Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Skyscraper (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
As sponsored by Duck Tape.
I have a fundamental problem with this film. And it’s not that it’s an irrevocably cheesy and derivative action movie, since you could automatically assume that by watching the ridiculously over-the-top trailer. But more on that later.
Dwayne Johnson plays Will Sawyer, a security expert left one-legged after a disastrous FBI operation 10 years previously. Now Will has moved with his wife Sarah (Neve Campbell, “Scream”, “House of Cards”) and two young kids into “The Pearl” in Hong Kong, the tallest building – by several Shards – in the world, designed and constructed by tech billionaire Zhao Long Ji (Chin Han, “Independence Day: Resurgence“). As the first residents, the family live in isolated splendour on a high floor. But in true “Die Hard” fashion, baddies, led by a the unconvincingly evil “Scandinavian” Kores Botha (Roland Møller, “The Commuter“), are intent on controlling and then destroying the high-rise. As fire races up towards his family, Will has to use all his physical capabilities to re-enter the building and save his family.
Now, there are implausible leaps in films and then there are IMPLAUSIBLE leaps!
As a story it’s well-crafted but completely bonkers. There are more ludicrous plot holes than muscles on Johnson’s well-crafted body. Why exactly does Botha needs to implement such a ridiculously convoluted plot to secure his goal? Why wasn’t the lift drop delayed by two minutes? Why don’t critical access controls have two-factor authentication? And – most perplexing of all – why don’t the “heaven cameras” show the building below?!!
Big, bigger, biggest!
Both “Die Hard” and “The Towering Inferno”, of which this is an unsubtle blend, could both be similarly accused of lacking credibility but were fun rides. This is not in the same league as either, but has its moments of vertiginous excitement. Johnson is suitably energetic in the muscular lead but lacks acting nuance. I was trying to analyse why this is, and I came down to his eyeballs! In conversation with Campbell, his eyes dart from left to right and back again, as if an army of ants are running over her face. He needs to take lessons on fixed stares from Michael Caine!
Duck tape! Anyone knows if you put two bits together you never get them apart again!
As the title of this review implies, Duck Tape also plays a key role: not for Johnson the fancy blue light/red light gloves of Tom Cruise! It also derives one of the best of a series of quotable lines from the film: “If it can’t be fixed with Duck Tape, you’re not using enough Duck Tape!”.
Neve Campbell is actually the best actor in the film, proving to be suitably kick-ass in her own right. It’s a shame she’s been rather tagged as ‘the screaming girl from “Scream”… no, not Barrymore, the other one’: she deserves more feature film opportunities like this one.
The best acting in the movie from Neve Campbell, here with a Noah Cottrell and a supremely confident performance by McKenna Roberts.
Rawson Marshall Thurber (“Central Intelligence“, “Dodgeball”) keeps the action to a tight 102 minutes, but needs to keep more control over his Hong Kong extras: there is far too much ‘twenty-second-pointing’ and over exuberant jumping up and down going on that draws the attention away from the principals. This is particularly the case in the Die-Hard rip-off of an ending (“HOOOLLLLLLYYYYYY!!!”).
As a popcorn piece of escapist nonsense, it’s serviceable and delivers as a B-grade movie… it’s not good enough to be a “Die Hard” classic, and not bad enough to be a “so bad it’s good” disaster like “Into the Storm“.
Taiwanese actress Hannah Quinlivan as Xia, the ruthless hit-girl.
You’ll note that I haven’t rubbished the film per se. So why then do I hold a negative view of the flick, and indeed somewhat regret going to see it?
One word – – Grenfell.
I knew the plot on going in, but didn’t equate just how damaging the mental effects of that dreadful night of 14th June 2017 were on my soul. Traumatic incendiary scenes together with some insensitive dialogue (“We’re going to turn that tower into a chimney”) broke through the wall of “entertainment” and left just a sick feeling in my stomach. And my wife had exactly the same feelings as we debriefed afterwards. This is a film that might have benefited from sitting on the shelf for a couple of years before release.
If you can separate in your mind the movie story from the shocking reality of one of life’s most unpleasant recent twists, then good for you: go and enjoy the movie. But I wasn’t so lucky so on a purely personal basis this is one occasion when I will give a film two ratings.
Dwayne Johnson plays Will Sawyer, a security expert left one-legged after a disastrous FBI operation 10 years previously. Now Will has moved with his wife Sarah (Neve Campbell, “Scream”, “House of Cards”) and two young kids into “The Pearl” in Hong Kong, the tallest building – by several Shards – in the world, designed and constructed by tech billionaire Zhao Long Ji (Chin Han, “Independence Day: Resurgence“). As the first residents, the family live in isolated splendour on a high floor. But in true “Die Hard” fashion, baddies, led by a the unconvincingly evil “Scandinavian” Kores Botha (Roland Møller, “The Commuter“), are intent on controlling and then destroying the high-rise. As fire races up towards his family, Will has to use all his physical capabilities to re-enter the building and save his family.
Now, there are implausible leaps in films and then there are IMPLAUSIBLE leaps!
As a story it’s well-crafted but completely bonkers. There are more ludicrous plot holes than muscles on Johnson’s well-crafted body. Why exactly does Botha needs to implement such a ridiculously convoluted plot to secure his goal? Why wasn’t the lift drop delayed by two minutes? Why don’t critical access controls have two-factor authentication? And – most perplexing of all – why don’t the “heaven cameras” show the building below?!!
Big, bigger, biggest!
Both “Die Hard” and “The Towering Inferno”, of which this is an unsubtle blend, could both be similarly accused of lacking credibility but were fun rides. This is not in the same league as either, but has its moments of vertiginous excitement. Johnson is suitably energetic in the muscular lead but lacks acting nuance. I was trying to analyse why this is, and I came down to his eyeballs! In conversation with Campbell, his eyes dart from left to right and back again, as if an army of ants are running over her face. He needs to take lessons on fixed stares from Michael Caine!
Duck tape! Anyone knows if you put two bits together you never get them apart again!
As the title of this review implies, Duck Tape also plays a key role: not for Johnson the fancy blue light/red light gloves of Tom Cruise! It also derives one of the best of a series of quotable lines from the film: “If it can’t be fixed with Duck Tape, you’re not using enough Duck Tape!”.
Neve Campbell is actually the best actor in the film, proving to be suitably kick-ass in her own right. It’s a shame she’s been rather tagged as ‘the screaming girl from “Scream”… no, not Barrymore, the other one’: she deserves more feature film opportunities like this one.
The best acting in the movie from Neve Campbell, here with a Noah Cottrell and a supremely confident performance by McKenna Roberts.
Rawson Marshall Thurber (“Central Intelligence“, “Dodgeball”) keeps the action to a tight 102 minutes, but needs to keep more control over his Hong Kong extras: there is far too much ‘twenty-second-pointing’ and over exuberant jumping up and down going on that draws the attention away from the principals. This is particularly the case in the Die-Hard rip-off of an ending (“HOOOLLLLLLYYYYYY!!!”).
As a popcorn piece of escapist nonsense, it’s serviceable and delivers as a B-grade movie… it’s not good enough to be a “Die Hard” classic, and not bad enough to be a “so bad it’s good” disaster like “Into the Storm“.
Taiwanese actress Hannah Quinlivan as Xia, the ruthless hit-girl.
You’ll note that I haven’t rubbished the film per se. So why then do I hold a negative view of the flick, and indeed somewhat regret going to see it?
One word – – Grenfell.
I knew the plot on going in, but didn’t equate just how damaging the mental effects of that dreadful night of 14th June 2017 were on my soul. Traumatic incendiary scenes together with some insensitive dialogue (“We’re going to turn that tower into a chimney”) broke through the wall of “entertainment” and left just a sick feeling in my stomach. And my wife had exactly the same feelings as we debriefed afterwards. This is a film that might have benefited from sitting on the shelf for a couple of years before release.
If you can separate in your mind the movie story from the shocking reality of one of life’s most unpleasant recent twists, then good for you: go and enjoy the movie. But I wasn’t so lucky so on a purely personal basis this is one occasion when I will give a film two ratings.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Tides of Madness in Tabletop Games
Dec 7, 2021
As you know, the world of board games is quite vast – there are so many games out there, I feel like I can barely keep up! So oftentimes when I come across a game, it’s not necessarily a new one. Enter Tides of Madness. It maaaay sound familiar, and that is because it is a reimplementation of Tides of Time (which we have reviewed before). Is this just a Cthulhian re-theme of the same game, or does it alter the gameplay at all? Keep reading to find out!
Tides of Madness is a game of card drafting and set collection in which 2 players are trying to amass the most points by the end of 3 rounds. To setup for a game, shuffle the deck and deal 5 cards to each player. Place the rest aside as a draw deck, and place the Madness tokens within reach. Each of the 3 rounds is broken down into 3 phases: Drafting, Scoring, and Refresh. During the Drafting phase, each player will choose one card from their hand to keep, and place it face-down in front of them. Once both players have chosen their card, they will be revealed simultaneously and placed in your tableau. Take the remaining cards from your hand and pass them to your opponent. You now draft another card from this new hand, and will then pass the cards again. Drafting continues in this fashion until both players have no cards remaining in hand.
The next phase, Scoring, now begins. Players check their tableau and take a Madness token for each card with a Madness icon. The player with the most Madness this round can choose to gain an additional 4 VP or heal (discard) one Madness token. An important note – if at any time a player receives 9 or more Madness tokens, they immediately lose the game! So keep an eye on those cards, and know when to heal. Next, players will score the cards based on printed objectives – sets of suits, majority of a suit, etc. Points are tallied on the score pad. Finally, the Refresh phase gets you ready for the next round. Each player collects their tableau and selects one card to keep for the next round, and another card to discard from the game. Players simultaneously reveal their kept card and it starts the round already in their tableau. Players will draw 2 new cards to total 5 in hand, and the next round is ready to begin. Play ends either if a player has 9 or more Madness, or after a total of 3 rounds. After the 3rd and final round, all points are added up and the player with the highest score wins.
So if you’re thinking this game is basically Tides of Time, you’re pretty much correct. The only difference between the two is the concept/mechanic of the Madness tokens. And honestly, I think the inclusion of the tokens elevates the strategy a bit. In Tides of Time, it really is all about set collection. But with Madness tokens, you’ve got some risk/reward balance to play with. Do you take a card to complete a set even though it gives you a Madness token? Or do you leave it for last so your opponent is forced to take it? The same applies to the extra step in the Scoring phase. Do you risk keeping all your Madness to snag 4 extra VP or is it better (and safer) to heal 1? It just adds another element to the gameplay that makes it feel a little more engaging and exciting than simple set collection.
To touch on components for a minute – this game consists of 18 oversized cards, a bunch of cardboard Madness tokens, a score pad, and small pencil. The artwork on the cards is appropriately thematic and dark, and the text is clear and easy to interpret. The Madness icon on certain cards is a bunch of tentacles on the side of the card, and it is easy to see which cards are affected and which are not. The tokens and score pad are both decent quality as well. Although not 100% necessary, I appreciate the inclusion of a score pad just to help you remember points between rounds. All in all, good production all around.
I have to say that of the two, I prefer Tides of Madness over Tides of Time. You may have noticed that I have rated both games at a 4, but the Madness element in this one just pushes it over the top for me. Both are good games, don’t get me wrong! Either work as a good set collection/drafting game, and are quick to learn and play. Tides of Madness just engages me a little more and that makes the overall gameplay more enjoyable for me. So all in all, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a maddening 4 / 6.
Tides of Madness is a game of card drafting and set collection in which 2 players are trying to amass the most points by the end of 3 rounds. To setup for a game, shuffle the deck and deal 5 cards to each player. Place the rest aside as a draw deck, and place the Madness tokens within reach. Each of the 3 rounds is broken down into 3 phases: Drafting, Scoring, and Refresh. During the Drafting phase, each player will choose one card from their hand to keep, and place it face-down in front of them. Once both players have chosen their card, they will be revealed simultaneously and placed in your tableau. Take the remaining cards from your hand and pass them to your opponent. You now draft another card from this new hand, and will then pass the cards again. Drafting continues in this fashion until both players have no cards remaining in hand.
The next phase, Scoring, now begins. Players check their tableau and take a Madness token for each card with a Madness icon. The player with the most Madness this round can choose to gain an additional 4 VP or heal (discard) one Madness token. An important note – if at any time a player receives 9 or more Madness tokens, they immediately lose the game! So keep an eye on those cards, and know when to heal. Next, players will score the cards based on printed objectives – sets of suits, majority of a suit, etc. Points are tallied on the score pad. Finally, the Refresh phase gets you ready for the next round. Each player collects their tableau and selects one card to keep for the next round, and another card to discard from the game. Players simultaneously reveal their kept card and it starts the round already in their tableau. Players will draw 2 new cards to total 5 in hand, and the next round is ready to begin. Play ends either if a player has 9 or more Madness, or after a total of 3 rounds. After the 3rd and final round, all points are added up and the player with the highest score wins.
So if you’re thinking this game is basically Tides of Time, you’re pretty much correct. The only difference between the two is the concept/mechanic of the Madness tokens. And honestly, I think the inclusion of the tokens elevates the strategy a bit. In Tides of Time, it really is all about set collection. But with Madness tokens, you’ve got some risk/reward balance to play with. Do you take a card to complete a set even though it gives you a Madness token? Or do you leave it for last so your opponent is forced to take it? The same applies to the extra step in the Scoring phase. Do you risk keeping all your Madness to snag 4 extra VP or is it better (and safer) to heal 1? It just adds another element to the gameplay that makes it feel a little more engaging and exciting than simple set collection.
To touch on components for a minute – this game consists of 18 oversized cards, a bunch of cardboard Madness tokens, a score pad, and small pencil. The artwork on the cards is appropriately thematic and dark, and the text is clear and easy to interpret. The Madness icon on certain cards is a bunch of tentacles on the side of the card, and it is easy to see which cards are affected and which are not. The tokens and score pad are both decent quality as well. Although not 100% necessary, I appreciate the inclusion of a score pad just to help you remember points between rounds. All in all, good production all around.
I have to say that of the two, I prefer Tides of Madness over Tides of Time. You may have noticed that I have rated both games at a 4, but the Madness element in this one just pushes it over the top for me. Both are good games, don’t get me wrong! Either work as a good set collection/drafting game, and are quick to learn and play. Tides of Madness just engages me a little more and that makes the overall gameplay more enjoyable for me. So all in all, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a maddening 4 / 6.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Fold-it in Tabletop Games
Dec 28, 2021
When it comes to cooking, I am definitely no master chef. Up until recently, ‘cooking’ for me consisted of merely putting frozen food into the oven…. Don’t judge! I am taking strides to expand my culinary skills though, so slowly but surely I’ll become a (hopefully) decent chef. That being said, when I saw a cute little food game called Fold-It, I figured that I should at least be able to handle these game recipes. Does it hit the spot, or does it get the chop?
Fold-It is a real-time dexterity puzzle game in which players are trying to fold their Recipe Cloth to match the current Order Card. Setup is simple – give each player a Recipe Cloth and 3 Star Tokens. Choose whether you want to play with the Basic or Advanced Order Cards (or a mix of both types) and shuffle the deck. Place a number of Fold-It tokens in the middle of the table to equal one fewer token than number of players. The game is now ready to begin!
Played over a series of rounds, players will be racing to complete the current Order Card the fastest. How? By folding their Recipe Cloth! Each Recipe Cloth is printed with a 4×4 grid of different dishes. The Order Cards each show a combination of 1-4 dishes. When an Order Card is revealed, all players will then try to fold and arrange their Recipe Cloth so that only the dishes from the Order Card are displayed. You can fold your cloth horizontally or vertically along the columns, and the cloth is double-sided to help accomplish your goal as well. Once you have folded your Recipe Cloth so that the dishes match the Order Card, grab one of the Fold-It tokens from the center of the table. When all the Fold-It tokens have been claimed, check each completed Recipe Cloth to verify that it is correct. If your Recipe Cloth matches, then you are in the clear! But if you made a mistake and had grabbed a Fold-It token, lose one of your Star tokens. *womp womp* The remaining player who was not able to grab a Fold-It token in the round discards one of their 3 Star tokens as well. The round is now over, and a new round begins by revealing the next Order Card. Play continues in this fashion until only one player remains with Star tokens. That player is declared the winner!
I have to admit that Fold-It surprised me, in a good way. I picked it up from a “Buy, Sell, Trade” Facebook group and really wasn’t expecting much from the gameplay. But when I actually got it to the table, I had a blast with it! The theme is cute, the gameplay is quirky, and it’s actually trickier than it looks. Some of the orders require you to fold the cloth in unique ways, and it can kind of be a brain burner. Add in the real-time racing element, and you’ve got an exciting game on your hands. Is it the most amazing and strategic game that I’ve ever played? No. But it’s pretty engaging for a light and fast filler game.
The components are pretty straight-forward. Cardboard tokens, nice sturdy cards, and actual cloth for the Recipe Cloth. The artwork is colorful and cute, and the tokens and cards will withstand many plays. I do especially like the Recipe Cloths too. The fact that they are actual cloth means that you won’t be worried about creasing issues from constant folding and unfolding between rounds and games. The cloths are double-sided as well to give you a boost for strategy as well. I will point out that all cloths are printed the exact same way, so it’s not like a Bingo board that varies between players. Everyone has the same tools with which to work each round, and everyone is on an even playing field that way. Nice components overall, in my opinion!
All in all, am I happy with my Fold-It purchase? Yes. It’s a quirky little filler game that is engaging and entertaining for all players. Yeah, there’s a player elimination element, but the game overall is so fast that the eliminated player(s) won’t be sitting around for long. Who knew that folding a piece of cloth could get your heart racing so fast? Fold-It is definitely a game that I’ll pull out when I need something quick and simple, or with which I can introduce people to the hobby. I guess if you play it too much, it would get kind of stale, but I don’t see that happening for me. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a tasty 4 / 6.
Fold-It is a real-time dexterity puzzle game in which players are trying to fold their Recipe Cloth to match the current Order Card. Setup is simple – give each player a Recipe Cloth and 3 Star Tokens. Choose whether you want to play with the Basic or Advanced Order Cards (or a mix of both types) and shuffle the deck. Place a number of Fold-It tokens in the middle of the table to equal one fewer token than number of players. The game is now ready to begin!
Played over a series of rounds, players will be racing to complete the current Order Card the fastest. How? By folding their Recipe Cloth! Each Recipe Cloth is printed with a 4×4 grid of different dishes. The Order Cards each show a combination of 1-4 dishes. When an Order Card is revealed, all players will then try to fold and arrange their Recipe Cloth so that only the dishes from the Order Card are displayed. You can fold your cloth horizontally or vertically along the columns, and the cloth is double-sided to help accomplish your goal as well. Once you have folded your Recipe Cloth so that the dishes match the Order Card, grab one of the Fold-It tokens from the center of the table. When all the Fold-It tokens have been claimed, check each completed Recipe Cloth to verify that it is correct. If your Recipe Cloth matches, then you are in the clear! But if you made a mistake and had grabbed a Fold-It token, lose one of your Star tokens. *womp womp* The remaining player who was not able to grab a Fold-It token in the round discards one of their 3 Star tokens as well. The round is now over, and a new round begins by revealing the next Order Card. Play continues in this fashion until only one player remains with Star tokens. That player is declared the winner!
I have to admit that Fold-It surprised me, in a good way. I picked it up from a “Buy, Sell, Trade” Facebook group and really wasn’t expecting much from the gameplay. But when I actually got it to the table, I had a blast with it! The theme is cute, the gameplay is quirky, and it’s actually trickier than it looks. Some of the orders require you to fold the cloth in unique ways, and it can kind of be a brain burner. Add in the real-time racing element, and you’ve got an exciting game on your hands. Is it the most amazing and strategic game that I’ve ever played? No. But it’s pretty engaging for a light and fast filler game.
The components are pretty straight-forward. Cardboard tokens, nice sturdy cards, and actual cloth for the Recipe Cloth. The artwork is colorful and cute, and the tokens and cards will withstand many plays. I do especially like the Recipe Cloths too. The fact that they are actual cloth means that you won’t be worried about creasing issues from constant folding and unfolding between rounds and games. The cloths are double-sided as well to give you a boost for strategy as well. I will point out that all cloths are printed the exact same way, so it’s not like a Bingo board that varies between players. Everyone has the same tools with which to work each round, and everyone is on an even playing field that way. Nice components overall, in my opinion!
All in all, am I happy with my Fold-It purchase? Yes. It’s a quirky little filler game that is engaging and entertaining for all players. Yeah, there’s a player elimination element, but the game overall is so fast that the eliminated player(s) won’t be sitting around for long. Who knew that folding a piece of cloth could get your heart racing so fast? Fold-It is definitely a game that I’ll pull out when I need something quick and simple, or with which I can introduce people to the hobby. I guess if you play it too much, it would get kind of stale, but I don’t see that happening for me. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a tasty 4 / 6.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Glass (2019) in Movies
Feb 1, 2019 (Updated Feb 1, 2019)
First 2 acts are interesting (1 more)
MacAvoy is great
A Textbook Example On How Not To End A Trilogy
Contains spoilers, click to show
Glass is the 3rd movie in M. Night Shyamalan's pseudo superhero trilogy following Unbreakable and Split. Unfortunately it is probably the worst movie out of the three and doesn't live up to the twenty years of build-up it has had going into it. Full spoilers will be present through this review as it's kind of hard to discuss the film without spoiling anything.
The movie opens with what is essentially a condensed version of both Unbreakable and Split. We see Bruce Willis' Dennis Dunn stalking criminals in his poncho and we see James MacAvoy's Kevin Wendell Crumb keeping four young girls captured in an abandoned warehouse. The old 'unstoppable force meets immovable object,' trope plays out and the two of them wind up getting caught by Sarah Paulson and her team, who apparently specialise in investigating those who have delusions about having superhuman powers.
She brings the two of them to a mental hospital where she is keeping Samuel L Jackson's Mr Glass. Sarah Paulson's character then spends the next chunk of the movie trying to convince the three that the powers that they believe they possess is actually in their heads and there is a real-world, logical explanation to everything that they can do. This part of the film is actually pretty interesting in the ideas that it poses and I liked where the film was going at this point.
Then the third act happens and we are reminded why Shyamalan so desperately needs an editor to keep his ideas in check. There is this huge build up that takes place teasing an epic fight between Dunn and The Beast at the top of some huge brand new building in the middle of the city. Unfortunately we never get there and instead we just get some mediocre action choreography in a medium sized car park between the two. The whole thing ends with the fairly contrived retcon twist that Kevin's dad was in the same train crash that Dunn survived and Mr Glass caused, thus making Mr Glass the 'creator,' of both superheroes. Then the three characters die in an extremely anticlimactic fashion. The Beast breaks a couple of Mr Glass' bones and he falls out of his wheelchair and dies, (even though this is something that we have seen happen to him in Unbreakable and he survived it.) Then a sniper randomly shoots Kevin even though the beast is tamed by the appearance of Anya Taylor-Joy's character, Casey from Split. He just gets shot once and dies with hardly any fanfare. Then David Dunn is drowned in a puddle as Sarah Paulson explains that she is part of a secret organisation that hunts people who believe that they are superheroes, determines whether or not they really are superheroes through a pretty drawn-out process and then proceeds to kill them if they do in fact possess superpowers. We also see that for some reason this group apparently only meets in crowded public restaurants in the middle of the city centre in broad daylight and have to wait until any non members of this super secret club, (that just killed 3 people in a public car park in broad daylight in front of cops and family members,) have left the restaurant before they can discuss business. Then it turns out that Mr Glass leaked the footage from the hospital security cameras online so that people would see that superheroes really do exist.
If you are someone that hasn't seen the movie and doesn't care about spoilers so you just read this review anyway; your brain is probably falling out of your ear after reading my description of the third act and that's because on paper this whole sequence of events is absolutely ludicrous and the fact that no one pointed this out during the movie's production is mind-boggling.
What a waste after two solid movies and a decent two first acts worth of build up...
There are some positives I took away though. It is as much of an absolute joy to watch James MacAvoy play so many totally different characters convincingly in one scene as it was in Split, maybe even more so here as we get to see even more personalities emerge and in even quicker succession. He is an utterly phenomenal actor. It is also cool to see Mr Glass and David Dunn after twenty years to see where they are at in their lives and how they have been spending their time since the events of Unbreakable. There are also some nice shots and camera angles in the film, (more so in the first two acts of the story,) and some nice colour scheme aesthetics going on in certain compositions that made some shots more interesting to look at.
Overall, this movie could have been so much more and in the end it throws away some really potentially interesting plot threads in favour for a few tacked on twists and gives us nothing more than a half arsed conclusion to an otherwise solid trilogy.
The movie opens with what is essentially a condensed version of both Unbreakable and Split. We see Bruce Willis' Dennis Dunn stalking criminals in his poncho and we see James MacAvoy's Kevin Wendell Crumb keeping four young girls captured in an abandoned warehouse. The old 'unstoppable force meets immovable object,' trope plays out and the two of them wind up getting caught by Sarah Paulson and her team, who apparently specialise in investigating those who have delusions about having superhuman powers.
She brings the two of them to a mental hospital where she is keeping Samuel L Jackson's Mr Glass. Sarah Paulson's character then spends the next chunk of the movie trying to convince the three that the powers that they believe they possess is actually in their heads and there is a real-world, logical explanation to everything that they can do. This part of the film is actually pretty interesting in the ideas that it poses and I liked where the film was going at this point.
Then the third act happens and we are reminded why Shyamalan so desperately needs an editor to keep his ideas in check. There is this huge build up that takes place teasing an epic fight between Dunn and The Beast at the top of some huge brand new building in the middle of the city. Unfortunately we never get there and instead we just get some mediocre action choreography in a medium sized car park between the two. The whole thing ends with the fairly contrived retcon twist that Kevin's dad was in the same train crash that Dunn survived and Mr Glass caused, thus making Mr Glass the 'creator,' of both superheroes. Then the three characters die in an extremely anticlimactic fashion. The Beast breaks a couple of Mr Glass' bones and he falls out of his wheelchair and dies, (even though this is something that we have seen happen to him in Unbreakable and he survived it.) Then a sniper randomly shoots Kevin even though the beast is tamed by the appearance of Anya Taylor-Joy's character, Casey from Split. He just gets shot once and dies with hardly any fanfare. Then David Dunn is drowned in a puddle as Sarah Paulson explains that she is part of a secret organisation that hunts people who believe that they are superheroes, determines whether or not they really are superheroes through a pretty drawn-out process and then proceeds to kill them if they do in fact possess superpowers. We also see that for some reason this group apparently only meets in crowded public restaurants in the middle of the city centre in broad daylight and have to wait until any non members of this super secret club, (that just killed 3 people in a public car park in broad daylight in front of cops and family members,) have left the restaurant before they can discuss business. Then it turns out that Mr Glass leaked the footage from the hospital security cameras online so that people would see that superheroes really do exist.
If you are someone that hasn't seen the movie and doesn't care about spoilers so you just read this review anyway; your brain is probably falling out of your ear after reading my description of the third act and that's because on paper this whole sequence of events is absolutely ludicrous and the fact that no one pointed this out during the movie's production is mind-boggling.
What a waste after two solid movies and a decent two first acts worth of build up...
There are some positives I took away though. It is as much of an absolute joy to watch James MacAvoy play so many totally different characters convincingly in one scene as it was in Split, maybe even more so here as we get to see even more personalities emerge and in even quicker succession. He is an utterly phenomenal actor. It is also cool to see Mr Glass and David Dunn after twenty years to see where they are at in their lives and how they have been spending their time since the events of Unbreakable. There are also some nice shots and camera angles in the film, (more so in the first two acts of the story,) and some nice colour scheme aesthetics going on in certain compositions that made some shots more interesting to look at.
Overall, this movie could have been so much more and in the end it throws away some really potentially interesting plot threads in favour for a few tacked on twists and gives us nothing more than a half arsed conclusion to an otherwise solid trilogy.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Avengers: Endgame (2019) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
The MCU will never be the same again
I’m not going to sit here and tell you that Avengers: Endgame is the best movie of the MCU, because frankly; it isn’t. It’s not even in my top three. However, as a culmination of everything Marvel has been working up to since 2008, it has to be applauded.
From a technical standpoint, Endgame is like nothing else we’ve ever seen come to the big screen, with a cast that pushes the film to breaking point, characters we remember from movies past and some we had perhaps forgotten about hit the screen in epic fashion. But how good is the finished product?
Adrift in space with no food or water, Tony Stark sends a message to Pepper Potts as his oxygen supply starts to dwindle. Meanwhile, the remaining Avengers – Thor, Black Widow, Captain America and Bruce Banner – must figure out a way to bring back their vanquished allies for an epic showdown with Thanos – the evil demigod who decimated the planet and the universe.
Directors Joe and Anthony Russo, who have by this point, helmed four MCU movies including the brilliant Captain America: Civil War are a safe pair of hands for this incredible feat of film-making, even if the movie feels overstuffed from time to time.
The film starts off exceptionally, with beautiful cinematography lending itself to some intriguing character development. Let’s not forget that we’ve been growing with some of these characters for 10 years and yet Endgame still manages to surprise and delight with new facets of their personalities.
This is helped of course by the tightly written script, but is mainly down to the actors who portray these icons of cinema. Robert Downey Jr is the best he’s been since the solo Iron Man movies and both Chris Evans and Hemsworth are immensely likeable as Captain America and Thor respectively. Unfortunately, Thor’s character arc here is a little disappointing as the Russo’s turn him into the butt of too many jokes – he is the god of thunder after all.
Where the film does suffer is with some of the newer characters. Brie Larson’s irritating Carol Danvers gets far too much screen time for someone so new to the franchise, and this sometimes feels at the expense of better, more established fan favourites. There’s nothing particularly wrong with her Captain Marvel, but she’s wooden and remains unlikeable, as she did in her solo outing earlier this year.
One individual that does standout however is Karen Gillan’s, Nebula. Always a secondary character up to this point, it’s fantastic to see her blossom and fully embody the personality of the troubled cyborg. In fact, she’s probably the best character across the entire running time.
Moments that should have more poignancy don’t get the respect they deserve
Josh Brolin’s Thanos is as intimidating as ever, though perhaps not as much as he was in last year’s Infinity War. And while the script-writing and humour are as spot on as you can imagine for a movie baring the MCU badge of honour, the Russo brothers are forced to re-write some of the franchise’s own rules – for plot reasons of course.
For fans of the entire universe, this proves unnerving but as with any series that’s lasted this long, some artistic license needs to be taken to keep it feeling fresh.
One thing that can’t be criticised however is the pacing. For a film a little over three hours long, Endgame never feels dull. Sure, there are moments that could have been trimmed down, but from thrilling set piece to thrilling set piece, the film steamrolls itself into a final hour that will have your jaw hitting the floor numerous times.
From a special effects standpoint, Endgame deserves praise. It would be easy to criticise the film for overflowing with CGI rather than the practical effects that the Star Wars and Jurassic franchises rely on, but this would be doing a disservice to the wonderful work the effects teams have done on this film. At no point are you under the illusion that this is all real, but it’s the best the MCU has been, especially towards the finale.
Nevertheless, the sheer scope of the film proves to be its undoing at times. Moments that should have more poignancy don’t get the respect they deserve and the number of characters vying for screen time naturally means some sacrifices needed to be made here and there.
Overall, Avengers: Endgame is a fitting tribute to the 21 films that came before it and acts as a cathartic exercise, putting to rest over a decade of thrilling, emotional and exciting movies. It’s action packed to the point of being exhausting and is, if you’ll pardon the pun, a technical marvel, but it just doesn’t quite hit the same heights as Infinity War and dare I say it, Thor: Ragnarok. As I stated at the beginning of this review, it would be easy for me to say Endgame is the best film in the franchise, but that would be doing a disservice to you the readers and the incredible films that truly deserve that title.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2019/04/27/avengers-endgame-review-the-mcu-will-never-be-the-same-again/
From a technical standpoint, Endgame is like nothing else we’ve ever seen come to the big screen, with a cast that pushes the film to breaking point, characters we remember from movies past and some we had perhaps forgotten about hit the screen in epic fashion. But how good is the finished product?
Adrift in space with no food or water, Tony Stark sends a message to Pepper Potts as his oxygen supply starts to dwindle. Meanwhile, the remaining Avengers – Thor, Black Widow, Captain America and Bruce Banner – must figure out a way to bring back their vanquished allies for an epic showdown with Thanos – the evil demigod who decimated the planet and the universe.
Directors Joe and Anthony Russo, who have by this point, helmed four MCU movies including the brilliant Captain America: Civil War are a safe pair of hands for this incredible feat of film-making, even if the movie feels overstuffed from time to time.
The film starts off exceptionally, with beautiful cinematography lending itself to some intriguing character development. Let’s not forget that we’ve been growing with some of these characters for 10 years and yet Endgame still manages to surprise and delight with new facets of their personalities.
This is helped of course by the tightly written script, but is mainly down to the actors who portray these icons of cinema. Robert Downey Jr is the best he’s been since the solo Iron Man movies and both Chris Evans and Hemsworth are immensely likeable as Captain America and Thor respectively. Unfortunately, Thor’s character arc here is a little disappointing as the Russo’s turn him into the butt of too many jokes – he is the god of thunder after all.
Where the film does suffer is with some of the newer characters. Brie Larson’s irritating Carol Danvers gets far too much screen time for someone so new to the franchise, and this sometimes feels at the expense of better, more established fan favourites. There’s nothing particularly wrong with her Captain Marvel, but she’s wooden and remains unlikeable, as she did in her solo outing earlier this year.
One individual that does standout however is Karen Gillan’s, Nebula. Always a secondary character up to this point, it’s fantastic to see her blossom and fully embody the personality of the troubled cyborg. In fact, she’s probably the best character across the entire running time.
Moments that should have more poignancy don’t get the respect they deserve
Josh Brolin’s Thanos is as intimidating as ever, though perhaps not as much as he was in last year’s Infinity War. And while the script-writing and humour are as spot on as you can imagine for a movie baring the MCU badge of honour, the Russo brothers are forced to re-write some of the franchise’s own rules – for plot reasons of course.
For fans of the entire universe, this proves unnerving but as with any series that’s lasted this long, some artistic license needs to be taken to keep it feeling fresh.
One thing that can’t be criticised however is the pacing. For a film a little over three hours long, Endgame never feels dull. Sure, there are moments that could have been trimmed down, but from thrilling set piece to thrilling set piece, the film steamrolls itself into a final hour that will have your jaw hitting the floor numerous times.
From a special effects standpoint, Endgame deserves praise. It would be easy to criticise the film for overflowing with CGI rather than the practical effects that the Star Wars and Jurassic franchises rely on, but this would be doing a disservice to the wonderful work the effects teams have done on this film. At no point are you under the illusion that this is all real, but it’s the best the MCU has been, especially towards the finale.
Nevertheless, the sheer scope of the film proves to be its undoing at times. Moments that should have more poignancy don’t get the respect they deserve and the number of characters vying for screen time naturally means some sacrifices needed to be made here and there.
Overall, Avengers: Endgame is a fitting tribute to the 21 films that came before it and acts as a cathartic exercise, putting to rest over a decade of thrilling, emotional and exciting movies. It’s action packed to the point of being exhausting and is, if you’ll pardon the pun, a technical marvel, but it just doesn’t quite hit the same heights as Infinity War and dare I say it, Thor: Ragnarok. As I stated at the beginning of this review, it would be easy for me to say Endgame is the best film in the franchise, but that would be doing a disservice to you the readers and the incredible films that truly deserve that title.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2019/04/27/avengers-endgame-review-the-mcu-will-never-be-the-same-again/
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Terminator Salvation (2009) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
In the year 2018, humans are resisting the machines Skynet created called terminators. John Connor is the man who is destined to lead the resistance. Everything John Connor knows is turned inside out when he comes across Marcus Wright. Marcus was put to death by lethal injection in 2003 for killing his brother and two cops yet here he stands today. When an all out assualt by John's superiors is declared on Skynet, John finds out that Kyle Reese (the man who would eventually become his father) has been captured and will be caught in the blast, he knows his only choice is to join forces with Marcus, rescue the human prisoners, and bring Skynet down.
Christian Bale may have been the biggest disappointment in this film. After everyone heard the sound clip of him blowing up on set at a cinematographer, everybody kind of wondered if Bale's success was getting to his head. Well, it just might have. That clip seemed to run through my mind an awful lot throughout the duration of the film. My biggest complaint was that John Connor yelled the majority of the time, even when there was no reason to. When he did talk normally, he used his Batman voice. It just didn't seem to fit since Bale is more than capable of altering his accent (Harsh Times, Rescue Dawn, The Prestige). It's an issue that was bound to come up eventually, but just didn't really click until now.
The other weak link of the film had to be the dialogue. It is incredibly cheesy at times. At the beginning of the film, one of John Connor's superiors yells, "You tell those men to respond, even if they're dead!" It just seemed to be over the top more often than not. While the dialogue was a bit on the atrocious side, the story did have one interesting element going for it. The entire film revolves around this element and is really the only new factor brought in to the Terminator franchise. While the film had its low points, I kept thinking that the film at least had this going for it. Then the ending rolled around and just completely dropped the ball.
With all the negative components of the film, there are still quite a few pieces of the puzzle that are worth mentioning. The action scenes are beyond superb. The camera always seems to be in the right spot at the right time and it isn't too close, which is a definite plus. It seems to be too close during action sequences and fighting scenes in most films these days and most of the action gets lost in the shuffle (Transformers is a good example). Being able to see everything without wondering what happened to this character or that character is a nice change. Something that should definitely happen more often. The entire scene with The Harvester is pretty phenomenal. There are also quite a few throwbacks to the first two films of the franchise. "Come with me if you want to live," and, "I'll be back," are both used in the film, Kyle Reese uses his signature weapon, a sawn off shotgun, Marcus Wright knocks the windshield out of the wrecking truck in a similar fashion the T-1000 did with the diesel in T2, John Connor cocking a gun and firing at a T-800 while being wounded much like Sarah Connor did with the T-1000 while being wounded in T2, and I'm sure quite a few more that I missed.
Sam Worthington should be getting all the attention Christian Bale is for this film. He actually makes you care about Marcus Wright despite what he's done in the past. The way he portrays his emotions and how he's done these horrible things yet is a decent guy deep down inside just makes you want to root for him. Anton Yelchin also deserves a mention. His version of Kyle Reese is pretty much spot on with how you'd imagine a younger version of Kyle Reese to act. His mannerisms, the way he talks, everything. He nailed it.
The sound was also spectacular. Sounds of huge terminators echoed off the walls and made the ground shake, helicoptor blades seemed to chop through the air in violent strokes, motorcycles screeched from one side of the theater to the other to sound like they were going right by you, and you could feel the area around you rumble whenever there was a huge explosion. The sound is definitely a huge aspect of an action film and it really delivered here.
Terminator: Salvation is worth seeing, but being a fan of the franchise and having high expectations may leave you walking away in disappointment. The film doesn't really elaborate on the war between humans and machines or really add anything to the franchise, when all is said and done. If you can somehow remember the first two films yet not compare this sequel with them while ignoring plot holes, Christian Bale's over the top performance, and cheesy dialogue, then you may be able to enjoy Terminator: Salvation to its full extent. But if you're looking for a great action film that fails to expand the Terminator mythos in any way, shape, or form, then this film delivers.
Christian Bale may have been the biggest disappointment in this film. After everyone heard the sound clip of him blowing up on set at a cinematographer, everybody kind of wondered if Bale's success was getting to his head. Well, it just might have. That clip seemed to run through my mind an awful lot throughout the duration of the film. My biggest complaint was that John Connor yelled the majority of the time, even when there was no reason to. When he did talk normally, he used his Batman voice. It just didn't seem to fit since Bale is more than capable of altering his accent (Harsh Times, Rescue Dawn, The Prestige). It's an issue that was bound to come up eventually, but just didn't really click until now.
The other weak link of the film had to be the dialogue. It is incredibly cheesy at times. At the beginning of the film, one of John Connor's superiors yells, "You tell those men to respond, even if they're dead!" It just seemed to be over the top more often than not. While the dialogue was a bit on the atrocious side, the story did have one interesting element going for it. The entire film revolves around this element and is really the only new factor brought in to the Terminator franchise. While the film had its low points, I kept thinking that the film at least had this going for it. Then the ending rolled around and just completely dropped the ball.
With all the negative components of the film, there are still quite a few pieces of the puzzle that are worth mentioning. The action scenes are beyond superb. The camera always seems to be in the right spot at the right time and it isn't too close, which is a definite plus. It seems to be too close during action sequences and fighting scenes in most films these days and most of the action gets lost in the shuffle (Transformers is a good example). Being able to see everything without wondering what happened to this character or that character is a nice change. Something that should definitely happen more often. The entire scene with The Harvester is pretty phenomenal. There are also quite a few throwbacks to the first two films of the franchise. "Come with me if you want to live," and, "I'll be back," are both used in the film, Kyle Reese uses his signature weapon, a sawn off shotgun, Marcus Wright knocks the windshield out of the wrecking truck in a similar fashion the T-1000 did with the diesel in T2, John Connor cocking a gun and firing at a T-800 while being wounded much like Sarah Connor did with the T-1000 while being wounded in T2, and I'm sure quite a few more that I missed.
Sam Worthington should be getting all the attention Christian Bale is for this film. He actually makes you care about Marcus Wright despite what he's done in the past. The way he portrays his emotions and how he's done these horrible things yet is a decent guy deep down inside just makes you want to root for him. Anton Yelchin also deserves a mention. His version of Kyle Reese is pretty much spot on with how you'd imagine a younger version of Kyle Reese to act. His mannerisms, the way he talks, everything. He nailed it.
The sound was also spectacular. Sounds of huge terminators echoed off the walls and made the ground shake, helicoptor blades seemed to chop through the air in violent strokes, motorcycles screeched from one side of the theater to the other to sound like they were going right by you, and you could feel the area around you rumble whenever there was a huge explosion. The sound is definitely a huge aspect of an action film and it really delivered here.
Terminator: Salvation is worth seeing, but being a fan of the franchise and having high expectations may leave you walking away in disappointment. The film doesn't really elaborate on the war between humans and machines or really add anything to the franchise, when all is said and done. If you can somehow remember the first two films yet not compare this sequel with them while ignoring plot holes, Christian Bale's over the top performance, and cheesy dialogue, then you may be able to enjoy Terminator: Salvation to its full extent. But if you're looking for a great action film that fails to expand the Terminator mythos in any way, shape, or form, then this film delivers.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Houses of Knowledge in Tabletop Games
Mar 26, 2020 (Updated Mar 26, 2020)
Museums. You know, the places you go with your family for, “fun bonding and learning experiences.” I have always been a big fan of museums. Art, Science & History, Aquariums, all of them! I like to stop and read the plaques too, but many times I am rushed along because EVERYTHING has to be seen. But did you know that museum curation could be interesting and cutthroat? I did not. Not until I played Houses of Knowledge, that is.
Houses of Knowledge pits 2-4 players against each other as museum curators desperately trying to fill their museums with interesting rooms and curious artifacts. In fact, a curator can end the competition once they are able to display eight lovely pieces in their halls. Beware, however, as the competition is also trying to gather the best gallery and may even attempt to pilfer your displayed items!
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, but the final components will be exactly the same as these shown, if the pending Kickstarter campaign is successful. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, but to give our readers a general feel for how the game plays. You can back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, order from your FLGS, or purchase through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
Setting up a game of Houses of Knowledge is quite a feat, as different decks need to be assembled according to player count. Refer to the rules to setup each deck. Once the decks are prepared and starting cards dealt to each player, create the Items and Actions markets by revealing six cards from each deck and assigning cost discs in decending order from the draw decks. Furthest away from the two draw decks will be placed the deck of Room cards, with two visible and available for purchase. These rooms will receive the leftover 5-value cost disc. Set the monicash aside to be used as a central bank. Determine the starting player and you are ready to begin!
Luckily, the game furnishes the players with reference cards so that all players have access to all options they are afforded on their turns. The first thing that happens on a turn is collecting income. Each turn a player earns 3 monicash (MC) plus the amounts earned from Rooms in their tableau. From here a turn has several options: buying Items or Actions from the market to your hand, paying 2 MC to play a card from your hand to your tableau, selling two cards for 2 MC, and buying Room cards.
When a player buys an Item or Action card from the market the new card is taken in hand, paying the cost shown on the cost disc either above or below the card taken. To play a card from hand, the player pays 2 MC to the bank and places an Item onto a corresponding Room card, or plays an Action card either on their own tableau or against an opponent.
Play continues in this fashion until one player is displaying eight Items in their Rooms or the draw decks are depleted. The round finishes completely so all players have an equal amount of turns, and then points are tallied and summed to determine the greatest curator and winner of Houses of Knowledge!
Components. As I mentioned in my disclaimer, we were provided a copy of this game for this preview. All components we were provided are finalized, so everything you see pictured here is how it will be upon a successful Kickstarter campaign. That said, the components are fantastic! The cards are good quality, the cost discs are good cardboard chips, and the money is the faux-paper money we are starting to see in games nowadays – and thank heavens for that! No more cheap Monopoly money! Oh by the way, the art on this one is superb and very chic. I love it!
So the game looks and feels great, but does it play well? YES. This one is excellent! At first it feels too simple because it is relatively easy to collect Rooms and Items to fit on those Rooms, so you think, “Heck, I can get eight Items in like four rounds!” That is, until your opponents hit you with some of the Action cards they’ve been hoarding unseen by you. One “friend” maybe steals one of your Items because you neglected to assign Guards to it, or the “pal” just before you in initiative order rearranges the Item cards so that the ones you wanted are now much more expensive, thus throwing your carefully-planned tactics down the drain. Ooh, it’s great tension! My one gripe: I wish it was longer so that I could really stick it to my enem- uhh, friends.
If you are a fan of card games that pack more of a punch than it first seems, and games that keep you wanting more, whilst giving you a grand feeling of quirky opulence, then you should certainly check out Houses of Knowledge. We are happy to recommend this one. Go back it on Kickstarter when the campaign begins!
Houses of Knowledge pits 2-4 players against each other as museum curators desperately trying to fill their museums with interesting rooms and curious artifacts. In fact, a curator can end the competition once they are able to display eight lovely pieces in their halls. Beware, however, as the competition is also trying to gather the best gallery and may even attempt to pilfer your displayed items!
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, but the final components will be exactly the same as these shown, if the pending Kickstarter campaign is successful. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, but to give our readers a general feel for how the game plays. You can back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, order from your FLGS, or purchase through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
Setting up a game of Houses of Knowledge is quite a feat, as different decks need to be assembled according to player count. Refer to the rules to setup each deck. Once the decks are prepared and starting cards dealt to each player, create the Items and Actions markets by revealing six cards from each deck and assigning cost discs in decending order from the draw decks. Furthest away from the two draw decks will be placed the deck of Room cards, with two visible and available for purchase. These rooms will receive the leftover 5-value cost disc. Set the monicash aside to be used as a central bank. Determine the starting player and you are ready to begin!
Luckily, the game furnishes the players with reference cards so that all players have access to all options they are afforded on their turns. The first thing that happens on a turn is collecting income. Each turn a player earns 3 monicash (MC) plus the amounts earned from Rooms in their tableau. From here a turn has several options: buying Items or Actions from the market to your hand, paying 2 MC to play a card from your hand to your tableau, selling two cards for 2 MC, and buying Room cards.
When a player buys an Item or Action card from the market the new card is taken in hand, paying the cost shown on the cost disc either above or below the card taken. To play a card from hand, the player pays 2 MC to the bank and places an Item onto a corresponding Room card, or plays an Action card either on their own tableau or against an opponent.
Play continues in this fashion until one player is displaying eight Items in their Rooms or the draw decks are depleted. The round finishes completely so all players have an equal amount of turns, and then points are tallied and summed to determine the greatest curator and winner of Houses of Knowledge!
Components. As I mentioned in my disclaimer, we were provided a copy of this game for this preview. All components we were provided are finalized, so everything you see pictured here is how it will be upon a successful Kickstarter campaign. That said, the components are fantastic! The cards are good quality, the cost discs are good cardboard chips, and the money is the faux-paper money we are starting to see in games nowadays – and thank heavens for that! No more cheap Monopoly money! Oh by the way, the art on this one is superb and very chic. I love it!
So the game looks and feels great, but does it play well? YES. This one is excellent! At first it feels too simple because it is relatively easy to collect Rooms and Items to fit on those Rooms, so you think, “Heck, I can get eight Items in like four rounds!” That is, until your opponents hit you with some of the Action cards they’ve been hoarding unseen by you. One “friend” maybe steals one of your Items because you neglected to assign Guards to it, or the “pal” just before you in initiative order rearranges the Item cards so that the ones you wanted are now much more expensive, thus throwing your carefully-planned tactics down the drain. Ooh, it’s great tension! My one gripe: I wish it was longer so that I could really stick it to my enem- uhh, friends.
If you are a fan of card games that pack more of a punch than it first seems, and games that keep you wanting more, whilst giving you a grand feeling of quirky opulence, then you should certainly check out Houses of Knowledge. We are happy to recommend this one. Go back it on Kickstarter when the campaign begins!
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Crazier Eights: Olympus in Tabletop Games
Feb 25, 2020
War. Old Maid. Go Fish. Crazy Eights. These are classic card games we probably all grew up playing. There have been many re-themes and new difficulty layers spread upon them to make them even more interesting. While UNO certainly has cornered the market on the Crazy Eights base, we have a new contender: Crazier Eights. Recoculous has published several versions of this card game with different themes: Camelot, Avalon, One Thousand & One Nights, and Shahrzad. Today we are taking a preview of Crazier Eights: Olympus.
You HAVE played Crazy Eights right? The card game where you attempt to be the first to exhaust your hand of cards, but you can only play down if you can match the suit or number on top of the discard pile? And if you can’t, you throw down an 8 as a wild and call the color to be played next? Well there you have the easy rules. Crazier Eights: Olympus (which I will from here call C8O) holds basically the same rule-set with a few new mechanics and a theme. The win condition is still the same: be the first to exhaust your hand of cards, but to win you will need to play your hand strategically against your opponents.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game. You are invited to back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, or purchase it through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup, shuffle the large deck of cards and place the deck in the middle of the table. Flip the top card to begin the discard pile and dictate the first card play. Deal each player seven cards and you are ready to begin!
The turn structure is familiar: check for any “start of turn” effects and apply them, draw a card, play and/or discard a card, then resolve any “end of turn” effects. The deck is comprised of Events and Assets in different colors (suits) and numbers like in a typical deck of playing cards. After checking and resolving start of turn effects on Asset cards in your personal tableau, you must draw a card from the deck. This is where C8O strays from OG Crazy Eights a bit. You may play a card from your hand (Assets and Events) and discard a card to the discard pile (matching the suit/number/or an Eight), or simply play a card from your hand without discarding. Cards played from your hand can be Event cards that are played, resolved, and then discarded to the bottom of the discard pile, or an Asset card that is played to your tableau that cause chain reactions or other abilities on future turns. Next, resolve any end of turn effects from Assets in your tableau before the next player begins their turn.
Play continues in this fashion until one player has rid themselves of their hand and is crowned the Master of Olympus! Or at least, the winner of the game.
Components. This game is a box full of cards. Again, as I do not know if these components will be altered at all, I will comment on what we were provided. The cards are fine. The layout makes sense, and the art on the faces of the cards remind me of very classic art depicting ancient Grecian scenes. I am no art historian, so I do not know if they are existing art pieces or new ones crafted for this game, but either way, they are a joy to behold… if you can spend the time appreciating the art instead of tracking what cards you need to play and what effects you can chain together (that was me). Extra points to the Recoculous team for associating symbols with the different suit colors for our colorblind friends. This is something that unfortunately goes unaddressed far too often.
This implementation is the first Crazier Eights we have had the chance to try, and I can say that we really enjoyed our plays of it. The game comes with many interesting and varied effects to craft an ingenious strategy, and the art is stellar. Beware of playing with AP-prone gamers, as there is a lot going on and it is more than just a skinned Crazy Eights. However, now having played this several times, I can say that it is my favorite Crazy Eights derivative and certainly worthy of a look. If your game collection is sorely lacking in ancient Greek-themed card games, or if you want a hybrid game of old school rules with interesting twists, then do consider backing this one or purchasing one of its predecessors.
PS – Don’t worry if, while you are playing, you have all your Assets stolen or destroyed. I have won the game with zero Assets in front of me while opponents have had eight, ironically. Assets are great, but you still need to shed your hand.
You HAVE played Crazy Eights right? The card game where you attempt to be the first to exhaust your hand of cards, but you can only play down if you can match the suit or number on top of the discard pile? And if you can’t, you throw down an 8 as a wild and call the color to be played next? Well there you have the easy rules. Crazier Eights: Olympus (which I will from here call C8O) holds basically the same rule-set with a few new mechanics and a theme. The win condition is still the same: be the first to exhaust your hand of cards, but to win you will need to play your hand strategically against your opponents.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game. You are invited to back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, or purchase it through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup, shuffle the large deck of cards and place the deck in the middle of the table. Flip the top card to begin the discard pile and dictate the first card play. Deal each player seven cards and you are ready to begin!
The turn structure is familiar: check for any “start of turn” effects and apply them, draw a card, play and/or discard a card, then resolve any “end of turn” effects. The deck is comprised of Events and Assets in different colors (suits) and numbers like in a typical deck of playing cards. After checking and resolving start of turn effects on Asset cards in your personal tableau, you must draw a card from the deck. This is where C8O strays from OG Crazy Eights a bit. You may play a card from your hand (Assets and Events) and discard a card to the discard pile (matching the suit/number/or an Eight), or simply play a card from your hand without discarding. Cards played from your hand can be Event cards that are played, resolved, and then discarded to the bottom of the discard pile, or an Asset card that is played to your tableau that cause chain reactions or other abilities on future turns. Next, resolve any end of turn effects from Assets in your tableau before the next player begins their turn.
Play continues in this fashion until one player has rid themselves of their hand and is crowned the Master of Olympus! Or at least, the winner of the game.
Components. This game is a box full of cards. Again, as I do not know if these components will be altered at all, I will comment on what we were provided. The cards are fine. The layout makes sense, and the art on the faces of the cards remind me of very classic art depicting ancient Grecian scenes. I am no art historian, so I do not know if they are existing art pieces or new ones crafted for this game, but either way, they are a joy to behold… if you can spend the time appreciating the art instead of tracking what cards you need to play and what effects you can chain together (that was me). Extra points to the Recoculous team for associating symbols with the different suit colors for our colorblind friends. This is something that unfortunately goes unaddressed far too often.
This implementation is the first Crazier Eights we have had the chance to try, and I can say that we really enjoyed our plays of it. The game comes with many interesting and varied effects to craft an ingenious strategy, and the art is stellar. Beware of playing with AP-prone gamers, as there is a lot going on and it is more than just a skinned Crazy Eights. However, now having played this several times, I can say that it is my favorite Crazy Eights derivative and certainly worthy of a look. If your game collection is sorely lacking in ancient Greek-themed card games, or if you want a hybrid game of old school rules with interesting twists, then do consider backing this one or purchasing one of its predecessors.
PS – Don’t worry if, while you are playing, you have all your Assets stolen or destroyed. I have won the game with zero Assets in front of me while opponents have had eight, ironically. Assets are great, but you still need to shed your hand.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Broom Service in Tabletop Games
Jun 24, 2021
A show of hands for all of us who have dressed for Halloween as a witch, wizard, druid, fairy, or the like. My hand is raised. How awesome would it be to actually have power to fly – even by broomstick? Or to make some excellent magic potions? Well daydream no more. Broom Service puts you into the world of flying witches and gathering druids and even Weather Fairies all to help your business deliver potions to towers and other buildings with magical tenants.
At its heart Broom Service is a trick-taking card game with pick-up-and-deliver mechanics flowing to the board. Each player will be attempting to supply the board’s towers and castles with magic potions, but they will need to craft them first. AND one does not simply HAVE potion ingredients handy – they need to gather the correct supplies. The winner of Broom Service is the player who best can supply areas of the board by claiming tricks to increase production of said potions.
To setup place the board in the middle of the table (I am waiting for a game to come along that asks you to place the board in the Northwest quadrant of the table or something similar). Populate the board with the proper Heavy Cloud tokens to be whisked away by players for points and access to additional board areas. Place player score tokens on 10 VP along the VP track. Shuffle the Event deck and randomly place seven cards in a draw pile, revealing one into the discard. Each player will receive their two witch hat pawns to be placed on the main castles, a deck of 10 role cards from which they will choose four each round, a set of one each of the three colors of potions, and magic wands per the rules. The game can now begin!
On a player’s turn they will choose one of their four role cards and place it face down in front of themselves. Once all have done this, the starting player will announce their chosen role and declare that they wish to be Cowardly or Brave. For instance, a player may say, “I am a Cowardly Fruit Gatherer” whilst revealing their role card. By declaring Cowardly, the player immediately performs the action on the bottom of the card for Cowardly Fruit Gatherers: produce one purple potion. In order to perform the actions on top of the card the player would need to declare that they are Brave. The player will not perform the action quite yet as now play continues to the next player in line who, if they also chose to play the Fruit Gatherer card, will declare if they will also be Brave. If so, the newest player to claim Brave will be essentially winning the Brave Fruit Gatherer trick. This continues around the table until the very last Brave Fruit Gatherer has declared and won the trick. The winning player then performs the action while all other previous Brave Fruit Gatherers receive NOTHING. Brutal.
The game continues in this fashion of players bidding on Brave roles for better results (as in the example, a Brave Fruit Gatherer is able to make two purple potions AND another potion of their choice) until players have played seven rounds. They then add up their points per the rule book and the winner is determined!
Now, this is a brief explanation of the trick-taking aspect of the game, but other roles actually allow players to deliver the potions made, and still others allow players to use their magic wands to whisk away Heavy Clouds for VPs and remove their board space blocking qualities. Each time a potion is delivered, the player will earn VPs. The trick-taking aspect is simply the gist and also crux of the game.
Components. I love the components in Broom Service. The board is nice and super colorful, with all areas easy to read and understand (though some players have issues with where the towers actually lie on the board, but you must look at which area the BASES of the towers touch to determine this). The cards have wistful artwork on them and the art throughout is stellar. The wooden witch hats and potions are all great, and I love the colors used on these – I mean, orange and purple go super well together. And then there’s green. All in all the components in Broom Service are just great.
That said, I give Broom Service excellent marks because it truly is a better implementation of its predecessor, Witch’s Brew, in almost every aspect (even though my wife disagrees). The art is better, the components are better, the addition of the board and its mechanics add so much to the game. I love being able to travel to different areas of the board to deliver items, and I really don’t have too many pick-up-and-deliver style games, so this really fills a niche in my collection. Also, on another personal note, Halloween happens to be my favorite holiday and Broom Service is certainly a game for that season. I am definitely not alone in my assessment of this one, as Purple Phoenix Games gives Broom Service a whooshy 14 / 18. Come at me on this one because I am defo a Brave Mountain Witch… or just a normal reviewer who likes this game a whole lot.
At its heart Broom Service is a trick-taking card game with pick-up-and-deliver mechanics flowing to the board. Each player will be attempting to supply the board’s towers and castles with magic potions, but they will need to craft them first. AND one does not simply HAVE potion ingredients handy – they need to gather the correct supplies. The winner of Broom Service is the player who best can supply areas of the board by claiming tricks to increase production of said potions.
To setup place the board in the middle of the table (I am waiting for a game to come along that asks you to place the board in the Northwest quadrant of the table or something similar). Populate the board with the proper Heavy Cloud tokens to be whisked away by players for points and access to additional board areas. Place player score tokens on 10 VP along the VP track. Shuffle the Event deck and randomly place seven cards in a draw pile, revealing one into the discard. Each player will receive their two witch hat pawns to be placed on the main castles, a deck of 10 role cards from which they will choose four each round, a set of one each of the three colors of potions, and magic wands per the rules. The game can now begin!
On a player’s turn they will choose one of their four role cards and place it face down in front of themselves. Once all have done this, the starting player will announce their chosen role and declare that they wish to be Cowardly or Brave. For instance, a player may say, “I am a Cowardly Fruit Gatherer” whilst revealing their role card. By declaring Cowardly, the player immediately performs the action on the bottom of the card for Cowardly Fruit Gatherers: produce one purple potion. In order to perform the actions on top of the card the player would need to declare that they are Brave. The player will not perform the action quite yet as now play continues to the next player in line who, if they also chose to play the Fruit Gatherer card, will declare if they will also be Brave. If so, the newest player to claim Brave will be essentially winning the Brave Fruit Gatherer trick. This continues around the table until the very last Brave Fruit Gatherer has declared and won the trick. The winning player then performs the action while all other previous Brave Fruit Gatherers receive NOTHING. Brutal.
The game continues in this fashion of players bidding on Brave roles for better results (as in the example, a Brave Fruit Gatherer is able to make two purple potions AND another potion of their choice) until players have played seven rounds. They then add up their points per the rule book and the winner is determined!
Now, this is a brief explanation of the trick-taking aspect of the game, but other roles actually allow players to deliver the potions made, and still others allow players to use their magic wands to whisk away Heavy Clouds for VPs and remove their board space blocking qualities. Each time a potion is delivered, the player will earn VPs. The trick-taking aspect is simply the gist and also crux of the game.
Components. I love the components in Broom Service. The board is nice and super colorful, with all areas easy to read and understand (though some players have issues with where the towers actually lie on the board, but you must look at which area the BASES of the towers touch to determine this). The cards have wistful artwork on them and the art throughout is stellar. The wooden witch hats and potions are all great, and I love the colors used on these – I mean, orange and purple go super well together. And then there’s green. All in all the components in Broom Service are just great.
That said, I give Broom Service excellent marks because it truly is a better implementation of its predecessor, Witch’s Brew, in almost every aspect (even though my wife disagrees). The art is better, the components are better, the addition of the board and its mechanics add so much to the game. I love being able to travel to different areas of the board to deliver items, and I really don’t have too many pick-up-and-deliver style games, so this really fills a niche in my collection. Also, on another personal note, Halloween happens to be my favorite holiday and Broom Service is certainly a game for that season. I am definitely not alone in my assessment of this one, as Purple Phoenix Games gives Broom Service a whooshy 14 / 18. Come at me on this one because I am defo a Brave Mountain Witch… or just a normal reviewer who likes this game a whole lot.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Shadow Hunters in Tabletop Games
Jul 24, 2021
Playing board games has enlightened me so much and given me wishes to follow career paths I would not have considered otherwise. One career I would NOT want to take on is that of a Shadow Hunter: the warriors who seek out and destroy beings from the demon realms walking in our midst. I’d rather stay blissfully ignorant to their existence and simply hope we can be friends. However, in board game worlds I will seek and destroy like a good little Shadow Hunter does.
Shadow Hunters is a hidden identity survival card game for groups of 4-8 players. Each player’s drawn persona will belong to the Shadows, the Hunters, or Neutrals (common bystanders). The goals of the players may all be completely different and the game may end at any time due to fulfilling personal agendas. Players may even win when their characters are dead!
To setup place the board on the table and randomly populate the card spaces on the board with the Area Cards. Shuffle the White Cards, Black Cards, and Hermit Cards (why didn’t they just name these the Green Cards?) into their own stacks and place them on the side of the board in their slots. Players choose their preferred colors, take the boards and pieces with that color, and place one of their wooden markers on the No Damage space on the board. The other wooden marker will be used for movement on the board Area cards. Shuffle and deal each player one Character Card to be kept secret from the other players. Determine start player and the game is ready to begin!
On a player’s turn they will be completing at least one task and then possible other tasks. First, the active player will roll both the 1d6 and 1d4 together to arrive at a number between two and 10. The player will place their marker on the matching Area card on the board. Should a player roll a seven they may choose any location other than the space they are on and move. Each location will have an action printed on its card that a player may choose to complete. These could be drawing cards from the White, Black, or Hermit decks, damaging other players, or stealing equipment cards from them. Lastly, the active player may straight up attack another player within the same Area range (the three different areas are two cards linked together, so either the card the marker shares or the one that is linked).
As soon as a character has suffered damage equal to or greater than the HP shown on their Character Card, that character dies. Once a character dies, the owning player flips the Character Card over to reveal the character and, more importantly, their faction to which they belong. If this causes one player to fulfill their character’s goals, they must announce that the game is over. If not, play continues in this fashion until a player’s goal has been achieved to end the game. This could mean the Shadow team or Hunter team wins as a group, or that one player wins alone.
Components. Oddly, this edition of Shadow Hunters is now almost 10 years old, so it fall within the “older games” group. That said, the components are still excellent quality, even by today’s standards. The cards have a faint linen finish, the cardboard components are all thick and matte finished, the wooden player markers are chunky and fun to move around. The only issues I have with components are that I wish the colors matched more on the wooden markers and the player boards. Not a huge deal, but something that makes me cringe just a little inside. The other issue I have is most definitely a personal preference: the numbers on the d4 are on the bottom and I prefer them on the top. I know, purely personal preference and I’m dumb for even mentioning it.
This is a game I love but irks my wife. And not even because she doesn’t like the game. It irks her because of how I play it. Until I use the Hermit Cards to try to help figure out which player is on my team I will certainly be attacking everyone I can every chance I get. That’s not the best way to make friends, and I get it, but I’m not taking that chance of allowing a potential opponent to get a leg up on me. That bothers my wife because many times I’m attacking my teammates. Oh well.
I have played this game so many times with different groups and have had great success with it almost every single time. It’s an easy teach, the theme makes sense, and having different end goals is something that many people can rally behind. I know there are about 3,000 hidden identity games out there, but I consider this one of the best. Even 10 years later it sill holds that sheen and gives us a little different experience than just spamming The Resistance: Avalon every time. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a hot 17 / 24. Pick this one up if you find it in the wild and want a different feel for your hidden identity collection. I love it and you might too.
Shadow Hunters is a hidden identity survival card game for groups of 4-8 players. Each player’s drawn persona will belong to the Shadows, the Hunters, or Neutrals (common bystanders). The goals of the players may all be completely different and the game may end at any time due to fulfilling personal agendas. Players may even win when their characters are dead!
To setup place the board on the table and randomly populate the card spaces on the board with the Area Cards. Shuffle the White Cards, Black Cards, and Hermit Cards (why didn’t they just name these the Green Cards?) into their own stacks and place them on the side of the board in their slots. Players choose their preferred colors, take the boards and pieces with that color, and place one of their wooden markers on the No Damage space on the board. The other wooden marker will be used for movement on the board Area cards. Shuffle and deal each player one Character Card to be kept secret from the other players. Determine start player and the game is ready to begin!
On a player’s turn they will be completing at least one task and then possible other tasks. First, the active player will roll both the 1d6 and 1d4 together to arrive at a number between two and 10. The player will place their marker on the matching Area card on the board. Should a player roll a seven they may choose any location other than the space they are on and move. Each location will have an action printed on its card that a player may choose to complete. These could be drawing cards from the White, Black, or Hermit decks, damaging other players, or stealing equipment cards from them. Lastly, the active player may straight up attack another player within the same Area range (the three different areas are two cards linked together, so either the card the marker shares or the one that is linked).
As soon as a character has suffered damage equal to or greater than the HP shown on their Character Card, that character dies. Once a character dies, the owning player flips the Character Card over to reveal the character and, more importantly, their faction to which they belong. If this causes one player to fulfill their character’s goals, they must announce that the game is over. If not, play continues in this fashion until a player’s goal has been achieved to end the game. This could mean the Shadow team or Hunter team wins as a group, or that one player wins alone.
Components. Oddly, this edition of Shadow Hunters is now almost 10 years old, so it fall within the “older games” group. That said, the components are still excellent quality, even by today’s standards. The cards have a faint linen finish, the cardboard components are all thick and matte finished, the wooden player markers are chunky and fun to move around. The only issues I have with components are that I wish the colors matched more on the wooden markers and the player boards. Not a huge deal, but something that makes me cringe just a little inside. The other issue I have is most definitely a personal preference: the numbers on the d4 are on the bottom and I prefer them on the top. I know, purely personal preference and I’m dumb for even mentioning it.
This is a game I love but irks my wife. And not even because she doesn’t like the game. It irks her because of how I play it. Until I use the Hermit Cards to try to help figure out which player is on my team I will certainly be attacking everyone I can every chance I get. That’s not the best way to make friends, and I get it, but I’m not taking that chance of allowing a potential opponent to get a leg up on me. That bothers my wife because many times I’m attacking my teammates. Oh well.
I have played this game so many times with different groups and have had great success with it almost every single time. It’s an easy teach, the theme makes sense, and having different end goals is something that many people can rally behind. I know there are about 3,000 hidden identity games out there, but I consider this one of the best. Even 10 years later it sill holds that sheen and gives us a little different experience than just spamming The Resistance: Avalon every time. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a hot 17 / 24. Pick this one up if you find it in the wild and want a different feel for your hidden identity collection. I love it and you might too.
