Search
Search results
MichaelS (0 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Feb 20, 2018
"Meanwhile, at the Hall Of Justice..."
This movie is the culmination of a childhood full of Saturday mornings in front of the tv in pajamas with a bowl of cereal. "Superfriends" was superheroes at it's most basic. The bad guys wanted to take over or destroy the world and the good guys have to stop them. That was the depth of the plots for both those classic cartoons, and this movie. It's pure cartoon fun brought to life, and I loved every minute of it.
The plot only serves as a reason for these heroes to come together. So you can say that story is not a top priority. Character is the name of the game here, and on that level, the movie is gold. Each character is fully realized, with their own individual situation they need to grow from. Every hero is given his or her moment to shine as an individual. When they stand as a team, it's some of the best superhero action we've ever gotten.
The performances of the League members is spot on across the board. Every character is presented exactly the way they should be. Ben Affleck continues to prove all the doubters wrong, by giving us the best live action version of Batman we've ever seen. Right from the start you see how he demands fear from evildoers, but filled with hope for the good things in the world. Gal Gadot IS Wonder Woman. If there was any doubt left after her solo movie, it should be thoroughly erased now. She's strong in body, mind, and spirit. Jason Mamoa forever erases the idea of Aquaman being the wimpiest superhero. His "surfer dude" take on the character brings all the recklessness and abandon you'd expect from a beach bum. He's almost like a Spartan soldier that lives for the excitement of battle. Ezra Miller brings a youthful excitement of someone who is simply jazzed by what he, and others, can do with their abilities. He's almost the comic relief until you realize that the excited reactions he gives to everything is exactly what we would to if we were dropped in that situation.
SPOILER TERRITORY....skip to "END SPOILERS" if you don't want anything ruined
Although it should really come as no surprise to anyone, Superman does indeed return from the dead in this movie. Not only is that he's resurrected very cool, but the aftermath gives us the best fight scene of the film. Superman vs The Justice League. 'nuff said? I've always loved Henry Cavill as Superman, but now he owns the role. He has grown from a man filled with self doubt, trying to find his place in the world, to a man who now fully realizes who he is, and what purpose he serves to mankind. Lots of great Superman stuff in this movie, and that is the thing I'm most thankful for.
END SPOILERS
This is the most fun I've had with a superhero movie in a long time. It may not have the deepest plot, but that is fine with me, because this is truly a comic book come to life. It's full of the action and joyful spirit that the boy in me tuned into every weekend. Now, if the post credit scene in the movie delivers, it REALLY will be everything that the classic Challenges Of The Superfriends, and reduce me to that boy in pajamas again, cereal in hand, and a smile on my face.
The plot only serves as a reason for these heroes to come together. So you can say that story is not a top priority. Character is the name of the game here, and on that level, the movie is gold. Each character is fully realized, with their own individual situation they need to grow from. Every hero is given his or her moment to shine as an individual. When they stand as a team, it's some of the best superhero action we've ever gotten.
The performances of the League members is spot on across the board. Every character is presented exactly the way they should be. Ben Affleck continues to prove all the doubters wrong, by giving us the best live action version of Batman we've ever seen. Right from the start you see how he demands fear from evildoers, but filled with hope for the good things in the world. Gal Gadot IS Wonder Woman. If there was any doubt left after her solo movie, it should be thoroughly erased now. She's strong in body, mind, and spirit. Jason Mamoa forever erases the idea of Aquaman being the wimpiest superhero. His "surfer dude" take on the character brings all the recklessness and abandon you'd expect from a beach bum. He's almost like a Spartan soldier that lives for the excitement of battle. Ezra Miller brings a youthful excitement of someone who is simply jazzed by what he, and others, can do with their abilities. He's almost the comic relief until you realize that the excited reactions he gives to everything is exactly what we would to if we were dropped in that situation.
SPOILER TERRITORY....skip to "END SPOILERS" if you don't want anything ruined
Although it should really come as no surprise to anyone, Superman does indeed return from the dead in this movie. Not only is that he's resurrected very cool, but the aftermath gives us the best fight scene of the film. Superman vs The Justice League. 'nuff said? I've always loved Henry Cavill as Superman, but now he owns the role. He has grown from a man filled with self doubt, trying to find his place in the world, to a man who now fully realizes who he is, and what purpose he serves to mankind. Lots of great Superman stuff in this movie, and that is the thing I'm most thankful for.
END SPOILERS
This is the most fun I've had with a superhero movie in a long time. It may not have the deepest plot, but that is fine with me, because this is truly a comic book come to life. It's full of the action and joyful spirit that the boy in me tuned into every weekend. Now, if the post credit scene in the movie delivers, it REALLY will be everything that the classic Challenges Of The Superfriends, and reduce me to that boy in pajamas again, cereal in hand, and a smile on my face.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Gozu (2003) in Movies
Jun 21, 2019
Minami is stuck in a rather peculiar situation. Both him and his closest friend, Ozaki, are members of the Azamawari Crew. Their boss orders Minami to take Ozaki out of the picture. Rumors are swirling about how crazy Ozaki has become, as of late. He claimed a chihuahua was a "yakuza attack dog" and that a random car that happened to be behind them at the time was a "yakuza attack car." When Minami accidentally kills Ozaki before they reach the actual destination for Ozaki's "dismissal," he thinks that things can't get any worse. That is until he reaches the inn where everyone seems to be acting unusual and Ozaki's body disappears.
Now on a quest to find where Ozaki has gone, Minami must deal with the bizarre individuals along the way like the innkeeper who shares her breast milk secrets, the white faced man who seems a little to eager to help him on his quest, and then there's that cow-headed creature that shows up in his room late one night. Minami soon realizes that his quest for his lost friend will not only be a long one, but a perplexing one as well.
Let's just say that if you're familiar with Takashi Miike's previous work like Ichi the Killer, Audition, and the banned from TV Masters of Horror episode, "Imprint," that Gozu fits in quite well with Miike's reputation. Gozu reels you in with the opening scene and then seems to snowball as the film goes on. It seems to dawdle through its duration as its weird individuals and events begin to pile up. A particular scene from The Shining ran through my mind throughout the film. The bear costume fellatio sequence. The Shining is known for being bizarre and unsettling and that is a perfect description of Gozu from the opening minutes of the film until the credits roll.
This is also the second film of Miike's involving breast milk that I've had the pleasure of seeing. He must associate that with weirdness or something, which it is. It's not necessarily something that sounds appealing, but once it starts happening it winds up being too horrifying and too unusual to turn away from. Seeing how far Miike is willing to push ideas in his films is one of the reasons people find his films enjoyable. That and originality. Despite the strangeness found in his films, finding something similar to his work is practically impossible. Originality is something that should be cherished when it's found in someone's work, but maybe that's just a personal opinion.
It's hard to label Gozu as a specific genre as it has elements from just about every genre that comes to mind. A dramatic horror with a little bit of mystery thrown in for good measure is the best I can do. The film is definitely a unique trip that definitely isn't for everyone. The most bizarre ideas roaming around in your brain right now probably don't compare to the last twenty or so minutes of Gozu. The events that unfold during that time are pretty jaw dropping. So if you're a Miike fan or are looking for something incredibly different (I'm talking way out there), then this comes highly recommended. There is no way that everyone who views this film will enjoy it, but the ending is incredibly memorable if the viewer can make it that far.
Now on a quest to find where Ozaki has gone, Minami must deal with the bizarre individuals along the way like the innkeeper who shares her breast milk secrets, the white faced man who seems a little to eager to help him on his quest, and then there's that cow-headed creature that shows up in his room late one night. Minami soon realizes that his quest for his lost friend will not only be a long one, but a perplexing one as well.
Let's just say that if you're familiar with Takashi Miike's previous work like Ichi the Killer, Audition, and the banned from TV Masters of Horror episode, "Imprint," that Gozu fits in quite well with Miike's reputation. Gozu reels you in with the opening scene and then seems to snowball as the film goes on. It seems to dawdle through its duration as its weird individuals and events begin to pile up. A particular scene from The Shining ran through my mind throughout the film. The bear costume fellatio sequence. The Shining is known for being bizarre and unsettling and that is a perfect description of Gozu from the opening minutes of the film until the credits roll.
This is also the second film of Miike's involving breast milk that I've had the pleasure of seeing. He must associate that with weirdness or something, which it is. It's not necessarily something that sounds appealing, but once it starts happening it winds up being too horrifying and too unusual to turn away from. Seeing how far Miike is willing to push ideas in his films is one of the reasons people find his films enjoyable. That and originality. Despite the strangeness found in his films, finding something similar to his work is practically impossible. Originality is something that should be cherished when it's found in someone's work, but maybe that's just a personal opinion.
It's hard to label Gozu as a specific genre as it has elements from just about every genre that comes to mind. A dramatic horror with a little bit of mystery thrown in for good measure is the best I can do. The film is definitely a unique trip that definitely isn't for everyone. The most bizarre ideas roaming around in your brain right now probably don't compare to the last twenty or so minutes of Gozu. The events that unfold during that time are pretty jaw dropping. So if you're a Miike fan or are looking for something incredibly different (I'm talking way out there), then this comes highly recommended. There is no way that everyone who views this film will enjoy it, but the ending is incredibly memorable if the viewer can make it that far.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Black Christmas (2019) in Movies
Dec 13, 2019
Verdict: All Over the Place
Story: Black Christmas starts as we meet our sorority sisters Riley (Poots), Kris (Shannon), Marty (Donoghue), Jesse (O’Grady), Helena (Adams) and Fran (Morris) who are preparing for the Christmas break, with Riley having history with the alpha sorority, which never got dealt with by the authorities.
They decide to get revenge through song and soon find themselves getting picked of by a masked killer, where they need to find themselves fighting to survive.
Thoughts on Black Christmas
Characters – Riley is previously a victim of sexual assault by one of the rich college students, 3-years-later she is still dealing with the effects, being the big sister to the rest of the sisters and is one of the few that worries about the locations of the other girls. Kris has been on a crusade to get equality, she spends most of the time preaching about how men have it easy and mostly gets annoying. Marty is another member of the sorority and like Jesse, we don’t learn much more about any of the other girls.
Performances – Imogen Poots is a talent actress when she is given something to work with, she is the strongest of a weak story, where nobody comes off like they are giving a good acting performance.
Story – The story is meant to be following a group of sorority sisters that get picked off and attacked by a masked killer over the Christmas break. Well, where do we start to break this story down, first thing, this isn’t any sort of remake or sequel to either movie seen before, it uses the location of the house and one look at a death, don’t think this is a remake. Secondly, we spend more time trying to get the message over about men thinking they can walk all over women and the only good men in life are nervous wrecks around the women. Thirdly, this is meant to be a horror and doesn’t even know what tone to stick to. Finally, the trailer gives away everything. This is a social message that uses an existing horror franchise to try and get a point over, without using any sort of subtitle approach.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in this film is almost non-excitant, it tries to use the slow slasher traits early on, which show glimpses, only to go, ‘you know what, we want to do an action horror now’ by the end. The mystery is also poor, because we get zero potential suspects and the only person it could be is revealed in the trailer.
Settings – The college location is fine, though it is the weird college I have ever seen.
Special Effects – When it comes to the effects, we get basic horror ones, sadly, the film decides to hide away from showing any actual gore, even though the injuries are designed to show it.
Scene of the Movie – Nate grabs an axe.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The girls leave a party at what they say is midnight, we cut to one that left early and it is suddenly 10.45, seriously can people not tell the time?
Final Thoughts – This is a very bad social message horror that spends more time banging you over the head with the message, than actually giving us a coherent story or any scare.
Overall: Social Message, without a scare.
Story: Black Christmas starts as we meet our sorority sisters Riley (Poots), Kris (Shannon), Marty (Donoghue), Jesse (O’Grady), Helena (Adams) and Fran (Morris) who are preparing for the Christmas break, with Riley having history with the alpha sorority, which never got dealt with by the authorities.
They decide to get revenge through song and soon find themselves getting picked of by a masked killer, where they need to find themselves fighting to survive.
Thoughts on Black Christmas
Characters – Riley is previously a victim of sexual assault by one of the rich college students, 3-years-later she is still dealing with the effects, being the big sister to the rest of the sisters and is one of the few that worries about the locations of the other girls. Kris has been on a crusade to get equality, she spends most of the time preaching about how men have it easy and mostly gets annoying. Marty is another member of the sorority and like Jesse, we don’t learn much more about any of the other girls.
Performances – Imogen Poots is a talent actress when she is given something to work with, she is the strongest of a weak story, where nobody comes off like they are giving a good acting performance.
Story – The story is meant to be following a group of sorority sisters that get picked off and attacked by a masked killer over the Christmas break. Well, where do we start to break this story down, first thing, this isn’t any sort of remake or sequel to either movie seen before, it uses the location of the house and one look at a death, don’t think this is a remake. Secondly, we spend more time trying to get the message over about men thinking they can walk all over women and the only good men in life are nervous wrecks around the women. Thirdly, this is meant to be a horror and doesn’t even know what tone to stick to. Finally, the trailer gives away everything. This is a social message that uses an existing horror franchise to try and get a point over, without using any sort of subtitle approach.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in this film is almost non-excitant, it tries to use the slow slasher traits early on, which show glimpses, only to go, ‘you know what, we want to do an action horror now’ by the end. The mystery is also poor, because we get zero potential suspects and the only person it could be is revealed in the trailer.
Settings – The college location is fine, though it is the weird college I have ever seen.
Special Effects – When it comes to the effects, we get basic horror ones, sadly, the film decides to hide away from showing any actual gore, even though the injuries are designed to show it.
Scene of the Movie – Nate grabs an axe.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The girls leave a party at what they say is midnight, we cut to one that left early and it is suddenly 10.45, seriously can people not tell the time?
Final Thoughts – This is a very bad social message horror that spends more time banging you over the head with the message, than actually giving us a coherent story or any scare.
Overall: Social Message, without a scare.
JT (287 KP) rated The Avengers (2012) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
As the dust settles on a film that has seriously ‘hulk smashed’ the box office its clear to see why this film has been met with such high acclaim from critics and fans alike. There is no getting away from the fact that this is one hell of a blockbuster, with more superheroes than you can cram into a S.H.I.E.L.D. meeting room and a villain that almost stole the whole show, it had pretty much everything.
The film opens as S.H.I.E.L.D. is mid evacuation after The Tesseract, an energy source of unknown potential, has activated. Loki (Tom Hiddleston) has plans to take over the world with a strong army and have everyone kneel before him, he’s cunning but “lacks conviction” as is pointed out by cult fan favourite Agent Coulson (Clark Gregg).
So, Nick Fury activates the Avengers initiative, pulling resource from Thor, Captain America, Iron Man, Black Widow, Hawkeye and of course Bruce Banner in order to stop the impending attack. The good thing about the Avengers is that no time needs to be spent setting the characters up, as given the previous films we know all about them and their powers. However, this gives more time for them to decipher each others egos.
Tony Stark feels like the team’s unofficial leader, brash and bold he has to contend with a number of personalities, remember he doesn’t play well with others. A great scene sees Thor, Captain America and Iron Man all come to blows but its hard to say if there was any clear winner.
Natasha Romanoff aka Black Widow and Clint ‘Hawkeye’ Barton who have popped up in previous films but neither had their own title struggle at times to fit in, but they are integral to the group and plot. However if there were not part of the assemble you wouldn’t miss them too much.
As for Bruce Banner, Weadon’s Hulk is probably the most realistic CGI transformation to date. Ang Lee’s looked ridiculous and Louis Leterrier’s Hulk looked liked he’d been pumped full of steroids as opposed to gamma radiation.
Weadon though achieved a great balance and with Mark Ruffalo stepping in as the green monster the Hulk had a lot of charisma in this, even having time for some humour. T.V. original big man Lou Ferrigno provided the voice so it all seemed like the Hulk was back.
The perfect villain – Loki
Hiddleston for me though was the stand-out here, as comic book villains go he brought so much to the role. It was a dark, composed and at times sinister portrayal of a man desperate for revenge and to be worshipped like the god he feels he deserves to be.
The films action sequences are second to none, with everything from the initial opening evacuation at S.H.I.E.L.D. to the climactic ending all choreographed to perfection. The only gripe is that it boarder lines on Transformers styled destruction, in which some parts are drawn out. I mean just how many Chitauri can one group of superheroes fend off?
Another post credits scene certainly would pave the way for a sequel, and given the film’s massive haul which is well in excess of $450m no one would stand in the way. It should pretty much be a forgone conclusion that the team will at some point reunite.
The film opens as S.H.I.E.L.D. is mid evacuation after The Tesseract, an energy source of unknown potential, has activated. Loki (Tom Hiddleston) has plans to take over the world with a strong army and have everyone kneel before him, he’s cunning but “lacks conviction” as is pointed out by cult fan favourite Agent Coulson (Clark Gregg).
So, Nick Fury activates the Avengers initiative, pulling resource from Thor, Captain America, Iron Man, Black Widow, Hawkeye and of course Bruce Banner in order to stop the impending attack. The good thing about the Avengers is that no time needs to be spent setting the characters up, as given the previous films we know all about them and their powers. However, this gives more time for them to decipher each others egos.
Tony Stark feels like the team’s unofficial leader, brash and bold he has to contend with a number of personalities, remember he doesn’t play well with others. A great scene sees Thor, Captain America and Iron Man all come to blows but its hard to say if there was any clear winner.
Natasha Romanoff aka Black Widow and Clint ‘Hawkeye’ Barton who have popped up in previous films but neither had their own title struggle at times to fit in, but they are integral to the group and plot. However if there were not part of the assemble you wouldn’t miss them too much.
As for Bruce Banner, Weadon’s Hulk is probably the most realistic CGI transformation to date. Ang Lee’s looked ridiculous and Louis Leterrier’s Hulk looked liked he’d been pumped full of steroids as opposed to gamma radiation.
Weadon though achieved a great balance and with Mark Ruffalo stepping in as the green monster the Hulk had a lot of charisma in this, even having time for some humour. T.V. original big man Lou Ferrigno provided the voice so it all seemed like the Hulk was back.
The perfect villain – Loki
Hiddleston for me though was the stand-out here, as comic book villains go he brought so much to the role. It was a dark, composed and at times sinister portrayal of a man desperate for revenge and to be worshipped like the god he feels he deserves to be.
The films action sequences are second to none, with everything from the initial opening evacuation at S.H.I.E.L.D. to the climactic ending all choreographed to perfection. The only gripe is that it boarder lines on Transformers styled destruction, in which some parts are drawn out. I mean just how many Chitauri can one group of superheroes fend off?
Another post credits scene certainly would pave the way for a sequel, and given the film’s massive haul which is well in excess of $450m no one would stand in the way. It should pretty much be a forgone conclusion that the team will at some point reunite.
REACTION.CAM: Vlog Video Maker
Photo & Video and Social Networking
App
• "I really love this app. It makes me feel like I'm a pro YouTuber." - sammymenz • "Amazing...
Ezan Vakti Pro
Lifestyle and Reference
App
***Another first new feature: PRAYER ON TIME: Prayer constantly reminds. Until you say OK. ...
Document Writer for Microsoft Office - Word & PDF
Productivity and Business
App
THE BEST DOCUMENT EDITING AND MANAGEMENT SUITE FOR IPHONE AND IPAD. + Create and Edit Rich Text...
Underlove Stories: Naomi
Games
App
An awesome visual novel game Description: - Played and enjoyed by THOUSANDS of visual novel and...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Wordslingers: The Story of Self-Publishing (2021) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
They say that everyone has a book in them. I guess the key question is whether anyone else wants to read it. Such is the subject of this new documentary from A. Brooks Bennett. As a publisher says at one point “Writing a book is a creative act; publishing a book is a business”.
The democratization of publishing
The internet has brought many advantages to modern life, but perhaps one of the most interesting is the democratization of publishing. No longer is control in the hands of publishing houses, who might glance at and immediately dismiss new ideas in literature. It’s worth remembering that 12 publishing houses turned down J.K. Rowling’s draft for Harry Potter! Now anyone can be creative in writing and self-publish on the web. My own wife – Sue Mann – did just this, self-publishing the WW1 poems and reminiscences of two of her great-uncles. (It’s available from all good bookshops… oh, no…. actually just from here!) Are the poems artistically any good? I have no idea! Will it sell many copies? Clearly not! Was it a personal goal achieved in honouring their memory? Absolutely! Different people want different things from the medium.
Very ‘American’.
It’s probably down to the pioneer spirit, but as a generalisation Americans seem far more ambitious than Brits: or at least, more OPENLY ambitious. Whereas most Brits will quietly get on with building their careers, some Americans will go hell-for-leather towards their vision of “success” no matter the cost: no guts; no glory; and be noisy about it!
But for every J.K. Rowling or Bill Bryson there are several thousand writers who have ‘failed to launch’.
Here we follow two budding authors – one from California; the other from North Carolina – self-publishing their work and seeking sales.
One – Giles A (“Andy”) Anderson – has self-published a seemingly disturbing work called “Vidu” – the first of what he hopes will be a five-part series. He first talks from a ghoulish bookstore, speaking psycho-babble with the requisite hyperbole of an ‘artiste’. (It suggests how the books might read… but perhaps that’s misjudging). It comes then as a surprise when we find he doesn’t live alone in a coffin playing video games on his own, but has a lovely wife and two young and perfectly normal children. So his book is an “off the beaten track kinda book”, but the man seems well-grounded and following his dream in bite-size pieces.
Moral: Avoid the Travel Books
As is often the case though, the documentary homes in on, and spends most of its time with, the other author – Adam Shephard. Shephard is struggling to launch as an author and also – in parallel – wrestling with the Green Card process for his supportive and vivacious Croatian wife Ivana. The problem is that Shephard has written an extended travel blog: ten-a-penny on sites like WordPress.
I read a Forbes article last year that reported that – astonishingly – in a survey 11% of American respondents had never travelled outside of their home state and 40% had never left the country. For such a well-heeled country, the US is incredibly insular. So Shephard’s vision is to encourage youngsters to step outside of their comfort zone and jump on that plane to Guatemala. It’s a fine objective. But does anyone want to listen? And – crucially – is the book any good and commercial enough? As the famous ‘founder of self-publishing’, the late Dan Poynter (to who the film is dedicated) says “You can’t make any money off a travel book”.
The film never goes as far as having either of the featured books critically reviewed: that might have added some extra spice to the story (and possibly provoked some painful reactions). But the piles of unopened boxes in Adam’s clinically white storage facility rather speaks for itself. Since Shephard never seems to do anything by halves, the boxes are piled high and thus the fall from grace is hard, long…. and absolutely riveting. (Ivana’s support and love in such difficult circumstances is commendable: he is a truly blessed man).
Jaw-dropping Walmart scene
At least at the start of the film, Adam’s self-belief and confidence in himself is infectious. The peak of his bravado, and a jaw-dropping highpoint in the movie for me, was a scene filmed in Walmart. Shephard, in a case of “reverse shoplifting”, sneaks HIS books onto the bookshelves of Walmart. What happens when they then try to buy one? It’s a real eye-opener and worth watching the documentary for in its own right.
It’s an interesting legal position: if Walmart were to be upset about this scene, what on earth could they charge them with!? Littering?
Highs and lows.
Shephard seems to have talent as a speaker, and it struck me that he would be genuinely suited to a job in sales. In the movie we see him performing self-confidence-building pitches to young people (and, boy, could we sometimes use that in the UK post-Brexit). A few books sold. But another event barely breaking even. The pattern becomes familiar and, in a way, rather tragic.
There are unexpected highs and lows for Adam and Ivana along the way though, unrelated to the publishing story, and the filmmaker skillfully weaves them into the narrative to good effect.
Thought-provoking.
I watched this on a whim and thought I’d probably switch off after 10 minutes. Documentaries normally are not my thing! But no. It had me gripped to see how things would turn out – like watching a slow-motion car crash! The journey was well-worth the ride: a real page-turner you might say.
The democratization of publishing
The internet has brought many advantages to modern life, but perhaps one of the most interesting is the democratization of publishing. No longer is control in the hands of publishing houses, who might glance at and immediately dismiss new ideas in literature. It’s worth remembering that 12 publishing houses turned down J.K. Rowling’s draft for Harry Potter! Now anyone can be creative in writing and self-publish on the web. My own wife – Sue Mann – did just this, self-publishing the WW1 poems and reminiscences of two of her great-uncles. (It’s available from all good bookshops… oh, no…. actually just from here!) Are the poems artistically any good? I have no idea! Will it sell many copies? Clearly not! Was it a personal goal achieved in honouring their memory? Absolutely! Different people want different things from the medium.
Very ‘American’.
It’s probably down to the pioneer spirit, but as a generalisation Americans seem far more ambitious than Brits: or at least, more OPENLY ambitious. Whereas most Brits will quietly get on with building their careers, some Americans will go hell-for-leather towards their vision of “success” no matter the cost: no guts; no glory; and be noisy about it!
But for every J.K. Rowling or Bill Bryson there are several thousand writers who have ‘failed to launch’.
Here we follow two budding authors – one from California; the other from North Carolina – self-publishing their work and seeking sales.
One – Giles A (“Andy”) Anderson – has self-published a seemingly disturbing work called “Vidu” – the first of what he hopes will be a five-part series. He first talks from a ghoulish bookstore, speaking psycho-babble with the requisite hyperbole of an ‘artiste’. (It suggests how the books might read… but perhaps that’s misjudging). It comes then as a surprise when we find he doesn’t live alone in a coffin playing video games on his own, but has a lovely wife and two young and perfectly normal children. So his book is an “off the beaten track kinda book”, but the man seems well-grounded and following his dream in bite-size pieces.
Moral: Avoid the Travel Books
As is often the case though, the documentary homes in on, and spends most of its time with, the other author – Adam Shephard. Shephard is struggling to launch as an author and also – in parallel – wrestling with the Green Card process for his supportive and vivacious Croatian wife Ivana. The problem is that Shephard has written an extended travel blog: ten-a-penny on sites like WordPress.
I read a Forbes article last year that reported that – astonishingly – in a survey 11% of American respondents had never travelled outside of their home state and 40% had never left the country. For such a well-heeled country, the US is incredibly insular. So Shephard’s vision is to encourage youngsters to step outside of their comfort zone and jump on that plane to Guatemala. It’s a fine objective. But does anyone want to listen? And – crucially – is the book any good and commercial enough? As the famous ‘founder of self-publishing’, the late Dan Poynter (to who the film is dedicated) says “You can’t make any money off a travel book”.
The film never goes as far as having either of the featured books critically reviewed: that might have added some extra spice to the story (and possibly provoked some painful reactions). But the piles of unopened boxes in Adam’s clinically white storage facility rather speaks for itself. Since Shephard never seems to do anything by halves, the boxes are piled high and thus the fall from grace is hard, long…. and absolutely riveting. (Ivana’s support and love in such difficult circumstances is commendable: he is a truly blessed man).
Jaw-dropping Walmart scene
At least at the start of the film, Adam’s self-belief and confidence in himself is infectious. The peak of his bravado, and a jaw-dropping highpoint in the movie for me, was a scene filmed in Walmart. Shephard, in a case of “reverse shoplifting”, sneaks HIS books onto the bookshelves of Walmart. What happens when they then try to buy one? It’s a real eye-opener and worth watching the documentary for in its own right.
It’s an interesting legal position: if Walmart were to be upset about this scene, what on earth could they charge them with!? Littering?
Highs and lows.
Shephard seems to have talent as a speaker, and it struck me that he would be genuinely suited to a job in sales. In the movie we see him performing self-confidence-building pitches to young people (and, boy, could we sometimes use that in the UK post-Brexit). A few books sold. But another event barely breaking even. The pattern becomes familiar and, in a way, rather tragic.
There are unexpected highs and lows for Adam and Ivana along the way though, unrelated to the publishing story, and the filmmaker skillfully weaves them into the narrative to good effect.
Thought-provoking.
I watched this on a whim and thought I’d probably switch off after 10 minutes. Documentaries normally are not my thing! But no. It had me gripped to see how things would turn out – like watching a slow-motion car crash! The journey was well-worth the ride: a real page-turner you might say.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Awkward Guests in Tabletop Games
Aug 6, 2020
One of my favorite classic mass-market games is definitely Clue. Murder, mystery, and a bit of deduction make for an engaging and entertaining game! That being said, even classic games can use a little updating from time to time. Allow me to introduce to you a Clue-on-steroids kind of game named Awkward Guests. How does it hold up to the OG staple? Keep reading to find out!
Mr. Walton has been murdered! You have been called in to investigate and get to the bottom of this gruesome mystery. By interrogating the suspects and the household staff, searching for clues, and examining the crime scene, you must decide WHO the killer is, WHY did they commit the murder, and HOW it was done. There may or may not even be an accomplice that needs to be caught too. Put your deduction skills to the test as you work to be the first investigator to solve the case!
Disclaimer: I do not intend to rehash the entire rulebook in this review, but rather give a general overview of the rules and gameplay. To read the entire rulebook, check out the game at your FLGS or directly from the publisher! -L
Awkward Guests is a card game of hand management, trading, and deduction in which the players are trying to be the first player to solve the murder of Mr. Walton. The game is actually pretty simple to play. To start, each player receives a hand of 6 cards and a case tracking sheet. The cards will have one or more references (case information) on them, as well as a value of 1-3 points, depending on the reliability of the information presented on the card. On your turn, you will ask for information about two different references in which you are interested. The other players will then look through their cards, and offer some or all that pertain to the chosen references in trade to the active player. The active player may then choose a player with whom to trade, giving that player any number of cards, as long as their value equals or exceeds the value of the cards received in trade. Look at your new cards, make notes on your case tracking sheet, and play continues to the next player. After all players have inquired and traded cards, players have the opportunity to solve the mystery. You must know WHO, HOW, and WHY, and possibly the identity of the ACCOMPLICE depending on case difficulty, in order to solve the mystery. If nobody is ready to solve, everyone discards their hand down to 3, and draws new cards to a hand size of 6. A new round then begins, and play continues until one player successfully solves the mystery.
When you get down to it, Awkward Guests is easy to learn and play. It mostly consists of trading cards to learn information. That’s it. And that’s what makes it a great game, in my opinion. Although it feels more involved than regular Clue, the gameplay itself is very similar and that familiarity is reassuring. One thing that elevates Awkward Guests above Clue is the fact that it requires so much more strategy than original Clue. In Clue, when asking for information, you are asking 1 specific opponent for information, and they have to provide it if they have it. In Awkward Guests, you are able to ask all opponents for information, and they can offer as much or as little information as they want. It increases the amount of strategy required to play, and takes it from a simple grid movement memory game, to one that encourages deduction and compromise. Since players are trading cards, you never know who is holding what cards at any given time, and that makes it harder to pinpoint the information you may need. You can’t just memorize another player’s hand of cards, because on any given turn that hand has completely changed. Along those lines as well, you have to decide what information you are willing to trade, in hopes of receiving useful information in return. You don’t want to just trade back the same cards to the same players in an effort to stunt their investigation, because that could deter them from trading with you in the future. You have to decide when is the right time to trade, and what information you are willing to hand to your opponents, because you need to be receiving new information as well.
Another brilliant thing about Awkward Guests is the amount of replayability. Each case uses a different combination of cards, and with so many cards, that means that thousands of different game decks could be generated and played as individual cases. The game design and card system boasts a possible total of 3,600 case solutions, each reached through these different card deck combinations. No matter how many times you play, it is almost guaranteed that you will never play the same case twice. That being said, the biggest downside of Awkward Guests for me is the actual game setup and teardown. Each case deck requires certain cards, so that means to set up, you have to search through all 243 cards and pull out only those required for the selected case. And then after the game, you must sort them all back into their correct order. That just takes a bit of time, and makes it a game that can’t just be played on the fly.
One other downside for me when playing Awkward Guests are the player screens. Each player receives a screen to block their case tracking sheet from opponents. As you learn information, you write it on your sheet to help keep track of your notes and accusations throughout the game. The player screens are also reference sheets, providing much gameplay information to alleviate the need to reference the rulebook at every turn. The downside is that there is just SO MUCH information in the player screens. It is quite overwhelming, and honestly, makes the game seem more complicated and confusing than it really is. I appreciate the effort to provide that cheat-sheet, but it needs to be majorly edited and redacted to be truly useful.
Let’s talk components. The game comes with some high quality double-sided case tracking sheets, and nice sturdy cards and cardboard components. It’s pretty simple, but really gets the job done effectively. The artwork is pretty basic and the color scheme is mostly monochromatic. It may not be the most exciting game to look at, but the lack of colors makes it feel appropriately thematic.
Overall, Awkward Guests is a good step-up game from Clue. It requires strategy, deduction, and even though the game is ultimately competitive, selective cooperation is a key to success. As a huge fan of Clue as a child, I can definitely say that I am a fan of Awkward Guests as an adult. Originally printed in a different language, this game was brought to Kickstarter with an English version in 2018, and I am certainly thankful that the decision was made to reprint it in English! If you like deduction games with a twist, I would absolutely recommend giving this one a shot. Purple Phoenix Games gives Awkward Guests a mysterious 17 / 24.
Mr. Walton has been murdered! You have been called in to investigate and get to the bottom of this gruesome mystery. By interrogating the suspects and the household staff, searching for clues, and examining the crime scene, you must decide WHO the killer is, WHY did they commit the murder, and HOW it was done. There may or may not even be an accomplice that needs to be caught too. Put your deduction skills to the test as you work to be the first investigator to solve the case!
Disclaimer: I do not intend to rehash the entire rulebook in this review, but rather give a general overview of the rules and gameplay. To read the entire rulebook, check out the game at your FLGS or directly from the publisher! -L
Awkward Guests is a card game of hand management, trading, and deduction in which the players are trying to be the first player to solve the murder of Mr. Walton. The game is actually pretty simple to play. To start, each player receives a hand of 6 cards and a case tracking sheet. The cards will have one or more references (case information) on them, as well as a value of 1-3 points, depending on the reliability of the information presented on the card. On your turn, you will ask for information about two different references in which you are interested. The other players will then look through their cards, and offer some or all that pertain to the chosen references in trade to the active player. The active player may then choose a player with whom to trade, giving that player any number of cards, as long as their value equals or exceeds the value of the cards received in trade. Look at your new cards, make notes on your case tracking sheet, and play continues to the next player. After all players have inquired and traded cards, players have the opportunity to solve the mystery. You must know WHO, HOW, and WHY, and possibly the identity of the ACCOMPLICE depending on case difficulty, in order to solve the mystery. If nobody is ready to solve, everyone discards their hand down to 3, and draws new cards to a hand size of 6. A new round then begins, and play continues until one player successfully solves the mystery.
When you get down to it, Awkward Guests is easy to learn and play. It mostly consists of trading cards to learn information. That’s it. And that’s what makes it a great game, in my opinion. Although it feels more involved than regular Clue, the gameplay itself is very similar and that familiarity is reassuring. One thing that elevates Awkward Guests above Clue is the fact that it requires so much more strategy than original Clue. In Clue, when asking for information, you are asking 1 specific opponent for information, and they have to provide it if they have it. In Awkward Guests, you are able to ask all opponents for information, and they can offer as much or as little information as they want. It increases the amount of strategy required to play, and takes it from a simple grid movement memory game, to one that encourages deduction and compromise. Since players are trading cards, you never know who is holding what cards at any given time, and that makes it harder to pinpoint the information you may need. You can’t just memorize another player’s hand of cards, because on any given turn that hand has completely changed. Along those lines as well, you have to decide what information you are willing to trade, in hopes of receiving useful information in return. You don’t want to just trade back the same cards to the same players in an effort to stunt their investigation, because that could deter them from trading with you in the future. You have to decide when is the right time to trade, and what information you are willing to hand to your opponents, because you need to be receiving new information as well.
Another brilliant thing about Awkward Guests is the amount of replayability. Each case uses a different combination of cards, and with so many cards, that means that thousands of different game decks could be generated and played as individual cases. The game design and card system boasts a possible total of 3,600 case solutions, each reached through these different card deck combinations. No matter how many times you play, it is almost guaranteed that you will never play the same case twice. That being said, the biggest downside of Awkward Guests for me is the actual game setup and teardown. Each case deck requires certain cards, so that means to set up, you have to search through all 243 cards and pull out only those required for the selected case. And then after the game, you must sort them all back into their correct order. That just takes a bit of time, and makes it a game that can’t just be played on the fly.
One other downside for me when playing Awkward Guests are the player screens. Each player receives a screen to block their case tracking sheet from opponents. As you learn information, you write it on your sheet to help keep track of your notes and accusations throughout the game. The player screens are also reference sheets, providing much gameplay information to alleviate the need to reference the rulebook at every turn. The downside is that there is just SO MUCH information in the player screens. It is quite overwhelming, and honestly, makes the game seem more complicated and confusing than it really is. I appreciate the effort to provide that cheat-sheet, but it needs to be majorly edited and redacted to be truly useful.
Let’s talk components. The game comes with some high quality double-sided case tracking sheets, and nice sturdy cards and cardboard components. It’s pretty simple, but really gets the job done effectively. The artwork is pretty basic and the color scheme is mostly monochromatic. It may not be the most exciting game to look at, but the lack of colors makes it feel appropriately thematic.
Overall, Awkward Guests is a good step-up game from Clue. It requires strategy, deduction, and even though the game is ultimately competitive, selective cooperation is a key to success. As a huge fan of Clue as a child, I can definitely say that I am a fan of Awkward Guests as an adult. Originally printed in a different language, this game was brought to Kickstarter with an English version in 2018, and I am certainly thankful that the decision was made to reprint it in English! If you like deduction games with a twist, I would absolutely recommend giving this one a shot. Purple Phoenix Games gives Awkward Guests a mysterious 17 / 24.
