Search
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Macaron in Tabletop Games
Oct 20, 2020
The only game I have ever been able to play with my extended family on a regular basis, and provided us an excuse to get together every Sunday, is Euchre. My family loves Euchre. It took me a long time to finally learn it, and I did so on a tour bus traveling from Paris to Barcelona. I played so much Euchre on that tour. I still play Euchre somewhat regularly with my wife and in-laws. What does this all have to do with a delicious-looking game about difficult to nail baked goods? Well, I described Macaron to my wife as, “A more intense Euchre with a baking theme, where the bowers may actually kill someone.”
Macaron is a baked goods-themed trick-taking card game for one to five players. In it players are bakers in medieval France trying to become the favored royal baker to the king and his family. The player who can earn the most VP by delivering the tastiest macarons to the royal family will be victorious and will then bake the other players a box of macarons to take home (I added that last part, but Ta-Te Wu should consider adding it to the rules).
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I know for sure the final components will be slightly 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
For this preview I am tackling the solo rule-set provided and my AI opponent is named Emma (per the rules). Multiplayer games will be played somewhat similarly, but against normal-intelligenced real people. Duh.
To setup a solo game, place the Score board in the middle of the table on whichever side is decided – one side allows up to 20 points, and the other up to 30. Place the first three Group boards (A with Almond and Pistachio, B with Strawberry and Blueberry, and C with just one Green Tea macaron upon it) somewhere near the Score board to denote the flavors being played. Remove all cards from the deck picturing Earl Grey and Chocolate flavored macarons. Shuffle the remaining macaron cards and deal the solo player 13 of them. Deal Emma one random card from the deck under each flavor on the Group board as shown below. These random cards will take on the flavor of whichever stack to which it now belongs. Continue dealing Emma eight cards to her stacks, but match them to their flavors – the 4 of Pistachio under Pistachio, etc. Emma should now have 13 cards in total, but each flavor stack should be shuffled and arranged as shown below. Choose a color for the player and for Emma, place one of each meeple on the Score board to track final scores, and the other meeples on the Gift Box tracker in the middle. Analyze each of Emma’s stacks to determine which Group contains the most cards. These flavors will be given the Royal token (I used the purple star) and are considered the trump suits this round. Flip over the top card of the deck that remains, and place the Allergen token (I used the tall goldenrod piece) upon the matching flavor. The game may now begin!
The solo player is always the starting player, so they will open the first trick by playing a card from hand. As in most card games, whichever flavor (suit) is led will need to be followed by Emma, if possible. The rulebook gives the player a nice turn-flow summary for Emma based on which player leads and which type of card is played.
As in Euchre, suit must be followed. If a player is unable to follow, they may play a Royal (trump) card to win the trick or any other non-Royal card. The Royal flavors are both flavors that belong to the same Group, or Green Tea, as it is its own Group. For each trick won, the player will advance their meeple on the Gift Box track to denote number of tricks won. Some card rules adjust the scoring. For example, should a value 1 card win the trick the winning player will increase their number of Gift Boxes three spaces instead of one. Should a trick include an Allergen flavor the winning player will still lead the next trick but will not advance their Gift Box meeple, as Allergens make the royal family sick. However, should a trick contain a value 2 card in it, the 2 cancels the Allergen and the winner may advance their Gift Box meeple as normal.
The round ends when a player, or Emma, has finished their hand of 13 cards played or reaches eight or more Gift Boxes (won tricks). Setup for a new round as the game was initially setup with dealing cards to each player and determining Royal and Allergen flavors. Play continues in this fashion until the player or Emma has reached the pre-determined score of 10, 20, or 30. The winner must now get to baking (again, I added that, but it REALLLLLY needs to happen, I think)!
Components. Again, this is a prototype copy of the game (though still pretty good) and the final components will certainly be different than the ones shown here. That said, the art style is simply wonderful and incredibly enjoyable. Yes, the Score board is a little busy, but it’s functional and fun. The art on the cards is very good, colorblind-friendly with icons in addition to colors, and the art doesn’t get in the way of playing tricks at all. All the other components used in the game will probably be different upon a successful Kickstarter campaign, and though I haven’t seen the proposed components, I am sure they will match the theme and be great to handle.
So as a lover of Euchre, am I also a lover of Macaron? ABSOLUTELY! It takes everything I enjoy about Euchre and somehow simplifies AND complexifies it. Teaching Euchre to new players can be a chore when they don’t latch onto the fact that the highest cards in the game are the Jacks of the same color of trump, but one is higher than the other. It can be awkward at first. Here, there are one or two flavors that are trump suits. It makes sense to be able to visualize a bit easier, and to be able to relate to flavors. In fact, my 4-year-old son wanted to “play” it earlier this morning, so I took out the Allergen mechanic and just did straight suit-following with trumps and he understood it. So, I guess by house-ruling a little you can also play this with children who are learning games for the first time, learning their numbers, or learning trick-taking games. That’s a fun hidden side quest!
Now, I can see how people will totally dig Macaron as a multiplayer game, but I am previewing this as a solo game. Is it just as good? Yep! I like being able to play the game whenever I want, and using another mechanic I didn’t describe earlier – Betting. Having to bet upon how many Gift Boxes you will score for the round adds another layer of analyzation I particularly enjoy. If you guess correctly you score an additional two Gift Boxes. If you’re wrong Emma scores two Boxes. Couple this with Emma’s unpredictable card play and you have an interesting AI player that you may never be able to “figure out” and beat methodically. I like that randomness from Emma. She has made a few games close, but ultimately has lost every game against me.
Macaron is a cute little Euchre-style card game that can be played well solo and multiplayer, and features wonderful style. I love the theme, and I seem to be attracted to food games; I love Bohnanza, Morels, Happy Salmon (my favorite fish to eat), Sushi Go!, Coconuts, and The Three Little Pigs (ok that one was mean, but hey, I love pork)! If you also enjoy food-related games, or trick-taking games, or just fun little card games you can play solo or with other people, please consider backing Macaron via their Kickstarter campaign launching soon. Tell them Purple Phoenix Games sent you and I will share my Gift Box of Macarons with you**. You will have to let me know your food allergies prior, though.
** I don’t actually have a Gift Box of Macarons. That was a lie, and I apologize for that.
Macaron is a baked goods-themed trick-taking card game for one to five players. In it players are bakers in medieval France trying to become the favored royal baker to the king and his family. The player who can earn the most VP by delivering the tastiest macarons to the royal family will be victorious and will then bake the other players a box of macarons to take home (I added that last part, but Ta-Te Wu should consider adding it to the rules).
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I know for sure the final components will be slightly 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
For this preview I am tackling the solo rule-set provided and my AI opponent is named Emma (per the rules). Multiplayer games will be played somewhat similarly, but against normal-intelligenced real people. Duh.
To setup a solo game, place the Score board in the middle of the table on whichever side is decided – one side allows up to 20 points, and the other up to 30. Place the first three Group boards (A with Almond and Pistachio, B with Strawberry and Blueberry, and C with just one Green Tea macaron upon it) somewhere near the Score board to denote the flavors being played. Remove all cards from the deck picturing Earl Grey and Chocolate flavored macarons. Shuffle the remaining macaron cards and deal the solo player 13 of them. Deal Emma one random card from the deck under each flavor on the Group board as shown below. These random cards will take on the flavor of whichever stack to which it now belongs. Continue dealing Emma eight cards to her stacks, but match them to their flavors – the 4 of Pistachio under Pistachio, etc. Emma should now have 13 cards in total, but each flavor stack should be shuffled and arranged as shown below. Choose a color for the player and for Emma, place one of each meeple on the Score board to track final scores, and the other meeples on the Gift Box tracker in the middle. Analyze each of Emma’s stacks to determine which Group contains the most cards. These flavors will be given the Royal token (I used the purple star) and are considered the trump suits this round. Flip over the top card of the deck that remains, and place the Allergen token (I used the tall goldenrod piece) upon the matching flavor. The game may now begin!
The solo player is always the starting player, so they will open the first trick by playing a card from hand. As in most card games, whichever flavor (suit) is led will need to be followed by Emma, if possible. The rulebook gives the player a nice turn-flow summary for Emma based on which player leads and which type of card is played.
As in Euchre, suit must be followed. If a player is unable to follow, they may play a Royal (trump) card to win the trick or any other non-Royal card. The Royal flavors are both flavors that belong to the same Group, or Green Tea, as it is its own Group. For each trick won, the player will advance their meeple on the Gift Box track to denote number of tricks won. Some card rules adjust the scoring. For example, should a value 1 card win the trick the winning player will increase their number of Gift Boxes three spaces instead of one. Should a trick include an Allergen flavor the winning player will still lead the next trick but will not advance their Gift Box meeple, as Allergens make the royal family sick. However, should a trick contain a value 2 card in it, the 2 cancels the Allergen and the winner may advance their Gift Box meeple as normal.
The round ends when a player, or Emma, has finished their hand of 13 cards played or reaches eight or more Gift Boxes (won tricks). Setup for a new round as the game was initially setup with dealing cards to each player and determining Royal and Allergen flavors. Play continues in this fashion until the player or Emma has reached the pre-determined score of 10, 20, or 30. The winner must now get to baking (again, I added that, but it REALLLLLY needs to happen, I think)!
Components. Again, this is a prototype copy of the game (though still pretty good) and the final components will certainly be different than the ones shown here. That said, the art style is simply wonderful and incredibly enjoyable. Yes, the Score board is a little busy, but it’s functional and fun. The art on the cards is very good, colorblind-friendly with icons in addition to colors, and the art doesn’t get in the way of playing tricks at all. All the other components used in the game will probably be different upon a successful Kickstarter campaign, and though I haven’t seen the proposed components, I am sure they will match the theme and be great to handle.
So as a lover of Euchre, am I also a lover of Macaron? ABSOLUTELY! It takes everything I enjoy about Euchre and somehow simplifies AND complexifies it. Teaching Euchre to new players can be a chore when they don’t latch onto the fact that the highest cards in the game are the Jacks of the same color of trump, but one is higher than the other. It can be awkward at first. Here, there are one or two flavors that are trump suits. It makes sense to be able to visualize a bit easier, and to be able to relate to flavors. In fact, my 4-year-old son wanted to “play” it earlier this morning, so I took out the Allergen mechanic and just did straight suit-following with trumps and he understood it. So, I guess by house-ruling a little you can also play this with children who are learning games for the first time, learning their numbers, or learning trick-taking games. That’s a fun hidden side quest!
Now, I can see how people will totally dig Macaron as a multiplayer game, but I am previewing this as a solo game. Is it just as good? Yep! I like being able to play the game whenever I want, and using another mechanic I didn’t describe earlier – Betting. Having to bet upon how many Gift Boxes you will score for the round adds another layer of analyzation I particularly enjoy. If you guess correctly you score an additional two Gift Boxes. If you’re wrong Emma scores two Boxes. Couple this with Emma’s unpredictable card play and you have an interesting AI player that you may never be able to “figure out” and beat methodically. I like that randomness from Emma. She has made a few games close, but ultimately has lost every game against me.
Macaron is a cute little Euchre-style card game that can be played well solo and multiplayer, and features wonderful style. I love the theme, and I seem to be attracted to food games; I love Bohnanza, Morels, Happy Salmon (my favorite fish to eat), Sushi Go!, Coconuts, and The Three Little Pigs (ok that one was mean, but hey, I love pork)! If you also enjoy food-related games, or trick-taking games, or just fun little card games you can play solo or with other people, please consider backing Macaron via their Kickstarter campaign launching soon. Tell them Purple Phoenix Games sent you and I will share my Gift Box of Macarons with you**. You will have to let me know your food allergies prior, though.
** I don’t actually have a Gift Box of Macarons. That was a lie, and I apologize for that.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Marriage Story (2019) in Movies
Jan 19, 2020
Well Acted Scenes Do Not A Good Movie Make
Noah Baumbach is one of those filmmakers that is highly regarded in the "Art House" community for his semi-autobiographical humanistic films. These are domestic dramas heavy on dialogue - the type of film that "A-List" Actors swarm to perform in for the acting challenges it brings. His latest, MARRIAGE STORY, is no exception as it follows the dissolution of a marriage and the struggles of the 2 main players involved. The husband and wife are written realistically (according to Baumbach) with moments of pathos and moments of repulsion thrown in at equal measure.
So, naturally, Baumbach (THE SQUID AND THE WHALE) was able to draw 2 of the better performers working in film today to play the leads - Scarlett Johannson and Adam Driver - and they deliver the goods (along with Laura Dern) - all 3 were deserved Oscar nominees - and the performances of ALL of the actors on screen are worth watching.
But...that's about all this film has going for it. For I found the first hour and a half of this film tedious with (at times) preposterous dialogue that looked good on paper - and was enthusiastically performed - but wrang (at least to me) as unrealistic. Consequently, this film is filled with well acted scenes that I kept saying to myself - "that was a well acted scene and that was an interesting choice that that actor made in that scene", but I found that these disparate scenes in this part of the film did not hold together as a movie. It seemed to me a series of acting class scenes and not a film.
And, for that, I blame Writer/Director Baumbach. This film, purportedly, parallels his divorce from actress Jennifer Jason Leigh (HATEFUL 8) and it shows. It's a little too "on the nose" and "inside baseball" for my tastes. The dialogue, at times, was "too cute" and the pacing was deliberate - which is a nice way of saying "slow".
What saves this film is the performances. Johannson dominates the first part of this film and she brings her "A" game, bringing a strength and awakening purpose to her character that will have you rooting for her - at the beginning. The first half of the film (for the most part) is Johannson's film and is what gives her her Oscar nomination (she won't win), but she deserves the nomination.
Laura Dern is also Oscar nominated for her role as Johannson's Divorce Attorney. Bright, funny, articulate and a shark in the courtroom and boardroom, Dern's character was fascinating to watch onscreen. While I thought this performance was "fine" and I was "okay" with it getting an Oscar nomination, I kept waiting for the "Oscar scene" for this supporting character - and about 2/3 of the way into the film this character had that moment - and Dern killed it. I would now say Dern is the deserved frontrunner for Best Supporting Actress (ironically, over Johansson who is ALSO nominated for Supporting Actress for JoJo Rabbit).
This scene propels the last 1/3 of this film into interesting territory - a place that this film had not gone to thus far. I was sucked into this last part and I think it is in no small reason due to the fact that this part of the film is driven (no pun intended) by Adam Driver's character. I've always found Driver to be a fascinating actor and while his character was not front and center much in the first part of the film, he commands center stage in the last part and I could not take my eyes off of his powerful performance. In a strong year of Best Acting performances, he shines and I would be happily surprised and satisfied if he won the Best Actor Oscar.
Alan Alda, as usual, brings an interesting character to the screen as does Julie Hagerty (remember her from AIRPLANE?) as Scarlett's mother. The surprise to me was the strong play of Ray Liotta as one of Driver's lawyers - it is his best work in quite some time and shows he does have some acting chops. Finally, good ol' Wallace Shawn (the "inconceivable" Count Visini in PRINCESS BRIDE) was fun - and annoying - in his scenes.
So...if you want to see some good acting in scenes that I am sure will end up as good scenes in an acting class performed very strongly, then check out MARRIAGE STORY. Just make sure you are well rested. A fast-paced romp it is not.
Letter Grade: B (for the strong performances)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
So, naturally, Baumbach (THE SQUID AND THE WHALE) was able to draw 2 of the better performers working in film today to play the leads - Scarlett Johannson and Adam Driver - and they deliver the goods (along with Laura Dern) - all 3 were deserved Oscar nominees - and the performances of ALL of the actors on screen are worth watching.
But...that's about all this film has going for it. For I found the first hour and a half of this film tedious with (at times) preposterous dialogue that looked good on paper - and was enthusiastically performed - but wrang (at least to me) as unrealistic. Consequently, this film is filled with well acted scenes that I kept saying to myself - "that was a well acted scene and that was an interesting choice that that actor made in that scene", but I found that these disparate scenes in this part of the film did not hold together as a movie. It seemed to me a series of acting class scenes and not a film.
And, for that, I blame Writer/Director Baumbach. This film, purportedly, parallels his divorce from actress Jennifer Jason Leigh (HATEFUL 8) and it shows. It's a little too "on the nose" and "inside baseball" for my tastes. The dialogue, at times, was "too cute" and the pacing was deliberate - which is a nice way of saying "slow".
What saves this film is the performances. Johannson dominates the first part of this film and she brings her "A" game, bringing a strength and awakening purpose to her character that will have you rooting for her - at the beginning. The first half of the film (for the most part) is Johannson's film and is what gives her her Oscar nomination (she won't win), but she deserves the nomination.
Laura Dern is also Oscar nominated for her role as Johannson's Divorce Attorney. Bright, funny, articulate and a shark in the courtroom and boardroom, Dern's character was fascinating to watch onscreen. While I thought this performance was "fine" and I was "okay" with it getting an Oscar nomination, I kept waiting for the "Oscar scene" for this supporting character - and about 2/3 of the way into the film this character had that moment - and Dern killed it. I would now say Dern is the deserved frontrunner for Best Supporting Actress (ironically, over Johansson who is ALSO nominated for Supporting Actress for JoJo Rabbit).
This scene propels the last 1/3 of this film into interesting territory - a place that this film had not gone to thus far. I was sucked into this last part and I think it is in no small reason due to the fact that this part of the film is driven (no pun intended) by Adam Driver's character. I've always found Driver to be a fascinating actor and while his character was not front and center much in the first part of the film, he commands center stage in the last part and I could not take my eyes off of his powerful performance. In a strong year of Best Acting performances, he shines and I would be happily surprised and satisfied if he won the Best Actor Oscar.
Alan Alda, as usual, brings an interesting character to the screen as does Julie Hagerty (remember her from AIRPLANE?) as Scarlett's mother. The surprise to me was the strong play of Ray Liotta as one of Driver's lawyers - it is his best work in quite some time and shows he does have some acting chops. Finally, good ol' Wallace Shawn (the "inconceivable" Count Visini in PRINCESS BRIDE) was fun - and annoying - in his scenes.
So...if you want to see some good acting in scenes that I am sure will end up as good scenes in an acting class performed very strongly, then check out MARRIAGE STORY. Just make sure you are well rested. A fast-paced romp it is not.
Letter Grade: B (for the strong performances)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Com-Pet-Ability in Tabletop Games
Apr 14, 2020
I have two dogs: a Yorkshire Terrier and a Powderpuff Chinese Crested. I love them dearly, but I just cannot see myself having any more 4-legged mammal pets. We promised our son a pet fish when we move (or a whole aquarium community if my wife will allow), but other than that, we will NOT be adding more pets to our household. So when I heard about a game that requires you to collect cards so that you have five pets to take home I immediate gave the deer-in-headlights look. No, I would not have a pet deer.
ComPetAbility is a card game with two play modes: a mode for players aged 7+ and one for younger gamers. We will be taking a look at the game for older gamers. In this game mode a player is attempting to amass five pets that will be accepting of each other and not cause heck in your house.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of the game for the purposes of this review. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rule book, 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 from the publisher directly or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, shuffle the large deck of cards and deal five to each player. Put the rest of the cards in the middle of the table as a draw pile, flip one over for the “shed” pile. You are now setup and ready to go!
The goal of the game is to begin a turn with five compatible pets (com-pet-able). This is achieved by having five cards whose three icons are satisfied with each other. For instance, turtles are compatible with every other type of animal, so the three icons on turtle cards are all green – compatible with all dogs, cats, and birds. Some dogs are compatible with other dogs but not cats, and some cats are compatible with other cats or kittens but not birds.
So on a turn, a player will choose a card to draw from either the draw pile or the shed pile to add to their hand. A turn ends when that player sheds (discards) a card to the shed pile. Turns continue in this fashion until a player begins their turn with five compatible animals. Players will then add up the points in their hands (the numbers in the upper right corner of the cards) of compatible animals. The player that ended the game with a completed set of five animal pets will score a bonus 10 points to add to their total. Whomever scores the highest is the winner of ComPetAbility!
Components. This is a stack of cards in a tin can. Yep, a tin can with a plastic lid. It’s very novel and lovely, but heck for someone who cares about how the games look and fit on their shelves. The game cards are good quality, which is handy because the game mode aimed at smaller children have them handling the cards a lot too so they have to be able to withstand that abuse. The art is cute, and the layout is easy to understand – even for young ones. No issues with the components from us (aside from the can not being a box, wink wink).
So here’s the thing with this one. We liked it. It is a great idea and is executed well. I don’t think I will pull this one out with adult gamers anymore though. The children’s mode of this game is what I hold dear, as my three-year-old LOVES it and “wins” every time. I have just played this one too many times where a player can be dealt either a winning hand or four of the five cards right away. I’m no designer, so I don’t know how to mitigate that besides chalking it up to “luck of the draw.” But that’s a negative for me, and perhaps I shouldn’t let it detract from an otherwise enjoyable game, but it’s what comes to mind every time I see on the shelf as a possibility for Game Night. However, if you like the theme, the style, and ease of play between two different modes then check it out. It can be used as a light filler, a gateway game, or children’s game. So for the pure flexibility of this one, Purple Phoenix Games gives it a canned (hehe) 13 / 18. The turtles are really cute, but the hybrid animals are kinda weird-lookin’.
ComPetAbility is a card game with two play modes: a mode for players aged 7+ and one for younger gamers. We will be taking a look at the game for older gamers. In this game mode a player is attempting to amass five pets that will be accepting of each other and not cause heck in your house.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of the game for the purposes of this review. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rule book, 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 from the publisher directly or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, shuffle the large deck of cards and deal five to each player. Put the rest of the cards in the middle of the table as a draw pile, flip one over for the “shed” pile. You are now setup and ready to go!
The goal of the game is to begin a turn with five compatible pets (com-pet-able). This is achieved by having five cards whose three icons are satisfied with each other. For instance, turtles are compatible with every other type of animal, so the three icons on turtle cards are all green – compatible with all dogs, cats, and birds. Some dogs are compatible with other dogs but not cats, and some cats are compatible with other cats or kittens but not birds.
So on a turn, a player will choose a card to draw from either the draw pile or the shed pile to add to their hand. A turn ends when that player sheds (discards) a card to the shed pile. Turns continue in this fashion until a player begins their turn with five compatible animals. Players will then add up the points in their hands (the numbers in the upper right corner of the cards) of compatible animals. The player that ended the game with a completed set of five animal pets will score a bonus 10 points to add to their total. Whomever scores the highest is the winner of ComPetAbility!
Components. This is a stack of cards in a tin can. Yep, a tin can with a plastic lid. It’s very novel and lovely, but heck for someone who cares about how the games look and fit on their shelves. The game cards are good quality, which is handy because the game mode aimed at smaller children have them handling the cards a lot too so they have to be able to withstand that abuse. The art is cute, and the layout is easy to understand – even for young ones. No issues with the components from us (aside from the can not being a box, wink wink).
So here’s the thing with this one. We liked it. It is a great idea and is executed well. I don’t think I will pull this one out with adult gamers anymore though. The children’s mode of this game is what I hold dear, as my three-year-old LOVES it and “wins” every time. I have just played this one too many times where a player can be dealt either a winning hand or four of the five cards right away. I’m no designer, so I don’t know how to mitigate that besides chalking it up to “luck of the draw.” But that’s a negative for me, and perhaps I shouldn’t let it detract from an otherwise enjoyable game, but it’s what comes to mind every time I see on the shelf as a possibility for Game Night. However, if you like the theme, the style, and ease of play between two different modes then check it out. It can be used as a light filler, a gateway game, or children’s game. So for the pure flexibility of this one, Purple Phoenix Games gives it a canned (hehe) 13 / 18. The turtles are really cute, but the hybrid animals are kinda weird-lookin’.
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 Throw Octopus in Tabletop Games
Dec 18, 2021
It’s a great sign when your 5-year-old wants to play a game over, and over, and over, and over… right? Especially if you also really enjoy playing? You never really know what to expect with new games and, luckily, this one is great… especially if you have kiddos or uptight friends.
In Throw Octopus, players are underwater city planners. Of sorts. Depending on the mode of play, players will attempt to rid themselves of their hand of seascape tiles, which depict wonky underwater creatures. The first player to shed their entire hand of tiles will be the winner!
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, chuck the tiles into a giant face-down pile and swirl them around to shuffle. Or try to riffle-shuffle, like, a thousand little cardboard tiles. Good luck. From the pile each player will choose eight tiles for their starting hand. Eight tiles, eight octopus tentacles. Coincidence? Also shuffle the Octopus Cards and place in a draw pile nearby. Flip over one of the tiles from the pile to serve as the starting tile. Youngest player goes first, and the game is ready to play!
On a turn, players will try to play one of their tiles to the ever-growing seascape being built on the table. Only by adding a tile from their hand to an appropriate place within the seascape can hands dwindle. At times a player will play a tile to the seascape depicting an octopus icon. After placing this tile, the active player will draw a card from the deck and either perform its action immediately or save it to be used at a later time (the card will instruct the players which to do). These cards could have players drawing more tiles, forcing other players to draw tiles, giving the active player the ability to manipulate tiles already placed in the seascape, or THROWING THE ADORABLE PLUSH OCTOPUS that comes with the game at an opponent. When the octopus is thrown at a player, they must immediately draw two tiles and skip their next turn. Should a player not have any other play, they must draw a tile from the pile and pass play to the next player.
As players are gaining and playing tiles to the board, the seascape is constantly changing, thus reflecting the real-life constantly-changing seascapes across the world. I may be reading too much into it. In any case, once a player places their final tile, they win and may challenge the players to a rematch immediately.
Recently added two-player rules allow for Speed Octopus play. In this mode, players are attempting to add to their own seascapes, and when they cannot play a card, they must discard a tile from their hand to their box top/bottom and draw a new tile from the shared pile. Once the game ends by players unable to play legally, points are scored for completed creatures in their personal board and negative points are earned for each tile in their box top/bottom. In this mode the cards and plushie are not used, but we house-ruled the usage of a Throw Octopus each time a creature was completed, just to further humiliate the other player.
Components. Again, this is a prototype copy of the game, but what we received was a box full of tiles, cards, and just the cutest little octoplushie we have ever seen. I really hope that all copies of the game come with this style of octopus, as my daughter immediately confiscated it the first few nights to sleep with her, no joke. I can only imagine the upgrades this will receive as a result of a successful Kickstarter campaign.
This is a silly, and sometimes frantic, tile laying game with take that and dexterity elements. Throwing the octopus and seeing the finished seascape at the end of the game are so satisfying. The art is great, and the concept is unique. I just know we will be playing this game for years to come. Again, if you happen to have littles in your your life or uptight friends, this is the game for you.
In Throw Octopus, players are underwater city planners. Of sorts. Depending on the mode of play, players will attempt to rid themselves of their hand of seascape tiles, which depict wonky underwater creatures. The first player to shed their entire hand of tiles will be the winner!
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, chuck the tiles into a giant face-down pile and swirl them around to shuffle. Or try to riffle-shuffle, like, a thousand little cardboard tiles. Good luck. From the pile each player will choose eight tiles for their starting hand. Eight tiles, eight octopus tentacles. Coincidence? Also shuffle the Octopus Cards and place in a draw pile nearby. Flip over one of the tiles from the pile to serve as the starting tile. Youngest player goes first, and the game is ready to play!
On a turn, players will try to play one of their tiles to the ever-growing seascape being built on the table. Only by adding a tile from their hand to an appropriate place within the seascape can hands dwindle. At times a player will play a tile to the seascape depicting an octopus icon. After placing this tile, the active player will draw a card from the deck and either perform its action immediately or save it to be used at a later time (the card will instruct the players which to do). These cards could have players drawing more tiles, forcing other players to draw tiles, giving the active player the ability to manipulate tiles already placed in the seascape, or THROWING THE ADORABLE PLUSH OCTOPUS that comes with the game at an opponent. When the octopus is thrown at a player, they must immediately draw two tiles and skip their next turn. Should a player not have any other play, they must draw a tile from the pile and pass play to the next player.
As players are gaining and playing tiles to the board, the seascape is constantly changing, thus reflecting the real-life constantly-changing seascapes across the world. I may be reading too much into it. In any case, once a player places their final tile, they win and may challenge the players to a rematch immediately.
Recently added two-player rules allow for Speed Octopus play. In this mode, players are attempting to add to their own seascapes, and when they cannot play a card, they must discard a tile from their hand to their box top/bottom and draw a new tile from the shared pile. Once the game ends by players unable to play legally, points are scored for completed creatures in their personal board and negative points are earned for each tile in their box top/bottom. In this mode the cards and plushie are not used, but we house-ruled the usage of a Throw Octopus each time a creature was completed, just to further humiliate the other player.
Components. Again, this is a prototype copy of the game, but what we received was a box full of tiles, cards, and just the cutest little octoplushie we have ever seen. I really hope that all copies of the game come with this style of octopus, as my daughter immediately confiscated it the first few nights to sleep with her, no joke. I can only imagine the upgrades this will receive as a result of a successful Kickstarter campaign.
This is a silly, and sometimes frantic, tile laying game with take that and dexterity elements. Throwing the octopus and seeing the finished seascape at the end of the game are so satisfying. The art is great, and the concept is unique. I just know we will be playing this game for years to come. Again, if you happen to have littles in your your life or uptight friends, this is the game for you.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Victim: The Cursed Forest in Tabletop Games
Sep 24, 2021
I mean, who WOULDN’T be frightened out of their undies when one of their traveling mates just suddenly becomes… something else… and chases them through a very odd forest? But yet, here is where we now play. In a vast forest with danger around every curve, and a horrific presence taunting the party with the imminent possession of their very bodies. A far cry from prancing about a candied forest in an attempt to reach the summit: Candy Castle. Board games have definitely evolved, and boy am I glad for that!
Victim: The Cursed Forest (which I shall from here call simply “Victim”) is a horror survival game where players assume the roles of survivors of a plane crash. Each survivor, which in the game are actually called Victims, must race against time and nightmare fiends in order to reach the safety bunker until saviors come rescue them. However, early in the game one of their own is possessed by the lurking horror and then turns on the party to pick them off one by one. It’s up to the victims to race to the bunker and input the correct code to open its hatch to relative safety!
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, basically shuffle each deck separately, and place the Bunker map tile in the bottom six of the stack, then split that into two stacks. Place out all the chits however makes sense for your table (organized for me, thank you), and each player chooses one of the characters to play and collects all their goodies. The Start Tile is laid down, the player minis are placed upon it and the chase is on!
Each turn the players will have several choices of actions to complete, with two actions available to be taken on their turn. Primarily, players will be Running around the map to different tiles and exploring their special characteristics. Some tiles allow players to search them for Item cards, some allow players to Decode as an action, and some also require players to pass certain tests of abilities. These tests correspond to each player’s abilities of Agility, Intelligence, Vitality, and Luck. The ability scores are different for each character and can be improved or worsened throughout the game. Character boards also will show each character’s special skills that can be used on a turn.
Once all players have completed their two actions in turn order, the last player will flip an Event card that may be active for the entirety of the next round. Sometimes these Events affect only characters on certain tile types, or even adjust ability scores and Items held. However, at the end of the second or third round of play (depending on the number of players), the ominous Curse Phase is completed.
The Curse Phase is a special one-time insert that has all players make a test against one of the four abilities. The lowest score for the test then becomes the host for the Evil that will ravage the party and wreak hell on the other players. The player no longer controls their chosen character, but immediately becomes the Evil that was drawn and now plays the game against the other players. The Evil takes their turn at the end of the round, just before the Event card is drawn.
Once the Evil enters play in earnest, the game quickly shifts from a nice exploration and map building game to a race against time to earn bunker password tokens from the Decoding tiles and avoid all attacks from the now raging Evil chasing the players. I will not describe the entirety of battle and Evil special abilities, but battle is a very simple Attack roll vs. Defense roll for one wound. When a player sustains two wounds, they are considered to have a Critical Injury and may only Crawl to another player in hopes of receiving healing or to arrive on a tile with healing properties upon it. However, a character that has been Critically Injured is ripe for the Evil’s Death Skill. The Death Skill is how the Evil is able to remove characters (and thusly players) from the game and decrease the odds of the Victims’ victory.
Play continues in this fashion of players taking their turns, then the Evil takes their turn, then the Event card is drawn as the last part of each round, until either the players collect the correct tokens to solve the hatch passcode and earn safety, or the Evil takes out the required number of characters for their victory. All this can be accomplished in a mere 45-90 minutes. Absolutely.
Components. Never having heard of Hexa House prior to arranging for this review, I had no idea what to expect in terms of components. However, this game comes in a very large box, the insert is kind of perfect (which is saying a lot, especially since it is a vacuum form), and everything inside the box is really great! I’m not really a miniatures kinda guy, but I can appreciate them. Standees are just as good to me, but I think these minis are above-average from my experience. The cards, the art style, the custom dice, everything just hits really well.
So you probably noticed my weird ratings graphic up top. Well, I will admit that my graphic design skills are, well, amateur at best. So I just created a 5 point 5 because I really feel this one is just amazing. Now, some people may have some small issues with the rule book, but please read it with a grain of salt: I believe they originate in Thai or Laotian languages and are translated to English. I didn’t have problems reading it at all, but had a couple questions. I tried playing several different ways when I had these questions, and usually just one option was really viable anyway.
That said, everything else about this game is truly wonderful. I sincerely enjoy that sudden shift near the beginning of the game where one player becomes the big baddie and comes for the rest of the players. Depending on placement and buddy systems that formed in the first part of the game, the Evil player will have either a feast setup before themselves, or have to do a bit of work to track down the characters to orchestrate their attack. I know I didn’t go into a whole lot of detail on what the Evil player can do on their turns, but it boils down to basically Hunt (run), Attack, and trap.
This base game ships with six Victims and six Evils. I have yet to see all the Evils in my plays, as the mechanic for determining which Evil surfaces is dependent on a draw of a card from a shuffled deck. That said, even when an Evil enters the game that I have played before, the players were different, and the map was different, and the placement of characters was different, so it did not feel “samey” to me at all.
I will admit that the most frustrating aspect of the game is the bunker hatch passcode. Okay, so once the Bunker tile is placed, a new component enters play: the Bunker board. A hole in the middle of the board is to house a Gate Token. This Gate Token is simply a target number that the players need to achieve using the different Number and Symbol Tokens won from successful Decode actions. The Number Tokens are simply 1-6, and the Symbol Tokens are plus/minus/multiply/divide. Therefore, in order to meet the Gate Token showing 35 players would need to gather 6 x 5 + 3 + 2. That is seven different successes at the Decoder tiles, and best case scenario has players pulling those exactly and no others. When you are playing a game that is a race against time (or death, in this instance), these little setbacks can cost the entire game – that is, if players simply cannot pass the test needed for a success at the Decoder tile. Frustrating, yes, but also a very cool addition to this style of game.
Victim has completely surprised me, and I am so thankful I had the opportunity to add this to my collection. My strong recommendation is that if you see one of these in the wild – GRAB IT. There are hours and hours of gameplay in this box, and I haven’t even touched the expansion for it yet (expect another review of that in the near future as well). Purple Phoenix Games officially gives this one a 5.5 / 6 (we NEVER do half points), but I feel like with even more plays, and with the expansion to be added soon, this may give my Top 10 list a shakeup still this year. If you are a fan of games like Betrayal at House on the Hill and Posthuman, then you need to check this one out for sure. Oh, did I mention that there is a LOT of dice rolling here too? Guess I just left that until the end for my dice-chucking lovers.
Victim: The Cursed Forest (which I shall from here call simply “Victim”) is a horror survival game where players assume the roles of survivors of a plane crash. Each survivor, which in the game are actually called Victims, must race against time and nightmare fiends in order to reach the safety bunker until saviors come rescue them. However, early in the game one of their own is possessed by the lurking horror and then turns on the party to pick them off one by one. It’s up to the victims to race to the bunker and input the correct code to open its hatch to relative safety!
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, basically shuffle each deck separately, and place the Bunker map tile in the bottom six of the stack, then split that into two stacks. Place out all the chits however makes sense for your table (organized for me, thank you), and each player chooses one of the characters to play and collects all their goodies. The Start Tile is laid down, the player minis are placed upon it and the chase is on!
Each turn the players will have several choices of actions to complete, with two actions available to be taken on their turn. Primarily, players will be Running around the map to different tiles and exploring their special characteristics. Some tiles allow players to search them for Item cards, some allow players to Decode as an action, and some also require players to pass certain tests of abilities. These tests correspond to each player’s abilities of Agility, Intelligence, Vitality, and Luck. The ability scores are different for each character and can be improved or worsened throughout the game. Character boards also will show each character’s special skills that can be used on a turn.
Once all players have completed their two actions in turn order, the last player will flip an Event card that may be active for the entirety of the next round. Sometimes these Events affect only characters on certain tile types, or even adjust ability scores and Items held. However, at the end of the second or third round of play (depending on the number of players), the ominous Curse Phase is completed.
The Curse Phase is a special one-time insert that has all players make a test against one of the four abilities. The lowest score for the test then becomes the host for the Evil that will ravage the party and wreak hell on the other players. The player no longer controls their chosen character, but immediately becomes the Evil that was drawn and now plays the game against the other players. The Evil takes their turn at the end of the round, just before the Event card is drawn.
Once the Evil enters play in earnest, the game quickly shifts from a nice exploration and map building game to a race against time to earn bunker password tokens from the Decoding tiles and avoid all attacks from the now raging Evil chasing the players. I will not describe the entirety of battle and Evil special abilities, but battle is a very simple Attack roll vs. Defense roll for one wound. When a player sustains two wounds, they are considered to have a Critical Injury and may only Crawl to another player in hopes of receiving healing or to arrive on a tile with healing properties upon it. However, a character that has been Critically Injured is ripe for the Evil’s Death Skill. The Death Skill is how the Evil is able to remove characters (and thusly players) from the game and decrease the odds of the Victims’ victory.
Play continues in this fashion of players taking their turns, then the Evil takes their turn, then the Event card is drawn as the last part of each round, until either the players collect the correct tokens to solve the hatch passcode and earn safety, or the Evil takes out the required number of characters for their victory. All this can be accomplished in a mere 45-90 minutes. Absolutely.
Components. Never having heard of Hexa House prior to arranging for this review, I had no idea what to expect in terms of components. However, this game comes in a very large box, the insert is kind of perfect (which is saying a lot, especially since it is a vacuum form), and everything inside the box is really great! I’m not really a miniatures kinda guy, but I can appreciate them. Standees are just as good to me, but I think these minis are above-average from my experience. The cards, the art style, the custom dice, everything just hits really well.
So you probably noticed my weird ratings graphic up top. Well, I will admit that my graphic design skills are, well, amateur at best. So I just created a 5 point 5 because I really feel this one is just amazing. Now, some people may have some small issues with the rule book, but please read it with a grain of salt: I believe they originate in Thai or Laotian languages and are translated to English. I didn’t have problems reading it at all, but had a couple questions. I tried playing several different ways when I had these questions, and usually just one option was really viable anyway.
That said, everything else about this game is truly wonderful. I sincerely enjoy that sudden shift near the beginning of the game where one player becomes the big baddie and comes for the rest of the players. Depending on placement and buddy systems that formed in the first part of the game, the Evil player will have either a feast setup before themselves, or have to do a bit of work to track down the characters to orchestrate their attack. I know I didn’t go into a whole lot of detail on what the Evil player can do on their turns, but it boils down to basically Hunt (run), Attack, and trap.
This base game ships with six Victims and six Evils. I have yet to see all the Evils in my plays, as the mechanic for determining which Evil surfaces is dependent on a draw of a card from a shuffled deck. That said, even when an Evil enters the game that I have played before, the players were different, and the map was different, and the placement of characters was different, so it did not feel “samey” to me at all.
I will admit that the most frustrating aspect of the game is the bunker hatch passcode. Okay, so once the Bunker tile is placed, a new component enters play: the Bunker board. A hole in the middle of the board is to house a Gate Token. This Gate Token is simply a target number that the players need to achieve using the different Number and Symbol Tokens won from successful Decode actions. The Number Tokens are simply 1-6, and the Symbol Tokens are plus/minus/multiply/divide. Therefore, in order to meet the Gate Token showing 35 players would need to gather 6 x 5 + 3 + 2. That is seven different successes at the Decoder tiles, and best case scenario has players pulling those exactly and no others. When you are playing a game that is a race against time (or death, in this instance), these little setbacks can cost the entire game – that is, if players simply cannot pass the test needed for a success at the Decoder tile. Frustrating, yes, but also a very cool addition to this style of game.
Victim has completely surprised me, and I am so thankful I had the opportunity to add this to my collection. My strong recommendation is that if you see one of these in the wild – GRAB IT. There are hours and hours of gameplay in this box, and I haven’t even touched the expansion for it yet (expect another review of that in the near future as well). Purple Phoenix Games officially gives this one a 5.5 / 6 (we NEVER do half points), but I feel like with even more plays, and with the expansion to be added soon, this may give my Top 10 list a shakeup still this year. If you are a fan of games like Betrayal at House on the Hill and Posthuman, then you need to check this one out for sure. Oh, did I mention that there is a LOT of dice rolling here too? Guess I just left that until the end for my dice-chucking lovers.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Parasite (2019) in Movies
Jan 27, 2020 (Updated Jan 27, 2020)
About twenty or so years ago, before the age of social media and all the FOMO and spoilers that comes from having such easy access to the entire movie loving world, a delayed UK release for a movie that had already been out in the US for some months wasn't such a big deal. I can remember buying an imported region 1 DVD of The Blair Witch Project and watching it on Halloween night in the UK, in the comfort of my living room and on the day it was released in the cinema. I was pretty disappointed with what I saw, but that's not my point here. Recently, we seem to be regressing to that period in time once more - not with big releases such as Marvel movies, which we are usually lucky enough to sometimes get a day or so before the US, but with films that could be described as being a little less mainstream. The Lighthouse, Jojo Rabbit, A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood and the subject of this review, Parasite, have all been subject to such treatment and, along with the delayed release of Disney+, the UK currently seems to be getting a serious shafting. Parasite though is a movie for which I've heard nothing but praise for what seems like forever now. It has received six Oscar nominations and is now receiving a US disc release before it's even released in UK cinemas! Anyway, ranting aside, I did manage to avoid any spoilers for Parasite and was able to go in fairly unclear as to what to expect, and I would urge everyone else to do the same. Consequently, I will try to review it by giving away as little as possible.
Parasite tells the story of the Kim family, living in poverty in a cluttered South Korean basement. When we join them they are all desperately trying to find a spot in their home where they can pick up on a nearby public WiFi hot spot in order to connect their phones to Whatsapp (turns out, it's in the corner of the toilet!). Times are clearly tough and when the mother manages to get a small job putting together pizza boxes at home, the whole family chips in to help. They even have the pleasure of being able to view drunk men staggering down their street and urinating right outside the basement window while they try to eat at their dining room table.
A friend of the son comes to visit him one evening and tells him that he has to go away for a while. He currently has a job teaching English to the daughter of the wealthy Park family and wonders if Ki-woo would like to temporarily take over for him. Despite Ki-woo having no experience in tutoring, Ki-woo is assured by his friend that it will be easy money and, providing he can win over the confidence of the "simple" mother of the house, he'll have no problem. Sure enough, the confident Ki-woo, backed up by a certificate created for him in Photoshop by his sister, manages to land himself a regular tutoring job. Then, with the use of charm, lies and deception, Ki-woo soon manages to secure cushy jobs within the Park household for the rest of his family - art tutor, housekeeper and chauffeur - all being introduced as either old acquaintances or referrals from colleagues rather than family members. And so, the family find themselves having to lead double lives, juggling their own poverty stricken home-life together, along with the separate lives they lead while working for the Park family as work colleagues.
And that is really the basis of the movie. It's an elaborate scheme which, despite being deceptive and dishonest, is a lot of fun to see play out, and at times you really can get behind the Kim family and root for them. Things go comically wrong, in the kind of way that reminded me of a sitcom where a situation involves our stars getting themselves deeper and deeper into something, no matter how hard they try to go along with it and come up with a solution. And then things start to go horribly, even horrifically wrong, courtesy of a number of little twists and shocks.
Don't let the fact that Parasite is a subtitled movie put you off and believe all the hype you come across, as this is a must see movie and I was gripped, on the edge of my seat and thoroughly entertained for the most part. There is a very clear message played out concerning the rich/poor divide - obvious at times, when you see the contrasting effect that a serious storm has on each family - and much subtler at other times. There are some elements though, surrounding the ending of the movie, which I didn't quite buy into and that stopped this from being a full 10 out of 10 from me. I felt there was a clear point where this could and should have ended earlier, but still an incredible movie all the same.
Parasite tells the story of the Kim family, living in poverty in a cluttered South Korean basement. When we join them they are all desperately trying to find a spot in their home where they can pick up on a nearby public WiFi hot spot in order to connect their phones to Whatsapp (turns out, it's in the corner of the toilet!). Times are clearly tough and when the mother manages to get a small job putting together pizza boxes at home, the whole family chips in to help. They even have the pleasure of being able to view drunk men staggering down their street and urinating right outside the basement window while they try to eat at their dining room table.
A friend of the son comes to visit him one evening and tells him that he has to go away for a while. He currently has a job teaching English to the daughter of the wealthy Park family and wonders if Ki-woo would like to temporarily take over for him. Despite Ki-woo having no experience in tutoring, Ki-woo is assured by his friend that it will be easy money and, providing he can win over the confidence of the "simple" mother of the house, he'll have no problem. Sure enough, the confident Ki-woo, backed up by a certificate created for him in Photoshop by his sister, manages to land himself a regular tutoring job. Then, with the use of charm, lies and deception, Ki-woo soon manages to secure cushy jobs within the Park household for the rest of his family - art tutor, housekeeper and chauffeur - all being introduced as either old acquaintances or referrals from colleagues rather than family members. And so, the family find themselves having to lead double lives, juggling their own poverty stricken home-life together, along with the separate lives they lead while working for the Park family as work colleagues.
And that is really the basis of the movie. It's an elaborate scheme which, despite being deceptive and dishonest, is a lot of fun to see play out, and at times you really can get behind the Kim family and root for them. Things go comically wrong, in the kind of way that reminded me of a sitcom where a situation involves our stars getting themselves deeper and deeper into something, no matter how hard they try to go along with it and come up with a solution. And then things start to go horribly, even horrifically wrong, courtesy of a number of little twists and shocks.
Don't let the fact that Parasite is a subtitled movie put you off and believe all the hype you come across, as this is a must see movie and I was gripped, on the edge of my seat and thoroughly entertained for the most part. There is a very clear message played out concerning the rich/poor divide - obvious at times, when you see the contrasting effect that a serious storm has on each family - and much subtler at other times. There are some elements though, surrounding the ending of the movie, which I didn't quite buy into and that stopped this from being a full 10 out of 10 from me. I felt there was a clear point where this could and should have ended earlier, but still an incredible movie all the same.
Gareth von Kallenbach (968 KP) rated The Lady In The Van (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
In the last two decades America has seen an almost literal ‘invasion’ of British film and television programming. Like the British ‘music invasion’ some 60 years ago we just can’t seem to get enough of it. Today’s film for your consideration is the 2015 British dramatic comedy ‘The Lady In The Van’. Based upon the 1999 West End play of the same name written by Alan Bennett and starring famed British actress Maggie Smith, who also portrayed the lead in the original stage production at Queens Theater in London and again in a 2009 BBC 4 radio adaption, ‘The Lady In The Van’ follows the true story of Maggie Shepherd. An elderly lady who lived in a rundown van in Bennett’s driveway for 15 years.
Directed by Nicholas Hytner, who also directed the stage play, the film stars legendary British actress Maggie Smith as Maggie Shepherd, Alex Jennings as Alan Bennett, Jim Broadbent as Underwood, Deborah Findlay as Pauline, Roger Allam as Rufus, Gwen Taylor as Mam, Cecillia Noble as Miss Brisco, Nicholas Burns as Giles Perry, Pandora Colin as Mrs Perry, and Frances de la Tour As Ursula Vaughan Williams.
‘The Lady In The Van’ follows the true story of playwright Alan Bennett’s strained and tested relationship with Miss Maggie Shepherd. An eccentric and frightened homeless woman whom he befriended in the 1970s shortly after he moved into London’s Camden neighborhood. Originally, Bennett invites Shepherd to park her aging Bedford van in his driveway so she can list it as an address in order to collect benefits and eventually move on. Instead, Shepherd ends up living in the van in Bennett’s driveway for 15 years. Just before her death in 1989, Alan learns that Maggie Shepherd is actually Margaret Fairchild. A gifted piano player who was a pupil of pianist Alfred Cortot and had a fondness for Chopin. So much so that when she tried to become a nun, she was kicked out of her religious order twice for wanting to play music. Bennett also learns that the reason Shepherd was homeless was that she was on the run for leaving the scene of a crime she didn’t commit after escaping an institution where she’d been committed by her own brother.
I found this movie to be a prime example of the concept ‘Everyone Has A Story To Tell’. Whether the person wants to tell the story or not is a whole other idea entirely. The strange friendship between Bennett and Shepherd is certainly an unusual one to be sure. While Bennett’s neighbors would be happy to see they as they describe ‘the crazy old lady leave the neighborhood, Bennett seems to follow his writer’s instincts and also his humanity. Maggie Smith’s and Alex Jennings’s performances as the oddly paired friends go far in helping to comprehend what went on between the two. Shepherd and Bennett both excelled as artists in their own way. One as a writer one as a musician. Both kinds of artists tell stories thorough their respective crafts. In this case though, the writer (Bennett) had the ‘responsibility’ of telling Shepherd’s story after debating with himself more than once whether he had the right to do so and whether it was moral or not. On top of that, it took over a decade to find the answers Bennett was looking for. In the end, it seems Bennett did what writers do. They use what’s around them in their lives to write about. And perhaps, by doing so, he helped give Shepherd some sort of closure and perhaps peace as well just before her death.
I’m going to give this film 4 out of 5 stars. The movie clocks in at 104 minutes so it is a long movie but honestly, how can you say ‘no’ to a movie with Maggie Smith? Honestly, explain that one to me. She definitely ‘carries the film’ with her performance as Miss Mary Shepherd but the combination of her performance and that of Alex Jennings as the writer Alan Bennett that really make the film. I think another one of the reasons this film was good was because you had so many of the people that were involved in the original play that worked on the film itself. I personally find some British films, comedies in particular, to be a bit quirky sometimes. As funny as British humor is its sometimes difficult to grasp at first and there’s a bit of that in this film. Don’t let that discourage you though. If you can find an awesome art house movie theater, I’d certainly recommend going to catch it there. If you can’t, watch it online.
This is your friendly neighborhood freelance photographer and movie fanatic ‘The CameraMan’ and on behalf of my fellows at Skewed & Reviewed I’d like to say ‘Thanks For Reading’ and we’ll see you at the movies.
Directed by Nicholas Hytner, who also directed the stage play, the film stars legendary British actress Maggie Smith as Maggie Shepherd, Alex Jennings as Alan Bennett, Jim Broadbent as Underwood, Deborah Findlay as Pauline, Roger Allam as Rufus, Gwen Taylor as Mam, Cecillia Noble as Miss Brisco, Nicholas Burns as Giles Perry, Pandora Colin as Mrs Perry, and Frances de la Tour As Ursula Vaughan Williams.
‘The Lady In The Van’ follows the true story of playwright Alan Bennett’s strained and tested relationship with Miss Maggie Shepherd. An eccentric and frightened homeless woman whom he befriended in the 1970s shortly after he moved into London’s Camden neighborhood. Originally, Bennett invites Shepherd to park her aging Bedford van in his driveway so she can list it as an address in order to collect benefits and eventually move on. Instead, Shepherd ends up living in the van in Bennett’s driveway for 15 years. Just before her death in 1989, Alan learns that Maggie Shepherd is actually Margaret Fairchild. A gifted piano player who was a pupil of pianist Alfred Cortot and had a fondness for Chopin. So much so that when she tried to become a nun, she was kicked out of her religious order twice for wanting to play music. Bennett also learns that the reason Shepherd was homeless was that she was on the run for leaving the scene of a crime she didn’t commit after escaping an institution where she’d been committed by her own brother.
I found this movie to be a prime example of the concept ‘Everyone Has A Story To Tell’. Whether the person wants to tell the story or not is a whole other idea entirely. The strange friendship between Bennett and Shepherd is certainly an unusual one to be sure. While Bennett’s neighbors would be happy to see they as they describe ‘the crazy old lady leave the neighborhood, Bennett seems to follow his writer’s instincts and also his humanity. Maggie Smith’s and Alex Jennings’s performances as the oddly paired friends go far in helping to comprehend what went on between the two. Shepherd and Bennett both excelled as artists in their own way. One as a writer one as a musician. Both kinds of artists tell stories thorough their respective crafts. In this case though, the writer (Bennett) had the ‘responsibility’ of telling Shepherd’s story after debating with himself more than once whether he had the right to do so and whether it was moral or not. On top of that, it took over a decade to find the answers Bennett was looking for. In the end, it seems Bennett did what writers do. They use what’s around them in their lives to write about. And perhaps, by doing so, he helped give Shepherd some sort of closure and perhaps peace as well just before her death.
I’m going to give this film 4 out of 5 stars. The movie clocks in at 104 minutes so it is a long movie but honestly, how can you say ‘no’ to a movie with Maggie Smith? Honestly, explain that one to me. She definitely ‘carries the film’ with her performance as Miss Mary Shepherd but the combination of her performance and that of Alex Jennings as the writer Alan Bennett that really make the film. I think another one of the reasons this film was good was because you had so many of the people that were involved in the original play that worked on the film itself. I personally find some British films, comedies in particular, to be a bit quirky sometimes. As funny as British humor is its sometimes difficult to grasp at first and there’s a bit of that in this film. Don’t let that discourage you though. If you can find an awesome art house movie theater, I’d certainly recommend going to catch it there. If you can’t, watch it online.
This is your friendly neighborhood freelance photographer and movie fanatic ‘The CameraMan’ and on behalf of my fellows at Skewed & Reviewed I’d like to say ‘Thanks For Reading’ and we’ll see you at the movies.
Marc Riley recommended Hex Enduction Hour by The Fall in Music (curated)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“Anger Begets Greater Anger”.
What is it? A black-comedy drama. But my fear would be that with such an ‘art-house’ title, it’s going to put a lot of people off… (“I saw ‘Paint Drying in Jackson, Mississippi‘, and that was dull”!). But it really really shouldn’t. FOR THIS IS A GEM OF A MOVIE… and so, so entertaining that two hours just sped by.
Frances McDormand (“Hail Caesar“, “Fargo”) plays a mother – Mildred Hayes – in pain. Her daughter Angela (Kathryn Newton) has been raped, set alight and murdered (so clearly LOL territory!) After ten months and no culprit arrested, she takes things into her own hands by renting the three billboards in question and posting a message to the local police chief, Willoughby (Woody Harrelson, “War for the Planet of the Apes“).
But the popular Chief Willoughby has his own problems, setting many in the town on a collision course with the feisty Mildred as tempers flare. Stoking the flames is the racist, unstable and unpredictable Officer Jason Dixon (Sam Rockwell, “Moon”). The billboard advertiser Red Welby (Caleb Landry Jones, “Get Out“) is uncomfortably caught in the middle of the battle.
In terms of the story, nothing in this film goes in the direction you expect. Willoughby’s reaction to the crisis is extraordinary… in a good way. Dixon’s reaction is also extraordinary for different reasons! Red herrings are scattered throughout the script to further set you off balance.
The film reminded me greatly of “Manchester By The Sea“, and not just because Lucas Hedges (as Mildred’s grieving and uncomfortable son) is again playing a very similar role. There is gut-wrenching drama, but diffused in the blink-of-an-eye by laugh-out-loud dialogue. Whereas “Manchester” could perhaps be described as a drama with black comedy, “Three Billboards” is probably better described as a black comedy with drama. But the comedy is dark, oh, so very dark! Some of the lines are so outrageous (both in terms of language used – very extreme – and the racial/homophobic nature of it) that you are sometimes uncertain whether you should be laughing at all. But it’s been brilliantly balanced and orchestrated.
As I commented in “Battle of the Sexes” the Screen Actors Guild Award for “Best Ensemble Cast” is one of my favourite categories of award, and I thought that film should have been nominated (it wasn’t)! But the ensemble cast in “Three Billboards” is another great example, and this one IS nominated! (Hoorah!)
For this whole town just LIVES AND BREATHES, thanks to the combined efforts of the cast: as well as the lead names, the cast includes Peter Dinklage (“Game of Thrones”) as a diminutive used car salesman; Caleb Landry Jones as Red Welby; Zeljko Ivanek as the police desk sergeant; Amanda Warren (“mother!“) as Mildred’s put-upon co-worker and (particularly) Sandy Martin as Dixon’s wizened and cranky old mother. All are fed with great lines and scenes to bring the story alive.
At the helm is writer/director (and London-born!) Martin McDonagh (“In Bruges”, “Seven Psychopaths”) and he delivers genius. I recently cruelly made fun of the writers of the awful “Pitch Perfect 3” for not coming up with any sort of viable plot. Here I am at the other extreme, in awe of how someone can sit down with a blank piece of paper and come out with this story, these characters and this dialogue. It would be foolish so early in the season to predict the Oscars, but here must be a great candidate for Original Screenplay.
Elsewhere I would see Frances McDormand and Woody Harrelson both as Oscar nominees for Best Actress/Actor and Sam Rockwell is surely a shoe-in for a Best Supporting Actor nomination for this…. I wonder what odds I can get for a win? Jason Dixon (is this perhaps a pun because he always keeps crossing “the line”?!) will I think be one of the most memorable characters for me in the cinema this year: a character you can despise, pity and even strangely admire at stages throughout the two hours. Something that Rockwell balances with consummate skill.
In terms of my one criticism, the script (in my opinion) rather over-eggs the pudding in the last ten minutes, stepping over into actions I didn’t find realistic. It was a nice ending when it came, but not one I felt invested in. So I’m going to put my (rarely used) ‘5-Fad’ back in my pocket, and instead rate this one just a tad lower. But regardless of that, ignore the title and GO AND SEE THIS ONE!
(Just a final note for those severely affected by the subject matter: while there is some significant violence in the film, the rape is not shown – i.e. there are no “flashback” scenes, apart from some – very brief – corpse photos in a folder Willoughby looks through).
Frances McDormand (“Hail Caesar“, “Fargo”) plays a mother – Mildred Hayes – in pain. Her daughter Angela (Kathryn Newton) has been raped, set alight and murdered (so clearly LOL territory!) After ten months and no culprit arrested, she takes things into her own hands by renting the three billboards in question and posting a message to the local police chief, Willoughby (Woody Harrelson, “War for the Planet of the Apes“).
But the popular Chief Willoughby has his own problems, setting many in the town on a collision course with the feisty Mildred as tempers flare. Stoking the flames is the racist, unstable and unpredictable Officer Jason Dixon (Sam Rockwell, “Moon”). The billboard advertiser Red Welby (Caleb Landry Jones, “Get Out“) is uncomfortably caught in the middle of the battle.
In terms of the story, nothing in this film goes in the direction you expect. Willoughby’s reaction to the crisis is extraordinary… in a good way. Dixon’s reaction is also extraordinary for different reasons! Red herrings are scattered throughout the script to further set you off balance.
The film reminded me greatly of “Manchester By The Sea“, and not just because Lucas Hedges (as Mildred’s grieving and uncomfortable son) is again playing a very similar role. There is gut-wrenching drama, but diffused in the blink-of-an-eye by laugh-out-loud dialogue. Whereas “Manchester” could perhaps be described as a drama with black comedy, “Three Billboards” is probably better described as a black comedy with drama. But the comedy is dark, oh, so very dark! Some of the lines are so outrageous (both in terms of language used – very extreme – and the racial/homophobic nature of it) that you are sometimes uncertain whether you should be laughing at all. But it’s been brilliantly balanced and orchestrated.
As I commented in “Battle of the Sexes” the Screen Actors Guild Award for “Best Ensemble Cast” is one of my favourite categories of award, and I thought that film should have been nominated (it wasn’t)! But the ensemble cast in “Three Billboards” is another great example, and this one IS nominated! (Hoorah!)
For this whole town just LIVES AND BREATHES, thanks to the combined efforts of the cast: as well as the lead names, the cast includes Peter Dinklage (“Game of Thrones”) as a diminutive used car salesman; Caleb Landry Jones as Red Welby; Zeljko Ivanek as the police desk sergeant; Amanda Warren (“mother!“) as Mildred’s put-upon co-worker and (particularly) Sandy Martin as Dixon’s wizened and cranky old mother. All are fed with great lines and scenes to bring the story alive.
At the helm is writer/director (and London-born!) Martin McDonagh (“In Bruges”, “Seven Psychopaths”) and he delivers genius. I recently cruelly made fun of the writers of the awful “Pitch Perfect 3” for not coming up with any sort of viable plot. Here I am at the other extreme, in awe of how someone can sit down with a blank piece of paper and come out with this story, these characters and this dialogue. It would be foolish so early in the season to predict the Oscars, but here must be a great candidate for Original Screenplay.
Elsewhere I would see Frances McDormand and Woody Harrelson both as Oscar nominees for Best Actress/Actor and Sam Rockwell is surely a shoe-in for a Best Supporting Actor nomination for this…. I wonder what odds I can get for a win? Jason Dixon (is this perhaps a pun because he always keeps crossing “the line”?!) will I think be one of the most memorable characters for me in the cinema this year: a character you can despise, pity and even strangely admire at stages throughout the two hours. Something that Rockwell balances with consummate skill.
In terms of my one criticism, the script (in my opinion) rather over-eggs the pudding in the last ten minutes, stepping over into actions I didn’t find realistic. It was a nice ending when it came, but not one I felt invested in. So I’m going to put my (rarely used) ‘5-Fad’ back in my pocket, and instead rate this one just a tad lower. But regardless of that, ignore the title and GO AND SEE THIS ONE!
(Just a final note for those severely affected by the subject matter: while there is some significant violence in the film, the rape is not shown – i.e. there are no “flashback” scenes, apart from some – very brief – corpse photos in a folder Willoughby looks through).