s not an oxymoron) in the form of Anthony Julius (Andrew Scott, “Sherlock”) and top barrister Richard Rampton (Tom Wilkinson, “Selma“). The stage is set for an epic legal battle that will establish not just legal precedent but also historical precedent affecting the entire Jewish people.
This film’s trailer really appealed to me, and I was looking forward to this film. And that view clearly also got through to people of my age bracket (and older) since the cinema was pretty full. But ultimately I was disappointed by the film.
But first the good points.
The cinematography by Haris Zambarloukos (“Thor”, “Mamma Mia”) is memorable, particularly for the Auschwitz tour which is done in an impressively bleak way on an astoundingly bleak winter’s day.
Andrew Scott, so woefully miscast as “C” in “Spectre“, here is a nice shoo-in for the cocksure but aloof expert. And Tom Wilkinson, who can seldom put a movie foot wrong, is also perfectly cast as the claret-swigging defence-lead: passionless and analytical even when facing the horrors of a trip to Auschwitz.
Timothy Spall’s Irving is well portrayed as the intelligent and articulate – albeit deluded – eccentric he no doubt is.
There are also some nice cameo performances, including John Sessions (“Florence Foster Jenkins“) as an Oxbridge history boffin and Mark Gatiss (“Sherlock”) as an Auschwitz expert.
However, these positives don’t outweigh the big negative that the broader ensemble cast never really gels together well. The first time this is evident is in an office meeting of the defence team where the interactions have a sheen of falseness about them that is barely hidden behind some weak script and forced nervous laughter. Tea can’t help.
In particular, attractive Kiwi actress Caren Pistorius (“The Light Between Oceans“) seems to have been given a poor hand to play with as the junior member of the team. A late night interaction with her boyfriend, who whinges at her for having to work late, seems to be taken from a more sexist age: “the 70’s called and they want their script back”.
None of this is helped by Rachel Weisz, who I’m normally a fan of, but here she is hindered by some rather dodgy lines by David Hare (“The Reader”) and an unconvincing (well, to me at least) New York accent. For me I’m afraid she just doesn’t seem to adequately convey her passion for the cause.
While the execution of the court scenes are well done, the film is hampered by its opening five words: “Based on a True Story”. This is something of a disease at the moment in the movies, and whilst in many films (the recent “Lion” for example) the story is in the journey rather than the result, with “Denial” the story is designed to build to a tense result that unfortunately lacks any sort of tension – since the result is pre-ordained.
This is all a great shame, since director Mick Jackson (“LA Story”, in his first feature for nearly 15 years) has the potential here for a great movie. Perhaps a more fictionalised version (“vaguely based on a true story”) might have provided more of a foundation for a better film?