Search
Search results
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Gender Outlaw: On Men, Women and the Rest of Us in Books
Jul 23, 2019
This book has one of the best forewords I've ever seen. Bornstein explains that since 1994, when the book was first published, language has changed a lot, and terms that were used regularly then, like transsexual, are highly offensive now. So she has heavily rewritten the book to change the language, but she goes on to say that language is an always-changing thing, and in five or six years this edition, too, might be offensive in the language used. Then she apologizes for that. My favorite lines are one of the last paragraphs of the foreword:
"Now, if anything you read in this book makes you feel bad or wrong or small and weak, then please know that I said something wrong. This book was written many years ago, and the culture I wrote it in is not the culture in which you're reading it. So, if you find anything to be personally insulting, please accept my apology and keep reading with the knowledge that your identity and how you express your gender are correct only when you feel they are correct."
It was a wonderful note to start the book on. I just loved "if you are offended, if this invalidates your identity, then I AM WRONG." Bornstein transitioned in the 80s, and has been an outspoken advocate of queer and trans people most of her life. She is definitely a figure in queer history that more people should read about.
The rest of the book is every bit as good as the foreword. Bornstein absolutely destroys the concept of gender in this book, dissecting it and looking at all the parts and pieces to attempt to figure out why society is so set on the binary system. She more than makes her case that gender is a spectrum, not an either/or. And not just a spectrum between "more male" and "more female" but a colorful kaleidoscope of gender expression and identity. She does not shy away from sensitive topics like surgeries and anatomy. She talks to the reader like she's your favorite outrageous aunt, sitting in the family room gossiping over heavily-spiked tea.
The formatting was occasionally confusing; she has the usual justified text, but then she has left-aligned passages (usually quotes from other people) and right-aligned passages (side-bar like content; I'm unclear if these are notes she made on the original text or what, but it generally clarifies or alters what the main text is talking about.)
I would HIGHLY recommend this book for anyone who wants to learn more about gender issues. Bornstein has an incredibly entertaining way of writing, and she loves to challenge what we think of as gender.
You can find all my reviews and more at http://goddessinthestacks.com
"Now, if anything you read in this book makes you feel bad or wrong or small and weak, then please know that I said something wrong. This book was written many years ago, and the culture I wrote it in is not the culture in which you're reading it. So, if you find anything to be personally insulting, please accept my apology and keep reading with the knowledge that your identity and how you express your gender are correct only when you feel they are correct."
It was a wonderful note to start the book on. I just loved "if you are offended, if this invalidates your identity, then I AM WRONG." Bornstein transitioned in the 80s, and has been an outspoken advocate of queer and trans people most of her life. She is definitely a figure in queer history that more people should read about.
The rest of the book is every bit as good as the foreword. Bornstein absolutely destroys the concept of gender in this book, dissecting it and looking at all the parts and pieces to attempt to figure out why society is so set on the binary system. She more than makes her case that gender is a spectrum, not an either/or. And not just a spectrum between "more male" and "more female" but a colorful kaleidoscope of gender expression and identity. She does not shy away from sensitive topics like surgeries and anatomy. She talks to the reader like she's your favorite outrageous aunt, sitting in the family room gossiping over heavily-spiked tea.
The formatting was occasionally confusing; she has the usual justified text, but then she has left-aligned passages (usually quotes from other people) and right-aligned passages (side-bar like content; I'm unclear if these are notes she made on the original text or what, but it generally clarifies or alters what the main text is talking about.)
I would HIGHLY recommend this book for anyone who wants to learn more about gender issues. Bornstein has an incredibly entertaining way of writing, and she loves to challenge what we think of as gender.
You can find all my reviews and more at http://goddessinthestacks.com
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Color Out of Space (2019) in Movies
Feb 8, 2020
You had me at Nicolas Cage.
The Gardners are settling into the secluded family home nicely, no city hustle and bustle to bother them. That peaceful life is shattered when a curious meteorite crashes into their garden. Far from a normal bit of space debris, the rock seems to be changing everything around it. It's taking over, the plants, pace and time, even the family themselves.
Briefly hearing Richard Stanley before this screening made me feel this adaptation of Lovecraft's work of the same name was in good hands, he clearly has an appreciation for what he's was working on and the imagery he creates makes for incredible viewing.
So, straight to Nic Cage... he doesn't quite go full Cage, but he's pretty close. It's the usual insanity we've all come to love.
This film is a little crazy on many levels, the family as a whole are very off before we even get to the magical meteorite. Each member seemingly has their own little corner of crazy town mapped out, and yet when you look at them as a whole you'd wouldn't put them in the same family.
As the film progresses and things get even more bizarre the family feel even less connected than at the beginning. The alien influence is pushing them further apart, but on top of that the script falls away in the middle and chaotic devolving of sanity replaces it. Each member of the family has their own experience with the meteorite, apart from chaos and the underlying cause none of it feels connected.
To say it plainly, there's some really messed up stuff. I would love to see how some of it was achieved because if Richardson is doing half the things it appears she is then she deserves some kind of award. I've got the short story to read so I can compare the two because honestly I can't visualise the written version of this story.
The creatures that evolve are made to be terrifying, and they do scare, but the comedy moments that come through from the performances (mostly unintentionally I guess) detract from it being all that shocking.
Our meteorite has a great influence over the sets for most of the movie, the colours and the growth are used to good effect. The progression is clear and well balanced, it might not always look realistic but the fact that that's the point helps.
When you look at Color Out Of Space as a whole it's all over the place, interesting but ambling, understandable and confusing. Despite that, it's an experience that I enjoyed having.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/02/color-out-of-space-movie-review.html
The Gardners are settling into the secluded family home nicely, no city hustle and bustle to bother them. That peaceful life is shattered when a curious meteorite crashes into their garden. Far from a normal bit of space debris, the rock seems to be changing everything around it. It's taking over, the plants, pace and time, even the family themselves.
Briefly hearing Richard Stanley before this screening made me feel this adaptation of Lovecraft's work of the same name was in good hands, he clearly has an appreciation for what he's was working on and the imagery he creates makes for incredible viewing.
So, straight to Nic Cage... he doesn't quite go full Cage, but he's pretty close. It's the usual insanity we've all come to love.
This film is a little crazy on many levels, the family as a whole are very off before we even get to the magical meteorite. Each member seemingly has their own little corner of crazy town mapped out, and yet when you look at them as a whole you'd wouldn't put them in the same family.
As the film progresses and things get even more bizarre the family feel even less connected than at the beginning. The alien influence is pushing them further apart, but on top of that the script falls away in the middle and chaotic devolving of sanity replaces it. Each member of the family has their own experience with the meteorite, apart from chaos and the underlying cause none of it feels connected.
To say it plainly, there's some really messed up stuff. I would love to see how some of it was achieved because if Richardson is doing half the things it appears she is then she deserves some kind of award. I've got the short story to read so I can compare the two because honestly I can't visualise the written version of this story.
The creatures that evolve are made to be terrifying, and they do scare, but the comedy moments that come through from the performances (mostly unintentionally I guess) detract from it being all that shocking.
Our meteorite has a great influence over the sets for most of the movie, the colours and the growth are used to good effect. The progression is clear and well balanced, it might not always look realistic but the fact that that's the point helps.
When you look at Color Out Of Space as a whole it's all over the place, interesting but ambling, understandable and confusing. Despite that, it's an experience that I enjoyed having.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/02/color-out-of-space-movie-review.html
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Guncle in Books
Jul 22, 2021
A beautiful, funny, and sweet story of finding hope after loss
Patrick and Sara were best friends in college. Then she married his brother, had two kids, and life went on. Until Sara dies, leaving Patrick's niece and nephew motherless. Patrick has always adored Maisie and Grant--for small time periods. But when his brother Greg asks Patrick, aka "Gay Uncle Patrick," or "GUP," to take the kids for a bit, he's faced with a dilemma. It's time to actually step up. So GUP and the kids head to Patrick's house in Palm Springs, where Patrick leads the life of a very single (and gay) slightly faded actor. Once there, he institutes the "Guncle Rules" and they set out trying to survive. But as Patrick bumbles his way through parenting and trying to help his little charges heal, he realizes they may be helping them more than he could have ever imagined.
"He promised when they'd met that he would never let her go. And then life intervened. She went north and married his brother. He went west and found fame on TV. And slowly, over time, he did. Let go."
Oh this book. I'm not sure a book has ever made me cry so many times, yet I loved it so much. It's often sad but also incredibly funny and heartwarming. Rowley does something special here, capturing Patrick, Maisie, and Grant so beautifully and authentically. This is a lovely story about family and coming together after loss.
There's not much I can say to do this wonderful book justice. The Guncle is made up of a million little moments--obviously Maisie and Grant are hurting, but you learn Patrick is as well. Who needs who more? Patrick is bitingly caustic, and he talks to the kids as if they are tiny adults. But the warmth and love that comes across in his humor--that he uses as his shield--is so clear. The book is a quiet and beautiful journey of all three characters learning to live again, and it's so well-done. It's such a tender and honest story. And the acceptance that comes across here--oh, it just warmed my heart. (A scene where Maisie didn't want to wear her bathing suit, and Patrick didn't force her, but let her wear a t-shirt instead, promising to buy her a rash guard--well it brought tears to my eyes.)
I promise if you give this sweet book a try, you will love it. I love Patrick, Maisie, and Grant. I adored the welcoming message of the book. It's a sad premise, but a hopeful book. 4.5+ stars.
"He promised when they'd met that he would never let her go. And then life intervened. She went north and married his brother. He went west and found fame on TV. And slowly, over time, he did. Let go."
Oh this book. I'm not sure a book has ever made me cry so many times, yet I loved it so much. It's often sad but also incredibly funny and heartwarming. Rowley does something special here, capturing Patrick, Maisie, and Grant so beautifully and authentically. This is a lovely story about family and coming together after loss.
There's not much I can say to do this wonderful book justice. The Guncle is made up of a million little moments--obviously Maisie and Grant are hurting, but you learn Patrick is as well. Who needs who more? Patrick is bitingly caustic, and he talks to the kids as if they are tiny adults. But the warmth and love that comes across in his humor--that he uses as his shield--is so clear. The book is a quiet and beautiful journey of all three characters learning to live again, and it's so well-done. It's such a tender and honest story. And the acceptance that comes across here--oh, it just warmed my heart. (A scene where Maisie didn't want to wear her bathing suit, and Patrick didn't force her, but let her wear a t-shirt instead, promising to buy her a rash guard--well it brought tears to my eyes.)
I promise if you give this sweet book a try, you will love it. I love Patrick, Maisie, and Grant. I adored the welcoming message of the book. It's a sad premise, but a hopeful book. 4.5+ stars.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Mandy (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
Red Miller (Nicholas Cage) is sent on a rampaging quest for vengeance when an evil cult abducts and kill his partner, Mandy Bloom.
The story is simple, Mandy and Red live alone in a forest. By chance Mandy is spotted by a cult leader who decided that he wants her to join him. Things don’t go to plan and Mandy ends up dead and Red starts on a quest for revenge. Simple and familiar, it’s not an uncommon plot, however Mandy is part film, part drug filled dream with snippets of animation thrown in, overlaid with a psychedelic, prog rock soundtrack. It has drugs, cults, demonic, slipknot esc bikers, (male) nudity, chainsaws and crossbows, religious parables and Jesus parallels. There is a metaphorical decent to hell and there is Nicholas Cage. All this is shot with constantly changing, coloured filters and distorted voices.
You can probably tell that Mandy isn’t for everyone, at times the film feels like an Italian horror, something like Suspiria or Deep Red and other time it seems like someone has brought a 70’s or 80’s rock/metal album cover to life. Throw in some animation that would be at home in ‘Heavy Metal’ Magazine, turn the crazy dial up to 11 and let Nicolas Cage (slowly) off the sanity leash and you have Mandy.
There are plot point that are not explained, for example Red suddenly has a friend who has a cross bow stored away for him and Red suddenly has a forge and knows how to use it. Is Mandy some kind of witch and, of course, is Red dead at the end.
I would say that there are some crazy scenes but the whole film is crazy but it does lead to some great scene’s like a chainsaw duel.
As I said, Mandy isn’t for everyone, it has a simple plot that has been turned in to a surreal nightmare so if you don’t like weird don’t watch this.
Mandy is also slow to get started as it builds up the atmosphere. I think that, if the film kept the atmosphere it starts with it could have been a similar tone to something like Midsommar however by the halfway point it has past that and, by the end the film just takes a head dive down the rabbit hole (almost literally).
Given all that I found it hard to rate, it has the feel of a 70’s horror and an 80’s grindhouse, some of the filters make it hard to understand some of the lines and the colour filters were disturbing and distracting although most of this was on purpose but over all I did enjoy it.
The story is simple, Mandy and Red live alone in a forest. By chance Mandy is spotted by a cult leader who decided that he wants her to join him. Things don’t go to plan and Mandy ends up dead and Red starts on a quest for revenge. Simple and familiar, it’s not an uncommon plot, however Mandy is part film, part drug filled dream with snippets of animation thrown in, overlaid with a psychedelic, prog rock soundtrack. It has drugs, cults, demonic, slipknot esc bikers, (male) nudity, chainsaws and crossbows, religious parables and Jesus parallels. There is a metaphorical decent to hell and there is Nicholas Cage. All this is shot with constantly changing, coloured filters and distorted voices.
You can probably tell that Mandy isn’t for everyone, at times the film feels like an Italian horror, something like Suspiria or Deep Red and other time it seems like someone has brought a 70’s or 80’s rock/metal album cover to life. Throw in some animation that would be at home in ‘Heavy Metal’ Magazine, turn the crazy dial up to 11 and let Nicolas Cage (slowly) off the sanity leash and you have Mandy.
There are plot point that are not explained, for example Red suddenly has a friend who has a cross bow stored away for him and Red suddenly has a forge and knows how to use it. Is Mandy some kind of witch and, of course, is Red dead at the end.
I would say that there are some crazy scenes but the whole film is crazy but it does lead to some great scene’s like a chainsaw duel.
As I said, Mandy isn’t for everyone, it has a simple plot that has been turned in to a surreal nightmare so if you don’t like weird don’t watch this.
Mandy is also slow to get started as it builds up the atmosphere. I think that, if the film kept the atmosphere it starts with it could have been a similar tone to something like Midsommar however by the halfway point it has past that and, by the end the film just takes a head dive down the rabbit hole (almost literally).
Given all that I found it hard to rate, it has the feel of a 70’s horror and an 80’s grindhouse, some of the filters make it hard to understand some of the lines and the colour filters were disturbing and distracting although most of this was on purpose but over all I did enjoy it.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Cooties (2015) in Movies
Aug 14, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
First off a warning, Cooties is a Zombie film where the zombies are children so, if you don't like violence against children than this really isn't the film for you.
Clint (Elijah Wood) moves back to his home town to work on his book and takes a job as a substitute teacher at his old school. On his first day a virus breaks out that turns all the children into zombies. Clint and the other teachers fight to escaper the school and find out what is happening.
Cooties is quite a self aware film, in one of the first scenes Clint askes his mother what she thought of his book and she tells him that the the characters are unlikable, the plot makes no sense and it's boring, the first one of those is true, most of the characters are unlikable, at least at the start of the film. The pre-zombie children are brats and the teachers range from meek to bullies. Making the children unlikable is necessary because of what happens later.
Some of the teachers do undergo character growth, as I said they start off unlikable but a few of them become more likeable as we find out what made them become teachers and how they react to the situation.
Saying that though, Cooties is not an overly cleaver film, it's a zombie film that uses horror tropes; people are trapped in small rooms, there are air vents, people get eaten and, despite how it starts there is no big message to the film. I say despite how it starts because I did think that it was going to be a big 'Anti Meat' film but any sigh of that is forgotten very soon and, apart from a slight pro-teacher message the film soon becomes another zombie flick, it doesn't even have the usual political undertones like the night of the living dead film.
Over all Cooties is generally a good zombie film but I think it will lose a big chunk of it's audience because it becomes quite violent as the teaches have to fight the children to get out.
Don't expect anything great, Cooties is just another zombie film with a gimmick that some will find distasteful but, if you like your zombie films with a bit of humour and mindless action and you can look past the fact the zombies are children then give Cooties a go.
One last thing, I did find myself asking, if the air vent is big enough to fit to small adults side by side then it must have been big enough for a large man so any one could have gone on the mission.
Clint (Elijah Wood) moves back to his home town to work on his book and takes a job as a substitute teacher at his old school. On his first day a virus breaks out that turns all the children into zombies. Clint and the other teachers fight to escaper the school and find out what is happening.
Cooties is quite a self aware film, in one of the first scenes Clint askes his mother what she thought of his book and she tells him that the the characters are unlikable, the plot makes no sense and it's boring, the first one of those is true, most of the characters are unlikable, at least at the start of the film. The pre-zombie children are brats and the teachers range from meek to bullies. Making the children unlikable is necessary because of what happens later.
Some of the teachers do undergo character growth, as I said they start off unlikable but a few of them become more likeable as we find out what made them become teachers and how they react to the situation.
Saying that though, Cooties is not an overly cleaver film, it's a zombie film that uses horror tropes; people are trapped in small rooms, there are air vents, people get eaten and, despite how it starts there is no big message to the film. I say despite how it starts because I did think that it was going to be a big 'Anti Meat' film but any sigh of that is forgotten very soon and, apart from a slight pro-teacher message the film soon becomes another zombie flick, it doesn't even have the usual political undertones like the night of the living dead film.
Over all Cooties is generally a good zombie film but I think it will lose a big chunk of it's audience because it becomes quite violent as the teaches have to fight the children to get out.
Don't expect anything great, Cooties is just another zombie film with a gimmick that some will find distasteful but, if you like your zombie films with a bit of humour and mindless action and you can look past the fact the zombies are children then give Cooties a go.
One last thing, I did find myself asking, if the air vent is big enough to fit to small adults side by side then it must have been big enough for a large man so any one could have gone on the mission.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Tetris: The Card Game in Tabletop Games
Jul 2, 2020
One of the first video games I can remember playing is Tetris. The colorful Tetrominoes, the catchy theme music, the excitement (and anxiety!) as the speed gradually increases – what isn’t there to love? Tetris is an addicting game that has withstood the test of time, so I was extremely excited when I was gifted Tetris: The Card Game. Does the card version have a foothold in the Tetris fandom? Or does it fail to complete any rows in the matrix? (Haha, see what I did there?)
Tetris: The Card Game is a game of hand management and pattern recognition in which players are racing to be the first to earn 10 points. Setup is simple – shuffle the entire deck of cards, and deal 10 to each player. The cards are double-sided, with one side depicting a Tetris Matrix, and the other depicting a specific Tetromino. Arrange your cards in a 2×5 grid, with the Tetromino side facing up. This grid will act as your personal scoring track. Place the remaining cards, Matrix-side up, in a draw deck in the center of the table. Deal 1 additional card to each player, to go in hand, and the game is ready to begin! You will be using your hand of cards, Tetromino side, to complete the Matrix side of the top card of the draw deck.
A round of play is pretty straight-forward: draw one card, play one card. At the start of your turn, draw the top card from the draw deck. This will reveal a new Matrix on the next card of the draw pile. Choose one of your two cards in hand to complete at least 1 row in the revealed Matrix. Play the card, showing your opponents how it would fit into the Matrix, and score points. You score 1 point per row completed, so if your piece completes 2 rows, you would score 2 points. To track your points, you flip over cards in your 2×5 grid to their Matrix sides, to represent your scored points. If on your turn, you are unable to complete a Matrix line with either of your cards in hand, you must discard one card, and are also penalized by having to forfeit one of your earned points, flipping that card back to its Tetromino side. There are also a handful of Special cards that can be used to manipulate play, whether Reversing the play direction, or forcing a player to lose a point, and that adds a new little twist to the game. The game ends when one player has scored all 10 points and is declared the winner!
Probably the best things about Tetris: The Card Game, is that it is so simple to learn and play. The simplicity brings back the nostalgia of the original game to the extreme. It’s a super light game that can be used as a filler/palate cleanser between bigger games, or just as a game to toss on the table when you’ve got 5 free minutes. Another added bonus of its simplicity is that it is pretty friendly for younger/newer gamers. Looking to get your young’uns into the hobby, or just spreading some happiness with friends and colleagues? This is a good introductory game that is light-hearted, although not a complete brain burner.
Now, on the flip side, there are some drawbacks to this game. The first and biggest being that it is entirely based upon the luck of the draw. There is pretty much no strategy involved, because you are at the mercy of the draw deck. You really can’t set up a game strategy that can be adapted throughout a play because the game is so dependent upon luck. Depending on the current Matrix in play, certain Tetrominos could not be used at all to complete a row, so you end up having to burn a turn (and losing a point) to discard a card. And then you have to hope for the best next turn. Another drawback of this version of Tetris is the hand limit of 2 cards. That severely limits your options each turn, and can turn the game from light-hearted to frustrating because of a lack of choices. This hand limit also limits any strategic options. Certain Matrices can only be completed by certain Tetrominos, so unless you have those in hand, you’re stuck wasting a turn. The Special cards included in the game add a twist to the gameplay, but are a little too ‘take that’ for my taste. But without them, there is no player interaction at all. So it’s kind of a lose-lose situation for me in that regard.
Ultimately, I would say that the OG Tetris is still king. This game attempts to encompass the atmosphere and enjoyability of the video game, but it just falls flat for me. It is too dependent upon luck, and doesn’t offer enough strategic choices for players, so it ends up feeling bland and unengaging. Am I happy with this game? Honestly, no. But playing this with the right group of people could still result in some entertainment and good times. If luck-based games are your thing, then definitely consider this game. But if not, let OG Tetris be your go-to game to fulfill your tile-dropping, row-completing urges. Purple Phoenix Games gives Tetris: The Card Game a blocky 4 / 12.
Tetris: The Card Game is a game of hand management and pattern recognition in which players are racing to be the first to earn 10 points. Setup is simple – shuffle the entire deck of cards, and deal 10 to each player. The cards are double-sided, with one side depicting a Tetris Matrix, and the other depicting a specific Tetromino. Arrange your cards in a 2×5 grid, with the Tetromino side facing up. This grid will act as your personal scoring track. Place the remaining cards, Matrix-side up, in a draw deck in the center of the table. Deal 1 additional card to each player, to go in hand, and the game is ready to begin! You will be using your hand of cards, Tetromino side, to complete the Matrix side of the top card of the draw deck.
A round of play is pretty straight-forward: draw one card, play one card. At the start of your turn, draw the top card from the draw deck. This will reveal a new Matrix on the next card of the draw pile. Choose one of your two cards in hand to complete at least 1 row in the revealed Matrix. Play the card, showing your opponents how it would fit into the Matrix, and score points. You score 1 point per row completed, so if your piece completes 2 rows, you would score 2 points. To track your points, you flip over cards in your 2×5 grid to their Matrix sides, to represent your scored points. If on your turn, you are unable to complete a Matrix line with either of your cards in hand, you must discard one card, and are also penalized by having to forfeit one of your earned points, flipping that card back to its Tetromino side. There are also a handful of Special cards that can be used to manipulate play, whether Reversing the play direction, or forcing a player to lose a point, and that adds a new little twist to the game. The game ends when one player has scored all 10 points and is declared the winner!
Probably the best things about Tetris: The Card Game, is that it is so simple to learn and play. The simplicity brings back the nostalgia of the original game to the extreme. It’s a super light game that can be used as a filler/palate cleanser between bigger games, or just as a game to toss on the table when you’ve got 5 free minutes. Another added bonus of its simplicity is that it is pretty friendly for younger/newer gamers. Looking to get your young’uns into the hobby, or just spreading some happiness with friends and colleagues? This is a good introductory game that is light-hearted, although not a complete brain burner.
Now, on the flip side, there are some drawbacks to this game. The first and biggest being that it is entirely based upon the luck of the draw. There is pretty much no strategy involved, because you are at the mercy of the draw deck. You really can’t set up a game strategy that can be adapted throughout a play because the game is so dependent upon luck. Depending on the current Matrix in play, certain Tetrominos could not be used at all to complete a row, so you end up having to burn a turn (and losing a point) to discard a card. And then you have to hope for the best next turn. Another drawback of this version of Tetris is the hand limit of 2 cards. That severely limits your options each turn, and can turn the game from light-hearted to frustrating because of a lack of choices. This hand limit also limits any strategic options. Certain Matrices can only be completed by certain Tetrominos, so unless you have those in hand, you’re stuck wasting a turn. The Special cards included in the game add a twist to the gameplay, but are a little too ‘take that’ for my taste. But without them, there is no player interaction at all. So it’s kind of a lose-lose situation for me in that regard.
Ultimately, I would say that the OG Tetris is still king. This game attempts to encompass the atmosphere and enjoyability of the video game, but it just falls flat for me. It is too dependent upon luck, and doesn’t offer enough strategic choices for players, so it ends up feeling bland and unengaging. Am I happy with this game? Honestly, no. But playing this with the right group of people could still result in some entertainment and good times. If luck-based games are your thing, then definitely consider this game. But if not, let OG Tetris be your go-to game to fulfill your tile-dropping, row-completing urges. Purple Phoenix Games gives Tetris: The Card Game a blocky 4 / 12.
Hadley (567 KP) rated Gods Go Begging in Books
May 8, 2021
Amazing writing (2 more)
Great storytelling
Good characters
Not many books can visit the Vietnam war so gracefully, especially fictional books that aren't political thrillers. Of course, there's a reason for that, other than drug use and the orders to kill innocent civilians, it was a war that drove soldiers to madness, but this is only the tip of the iceberg in Alfredo Vea's third novel Gods Go Begging.
Mai and Persephone are as close as sisters, one was born in America, and the other was born in Vietnam; the two met because their husbands had fought in the Vietnam war, but had never returned, sealing an unbreakable bond between the two women. While the two spent most of their time cooking together, they decided to open up a luncheonette, and share their love of food with the city - - - until one night, when two young men showed up to smash their dreams by murdering both of them in cold blood. Little did the defense attorney for one of the young men, Jesse Pasadoble, know that these women would not only leave a scar on him, but they would also cause memories from a hill in Vietnam to haunt him all over again.
While Pasadoble is working the two women's murder case, he's also working another heart-wrenching case involving a white supremacist who has possibly molested and raped his own niece. Pasadoble tries his best to distance himself from the case, especially because he has to defend the man in question, but sometimes he lets his temper get the best of him. Pasadoble comes face-to-face with his client in an angry stare-off. After putting up with racial statements from the client, Pasadoble puts him in his place. The client may be a big man who can frighten most people, but Pasadoble pacifies him with his own anger, threatening to kick his ass in front of everyone that is in the jail setting the tone of what type of person Pasadoble can be for the reader.
The readers get flashbacks of Pasadoble's time in the Vietnam war, specifically one fight that happened on a hill near the Loatian border. These flashbacks happen suddenly throughout the book, but I personally believe that they are so important to understanding the world in which Vea has created in the novel because, near the end of the book, these flashbacks make everything come full circle. One of these flashbacks introduces an important character who is the Padre in Pasadoble's platoon - - - during such flashback, the Padre has devastating things happen around him that begin to make him question his faith in God.
Although the flashbacks happen here and there, the story easily continues on with Pasadoble's double homicide case getting more complicated by the page when the second of the two suspects is suddenly found dead on a hill that the locals call 'Tourette's Hill.' One such local that lived near the hill is one of the victims' mothers, Mrs. Harp, who is a very odd character: she's an aging beauty queen whose home is covered in photographs of only her, and none of her deceased son, and even while Pasadoble questions her about her son, she seems to get lost in a reverie of what her life was like before the son existed.
Pasadoble is the key character in this story; without him, connections would not have been made and characters would not have mattered. Pasadoble, a man who has a way with words, such as speaking with an ex-girlfriend about a 'hill' : "Carolina, think about the stratifications of an open hillside, a place where earth has given way and time itself is left exposed, layer upon layer - - - silica, clay, diatoms, and ash. Down here at this level is the time of the swelling sea; here, the time of the desert when hot, rising air would have haunted our eyes; here is a jagged karst, a time when the world shook an abrasion into its own skin; and here are the fossil dead, here you will find love and war in the same shamble of strewn bone. Here and there, where the world has shifted and cracked open, one era will touch another. And once upon the rarest time, human hands and eyes from the distant past can seek out and find... search for and contact... hands and eyes of the present time... our time. " Pasadoble reveals that everyone has a 'hill' that they constantly battle, his just happens to be the one where he lost brothers on in Vietnam.
I can't go much further into the story without giving away some of the great details that made up this book, but I can say I was blown away by this story. This is by far one of the best crime fiction books I have ever read; this is one of those crazy good books that you have never heard of that will change how you view things after you read it. Vea is one of the few authors that exist today that can make a story read like poetry. I highly recommend this novel to people who like crime fiction.
Mai and Persephone are as close as sisters, one was born in America, and the other was born in Vietnam; the two met because their husbands had fought in the Vietnam war, but had never returned, sealing an unbreakable bond between the two women. While the two spent most of their time cooking together, they decided to open up a luncheonette, and share their love of food with the city - - - until one night, when two young men showed up to smash their dreams by murdering both of them in cold blood. Little did the defense attorney for one of the young men, Jesse Pasadoble, know that these women would not only leave a scar on him, but they would also cause memories from a hill in Vietnam to haunt him all over again.
While Pasadoble is working the two women's murder case, he's also working another heart-wrenching case involving a white supremacist who has possibly molested and raped his own niece. Pasadoble tries his best to distance himself from the case, especially because he has to defend the man in question, but sometimes he lets his temper get the best of him. Pasadoble comes face-to-face with his client in an angry stare-off. After putting up with racial statements from the client, Pasadoble puts him in his place. The client may be a big man who can frighten most people, but Pasadoble pacifies him with his own anger, threatening to kick his ass in front of everyone that is in the jail setting the tone of what type of person Pasadoble can be for the reader.
The readers get flashbacks of Pasadoble's time in the Vietnam war, specifically one fight that happened on a hill near the Loatian border. These flashbacks happen suddenly throughout the book, but I personally believe that they are so important to understanding the world in which Vea has created in the novel because, near the end of the book, these flashbacks make everything come full circle. One of these flashbacks introduces an important character who is the Padre in Pasadoble's platoon - - - during such flashback, the Padre has devastating things happen around him that begin to make him question his faith in God.
Although the flashbacks happen here and there, the story easily continues on with Pasadoble's double homicide case getting more complicated by the page when the second of the two suspects is suddenly found dead on a hill that the locals call 'Tourette's Hill.' One such local that lived near the hill is one of the victims' mothers, Mrs. Harp, who is a very odd character: she's an aging beauty queen whose home is covered in photographs of only her, and none of her deceased son, and even while Pasadoble questions her about her son, she seems to get lost in a reverie of what her life was like before the son existed.
Pasadoble is the key character in this story; without him, connections would not have been made and characters would not have mattered. Pasadoble, a man who has a way with words, such as speaking with an ex-girlfriend about a 'hill' : "Carolina, think about the stratifications of an open hillside, a place where earth has given way and time itself is left exposed, layer upon layer - - - silica, clay, diatoms, and ash. Down here at this level is the time of the swelling sea; here, the time of the desert when hot, rising air would have haunted our eyes; here is a jagged karst, a time when the world shook an abrasion into its own skin; and here are the fossil dead, here you will find love and war in the same shamble of strewn bone. Here and there, where the world has shifted and cracked open, one era will touch another. And once upon the rarest time, human hands and eyes from the distant past can seek out and find... search for and contact... hands and eyes of the present time... our time. " Pasadoble reveals that everyone has a 'hill' that they constantly battle, his just happens to be the one where he lost brothers on in Vietnam.
I can't go much further into the story without giving away some of the great details that made up this book, but I can say I was blown away by this story. This is by far one of the best crime fiction books I have ever read; this is one of those crazy good books that you have never heard of that will change how you view things after you read it. Vea is one of the few authors that exist today that can make a story read like poetry. I highly recommend this novel to people who like crime fiction.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Toy Story 4 (2019) in Movies
Jun 25, 2019
Another TOY STORY triumph for PIXAR
When I first heard that Pixar was going to make a 4th TOY STORY film, I found myself firmly in the camp of "why are they doing this? The 3rd film tied off the trilogy marvelously well and 4th film was not needed" But...I trust Pixar, and when it was revealed that both Tom Hanks and Tim Allen were back on board after reading the script, my fears were alleviated quite a bit, but I still had some unease in the pit of my stomach.
I shouldn't have worried. For TOY STORY 4 is a wonderful addition to the adventures of Woody, Buzz and gang. It fits in nicely with the other films in the series and brings just the right amount of joy, fun, adventure and emotional heft.
Picking up the adventures of these toys as they now belong to Bonnie (after being gifted to Bonnie when their original owner, Andy, went off to college at the end of Toy Story 3), things have progressed realistically enough. The "order of things" in Bonnie's room is somewhat different than in Andy's. Woody, the old Cowboy doll, is relegated (more often than not) to the closet while Bonnie plays more with Jessie, Buzz and others. Into this group comes "Forky" a plastic spork that is made into a toy by Bonnie at Kindergarten. In a nice reversal of the first Toy Story film, Woody works hard to ensure that Forky is accepted into the group.
Without revealing too much of the plot, the gang (including Woody and Forky) go on a roadtrip with Bonnie in her parents' rented RV and end up in a small-ish town where a carnival is taking place across the street from an Antique store that houses Woody's old flame, Bo Peep. New characters are introduced, old characters are given a moment (or two) to shine and adventures and shenanigans ensue, with an emotionally satisfying climax - you know, a TOY STORY film.
This one continues to progress these toys "lives" and adventures in such a smart, natural and clever way that I did not feel that I was watching the same film again. I was watching characters I love continue to live, learn, grow and progress - a very smart choice by these filmmakers.
As always, the voice cast is superb. Tim Allen (Buzz Lightyear), Joan Cusak (Jessie), Wallace Shawn (Rex), John Ratzenberger (Piggy) and even the late Don Rickles (Mr. PotatoHead) are all back and contribute greatly to the finished result. It is like putting on an old, comfortable sweater on a somewhat chilly day. You get a reassuring shiver of warmth.
But the filmmakers don't stop there - Annie Potts is back as Bo Peep (she - and the Bo Peep character - were in the original Toy Story). Add to these voices, the marvelous work by Christina Hendricks (Gabby Gabby), Key & Peele (Ducky & Bunny), Carl Weathers (all the Combat Carls) and Tony Hale (wonderfully quirky as Forky) and we have quite the ensemble of interesting, quirky characters - growing and enriching the "Universe" they are in (quite like what Marvel has done with their "Universe"). Special notice needs to be made of Keanu Reeves work as Canadian Daredevil toy Duke Kaboom (the Canadian Evil Kneivel), it is the most entertaining - to me - of all the new characters.
But...make no mistake...this film belongs to Tom Hanks as Woody. It has taken me 4 films to realize this, but Hanks good guy "everyman" portrayal of Woody is the heart and soul of these pictures and this 4th film is Woody's film - as his character comes full circle from the paranoid toy who wants to keep living his safe existence to something much, much more in this film. It isn't hyperbole of me to say that I would be just fine for Hanks to receive an Oscar nomination for his voice work in this film - he is that good.
Interestingly enough, Pixar brought in a novice Director, Josh Cooley, to helm this film. It is his first feature film directing experience, but he is a veteran Pixar face - having written INSIDE OUT and was the main Storyboard Artist for UP - his direction looks like someone who was comfortable in this medium - and with the style of film that Pixar (usually) goes for - and he does terrific work here.
I really enjoyed the journey of the characters (especially Woody) in this film. I need not have worried about Pixar making a 4th Toy Story - they nailed the landing again.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)
I shouldn't have worried. For TOY STORY 4 is a wonderful addition to the adventures of Woody, Buzz and gang. It fits in nicely with the other films in the series and brings just the right amount of joy, fun, adventure and emotional heft.
Picking up the adventures of these toys as they now belong to Bonnie (after being gifted to Bonnie when their original owner, Andy, went off to college at the end of Toy Story 3), things have progressed realistically enough. The "order of things" in Bonnie's room is somewhat different than in Andy's. Woody, the old Cowboy doll, is relegated (more often than not) to the closet while Bonnie plays more with Jessie, Buzz and others. Into this group comes "Forky" a plastic spork that is made into a toy by Bonnie at Kindergarten. In a nice reversal of the first Toy Story film, Woody works hard to ensure that Forky is accepted into the group.
Without revealing too much of the plot, the gang (including Woody and Forky) go on a roadtrip with Bonnie in her parents' rented RV and end up in a small-ish town where a carnival is taking place across the street from an Antique store that houses Woody's old flame, Bo Peep. New characters are introduced, old characters are given a moment (or two) to shine and adventures and shenanigans ensue, with an emotionally satisfying climax - you know, a TOY STORY film.
This one continues to progress these toys "lives" and adventures in such a smart, natural and clever way that I did not feel that I was watching the same film again. I was watching characters I love continue to live, learn, grow and progress - a very smart choice by these filmmakers.
As always, the voice cast is superb. Tim Allen (Buzz Lightyear), Joan Cusak (Jessie), Wallace Shawn (Rex), John Ratzenberger (Piggy) and even the late Don Rickles (Mr. PotatoHead) are all back and contribute greatly to the finished result. It is like putting on an old, comfortable sweater on a somewhat chilly day. You get a reassuring shiver of warmth.
But the filmmakers don't stop there - Annie Potts is back as Bo Peep (she - and the Bo Peep character - were in the original Toy Story). Add to these voices, the marvelous work by Christina Hendricks (Gabby Gabby), Key & Peele (Ducky & Bunny), Carl Weathers (all the Combat Carls) and Tony Hale (wonderfully quirky as Forky) and we have quite the ensemble of interesting, quirky characters - growing and enriching the "Universe" they are in (quite like what Marvel has done with their "Universe"). Special notice needs to be made of Keanu Reeves work as Canadian Daredevil toy Duke Kaboom (the Canadian Evil Kneivel), it is the most entertaining - to me - of all the new characters.
But...make no mistake...this film belongs to Tom Hanks as Woody. It has taken me 4 films to realize this, but Hanks good guy "everyman" portrayal of Woody is the heart and soul of these pictures and this 4th film is Woody's film - as his character comes full circle from the paranoid toy who wants to keep living his safe existence to something much, much more in this film. It isn't hyperbole of me to say that I would be just fine for Hanks to receive an Oscar nomination for his voice work in this film - he is that good.
Interestingly enough, Pixar brought in a novice Director, Josh Cooley, to helm this film. It is his first feature film directing experience, but he is a veteran Pixar face - having written INSIDE OUT and was the main Storyboard Artist for UP - his direction looks like someone who was comfortable in this medium - and with the style of film that Pixar (usually) goes for - and he does terrific work here.
I really enjoyed the journey of the characters (especially Woody) in this film. I need not have worried about Pixar making a 4th Toy Story - they nailed the landing again.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated Flatland (Enhanced Illustrated Edition) in Books
Nov 13, 2019
I have wanted to read Flatland since I read the reference to it in Gödel Escher Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid which was a set text at university. As the book is out of copyright it was one of the first that I downloaded to my eReader.
The book (although really a novella rather than a full novel at only 88 pages) works on two levels; firstly the story revolves around A Square, an inhabitant of the two dimensional space that is Flatland. Most of the book describes the rigid social hierarchy of the regular polygons that make up the people - the more sides a person has the higher their social standing. Irregular shapes are despised and usually executed. The second half involves investigation into the nature of dimensions when A Square first of all dreams of a one dimensional land, then is shown three dimensions and zero dimensions by a spherical person from the three dimensional land.
The first half is a satire on the rigid class system of Victorian society - it is particularly disparaging of women, who being lines rather than shapes are very much second class citizens, even having their own doors into and out of houses. This half shows the book's age, it was written in a different time and looking at it from more than 100 years later a lot of the discussion is overlong and unengaging. This part has not aged at all well.
The book only comes into its own when A Square has a dream about a land of one dimension, populated by lines of varying length, the longest line being the King of Lineland. The two dimensional dreamer attempts to persuade the King that is he could step sideways he would be able to see that his land of a single line was limited. Of course the King can conceive of no such direction as 'sideways' and rejects the suggestion as ridiculous.
A sphere from the 3 dimensional land of Space then visits Flatland, appearing as a circle of varying size as he passes through the two dimensional space. He tries to persuade Square that if he could move 'up' or 'down' he would be able to move beyond the rigid plane of his existence. Obviously the square cannot understand a direction which doesn't fall into two dimensions, until the sphere pulls him up and then he can look down to see Flatland spread out below him. He has an epiphany and is determined to spread the word on three dimensional space. The sphere also visits a zero dimensional land. However when the square suggests that if the sphere could somehow move in a new direction he might be able to enter four dimensional space the sphere is very quick to say how ridiculous such a notion is.
In this way the ideas behind dimensions are communicated quite effectively, including being able to deduce the properties of a four dimensional regular shape by extrapolating the properties of lines, squares and cubes. It is then clear how properties of higher dimensions can be calculated without our poor three dimensional minds actually being able to perceive of it.
Flatland is regarded as one of the very first science fiction novels. So is Gulliver's Travels but that has very little science and to my mind is more of a fantasy book. Despite Flatland having very little in the way of story and plot (although there are twists in the story) and the first half isn't really story at all but social commentary, it definitely describes fantastic worlds and imagines what the results would be of living in such places. This seems to me to be the very concept behind science fiction.
In conclusion, I would not recommend this to everyone as I think its appeal is quite limited. But for anyone of a mathematical bent who likes science fiction, it's always good to see where it all started.
The book (although really a novella rather than a full novel at only 88 pages) works on two levels; firstly the story revolves around A Square, an inhabitant of the two dimensional space that is Flatland. Most of the book describes the rigid social hierarchy of the regular polygons that make up the people - the more sides a person has the higher their social standing. Irregular shapes are despised and usually executed. The second half involves investigation into the nature of dimensions when A Square first of all dreams of a one dimensional land, then is shown three dimensions and zero dimensions by a spherical person from the three dimensional land.
The first half is a satire on the rigid class system of Victorian society - it is particularly disparaging of women, who being lines rather than shapes are very much second class citizens, even having their own doors into and out of houses. This half shows the book's age, it was written in a different time and looking at it from more than 100 years later a lot of the discussion is overlong and unengaging. This part has not aged at all well.
The book only comes into its own when A Square has a dream about a land of one dimension, populated by lines of varying length, the longest line being the King of Lineland. The two dimensional dreamer attempts to persuade the King that is he could step sideways he would be able to see that his land of a single line was limited. Of course the King can conceive of no such direction as 'sideways' and rejects the suggestion as ridiculous.
A sphere from the 3 dimensional land of Space then visits Flatland, appearing as a circle of varying size as he passes through the two dimensional space. He tries to persuade Square that if he could move 'up' or 'down' he would be able to move beyond the rigid plane of his existence. Obviously the square cannot understand a direction which doesn't fall into two dimensions, until the sphere pulls him up and then he can look down to see Flatland spread out below him. He has an epiphany and is determined to spread the word on three dimensional space. The sphere also visits a zero dimensional land. However when the square suggests that if the sphere could somehow move in a new direction he might be able to enter four dimensional space the sphere is very quick to say how ridiculous such a notion is.
In this way the ideas behind dimensions are communicated quite effectively, including being able to deduce the properties of a four dimensional regular shape by extrapolating the properties of lines, squares and cubes. It is then clear how properties of higher dimensions can be calculated without our poor three dimensional minds actually being able to perceive of it.
Flatland is regarded as one of the very first science fiction novels. So is Gulliver's Travels but that has very little science and to my mind is more of a fantasy book. Despite Flatland having very little in the way of story and plot (although there are twists in the story) and the first half isn't really story at all but social commentary, it definitely describes fantastic worlds and imagines what the results would be of living in such places. This seems to me to be the very concept behind science fiction.
In conclusion, I would not recommend this to everyone as I think its appeal is quite limited. But for anyone of a mathematical bent who likes science fiction, it's always good to see where it all started.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022) in Movies
May 9, 2022
Fun...with heart
Doctor Strange is my favorite Marvel character. This comes from my college days when one of my roommates had a stack of Dr. Strange comics and I tore through them - one of the few Marvel comics that I have actually read. So I was thrilled to find out that Sam Raimi was coming back (was he ever gone?) to direct the 2nd solo Dr. Strange film, DOCTOR STRANGE IN THE MULTIVERSE OF MADNESS.
And it does not disappoint for while DOCTOR STRANGE IN THE MULTIVERSE OF MADNESS is not quite as “mad” as one would expect by the build up to this film, it delivers solid action by actors playing characters that are easy to root for (or root against) all done with a wink in the eye and a focus on Marvel’s secret weapon…relationships and heart.
You will find no brooding “dark knights” in this one.
Sprightly Directed by Sam Raimi (THE EVIL DEAD), Multiverse (as I will call it from here on out) finds our titular hero (Benedict Cumberbatch) connecting with - and working to save - a multiverse hopping heroine in the form of America Chavez (Xochitl Gomez) from an evil that wishes to drain her of her multiverse hopping powers.
What happens next is a multiverse hopping action/adventure/horror/chase film that really shows off the cinematic sensibilities of Director Raimi who’s mark is all over this film…for the better. Multiverse swerves really close to being a horror film, but, fortunately for it’s box office fortunes, remains firmly in the action/adventure/superhero genre. Only a director like Raimi can ride this fine line as well as he has and it works for this film.
Cumberbatch, of course, is terrific as Doctor Stephen Strange and he slides, comfortably, back into the cloak and sling-ring. Benedict Wong (Wong - The Sorcerer Supreme), Rachel McAdams (Dr. Christine Palmer) and Chiwetel Ejiofor (Baron Mordo) all reprise their characters from the first film and they all seem re-energized in their roles for this one while Xochitl Gomez makes a winning debut as America Chavez.
But, make no mistake, the personae that steals this film is Elizabeth Olson as the grieving Wanda Maximoff/Scarlett Witch who Dr. Strange reaches out to when America Chavez falls into his lap. She is outstanding and is really the driving force here. It would not be a misnomer to say that this film easily could have been titled THE SCARLET WITCH IN THE MULTIVERSE OF MADNESS.
My one quibble with this film is that it doesn’t go to enough Multiverses to suit my tastes and is not quite as “mad” as one would hope - our hero does spend a rather large amount of time in one multiverse - but that is a minor issue and this one multiverse does bring many fun cameos…cameos that will not be spoiled here.
Which brings up one last point. See this film, if you can, in a theater full of the aforementioned fanboys. The full house IMAX theater that I caught this film in went absolutely nuts when one specific person showed his/her face for their extended cameo and that was a very fun time.
As is DOCTOR STRANGE IN THE MULTIVERSE OF MADNESS - it works well as a stand alone film, but if you want to do “some homework”, check out the Disney+ TV Series WANDAVISION (essential), the first DOCTOR STRANGE movie (good background) and the animated Disney+ series MARVEL’S WHAT IF (some nice callbacks).
And, of course, stay for the end credits…it sets up DOCTOR STRANGE 3, a film that can’t get here soon enough.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And it does not disappoint for while DOCTOR STRANGE IN THE MULTIVERSE OF MADNESS is not quite as “mad” as one would expect by the build up to this film, it delivers solid action by actors playing characters that are easy to root for (or root against) all done with a wink in the eye and a focus on Marvel’s secret weapon…relationships and heart.
You will find no brooding “dark knights” in this one.
Sprightly Directed by Sam Raimi (THE EVIL DEAD), Multiverse (as I will call it from here on out) finds our titular hero (Benedict Cumberbatch) connecting with - and working to save - a multiverse hopping heroine in the form of America Chavez (Xochitl Gomez) from an evil that wishes to drain her of her multiverse hopping powers.
What happens next is a multiverse hopping action/adventure/horror/chase film that really shows off the cinematic sensibilities of Director Raimi who’s mark is all over this film…for the better. Multiverse swerves really close to being a horror film, but, fortunately for it’s box office fortunes, remains firmly in the action/adventure/superhero genre. Only a director like Raimi can ride this fine line as well as he has and it works for this film.
Cumberbatch, of course, is terrific as Doctor Stephen Strange and he slides, comfortably, back into the cloak and sling-ring. Benedict Wong (Wong - The Sorcerer Supreme), Rachel McAdams (Dr. Christine Palmer) and Chiwetel Ejiofor (Baron Mordo) all reprise their characters from the first film and they all seem re-energized in their roles for this one while Xochitl Gomez makes a winning debut as America Chavez.
But, make no mistake, the personae that steals this film is Elizabeth Olson as the grieving Wanda Maximoff/Scarlett Witch who Dr. Strange reaches out to when America Chavez falls into his lap. She is outstanding and is really the driving force here. It would not be a misnomer to say that this film easily could have been titled THE SCARLET WITCH IN THE MULTIVERSE OF MADNESS.
My one quibble with this film is that it doesn’t go to enough Multiverses to suit my tastes and is not quite as “mad” as one would hope - our hero does spend a rather large amount of time in one multiverse - but that is a minor issue and this one multiverse does bring many fun cameos…cameos that will not be spoiled here.
Which brings up one last point. See this film, if you can, in a theater full of the aforementioned fanboys. The full house IMAX theater that I caught this film in went absolutely nuts when one specific person showed his/her face for their extended cameo and that was a very fun time.
As is DOCTOR STRANGE IN THE MULTIVERSE OF MADNESS - it works well as a stand alone film, but if you want to do “some homework”, check out the Disney+ TV Series WANDAVISION (essential), the first DOCTOR STRANGE movie (good background) and the animated Disney+ series MARVEL’S WHAT IF (some nice callbacks).
And, of course, stay for the end credits…it sets up DOCTOR STRANGE 3, a film that can’t get here soon enough.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)