Search
Search results
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated The New Mutants (2020) in Movies
Aug 29, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
At the time of writing this, The New Mutants has been out in the UK for about 3 days, on preview, and I have already seen a review headed 'The worst X-Men movie yet', I didn't read the review so maybe the reviewer makes some insightful points but, with a lead like that i doubt it.
You see The New Mutants isn't an X-men film, it's set in the (fox? maybe) X-men universe but it's not superheros'/mutants vs other mutants/robots/government, even thought there is a bit of mutants vs baddies.
It is a 'genesis' story, unlike the X-men films, we are seeing the creation of a new team. Like the X-Men films it starts with a new mutant meeting other Mutants.
The 'new mutant' to the New Mutants is Danielle Moonstar, a native American who's reserve and family are destroyed by a tornado leaving her as the only survivor. Danielle wakes up in a hospital to be told of her lose and that the only reason she survived was because she was mutant and she is now in a hospital where she can learn how to use her powers and then she is introduced to the patients/mutants who are at the hospital.
The mutant roster is the New Mutants of the 80's & 90's comics (minus one or two) and the film has a very 80's feel to it.
The New Mutants has a slow start and almost has a 'Breakfast club with powers' feel to it, you have a group of teens who have been placed together and are unable to leave. They sit around and talk about their past and fight and make friends and kiss and fight their worst nightmares and, suddenly your no longer watching 'The Breakfast Club with powers' but 'Nightmare on Elm street 3: the dream warriors, with powers' (Yes I know the kids in Elm Street 3 get powers for a bit but this is different). The Mutants have to team up to fight all sorts of nasties from their pasts, become one cohesive team and find out who is creating the nightmares.
The New Mutants pulls off the 80's teen movie style well but some of the CGI seems a bit off.
Even with the 80's feel we don't actually know when the film is set, the T.V's in the hospital are often showing 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer' (the series) so that would imply that it's at least late 90's and the X-Men are mentioned although they are referred to as heroes which doesn't seem to fit elsewhere in the fox universe.
And this, of course is the biggest problem with the film (and it's not the
films fault), New Mutants was started as a Fox film, as part of their X-Men universe but then it got delayed and then fox got brought out by Disney and the film got delayed again (and many thought it would never to see light day.) Then it got released but, the Disney Marvel cinematic Universe doesn't (yet) have mutants (because they were owned by fox ) so it doesn't fit in with any of the Disney films or, as it was finished by Disney it doesn't fit with any X-Men film and so is floating in the strange limbo shared with Legion and the Gifted.
As a stand alone film it is ok however, as Disney had time to re edit it, it makes you wonder why it has been left open, The New Mutants are formed and ready to see what else life can throw at them, is this how mutants are going to be introduce to the Disney-verse or are we just going to be left hanging.
You see The New Mutants isn't an X-men film, it's set in the (fox? maybe) X-men universe but it's not superheros'/mutants vs other mutants/robots/government, even thought there is a bit of mutants vs baddies.
It is a 'genesis' story, unlike the X-men films, we are seeing the creation of a new team. Like the X-Men films it starts with a new mutant meeting other Mutants.
The 'new mutant' to the New Mutants is Danielle Moonstar, a native American who's reserve and family are destroyed by a tornado leaving her as the only survivor. Danielle wakes up in a hospital to be told of her lose and that the only reason she survived was because she was mutant and she is now in a hospital where she can learn how to use her powers and then she is introduced to the patients/mutants who are at the hospital.
The mutant roster is the New Mutants of the 80's & 90's comics (minus one or two) and the film has a very 80's feel to it.
The New Mutants has a slow start and almost has a 'Breakfast club with powers' feel to it, you have a group of teens who have been placed together and are unable to leave. They sit around and talk about their past and fight and make friends and kiss and fight their worst nightmares and, suddenly your no longer watching 'The Breakfast Club with powers' but 'Nightmare on Elm street 3: the dream warriors, with powers' (Yes I know the kids in Elm Street 3 get powers for a bit but this is different). The Mutants have to team up to fight all sorts of nasties from their pasts, become one cohesive team and find out who is creating the nightmares.
The New Mutants pulls off the 80's teen movie style well but some of the CGI seems a bit off.
Even with the 80's feel we don't actually know when the film is set, the T.V's in the hospital are often showing 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer' (the series) so that would imply that it's at least late 90's and the X-Men are mentioned although they are referred to as heroes which doesn't seem to fit elsewhere in the fox universe.
And this, of course is the biggest problem with the film (and it's not the
films fault), New Mutants was started as a Fox film, as part of their X-Men universe but then it got delayed and then fox got brought out by Disney and the film got delayed again (and many thought it would never to see light day.) Then it got released but, the Disney Marvel cinematic Universe doesn't (yet) have mutants (because they were owned by fox ) so it doesn't fit in with any of the Disney films or, as it was finished by Disney it doesn't fit with any X-Men film and so is floating in the strange limbo shared with Legion and the Gifted.
As a stand alone film it is ok however, as Disney had time to re edit it, it makes you wonder why it has been left open, The New Mutants are formed and ready to see what else life can throw at them, is this how mutants are going to be introduce to the Disney-verse or are we just going to be left hanging.
Angry Birds Evolution
Games
App
Something is causing the the pigs to herd to Bird Island in droves, and the birds have found their...
PAW Patrol: Air & Sea
Education and Games
App
Pups Take Flight is now PAW Patrol Air and Sea Adventures! Kids take to the sky and sea with the PAW...
PAW Patrol: Air & Sea HD
Education and Games
App
Pups Take Flight is now PAW Patrol Air and Sea Adventures! Kids take to the sky and sea with the PAW...
Farm Charm
Games and Entertainment
App
Farm Charm is a charming accumulative match-3 puzzler with lots of fascinating levels! Discover...
Charmed & Dangerous
10.0
Rate It
Book
Magic takes many forms. From malignant hexes to love charms gone amok, you’ll find a vast array of...
Urban Fantasy Paranormal MM Romance
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (2022) in Movies
Apr 30, 2022
The Magic is Fading
Alas, the magic is fading in the Wizarding World
The 3rd installment of the Fantastic Beasts saga, THE SECRETS OF DUMBLEDORE is satisfying enough for fans of the ongoing Wizarding World of Harry Potter universe and will be time well spent for those of you that have watched all 8 Harry Potter films and the first 2 FANTASTIC BEASTS films, but it is nothing…magical.
Picking up where the 2nd film (THE CRIMES OF GRINDEWALD) left off, the arch-nemesis of Dumbledore (a game Jude Law) is in power and looking to start a war with the Muggles (non-magic folk). A ragtag group of heroes (are there any other kind) led by Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) are humanity’s only hope.
And…while this worked well in the first series of film…this setup falls rather flat as it has a “been there done that” feel to it that is not really elevated above the ordinary.
The reason are numerous:
First, Newt Scamander is no Harry Potter. While Eddie Redymayne plays an interesting, quirky, central character - a character who’s unique skills were needed to defeat the bad guy in the first film - he is, really, a secondary character, yet he is the one we follow throughout the film. Kind of like watching the Harry Potter films through the eyes of Neville Longbottom.
Secondly, Grindewald (this time played by Mads Mikkelsen, replacing Johnny Depp) is no Voldemort. Grindewald was an interesting character set up in the first film, but by this film, he is pretty bland (and pretty blandly played by Mikkeslen who is, frankly, miscast).
Thirdly, Dumbledore (Jude Law in a very good performance, one that needed to be larger and more central) is sidelined for most of this film - a film about the battle between Grindewald and Dumbledore, a stumble (plotwise) to be sure in an awkward attempt to keeping the Newt Scamander character front and center.
Fortunately, the supporting cast is strong from Dan Fogler’s muggle, Jacob Kowalski to his love, Queenie (Alison Sudol) to Newt’s brother, Theseus (Callum Turner) to Newt’s assistant Bunty (Victoria Yeates) to Dumbledore’s brother, Aberforth (Richard Coyle) - all have their moments and are interesting (enough) to watch.
Unfortunately, Ezra Miller’s conflicted villain, Credence is poorly written with a crescendo to his character that lands with a thud. And, the inexplicable reason that Katherine Waterston’s main character of Tina is sidelined (rumors are she conflicted with J.K. Rowling) just doesn’t land, so, consequently, 2 major pieces from the first 2 films just don’t work.
What does work in this film is the magical sequences, as handled by Harry Potter veteran David Yates (who has now helmed 6 films in the Wizarding World franchise), the magical scenes are truly…magical. They are fun to watch and the real reason to watch this film, but the story is weak with a misguided viewpoint character that diminishes the fantasy for all.
Rumors are that this was supposed to be a 5 film franchise, but with box office diminishing for each successive Fantastic Beasts films, the filmmakers wisely decided to wrap up most storylines in this film.
It’s time to say goodbye to FANTASTIC BEASTS, but it should be time for the Wizarding World to go the way of Star Wars, Marvel and Star Trek - streaming TV series that breathes new life - and new, interesting characters - to a sagging franchise.
In the meantime, FANTASTIC BEASTS: THE SECRETS OF DUMBLEDORE is “good enough” and since it is all we have at the moment, it will have to do.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The 3rd installment of the Fantastic Beasts saga, THE SECRETS OF DUMBLEDORE is satisfying enough for fans of the ongoing Wizarding World of Harry Potter universe and will be time well spent for those of you that have watched all 8 Harry Potter films and the first 2 FANTASTIC BEASTS films, but it is nothing…magical.
Picking up where the 2nd film (THE CRIMES OF GRINDEWALD) left off, the arch-nemesis of Dumbledore (a game Jude Law) is in power and looking to start a war with the Muggles (non-magic folk). A ragtag group of heroes (are there any other kind) led by Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) are humanity’s only hope.
And…while this worked well in the first series of film…this setup falls rather flat as it has a “been there done that” feel to it that is not really elevated above the ordinary.
The reason are numerous:
First, Newt Scamander is no Harry Potter. While Eddie Redymayne plays an interesting, quirky, central character - a character who’s unique skills were needed to defeat the bad guy in the first film - he is, really, a secondary character, yet he is the one we follow throughout the film. Kind of like watching the Harry Potter films through the eyes of Neville Longbottom.
Secondly, Grindewald (this time played by Mads Mikkelsen, replacing Johnny Depp) is no Voldemort. Grindewald was an interesting character set up in the first film, but by this film, he is pretty bland (and pretty blandly played by Mikkeslen who is, frankly, miscast).
Thirdly, Dumbledore (Jude Law in a very good performance, one that needed to be larger and more central) is sidelined for most of this film - a film about the battle between Grindewald and Dumbledore, a stumble (plotwise) to be sure in an awkward attempt to keeping the Newt Scamander character front and center.
Fortunately, the supporting cast is strong from Dan Fogler’s muggle, Jacob Kowalski to his love, Queenie (Alison Sudol) to Newt’s brother, Theseus (Callum Turner) to Newt’s assistant Bunty (Victoria Yeates) to Dumbledore’s brother, Aberforth (Richard Coyle) - all have their moments and are interesting (enough) to watch.
Unfortunately, Ezra Miller’s conflicted villain, Credence is poorly written with a crescendo to his character that lands with a thud. And, the inexplicable reason that Katherine Waterston’s main character of Tina is sidelined (rumors are she conflicted with J.K. Rowling) just doesn’t land, so, consequently, 2 major pieces from the first 2 films just don’t work.
What does work in this film is the magical sequences, as handled by Harry Potter veteran David Yates (who has now helmed 6 films in the Wizarding World franchise), the magical scenes are truly…magical. They are fun to watch and the real reason to watch this film, but the story is weak with a misguided viewpoint character that diminishes the fantasy for all.
Rumors are that this was supposed to be a 5 film franchise, but with box office diminishing for each successive Fantastic Beasts films, the filmmakers wisely decided to wrap up most storylines in this film.
It’s time to say goodbye to FANTASTIC BEASTS, but it should be time for the Wizarding World to go the way of Star Wars, Marvel and Star Trek - streaming TV series that breathes new life - and new, interesting characters - to a sagging franchise.
In the meantime, FANTASTIC BEASTS: THE SECRETS OF DUMBLEDORE is “good enough” and since it is all we have at the moment, it will have to do.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Ant-Man and The Wasp: Quantumania (2023) in Movies
Mar 18, 2023
Middle of the Road Marvel
The good news for long-time, hard core Marvel Cinematic Universe fans is that the next “big bad” in the Marvel Cinematic Universe has been unleashed and we will now get to see “Kang The Conqueror” (in his permutations) battling our heroes for the foreseeable future.
The bad news is that for casual fans – and folks that are just plain tired of the MCU – things are going to get more complex and convoluted as the MCU heads deeper into the “Comic Bookiness” of their source material.
Such is the case with ANT-MAN AND THE WASP: QUANTUMANIA, the 3rd standalone Ant Man film starring Paul Ruud, Evangeline Lilly and Michael Douglas. It is a very “Comic Bookie” film in that it takes the audience to the “Quantum Realm” and all the quirky characters and locations therein.
Director Peyton Reed (who helmed the previous 2 Ant-Man films) leans into this “Comic Bookieness” in that he accents the weird and bizarre and creates comic-book-like panels on the images on the screen. Consequently, this makes the film interesting to look at, but for the most part, there is not much substance under the surface.
For their part, Ruud, Lilly, Douglas, Michelle Pfeiffer (returning from the 2nd Ant-Man film) and newcomer Kathryn Newton (taking over the role of Ruud’s daughter, Cassie) are game in what they are asked to work with and react to (mostly to a green screen with CGI filled in later) and they all are winning (enough) presences on screen to spend a very enjoyable time with.
Jonathan Majors is on-board as Kang the Conqueror (a version of him was seen at the end of the first season of the Disney+ series LOKI) and he brings his considerable acting chops, gravitas and weight to the proceedings. He is a force to be reckoned with which was apparent from almost the first time he commanded the screen in this film. It will be interesting to see where he takes things from here.
The problem with this film is that it is (mostly) style with very little substance. Necessarily, the plot drives a more dramatic, darker theme to this Ant-Man film than in previous outings and the film suffers because of it. One of the charms of the Ant-Man films is that Director Reed was able to lean into the inherent goofiness of Paul Ruud and the absurd idea of him being able to shrink. That quirkiness and sense of fun is gone – as are regular characters played in the past 2 films by the likes of Bobby Canavale, Judy Greer, Randall Park (who has a blink or you’ll miss him cameo) and (most egregiously) Michael Pena.
What they are replaced by are some quirky “Quantum Realm” characters – most of whom are CGI and are voiced by some very good voice performers – it just doesn’t hit the same, since the overall theme is darker. Katy M. O’Brian and William Jackson Harper (who is rounding into a very intriguing performer) bring gusto to their roles as a few members of the Quantum realm, which helps pick up the sagginess of this film, but not enough. Not even a Bill Murray appearance can elevate this film to something funner than it is.
All in all a “fine” entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe – and one that will remind you very much that you are watching a film based on Comic Book characters – but it falls squarely in the middle of the MCU entries...a catalogue of which is becoming very deep (maybe too deep), indeed.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The bad news is that for casual fans – and folks that are just plain tired of the MCU – things are going to get more complex and convoluted as the MCU heads deeper into the “Comic Bookiness” of their source material.
Such is the case with ANT-MAN AND THE WASP: QUANTUMANIA, the 3rd standalone Ant Man film starring Paul Ruud, Evangeline Lilly and Michael Douglas. It is a very “Comic Bookie” film in that it takes the audience to the “Quantum Realm” and all the quirky characters and locations therein.
Director Peyton Reed (who helmed the previous 2 Ant-Man films) leans into this “Comic Bookieness” in that he accents the weird and bizarre and creates comic-book-like panels on the images on the screen. Consequently, this makes the film interesting to look at, but for the most part, there is not much substance under the surface.
For their part, Ruud, Lilly, Douglas, Michelle Pfeiffer (returning from the 2nd Ant-Man film) and newcomer Kathryn Newton (taking over the role of Ruud’s daughter, Cassie) are game in what they are asked to work with and react to (mostly to a green screen with CGI filled in later) and they all are winning (enough) presences on screen to spend a very enjoyable time with.
Jonathan Majors is on-board as Kang the Conqueror (a version of him was seen at the end of the first season of the Disney+ series LOKI) and he brings his considerable acting chops, gravitas and weight to the proceedings. He is a force to be reckoned with which was apparent from almost the first time he commanded the screen in this film. It will be interesting to see where he takes things from here.
The problem with this film is that it is (mostly) style with very little substance. Necessarily, the plot drives a more dramatic, darker theme to this Ant-Man film than in previous outings and the film suffers because of it. One of the charms of the Ant-Man films is that Director Reed was able to lean into the inherent goofiness of Paul Ruud and the absurd idea of him being able to shrink. That quirkiness and sense of fun is gone – as are regular characters played in the past 2 films by the likes of Bobby Canavale, Judy Greer, Randall Park (who has a blink or you’ll miss him cameo) and (most egregiously) Michael Pena.
What they are replaced by are some quirky “Quantum Realm” characters – most of whom are CGI and are voiced by some very good voice performers – it just doesn’t hit the same, since the overall theme is darker. Katy M. O’Brian and William Jackson Harper (who is rounding into a very intriguing performer) bring gusto to their roles as a few members of the Quantum realm, which helps pick up the sagginess of this film, but not enough. Not even a Bill Murray appearance can elevate this film to something funner than it is.
All in all a “fine” entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe – and one that will remind you very much that you are watching a film based on Comic Book characters – but it falls squarely in the middle of the MCU entries...a catalogue of which is becoming very deep (maybe too deep), indeed.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Tiny Epic Tactics in Tabletop Games
Jul 8, 2021
One of the neatest things about the Tiny Epic game series is how they manage to fit so much game into such a small box. But alas, boxes are not always just mere storage devices – in Tiny Epic Tactics, they are components of the game! These nesting boxes will create a 3D terrain on which players will be moving across, over, and through on their way to victory! But how does this game fit into the Tiny Epic series overall? Keep reading to find out!
Disclaimer: There are 5 different modes of play in Tiny Epic Tactics. In this review, I will be focusing on the 2-4 Player Competitive mode. There are also expansions for this game, but this review will not cover those materials. I also do not intend to rehash the entire rulebook, but rather provide a general overview of the rules and gameplay. For a more in-depth look at the rules, pick up a copy of the game from the publisher or at your FLGS. -L
Tiny Epic Tactics is a game of strategy and combat in which players will lead their teams of 4 heroes to fight opponents and attempt to gain control of a number of areas in the realm. To setup the game, unroll the map scroll and place the boxes onto their corresponding spaces. Randomly deal each player 1 Unit card from each class (Fighters, Wizards, Rogues, and Beasts), and give them 4 Unit tokens (meeples) in their chosen color, as well as tracker tokens for Health, Ammo, and Mana. Players will select their 4-space starting location, and will place all 4 of their Units on the map. Shuffle the deck of Tactic cards, and deal 2 to each player. Players will look at the cards and select one to keep in hand, discarding the other. Place the Tactic card deck in reach of all players, and place the Control Card nearby, with the 3 Flag tokens on the Start space. The game is ready to begin!
Over a series of rounds, players will take turns performing actions until either one player has had all of their Units captured or one player has captured the final Flag token (based on player count). The remaining players will take one final turn, and then the game ends, VPs are tallied, and the player with the most VPs is the winner! A game turn is made up of four steps, the first of which being to check for Majority Control. To see if you hold a Majority Control over any of the Control Areas on the map, count the number of Units in each triggered Control Area – if your Units make up the majority of Units in that area, advance the corresponding Flag token on the Control card, and if you do not hold the majority, then nothing happens. Once a Flag has been advanced to the final space, it is given to the player who holds Majority Control.
The next step of your turn is to take up to 3 actions with your Units. Possible actions are: Movement, Melee Attack, Missile Attack, and Cast a Spell. All Units have a printed value on their cards for Movement, as well as either Melee Attack, Missile Attack, or Spell Attack value, based on the Unit’s class. All of these actions are pretty self-explanatory, with a couple of extra components – use of Ammo/Mana, rolling dice, advantages/penalties based on Elevation, etc. – that make the gameplay strategic and challenging. The third turn step is to remove Weakened tokens (more on this later), and the final step is to draw a Tactic Card. Look at the card, and either keep it in hand or discard it – you may only ever have 2 Tactic Cards in hand. Play continues in this fashion until the end of the game is triggered, either when a single player has had all 4 of their Units captured or a player has taken the final Flag token. All other players take one more turn and then VPs are tallied for final scoring.
Ok so first thing I want to talk about is the use of boxes to create a 3D map. It is SO COOL. It’s such a unique idea, and one that I honestly haven’t seen before. The added aspect of Elevation in regards to movement and range for attacks really ups the strategic gameplay for me. Want to climb to a higher peak? Ok, that costs +1 movement. Don’t have enough movement to climb up this turn? Then you’re outta luck. Your strategy must always be changing based on where Units are located on the map.
Speaking of strategy, there are several different game elements that you can base your gameplay on – there is no ‘right’ way to play! Maybe you really want to focus on getting Flag tokens, so you try to protect that area and maintain majority at all costs. Maybe you don’t care about the Flags and it’s all about combat to you – you’re on the hunt for enemy Units and Area Control means nothing to you. Or maybe your aim is to complete your Tactic Cards, which will then allow you to perform a special/bonus action upon completion. There are different ways to play this game, and that makes it engaging and entertaining as you must constantly adapt your strategy while trying to figure out how your opponents are playing too!
Another neat element of Tiny Epic Tactics is that on each turn you only have 3 actions – and a single Unit may only perform one action per turn! So you can’t just spend all 3 actions moving and attacking with the same Unit, they must be spread across all of your heroes. That adds to the strategy because you have to set your Units up in advance for certain actions, but must quickly adapt based on the movements of your opponents. You can have a Unit perform a second, different, action on the same turn, but it will then become Weakened. When Weakened, a Unit cannot perform any actions on the next turn, and will have the Weakened condition removed at the end of said turn. Or, on your next turn, you may choose to pay 2 Health to remove the Weakened token and be able to act in that same turn. It’s kind of a gamble – how far are you willing to push your Units, and are you able to sacrifice their abilities for an entire turn in order to removed the Weakened token?
Let’s touch on components for a minute. These components are great, as is to be expected of the Tiny Epic series. The art is colorful and unique, the boxes are sturdy, the cards are nice and thick, and the wooden components are quality. No real gripes from me regarding production quality of this game! The gripe I do have is about the gameplay – specifically a 2-player game. When playing a 2-player game in competitive mode, the game end is triggered after 1 Flag token has been secured. This really can negate any need for strategy or player interaction, because each player starts near a Control Area, and can simply just move there and camp out to take the Flag. In my first games at a 2-player count, I found the gameplay to be kind of bland and not engaging because of this. At higher player counts, you have to interact with opponents on the map as you try to capture Control Areas. If at a 2-player count, you were required to secure 2 Flag tokens, or maybe just mandate that the secured Flag must be the one located in the center of the map, it would encourage more interactions between the players, and thereby elevate the strategy and gameplay in my opinion. Just something to consider.
Overall, I think that Tiny Epic Tactics is a solid game in this series. It is not my favorite by any means, but the gameplay and mechanics fill a gap left by the other Tiny Epics. The strategy required can be high-level, but the simplicity of the physical gameplay makes it feel accessible and inviting to all types of gamers. If you’re looking for a great 2-player Tiny Epic, maybe keep looking, but for a 3-4 player game, Tiny Epic Tactics hits the spot. Purple Phoenix Games gives it a tactical 8 / 12.
Disclaimer: There are 5 different modes of play in Tiny Epic Tactics. In this review, I will be focusing on the 2-4 Player Competitive mode. There are also expansions for this game, but this review will not cover those materials. I also do not intend to rehash the entire rulebook, but rather provide a general overview of the rules and gameplay. For a more in-depth look at the rules, pick up a copy of the game from the publisher or at your FLGS. -L
Tiny Epic Tactics is a game of strategy and combat in which players will lead their teams of 4 heroes to fight opponents and attempt to gain control of a number of areas in the realm. To setup the game, unroll the map scroll and place the boxes onto their corresponding spaces. Randomly deal each player 1 Unit card from each class (Fighters, Wizards, Rogues, and Beasts), and give them 4 Unit tokens (meeples) in their chosen color, as well as tracker tokens for Health, Ammo, and Mana. Players will select their 4-space starting location, and will place all 4 of their Units on the map. Shuffle the deck of Tactic cards, and deal 2 to each player. Players will look at the cards and select one to keep in hand, discarding the other. Place the Tactic card deck in reach of all players, and place the Control Card nearby, with the 3 Flag tokens on the Start space. The game is ready to begin!
Over a series of rounds, players will take turns performing actions until either one player has had all of their Units captured or one player has captured the final Flag token (based on player count). The remaining players will take one final turn, and then the game ends, VPs are tallied, and the player with the most VPs is the winner! A game turn is made up of four steps, the first of which being to check for Majority Control. To see if you hold a Majority Control over any of the Control Areas on the map, count the number of Units in each triggered Control Area – if your Units make up the majority of Units in that area, advance the corresponding Flag token on the Control card, and if you do not hold the majority, then nothing happens. Once a Flag has been advanced to the final space, it is given to the player who holds Majority Control.
The next step of your turn is to take up to 3 actions with your Units. Possible actions are: Movement, Melee Attack, Missile Attack, and Cast a Spell. All Units have a printed value on their cards for Movement, as well as either Melee Attack, Missile Attack, or Spell Attack value, based on the Unit’s class. All of these actions are pretty self-explanatory, with a couple of extra components – use of Ammo/Mana, rolling dice, advantages/penalties based on Elevation, etc. – that make the gameplay strategic and challenging. The third turn step is to remove Weakened tokens (more on this later), and the final step is to draw a Tactic Card. Look at the card, and either keep it in hand or discard it – you may only ever have 2 Tactic Cards in hand. Play continues in this fashion until the end of the game is triggered, either when a single player has had all 4 of their Units captured or a player has taken the final Flag token. All other players take one more turn and then VPs are tallied for final scoring.
Ok so first thing I want to talk about is the use of boxes to create a 3D map. It is SO COOL. It’s such a unique idea, and one that I honestly haven’t seen before. The added aspect of Elevation in regards to movement and range for attacks really ups the strategic gameplay for me. Want to climb to a higher peak? Ok, that costs +1 movement. Don’t have enough movement to climb up this turn? Then you’re outta luck. Your strategy must always be changing based on where Units are located on the map.
Speaking of strategy, there are several different game elements that you can base your gameplay on – there is no ‘right’ way to play! Maybe you really want to focus on getting Flag tokens, so you try to protect that area and maintain majority at all costs. Maybe you don’t care about the Flags and it’s all about combat to you – you’re on the hunt for enemy Units and Area Control means nothing to you. Or maybe your aim is to complete your Tactic Cards, which will then allow you to perform a special/bonus action upon completion. There are different ways to play this game, and that makes it engaging and entertaining as you must constantly adapt your strategy while trying to figure out how your opponents are playing too!
Another neat element of Tiny Epic Tactics is that on each turn you only have 3 actions – and a single Unit may only perform one action per turn! So you can’t just spend all 3 actions moving and attacking with the same Unit, they must be spread across all of your heroes. That adds to the strategy because you have to set your Units up in advance for certain actions, but must quickly adapt based on the movements of your opponents. You can have a Unit perform a second, different, action on the same turn, but it will then become Weakened. When Weakened, a Unit cannot perform any actions on the next turn, and will have the Weakened condition removed at the end of said turn. Or, on your next turn, you may choose to pay 2 Health to remove the Weakened token and be able to act in that same turn. It’s kind of a gamble – how far are you willing to push your Units, and are you able to sacrifice their abilities for an entire turn in order to removed the Weakened token?
Let’s touch on components for a minute. These components are great, as is to be expected of the Tiny Epic series. The art is colorful and unique, the boxes are sturdy, the cards are nice and thick, and the wooden components are quality. No real gripes from me regarding production quality of this game! The gripe I do have is about the gameplay – specifically a 2-player game. When playing a 2-player game in competitive mode, the game end is triggered after 1 Flag token has been secured. This really can negate any need for strategy or player interaction, because each player starts near a Control Area, and can simply just move there and camp out to take the Flag. In my first games at a 2-player count, I found the gameplay to be kind of bland and not engaging because of this. At higher player counts, you have to interact with opponents on the map as you try to capture Control Areas. If at a 2-player count, you were required to secure 2 Flag tokens, or maybe just mandate that the secured Flag must be the one located in the center of the map, it would encourage more interactions between the players, and thereby elevate the strategy and gameplay in my opinion. Just something to consider.
Overall, I think that Tiny Epic Tactics is a solid game in this series. It is not my favorite by any means, but the gameplay and mechanics fill a gap left by the other Tiny Epics. The strategy required can be high-level, but the simplicity of the physical gameplay makes it feel accessible and inviting to all types of gamers. If you’re looking for a great 2-player Tiny Epic, maybe keep looking, but for a 3-4 player game, Tiny Epic Tactics hits the spot. Purple Phoenix Games gives it a tactical 8 / 12.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Banker's Wife in Books
Mar 6, 2019
Great, exciting, tense novel
Annabel Lerner feels isolated in Geneva: she's not like the other bankers' wives, and she rarely sees her husband Matthew anymore. They moved to Geneva for a fresh start--and yes, to take advantage of the salary Matthew's private banking job at Swiss United offered. But Annabel never realized how stressed Matthew would be or how often he'd travel. And then, suddenly, he's gone: his private plane simply falling off the radar over the French Alps. Before she can even understand what's happening, Annabel is left to deal with the aftermath, including a trail of secrets and the powerful men at Swiss United who don't want them exposed. Meanwhile, Marina Tourneau is a reporter for The Press. Her mentor, Duncan Carr, has been chasing a story involving Morty Reiss, whose hedge fund was one of the largest Ponzi scams of all time. Supposedly, before he could get caught, Morty committed suicide. But Duncan and Marina believe Marty faked his death and Duncan has become obsessed with proving it--to the detriment of his health, his reputation, and his career. But Marina is also engaged to Grant Ellis, whose wealthy father, James, is about to run for President. The plan is for Marina to stop writing and stand by her man. But when she suddenly realizes she's on the trail of the story of her career, what will she do?
Well, this turned out to be a gem of a novel. When I first started reading it, I was a little worried that I wouldn't see what the fuss was all about, but things quickly picked up, and I was hooked. One of the best things about this novel is that it's an old-style thriller--it reminded me of old-school Grisham or Stieg Larsson. It even throws shade at the glutton of Girl books and their (annoying) unreliable narrators, which I love. This is a mystery for folks who love real stories without any fuss or distraction and with strong characters--all of which combine to leave you befuddled and anxious as everything slowly unfurls.
Alger takes us into the complicated and dark world of Swiss banking, where we are introduced to a lot of real bad guys who have no morals. You can't trust them, you know they are bad, and you know your heroes and heroines are in true danger. Rarely do I think this while reading a book (because, face it, the book is always better), but I really think this book would *actually* make a great movie. It's exciting and tense, and the way things are slowly revealed would make for a very effective film.
But, anyway, it's a wonderful novel. You quickly get sucked into Annabel and Marina's worlds--the majority of the story is told from their points of view. There's a decent amount of ancillary characters to keep track of, but it's certainly manageable. The best is not knowing who to trust, what to believe, or how things went down. There's that Girl with a Dragon Tattoo-reporting vibe that I love: the pleasure of solving a case. The story is set in 2015 but is completely timely, yet utterly timeless in its essence of greed, money, and fear--and what people do in the name of all three. I just loved the old-fashioned thrill of it, the long list of suspects, the excitement of trying to work out who did what.
Overall, this is just a great novel. The plot is excellent--tense, exciting, and expertly woven together. The characters are strong, but it's really the story that's the standout here. It truly reminds you of mysteries and thrillers of old (I sound ancient here, but whatever). Don't let the banking theme scare you off: this is a fabulous read, and if you're a mystery or thriller fan, I think you'll really enjoy this one. 4+ stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).
Well, this turned out to be a gem of a novel. When I first started reading it, I was a little worried that I wouldn't see what the fuss was all about, but things quickly picked up, and I was hooked. One of the best things about this novel is that it's an old-style thriller--it reminded me of old-school Grisham or Stieg Larsson. It even throws shade at the glutton of Girl books and their (annoying) unreliable narrators, which I love. This is a mystery for folks who love real stories without any fuss or distraction and with strong characters--all of which combine to leave you befuddled and anxious as everything slowly unfurls.
Alger takes us into the complicated and dark world of Swiss banking, where we are introduced to a lot of real bad guys who have no morals. You can't trust them, you know they are bad, and you know your heroes and heroines are in true danger. Rarely do I think this while reading a book (because, face it, the book is always better), but I really think this book would *actually* make a great movie. It's exciting and tense, and the way things are slowly revealed would make for a very effective film.
But, anyway, it's a wonderful novel. You quickly get sucked into Annabel and Marina's worlds--the majority of the story is told from their points of view. There's a decent amount of ancillary characters to keep track of, but it's certainly manageable. The best is not knowing who to trust, what to believe, or how things went down. There's that Girl with a Dragon Tattoo-reporting vibe that I love: the pleasure of solving a case. The story is set in 2015 but is completely timely, yet utterly timeless in its essence of greed, money, and fear--and what people do in the name of all three. I just loved the old-fashioned thrill of it, the long list of suspects, the excitement of trying to work out who did what.
Overall, this is just a great novel. The plot is excellent--tense, exciting, and expertly woven together. The characters are strong, but it's really the story that's the standout here. It truly reminds you of mysteries and thrillers of old (I sound ancient here, but whatever). Don't let the banking theme scare you off: this is a fabulous read, and if you're a mystery or thriller fan, I think you'll really enjoy this one. 4+ stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).