Search
Search results
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated The Seals of Cthulhu in Tabletop Games
Jun 9, 2021
I don’t really know the origins/history of Cthulhu, but it has always been a theme that draws me in when I see it. Just the concept of these Elder Gods is creepy, yet exciting, and rarely will I turn down the chance to play a Cthulhu-esque game. That being said, when I stumbled upon The Seals of Cthulhu on Kickstarter, and checked out the page, I knew I had to back. Did my unfaltering fascination with the Cthulhu theme lead me astray, or did this game enhance my existing opinions?
The Seals of Cthulhu is a 2-player game of bluffing and betting in which players are trying to amass the most Control points at the end of 5 rounds. To setup for a game, each player decides which role they will take on: Cultist or Investigator. Each player will receive the 4 Influence markers and 5 Artifact cards corresponding to their chosen role for the game. Players decide on which of the 7 Elder Gods they would like to play with, and takes that card into their hand as well. Select a starting player, who will receive the Active Player Marker, and the game is ready to begin!
On your turn, you will select 1 card from your hand and place it face-down between yourself and your opponent. After selecting a card, you will place a number of Influence markers that you control next to the card, serving as your bid for control of this card. Once you have made your initial bid, your opponent has two choices: accept your bid (taking the Influence markers for themselves) and allowing you to gain control of the card, or they may make their own bid with Influence markers in their control. When bidding against your opponent, you must always bid at least 1 more Influence than what was just bid. This bidding war continues back and forth until one player decides to take the entire Influence bid, letting the other player gain the card. Once a bid has been accepted, the card in question is placed face-up in front of the winning bidder.
Here’s the neat part – each Artifact card is broken in half. At the start of the game, each player each has only half of each Artifact card in hand. So in the bidding process, you may be able to acquire the other half, and thus complete an Artifact. Each Artifact has a special ability that can only be used when completed. Having only half of the Journal isn’t doing you any good! Each special ability may only be used once per game, so choose your opportunities wisely. The game continues in this fashion, with players taking turns bidding and gathering artifacts, until each player has taken 5 turns. Players will then add up the total Control value of their face-up cards, and the player with the highest Control value is the winner!
At its core, the physical gameplay of The Seals of Cthulhu is pretty simple and straightforward. Pick a card, and bid on it. That’s where the simplicity ends, though, and strategy takes over. Both players start with the exact same cards in hand, but how and when you decide to play those cards is what drives the strategy of this game. If you seem too eager when making a bid, perhaps your opponent will vastly outbid you to keep you from getting that card. You can even start the bidding at zero, at the risk of letting your opponent control your bidding round. Are you able to balance the risk/reward of the bidding process in order to maximize your tableau?
And, as stated above, each complete artifact has a special ability that can be used to either benefit you or hinder your opponent. The game also comes with Cultist/Investigator cards that you may choose to use in a game. Both players select one of the characters to become for the game, and each character provides a special ability during the game. At the end of the game, the only cards that are scored from your tableau are the ones that are face-up. Certain abilities, from both Artifacts and characters, allow you to flip cards face-down, thus depriving the player of those end-game points. Another neat thing about this game is that even if a player runs out of Influence tokens, they can bid with cards they already control in their tableau. Every card has a certain Influence value, and can be added to bids. If your opponent chooses to accept the bid, however, you have to give up that card! It’s important to keep an eye on the cards your opponent already controls, so you don’t just accidentally help them complete an Artifact. The strategic options of this game are vast and variable, and keep both players actively engaged the entire game. The only downside of this game for me is that I wish there were more cards/Artifact options for each play. Perhaps, like the Elder Gods cards, sets that can be interchanged between games as long as both players agree on the cards. Just a little something that can change every game in small ways.
Components. Probably the first thing that drew me to this game on Kickstarter was the color scheme and art style. It looked spooky and vibrant, and it really adds to the immersion in the game. The cards themselves are all large and sturdy, and are clear to read. I did go for the custom sleeve add-on, and those are some high quality sleeves as well. The Cultist and Investigator tokens are shaped and screen printed, and just plain fun to have in hand, as well as the Active Player Marker. The game box itself is designed to look like a creepy old book, and closes magnetically on the side – all of which just makes the theme come more alive!
In general, I am not a fan of bluffing games, but to me, The Seals of Cthulhu feels more like a bidding game than bluffing. Is it my favorite 2-player game? No, but it’s one that I am happy to have in my collection. The gameplay itself feels fresh but fast, and the strategy can be as simple or as complicated as you want it to be. The inclusion of optional character roles adds to the variability of the gameplay, and the requirement to have both halves of an Artifact in order to use its ability adds an extra layer to your strategy. The color scheme and artwork is what originally drew me in to the Kickstarter campaign for this game, but the gameplay is what keeps me coming back. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a ritualistic 8 / 12. Check it out if you’re on the lookout for more 2-player games!
The Seals of Cthulhu is a 2-player game of bluffing and betting in which players are trying to amass the most Control points at the end of 5 rounds. To setup for a game, each player decides which role they will take on: Cultist or Investigator. Each player will receive the 4 Influence markers and 5 Artifact cards corresponding to their chosen role for the game. Players decide on which of the 7 Elder Gods they would like to play with, and takes that card into their hand as well. Select a starting player, who will receive the Active Player Marker, and the game is ready to begin!
On your turn, you will select 1 card from your hand and place it face-down between yourself and your opponent. After selecting a card, you will place a number of Influence markers that you control next to the card, serving as your bid for control of this card. Once you have made your initial bid, your opponent has two choices: accept your bid (taking the Influence markers for themselves) and allowing you to gain control of the card, or they may make their own bid with Influence markers in their control. When bidding against your opponent, you must always bid at least 1 more Influence than what was just bid. This bidding war continues back and forth until one player decides to take the entire Influence bid, letting the other player gain the card. Once a bid has been accepted, the card in question is placed face-up in front of the winning bidder.
Here’s the neat part – each Artifact card is broken in half. At the start of the game, each player each has only half of each Artifact card in hand. So in the bidding process, you may be able to acquire the other half, and thus complete an Artifact. Each Artifact has a special ability that can only be used when completed. Having only half of the Journal isn’t doing you any good! Each special ability may only be used once per game, so choose your opportunities wisely. The game continues in this fashion, with players taking turns bidding and gathering artifacts, until each player has taken 5 turns. Players will then add up the total Control value of their face-up cards, and the player with the highest Control value is the winner!
At its core, the physical gameplay of The Seals of Cthulhu is pretty simple and straightforward. Pick a card, and bid on it. That’s where the simplicity ends, though, and strategy takes over. Both players start with the exact same cards in hand, but how and when you decide to play those cards is what drives the strategy of this game. If you seem too eager when making a bid, perhaps your opponent will vastly outbid you to keep you from getting that card. You can even start the bidding at zero, at the risk of letting your opponent control your bidding round. Are you able to balance the risk/reward of the bidding process in order to maximize your tableau?
And, as stated above, each complete artifact has a special ability that can be used to either benefit you or hinder your opponent. The game also comes with Cultist/Investigator cards that you may choose to use in a game. Both players select one of the characters to become for the game, and each character provides a special ability during the game. At the end of the game, the only cards that are scored from your tableau are the ones that are face-up. Certain abilities, from both Artifacts and characters, allow you to flip cards face-down, thus depriving the player of those end-game points. Another neat thing about this game is that even if a player runs out of Influence tokens, they can bid with cards they already control in their tableau. Every card has a certain Influence value, and can be added to bids. If your opponent chooses to accept the bid, however, you have to give up that card! It’s important to keep an eye on the cards your opponent already controls, so you don’t just accidentally help them complete an Artifact. The strategic options of this game are vast and variable, and keep both players actively engaged the entire game. The only downside of this game for me is that I wish there were more cards/Artifact options for each play. Perhaps, like the Elder Gods cards, sets that can be interchanged between games as long as both players agree on the cards. Just a little something that can change every game in small ways.
Components. Probably the first thing that drew me to this game on Kickstarter was the color scheme and art style. It looked spooky and vibrant, and it really adds to the immersion in the game. The cards themselves are all large and sturdy, and are clear to read. I did go for the custom sleeve add-on, and those are some high quality sleeves as well. The Cultist and Investigator tokens are shaped and screen printed, and just plain fun to have in hand, as well as the Active Player Marker. The game box itself is designed to look like a creepy old book, and closes magnetically on the side – all of which just makes the theme come more alive!
In general, I am not a fan of bluffing games, but to me, The Seals of Cthulhu feels more like a bidding game than bluffing. Is it my favorite 2-player game? No, but it’s one that I am happy to have in my collection. The gameplay itself feels fresh but fast, and the strategy can be as simple or as complicated as you want it to be. The inclusion of optional character roles adds to the variability of the gameplay, and the requirement to have both halves of an Artifact in order to use its ability adds an extra layer to your strategy. The color scheme and artwork is what originally drew me in to the Kickstarter campaign for this game, but the gameplay is what keeps me coming back. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a ritualistic 8 / 12. Check it out if you’re on the lookout for more 2-player games!
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Mank (2020) in Movies
Dec 10, 2020
Cinematography - glorious to look at (1 more)
A fabulous ensemble cast, with Oldham, Seyfried, Arliss and Dance excelling
"Mank" is a biopic slice of the career of Herman Jacob Mankiewicz (Gary Oldman), the Hollywood screenwriter who was the pen behind what is regularly voted by critics as being the greatest movie of all time - "Citizen Kane". "Citizen Kane" was written in 1940 (and released the following year) and much of the action in "Mank" takes place in a retreat in the Mojave desert when Mank, crippled by a full-cast on the leg, has been 'sent' by Orson Welles (Tom Burke) to complete the screenplay without alcohol and other worldly distractions. Helping administer to his writing and care needs are English typist Rita Alexander (Lily Collins) and carer Fraulein Freda (Monika Gossmann). However, although Mank produces brilliant stuff, his speed of progress exasperates his 'minder' and editor John Houseman (Sam Troughton). (Yes, THAT John Houseman, the actor.)
In developing the story, we continuously flash-back six years - - nicely indicated by typed 'script notes' - - to 1934 where Mank is working at MGM studios for Louis B. Mayer (Arliss Howard) and mixing in the circles of millionaire publisher William Randolph Hearst (Charles Dance) and his glamorous young wife, actress Marion Davies (Amanda Seyfried). Allegedly, the "Citizen Kane" script was based on Hearst. But what souring of the relationship could have led to such a stinging betrayal during those six years?
Mank has an embarrassment of acting riches. Mankiewicz is a fascinating character: charismatic, reckless, passionate and the definition of a loose cannon. Basically, a dream for a great actor to portray. And Gary Oldham IS a great actor. After doing Churchill in "Darkest Hour", he here turns in a magnificent performance as the alcoholic writer. Never more so than in a furious tirade at a dinner table late in the film, which will likely be the equivalent to the Churchill "tiger" speech come Oscar time. Surely, there's a Best Actor nomination there?
Equally impressive though are some of the supporting cast.
- Tom Burke - so good as TV's "Strike" - gives a fine impersonation of the great Orson Welles: full of confidence and swagger. It's only a cameo role, but he genuinely 'feels' like the young Welles.
- Amanda Seyfried: It took me almost half of the film to recognize her as Marion Davies, and her performance is pitch perfect - the best of her career in my view, and again Oscar-worthy.
- Arliss Howard for me almost steals the show as the megalomaniac Mayer: his introduction to Mank's brother Joe (Tom Pelphrey) has a memorable "walk with me" walkthrough of the studio with Mayer preaching on the real meaning of MGM and the movies in general. Breathtakingly good.
- But - I said "nearly steals the show".... the guy who made off with it in a swag-bag for me was our own Charles Dance as Hearst. Quietly impressive throughout, he just completely nails it with his "organ-grinder's monkey" speech towards the end of the movie. Probably my favourite monologue of 2020. Chilling. I'd really like to see Dance get a Supporting Actor nomination for this.
The screenplay was originally written by director David Fincher's late father Jack. Jack Fincher died in 2002, and this project has literally been decades in the planning. Mankiewicz has a caustic turn of phrase, and there are laugh-out lines of dialogue scattered throughout the script. "Write hard, aim low" implores Houseman at one point. And my personal favourite: Mank's puncturing of the irony that the Screen Writers Guild has been formed without an apostrophe! A huge LOL!
Aside from the witty dialogue, the script has a nuance to the storytelling that continually surprises. A revelation from Freda about Mank's philanthropic tendencies brings you up short in your face-value impression of his character. And the drivers that engineer the rift between Mankiewicz and Hearst - based around the story of the (fictional) director Shelly Metcalf (Jamie McShane) - are not slapped in your face, but elegantly slipped into your subconscious.
In addition, certain aspects are frustratingly withheld from you. Mank's long-suffering wife (a definition of the phrase) Sara (Tuppence Middleton) only occasionally comes into focus. The only reference to his kids are a crash in the background as they "remodel" the family home. Is the charismatic Mank a faithful husband or a philanderer? Is the relationship with Rita Alexander just professional and platonic (you assume so), or is there more going on? There's a tension there in the storytelling that never quite gets resolved: and that's a good thing.
Mank also has an embarrassment of technical riches. Even from the opening titles, you get the impression that this is a work of genius. All in black and white, and with the appearance of 40's titling, they scroll majestically in the sky and then - after "Charles Dance" - effortlessly scroll down to the desert highway. It's evidence of an attention to detail perhaps forced by lockdown. ("MUM - I'm bored". "Go up to your room and do some more work on that movie then".)
It's deliciously modern, yet retro. I love the fact that the cross-reel "circle" cue-marks appear so prominently... the indicators that the projectionist needs to spin up the next reel. I think they are still used in most modern films, but not as noticeably as in the old films... and this one!
A key contributor to the movie is cinematographer Erik Messerschmidt. Everything looks just BEAUTIFUL, and it is now a big regret that I didn't go to watch this on the big screen after all. Surely there will be a cinematography Oscar nomination for this one. Unbelievably, this is Messerschmidt's debut feature as director of cinematography!
Elsewhere, you can imagine multiple other technical Oscar noms. The tight and effective editing is by Kirk Baxter. And the combination of the glorious production design (Donald Graham Burt) and the costume design (Trish Summerville) make the movie emanate the same nostalgia for Hollywood as did last year's "Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood".... albeit set forty years earlier. Even the music (by the regular team of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross) might get nominated, since I had to go back and check that it actually HAD music at all: it's subtly unobtrusive and effective.
The only area I had any issue with here was the sound mixing, since I had trouble picking up some of the dialogue.
Although I can gush about this movie as a technical work of art, I'm going to hold off a 10* review on this one. For one reason only. I just didn't feel 100% engaged with the story (at least with a first watch). The illustrious Mrs Movie Man summed it up with the phrase "I just didn't care enough what happened to any of the characters". I think though that this one is sufficiently subtle and cerebral that it deserves another watch.
Will it win Oscars. Yes, for sure. Hell, I would like to put a bet on that "Mank" will top the list of the "most nominations" when they are announced. (Hollywood likes nothing more than a navel-gazing look at its history of course). And an obvious nomination here will be David Fincher for Best Director. But, for me, this falls into a similar bucket as that other black and white multi-Oscar winner of two year's ago "Roma". It's glorious to look at; brilliantly directed; but not a movie I would choose to readily reach for to repeatedly watch again.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/12/10/mank-divines-for-oscar-gold-in-a-sea-of-pyrites/. Thanks.)
In developing the story, we continuously flash-back six years - - nicely indicated by typed 'script notes' - - to 1934 where Mank is working at MGM studios for Louis B. Mayer (Arliss Howard) and mixing in the circles of millionaire publisher William Randolph Hearst (Charles Dance) and his glamorous young wife, actress Marion Davies (Amanda Seyfried). Allegedly, the "Citizen Kane" script was based on Hearst. But what souring of the relationship could have led to such a stinging betrayal during those six years?
Mank has an embarrassment of acting riches. Mankiewicz is a fascinating character: charismatic, reckless, passionate and the definition of a loose cannon. Basically, a dream for a great actor to portray. And Gary Oldham IS a great actor. After doing Churchill in "Darkest Hour", he here turns in a magnificent performance as the alcoholic writer. Never more so than in a furious tirade at a dinner table late in the film, which will likely be the equivalent to the Churchill "tiger" speech come Oscar time. Surely, there's a Best Actor nomination there?
Equally impressive though are some of the supporting cast.
- Tom Burke - so good as TV's "Strike" - gives a fine impersonation of the great Orson Welles: full of confidence and swagger. It's only a cameo role, but he genuinely 'feels' like the young Welles.
- Amanda Seyfried: It took me almost half of the film to recognize her as Marion Davies, and her performance is pitch perfect - the best of her career in my view, and again Oscar-worthy.
- Arliss Howard for me almost steals the show as the megalomaniac Mayer: his introduction to Mank's brother Joe (Tom Pelphrey) has a memorable "walk with me" walkthrough of the studio with Mayer preaching on the real meaning of MGM and the movies in general. Breathtakingly good.
- But - I said "nearly steals the show".... the guy who made off with it in a swag-bag for me was our own Charles Dance as Hearst. Quietly impressive throughout, he just completely nails it with his "organ-grinder's monkey" speech towards the end of the movie. Probably my favourite monologue of 2020. Chilling. I'd really like to see Dance get a Supporting Actor nomination for this.
The screenplay was originally written by director David Fincher's late father Jack. Jack Fincher died in 2002, and this project has literally been decades in the planning. Mankiewicz has a caustic turn of phrase, and there are laugh-out lines of dialogue scattered throughout the script. "Write hard, aim low" implores Houseman at one point. And my personal favourite: Mank's puncturing of the irony that the Screen Writers Guild has been formed without an apostrophe! A huge LOL!
Aside from the witty dialogue, the script has a nuance to the storytelling that continually surprises. A revelation from Freda about Mank's philanthropic tendencies brings you up short in your face-value impression of his character. And the drivers that engineer the rift between Mankiewicz and Hearst - based around the story of the (fictional) director Shelly Metcalf (Jamie McShane) - are not slapped in your face, but elegantly slipped into your subconscious.
In addition, certain aspects are frustratingly withheld from you. Mank's long-suffering wife (a definition of the phrase) Sara (Tuppence Middleton) only occasionally comes into focus. The only reference to his kids are a crash in the background as they "remodel" the family home. Is the charismatic Mank a faithful husband or a philanderer? Is the relationship with Rita Alexander just professional and platonic (you assume so), or is there more going on? There's a tension there in the storytelling that never quite gets resolved: and that's a good thing.
Mank also has an embarrassment of technical riches. Even from the opening titles, you get the impression that this is a work of genius. All in black and white, and with the appearance of 40's titling, they scroll majestically in the sky and then - after "Charles Dance" - effortlessly scroll down to the desert highway. It's evidence of an attention to detail perhaps forced by lockdown. ("MUM - I'm bored". "Go up to your room and do some more work on that movie then".)
It's deliciously modern, yet retro. I love the fact that the cross-reel "circle" cue-marks appear so prominently... the indicators that the projectionist needs to spin up the next reel. I think they are still used in most modern films, but not as noticeably as in the old films... and this one!
A key contributor to the movie is cinematographer Erik Messerschmidt. Everything looks just BEAUTIFUL, and it is now a big regret that I didn't go to watch this on the big screen after all. Surely there will be a cinematography Oscar nomination for this one. Unbelievably, this is Messerschmidt's debut feature as director of cinematography!
Elsewhere, you can imagine multiple other technical Oscar noms. The tight and effective editing is by Kirk Baxter. And the combination of the glorious production design (Donald Graham Burt) and the costume design (Trish Summerville) make the movie emanate the same nostalgia for Hollywood as did last year's "Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood".... albeit set forty years earlier. Even the music (by the regular team of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross) might get nominated, since I had to go back and check that it actually HAD music at all: it's subtly unobtrusive and effective.
The only area I had any issue with here was the sound mixing, since I had trouble picking up some of the dialogue.
Although I can gush about this movie as a technical work of art, I'm going to hold off a 10* review on this one. For one reason only. I just didn't feel 100% engaged with the story (at least with a first watch). The illustrious Mrs Movie Man summed it up with the phrase "I just didn't care enough what happened to any of the characters". I think though that this one is sufficiently subtle and cerebral that it deserves another watch.
Will it win Oscars. Yes, for sure. Hell, I would like to put a bet on that "Mank" will top the list of the "most nominations" when they are announced. (Hollywood likes nothing more than a navel-gazing look at its history of course). And an obvious nomination here will be David Fincher for Best Director. But, for me, this falls into a similar bucket as that other black and white multi-Oscar winner of two year's ago "Roma". It's glorious to look at; brilliantly directed; but not a movie I would choose to readily reach for to repeatedly watch again.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/12/10/mank-divines-for-oscar-gold-in-a-sea-of-pyrites/. Thanks.)
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated The Bane Chronicles in Books
Aug 3, 2020
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Book-Review-Banner-66.png"/>;
The Bane Chronicles is a collection of short stories, all featuring the famous Warlock - Magnus Bane. Throughout the ages, we get to see him develop to the character that we know. We read more about the moments that made Magnus who he is today.
I really enjoyed diving into this book, and I am glad I read it. Some stories I loved, some not so much, but I overall loved this book and will treasure it forever. It is written by Cassandra Clare, Sarah Rees Brennan and Maureen Johnson. <a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/2018/10/22/city-of-bones-the-mortal-instruments-1-by-cassandra-clare-book-review/">Read my review of City of Bones,</a> in case you are interested what I think about the first book of the Shadowhunter universe.
<b><i>1. What Really Happened in Peru by Cassandra Clare and Sarah Rees Brennan - ★★★★ </i></b>
A perfect introduction of the Magnus we all love reading about. We witness a couple of adventures Magnus has in Peru. We meet Ragnor and Catarina and witness a few of Magnus’s love interests. I loved how the characters were written and the stories made me giggle. Especially the scene of how the town reacts to Magnus’ lack of talent to play an instrument.
<b><i>2. The Runaway Queen by Cassandra Clare and Maureen Johnson - ★★★★</i></b>
Set in Paris. Hot air balloon ride. Magnus decides to assist to get the Queen Marie Antoinette to escape Paris. He also has a quite interesting encounter with a bunch of vampires. Fast-faced and beautifully written. I love that it captured a certain period of history, and really focused to get the facts accurate for those times.
<b><i>3. Vampires, Scones and Edmund Herondale by Cassandra Clare and Sarah Rees Brennan - ★★★★★</i></b>
Set in London. In this short story, Magnus realises how unfair the Shadowhunter laws are. And how the Nephilim have to obey them. When Edmund Herondale falls in love with a mundane, the Shadowhunters don’t care at all. He is stripped from his runes. For me, it was very emotional to watch Magnus fall in love, but sacrifice a few years of his happiness so Camille can give love to a werewolf, who will age and then eventually die. Also, the necklace he makes for her means so much and I can’t even cope! I loved the cryptic future prophecy in the end - I think it brought some emotion to the story.
<b><i>4. The Midnight Heir by Cassandra Clare and Sarah Rees Brennan - ★★★★</i></b>
Very action-driven story, that didn’t leave me too impressed. I liked the fact that some important characters are featured, but it feels like the writing of the characters was poor. Set in London again, Magnus tries to help the Herondales. He also gets to meet Tatiana Blackthorn again. Magnus learns the hard way that even though he wants to help Shadowhunters, sometimes there’s nothing he can do.
<b><i>5. The Rise of Hotel Dumort by Cassandra Clare and Maureen Johnson - ★★★★★</i></b>
Hotel Dumort in New York is quite a well-known place in the Shadowhunter universe. Warned by a vampire that danger is lurking, Magnus finds himself into another adventure. He helps the Shadowhunters again. And he also meets with a very old warlock, who opens up a portal to Hell. Magnus is called to go, possibly speaking to his father, before he finds the strength in him to close the portal. He helps a human forget and therefore prevents him from committing suicide. He also finds art that Camille is somehow involved with what happened. It kept me glued to my sofa in anticipation.
<b><i>6. Saving Raphael Santiago by Cassandra Clare and Sarah Rees Brennan - ★★★★★</i></b>
Raphael is one of my dearest characters, I have to admit. He was turned into what he despised the most. He never would have chosen blood and immortality. The fact that Magnus is there to help him save himself is so powerful. I really enjoyed this short story! Very emotional!
<b><i>7. The Fall of the Hotel Dumort by Cassandra Clare and Maureen Johnson - ★★★★</i></b>
This is probably the most emotional story of them all. It also might be the most important one for Magnus’s character development. His relationship with Camille is brought back and he has to do something very scary and brave to be finally able to move on.
<b><i>8. What to Buy the Shadowhunter Who Has Everything (And Who You’re Not Officially Dating Anyway) by Cassandra Clare and Sarah Rees Brennan - ★★★★</i></b>
Definitely the cutest story so far! Magnus and Alec are dating. It’s also Alec’s birthday and Magnus is thinking of a gift. Isabelle’s visit was also quite emotional to me. To see how much she cares for Alex and would be there for him. Also, the birthday gift that Magnus chooses in the end is too precious!
<b><i>9. The Last Stand of the New York Institute by Cassandra Clare, Sarah Rees Brennan and Maureen Johnson - ★★★★★</i></b>
A powerful story with a lot of Easter Eggs. We are reminded of the Circle and of a couple of fights. The Shadowhunters will help out the Downworlders against other Shadowhunters. We witness Valentine’s cruelty in a new light. And we read about Magnus meeting Jocelyn and Clary.
<b><i>10. The Course of True Love (And First Dates) by Cassandra Clare - ★★★★★</i></b>
A story written only by Cassandra Clare. This story will probably be the most popular one, as it features Alec and Magnus on their first date. The writing is good and I really enjoyed how real the date was. It had all those awkward moments that I’ve experienced. Moments that help you get to know the person better than a few rehearsed questions. This short story shows how much Cassandra Clare knows her characters and cares for them, and it is very eminent to see the difference, compared to the rest of this book.
<b><i>11. The Voicemail of Magnus Bane by Cassandra Clare, Sarah Rees Brennan and Maureen Johnson - ★★★★</i></b>
In this short story, we read a couple of interesting voicemails. They are all sent to Magnus, by different people, when he and Alec break up. It is emotional and humorous at the same time, as you see people react in different ways. Isabelle’s voicemails are pure passion and I love it.
<b><i>The Bane Chronicles is a book I will cherish, for it introduced me to a side of Magnus I never knew. The Bane Chronicles is worth reading, especially if you are a fan of the Shadowhunter universe. I would recommend The Bane Chronicles to everyone that loves fantasy and magic.</i></b>
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Book-Review-Banner-66.png"/>;
The Bane Chronicles is a collection of short stories, all featuring the famous Warlock - Magnus Bane. Throughout the ages, we get to see him develop to the character that we know. We read more about the moments that made Magnus who he is today.
I really enjoyed diving into this book, and I am glad I read it. Some stories I loved, some not so much, but I overall loved this book and will treasure it forever. It is written by Cassandra Clare, Sarah Rees Brennan and Maureen Johnson. <a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/2018/10/22/city-of-bones-the-mortal-instruments-1-by-cassandra-clare-book-review/">Read my review of City of Bones,</a> in case you are interested what I think about the first book of the Shadowhunter universe.
<b><i>1. What Really Happened in Peru by Cassandra Clare and Sarah Rees Brennan - ★★★★ </i></b>
A perfect introduction of the Magnus we all love reading about. We witness a couple of adventures Magnus has in Peru. We meet Ragnor and Catarina and witness a few of Magnus’s love interests. I loved how the characters were written and the stories made me giggle. Especially the scene of how the town reacts to Magnus’ lack of talent to play an instrument.
<b><i>2. The Runaway Queen by Cassandra Clare and Maureen Johnson - ★★★★</i></b>
Set in Paris. Hot air balloon ride. Magnus decides to assist to get the Queen Marie Antoinette to escape Paris. He also has a quite interesting encounter with a bunch of vampires. Fast-faced and beautifully written. I love that it captured a certain period of history, and really focused to get the facts accurate for those times.
<b><i>3. Vampires, Scones and Edmund Herondale by Cassandra Clare and Sarah Rees Brennan - ★★★★★</i></b>
Set in London. In this short story, Magnus realises how unfair the Shadowhunter laws are. And how the Nephilim have to obey them. When Edmund Herondale falls in love with a mundane, the Shadowhunters don’t care at all. He is stripped from his runes. For me, it was very emotional to watch Magnus fall in love, but sacrifice a few years of his happiness so Camille can give love to a werewolf, who will age and then eventually die. Also, the necklace he makes for her means so much and I can’t even cope! I loved the cryptic future prophecy in the end - I think it brought some emotion to the story.
<b><i>4. The Midnight Heir by Cassandra Clare and Sarah Rees Brennan - ★★★★</i></b>
Very action-driven story, that didn’t leave me too impressed. I liked the fact that some important characters are featured, but it feels like the writing of the characters was poor. Set in London again, Magnus tries to help the Herondales. He also gets to meet Tatiana Blackthorn again. Magnus learns the hard way that even though he wants to help Shadowhunters, sometimes there’s nothing he can do.
<b><i>5. The Rise of Hotel Dumort by Cassandra Clare and Maureen Johnson - ★★★★★</i></b>
Hotel Dumort in New York is quite a well-known place in the Shadowhunter universe. Warned by a vampire that danger is lurking, Magnus finds himself into another adventure. He helps the Shadowhunters again. And he also meets with a very old warlock, who opens up a portal to Hell. Magnus is called to go, possibly speaking to his father, before he finds the strength in him to close the portal. He helps a human forget and therefore prevents him from committing suicide. He also finds art that Camille is somehow involved with what happened. It kept me glued to my sofa in anticipation.
<b><i>6. Saving Raphael Santiago by Cassandra Clare and Sarah Rees Brennan - ★★★★★</i></b>
Raphael is one of my dearest characters, I have to admit. He was turned into what he despised the most. He never would have chosen blood and immortality. The fact that Magnus is there to help him save himself is so powerful. I really enjoyed this short story! Very emotional!
<b><i>7. The Fall of the Hotel Dumort by Cassandra Clare and Maureen Johnson - ★★★★</i></b>
This is probably the most emotional story of them all. It also might be the most important one for Magnus’s character development. His relationship with Camille is brought back and he has to do something very scary and brave to be finally able to move on.
<b><i>8. What to Buy the Shadowhunter Who Has Everything (And Who You’re Not Officially Dating Anyway) by Cassandra Clare and Sarah Rees Brennan - ★★★★</i></b>
Definitely the cutest story so far! Magnus and Alec are dating. It’s also Alec’s birthday and Magnus is thinking of a gift. Isabelle’s visit was also quite emotional to me. To see how much she cares for Alex and would be there for him. Also, the birthday gift that Magnus chooses in the end is too precious!
<b><i>9. The Last Stand of the New York Institute by Cassandra Clare, Sarah Rees Brennan and Maureen Johnson - ★★★★★</i></b>
A powerful story with a lot of Easter Eggs. We are reminded of the Circle and of a couple of fights. The Shadowhunters will help out the Downworlders against other Shadowhunters. We witness Valentine’s cruelty in a new light. And we read about Magnus meeting Jocelyn and Clary.
<b><i>10. The Course of True Love (And First Dates) by Cassandra Clare - ★★★★★</i></b>
A story written only by Cassandra Clare. This story will probably be the most popular one, as it features Alec and Magnus on their first date. The writing is good and I really enjoyed how real the date was. It had all those awkward moments that I’ve experienced. Moments that help you get to know the person better than a few rehearsed questions. This short story shows how much Cassandra Clare knows her characters and cares for them, and it is very eminent to see the difference, compared to the rest of this book.
<b><i>11. The Voicemail of Magnus Bane by Cassandra Clare, Sarah Rees Brennan and Maureen Johnson - ★★★★</i></b>
In this short story, we read a couple of interesting voicemails. They are all sent to Magnus, by different people, when he and Alec break up. It is emotional and humorous at the same time, as you see people react in different ways. Isabelle’s voicemails are pure passion and I love it.
<b><i>The Bane Chronicles is a book I will cherish, for it introduced me to a side of Magnus I never knew. The Bane Chronicles is worth reading, especially if you are a fan of the Shadowhunter universe. I would recommend The Bane Chronicles to everyone that loves fantasy and magic.</i></b>
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Captain Marvel (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
Midnight screening... what was I thinking? Somehow I managed to stay awake in the cinema (others didn't fare so well), but I went in pretty pumped up. Not so much for the film but the overall atmosphere of a Marvel first screening. There were over 100 tickets pre-booked, and the cinema was certainly very busy. There's something about the buzz of an audience that big. I did try and hold a couple of conversations while I was there, they were not successful due to my brain's impaired state.
*sigh*
Let me just get this out now... I enjoyed this movie, but I also didn't like it. I know, what does that even mean? I'm going to waffle a bit and hopefully it'll become clear.
I don't have a lot of pre-knowledge about Captain Marvel, in fact, until the trailers started coming out I'd probably have asked if you meant Ms Marvel or Shazam. As always the similarities between characters and brand is a complete mess.
Brie Larson had some pretty big boots to fill as the MCU's first headlining female character. I feel a bit sorry for Black Widow to be honest, but this is probably a bit lighter than her offering would have been considering her background.
Watching the trailers for this I wasn't left wowed. Vers comes across as rather cocky and after seeing the film I don't think she needed to be that way. Part of me thinks that a difference actress would have played it better, but mainly I'm just happy that they didn't ruin it.
Samuel L. Jackson was a treat, but then when isn't he?! It was nice seeing this more light-hearted side of his character. It leaves us with a little gap in his history that makes me wonder what happened to him. As ever he's a great presence and shows us just a glimpse of what's to come (or rather what we've already seen) while still being funny.
Ben Mendelsohn has made a rather large splash over the last few years in big-ticket movies. Rogue One, Ready Player One, Robin Hood and now Captain Marvel. His character of Talos is comical and warm but I found it slightly strange hearing him with his normal accent. That seems even weirder when I write it down, I guess I'm just hardwired to expect most aliens to sound American! He's definitely my stand out actor in this, he handles the twists and turns of the story wonderfully and made for an incredible surprise. There was one moment with a terrible bit of script that made me cringe at the screen but everything else made up for it.
I probably need to say something about Jude Law, that something is going to be "meh". I'm not sure that I'm fuzzed by any of his roles historically, and this isn't really any different. He also suffered from a dubious bit of script near the end of the film that feels out of place, but I'll leave that one for you to contemplate on.
I know I've been a bit of a mix so far about Captain Marvel but there are a lot of things to like about this movie. In particular, Marvel have really nailed music on the head recently, Guardians Of The Galaxy (1 not 2) and Thor: Ragnarok being two of my favourites. There's that moment of joy when you hear those old tunes, a smile crept across my face for every one of them. It was a great selection and they fitted into place amongst the story so well.
Nostalgia value is high in this one. Ahh, Blockbuster, I do miss you. There are plenty of things to spot, I'm sure that someone has already created a bingo game to go along with it... or a drinking game, "cry into your drink uncontrollably when you see Stan Lee". We obviously knew he'd filmed some cameos before he moved on into his big ol' galaxy, it was lovely to see him smiling out at us. Not only was it a fun little cameo but Marvel also did something magical with those opening titles and it made me cry... don't judge me!! I didn't cry as much as I did during the credit tribute in Once Upon A Deadpool though.
I could keep waffling, I'm fully aware that I've gone on a lot longer than normal about this one. I'll try not to keep you too much longer.
Obviously they've used some artistic license with the characters from the comics, as they do. The Skrull minions are so close to the comics, I was a little dubious about them when they popped up but they're carbon copies. The main thing that I know they changed was Nick Fury's eye, this version is better than the comics. I'd be interested to know how SLJ felt about finally being able to play Fury with both his eyes.
De-aging was used again but with much heavier usage than we've seen before. It was a bold choice doing it on one of the main characters when he's got so much screen time but I'm glad they chose this over recasting him. There weren't any of the minor oddities that were visible during Ant-Man & The Wasp's use of it, it all looked quite natural. There's no denying that Coulson might be a little overdone but *squeeeeee* little Coulson is so adorable that I don't care!
I mentioned my issues with Vers in the trailers, that wasn't the only misgiving I had. There weren't as many as the "I'm never going to see this movie" crowd (you know you're going to see it, get ahold of yourselves) but there were a few.
We've been with this series for over 10 years, this film leads into the last film in the sequence... and now they're giving us a new character? That's what I have an issue with. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea that they're bringing in a female character to clear up the mess created by the (mainly) boy's club, it's art imitating life... I'm joking, partly... but I can't help feeling like this is more of a last minute add-on. Previous new additions have appeared in other films, they've been able to interact with characters. The whole way through we've been shown teamwork and camaraderie, and throwing Captain Marvel in at the last minute flies in the face of that. But if we'd had her around before this then we probably wouldn't have needed Endgame because there would have been no distractions from what needed to be done. (Before you start on me we see that for a fact, none of Thor and Starlord's nonsense.)
For all of my waffling about it feeling separate they have clearly tried to connect her to the existing MCU. There are links in there on multiple fronts which give you hints at other films, it's quite impressive that they managed to make this without it being filled with series continuity errors.
As my last parting comment I want to say that Goose was amazing. Sadly not so hot on the CGI, I did wonder at one point if he was going to jump up and dance Garfield-style at one point. Annoyingly I already knew some details about this fluffy character before seeing the film but it just left me with anticipation. I didn't think that Fury would be a cat person though.
What you should do
If you're a Marvel fan you're going to have to see it before Endgame, but quite frankly you should want to see it. You could skip it if you really want to... but do you want to risk it? No, I didn't think so.
REMEMBER: There are two credit scenes, one in the middle and one at the end.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Of all the things I'd have to say Goose, that cute little floof would brighten my day as well as coming in handy for several reasons.
*sigh*
Let me just get this out now... I enjoyed this movie, but I also didn't like it. I know, what does that even mean? I'm going to waffle a bit and hopefully it'll become clear.
I don't have a lot of pre-knowledge about Captain Marvel, in fact, until the trailers started coming out I'd probably have asked if you meant Ms Marvel or Shazam. As always the similarities between characters and brand is a complete mess.
Brie Larson had some pretty big boots to fill as the MCU's first headlining female character. I feel a bit sorry for Black Widow to be honest, but this is probably a bit lighter than her offering would have been considering her background.
Watching the trailers for this I wasn't left wowed. Vers comes across as rather cocky and after seeing the film I don't think she needed to be that way. Part of me thinks that a difference actress would have played it better, but mainly I'm just happy that they didn't ruin it.
Samuel L. Jackson was a treat, but then when isn't he?! It was nice seeing this more light-hearted side of his character. It leaves us with a little gap in his history that makes me wonder what happened to him. As ever he's a great presence and shows us just a glimpse of what's to come (or rather what we've already seen) while still being funny.
Ben Mendelsohn has made a rather large splash over the last few years in big-ticket movies. Rogue One, Ready Player One, Robin Hood and now Captain Marvel. His character of Talos is comical and warm but I found it slightly strange hearing him with his normal accent. That seems even weirder when I write it down, I guess I'm just hardwired to expect most aliens to sound American! He's definitely my stand out actor in this, he handles the twists and turns of the story wonderfully and made for an incredible surprise. There was one moment with a terrible bit of script that made me cringe at the screen but everything else made up for it.
I probably need to say something about Jude Law, that something is going to be "meh". I'm not sure that I'm fuzzed by any of his roles historically, and this isn't really any different. He also suffered from a dubious bit of script near the end of the film that feels out of place, but I'll leave that one for you to contemplate on.
I know I've been a bit of a mix so far about Captain Marvel but there are a lot of things to like about this movie. In particular, Marvel have really nailed music on the head recently, Guardians Of The Galaxy (1 not 2) and Thor: Ragnarok being two of my favourites. There's that moment of joy when you hear those old tunes, a smile crept across my face for every one of them. It was a great selection and they fitted into place amongst the story so well.
Nostalgia value is high in this one. Ahh, Blockbuster, I do miss you. There are plenty of things to spot, I'm sure that someone has already created a bingo game to go along with it... or a drinking game, "cry into your drink uncontrollably when you see Stan Lee". We obviously knew he'd filmed some cameos before he moved on into his big ol' galaxy, it was lovely to see him smiling out at us. Not only was it a fun little cameo but Marvel also did something magical with those opening titles and it made me cry... don't judge me!! I didn't cry as much as I did during the credit tribute in Once Upon A Deadpool though.
I could keep waffling, I'm fully aware that I've gone on a lot longer than normal about this one. I'll try not to keep you too much longer.
Obviously they've used some artistic license with the characters from the comics, as they do. The Skrull minions are so close to the comics, I was a little dubious about them when they popped up but they're carbon copies. The main thing that I know they changed was Nick Fury's eye, this version is better than the comics. I'd be interested to know how SLJ felt about finally being able to play Fury with both his eyes.
De-aging was used again but with much heavier usage than we've seen before. It was a bold choice doing it on one of the main characters when he's got so much screen time but I'm glad they chose this over recasting him. There weren't any of the minor oddities that were visible during Ant-Man & The Wasp's use of it, it all looked quite natural. There's no denying that Coulson might be a little overdone but *squeeeeee* little Coulson is so adorable that I don't care!
I mentioned my issues with Vers in the trailers, that wasn't the only misgiving I had. There weren't as many as the "I'm never going to see this movie" crowd (you know you're going to see it, get ahold of yourselves) but there were a few.
We've been with this series for over 10 years, this film leads into the last film in the sequence... and now they're giving us a new character? That's what I have an issue with. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea that they're bringing in a female character to clear up the mess created by the (mainly) boy's club, it's art imitating life... I'm joking, partly... but I can't help feeling like this is more of a last minute add-on. Previous new additions have appeared in other films, they've been able to interact with characters. The whole way through we've been shown teamwork and camaraderie, and throwing Captain Marvel in at the last minute flies in the face of that. But if we'd had her around before this then we probably wouldn't have needed Endgame because there would have been no distractions from what needed to be done. (Before you start on me we see that for a fact, none of Thor and Starlord's nonsense.)
For all of my waffling about it feeling separate they have clearly tried to connect her to the existing MCU. There are links in there on multiple fronts which give you hints at other films, it's quite impressive that they managed to make this without it being filled with series continuity errors.
As my last parting comment I want to say that Goose was amazing. Sadly not so hot on the CGI, I did wonder at one point if he was going to jump up and dance Garfield-style at one point. Annoyingly I already knew some details about this fluffy character before seeing the film but it just left me with anticipation. I didn't think that Fury would be a cat person though.
What you should do
If you're a Marvel fan you're going to have to see it before Endgame, but quite frankly you should want to see it. You could skip it if you really want to... but do you want to risk it? No, I didn't think so.
REMEMBER: There are two credit scenes, one in the middle and one at the end.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Of all the things I'd have to say Goose, that cute little floof would brighten my day as well as coming in handy for several reasons.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Hiding Hitler in Tabletop Games
Apr 6, 2021
Adolf Hitler was an abomination of a person, can we all agree? Now that THAT is out of the way, let’s talk card games based on a character from history named Hitler. This game is based on a historical figure, but once translated to cardstock becomes simply the target of victory. When I heard the pitch (I paraphrased by quite a bit) for Hiding Hitler I immediately winced, as the subject matter makes me wince. But I took a chance on the game, and I am here to let you know that it will be okay, this is merely a card game, but if you are offended by the subject matter, please check out any of our other reviews that contain zero references to horrible people.
Hiding Hitler is a hand management, take that card game for four to six players. In it, players are trying to end the game with either the Hitler card in their hand or the Death token in their possession. The game is played over a series of turns and ends once the final turn has been taken, following the draw of the final card from the draw deck.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, as there are just too many. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup, shuffle the deck of cards and deal six cards to each player. Set the draw deck in the middle of the table, along with the other components. The left of the deck is considered the “Graveyard” and the right side of the deck is the “Action Pile.” Depending on the game mode chosen to play, the Hitler card may be in one of the players’ hands (Blitzkrieg mode – faster because Hitler is already in one player’s hand) or possibly in the draw deck (Strategic mode – slower if Hitler starts in the draw deck). The first player is now able to begin taking their turn and the hunt (or hiding) of Hitler may begin!
On a turn a player may play any amount of Action, Attack, or Instant cards from their hand, resolved one at a time. Action cards are just that: cards that allow for some type of action, be it drawing more cards, or having the entire table draw more cards. Attacks are targeted at a specific player and that player will need to roll the die in order to achieve the Attack card’s victory condition. For example, the Attack card may instruct the attacked to roll higher than value 2 on the die. If they beat that number nothing happens. However, should they roll a 1 (or simply not meet the number on the card) the failing player will need to discard Hitler to the Graveyard if they have it, or discard any other card to the Action Pile. Finally, Instant cards can be played AT ANY TIME, even if not on the player’s turn. These can negate actions or modify die/roll results. Once a player has no more cards to play (or cards they wish to play), the turn ends by drawing one card from the draw deck. It is now the next player’s turn.
Play continues in this fashion of players taking turns playing cards from their hands to attack each other, bolster their hands, and affect each other in various ways until the last card is drawn from the deck. This signifies one final turn for all players. When the final turns are over the winning player is they who either have the Hitler card in hand, or was the last player to send Hitler to the Graveyard, thus collecting the Death token. This winner may now awkwardly congratulate themselves on winning a card game based on eliminating or Hiding Hitler. Yay?
Components. Again, this is a prototype version of the game, so the components may be different as a result of a successful Kickstarter campaign. That said, this game is a bunch of cards, a small die, and a plastic token with Hitler stickers. The cards are all fine, the die is a smaller size than your typical RPG set, and the plastic standee token is fine as well. I do need to address the art style on the cards. It is quite cartoony and really isn’t my style, but for this type of game it works just fine. I am not really excited by it at all, but there is nothing gruesome or triggery in the artwork. FOR ME. I do not speak for everyone though, so if you have issues with it, you are more than entitled to your opinions.
It is difficult to review, or even play for that matter, a game with such an emotionally charged central character. However, this is meant to be a lighthearted card game with a wonky theme. And it most certainly is that. Players are playing as many cards as they dare trying to find out where that Hitler card is residing so they may Attack and send it to the Graveyard. This earns the Death token. But can you hold onto that token until the end of the game? Depending on how far through the deck the game currently is, other players still may have chances to bring the Hitler card back to life. When this happens that Death token is surrendered and available to be earned again. I like that. Now, obviously, the whole zombie thing is weird, but the game is weird in itself, so that fits. Want to throw some achievements into your game? See how many times a player can send Hitler to the Graveyard. You can do that, and it would be a fun way to spice up the game for everyone.
At the end of the day, again, this is a card game with a Hitler theme. In it, Hitler really doesn’t DO anything. He just hangs out in players’ hands, gets sent to the Graveyard, possibly is resurrected, and the cycle continues until the end of the game. The theme may be off-putting for some, but I have no problems with it after having played it several times now. I cannot stress this enough: if you or any of your playmates MAY be offended by the theme, please do not pull this out at game night. It works best with players who can see it and appreciate it for what it is.
Now that the disclaimers are hopefully done, I can explain what this reminds me of, and give you some thoughts. Have you played Munchkin before? You know the part of the game (which we lovingly refer to as “the second half”) where one player is on 9th level attempting to win the game and everyone is ganging up on them to prevent the victory? Hiding Hitler feels a little like that scenario, but throughout the entire game. So many cards can be played on one turn and some cards are played out of turn to increase or decrease the die rolls, and when all players know exactly who has Hitler and they gang up on that player, it’s just Munchkin all over. Now, I feel like here in Hiding Hitler it doesn’t seem to be SO hurtful toward other players as it is in Munchkin, but I get that same vibe. It should be restated that I like Munchkin, so comping this to that game doesn’t necessarily mean it is at all a bad thing. It just gives me that same feeling.
So if you are looking for a possibly quicker and smaller card game to replace your copy of Munchkin, then check out Hiding Hitler. Yes, this is SUPER niche with the gameplay and theme, but with the right crowd I do believe it would be a hit. It has its flaws, but does also offer a rewarding gaming experience that I think about for hours after the game is over. When games can create lasting fond memories of the experience, then it has graduated into a good game. And I think Hiding Hitler is a good game. If you like the sounds of this one, I invite you to consider backing it on Kickstarter when the campaign launches. Find some friends ahead of time that may be into the theme, or can look past it, and prepare them for what is about to come: a game about keeping Hitler safe. Or murdering him. Either way.
Hiding Hitler is a hand management, take that card game for four to six players. In it, players are trying to end the game with either the Hitler card in their hand or the Death token in their possession. The game is played over a series of turns and ends once the final turn has been taken, following the draw of the final card from the draw deck.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, as there are just too many. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup, shuffle the deck of cards and deal six cards to each player. Set the draw deck in the middle of the table, along with the other components. The left of the deck is considered the “Graveyard” and the right side of the deck is the “Action Pile.” Depending on the game mode chosen to play, the Hitler card may be in one of the players’ hands (Blitzkrieg mode – faster because Hitler is already in one player’s hand) or possibly in the draw deck (Strategic mode – slower if Hitler starts in the draw deck). The first player is now able to begin taking their turn and the hunt (or hiding) of Hitler may begin!
On a turn a player may play any amount of Action, Attack, or Instant cards from their hand, resolved one at a time. Action cards are just that: cards that allow for some type of action, be it drawing more cards, or having the entire table draw more cards. Attacks are targeted at a specific player and that player will need to roll the die in order to achieve the Attack card’s victory condition. For example, the Attack card may instruct the attacked to roll higher than value 2 on the die. If they beat that number nothing happens. However, should they roll a 1 (or simply not meet the number on the card) the failing player will need to discard Hitler to the Graveyard if they have it, or discard any other card to the Action Pile. Finally, Instant cards can be played AT ANY TIME, even if not on the player’s turn. These can negate actions or modify die/roll results. Once a player has no more cards to play (or cards they wish to play), the turn ends by drawing one card from the draw deck. It is now the next player’s turn.
Play continues in this fashion of players taking turns playing cards from their hands to attack each other, bolster their hands, and affect each other in various ways until the last card is drawn from the deck. This signifies one final turn for all players. When the final turns are over the winning player is they who either have the Hitler card in hand, or was the last player to send Hitler to the Graveyard, thus collecting the Death token. This winner may now awkwardly congratulate themselves on winning a card game based on eliminating or Hiding Hitler. Yay?
Components. Again, this is a prototype version of the game, so the components may be different as a result of a successful Kickstarter campaign. That said, this game is a bunch of cards, a small die, and a plastic token with Hitler stickers. The cards are all fine, the die is a smaller size than your typical RPG set, and the plastic standee token is fine as well. I do need to address the art style on the cards. It is quite cartoony and really isn’t my style, but for this type of game it works just fine. I am not really excited by it at all, but there is nothing gruesome or triggery in the artwork. FOR ME. I do not speak for everyone though, so if you have issues with it, you are more than entitled to your opinions.
It is difficult to review, or even play for that matter, a game with such an emotionally charged central character. However, this is meant to be a lighthearted card game with a wonky theme. And it most certainly is that. Players are playing as many cards as they dare trying to find out where that Hitler card is residing so they may Attack and send it to the Graveyard. This earns the Death token. But can you hold onto that token until the end of the game? Depending on how far through the deck the game currently is, other players still may have chances to bring the Hitler card back to life. When this happens that Death token is surrendered and available to be earned again. I like that. Now, obviously, the whole zombie thing is weird, but the game is weird in itself, so that fits. Want to throw some achievements into your game? See how many times a player can send Hitler to the Graveyard. You can do that, and it would be a fun way to spice up the game for everyone.
At the end of the day, again, this is a card game with a Hitler theme. In it, Hitler really doesn’t DO anything. He just hangs out in players’ hands, gets sent to the Graveyard, possibly is resurrected, and the cycle continues until the end of the game. The theme may be off-putting for some, but I have no problems with it after having played it several times now. I cannot stress this enough: if you or any of your playmates MAY be offended by the theme, please do not pull this out at game night. It works best with players who can see it and appreciate it for what it is.
Now that the disclaimers are hopefully done, I can explain what this reminds me of, and give you some thoughts. Have you played Munchkin before? You know the part of the game (which we lovingly refer to as “the second half”) where one player is on 9th level attempting to win the game and everyone is ganging up on them to prevent the victory? Hiding Hitler feels a little like that scenario, but throughout the entire game. So many cards can be played on one turn and some cards are played out of turn to increase or decrease the die rolls, and when all players know exactly who has Hitler and they gang up on that player, it’s just Munchkin all over. Now, I feel like here in Hiding Hitler it doesn’t seem to be SO hurtful toward other players as it is in Munchkin, but I get that same vibe. It should be restated that I like Munchkin, so comping this to that game doesn’t necessarily mean it is at all a bad thing. It just gives me that same feeling.
So if you are looking for a possibly quicker and smaller card game to replace your copy of Munchkin, then check out Hiding Hitler. Yes, this is SUPER niche with the gameplay and theme, but with the right crowd I do believe it would be a hit. It has its flaws, but does also offer a rewarding gaming experience that I think about for hours after the game is over. When games can create lasting fond memories of the experience, then it has graduated into a good game. And I think Hiding Hitler is a good game. If you like the sounds of this one, I invite you to consider backing it on Kickstarter when the campaign launches. Find some friends ahead of time that may be into the theme, or can look past it, and prepare them for what is about to come: a game about keeping Hitler safe. Or murdering him. Either way.
KalJ95 (25 KP) rated The Last of Us Part II in Video Games
Jun 23, 2020
You Won't Find A Better Game In Terms Of Presentation. (4 more)
Level Design Is Astounding.
Like The First Game, This Will Create A Conversation For Years To Come
Sound Design Is Incredible.
Takes Risks, And Some Do Pay Off.
A Flawed Sequel. (4 more)
Awful Pacing.
Structure Of Narrative Is Bad.
Some Terrible Dialogue.
Shoehorned Agenda.
The last of The Last of Us.
The video game industry doesn't get enough credit as a source of entertainment, in my humble opinion. Time and time again, the industry has proven that it can produce something magical, memorable, mesmerising to play, and even more so, something engaging to watch as someone not even holding the controller. Naughty Dog’s 2013 masterpiece, The Last of Us, became an overnight classic game because it was cinematic in presentation, and a rollercoaster of emotions in narrative. I sat and played the remastered version on my PlayStation 4 in 2017, and fell in love with the chemistry, love and heartbreak Joel and Ellie took with them, as they crossed a post-apocalyptic America. I was satisfied with the conclusion, and felt the story of these two characters was finished. I didn't need, or ever want a sequel. Then a few months pass, The Last of Us Part II is announced. Obviously, I was ecstatic, but also concerned. Trailers came and went, delays happened over and over, and leaks began to drip onto the internet. I was even more concerned with the leaks, and how this game was taking shape, but I remained open minded, and began playing the game.
The Last of Us Part II is a strange beast. An ambitious, exquisite experience, mired by multiple flaws in structure, pacing and plot holes. I simultaneously adored and loathed the twenty five hour experience, and I’m ready to do it all again. Ellie’s thirst for revenge deals with many issues of morality and hate, and the consequences of ones actions. To coin a phrase, “violence begets violence”, and this is very violent. A flawed piece of art, that often shoehorns a political tick list so it can cater to a certain demographic of sexuality and gender. Whatever you think about Part II, it will create a conversation for years to come, for better or worse.
Narrative:
Ellie and Joel are settled in Jackson, Wyoming, living a relatively normal existence. Ellie is nineteen, and has a job, like the rest of the fighters in Jackson, by going out into the world on routes to clear out the wondering infected. When Ellie witnesses a violent event, she takes it into her own hands to take bloody revenge on the people responsible.
A big risk was taken by Naughty Dog to decide what they did for the first two hours, even the VP of the company, Neil Druckmann, said himself the game will be “divisive”, and that is probably an understatement judging by the fan backlash. I feel it worked to support the other twenty three hours, and shows the blurry line of being good and bad in this world.
Unfortunately, the narrative slogs through awful structuring and some dreadful, downright cringe-worthy dialogue. The structure goes back and forth from the present day, to months, and sometimes years previous, and this is all to cement the events that keep the narrative flowing. The flashbacks featuring Joel and Ellie give you brief moments of happiness, followed by devastating revelations. They are the best moments of the game, you can feel the warmth the characters have for each other, and the heartbreaking actions they take. It made me wonder why they simply didn't just create a game with these ideas in mind. Other flashbacks create more problems than they solve, particularly in the latter half of the game. The first half, for all its faults, really treats you to a vicious and bloodthirsty ride through Seattle, and you completely feel the motivation and drive Ellie has to complete the mission she's set out to do. Seattle is huge, and the perfect backdrop for this game.
Sadly, the second half of the game is an absolute mess. The whole experience becomes nothing more than “go to this location, collect something, go back” over and over again. Its a lazy trope that causes so much fatigue in terms of pacing, slowing down any momentum gained by the first half. The second half serves the most important purpose too, and while I did grow to understand the intention it was presenting me, I couldn't help but feel frequently bored of doing fetch quests. To remain as spoiler free as possible, the game is split into two perspectives of Ellie, and an entirely new character. Naughty Dog wants you to understand the perspectives of both sides, but the history thats been created with the original game, you cant help but sympathise with Ellie more. The fact that its half the game away from the main protagonist, and starts you fresh with a new character, with new skill sets and weapons, really feels out of place. This could of worked much better as an episodic entry, rather than just two stories, one after the other. I can understand people who love this way of storytelling, but for me it slows the pacing down.
Gameplay:
Part II is the most beautiful game I’ve ever played. Naughty Dog continue to set the bar extremely high in terms of surroundings and facial animations, and the seamless transitions from cutscene to gameplay made my jaw drop. Each facial movement shows the hurt, the honesty, the devastation the characters carry with them. It almost feels more like a film or tv series than a video game, featuring an excellent performance from Troy Baker, and a career defining show from Ashley Johnson. Unfortunately, some of the new cast members don't have enough time on screen to give a full understanding of their personality or perspective. Some are likeable, relatable even, but some are just annoying, saying some of the strangest, out of place dialogue.
In terms of its gameplay, Part II hasn't really changed anything from its predecessor. It feels the same, whether you enjoyed it first time round or not. I personally am in the middle ground, it works for what it is. The Last of Us has always been a game about surviving by any means necessary. Part II feels like multiple ideas all in one, all conflicting themselves. Let me explain:
The game actively tries to twist the act of killing people to make you seem like its an awful thing to do. This is an interesting idea that has been done many times before in games, but it works in the oddest of ways here. I have completed the game twice now, and found it almost impossible to not kill anyone, yet cutscenes display remorse within the characters after they’ve murdered someone. This conflicts the idea of the whole game, where one moment I'm slicing a persons throat with a knife, the next I do the exact same, but this time I regret that decision. Again, its adding less weight to the story, and actively contradicting everything that happens.
Extra Notes:
The environments of Part II are some of the best in a video game. A sandbox of lush greenery and worn down buildings follows the same formula that Naughty Dog designed in Uncharted: The Lost Legacy, where you can explore a massive space to do what you find the objectives, but also see the sights and collect items. The level design of the entire game is absolutely masterful, but this level astounded me graphically and structurally.
By this point, it probably feels like I utterly hated Part II. I did, and didn’t, and thats the line I'm sticking on. The Last of Us always presented a commentary as to the nature of relationships, love, life and death. At the core was Ellie and Joel, two wayward strangers forced together on a journey across America. Everyone has a reason to love that game, for me its their chemistry and progression. Joel was hardened, standoffish, only to warm to Ellie, and love her by the end. Ellie, the immune girl who's humorous, optimistic and full of life, who ultimately becomes cold, quiet and sceptical of Joel.
Part II presents a different commentary, one of revenge and hate. I firmly believe Part II is weak in most areas, a downgrade in fact compared to its counterpart, but its so beautiful and bleak, with so many incapsulated moments of joy, heartbreak, love, shock. Its uncompromising, relentless and essential for anyone with a PS4. This will be a game I will constantly change my opinion on the more I think about it. As I said at the beginning, I never felt a sequel was necessary, and I firmly believe the story must end here.
(P.S. I must mention that Naughty Dog and Sony have only themselves to blame when it comes to the reception Part II has received during its release and promotional material. Early reviewers were told that they could only go into detail about the first ten or so hours, not mentioning the other fifteen. The other fifteen hours are incredibly important to mention, and they either make or break this game, so not letting reviewers do their job feels disingenuous, and from my point of view shows that they had no faith in their product to be criticised. The promotional material is also hugely misleading. The trailers show a completely different game, and characters are swapped for others in key scenes. That is wrong, and once again, shows your audience you had zero faith in your product based on the actual plot of your game.)
The Last of Us Part II is a strange beast. An ambitious, exquisite experience, mired by multiple flaws in structure, pacing and plot holes. I simultaneously adored and loathed the twenty five hour experience, and I’m ready to do it all again. Ellie’s thirst for revenge deals with many issues of morality and hate, and the consequences of ones actions. To coin a phrase, “violence begets violence”, and this is very violent. A flawed piece of art, that often shoehorns a political tick list so it can cater to a certain demographic of sexuality and gender. Whatever you think about Part II, it will create a conversation for years to come, for better or worse.
Narrative:
Ellie and Joel are settled in Jackson, Wyoming, living a relatively normal existence. Ellie is nineteen, and has a job, like the rest of the fighters in Jackson, by going out into the world on routes to clear out the wondering infected. When Ellie witnesses a violent event, she takes it into her own hands to take bloody revenge on the people responsible.
A big risk was taken by Naughty Dog to decide what they did for the first two hours, even the VP of the company, Neil Druckmann, said himself the game will be “divisive”, and that is probably an understatement judging by the fan backlash. I feel it worked to support the other twenty three hours, and shows the blurry line of being good and bad in this world.
Unfortunately, the narrative slogs through awful structuring and some dreadful, downright cringe-worthy dialogue. The structure goes back and forth from the present day, to months, and sometimes years previous, and this is all to cement the events that keep the narrative flowing. The flashbacks featuring Joel and Ellie give you brief moments of happiness, followed by devastating revelations. They are the best moments of the game, you can feel the warmth the characters have for each other, and the heartbreaking actions they take. It made me wonder why they simply didn't just create a game with these ideas in mind. Other flashbacks create more problems than they solve, particularly in the latter half of the game. The first half, for all its faults, really treats you to a vicious and bloodthirsty ride through Seattle, and you completely feel the motivation and drive Ellie has to complete the mission she's set out to do. Seattle is huge, and the perfect backdrop for this game.
Sadly, the second half of the game is an absolute mess. The whole experience becomes nothing more than “go to this location, collect something, go back” over and over again. Its a lazy trope that causes so much fatigue in terms of pacing, slowing down any momentum gained by the first half. The second half serves the most important purpose too, and while I did grow to understand the intention it was presenting me, I couldn't help but feel frequently bored of doing fetch quests. To remain as spoiler free as possible, the game is split into two perspectives of Ellie, and an entirely new character. Naughty Dog wants you to understand the perspectives of both sides, but the history thats been created with the original game, you cant help but sympathise with Ellie more. The fact that its half the game away from the main protagonist, and starts you fresh with a new character, with new skill sets and weapons, really feels out of place. This could of worked much better as an episodic entry, rather than just two stories, one after the other. I can understand people who love this way of storytelling, but for me it slows the pacing down.
Gameplay:
Part II is the most beautiful game I’ve ever played. Naughty Dog continue to set the bar extremely high in terms of surroundings and facial animations, and the seamless transitions from cutscene to gameplay made my jaw drop. Each facial movement shows the hurt, the honesty, the devastation the characters carry with them. It almost feels more like a film or tv series than a video game, featuring an excellent performance from Troy Baker, and a career defining show from Ashley Johnson. Unfortunately, some of the new cast members don't have enough time on screen to give a full understanding of their personality or perspective. Some are likeable, relatable even, but some are just annoying, saying some of the strangest, out of place dialogue.
In terms of its gameplay, Part II hasn't really changed anything from its predecessor. It feels the same, whether you enjoyed it first time round or not. I personally am in the middle ground, it works for what it is. The Last of Us has always been a game about surviving by any means necessary. Part II feels like multiple ideas all in one, all conflicting themselves. Let me explain:
The game actively tries to twist the act of killing people to make you seem like its an awful thing to do. This is an interesting idea that has been done many times before in games, but it works in the oddest of ways here. I have completed the game twice now, and found it almost impossible to not kill anyone, yet cutscenes display remorse within the characters after they’ve murdered someone. This conflicts the idea of the whole game, where one moment I'm slicing a persons throat with a knife, the next I do the exact same, but this time I regret that decision. Again, its adding less weight to the story, and actively contradicting everything that happens.
Extra Notes:
The environments of Part II are some of the best in a video game. A sandbox of lush greenery and worn down buildings follows the same formula that Naughty Dog designed in Uncharted: The Lost Legacy, where you can explore a massive space to do what you find the objectives, but also see the sights and collect items. The level design of the entire game is absolutely masterful, but this level astounded me graphically and structurally.
By this point, it probably feels like I utterly hated Part II. I did, and didn’t, and thats the line I'm sticking on. The Last of Us always presented a commentary as to the nature of relationships, love, life and death. At the core was Ellie and Joel, two wayward strangers forced together on a journey across America. Everyone has a reason to love that game, for me its their chemistry and progression. Joel was hardened, standoffish, only to warm to Ellie, and love her by the end. Ellie, the immune girl who's humorous, optimistic and full of life, who ultimately becomes cold, quiet and sceptical of Joel.
Part II presents a different commentary, one of revenge and hate. I firmly believe Part II is weak in most areas, a downgrade in fact compared to its counterpart, but its so beautiful and bleak, with so many incapsulated moments of joy, heartbreak, love, shock. Its uncompromising, relentless and essential for anyone with a PS4. This will be a game I will constantly change my opinion on the more I think about it. As I said at the beginning, I never felt a sequel was necessary, and I firmly believe the story must end here.
(P.S. I must mention that Naughty Dog and Sony have only themselves to blame when it comes to the reception Part II has received during its release and promotional material. Early reviewers were told that they could only go into detail about the first ten or so hours, not mentioning the other fifteen. The other fifteen hours are incredibly important to mention, and they either make or break this game, so not letting reviewers do their job feels disingenuous, and from my point of view shows that they had no faith in their product to be criticised. The promotional material is also hugely misleading. The trailers show a completely different game, and characters are swapped for others in key scenes. That is wrong, and once again, shows your audience you had zero faith in your product based on the actual plot of your game.)