Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Upside (2019) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Not the 5* French classic, but a fun and moving movie nonetheless.
So, the movie-going audience for this film will divide into two categories:
Category A: those that have seen the original 2011 French classic “The Intouchables” that this is based on, and;
Category B: those that haven’t.
2011 is just before I started “One Mann’s Movies”, but “The Intouchables” would have got 5* from me, no problem.
This movie joins a list of standout European movies – for example, “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”; “Let The Right One In”; “Sleepless Night”; etc. – that have had Hollywood “makeovers” that don’t match up to the originals. And this is no exception. However, it’s still been well made and deserves respect as a standalone piece of movie-making.
The Plot
Based on a true story, Phillip Lacasse (Bryan Cranston) is left both paraplegic and widowed by a string of bad luck. Not that money can buy you everything, but his care arrangements are substantially helped by him being a multi-millionaire (“Not rich enough to buy The Yankees; Rich enough to buy The Mets”). This is from success in investments and writing about such investments.
Depressed, cranky and with a “DNR” that his diligent PA Yvonne (Nicole Kidman) seems unable to comply with, Phillip lashes out at anyone and everyone and so dispatches his carers with monotonous regularity. Dell Scott (Kevin Hart) is on parole, with the requirement to seek work. Due to a mix-up, he finds himself in the employ of Phillip: with the suspicion that he’s been hired because he is the very worst candidate imaginable, and thus the most likely to let Phillip shuffle off this mortal coil. But the two men’s antipathy to each other slowly thaws as they teach each other new tricks.
Pin left in the grenade
Those who have seen “The Intouchables” will fondly remember the first 5 minutes of that film: a flash-forward to a manic police car-chase featuring our protagonists (there played by François Cluzet and Omar Sy). It drops like a comedy hand-grenade to open the film. Unfortunately, you can’t help but feel a bit let down by the same re-creation in “The Upside”. It has all the same content but none of the heart.
After that rocky start, the film continues to rather stutter along. Part of the reason for this I think is Kevin Hart. It’s not that he’s particularly bad in the role: it’s just that he IS Kevin Hart, and I was constantly thinking “there’s that comedian playing that role”.
However, once the story gets into its swing, giving Cranston more of a chance to shine (which he does), then the film started to motor and my reservations about Hart started to wane. Some of these story set pieces – such as the one about the art work – are punch-the-air funny in their own right. Cranston’s timing in delivering his punchlines is immaculate.
This IS what actors do
There seems to have been some furore about the casting of Bryan Cranston as the role of the disabled millionaire instead of a disabled actor. Lord save us! He’s an actor! That’s what actors do for a living: pretend to be people they’re not! It’s also worth pointing out that François Cluzet was an able-bodied actor as well.
As already mentioned, Bryan Cranston excels in the role. Phillip goes through such a wide range of emotions from despair to pure joy and back again that you can’t help but be impressed by the performance.
On the female side of the cast, it’s really nice to see Nicole Kidman in such a quiet and understated role and it’s nicely done; Aja Naomi King does a nice job as Dell’s protective ex-girlfriend Latrice; and there’s a nice female cameo as well, which I won’t spoil since I wasn’t expecting to see her in the film.
Final Thoughts
As a standalone film it has some laugh-out-loud moments, some feelgood highs and some moments of real pathos. The audience I saw this with was small, but there was still a buzz in the room and sporadic applause as the end titles came up: God only knows that’s unusual for a film!
The director is “Limitless” and “Divergent” director Neil Burger, and it’s a perfectly fun and innocent night out at the flicks that I commend to the house in this month of celluloid awards heavyweights.
Category A: those that have seen the original 2011 French classic “The Intouchables” that this is based on, and;
Category B: those that haven’t.
2011 is just before I started “One Mann’s Movies”, but “The Intouchables” would have got 5* from me, no problem.
This movie joins a list of standout European movies – for example, “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”; “Let The Right One In”; “Sleepless Night”; etc. – that have had Hollywood “makeovers” that don’t match up to the originals. And this is no exception. However, it’s still been well made and deserves respect as a standalone piece of movie-making.
The Plot
Based on a true story, Phillip Lacasse (Bryan Cranston) is left both paraplegic and widowed by a string of bad luck. Not that money can buy you everything, but his care arrangements are substantially helped by him being a multi-millionaire (“Not rich enough to buy The Yankees; Rich enough to buy The Mets”). This is from success in investments and writing about such investments.
Depressed, cranky and with a “DNR” that his diligent PA Yvonne (Nicole Kidman) seems unable to comply with, Phillip lashes out at anyone and everyone and so dispatches his carers with monotonous regularity. Dell Scott (Kevin Hart) is on parole, with the requirement to seek work. Due to a mix-up, he finds himself in the employ of Phillip: with the suspicion that he’s been hired because he is the very worst candidate imaginable, and thus the most likely to let Phillip shuffle off this mortal coil. But the two men’s antipathy to each other slowly thaws as they teach each other new tricks.
Pin left in the grenade
Those who have seen “The Intouchables” will fondly remember the first 5 minutes of that film: a flash-forward to a manic police car-chase featuring our protagonists (there played by François Cluzet and Omar Sy). It drops like a comedy hand-grenade to open the film. Unfortunately, you can’t help but feel a bit let down by the same re-creation in “The Upside”. It has all the same content but none of the heart.
After that rocky start, the film continues to rather stutter along. Part of the reason for this I think is Kevin Hart. It’s not that he’s particularly bad in the role: it’s just that he IS Kevin Hart, and I was constantly thinking “there’s that comedian playing that role”.
However, once the story gets into its swing, giving Cranston more of a chance to shine (which he does), then the film started to motor and my reservations about Hart started to wane. Some of these story set pieces – such as the one about the art work – are punch-the-air funny in their own right. Cranston’s timing in delivering his punchlines is immaculate.
This IS what actors do
There seems to have been some furore about the casting of Bryan Cranston as the role of the disabled millionaire instead of a disabled actor. Lord save us! He’s an actor! That’s what actors do for a living: pretend to be people they’re not! It’s also worth pointing out that François Cluzet was an able-bodied actor as well.
As already mentioned, Bryan Cranston excels in the role. Phillip goes through such a wide range of emotions from despair to pure joy and back again that you can’t help but be impressed by the performance.
On the female side of the cast, it’s really nice to see Nicole Kidman in such a quiet and understated role and it’s nicely done; Aja Naomi King does a nice job as Dell’s protective ex-girlfriend Latrice; and there’s a nice female cameo as well, which I won’t spoil since I wasn’t expecting to see her in the film.
Final Thoughts
As a standalone film it has some laugh-out-loud moments, some feelgood highs and some moments of real pathos. The audience I saw this with was small, but there was still a buzz in the room and sporadic applause as the end titles came up: God only knows that’s unusual for a film!
The director is “Limitless” and “Divergent” director Neil Burger, and it’s a perfectly fun and innocent night out at the flicks that I commend to the house in this month of celluloid awards heavyweights.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Fort in Tabletop Games
Jul 27, 2021
One activity my 5-year-old son will never tire of: building forts. Mostly pillow/blanket-based, but all I am doing is grooming him for an eventual treehouse fort of his own in the backyard someday. What an excellent theme for a game, and when I had a chance to speak with Brooke from Leder Games about reviewing this one, I absolutely jumped for joy for the opportunity. No guessing whether we like a game here at Purple Phoenix Games – we put our ratings right on the first graphic of every review, so you know already that I love Fort. Let’s see why.
Fort is a hand management, deck-building game with a follow mechanic for two to four players. In it, players are assuming the roles of everyday kids trying to build their forts, play with their toys, and eat pizza with their buddies. The winner of the game is they who is able to score the most victory points (VP) at the end of the game, which can end in one of three different fashions.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, each player chooses a player color and takes all items belonging to them, including the Best Friends cards from the stack. Every other component is then separated by type and cards shuffled. Per the rules, some decks of cards will only have a certain amount on the table, whereas the main deck of kid cards is always used. Each player will draw eight kid cards from the deck to add to their Best Friends and shuffle them. They will also place their score markers on the 0 space of the Victory Track board. Randomly determine the starting player and give them the coveted First Player card, and the game may now begin!
Fort is played in turns, with each turn consisting of five phases (the first phase is skipped on the first turn). The first phase is Cleanup. To Cleanup, the active player takes all kid cards remaining in their Yard and places them in their own discard pile. Next, the active player will Play a kid card from their hand. On each card is a space for up to two actions to be taken: the public action on top and the private action on bottom. The player may complete both, but MUST complete at least one of the actions in its entirety. If using the public action of the card, then other players at the table may also follow the action by discarding one card of the matching suit of the card originally played. However, the leader (active player) may also play additional cards from their hand, of the same suit, in order to boost the effects of the actions. Followers may not. These actions include gaining “stuff” (pizza and toys) to be placed in their Stuff area or backpack, trashing cards in their hands, or gaining VP.
After the players have Played cards, the next phase is Recruit. The active player may choose any kid card that exists in the Park (the space underneath the Victory Track that is always full of kids), another player’s Yard (the space above the player’s main board that they neglected to play with their previous turn), or they may simply draw a kid card blindly from the Park deck. These kids are sent directly to the discard pile to be drawn on a later turn.
Finally, phases four and five end a player’s turn. Phase four is Discard, where the active player will discard all their Best Friends, kid cards they played this turn, and recruited kids. The kid cards leftover that were not used are sent to the player’s Yard above their main boards to possibly be stolen by another player during their Recruit phase. After Discarding, the final phase is Draw, where the active player will draw another hand of five cards to prepare to follow other players and to prepare for the next round. Fort continues in this fashion of each player taking turns and following others’ actions until one player earns 25 VP on the track, any player increases their Fort to level 5, or the Park deck becomes empty. All players will finish their turns so that they all have played an equal amount of turns, and then the players total their scores to crown the winner!
Components. This game has super great components. The little pizza and toys bits are awesome, the double-layered boards are cool, and the art is amazing as well. If it looks familiar in style, it’s because you have seen this art on Root, Oath, and Vast, among others. I love it so much and it is a perfect match for this theme. I really have little negative to say about Fort except that I wish the player colors were different. The orange and yellow are a little close in hue, and the brownish/olive is drab. Everything else, though, *chef’s kiss.
It is probably no surprise why I love this one. Deck-building has long been one of my favorite mechanics, and I have always enjoyed the follow mechanic found in Tiny Epic Galaxies and Villages of Valeria. Mix those up with much more going on and an excellent theme and it’s definitely a big time winner for me. I think what puts me over the edge here is that cards can be used for a couple different actions, and they can be boosted with the right strategies. Get your deck in order to really maximize each turn and the game opens up for you. Several times I have been able to focus my deck and really pound some powerful abilities, but it certainly doesn’t always work out for me, especially when others catch on to what I am doing and hate-draft me into other tactics.
If you are into a fresh new look at deck-building and enjoy more wacky themes, as I do, then I urge you to check out Fort. Officially, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a playful 5 / 6, but even though it probably won’t break into my Top 10, I do think it will come to the table more often than most games in my Top 10. So should I reconsider my Top 10? Hmm. Anyway, Fort is awesome and everyone I have played with seem to agree with me. So grab a copy or two for yourself. Heck, the gift-giving season is fast approaching, and I know these fit very well under trees and other significant symbols of festivities…
Fort is a hand management, deck-building game with a follow mechanic for two to four players. In it, players are assuming the roles of everyday kids trying to build their forts, play with their toys, and eat pizza with their buddies. The winner of the game is they who is able to score the most victory points (VP) at the end of the game, which can end in one of three different fashions.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, each player chooses a player color and takes all items belonging to them, including the Best Friends cards from the stack. Every other component is then separated by type and cards shuffled. Per the rules, some decks of cards will only have a certain amount on the table, whereas the main deck of kid cards is always used. Each player will draw eight kid cards from the deck to add to their Best Friends and shuffle them. They will also place their score markers on the 0 space of the Victory Track board. Randomly determine the starting player and give them the coveted First Player card, and the game may now begin!
Fort is played in turns, with each turn consisting of five phases (the first phase is skipped on the first turn). The first phase is Cleanup. To Cleanup, the active player takes all kid cards remaining in their Yard and places them in their own discard pile. Next, the active player will Play a kid card from their hand. On each card is a space for up to two actions to be taken: the public action on top and the private action on bottom. The player may complete both, but MUST complete at least one of the actions in its entirety. If using the public action of the card, then other players at the table may also follow the action by discarding one card of the matching suit of the card originally played. However, the leader (active player) may also play additional cards from their hand, of the same suit, in order to boost the effects of the actions. Followers may not. These actions include gaining “stuff” (pizza and toys) to be placed in their Stuff area or backpack, trashing cards in their hands, or gaining VP.
After the players have Played cards, the next phase is Recruit. The active player may choose any kid card that exists in the Park (the space underneath the Victory Track that is always full of kids), another player’s Yard (the space above the player’s main board that they neglected to play with their previous turn), or they may simply draw a kid card blindly from the Park deck. These kids are sent directly to the discard pile to be drawn on a later turn.
Finally, phases four and five end a player’s turn. Phase four is Discard, where the active player will discard all their Best Friends, kid cards they played this turn, and recruited kids. The kid cards leftover that were not used are sent to the player’s Yard above their main boards to possibly be stolen by another player during their Recruit phase. After Discarding, the final phase is Draw, where the active player will draw another hand of five cards to prepare to follow other players and to prepare for the next round. Fort continues in this fashion of each player taking turns and following others’ actions until one player earns 25 VP on the track, any player increases their Fort to level 5, or the Park deck becomes empty. All players will finish their turns so that they all have played an equal amount of turns, and then the players total their scores to crown the winner!
Components. This game has super great components. The little pizza and toys bits are awesome, the double-layered boards are cool, and the art is amazing as well. If it looks familiar in style, it’s because you have seen this art on Root, Oath, and Vast, among others. I love it so much and it is a perfect match for this theme. I really have little negative to say about Fort except that I wish the player colors were different. The orange and yellow are a little close in hue, and the brownish/olive is drab. Everything else, though, *chef’s kiss.
It is probably no surprise why I love this one. Deck-building has long been one of my favorite mechanics, and I have always enjoyed the follow mechanic found in Tiny Epic Galaxies and Villages of Valeria. Mix those up with much more going on and an excellent theme and it’s definitely a big time winner for me. I think what puts me over the edge here is that cards can be used for a couple different actions, and they can be boosted with the right strategies. Get your deck in order to really maximize each turn and the game opens up for you. Several times I have been able to focus my deck and really pound some powerful abilities, but it certainly doesn’t always work out for me, especially when others catch on to what I am doing and hate-draft me into other tactics.
If you are into a fresh new look at deck-building and enjoy more wacky themes, as I do, then I urge you to check out Fort. Officially, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a playful 5 / 6, but even though it probably won’t break into my Top 10, I do think it will come to the table more often than most games in my Top 10. So should I reconsider my Top 10? Hmm. Anyway, Fort is awesome and everyone I have played with seem to agree with me. So grab a copy or two for yourself. Heck, the gift-giving season is fast approaching, and I know these fit very well under trees and other significant symbols of festivities…
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Back to the Future (1985) in Movies
Mar 30, 2018
Almost a perfect film
I was flipping channels the other day and ran across BACK TO THE FUTURE, it was just about to start and since I hadn't seen it in quite awhile, I figured I'd catch the first part of it before venturing off to other surfing opportunities. As often happens in this sort of situation, I ended up transfixed by this film and watched the whole thing. After it was over, I asked myself why did I enjoy this film so much and my answer was fascinating (at least to me) -
BACK TO THE FUTURE is about as perfect of a film as there is.
Why? Let's start with the structure of this film. It follows the classic 3 Act structure. ACT 1: set up the premise, the gimmick (if any) and the stakes. ACT 2: escalate the stakes and throw in complications and obstacles. ACT 3: Resolve everything.
Seems like a pretty simple formula, right? So why do so many get it wrong? Quite simply, they don't keep it simple and then execute (almost to perfection) the simplicity of the structure. Let's break down the 3 Acts of BACK TO THE FUTURE.
ACT 1 - set up the premise, the gimmick and the stakes. The premise & gimmick is simple, time travel is possible and our hero travels back in time and is stranded there. The stakes are even simpler - our hero must find a way to get Back to the Future.
ACT 2 - escalate the stakes and throw in complicaitons and obstacles. The stakes are escalated by the fact that our hero interrupts the timeline of when his mother met his father, thus there is the very real possibility that he will cease to exist for his parents never met. Our hero must find a way to bring his mother and father together. The complications are that his parents are not the boring old fuddy-duddy's that our hero thought they were, his father is a peeping-Tom nerd and his mother is a randy high-schooler who falls in love (lust?) with our hero, her son. Further complicating things is that the time machine must find enough power to make the time travel device (the flux-capacitor!) work, power that is not readily available in this timeline. Adding one more complication to the mix is the school bully who is constantly after our hero.
ACT 3 - resolve everything. This is where this film excels. EVERY loose end is tied up. Our hero find a way to reunite his mother and father, the bully is put in his place, a source of energy is found and our hero's journey comes to a succesful conclusion.
There is much, much more to this film than those plot points, but I just wanted to show how deceptively simple and efficient this plot is. Kudo's must go out to screenwriter's Robert Zemeckis (more on him later) and Bob Gale for coming up with this idea and executing it so well. Gale (1941, KOLCHAK: THE NIGHT STALKER) said he came up with this idea when he saw his father's high school yearbook and dreamed about going back to meet him. He stated that he doubted that he and his father would have been friends.
An interesting side fact: The University of Southern California Film school's writing classes use the screenplay for Back to the Future as the model of "The Perfect Screenplay". So, I rest my case.
But a "perfect" screenplay would be worthless without near perfect execution of putting the words and actions up on the screen - and this film achieves that as well. Director (and co-screenwriter) Robert Zemeckis (WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT, FORREST GUMP) cleary had a vision of how to make this film and did not waiver from it. The action is strong, the fluidness of the film is solid and the performances are all top-notch. The only thing that might knock this film down a peg or two is some of the 32 "special effects" shots that - to look at it these days - seem somewhat archaic (see the flames between Doc Brown's and Marty's feet when the DeLorean first goes forward in time). But for the time, these special effects are state-of-the-art.
Speaking of performances, Michael J. Fox became a movie star with this film, and rightfully so. His Marty McFly is charming, quirky, intelligent, dorky - all at the same time. His uncomfortableness with his teen age mother is palatable. Credit must go with Director Zemeckis, who - after he couldn't get Fox released from his contract on the TV show FAMILY TIES - went (famously) with his 2nd choice, Eric Stoltz. When Stolt's seriousness and "method" acting was not meshing with the type of film he wanted to make, Zemeckis made the bold decision to fire Stoltz and worked out a deal where he can use Fox at night while Fox shot Family ties during the day.
Playing against Fox, brilliantly, is Christopher Lloyd as "Doc" Emmit Brown. A two-time Emmy winner (at the time) for playing crazy Jim Ignatowski on the TV show TAXI, Lloyd played Doc Brown as "part Einstein, part composer Leopold Stokowski", creating what would be the benchmark for "brilliant, scatter-brained scientist". Leah Thompson does the finest performance of her career as Marty's mother and Crispin Glover was beyond quirky as Marty's nerd/loser Dad. Finally Thomas F. Wilson is the embodiment of bully as "Biff" Tannen.
After the success of this film, two other BACK TO THE FUTURE films were made - films that I feel were good, but somewhat diluted the perfection of this film. No matter. Sit down, relax and enjoy one of the most "perfect" films ever made.
Letter Grade: A+
A rare 10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BACK TO THE FUTURE is about as perfect of a film as there is.
Why? Let's start with the structure of this film. It follows the classic 3 Act structure. ACT 1: set up the premise, the gimmick (if any) and the stakes. ACT 2: escalate the stakes and throw in complications and obstacles. ACT 3: Resolve everything.
Seems like a pretty simple formula, right? So why do so many get it wrong? Quite simply, they don't keep it simple and then execute (almost to perfection) the simplicity of the structure. Let's break down the 3 Acts of BACK TO THE FUTURE.
ACT 1 - set up the premise, the gimmick and the stakes. The premise & gimmick is simple, time travel is possible and our hero travels back in time and is stranded there. The stakes are even simpler - our hero must find a way to get Back to the Future.
ACT 2 - escalate the stakes and throw in complicaitons and obstacles. The stakes are escalated by the fact that our hero interrupts the timeline of when his mother met his father, thus there is the very real possibility that he will cease to exist for his parents never met. Our hero must find a way to bring his mother and father together. The complications are that his parents are not the boring old fuddy-duddy's that our hero thought they were, his father is a peeping-Tom nerd and his mother is a randy high-schooler who falls in love (lust?) with our hero, her son. Further complicating things is that the time machine must find enough power to make the time travel device (the flux-capacitor!) work, power that is not readily available in this timeline. Adding one more complication to the mix is the school bully who is constantly after our hero.
ACT 3 - resolve everything. This is where this film excels. EVERY loose end is tied up. Our hero find a way to reunite his mother and father, the bully is put in his place, a source of energy is found and our hero's journey comes to a succesful conclusion.
There is much, much more to this film than those plot points, but I just wanted to show how deceptively simple and efficient this plot is. Kudo's must go out to screenwriter's Robert Zemeckis (more on him later) and Bob Gale for coming up with this idea and executing it so well. Gale (1941, KOLCHAK: THE NIGHT STALKER) said he came up with this idea when he saw his father's high school yearbook and dreamed about going back to meet him. He stated that he doubted that he and his father would have been friends.
An interesting side fact: The University of Southern California Film school's writing classes use the screenplay for Back to the Future as the model of "The Perfect Screenplay". So, I rest my case.
But a "perfect" screenplay would be worthless without near perfect execution of putting the words and actions up on the screen - and this film achieves that as well. Director (and co-screenwriter) Robert Zemeckis (WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT, FORREST GUMP) cleary had a vision of how to make this film and did not waiver from it. The action is strong, the fluidness of the film is solid and the performances are all top-notch. The only thing that might knock this film down a peg or two is some of the 32 "special effects" shots that - to look at it these days - seem somewhat archaic (see the flames between Doc Brown's and Marty's feet when the DeLorean first goes forward in time). But for the time, these special effects are state-of-the-art.
Speaking of performances, Michael J. Fox became a movie star with this film, and rightfully so. His Marty McFly is charming, quirky, intelligent, dorky - all at the same time. His uncomfortableness with his teen age mother is palatable. Credit must go with Director Zemeckis, who - after he couldn't get Fox released from his contract on the TV show FAMILY TIES - went (famously) with his 2nd choice, Eric Stoltz. When Stolt's seriousness and "method" acting was not meshing with the type of film he wanted to make, Zemeckis made the bold decision to fire Stoltz and worked out a deal where he can use Fox at night while Fox shot Family ties during the day.
Playing against Fox, brilliantly, is Christopher Lloyd as "Doc" Emmit Brown. A two-time Emmy winner (at the time) for playing crazy Jim Ignatowski on the TV show TAXI, Lloyd played Doc Brown as "part Einstein, part composer Leopold Stokowski", creating what would be the benchmark for "brilliant, scatter-brained scientist". Leah Thompson does the finest performance of her career as Marty's mother and Crispin Glover was beyond quirky as Marty's nerd/loser Dad. Finally Thomas F. Wilson is the embodiment of bully as "Biff" Tannen.
After the success of this film, two other BACK TO THE FUTURE films were made - films that I feel were good, but somewhat diluted the perfection of this film. No matter. Sit down, relax and enjoy one of the most "perfect" films ever made.
Letter Grade: A+
A rare 10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Kids of Appetite in Books
Dec 14, 2018
<i>This ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review
They lived and they laughed and they saw that it was good.</i>
<i>Mosquitoland </i>was the best book I read last year (2015) and I was excited to discover what David Arnold would write next. I approached<i> Kids of Appetite</i> with mild trepidation; what if it did not live up to my expectations? Need not have worried – it was brilliant. Dubbed a “tragicomedy” <i>Kids of Appetite</i> is a combination of realistic, heartbreaking experiences with intellectual humour.
The book opens mid interview at a local police station where two teenagers, Vic and Mad, are being questioned about a murder their friend has supposedly committed. From there, the story backtracks a week and proceeds to bring the reader up to date. It all begins with Vic running away from home, distancing himself from his mother and her new partner. By chance, a coincidence – a bump, Vic would say – he is found by Mad who introduces him to a small group of homeless friends. Vic may not have packed in preparation for life on the streets – or in a greenhouse as it turns out – however he did grab the urn containing his late father’s ashes before racing out of the house. Along with the urn is a letter containing cryptic clues that lead to various locations that Vic’s father wished for his ashes to be scattered. He, along with his new found friends; make it a mission to put his father to rest.
It is not possible to label the general theme of the book. <i>Kids of Appetite</i> is a story full of stories. Each character has their own past, something that led them to the situation they find themselves in now. The group consists of five members – once Vic has been accepted. Baz, at age twenty-seven, is clearly the leader: responsible, caring, and fatherly – until accused of murder. Seven years younger is Zuz, Baz’s mute brother, and finally Coco, an eleven year old with the mouth of a foul old lady. It is Coco, amongst all her swearing and hilarious misuse of words, that coins the name <i>Kids of Appetite, KOA</i> for short, a play on words: they are not solely in want of food, they hunger for life.
Initially it would appear that the main focus will be on Vic: his father’s death, his mother’s new partner, Moebius (facial paralysis) – a syndrome that results in a lot of bullying and discrimination – and, of course, his flight from home. However the remaining members of <i>KOA </i>equally contribute to the overall narrative. Mad, like Vic, knows what it is like to lose a father. Unfortunately she also knows what it is like to lose a mother. Her life since the fateful car crash that left her and orphan has been full of abuse and uncertainty. Baz and Zuz, on the other hand, have escaped a traumatizing childhood in the midst of the Congo Civil War.
Similarly with <i>Mosquitoland</i>, Arnold’s second book is full of intellectual knowledge and humour complete with references to highbrow material. Vic is obsessed with an operatic song and deeply interested in abstract art, particularly Matisse. He pulls the artist’s work apart in search of meaning and relatable truths of life. Like Vic, Mad has a particular song she draws comfort from. The lyrics help her make sense of the world around her, and produce her own manifesto – Madifesto, rather. She is particularly fascinated by S E Hinton’s <i>The Outsiders</i> – a book I have not read, but am obviously going to now. With in-depth theories purloined from her favourite novel, she encourages and advises those around her.
The murder investigation is evidently another key point of the book. I do not want to say too much on the matter as it would not be fair to give the ending away. Be reassured that<i> Kids of Appetite</i> is not a thriller, crime or horror novel; it is the events and dialogue leading up to the conclusion that make up the greatest parts of the story.
It is essentially the characters that make <i>Kids of Appetite</i> such a fantastic work of fiction. Their background stories are all based on real life experiences of many people throughout the world, but it is their opinion of life, their terminology, and their reckless enthusiasm that really impacts the reader. <i>Kids of Appetite</i> is a book to be read over and over again. So many phrases can be lifted and quoted to explain our own lives and feelings. In fact, the entire novel is one big quote to sum up life itself. Although there are so many themes, stories and ideas, there is one clear message. Let go. Let go of the past. Let go of the things that hold you back. For Vic and Mad it is the death of their parents; for Coco it is abandonment; and Baz and Zuz learn to let go of their violent childhood.
David Arnold is an extremely talented author, seamlessly flowing from one notion to another, whilst sweeping the reader into a sea of pure emotion. He may over use the word “ergo” and have an unconventional penchant for ellipses, but that only adds to the uniqueness of the writing. There may be an excessive amount of expletives, however that is overshadowed by the pure genius of the story itself. <i>Kids of Appetite</i> is a book I want to recommend to all. The blurb likens it to authors Rainbow Rowell and Jennifer Niven – I would like to throw John Green into the mix – and should appeal to many Young Adult readers. I could write forever about this book, but I would rather you go and read it yourself. And whilst you read, remember:
<i>They lived and they laughed and they saw that it was good. </i>
They lived and they laughed and they saw that it was good.</i>
<i>Mosquitoland </i>was the best book I read last year (2015) and I was excited to discover what David Arnold would write next. I approached<i> Kids of Appetite</i> with mild trepidation; what if it did not live up to my expectations? Need not have worried – it was brilliant. Dubbed a “tragicomedy” <i>Kids of Appetite</i> is a combination of realistic, heartbreaking experiences with intellectual humour.
The book opens mid interview at a local police station where two teenagers, Vic and Mad, are being questioned about a murder their friend has supposedly committed. From there, the story backtracks a week and proceeds to bring the reader up to date. It all begins with Vic running away from home, distancing himself from his mother and her new partner. By chance, a coincidence – a bump, Vic would say – he is found by Mad who introduces him to a small group of homeless friends. Vic may not have packed in preparation for life on the streets – or in a greenhouse as it turns out – however he did grab the urn containing his late father’s ashes before racing out of the house. Along with the urn is a letter containing cryptic clues that lead to various locations that Vic’s father wished for his ashes to be scattered. He, along with his new found friends; make it a mission to put his father to rest.
It is not possible to label the general theme of the book. <i>Kids of Appetite</i> is a story full of stories. Each character has their own past, something that led them to the situation they find themselves in now. The group consists of five members – once Vic has been accepted. Baz, at age twenty-seven, is clearly the leader: responsible, caring, and fatherly – until accused of murder. Seven years younger is Zuz, Baz’s mute brother, and finally Coco, an eleven year old with the mouth of a foul old lady. It is Coco, amongst all her swearing and hilarious misuse of words, that coins the name <i>Kids of Appetite, KOA</i> for short, a play on words: they are not solely in want of food, they hunger for life.
Initially it would appear that the main focus will be on Vic: his father’s death, his mother’s new partner, Moebius (facial paralysis) – a syndrome that results in a lot of bullying and discrimination – and, of course, his flight from home. However the remaining members of <i>KOA </i>equally contribute to the overall narrative. Mad, like Vic, knows what it is like to lose a father. Unfortunately she also knows what it is like to lose a mother. Her life since the fateful car crash that left her and orphan has been full of abuse and uncertainty. Baz and Zuz, on the other hand, have escaped a traumatizing childhood in the midst of the Congo Civil War.
Similarly with <i>Mosquitoland</i>, Arnold’s second book is full of intellectual knowledge and humour complete with references to highbrow material. Vic is obsessed with an operatic song and deeply interested in abstract art, particularly Matisse. He pulls the artist’s work apart in search of meaning and relatable truths of life. Like Vic, Mad has a particular song she draws comfort from. The lyrics help her make sense of the world around her, and produce her own manifesto – Madifesto, rather. She is particularly fascinated by S E Hinton’s <i>The Outsiders</i> – a book I have not read, but am obviously going to now. With in-depth theories purloined from her favourite novel, she encourages and advises those around her.
The murder investigation is evidently another key point of the book. I do not want to say too much on the matter as it would not be fair to give the ending away. Be reassured that<i> Kids of Appetite</i> is not a thriller, crime or horror novel; it is the events and dialogue leading up to the conclusion that make up the greatest parts of the story.
It is essentially the characters that make <i>Kids of Appetite</i> such a fantastic work of fiction. Their background stories are all based on real life experiences of many people throughout the world, but it is their opinion of life, their terminology, and their reckless enthusiasm that really impacts the reader. <i>Kids of Appetite</i> is a book to be read over and over again. So many phrases can be lifted and quoted to explain our own lives and feelings. In fact, the entire novel is one big quote to sum up life itself. Although there are so many themes, stories and ideas, there is one clear message. Let go. Let go of the past. Let go of the things that hold you back. For Vic and Mad it is the death of their parents; for Coco it is abandonment; and Baz and Zuz learn to let go of their violent childhood.
David Arnold is an extremely talented author, seamlessly flowing from one notion to another, whilst sweeping the reader into a sea of pure emotion. He may over use the word “ergo” and have an unconventional penchant for ellipses, but that only adds to the uniqueness of the writing. There may be an excessive amount of expletives, however that is overshadowed by the pure genius of the story itself. <i>Kids of Appetite</i> is a book I want to recommend to all. The blurb likens it to authors Rainbow Rowell and Jennifer Niven – I would like to throw John Green into the mix – and should appeal to many Young Adult readers. I could write forever about this book, but I would rather you go and read it yourself. And whilst you read, remember:
<i>They lived and they laughed and they saw that it was good. </i>
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Coco (2017) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020 (Updated Mar 3, 2020)
As part of my project to compile a coffee table book called 21st Century cinema: 200 Unmissable Films, I have found it interesting, but not surprising, that almost 10% of the list since the year 2000 are animated features. It is an art form that Pixar and Disney especially, but many smaller studios, are excelling in, because of technological advances, and the free range of realising an imaginative vision. The trouble often is that they aren’t my first port of call anymore now I don’t have a kid around to watch them with. So it takes me some time to catch up on the good ones these days.
Also, for every good one there are several really lame ones, designed to get families into cinemas and take their money without much concession to a good script. It only takes the bad experience of a couple of those to put you off the genre as an adult. It can be hard to remember that some are made only with 6 year olds in mind. Frozen, for example. They have their place, and the phenomenon of which ones kids are drawn to is a different study altogether. For the purposes of my list, I am looking for the ones that can entertain young and older audiences at the same time. And, to date, no one has done that better than Pixar.
The benchmark, for me, remains Monsters Inc, The Incredibles and the Toy Story series. The latter especially, have a great knack of pleasing all generations. The key is always the writing. Animation styles and techniques can impress the eye, but it is always the theme, the relationships and the words that make an animated film enduring. Music also plays a big part; as does the level of humour. Both incredibly intangible arts that you can’t just buy.
I watched Coco on a Sunday morning – the perfect time to watch an animated film, by law! Chances are you will be a little hungover (I was) and susceptible to the inevitable sentimentality you are about to experience. The first thing that struck me was the colours! Embracing a Latin American cultural canvas, I don’t think I have ever seen such a vivid rainbow attacking my senses. From the naked flames of the candles, to the warm tones of the sunlight and the almost neon glow on display around the dead and the world of the afterlife, it was a visual treat I can honestly say I have never experienced before.
Oh, yes, Coco is about dying, if you didn’t know! And to say more about the genius of their approach to it, would be classed as a spoiler! The action takes place on Diá de Muertos (the day of the dead), when family members can revisit their loved ones, as long as they have been remembered. Our hero, young Miguel, loves music. But his family have banned him from listening to, or playing, it because of the shame surrounding a long dead ancestor. The magic of the day leads him to the underworld of the dead, to find out the truth and save the day.
Of course, once there, he meets all sorts of strange characters, and is lead on a fateful journey with lots of unexpected twists. Again, we won’t go into who, or why for the sake of spoilers. Suffice to say, the ideas, emotion and sense of righteousness flow, stirred up in the mix of constant moments of humour, some that land, some that don’t quite, at a pace fitting, and demanded, by young audiences. The ultimate aim being to reveal the truth behind the family story and to allow the dead to be remembered for their real worth.
On the negatives first: it is all pitched at quite a young audience, in the same way one of Pixar’s less successful films, Cars, is. Which means a lot of the humour lacks the sophistication needed to make it a classic. Also, for a film about the love and joy of music, the songs are only OK, and not especially memorable, although the Oscar winning main theme “Remember Me” serves its purpose very well in the climax. There are also one or two dips in the pacing of scenes that break the spell; surely the cornerstone rule of animated films: don’t drop the ball! Something both Wall-E and Up do at points, spoiling the overall impression of something so glorious in their best moments.
The power of Grandmas
To be more positive, we have to acknowledge the very, very high bar that Pixar set themselves. From an animation point of view, if this film had been released in 2001, we’d be in raptures about it! It is beautiful to look at! And the attention to detail is extraordinary, allowing for many re-watches, just to see the things they have put in there to largely amuse themselves. As a vision of an idea brought to life it is a consummate success! It is, essentially, so likeable. And at its heart, once again, right on the money.
It isn’t called Miguel. It isn’t called The Day of the Dead. It is called Coco. And by the end, you realise why that is important. Death is sad. Dementia is also an awful, awful thing. The strength of Coco is taking these difficult subjects and shining a meaningful light on them, that not only comments intelligently on them, but breaks the heart with the truth of it all. It takes a while to get there with this one, but the pay-off is sublime, yet again! Remember me, a simple sentiment that goes a long, long way!
As a side note, there is a controversial, but massively effective medical technique being utilised in the real world, with alzheimers sufferers, that uses music to trigger memory. It’s application and results are astonishing, for their ability to bring people “back to life”. Which, naturally, moved me immensely. To think the best moment of Coco isn’t just wish fulfilment in a sentimental world, but a real thing that can be done!
Sentimentality aside, Coco is a good film, in every sense of the word. As a parent, I would revel in the opportunity to show this to a child, for the positive conversations it might invoke. The aspects of cinema magic needed to make it an experience worth having are all there. To fault it is only to be unnecessarily picky. Better to go on the journey and enjoy it for what it is. Which, increasingly, is my mantra for watching anything. Who would not hope that someone chooses to celebrate life, with the thought “Remember Me”?
Also, for every good one there are several really lame ones, designed to get families into cinemas and take their money without much concession to a good script. It only takes the bad experience of a couple of those to put you off the genre as an adult. It can be hard to remember that some are made only with 6 year olds in mind. Frozen, for example. They have their place, and the phenomenon of which ones kids are drawn to is a different study altogether. For the purposes of my list, I am looking for the ones that can entertain young and older audiences at the same time. And, to date, no one has done that better than Pixar.
The benchmark, for me, remains Monsters Inc, The Incredibles and the Toy Story series. The latter especially, have a great knack of pleasing all generations. The key is always the writing. Animation styles and techniques can impress the eye, but it is always the theme, the relationships and the words that make an animated film enduring. Music also plays a big part; as does the level of humour. Both incredibly intangible arts that you can’t just buy.
I watched Coco on a Sunday morning – the perfect time to watch an animated film, by law! Chances are you will be a little hungover (I was) and susceptible to the inevitable sentimentality you are about to experience. The first thing that struck me was the colours! Embracing a Latin American cultural canvas, I don’t think I have ever seen such a vivid rainbow attacking my senses. From the naked flames of the candles, to the warm tones of the sunlight and the almost neon glow on display around the dead and the world of the afterlife, it was a visual treat I can honestly say I have never experienced before.
Oh, yes, Coco is about dying, if you didn’t know! And to say more about the genius of their approach to it, would be classed as a spoiler! The action takes place on Diá de Muertos (the day of the dead), when family members can revisit their loved ones, as long as they have been remembered. Our hero, young Miguel, loves music. But his family have banned him from listening to, or playing, it because of the shame surrounding a long dead ancestor. The magic of the day leads him to the underworld of the dead, to find out the truth and save the day.
Of course, once there, he meets all sorts of strange characters, and is lead on a fateful journey with lots of unexpected twists. Again, we won’t go into who, or why for the sake of spoilers. Suffice to say, the ideas, emotion and sense of righteousness flow, stirred up in the mix of constant moments of humour, some that land, some that don’t quite, at a pace fitting, and demanded, by young audiences. The ultimate aim being to reveal the truth behind the family story and to allow the dead to be remembered for their real worth.
On the negatives first: it is all pitched at quite a young audience, in the same way one of Pixar’s less successful films, Cars, is. Which means a lot of the humour lacks the sophistication needed to make it a classic. Also, for a film about the love and joy of music, the songs are only OK, and not especially memorable, although the Oscar winning main theme “Remember Me” serves its purpose very well in the climax. There are also one or two dips in the pacing of scenes that break the spell; surely the cornerstone rule of animated films: don’t drop the ball! Something both Wall-E and Up do at points, spoiling the overall impression of something so glorious in their best moments.
The power of Grandmas
To be more positive, we have to acknowledge the very, very high bar that Pixar set themselves. From an animation point of view, if this film had been released in 2001, we’d be in raptures about it! It is beautiful to look at! And the attention to detail is extraordinary, allowing for many re-watches, just to see the things they have put in there to largely amuse themselves. As a vision of an idea brought to life it is a consummate success! It is, essentially, so likeable. And at its heart, once again, right on the money.
It isn’t called Miguel. It isn’t called The Day of the Dead. It is called Coco. And by the end, you realise why that is important. Death is sad. Dementia is also an awful, awful thing. The strength of Coco is taking these difficult subjects and shining a meaningful light on them, that not only comments intelligently on them, but breaks the heart with the truth of it all. It takes a while to get there with this one, but the pay-off is sublime, yet again! Remember me, a simple sentiment that goes a long, long way!
As a side note, there is a controversial, but massively effective medical technique being utilised in the real world, with alzheimers sufferers, that uses music to trigger memory. It’s application and results are astonishing, for their ability to bring people “back to life”. Which, naturally, moved me immensely. To think the best moment of Coco isn’t just wish fulfilment in a sentimental world, but a real thing that can be done!
Sentimentality aside, Coco is a good film, in every sense of the word. As a parent, I would revel in the opportunity to show this to a child, for the positive conversations it might invoke. The aspects of cinema magic needed to make it an experience worth having are all there. To fault it is only to be unnecessarily picky. Better to go on the journey and enjoy it for what it is. Which, increasingly, is my mantra for watching anything. Who would not hope that someone chooses to celebrate life, with the thought “Remember Me”?
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated The King of ZING in Tabletop Games
Feb 27, 2021
Board game design these days has taken quite an innovative turn – with the creation of new mechanics, combination of game styles, and unique themes being introduced. It seems that everywhere you look, there is something new! That doesn’t mean we have to give up on the classic mechanics and gameplay styles, though, and thats where The King of Zing comes into play.
The King of Zing is a card game of take-that and hand management in which players are trying to be the first to reach 100 points. Sounds simple enough, right? Well, throw some Specialty cards into the mix that allow opponents to manipulate your turn strategy, and even occasionally place their own tokens on your board, and you’ve got quite a strategic conundrum!
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 for a game of The King of Zing, first place the board in the center of the table. Shuffle the deck of cards, dealing 5 to each player, and give players the 25 tokens in their chosen color. (Note: This prototype did not include tokens, so I improvised and borrowed some from another game. The final tokens will not look like the ones pictured below!). Place the remaining cards on the Deck space of the board, creating a draw deck, and flip over the top card to the Discard space. Choose a starting player, and the game is ready to begin!
Throughout the game, you will be drawing or playing cards. At the start of your turn, you will either draw the top card of the Draw deck, or take the top card of the Discard pile into your hand. If the card you drew matches your chosen color, you may immediately play it to your Grave (personal discard pile) and place one of your tokens onto your player board on the corresponding number, thus ending your turn. Otherwise, once you draw a card, you can do the following: select a card from your hand to go in the communal Discard pile, play a Specialty card, place a card from your hand face-up or face-down onto any player’s open Hold space, or play the face-down card from your own Hold space. **Important note** If there is ever a face-up card in your Hold at the start of your turn, you must play it and your turn ends. (This could be a strategic way to encumber opponents!). Play continues in this fashion until a player has collected 4 tokens in a row on their player board. Points are then scored (based on the number of tokens you played), and then the game resets – a series of games is played until one player reaches 100 points and is declared the ultimate winner!
The first thing I want to touch on is the rulebook for The King of Zing. As far as rulebooks go, it is not my favorite. There are some areas of ambiguity that left me confused, and it definitely took several read-throughs and a couple of false-starts at playing to figure out exactly how the gameplay flows. Being a prototype copy of the game, I imagine that editing/rewriting of the rulebook is something that will happen before final production.
Next, the overall gameplay. The different elements are reminiscent of other classic games – getting 4 tokens in a row a la Connect 4, the use of Specialty cards (Reverse, Skip, etc.) a la UNO. In their respective games, these mechanics work well, but how do they work together in The King of Zing? For the most part, I would say they work relatively well together. The mechanics compliment each other and feel logical in play. Probably the most unique aspect of Zing for me is the Hold space for each player. The ability to play cards to Hold spaces, either your own or of an opponent, gives you the opportunity to either plan a strategy/turn in advance, or potentially hinder an opponent. Playing a card face-up to a Hold guarantees that it will be played on the next turn, so not only are you planning ahead, but also broadcasting your move to your opponents. Conversely, a card played face-down could be resolved in any future turn, and can be a battle of risk/reward when played by opponents. A card played to my Hold face-down could just be a useless card for me, causing me to waste a turn to resolve it. BUT, what if an opponent gives you a card you actually need face-down – you don’t know that it is useful, but are you willing to risk a wasted turn to find out? The Hold space adds a new twist to the game that elevates the gameplay.
Components. Zing consists of a board and a big stack of cards. The board is nice and sturdy, the play areas clearly marked. The cards are colorful and thick, and the art is mostly minimal. The Specialty cards have a short description of their use printed on the card, but a more in-depth explanation can be found in the rulebook. As I stated above, this copy did not have any player tokens, so I cannot comment on how those will look in final production. All in all, a decent production quality.
All in all, The King of Zing feels like a take on an old classic. The gameplay incorporates several tried-and-true mechanics, and the flow of the game is pretty straightforward. The rulebook even suggests some gameplay variations, so The King of Zing can be played with gamers as young as 4 years old. Ultimately, the rulebook needs an overhaul, but the skeleton of the game seems to hold up. If you’re looking for something that brings back some nostalgia for older games, try The King of Zing.
The King of Zing is a card game of take-that and hand management in which players are trying to be the first to reach 100 points. Sounds simple enough, right? Well, throw some Specialty cards into the mix that allow opponents to manipulate your turn strategy, and even occasionally place their own tokens on your board, and you’ve got quite a strategic conundrum!
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 for a game of The King of Zing, first place the board in the center of the table. Shuffle the deck of cards, dealing 5 to each player, and give players the 25 tokens in their chosen color. (Note: This prototype did not include tokens, so I improvised and borrowed some from another game. The final tokens will not look like the ones pictured below!). Place the remaining cards on the Deck space of the board, creating a draw deck, and flip over the top card to the Discard space. Choose a starting player, and the game is ready to begin!
Throughout the game, you will be drawing or playing cards. At the start of your turn, you will either draw the top card of the Draw deck, or take the top card of the Discard pile into your hand. If the card you drew matches your chosen color, you may immediately play it to your Grave (personal discard pile) and place one of your tokens onto your player board on the corresponding number, thus ending your turn. Otherwise, once you draw a card, you can do the following: select a card from your hand to go in the communal Discard pile, play a Specialty card, place a card from your hand face-up or face-down onto any player’s open Hold space, or play the face-down card from your own Hold space. **Important note** If there is ever a face-up card in your Hold at the start of your turn, you must play it and your turn ends. (This could be a strategic way to encumber opponents!). Play continues in this fashion until a player has collected 4 tokens in a row on their player board. Points are then scored (based on the number of tokens you played), and then the game resets – a series of games is played until one player reaches 100 points and is declared the ultimate winner!
The first thing I want to touch on is the rulebook for The King of Zing. As far as rulebooks go, it is not my favorite. There are some areas of ambiguity that left me confused, and it definitely took several read-throughs and a couple of false-starts at playing to figure out exactly how the gameplay flows. Being a prototype copy of the game, I imagine that editing/rewriting of the rulebook is something that will happen before final production.
Next, the overall gameplay. The different elements are reminiscent of other classic games – getting 4 tokens in a row a la Connect 4, the use of Specialty cards (Reverse, Skip, etc.) a la UNO. In their respective games, these mechanics work well, but how do they work together in The King of Zing? For the most part, I would say they work relatively well together. The mechanics compliment each other and feel logical in play. Probably the most unique aspect of Zing for me is the Hold space for each player. The ability to play cards to Hold spaces, either your own or of an opponent, gives you the opportunity to either plan a strategy/turn in advance, or potentially hinder an opponent. Playing a card face-up to a Hold guarantees that it will be played on the next turn, so not only are you planning ahead, but also broadcasting your move to your opponents. Conversely, a card played face-down could be resolved in any future turn, and can be a battle of risk/reward when played by opponents. A card played to my Hold face-down could just be a useless card for me, causing me to waste a turn to resolve it. BUT, what if an opponent gives you a card you actually need face-down – you don’t know that it is useful, but are you willing to risk a wasted turn to find out? The Hold space adds a new twist to the game that elevates the gameplay.
Components. Zing consists of a board and a big stack of cards. The board is nice and sturdy, the play areas clearly marked. The cards are colorful and thick, and the art is mostly minimal. The Specialty cards have a short description of their use printed on the card, but a more in-depth explanation can be found in the rulebook. As I stated above, this copy did not have any player tokens, so I cannot comment on how those will look in final production. All in all, a decent production quality.
All in all, The King of Zing feels like a take on an old classic. The gameplay incorporates several tried-and-true mechanics, and the flow of the game is pretty straightforward. The rulebook even suggests some gameplay variations, so The King of Zing can be played with gamers as young as 4 years old. Ultimately, the rulebook needs an overhaul, but the skeleton of the game seems to hold up. If you’re looking for something that brings back some nostalgia for older games, try The King of Zing.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Doctor Who: Time of the Daleks in Tabletop Games
Sep 2, 2021
I cannot tell you what a big fan of Doctor Who I am. I have one sticker on my car, and it’s a DW TARDIS right there in the upper left. They say you’ll never forget your first Doctor, and I only started watching several years into the reboot, but started with 9. And then 10 stole my heart. 11 was also quite amazing and I always reference people who have never seen the show to please please please watch, “Vincent and the Doctor.” If you watch that episode and are not moved to tears by the sheer beauty of the story being told, you absolutely have no soul. And if after watching that episode you are not an immediately-converted Whovian, then it was never meant to be. So why then is my rating on this game so lackluster if I love the IP so?
Doctor Who: Time of the Daleks (which I will carefully refer to as DW from here on out though I would never abbreviate to Dr.) is an adventure dice racing game, even though the only official tag is dice. In it, players take on the roles of different Doctor regenerations and will travel through time and space collecting companions, Timey-Wimey cards, and Sonic Charges in order to manipulate dice rolls to defeat Dilemmas and Time Anomalies that pop up at the absolute worst times.
To setup, follow the rulebook instructions – there are just too many components to detail here. The game takes up quite a bit of table space, so do make sure to use your largest table.
On a player’s turn they will be adding Sonic Charges, shuffling up companions, and rolling the TARDIS die to determine travel. Once at a location, the Doctor (and subsequent harem) can Adventure by assessing the challenge of dice results printed on the Location board plus the Dilemma disc combined. It is these icons that must be rolled (and possibly manipulated) in order to have a successful adventure. If successful, typically this involves a reward of moving the TARDIS pawn on the main Web of Time board closer to Gallifrey, in addition to other rewards. Failure on an adventure will typically result in the Dalek ship being moved further from Skaro and closer to Gallifrey.
Once the Doctors have had their turn, the Daleks will take a turn. Immediately move the Dalek ship one space on the Web of Time track towards Gallifrey, and if they have reached Gallifrey before any Doctor, or on the same turn as a Doctor, the Daleks win and the Doctors all lose. If not, play continues in this fashion until one of those win conditions are met, along with a couple more loss conditions I will leave you to discover.
This is a very pared-down synopsis of the rules, and I have intentionally left out several rules so as not to bog down my paraphrasing with minutia. Take this into consideration when determining if this is the game for you.
Components. All in all the components in DW are absolutely stellar! All the cardboard is thick and features great art and screencaps (which is a polarizing subject that I simply don’t mind). The dice are great quality, though I wish they had chosen a different color for the blue dice so that the TARDIS die would be the only blue in the box. The minis are great, and have interchangeable bases because throughout the game the Doctors may have to regenerate, thus switching to a different Doctor mid-game (awesome mechanic for this IP by the way).
Let me tell you why I like this DW game and why I do not. Firstly, the game is just too hard for me. Maybe it’s how I roll the dice, but I feel I am almost never in possession of enough resources to be able to reroll or manually manipulate my dice results enough to have the requisite amount of successful adventures. Some challenges require the Doctor to roll six dice, but then there are restrictions in play that drop a Doctor’s dice pool down to six, thus creating a you-must-roll-EXACTLY-what-you-need-to-win scenario that is tough to swallow for a dice game. Also, this next part is completely personal opinion, I wish that 10 was included in the starter box. I got my 11, and I appreciate that, but I feel like 10 is the most widely-popular Doctor in the franchise, or at least in New Who, so the ball was dropped here. I know I can purchase 10 in an expansion pack with 5 (and kudos to whomever made THAT combination), but I want him NOW.
Time travel games are so difficult to pull off, and with Doctor Who you HAVE to consider that time travel will play a very important part in gameplay. I believe this title handles it well, and even allows for multiple Doctors to work together (let’s not talk about time paradoxes for now). That is great and allows for excellent cooperative play, so I applaud the designer for that. I also enjoy the different abilities given by each different regeneration as well as what the companions each bring to the table. Perhaps a companion will add certain colors of dice to the Dice Pool, or allow the Doctor to switch out some of his generic dice for stronger and more specific dice, or simply allow rerolls of certain colors of dice. I dig that a lot. And seeing my precious companions in the game matched up to their Doctors fills me with a sense of nostalgia that I just do not feel in other games.
While this has been the subject of much deliberation on my part, I will be keeping my copy of the game, and will most definitely be adding 5 and 10 to the mix. I really want to like this game more than I do, and maybe having 10 in my arsenal is enough to do it, though I have my doubts. I love the Doctor Who IP and love dice games. I think this is a good game overall, and will continue to explore it with other gamers. Something will click, I’m sure of it. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one wibbly-wobbly 8 / 12. If you need a difficult dice game in your collection and also love the Doctors, pick up a copy. But also do yourself a favor and grab a copy of any expansion that includes your favorite Doctor – you will thank me later. Spoilers, sweetie, that’s coming in tomorrow’s post.
Doctor Who: Time of the Daleks (which I will carefully refer to as DW from here on out though I would never abbreviate to Dr.) is an adventure dice racing game, even though the only official tag is dice. In it, players take on the roles of different Doctor regenerations and will travel through time and space collecting companions, Timey-Wimey cards, and Sonic Charges in order to manipulate dice rolls to defeat Dilemmas and Time Anomalies that pop up at the absolute worst times.
To setup, follow the rulebook instructions – there are just too many components to detail here. The game takes up quite a bit of table space, so do make sure to use your largest table.
On a player’s turn they will be adding Sonic Charges, shuffling up companions, and rolling the TARDIS die to determine travel. Once at a location, the Doctor (and subsequent harem) can Adventure by assessing the challenge of dice results printed on the Location board plus the Dilemma disc combined. It is these icons that must be rolled (and possibly manipulated) in order to have a successful adventure. If successful, typically this involves a reward of moving the TARDIS pawn on the main Web of Time board closer to Gallifrey, in addition to other rewards. Failure on an adventure will typically result in the Dalek ship being moved further from Skaro and closer to Gallifrey.
Once the Doctors have had their turn, the Daleks will take a turn. Immediately move the Dalek ship one space on the Web of Time track towards Gallifrey, and if they have reached Gallifrey before any Doctor, or on the same turn as a Doctor, the Daleks win and the Doctors all lose. If not, play continues in this fashion until one of those win conditions are met, along with a couple more loss conditions I will leave you to discover.
This is a very pared-down synopsis of the rules, and I have intentionally left out several rules so as not to bog down my paraphrasing with minutia. Take this into consideration when determining if this is the game for you.
Components. All in all the components in DW are absolutely stellar! All the cardboard is thick and features great art and screencaps (which is a polarizing subject that I simply don’t mind). The dice are great quality, though I wish they had chosen a different color for the blue dice so that the TARDIS die would be the only blue in the box. The minis are great, and have interchangeable bases because throughout the game the Doctors may have to regenerate, thus switching to a different Doctor mid-game (awesome mechanic for this IP by the way).
Let me tell you why I like this DW game and why I do not. Firstly, the game is just too hard for me. Maybe it’s how I roll the dice, but I feel I am almost never in possession of enough resources to be able to reroll or manually manipulate my dice results enough to have the requisite amount of successful adventures. Some challenges require the Doctor to roll six dice, but then there are restrictions in play that drop a Doctor’s dice pool down to six, thus creating a you-must-roll-EXACTLY-what-you-need-to-win scenario that is tough to swallow for a dice game. Also, this next part is completely personal opinion, I wish that 10 was included in the starter box. I got my 11, and I appreciate that, but I feel like 10 is the most widely-popular Doctor in the franchise, or at least in New Who, so the ball was dropped here. I know I can purchase 10 in an expansion pack with 5 (and kudos to whomever made THAT combination), but I want him NOW.
Time travel games are so difficult to pull off, and with Doctor Who you HAVE to consider that time travel will play a very important part in gameplay. I believe this title handles it well, and even allows for multiple Doctors to work together (let’s not talk about time paradoxes for now). That is great and allows for excellent cooperative play, so I applaud the designer for that. I also enjoy the different abilities given by each different regeneration as well as what the companions each bring to the table. Perhaps a companion will add certain colors of dice to the Dice Pool, or allow the Doctor to switch out some of his generic dice for stronger and more specific dice, or simply allow rerolls of certain colors of dice. I dig that a lot. And seeing my precious companions in the game matched up to their Doctors fills me with a sense of nostalgia that I just do not feel in other games.
While this has been the subject of much deliberation on my part, I will be keeping my copy of the game, and will most definitely be adding 5 and 10 to the mix. I really want to like this game more than I do, and maybe having 10 in my arsenal is enough to do it, though I have my doubts. I love the Doctor Who IP and love dice games. I think this is a good game overall, and will continue to explore it with other gamers. Something will click, I’m sure of it. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one wibbly-wobbly 8 / 12. If you need a difficult dice game in your collection and also love the Doctors, pick up a copy. But also do yourself a favor and grab a copy of any expansion that includes your favorite Doctor – you will thank me later. Spoilers, sweetie, that’s coming in tomorrow’s post.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Monster Stomping: Heroes in Tabletop Games
Dec 15, 2020
Godzilla. King Kong. Goldar. Large monsters that terrorize cities. We’ve all seen ’em. They’ve kicked in our schools, workplaces, and neighborhood parks. Luckily, even greater heroes are around to save the day and protect our livelihoods with their amazing superpowers. What, just my neighborhood? Oh. Well, get ready to play a game based on my neighborhood superhero and the kaijus that wreak havoc and bring devastation everywhere they tread.
Ok, so I don’t have these monsters and superheroes in my area. I wish we did. In any case, Monster Stomping: Heroes is a card game of building heroes to protect your city and also building monsters to attack other cities. The first player to have six City Defense cards in their tableau will win!
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, each player will receive one monster body card, one hero body card, and one city card to be placed in front of them on the table. The remaining setup cards can be placed back in the box. The remaining cards will be shuffled to create the large draw deck. Each player is dealt five cards from this deck to create their hand and the game may now begin!
On a player’s turn they will have a choice of three actions to take: Play, Discard Your Hand, or Attack! When the active player decides to Play they will first draw cards to increase their hand to six cards. Next they may play a card face-up on the table. These cards are Monster Powers, Hero Powers, or City Defense cards. Both Monster and Hero Powers are mix-and-match body parts that add value to the Attack phase. City Defense cards are placed around the city card. Six of these are needed to win. After one of these three card types are played to the table the player may also play a blue-bordered Special Card. The Special Cards could allow players to view the contents of an opponent’s hand, or skip a player’s turn, or even discard a City Defense card.
A player may dislike their hand of cards and wish to Discard Your Hand any number of cards. Once done the player will draw back up to six cards and then discard one to return to the hand limit of five cards.
If the active player is feeling lucky or particularly surly they may Attack! another player’s city. During an Attack! the attacking player and defending player will both roll 1d6. The result of the die roll is then added to any bonuses afforded them from their built Monster (attacker) or Hero (defender). At this time any involved player may play a Combat card from their hand to tip the scales of battle. These will either add or subtract values from the Monster or Hero, or block the Monster altogether, or even switch a player’s Hero and Monster values during the battle. The winning attacker then steals one of the defender’s City Defense cards and places it in their own city. The winning defender will receive the Morale Boost meeple to earn a +1 to their hero the next time they are attacked.
Once the active player has completed their turn play continues to the next player until a sixth City Defense card has been placed. When this happens the next player is allowed one more turn to either earn their sixth City Defense card or thwart the previous player by causing them to lose their sixth card. Play continues in this fashion until one player is the ultimate winner and completely defends their city!
Components. Again, this is a prototype copy of the game and I do not know if these will be updated in any fashion in the final copy. That said, we were provided a box with 2d6, a Morale Boost meeple, and a bunch of cards. The dice are fine and can be switched out with prettier ones if you prefer (I might), and the meeple is an interesting shape and excellent orange color. The cards are matte finished and the art on them is pretty good. The layout of the cards is easy to use. In fact, the layout of the cards (especially the Special and Combat cards) are incredibly reminiscent of the cards in Munchkin.
Actually, the entire time I was playing Monster Stomping: Heroes I could not help but feel like I was playing a better version of Munchkin. It is essentially the same game: the winner has to get to six City Defense cards (10th level in Munchkin), uses cards to debilitate opponents (same in Munchkin), creates better toons in front of themselves (same in Munchkin), and has the additional ability of a helper to aid in battle (same in Munchkin). Let me reiterate that this game is a BETTER version of Munchkin, even though it is extremely similar.
What I really like about this one is the quick play that can be had and the ability to be played by two players. Since I’m comparing it to Munchkin now, a game of Munchkin can easily take a frustrating two or more hours to complete. I say frustrating because all players end up simply ganging up on their opponents at the end just trying to prevent them from winning. While the same is partially true in Monster Stomping, there are only six cards to be collected before becoming the winner and some players may become untouchable at times due to their impressive Monster or Hero-building skills. Another aspect I truly appreciate and enjoy here is that the game can be played with only two players, while Munchkin requires at least three. That may not seem like a huge difference, but if I can play a game at home with my wife without having to add house rules or other ways to doctor up the rules, then I am a much happier man.
I enjoy building the different characters in the game and seeing what kind of abomination I end up with at game’s end. This is much more personal preference for me because building a character in Munchkin is handled much the same way, but differently. For those who have played Munchkin, I am sure you understand.
So all in all, if you are a closet fan of Munchkin and want to protect your gamer cred, you certainly need to check out Monster Stomping: Heroes. It will give you all the good parts of Munchkin but filter out the underwhelming or over-stuffed feelings. It plays quickly, and gives players lots of options to build their characters. The game is easy to teach and learn, and you may even wish to play several games in a row. While I have compared this to Munchkin quite a bit, Monster Stomping: Heroes is its own game and offers several differences to players. If you have been looking for a Munchkin replacement, I may have found it for you. You’re welcome.
Ok, so I don’t have these monsters and superheroes in my area. I wish we did. In any case, Monster Stomping: Heroes is a card game of building heroes to protect your city and also building monsters to attack other cities. The first player to have six City Defense cards in their tableau will win!
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, each player will receive one monster body card, one hero body card, and one city card to be placed in front of them on the table. The remaining setup cards can be placed back in the box. The remaining cards will be shuffled to create the large draw deck. Each player is dealt five cards from this deck to create their hand and the game may now begin!
On a player’s turn they will have a choice of three actions to take: Play, Discard Your Hand, or Attack! When the active player decides to Play they will first draw cards to increase their hand to six cards. Next they may play a card face-up on the table. These cards are Monster Powers, Hero Powers, or City Defense cards. Both Monster and Hero Powers are mix-and-match body parts that add value to the Attack phase. City Defense cards are placed around the city card. Six of these are needed to win. After one of these three card types are played to the table the player may also play a blue-bordered Special Card. The Special Cards could allow players to view the contents of an opponent’s hand, or skip a player’s turn, or even discard a City Defense card.
A player may dislike their hand of cards and wish to Discard Your Hand any number of cards. Once done the player will draw back up to six cards and then discard one to return to the hand limit of five cards.
If the active player is feeling lucky or particularly surly they may Attack! another player’s city. During an Attack! the attacking player and defending player will both roll 1d6. The result of the die roll is then added to any bonuses afforded them from their built Monster (attacker) or Hero (defender). At this time any involved player may play a Combat card from their hand to tip the scales of battle. These will either add or subtract values from the Monster or Hero, or block the Monster altogether, or even switch a player’s Hero and Monster values during the battle. The winning attacker then steals one of the defender’s City Defense cards and places it in their own city. The winning defender will receive the Morale Boost meeple to earn a +1 to their hero the next time they are attacked.
Once the active player has completed their turn play continues to the next player until a sixth City Defense card has been placed. When this happens the next player is allowed one more turn to either earn their sixth City Defense card or thwart the previous player by causing them to lose their sixth card. Play continues in this fashion until one player is the ultimate winner and completely defends their city!
Components. Again, this is a prototype copy of the game and I do not know if these will be updated in any fashion in the final copy. That said, we were provided a box with 2d6, a Morale Boost meeple, and a bunch of cards. The dice are fine and can be switched out with prettier ones if you prefer (I might), and the meeple is an interesting shape and excellent orange color. The cards are matte finished and the art on them is pretty good. The layout of the cards is easy to use. In fact, the layout of the cards (especially the Special and Combat cards) are incredibly reminiscent of the cards in Munchkin.
Actually, the entire time I was playing Monster Stomping: Heroes I could not help but feel like I was playing a better version of Munchkin. It is essentially the same game: the winner has to get to six City Defense cards (10th level in Munchkin), uses cards to debilitate opponents (same in Munchkin), creates better toons in front of themselves (same in Munchkin), and has the additional ability of a helper to aid in battle (same in Munchkin). Let me reiterate that this game is a BETTER version of Munchkin, even though it is extremely similar.
What I really like about this one is the quick play that can be had and the ability to be played by two players. Since I’m comparing it to Munchkin now, a game of Munchkin can easily take a frustrating two or more hours to complete. I say frustrating because all players end up simply ganging up on their opponents at the end just trying to prevent them from winning. While the same is partially true in Monster Stomping, there are only six cards to be collected before becoming the winner and some players may become untouchable at times due to their impressive Monster or Hero-building skills. Another aspect I truly appreciate and enjoy here is that the game can be played with only two players, while Munchkin requires at least three. That may not seem like a huge difference, but if I can play a game at home with my wife without having to add house rules or other ways to doctor up the rules, then I am a much happier man.
I enjoy building the different characters in the game and seeing what kind of abomination I end up with at game’s end. This is much more personal preference for me because building a character in Munchkin is handled much the same way, but differently. For those who have played Munchkin, I am sure you understand.
So all in all, if you are a closet fan of Munchkin and want to protect your gamer cred, you certainly need to check out Monster Stomping: Heroes. It will give you all the good parts of Munchkin but filter out the underwhelming or over-stuffed feelings. It plays quickly, and gives players lots of options to build their characters. The game is easy to teach and learn, and you may even wish to play several games in a row. While I have compared this to Munchkin quite a bit, Monster Stomping: Heroes is its own game and offers several differences to players. If you have been looking for a Munchkin replacement, I may have found it for you. You’re welcome.
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 On the Rocks in Tabletop Games
Sep 7, 2021
I have to come clean right at the top of this one. I have not really tried a whole lot of different cocktails in my life. I have been mostly a beer kind of guy. Not that I am opposed to cocktails at all – in fact, I have really enjoyed most of the drinks I have tried. That said, I wish I was more hip so I would know all the drink lingo and really know why someone would want their concoction shaken and not stirred. So, I went into this one thinking I would learn the secret finally. But I didn’t. I did have a good time playing it though.
“On the Rocks is a marble drafting, cocktail recipe fulfillment game for 1-4 players. It is NOT a drinking game.” – straight from the game’s BGG page. So what does that mean? Well, this one is a variation of the “I cut, you choose” style game, but HEAVILY themed around bartending and enhanced with additional fun mechanics. The winner is the player who amasses the most amount of money by the end of their shift.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, consult the rulebook, as there are many steps. However, once setup, the game should look similar to the photo below. Choose the starting player and the mixology competition can begin!
On the Rocks is played over several rounds with each player completing specific steps. The first step is optional, and is Tip Cards. Players will accumulate Tip Cards throughout the game, and each one features a special ability that may be used at this time. The next step may also be optional, depending on if the active player had received a Complaint card previously. Complaints must be completed on this step and is pretty much a wrench thrown in the plans by competitors.
Once these (possibly) optional steps have been completed the active player then takes the 2d6 and Rolls them. This number determines how many ingredient marbles are to be pulled from the bag and added into play. For the cost of one ingredient marble, the active player may manipulate the rolled dice by flipping it to its opposite face. Next, the player will Draft the number of marbles from the bag they rolled in the previous step. From these drafted marbles the player will Mix them into the blue Jigger Bowls in the middle of the table one at a time, a la Mancala (oh that’s fun to say: A LA MANCALA!). Then the player will Select & Place a jigger of marbles from the table onto their player board. Placing the corresponding marbles onto the drinks is how recipes can be completed. If any ingredients were selected from the jigger but not placed, the player must then place the ingredients into the Extra Ingredients shot glasses on the top portion of the player board, to Save for later use.
When the ingredient marbles have been placed and saved, the player must then complete the Resolve step. Several ingredient marbles are “Premium” or “Spill” marbles. Premium marbles (golden) allow the player to select ANY two ingredients from the draw bag and the Premium marble is then discarded to the coaster in the middle of the table. The black Spill marble forces the active player to draw a Spill card from the deck and complete its action. It also during the Resolve step that the player may complete a recipe card by discarding the drink’s ingredients to the bag and flipping its recipe card face-down. If the entire order (all of the face-up recipe cards) is completed, the active player’s round ends and they notate this by placing one of the three lemon tokens on their player board. Some round end cleanup is performed, like drawing another set of 3 or 4 drink recipes for an order, and the player’s turn is over.
Once a player has completed their third order of drinks, they must indicate “Last Call” to the other players at the table. This informs the other players that they have one last turn to earn any extra money before the game ends. When the game has been finished, final scoring is performed and the winner is they who earned the most money throughout the night. The other players must immediately fix the winner a drink, or buy the winner a shot. Okay, those aren’t in the rulebook, but merely suggestions for the revised second edition…
Components. For those that follow our reviews, you know I am a sucker for games with great components, and this one definitely delivers for me. The aesthetics and art style are just perfect, the double-layer boards are always lovely, and the rubber jiggers are excellent. I cannot see anything that can be improved in terms of components, and I completely expected that because this was published by Pentree Games and 25th Century Games (one of my favorite publishers in the business). The game looks and feels deluxe, which is VERY satisfying.
I think that the Pittre duo of Michael and Christina really knocked it out of the park with this one. Wait, this is their first game design?? And it’s incredible? Okay okay, I’ll be keeping my eye on you two. On the Rocks is a light game with excellent table presence and some difficult choices presented. Now, the choices may be TOOOOOO difficult for some gamers, especially our AP-prone players. Carefully planning out each ingredient’s distribution into the jigger bowls can send them into a frenzy, so I have advised to choose one or two bowls they wish to buff and concentrate on hitting those with the marbles they want, and just randomly place the other ingredients. I know that is a big ask, but this game is supposed to take 45-90 minutes, not 45-90 hours. My other gripe about the game is the color-dependence of the ingredient marbles. I am sorry to all my colorblind friends out there, but I am unable to see how you might keep a possible 12 different marbles straight in your heads while simultaneously remembering the state of marbles in each jigger bowl. I hope I am completely wrong, as I do not suffer from colorblindness, and please do let me know if this is still playable for those gamers.
These gripes aside, everything else about the game is fabulous. I love being able to manipulate my dice rolls (yes, with a cost) to have ultimate control of the number of marbles pulled from the bag. That bag, however, takes control away immediately unless I draft a bunch of clear (wild) or golden marbles to affect my final placements. I also adore struggling to choose which recipes to concentrate on first, and weighing the possibilities of completing the higher value recipes, or blitzing the smaller ones first.
Oh, and the Spills cards? They can be real pains in the booty. These effectively give the active player the ability to completely botch another players’ plans by discarding their ingredient marbles from their player board. Not enough player interaction? How about negative Tip cards, which are earned by completing a recipe, that impede a competitor’s progress by making them complete the Tip card before being able to move on with their plans, or by limiting their marble selection to two instead of the entire bowl? Yeah, this has player interaction for sure.
Again, I like a good drink now and then, just as much as the next person. However, I have never been a bartender, and I do not plan on ever becoming one. I could not ever imagine having to compete with other bartenders for tip money either, especially if it is as brutally cutthroat as On the Rocks portrays it to be. I will, however, play a game where all that “fun” is diluted to dice, cards, and marbles. I was looking through my collection recently and noticed have embarrassingly few games with an adult beverage theme. If you are like me and require more games depicting fun with alcohol, then I strongly urge you to check out On the Rocks. I feel like I can finally graduate from Fuzzy Navels and Stone Sours just by playing this game and really upping my liquor acumen. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a delicious 5 / 6. It seems readily available for consumption, but please do not try to go drink for drink with this game. It’s not designed to be a drinking game… or is it?
“On the Rocks is a marble drafting, cocktail recipe fulfillment game for 1-4 players. It is NOT a drinking game.” – straight from the game’s BGG page. So what does that mean? Well, this one is a variation of the “I cut, you choose” style game, but HEAVILY themed around bartending and enhanced with additional fun mechanics. The winner is the player who amasses the most amount of money by the end of their shift.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, consult the rulebook, as there are many steps. However, once setup, the game should look similar to the photo below. Choose the starting player and the mixology competition can begin!
On the Rocks is played over several rounds with each player completing specific steps. The first step is optional, and is Tip Cards. Players will accumulate Tip Cards throughout the game, and each one features a special ability that may be used at this time. The next step may also be optional, depending on if the active player had received a Complaint card previously. Complaints must be completed on this step and is pretty much a wrench thrown in the plans by competitors.
Once these (possibly) optional steps have been completed the active player then takes the 2d6 and Rolls them. This number determines how many ingredient marbles are to be pulled from the bag and added into play. For the cost of one ingredient marble, the active player may manipulate the rolled dice by flipping it to its opposite face. Next, the player will Draft the number of marbles from the bag they rolled in the previous step. From these drafted marbles the player will Mix them into the blue Jigger Bowls in the middle of the table one at a time, a la Mancala (oh that’s fun to say: A LA MANCALA!). Then the player will Select & Place a jigger of marbles from the table onto their player board. Placing the corresponding marbles onto the drinks is how recipes can be completed. If any ingredients were selected from the jigger but not placed, the player must then place the ingredients into the Extra Ingredients shot glasses on the top portion of the player board, to Save for later use.
When the ingredient marbles have been placed and saved, the player must then complete the Resolve step. Several ingredient marbles are “Premium” or “Spill” marbles. Premium marbles (golden) allow the player to select ANY two ingredients from the draw bag and the Premium marble is then discarded to the coaster in the middle of the table. The black Spill marble forces the active player to draw a Spill card from the deck and complete its action. It also during the Resolve step that the player may complete a recipe card by discarding the drink’s ingredients to the bag and flipping its recipe card face-down. If the entire order (all of the face-up recipe cards) is completed, the active player’s round ends and they notate this by placing one of the three lemon tokens on their player board. Some round end cleanup is performed, like drawing another set of 3 or 4 drink recipes for an order, and the player’s turn is over.
Once a player has completed their third order of drinks, they must indicate “Last Call” to the other players at the table. This informs the other players that they have one last turn to earn any extra money before the game ends. When the game has been finished, final scoring is performed and the winner is they who earned the most money throughout the night. The other players must immediately fix the winner a drink, or buy the winner a shot. Okay, those aren’t in the rulebook, but merely suggestions for the revised second edition…
Components. For those that follow our reviews, you know I am a sucker for games with great components, and this one definitely delivers for me. The aesthetics and art style are just perfect, the double-layer boards are always lovely, and the rubber jiggers are excellent. I cannot see anything that can be improved in terms of components, and I completely expected that because this was published by Pentree Games and 25th Century Games (one of my favorite publishers in the business). The game looks and feels deluxe, which is VERY satisfying.
I think that the Pittre duo of Michael and Christina really knocked it out of the park with this one. Wait, this is their first game design?? And it’s incredible? Okay okay, I’ll be keeping my eye on you two. On the Rocks is a light game with excellent table presence and some difficult choices presented. Now, the choices may be TOOOOOO difficult for some gamers, especially our AP-prone players. Carefully planning out each ingredient’s distribution into the jigger bowls can send them into a frenzy, so I have advised to choose one or two bowls they wish to buff and concentrate on hitting those with the marbles they want, and just randomly place the other ingredients. I know that is a big ask, but this game is supposed to take 45-90 minutes, not 45-90 hours. My other gripe about the game is the color-dependence of the ingredient marbles. I am sorry to all my colorblind friends out there, but I am unable to see how you might keep a possible 12 different marbles straight in your heads while simultaneously remembering the state of marbles in each jigger bowl. I hope I am completely wrong, as I do not suffer from colorblindness, and please do let me know if this is still playable for those gamers.
These gripes aside, everything else about the game is fabulous. I love being able to manipulate my dice rolls (yes, with a cost) to have ultimate control of the number of marbles pulled from the bag. That bag, however, takes control away immediately unless I draft a bunch of clear (wild) or golden marbles to affect my final placements. I also adore struggling to choose which recipes to concentrate on first, and weighing the possibilities of completing the higher value recipes, or blitzing the smaller ones first.
Oh, and the Spills cards? They can be real pains in the booty. These effectively give the active player the ability to completely botch another players’ plans by discarding their ingredient marbles from their player board. Not enough player interaction? How about negative Tip cards, which are earned by completing a recipe, that impede a competitor’s progress by making them complete the Tip card before being able to move on with their plans, or by limiting their marble selection to two instead of the entire bowl? Yeah, this has player interaction for sure.
Again, I like a good drink now and then, just as much as the next person. However, I have never been a bartender, and I do not plan on ever becoming one. I could not ever imagine having to compete with other bartenders for tip money either, especially if it is as brutally cutthroat as On the Rocks portrays it to be. I will, however, play a game where all that “fun” is diluted to dice, cards, and marbles. I was looking through my collection recently and noticed have embarrassingly few games with an adult beverage theme. If you are like me and require more games depicting fun with alcohol, then I strongly urge you to check out On the Rocks. I feel like I can finally graduate from Fuzzy Navels and Stone Sours just by playing this game and really upping my liquor acumen. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a delicious 5 / 6. It seems readily available for consumption, but please do not try to go drink for drink with this game. It’s not designed to be a drinking game… or is it?
