Search
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Mile 22 (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
With a run time of 1 hour 34 minutes, and such a fast flowing story line, you certainly don't feel like you're bored at any point during Mile 22. There were plenty of times where I was confused, and a couple where I was amused, but never bored.
Overall the story is a good one and I felt like the twists and turns come in just the right places. But there's no denying that this could have been a 4/5 star film for me had there been some differences.
The opening titles set about cataloging Silva's (Mark Wahlberg) personal history so that we know what sort of person he is and how he's ended up at the head of this team. While it actually worked well I'm unsure of why it was needed at all. Most of the traits that were being shown are ones that frequently pop up in movies in the stereotypical spec ops/military characters, they needed no explanation. Similarly, the back story for Alice seemed surplus to requirements and shoe-horned in so she could have something for Silva to get angry about. Although later in the film she uses the back story to manipulate a baddie when she's cornered and that was quite amusing so I'm willing to let it slide.
By far the best thing about this movie is Iko Uwais. At all times he's consistent to character and his fight scenes were incredible. So it's a little sad that they were marred by some terrible editing. Many of the scenes would flow nicely and you were just becoming engrossed in them when they would cut abruptly to another angle. The only thing it seemed to achieve was speeding up the action, which was already fast and going along very nicely on it's own in the first place. The cuts were chaotic and difficult to watch and ruined what could have been the redeeming feature of this film.
During the film you see Silva talking about the events at some kind of briefing. Although short, they felt like ramblings and didn't make much sense. Placing one "present day" scene at either end of the main events would have achieved a much better job and covered up what felt like a script that had gone awry.
The ending felt like a bit of a cop out to me. Not answering the main question that we were all looking for left me with a deeply unsatisfying feeling and some annoyance at what felt like an obvious attempt to set up for a sequel.
I was surprised to see that this was an 18 certificate. After sitting through the whole thing I feel like it could have quite happily sat at the 15 level. All it would have needed was the removal of a lot of unnecessary language and to have some of the more graphic scenes shot from a different angle/cut better to not show so much of the brutality. That being said though, I didn't find the violence particularly bad compared to other things I've seen.
As an after thought having just rewatched the trailer again before putting it into this post... it's a shame that there weren't some of the computer erasure effects from the trailer in the film. There were certainly opportunities and with the level of technology that they're using it seems to be down played at almost all points.
What should you do?
Watch it for Iko Uwais. His action sequences were so good that they hold up the rest of the film.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I could really do with the Hand of God when I'm out and about driving.
Overall the story is a good one and I felt like the twists and turns come in just the right places. But there's no denying that this could have been a 4/5 star film for me had there been some differences.
The opening titles set about cataloging Silva's (Mark Wahlberg) personal history so that we know what sort of person he is and how he's ended up at the head of this team. While it actually worked well I'm unsure of why it was needed at all. Most of the traits that were being shown are ones that frequently pop up in movies in the stereotypical spec ops/military characters, they needed no explanation. Similarly, the back story for Alice seemed surplus to requirements and shoe-horned in so she could have something for Silva to get angry about. Although later in the film she uses the back story to manipulate a baddie when she's cornered and that was quite amusing so I'm willing to let it slide.
By far the best thing about this movie is Iko Uwais. At all times he's consistent to character and his fight scenes were incredible. So it's a little sad that they were marred by some terrible editing. Many of the scenes would flow nicely and you were just becoming engrossed in them when they would cut abruptly to another angle. The only thing it seemed to achieve was speeding up the action, which was already fast and going along very nicely on it's own in the first place. The cuts were chaotic and difficult to watch and ruined what could have been the redeeming feature of this film.
During the film you see Silva talking about the events at some kind of briefing. Although short, they felt like ramblings and didn't make much sense. Placing one "present day" scene at either end of the main events would have achieved a much better job and covered up what felt like a script that had gone awry.
The ending felt like a bit of a cop out to me. Not answering the main question that we were all looking for left me with a deeply unsatisfying feeling and some annoyance at what felt like an obvious attempt to set up for a sequel.
I was surprised to see that this was an 18 certificate. After sitting through the whole thing I feel like it could have quite happily sat at the 15 level. All it would have needed was the removal of a lot of unnecessary language and to have some of the more graphic scenes shot from a different angle/cut better to not show so much of the brutality. That being said though, I didn't find the violence particularly bad compared to other things I've seen.
As an after thought having just rewatched the trailer again before putting it into this post... it's a shame that there weren't some of the computer erasure effects from the trailer in the film. There were certainly opportunities and with the level of technology that they're using it seems to be down played at almost all points.
What should you do?
Watch it for Iko Uwais. His action sequences were so good that they hold up the rest of the film.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I could really do with the Hand of God when I'm out and about driving.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Black Water: Abyss (2020) in Movies
Aug 22, 2020
I don't know how I've never seen Black Water, but I saw the trailer for Abyss and it caught my eye so I'll be going back to check the first one out as they're usually better.
When Cash finds a cave while out searching for two missing hikers he invites his friends to explore it with him. Deep in the cave system they come upon a cavern, as they look around they're suddenly hit by a torrent of water and become trapped by the rising water... and they might not be alone.
Where to start... I love creature features, at this point that's common knowledge, but there are some that make me a little sad. Black Water: Abyss might be one of those. It has all the potential but somehow it wasn't engaging, perhaps it took itself a little too seriously?
It suffered from excessive length, or rather the perception of length as it had a runtime of just 1 hour 38 minutes. It felt a lot longer. 98 minutes would be a perfect length for this sort of film but this dragged on and on.
There's a tried and tested formula: group gets trapped, there's peril, group have to escape, most die or at least get maimed. 47 Meters Down, Deep Blue Sea, Crawl... I won't go on. It's a simple story that so many films before have done, it shouldn't have been hard to recreate.
The actors are all good. Luke Mitchell (Blindspot) and Jessica McNamee (The Meg) were both faces I recognised and their previous roles sat positively with me. They play Jen and Eric who are a happy couple on the surface but the tension builds, they work well together. Anthony J Sharpe as Cash givens off some heavy Murdock vibes, the slightly crazy character did lighten everything a little but I'm not sure if that's a good or a bad thing in the long run. Our other couple are Yolanda and Viktor (Amali Golden and Benjamin Hoetjes), they're made to be the opposites of Jen and Eric seemingly one particular line of dialogue in the middle. They didn't have the same presence but that wasn't really necessary.
CGI crocs. I'll give them some credit for the fact that there were a couple of shots where I couldn't say if they were CG, real or practical. For the most part though I wasn't excited by what I saw, there was a lot of eye and snout shots or just ripples in the water. The bigger shots were chaotic and mainly obscured by fast motion and water, when you do get a good view it doesn't gel with anything around it, the colourings in particular seem to be inconsistent with the light inside the cave.
There are a lot of leading shots that should help with suspense, but somehow don't. They're typical off-set characters with open space that make you think a croc is going to jump out, classic right? But it seems like they made a concerted effort to combat predictability by putting a few of those shots together and not using the first one for the scare... which had a negative effect for me. Part of the fun of these films is that you know something is coming and you can get a gratifying win from guessing what's going to happen, after a few thwarted attempts at that it became really frustrating and less than satisfying to watch.
Despite a lot of disappointment this isn't a bad film, swapping some of the drama for more action and giving the viewers a few "wins" would have easily made the runtime a bit more bearable. I did get a solid laugh out of it towards the end, perhaps it missed its calling as a comedy.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/08/black-water-abyss-movie-review.html
When Cash finds a cave while out searching for two missing hikers he invites his friends to explore it with him. Deep in the cave system they come upon a cavern, as they look around they're suddenly hit by a torrent of water and become trapped by the rising water... and they might not be alone.
Where to start... I love creature features, at this point that's common knowledge, but there are some that make me a little sad. Black Water: Abyss might be one of those. It has all the potential but somehow it wasn't engaging, perhaps it took itself a little too seriously?
It suffered from excessive length, or rather the perception of length as it had a runtime of just 1 hour 38 minutes. It felt a lot longer. 98 minutes would be a perfect length for this sort of film but this dragged on and on.
There's a tried and tested formula: group gets trapped, there's peril, group have to escape, most die or at least get maimed. 47 Meters Down, Deep Blue Sea, Crawl... I won't go on. It's a simple story that so many films before have done, it shouldn't have been hard to recreate.
The actors are all good. Luke Mitchell (Blindspot) and Jessica McNamee (The Meg) were both faces I recognised and their previous roles sat positively with me. They play Jen and Eric who are a happy couple on the surface but the tension builds, they work well together. Anthony J Sharpe as Cash givens off some heavy Murdock vibes, the slightly crazy character did lighten everything a little but I'm not sure if that's a good or a bad thing in the long run. Our other couple are Yolanda and Viktor (Amali Golden and Benjamin Hoetjes), they're made to be the opposites of Jen and Eric seemingly one particular line of dialogue in the middle. They didn't have the same presence but that wasn't really necessary.
CGI crocs. I'll give them some credit for the fact that there were a couple of shots where I couldn't say if they were CG, real or practical. For the most part though I wasn't excited by what I saw, there was a lot of eye and snout shots or just ripples in the water. The bigger shots were chaotic and mainly obscured by fast motion and water, when you do get a good view it doesn't gel with anything around it, the colourings in particular seem to be inconsistent with the light inside the cave.
There are a lot of leading shots that should help with suspense, but somehow don't. They're typical off-set characters with open space that make you think a croc is going to jump out, classic right? But it seems like they made a concerted effort to combat predictability by putting a few of those shots together and not using the first one for the scare... which had a negative effect for me. Part of the fun of these films is that you know something is coming and you can get a gratifying win from guessing what's going to happen, after a few thwarted attempts at that it became really frustrating and less than satisfying to watch.
Despite a lot of disappointment this isn't a bad film, swapping some of the drama for more action and giving the viewers a few "wins" would have easily made the runtime a bit more bearable. I did get a solid laugh out of it towards the end, perhaps it missed its calling as a comedy.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/08/black-water-abyss-movie-review.html
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Rick and Morty - Season 2 in TV
Jul 21, 2017
Absolute insanity (1 more)
Will leave you in stitches throughout
The Universe Is A Crazy and Chaotic Place…
Rick & Morty was one of those shows that totally flew under the radar for me while it was on the air for months, then all of a sudden almost every podcast and youtuber that I subscribe to were recommending it. Though by the time that I was recommended it, I was aware it was an Adult Swim show, so I assumed each episode would only be around six or seven minutes long and put it on the backburner. Then one day I had run out of things to watch, I was up to date on all of my youtube videos and decided to give it a shot. Whilst I didn’t fall in love with it immediately, it did hook me right away and I was pleased to learn each episode was 20 minutes long and because the episodes are so short, I decided to watch a few episodes in a row and by the time I had finished watching Anatomy Park, the third episode of the first season, I realised how great this show was. The writing is so off the wall and insane yet dry that it works and the characters and the dynamic that they have is honestly hilarious, the comedic timing is also spot on. If you haven’t seen the show, think a blend of Family Guy style animation, with a backdrop of a Back To The Future or Doctor Who kind of universe and sprinkled with Always Sunny In Philadelphia style comedy. There is so much about this show that makes it funny, the sheer insanity and traumatisation that Rick exposes his grandchildren to, only to then brush it off as if it is totally normal as it is them that are overreacting and then there is Gerry and Beth’s broken marriage that only exists because Gerry got Beth pregnant with Summer when they were teenagers. Rick and Gerry are probably my two favourite characters in the show, Rick because you know he has seen so many insane things all over the galaxy over the years that literally nothing bothers him anymore and everything is normal to him, no matter how insane it seems to us and the other characters in the show and Gerry because of his exceptional mediocrity and impressive amount of general naivety. Also it would be criminal not to mention the other vast array of fantastically hilarious characters that we meet throughout the show, from Mr Meeseeks, (look at me!) to Mr Poopybutthole, to Birdperson, the list goes on getting more and more crazy as it does. The show is two seasons in so far, with a total of 21 episodes and I can honestly say that there is not one episode that I don’t like. I do have my favourites however, like M Night Shamaliens, when Rick, Morty and Gerry are stuck in a simulation of the real world and Gerry thinks he is having the greatest day of his life, or Rick Potion No.9, where said potion makes everybody fall in love with Morty, then transform into grotesque monsters, so they simply leave that reality behind and move into a fresh one, or Raising Gazorpazorp, where Morty goes through fatherhood in the space of a day, or Mortynight Run where they leave Gerry in a nursing home full of other Gerrys, I don’t want to spoil too much for those who haven’t seen it, but if you haven’t then stop watching this review right now and go watch Rick & Morty. The animation uses an odd art style, which may be initially off-putting, but a few episodes in, it becomes clear that this animation is to a high standard, just done in an odd style. The voice acting also seems fairly amateur at first, but as the show goes on and you get to know the characters and the world, the voice acting actually works perfectly in unison with the way that the show is written.
There isn’t much more to say, this show has hardly any negative qualities, it is one of the best animated shows that I have seen in the last decade and it is totally my kind of humour.
There isn’t much more to say, this show has hardly any negative qualities, it is one of the best animated shows that I have seen in the last decade and it is totally my kind of humour.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Aquaman (2018) in Movies
Jun 8, 2019
"war is coming to the surface"
Aquaman is absolutely a disciple of the superhero formula we've seen used, reused and recycled over the past couple decades...but its formula done right. There's an inherent lunacy to a hero like Aquaman; his myth is built upon a lost Atlantean culture that's simultaneously advanced technologically and heavily influenced by ancient Greek mythology, and his powers included near-Superman levels of strength and invulnerability existing alongside an ability to communicate with marine life. This makes approaching his story from a gritty, realistic perspective damn near impossible.
Instead Wan and the writers behind Aquaman intelligently focus on world-building and following the tried-and-true "heroic journey"; complete with initial rejection of a prophesied role, slow but steady immersion into said role's culture, recognition of the need for growth and change, and eventual assumption of role. It's been seen before and it'll be seen again. But what propels Aquaman ahead of other films like it is the energy that Wan imbues it with. It's goofy without undermining the sincerity of Arthur's journey. It's fast-paced and simple-minded without sacrificing the weight and universality of this particular hero's myth. It's loud and colorful and *full* of CGI everything without reducing itself to an over-commercialized, artless heap of nothingness.
It's a big-ass blockbuster with personality. Momoa has charisma to spare; he owns the physicality and irreverence of this new imagining of the king of the ocean perfectly. Amber Heard is sexy and badass as Mera; something of a victim of a forced romance but also a compelling and strong protagonist in her own right. Patrick Wilson as Oceanmaster (call me....Oceanmaster) is given enough screen-time to develop that he's more than a punching bag for Aquaman; but actually a character with ambitions and a defined, fleshed-out purpose. The origin segment is tightly done and more than enough to set the stage for what is to come. And probably the strongest aspect of this picture, the costuming and world-building, is off the charts. Similar to the enduring fantasy films that precede this (LOTR, Star Wars, Avatar for a few examples) the undersea kingdoms are a place I want to return to. They aren't just my world dressed up with CGI and the occasional costuming flourish; they're entirely foreign and endlessly inventive. Probably a solid third of the film is simply Aquaman, and the audience, being told about this world and shown it by Mera. While that may not be artistically prestigious strategy for engaging audiences, it entertains and fascinates on a "turn off your brain and look at those pretty colors" sort of way. There's a simple glee in seeing sharks ridden like horses or an octopus pounding a war-time set of drums.
I always offer the disclaimer when writing about nerdy films that I love which is this: I am a nerd. While I wasn't particularly attached to Aquaman growing up; his journey, the nature of this sort of film and the cinematic universe he will be growing into are fundamentally important to me, and I like to embrace that bias rather than keep it in check with reduced ratings or "objective" analysis. Whether it be a giant, confusing and chaotic battle between underwater armies or the horrifying descent into "the trench"; you'll always find me looking up at the screen like a little kid. Or moments like Arthur meeting Mera and confronting is past, or taking upon the role of king while wielding the trident; I just love that sort of stuff. I'm a sucker for these beats and this formula; and all signs point to this continuing. So while I may like it more than most; I'd mostly like to say Aquaman still distinguishes itself as a particularly goofy, sprawling, mythic, and metal experience that deserved to be seen on the big-screen, and to be celebrated as the fantasy film it is. It's a great time, and a nice addition to the DC film franchise.
Instead Wan and the writers behind Aquaman intelligently focus on world-building and following the tried-and-true "heroic journey"; complete with initial rejection of a prophesied role, slow but steady immersion into said role's culture, recognition of the need for growth and change, and eventual assumption of role. It's been seen before and it'll be seen again. But what propels Aquaman ahead of other films like it is the energy that Wan imbues it with. It's goofy without undermining the sincerity of Arthur's journey. It's fast-paced and simple-minded without sacrificing the weight and universality of this particular hero's myth. It's loud and colorful and *full* of CGI everything without reducing itself to an over-commercialized, artless heap of nothingness.
It's a big-ass blockbuster with personality. Momoa has charisma to spare; he owns the physicality and irreverence of this new imagining of the king of the ocean perfectly. Amber Heard is sexy and badass as Mera; something of a victim of a forced romance but also a compelling and strong protagonist in her own right. Patrick Wilson as Oceanmaster (call me....Oceanmaster) is given enough screen-time to develop that he's more than a punching bag for Aquaman; but actually a character with ambitions and a defined, fleshed-out purpose. The origin segment is tightly done and more than enough to set the stage for what is to come. And probably the strongest aspect of this picture, the costuming and world-building, is off the charts. Similar to the enduring fantasy films that precede this (LOTR, Star Wars, Avatar for a few examples) the undersea kingdoms are a place I want to return to. They aren't just my world dressed up with CGI and the occasional costuming flourish; they're entirely foreign and endlessly inventive. Probably a solid third of the film is simply Aquaman, and the audience, being told about this world and shown it by Mera. While that may not be artistically prestigious strategy for engaging audiences, it entertains and fascinates on a "turn off your brain and look at those pretty colors" sort of way. There's a simple glee in seeing sharks ridden like horses or an octopus pounding a war-time set of drums.
I always offer the disclaimer when writing about nerdy films that I love which is this: I am a nerd. While I wasn't particularly attached to Aquaman growing up; his journey, the nature of this sort of film and the cinematic universe he will be growing into are fundamentally important to me, and I like to embrace that bias rather than keep it in check with reduced ratings or "objective" analysis. Whether it be a giant, confusing and chaotic battle between underwater armies or the horrifying descent into "the trench"; you'll always find me looking up at the screen like a little kid. Or moments like Arthur meeting Mera and confronting is past, or taking upon the role of king while wielding the trident; I just love that sort of stuff. I'm a sucker for these beats and this formula; and all signs point to this continuing. So while I may like it more than most; I'd mostly like to say Aquaman still distinguishes itself as a particularly goofy, sprawling, mythic, and metal experience that deserved to be seen on the big-screen, and to be celebrated as the fantasy film it is. It's a great time, and a nice addition to the DC film franchise.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Elementos in Tabletop Games
Aug 6, 2019
I am going to be honest. I am typically not a fan of abstract strategy games unless they have some kind of interesting theme on them: Azul (a Golden Feather Award winner), Patchwork, Reef, Onitama, Hive. These are all in my Top 100 of All Time, but they also have some sort of theme working for them to help me digest the immense calculating nature of most abstracts. So when I tell you that Elementos has also now breached my Top 100 with a very loose theme, I’m kinda shook myself.
So the winner of Elementos is the player that can get their wand (the wooden stick) to one of the three squares on the opponent’s side of the board (a la American football). This is accomplished by moving the element discs down the board and overtaking discs using the game’s elemental weakness wheel: fire burns trees, trees drink water, water douses fire. Movement can be made to any space obliquely, straight forward, or forward diagonally, unless the piece being moved is carrying the wand. Those wand-carrying pieces can only be moved straight forward.
Undoubtedly players will find themselves wanting to enter a space containing an opponent’s disc. Following the movement rules and elemental wheel described above, the attacking piece can overtake the opponent’s space and remove the opponent’s disc from the board. Easy, right? Let me explain the kicker here. The discs are double-sided and have different elements on the flip-side. So for an action (instead of moving) a player can simply flip any of their discs to the other side – perhaps to block movement, or setup a takeover on the next turn. As you only have one action to use on your turn you may not flip and move on the same turn. The other allowable action on a turn is to pass the wand to another friendly piece, observing movement rules for wand movement as well. The benefit with this is that the wand-carrying discs can neither attack nor BE attacked. Need to protect your tree from that fire ahead? Pass it the wand and be safe.
The rule sheet states that at any time you may peek at what element is on the flip-side of any piece at any time, but there is a variant described where you play the game without peeking, and we found that to be a more enjoyable way to play. You just never know if the other side of your tree is a fire or a water, and it sometimes results in turns where you effectively shoot yourself in the foot. Yes, it diminishes the tactics of the game, and if you would rather plan your moves well ahead of your turns like a Chess Grand Master, so be it. I kinda like the chaotic nature of not knowing what’s on the other side.
Components. So this is a clam shell wooden box that pulls double duty as the game board and storage for the other components. It is of good quality, and is reminiscent of the keepsake boxes one might find at Hobby Lobby or the like. The discs are painted and silk-screened plywood discs with a hole in the middle to accept the wand. The wand itself is a length of wooden dowel. All of these components are of good quality, but I wish a different finish was applied to the wood. The finish on the copy I was sent for review isn’t really conducive to sliding pieces on, so I suggest you pick up the pieces (any Average White Band fans here?) and place them where they need to go. Do as I say, not as I do.
Overall this is a really great game that I know will see lots of play in my house. My wife likes abstracts a lot and I predict she will enjoy this one as much as she adores Blokus (which she adores a TON). For the ease of teaching, play, and that itch to play just one more time, we at Purple Phoenix Games give this one a no-peek 9 / 12. If you are a fan of Chess, Checkers, or any of the other abstract strategy games I listed earlier, you should really check this one out. It’s a little different and a lot fun.
So the winner of Elementos is the player that can get their wand (the wooden stick) to one of the three squares on the opponent’s side of the board (a la American football). This is accomplished by moving the element discs down the board and overtaking discs using the game’s elemental weakness wheel: fire burns trees, trees drink water, water douses fire. Movement can be made to any space obliquely, straight forward, or forward diagonally, unless the piece being moved is carrying the wand. Those wand-carrying pieces can only be moved straight forward.
Undoubtedly players will find themselves wanting to enter a space containing an opponent’s disc. Following the movement rules and elemental wheel described above, the attacking piece can overtake the opponent’s space and remove the opponent’s disc from the board. Easy, right? Let me explain the kicker here. The discs are double-sided and have different elements on the flip-side. So for an action (instead of moving) a player can simply flip any of their discs to the other side – perhaps to block movement, or setup a takeover on the next turn. As you only have one action to use on your turn you may not flip and move on the same turn. The other allowable action on a turn is to pass the wand to another friendly piece, observing movement rules for wand movement as well. The benefit with this is that the wand-carrying discs can neither attack nor BE attacked. Need to protect your tree from that fire ahead? Pass it the wand and be safe.
The rule sheet states that at any time you may peek at what element is on the flip-side of any piece at any time, but there is a variant described where you play the game without peeking, and we found that to be a more enjoyable way to play. You just never know if the other side of your tree is a fire or a water, and it sometimes results in turns where you effectively shoot yourself in the foot. Yes, it diminishes the tactics of the game, and if you would rather plan your moves well ahead of your turns like a Chess Grand Master, so be it. I kinda like the chaotic nature of not knowing what’s on the other side.
Components. So this is a clam shell wooden box that pulls double duty as the game board and storage for the other components. It is of good quality, and is reminiscent of the keepsake boxes one might find at Hobby Lobby or the like. The discs are painted and silk-screened plywood discs with a hole in the middle to accept the wand. The wand itself is a length of wooden dowel. All of these components are of good quality, but I wish a different finish was applied to the wood. The finish on the copy I was sent for review isn’t really conducive to sliding pieces on, so I suggest you pick up the pieces (any Average White Band fans here?) and place them where they need to go. Do as I say, not as I do.
Overall this is a really great game that I know will see lots of play in my house. My wife likes abstracts a lot and I predict she will enjoy this one as much as she adores Blokus (which she adores a TON). For the ease of teaching, play, and that itch to play just one more time, we at Purple Phoenix Games give this one a no-peek 9 / 12. If you are a fan of Chess, Checkers, or any of the other abstract strategy games I listed earlier, you should really check this one out. It’s a little different and a lot fun.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Venom (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
I went into the screen with wildly low expectations for Venom, nothing in the trailer had me on the edge of my seat. In the run up to me going there were more and more reviews appearing saying that it was bad, not that I read any of them. So many people just felt the need to put it right in the title... yes, yes, but much more obvious than mine!!
But you know what? It wasn't bad. That's not to say it was good, but it wasn't bad. I didn't laugh anywhere near as much as everyone else did, but it did have some funny bits in it. I'm sorry though, "blowing like a turd in the wind"? Not funny. Wasn't funny in the trailer, not funny in the film.
Full disclosure, I've booked to see this again. Not because I enjoyed it so much but because the people who were watching it in the screen with me were the noisiest people on the planet.
I understand that they couldn't accurately do Venom's origin story as it invilves Spider-man but I'm not sure how I felt about this version of events. Also, if a super nerd out there could help me out... I thought that Venom was the name for the combined host and symbiote, but in the film the symbiote is called Venom... which way is correct?
There are some great bits between Eddie and Venom. Venom obviously thinks Eddie is a bit of a wimp and doesn't mind pointing it out. He's embarrassed by him putting his hands up in surrender and by him being unwilling to jump out of an upper floor window. Both bring amusing exchanges.
When we see the duo fighting and evading the tac team in the early part of the film all I could think was how reminiscent of Upgrade it was when he was being controlled by Venom. I also got flashes of other Marvel offerings, specifically Hulk. Venom tossing people around by their feet, then witnessing him fight Riot gave me flashbacks of Hulk and The Abomination. The latter was a lot easier to watch than the fight between this new pair though. It was way too chaotic, and almost impossible to figure out exactly what was happening.
In general I'm not a fan of the CGI symbiotes, they look a lot more cartoony and feel slightly unfinished, like there's a layer missing to make them more realistic. I also wasn't overly keen on much of the acting, I found Tom Hardy to be lacking and didn't find Eddie Brock to be very dynamic for an investigative journalist.
The first of the credit scenes lines us up with a potential sequel with a quick appearence by Woody Harrelson as Cletus Kasady who historically was the original host for Carnage. Harrelson has grown on me immensely in recent years with his acting and it would be a shame not to see him given this serial killers' role in the Universe... but with a film that feels like it fits more in the Maguire era of Spider-man movies I personally can't see a sequel from Venom doing him justice.
The second credit scene felt a little like a cheat to me as it wasn't anything to do with the film. It was entertaining despite that though. A little lighthearted humour but it felt completely out of place, it was much more like a short you would watch before the main event. Perhaps it would have been better as a "feature length" trailer than a credit scene.
What should you do?
You should probably see it. In my opinion it doesn't compare to any of the other "super" movies, and he isn't going to become my favourite anti-hero, but it is a reasonable diversion and the humour that's there isn't that bad.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
If I could have a symbiote that won't kill be and wouldn't look so crazy then I think I'd probably see where it took me.
But you know what? It wasn't bad. That's not to say it was good, but it wasn't bad. I didn't laugh anywhere near as much as everyone else did, but it did have some funny bits in it. I'm sorry though, "blowing like a turd in the wind"? Not funny. Wasn't funny in the trailer, not funny in the film.
Full disclosure, I've booked to see this again. Not because I enjoyed it so much but because the people who were watching it in the screen with me were the noisiest people on the planet.
I understand that they couldn't accurately do Venom's origin story as it invilves Spider-man but I'm not sure how I felt about this version of events. Also, if a super nerd out there could help me out... I thought that Venom was the name for the combined host and symbiote, but in the film the symbiote is called Venom... which way is correct?
There are some great bits between Eddie and Venom. Venom obviously thinks Eddie is a bit of a wimp and doesn't mind pointing it out. He's embarrassed by him putting his hands up in surrender and by him being unwilling to jump out of an upper floor window. Both bring amusing exchanges.
When we see the duo fighting and evading the tac team in the early part of the film all I could think was how reminiscent of Upgrade it was when he was being controlled by Venom. I also got flashes of other Marvel offerings, specifically Hulk. Venom tossing people around by their feet, then witnessing him fight Riot gave me flashbacks of Hulk and The Abomination. The latter was a lot easier to watch than the fight between this new pair though. It was way too chaotic, and almost impossible to figure out exactly what was happening.
In general I'm not a fan of the CGI symbiotes, they look a lot more cartoony and feel slightly unfinished, like there's a layer missing to make them more realistic. I also wasn't overly keen on much of the acting, I found Tom Hardy to be lacking and didn't find Eddie Brock to be very dynamic for an investigative journalist.
The first of the credit scenes lines us up with a potential sequel with a quick appearence by Woody Harrelson as Cletus Kasady who historically was the original host for Carnage. Harrelson has grown on me immensely in recent years with his acting and it would be a shame not to see him given this serial killers' role in the Universe... but with a film that feels like it fits more in the Maguire era of Spider-man movies I personally can't see a sequel from Venom doing him justice.
The second credit scene felt a little like a cheat to me as it wasn't anything to do with the film. It was entertaining despite that though. A little lighthearted humour but it felt completely out of place, it was much more like a short you would watch before the main event. Perhaps it would have been better as a "feature length" trailer than a credit scene.
What should you do?
You should probably see it. In my opinion it doesn't compare to any of the other "super" movies, and he isn't going to become my favourite anti-hero, but it is a reasonable diversion and the humour that's there isn't that bad.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
If I could have a symbiote that won't kill be and wouldn't look so crazy then I think I'd probably see where it took me.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Pet Sematary (2019) in Movies
Apr 2, 2019 (Updated Apr 5, 2019)
Not only have I not read the Stephen King book that Pet Sematary is based on, I haven't even seen the original 1989 movie either. As much as I feel ashamed for completely missing out on both of those, it also meant that I was able to head into this movie with nothing to compare it to and no idea of what to expect, other than a bit of creepy-burial-ground-raising-the-dead type stuff that the first trailer covered. One quick note on the trailers before I begin though - the most recent one, which luckily I only saw after I had seen the movie, pretty much gives away the entire plot. Granted, if you're a fan of Stephen Kings work, or even the original movie, then you're going to know what to expect anyway. But, if you're like me - someone who enjoys a good horror movie, but doesn't read books and has gaping holes in his movie viewing history, then try and give the trailers a miss on this occasion before heading into the cinema.
Louis Creed (Jason Clarke) is a Boston doctor who moves his family to the (hopefully) less chaotic setting of rural Maine - wife Rachel (Amy Seimetz), 8 year old daughter Ellie (Jeté Laurence), toddler Gage and friendly family cat Church. However, the family soon discover that their house is located right alongside a road which is prone to noisy trucks suddenly speeding past - our first jump scare and something already given away by the trailers! Those trucks also have a tendency to end the lives of any local pets who might happen to wander out in front of them, so it's pretty handy that there happens to be a Native American graveyard out in the woods at the back of the Creed's new house.
The local children make good use of the area, carrying out a funeral procession while wearing masks before burying deceased pets there, and they have also erected a sign - "Pet Sematary", which is nailed to one of the trees outside of it. Unfortunately, it's not too long before Church falls victim to a passing truck, at which point friendly neighbour Jud (John Lithgow) tells Louis of a special burial ritual which can be carried out on an area of ground located even further into the forest. It's a ritual that can bring the dead back to life so, in order to avoid upsetting daughter Ellie, Louis keeps the death a secret until he and Jud can head out late that night to perform the ritual with Church. Sure enough, Church is back with the family the next morning - alive, but looking very disheveled and in a seriously grumpy mood. He's not quite the cute little bundle of joy he once was - as Jud puts it, "Sometimes dead is better".
After banging on earlier about spoilers for movies, I feel it would be wrong of me to go and do the same thing here. If you're familiar with the story, then you'll know what happens anyway, although there is a moderate change of detail in this particular version which has already had a few die hard Stephen King fans up in arms. I'll just say that the special properties of the burial ground get used on a few more occasions during the course of the movie, with increasingly devastating consequences, and I personally felt that the change to the source material totally worked within the confines of this version of the story.
Ok, so what did I think of the movie overall? Well, I found Pet Sematary to be pretty intense, even more so than 'Us' recently. There were a couple of guys to the side of me in the cinema who were sitting forward on the edge of their seat for the majority of the movie just hyperventilating - I thought they were going to have a heart attack at one point! Yes, there are some jump scares, but this was more the kind of nightmare horror that I loved while watching 'Us' and it had me gripped to my seat for a good 80% or so of its run-time. Everyone involved in the movie is on top form - the children are outstanding, as is Jason Clarke, John Lithgow, even the cat! The dread-filled atmosphere, the tragedy and the horror of it all, it really resonated with me and I came away from this exhausted but happy!
Louis Creed (Jason Clarke) is a Boston doctor who moves his family to the (hopefully) less chaotic setting of rural Maine - wife Rachel (Amy Seimetz), 8 year old daughter Ellie (Jeté Laurence), toddler Gage and friendly family cat Church. However, the family soon discover that their house is located right alongside a road which is prone to noisy trucks suddenly speeding past - our first jump scare and something already given away by the trailers! Those trucks also have a tendency to end the lives of any local pets who might happen to wander out in front of them, so it's pretty handy that there happens to be a Native American graveyard out in the woods at the back of the Creed's new house.
The local children make good use of the area, carrying out a funeral procession while wearing masks before burying deceased pets there, and they have also erected a sign - "Pet Sematary", which is nailed to one of the trees outside of it. Unfortunately, it's not too long before Church falls victim to a passing truck, at which point friendly neighbour Jud (John Lithgow) tells Louis of a special burial ritual which can be carried out on an area of ground located even further into the forest. It's a ritual that can bring the dead back to life so, in order to avoid upsetting daughter Ellie, Louis keeps the death a secret until he and Jud can head out late that night to perform the ritual with Church. Sure enough, Church is back with the family the next morning - alive, but looking very disheveled and in a seriously grumpy mood. He's not quite the cute little bundle of joy he once was - as Jud puts it, "Sometimes dead is better".
After banging on earlier about spoilers for movies, I feel it would be wrong of me to go and do the same thing here. If you're familiar with the story, then you'll know what happens anyway, although there is a moderate change of detail in this particular version which has already had a few die hard Stephen King fans up in arms. I'll just say that the special properties of the burial ground get used on a few more occasions during the course of the movie, with increasingly devastating consequences, and I personally felt that the change to the source material totally worked within the confines of this version of the story.
Ok, so what did I think of the movie overall? Well, I found Pet Sematary to be pretty intense, even more so than 'Us' recently. There were a couple of guys to the side of me in the cinema who were sitting forward on the edge of their seat for the majority of the movie just hyperventilating - I thought they were going to have a heart attack at one point! Yes, there are some jump scares, but this was more the kind of nightmare horror that I loved while watching 'Us' and it had me gripped to my seat for a good 80% or so of its run-time. Everyone involved in the movie is on top form - the children are outstanding, as is Jason Clarke, John Lithgow, even the cat! The dread-filled atmosphere, the tragedy and the horror of it all, it really resonated with me and I came away from this exhausted but happy!
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Colt Express in Tabletop Games
Feb 6, 2020
Aaaaaall aboard! Next stop, the Old West! Climb onto the Union Pacific Express and prepare for the journey of a lifetime. Your plan? To rob this train, of course! Unbeknownst to you, however, several other bandits have picked this exact train as their score as well! Which bandit can outwit the others and come away with the most loot? Or will the Marshall track you all down and hand you over to the Law?
Disclaimer: There are many expansions for Colt Express. I do not have any of them, nor do I have any gameplay experience with any of them. If and when I do get them added into my base game, I will either amend this review or write a new one! – L
Colt Express is a game of action programming in which players are trying to accumulate the most treasure over 5 rounds of play. Each round consists of 2 phases – Schemin’ and Stealin’. During the Schemin’ phase, players select action cards from their hand and play them to the center of the table in turn order. Possible actions are: Move between cars, Change floors, Shoot, Rob, or Move the Marshall. Depending on the round requirements, cards will be played either face-up or face-down. Face-up cards allow your opponents to see what you are programming and gives everyone a chance to counteract those actions, while the face-down cards leave some mystery to your strategy and your ultimate plan for victory. During the Stealin’ phase, the action cards are actually performed in the same order in which they were played. A new round card is then revealed, and players start the next Schemin’ phase. After 5 rounds, the player who has accumulated the most loot is the winner!
I have to start by saying that I generally do not like action programming games. I like to have a clear step-by-step strategy that I am able to adjust and adapt based on the current play situations. In action programming games, that really isn’t possible because you have to commit to your chosen actions before they are played out. That makes these games more chaotic than I would like because your carefully thought-out plans can be easily compromised by one single action of an opponent, throwing your strategy out the window. That being said, I think Colt Express approaches action programming in a unique way that takes the game to the next level. How? By varying whether your programmed actions are public or private knowledge. Depending on the round, you play cards face-up or face-down to the center of the table. As stated earlier, face-up cards give your opponents a peek at your strategy while your face-down cards keep some mystery in your plans. I really like this approach because it makes the game less luck-driven and gives players the opportunity to play with some semblance of strategy. Instead of focusing on just your actions and hoping that they aren’t inadvertently compromised, you get the chance to see some of what your opponents are planning and adjust your gameplay based on that. Yes, there will always be some twists and surprises that you didn’t see coming, but you’ve got to think beyond your strategy and keep yourself safe from other players. The added element of partial hidden-information makes Colt Express a more exciting game for me.
Let’s talk components next. I think the game components of Colt Express make the game so neat and cute at the same time. Colt Express is played on an actual 3D cardboard train! Each player has a meeple in their color, and you get to physically move your merson around the train according to your programmed actions. I think it works great by adding that spacial element to help players visualize their movement. The components themselves are pretty good quality, in my opinion. The train and the loot tokens are made of nice sturdy cardboard, and I know they will hold up to lots of plays. And don’t sweat it – the train can be stored fully-assembled in the box! That minimizes the time required for setup, and lets you get right to playing.
All in all, I think Colt Express is a fun game that requires strategy, but is not a brain-burner. There’s still enough luck involved to keep everyone on their toes, and the ensuing quasi-chaos really make the game feel like a train heist. If you haven’t tried Colt Express, I would recommend you do. It’s not on my list of favorite games, but it’s one that I like to bring out every so often! Purple Phoenix Games gives Colt Express a high-speed 15 / 24.
Disclaimer: There are many expansions for Colt Express. I do not have any of them, nor do I have any gameplay experience with any of them. If and when I do get them added into my base game, I will either amend this review or write a new one! – L
Colt Express is a game of action programming in which players are trying to accumulate the most treasure over 5 rounds of play. Each round consists of 2 phases – Schemin’ and Stealin’. During the Schemin’ phase, players select action cards from their hand and play them to the center of the table in turn order. Possible actions are: Move between cars, Change floors, Shoot, Rob, or Move the Marshall. Depending on the round requirements, cards will be played either face-up or face-down. Face-up cards allow your opponents to see what you are programming and gives everyone a chance to counteract those actions, while the face-down cards leave some mystery to your strategy and your ultimate plan for victory. During the Stealin’ phase, the action cards are actually performed in the same order in which they were played. A new round card is then revealed, and players start the next Schemin’ phase. After 5 rounds, the player who has accumulated the most loot is the winner!
I have to start by saying that I generally do not like action programming games. I like to have a clear step-by-step strategy that I am able to adjust and adapt based on the current play situations. In action programming games, that really isn’t possible because you have to commit to your chosen actions before they are played out. That makes these games more chaotic than I would like because your carefully thought-out plans can be easily compromised by one single action of an opponent, throwing your strategy out the window. That being said, I think Colt Express approaches action programming in a unique way that takes the game to the next level. How? By varying whether your programmed actions are public or private knowledge. Depending on the round, you play cards face-up or face-down to the center of the table. As stated earlier, face-up cards give your opponents a peek at your strategy while your face-down cards keep some mystery in your plans. I really like this approach because it makes the game less luck-driven and gives players the opportunity to play with some semblance of strategy. Instead of focusing on just your actions and hoping that they aren’t inadvertently compromised, you get the chance to see some of what your opponents are planning and adjust your gameplay based on that. Yes, there will always be some twists and surprises that you didn’t see coming, but you’ve got to think beyond your strategy and keep yourself safe from other players. The added element of partial hidden-information makes Colt Express a more exciting game for me.
Let’s talk components next. I think the game components of Colt Express make the game so neat and cute at the same time. Colt Express is played on an actual 3D cardboard train! Each player has a meeple in their color, and you get to physically move your merson around the train according to your programmed actions. I think it works great by adding that spacial element to help players visualize their movement. The components themselves are pretty good quality, in my opinion. The train and the loot tokens are made of nice sturdy cardboard, and I know they will hold up to lots of plays. And don’t sweat it – the train can be stored fully-assembled in the box! That minimizes the time required for setup, and lets you get right to playing.
All in all, I think Colt Express is a fun game that requires strategy, but is not a brain-burner. There’s still enough luck involved to keep everyone on their toes, and the ensuing quasi-chaos really make the game feel like a train heist. If you haven’t tried Colt Express, I would recommend you do. It’s not on my list of favorite games, but it’s one that I like to bring out every so often! Purple Phoenix Games gives Colt Express a high-speed 15 / 24.
Take Me Apart by Kelela
5.8
Rate It
Album Watch
With great anticipation, Kelela's debut album emerges as an epic portrait of an artist spanning the...
dance electronic R&B pop
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Deception: Murder in Hong Kong in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019
One of the funnest (yeah I know, it’s not a word) parts of board gaming is getting to introduce new people to the hobby! Whether it’s a family gathering or a party with friends, I love breaking out a fun game for any occasion! Some board gamers have an aversion to the ‘party’ games category, but I think you just need to find the right game for the group to have the best experience! One of those games, for me, is Deception: Murder in Hong Kong!
MURDER! As an Investigator, that’s just another day on the job for you. This time feels different, though. Something about this case is off… After the initial evidence is gathered, the team’s Forensic Scientist has disclosed to the team that the killer is one of the Investigators! Everyone is on edge, accusing every other Investigator of being the murderer. Everyone had potential means and motive, and it is up to you to figure it out! As the Forensic Scientist uncovers more evidence, the details of the crime will come to light, and the killer will be revealed. Put your investigative and deductive skills to the test as you try to unmask the killer, or throw the team off your scent if you are the culprit!
DISCLAIMER!! This review is for vanilla Deception: Murder in Hong Kong. We have plans to add in the expansion once one of us purchases it and learns it and teaches it to the rest of us. Should that happen and our review change, we will add that information to this review or to a new review and link to it from here. -T
Deception: Murder in Hong Kong is a game of bluffing, deduction, and hidden identity. All players (except for the Forensic Scientist) have a secret role in the game – Investigator, Witness, Murderer, or Accomplice. The Forensic Scientist knows who the killer is, and how they did it. It is their job to guide the Investigators to the killer by providing clues about the uncovered evidence. The Investigators are trying to interpret the clues and uncover the killer’s identity. The Witness knows who the killer is, but has not yet figured out how they did it. The Murderer and Accomplice are looking to pin the murder on one of the other innocent members of the team! As clues are revealed, each player gets a chance to make a case against the player whom they think is the murderer. You must convince everyone of your logic, or else the killer could get away! In a game where everyone is a suspect, who can you trust? Gather clues, present your case, and put your poker face to the test in this ultimate game of deception! (See what I did there?)
I thoroughly enjoy games of deduction. Anything where you have to think and solve puzzles/riddles/etc. is fun for me. In Deception, it’s a race to see who can find the solution first. Not only do you have to deduce the correct answer from the provided clues, but you also have to put your persuasive skills to the test! Unless you can convince everyone that a specific player is the killer, they might turn their accusations towards someone else, or even worse, towards YOU! You really have to think outside of the box to interpret the Forensic Scientist’s clues, and I like to challenge myself to find the solution in as few turns as possible. The faster I can solve the murder, the smarter I feel. Don’t lie, it makes you feel smart too when you figure it out before anyone else!
The only part of Deception that I don’t really enjoy is the bluffing aspect, which is one of the most integral parts of the game, I know. I am just a horrible liar with a questionable poker face. If we play and I am the Murderer, I am almost always found out. Whenever anyone accuses me, my mind blanks and I cannot think of a single convincing way to get everyone off my scent! That is a personal problem, though, because when I get to be just a regular ol’ Investigator, I have a blast! I can still be accused, but I always feel like I have an easier time getting people off my case if I am actually innocent. I know some people really enjoy being the Murderer because they like the challenge of deceiving the entire team. I am not one of those people though. If I was guaranteed to be just a plain Investigator (or the Forensic Scientist) every time, I would probably pull this game out more!
Deception: Murder in Hong Kong is a ‘party’ game, but with the right group, it can still be a challenging game. A higher player count, in this case, does not necessarily equate to a chaotic game either. So give Deception a try. It’ll be worth it! Purple Phoenix Games gives it a 17 / 24.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2018/12/26/deception-murder-in-hong-kong-review/
MURDER! As an Investigator, that’s just another day on the job for you. This time feels different, though. Something about this case is off… After the initial evidence is gathered, the team’s Forensic Scientist has disclosed to the team that the killer is one of the Investigators! Everyone is on edge, accusing every other Investigator of being the murderer. Everyone had potential means and motive, and it is up to you to figure it out! As the Forensic Scientist uncovers more evidence, the details of the crime will come to light, and the killer will be revealed. Put your investigative and deductive skills to the test as you try to unmask the killer, or throw the team off your scent if you are the culprit!
DISCLAIMER!! This review is for vanilla Deception: Murder in Hong Kong. We have plans to add in the expansion once one of us purchases it and learns it and teaches it to the rest of us. Should that happen and our review change, we will add that information to this review or to a new review and link to it from here. -T
Deception: Murder in Hong Kong is a game of bluffing, deduction, and hidden identity. All players (except for the Forensic Scientist) have a secret role in the game – Investigator, Witness, Murderer, or Accomplice. The Forensic Scientist knows who the killer is, and how they did it. It is their job to guide the Investigators to the killer by providing clues about the uncovered evidence. The Investigators are trying to interpret the clues and uncover the killer’s identity. The Witness knows who the killer is, but has not yet figured out how they did it. The Murderer and Accomplice are looking to pin the murder on one of the other innocent members of the team! As clues are revealed, each player gets a chance to make a case against the player whom they think is the murderer. You must convince everyone of your logic, or else the killer could get away! In a game where everyone is a suspect, who can you trust? Gather clues, present your case, and put your poker face to the test in this ultimate game of deception! (See what I did there?)
I thoroughly enjoy games of deduction. Anything where you have to think and solve puzzles/riddles/etc. is fun for me. In Deception, it’s a race to see who can find the solution first. Not only do you have to deduce the correct answer from the provided clues, but you also have to put your persuasive skills to the test! Unless you can convince everyone that a specific player is the killer, they might turn their accusations towards someone else, or even worse, towards YOU! You really have to think outside of the box to interpret the Forensic Scientist’s clues, and I like to challenge myself to find the solution in as few turns as possible. The faster I can solve the murder, the smarter I feel. Don’t lie, it makes you feel smart too when you figure it out before anyone else!
The only part of Deception that I don’t really enjoy is the bluffing aspect, which is one of the most integral parts of the game, I know. I am just a horrible liar with a questionable poker face. If we play and I am the Murderer, I am almost always found out. Whenever anyone accuses me, my mind blanks and I cannot think of a single convincing way to get everyone off my scent! That is a personal problem, though, because when I get to be just a regular ol’ Investigator, I have a blast! I can still be accused, but I always feel like I have an easier time getting people off my case if I am actually innocent. I know some people really enjoy being the Murderer because they like the challenge of deceiving the entire team. I am not one of those people though. If I was guaranteed to be just a plain Investigator (or the Forensic Scientist) every time, I would probably pull this game out more!
Deception: Murder in Hong Kong is a ‘party’ game, but with the right group, it can still be a challenging game. A higher player count, in this case, does not necessarily equate to a chaotic game either. So give Deception a try. It’ll be worth it! Purple Phoenix Games gives it a 17 / 24.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2018/12/26/deception-murder-in-hong-kong-review/