Search
Search results
LOUISE HAY AFFIRMATION MEDITATIONS: ESSENTIAL AFFIRMATIONS FOR HEALTH, LOVE, SUCCESS & SELF-ESTEEM
Lifestyle and Health & Fitness
App
Unleash your full potential for love, health, success and self-esteem with this revolutionary new...
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Super Size Me (2004) in Movies
Sep 20, 2020
Look, no shit eating at McDonald's for 30 days straight with bare minimum activity is unhealthy - but this is still one of the most fun documentaries ever made and it's not like that's the only ace-in-the-hole this has anyway. Holds up even after three watches, Spurlock's nonchalant, breezy energy towards making himself a human test subject for such a ludicrous experiment in and of itself is entertaining. But couple that with his goofy gravitas and cavalcade of hilarity then this just becomes even more of a blast to watch. Undeniably this was instrumental in shaping the fast food world of today, but contrary to popular belief this is also still very informative with a lot of those type of facts that just make you disappointed in the human race. And even though so much has changed since then that this should theoretically be obsolete, it isn't - because not only does much of this still unfortunately hold true to this day, but it's beyond interesting as a time capsule of a time that seems like forever ago even though it was just in recent history, one that you can consistently compare to today's take on the subject. The blend between fast food hit piece and McDonald's diet journey is immaculate, and as with even the weakest of Spurlock docs it's clear that a chief goal here is to just create a movie that you can have a really good, memorable, and unique time watching. We watched this for health class in seventh grade and - to be frank - we were all a bunch of juvenile little shit-heads so this would have sated our appetitive for celebratory immaturity on its own; but then the teacher let us basically commentate on the movie *as* we watched it and that was one of the greatest school days I've ever had. Forever one of my favorites.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Arctic Scavengers in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019
One of the best parts of the board gaming experience is finding a fun group of people with whom to play! Sometimes, though, coordinating a game night is easier said than done. We all must occasionally forego the group experience and face the world as the Lonely Only. But fear not! The world of solo-play is a vast and exciting realm! What follows is a chronicle of my journey into the solo-playing world – notes on gameplay, mechanics, rules, difficulty, and overall experience with solo variations of commonly multiplayer games! I hope this will provide some insight as you continue to grow your collection, or explore your already owned games!
Welcome to the Ice Age. No, not the animated movie. I’m talking about the real deal. Arctic Scavengers is set in a post-apocalyptic ice age where the cold is deadly and the resources are scarce. Any surviving humans have banded together to form ‘tribes’ that are competing for dominance in this frigid tundra. Can you and your tribe outwit your competitors to become the most powerful group? Or will a bigger and more menacing tribe overpower you and jeopardize your survival?
Disclaimer: The solo variant is only addressed in the Recon Expansion rules. There IS another expansion – HQ – but I have not used that content in my solo plays. This review only encompasses the Base Game and Recon Expansion.
Arctic Scavengers is a deck-building game where players are recruiting mercenaries to their tribes, searching for general resources, and battling other tribes for contested resources. Each turn has two main phases – Resource Gathering and Skirmish. During Resource Gathering, you play cards from your hand to either recruit new mercenaries or search the junkyard for general resources. Any remaining cards in your hand are then used during the Skirmish phase – where the player with the highest ‘fight’ value wins the contested resource for that round. At the end of the game, the player with the biggest tribe wins!
The solo variant has some minor differences, but is played essentially the same way. In a solo game, the contested resource cards are divided into 7 skirmishes to be encountered throughout the game. You can decide when to engage in a skirmish – it is not a requirement to encounter one each turn. After each skirmish, you either win and earn a contested resource, or lose and must permanently discard a card from your losing hand. The game ends when all 7 skirmishes have been encountered. The other difference is that each time you have to re-shuffle your discard pile, you must permanently remove the top card of your new deck from the game. Beyond those changes, the game remains the same. At the end of the game, all cards in your tribe are worth certain numbers of points – the goal is to beat your own personal best score.
In theory, this game sounds super cool! But when I actually got to play it solo, I was seriously underwhelmed. The game feels stagnant in the sense that there is no tension or urgency in your strategy. Since YOU get to decide when to engage in a skirmish, it is possible to just while away the time building up your deck until you have enough cards to beat every skirmish. Yes, you permanently discard a card each time you re-shuffle your discard pile, but if you are able to recruit one or two new cards each turn, it negates the penalty of discarding a card. The ability to choose when to engage in skirmishes is seriously over-powered because there is nothing stopping you from ignoring skirmishes and amassing cards for end-game scoring.
The other grievance I have with the game is regarding the Junkyard – the deck of cards where you ‘search’ for resources. The solo rules do not explicitly address setting up the Junkyard deck at all. So do you use one or not? Not having the Junkyard deck can be a serious hinderance – certain mercenaries cannot be recruited without certain resources. If you DO play with the Junkyard, how many cards do you use? Do you use the corresponding cards from the Base game and BOTH expansions? Only Base game and one expansion? Again, not explicitly addressed. I’ve tried using all of the Junkyard cards and that is difficult – there are just too many cards in that deck. I have gone entire games without coming across a necessary resource just because the size of the deck is too large (and I’m apparently a poor card-shuffler). The simple solution to this ambiguity would have been to just address it in the rulebook. But it’s not there, so I’m left guessing as to how I should set it up every time.
I really like the idea of this game. I really don’t like the solo variant though. Not having forced skirmishes makes the game extremely boring for me – I don’t really need a strategy since I can just recruit cards until I can draw a powerful hand. If there was a timeline for skirmishes – maybe something like “You must encounter one skirmish every other turn” – the game would be vastly different. I would actually need to strategize what cards to recruit and how I should delegate my cards on turns with a skirmish. In most games, I will reach a certain point where I choose to encounter a skirmish (that I know I will lose) just because I am starting to get bored. I appreciate the sentiment of including a solo variant, but this one just does not work.
Arctic Scavengers requires decent strategy and it offers good player interaction in group games. In a solo game, however, it is just imbalanced and boring. This is one solo variant that I would not recommend that you try, unless you are including drastic house rules.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/03/06/solo-chronicles-arctic-scavengers/
Welcome to the Ice Age. No, not the animated movie. I’m talking about the real deal. Arctic Scavengers is set in a post-apocalyptic ice age where the cold is deadly and the resources are scarce. Any surviving humans have banded together to form ‘tribes’ that are competing for dominance in this frigid tundra. Can you and your tribe outwit your competitors to become the most powerful group? Or will a bigger and more menacing tribe overpower you and jeopardize your survival?
Disclaimer: The solo variant is only addressed in the Recon Expansion rules. There IS another expansion – HQ – but I have not used that content in my solo plays. This review only encompasses the Base Game and Recon Expansion.
Arctic Scavengers is a deck-building game where players are recruiting mercenaries to their tribes, searching for general resources, and battling other tribes for contested resources. Each turn has two main phases – Resource Gathering and Skirmish. During Resource Gathering, you play cards from your hand to either recruit new mercenaries or search the junkyard for general resources. Any remaining cards in your hand are then used during the Skirmish phase – where the player with the highest ‘fight’ value wins the contested resource for that round. At the end of the game, the player with the biggest tribe wins!
The solo variant has some minor differences, but is played essentially the same way. In a solo game, the contested resource cards are divided into 7 skirmishes to be encountered throughout the game. You can decide when to engage in a skirmish – it is not a requirement to encounter one each turn. After each skirmish, you either win and earn a contested resource, or lose and must permanently discard a card from your losing hand. The game ends when all 7 skirmishes have been encountered. The other difference is that each time you have to re-shuffle your discard pile, you must permanently remove the top card of your new deck from the game. Beyond those changes, the game remains the same. At the end of the game, all cards in your tribe are worth certain numbers of points – the goal is to beat your own personal best score.
In theory, this game sounds super cool! But when I actually got to play it solo, I was seriously underwhelmed. The game feels stagnant in the sense that there is no tension or urgency in your strategy. Since YOU get to decide when to engage in a skirmish, it is possible to just while away the time building up your deck until you have enough cards to beat every skirmish. Yes, you permanently discard a card each time you re-shuffle your discard pile, but if you are able to recruit one or two new cards each turn, it negates the penalty of discarding a card. The ability to choose when to engage in skirmishes is seriously over-powered because there is nothing stopping you from ignoring skirmishes and amassing cards for end-game scoring.
The other grievance I have with the game is regarding the Junkyard – the deck of cards where you ‘search’ for resources. The solo rules do not explicitly address setting up the Junkyard deck at all. So do you use one or not? Not having the Junkyard deck can be a serious hinderance – certain mercenaries cannot be recruited without certain resources. If you DO play with the Junkyard, how many cards do you use? Do you use the corresponding cards from the Base game and BOTH expansions? Only Base game and one expansion? Again, not explicitly addressed. I’ve tried using all of the Junkyard cards and that is difficult – there are just too many cards in that deck. I have gone entire games without coming across a necessary resource just because the size of the deck is too large (and I’m apparently a poor card-shuffler). The simple solution to this ambiguity would have been to just address it in the rulebook. But it’s not there, so I’m left guessing as to how I should set it up every time.
I really like the idea of this game. I really don’t like the solo variant though. Not having forced skirmishes makes the game extremely boring for me – I don’t really need a strategy since I can just recruit cards until I can draw a powerful hand. If there was a timeline for skirmishes – maybe something like “You must encounter one skirmish every other turn” – the game would be vastly different. I would actually need to strategize what cards to recruit and how I should delegate my cards on turns with a skirmish. In most games, I will reach a certain point where I choose to encounter a skirmish (that I know I will lose) just because I am starting to get bored. I appreciate the sentiment of including a solo variant, but this one just does not work.
Arctic Scavengers requires decent strategy and it offers good player interaction in group games. In a solo game, however, it is just imbalanced and boring. This is one solo variant that I would not recommend that you try, unless you are including drastic house rules.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/03/06/solo-chronicles-arctic-scavengers/
eBiblia La Santa Biblia & Mapas Biblicos Gratis
Lifestyle
App
One of the best applications Bible hope this application change their lives we want to share with...
Lost - Season 1
8.5
Rate It
TV Season Watch
Oceanic Air flight 815 tore apart in mid-air and crashed on a Pacific island, leaving 48 passengers...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Greatest Showman (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
I can’t claim to know much about musicals. I don’t actively avoid them, but I don’t go out of my way to see them either. The few that I have seen and liked don’t seem to sit well with the musical theater crowd either. For instance, recently in conversation my defense of Russell Crowe as Javert in the latest adaptation of Les Misérables was shot down in a matter of seconds. My wife, with some frequency, reminds me that my (until now) secret admiration of Tim Burton’s Sweeney Todd is something that should never be declared in a public forum. For me, one of the best achievements in musical film will always be South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut; and though there is a general positivity about it, I’ve never seen it taken all that seriously as a contemporary musical (it was certainly a hell of a lot more memorable than 2003’s Best Picture winner, Chicago). So, if you haven’t already decided my opinion will be moot and stopped reading, I will, with the limited appreciation I have for this genre, give The Greatest Showman the fairest shake I can.
At a surprisingly short hour and forty-five minutes, this high-concept imagining of the meteoric rise of P.T. Barnum (Hugh Jackman), from the impoverished son of a tailor to one of the biggest names in the history of entertainment, should absolutely fly by. Tragically, it doesn’t. Beginning with an irresponsibly rushed first act that condenses decades of backstory into a few minutes, it dramatically stops dead between its second and third acts as we’re subjected to three songs in a row that not all that subtly beat us over the head with the inevitably that our leads are going to have to face some predictable, life-changing conflict before the big finale. Showman also suffers from the delusion that period pieces will be more engaging and relatable with a modern-inspired soundtrack, à la Baz Luhrmann’s misguided attempt at The Great Gatsby. The idea being that the music of the time, though antiquated to us now, would have sounded modern to people then, so why not put modern music, whether original or sourced, over period images in an attempt to bridge the gap between their world and ours? It’s a concept that might sound great on paper, but as Luhrmann already proved, the final results don’t so much complement each other as they expose each other’s weaknesses.
Its major flaw though, and why The Greatest Showman fails to be a great anything, is the insistence on force-feeding moments of attempted catharsis every 15-20 minutes, having earned almost none of them. A great many of the numbers are presented as such grand, climactic set pieces that they don’t feel as though they are working to serve a cohesive, larger whole. We are inundated with a blur of crescendo after crescendo and left little time to reflect on what we have just seen and heard before the film clumsily bounds off to the next song-and-dance laden plot point; and if you asked me to name any of the individual tunes now three days later, I’d be hard-pressed to do so. It’s an odd juxtaposition, and one I’ve very rarely experienced, wanting so badly for a film to end and at the same time wishing it had been given more time to fully realize its scope. Keep your ears open as well for an ill-advised line in which Barnum proudly compares himself to Napoleon. Isn’t Barnum supposed to be the “hero” of this piece, someone we are supposed to identify with and for whom we want to find success? Somebody please provide Showman’s writers a history lesson that didn’t just come off a Wikipedia page (for Barnum and Napoleon’s sakes).
With any negative criticism, I do like to try and go out on something positive, and if I have to concede anything to this movie, it’s that it finds its footing, albeit temporarily, while addressing issues of equality. Showman shines in the few moments where the supporting players portraying Barnum’s “oddities”, Keala Settle as Lettie Lutz in particular, are given the opportunity to stand toe-to-toe with the leads and, in many of these scenes, they rise above even the likes of Hugh Jackman. Another member of the cast who merits a little bit of praise (and I reserve the right to retract this at any time of my choosing, more than likely with whatever juvenile comedy he’ll be seen in next) is Zac Efron. Exposure to the likes of Nicole Kidman and John Cusack in 2012’s sadly overlooked The Paperboy, may finally be yielding results as he is the only lead who leaves an impression. Though his journey as a high society playwright begrudgingly brought into Barnum’s world definitely leans heavily on the saccharine side, it does provide a break of plausibility in amongst the unbridled chaos of the rest of the picture. I wouldn’t doubt that there is a much better movie that could have been made from expanding into its own feature the subplot of his character bucking the expectations of his status to fall in love with a circus performer.
At a surprisingly short hour and forty-five minutes, this high-concept imagining of the meteoric rise of P.T. Barnum (Hugh Jackman), from the impoverished son of a tailor to one of the biggest names in the history of entertainment, should absolutely fly by. Tragically, it doesn’t. Beginning with an irresponsibly rushed first act that condenses decades of backstory into a few minutes, it dramatically stops dead between its second and third acts as we’re subjected to three songs in a row that not all that subtly beat us over the head with the inevitably that our leads are going to have to face some predictable, life-changing conflict before the big finale. Showman also suffers from the delusion that period pieces will be more engaging and relatable with a modern-inspired soundtrack, à la Baz Luhrmann’s misguided attempt at The Great Gatsby. The idea being that the music of the time, though antiquated to us now, would have sounded modern to people then, so why not put modern music, whether original or sourced, over period images in an attempt to bridge the gap between their world and ours? It’s a concept that might sound great on paper, but as Luhrmann already proved, the final results don’t so much complement each other as they expose each other’s weaknesses.
Its major flaw though, and why The Greatest Showman fails to be a great anything, is the insistence on force-feeding moments of attempted catharsis every 15-20 minutes, having earned almost none of them. A great many of the numbers are presented as such grand, climactic set pieces that they don’t feel as though they are working to serve a cohesive, larger whole. We are inundated with a blur of crescendo after crescendo and left little time to reflect on what we have just seen and heard before the film clumsily bounds off to the next song-and-dance laden plot point; and if you asked me to name any of the individual tunes now three days later, I’d be hard-pressed to do so. It’s an odd juxtaposition, and one I’ve very rarely experienced, wanting so badly for a film to end and at the same time wishing it had been given more time to fully realize its scope. Keep your ears open as well for an ill-advised line in which Barnum proudly compares himself to Napoleon. Isn’t Barnum supposed to be the “hero” of this piece, someone we are supposed to identify with and for whom we want to find success? Somebody please provide Showman’s writers a history lesson that didn’t just come off a Wikipedia page (for Barnum and Napoleon’s sakes).
With any negative criticism, I do like to try and go out on something positive, and if I have to concede anything to this movie, it’s that it finds its footing, albeit temporarily, while addressing issues of equality. Showman shines in the few moments where the supporting players portraying Barnum’s “oddities”, Keala Settle as Lettie Lutz in particular, are given the opportunity to stand toe-to-toe with the leads and, in many of these scenes, they rise above even the likes of Hugh Jackman. Another member of the cast who merits a little bit of praise (and I reserve the right to retract this at any time of my choosing, more than likely with whatever juvenile comedy he’ll be seen in next) is Zac Efron. Exposure to the likes of Nicole Kidman and John Cusack in 2012’s sadly overlooked The Paperboy, may finally be yielding results as he is the only lead who leaves an impression. Though his journey as a high society playwright begrudgingly brought into Barnum’s world definitely leans heavily on the saccharine side, it does provide a break of plausibility in amongst the unbridled chaos of the rest of the picture. I wouldn’t doubt that there is a much better movie that could have been made from expanding into its own feature the subplot of his character bucking the expectations of his status to fall in love with a circus performer.
To Miss with Love
Book
From the whistle-blowing teacher behind the headlines: one inspirational teacher, one extraordinary...
Escape Tales: Children of Wyrmwoods
Tabletop Game
Escape Tales: Children of Wyrmwoods is a story driven escape room in card game form, with immersive...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Incredibles 2 (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
It’s hard to believe that the first Incredibles by Disney Pixar debuted all the way back in 2004, and for those of you counting that’s over 14 years ago. Featuring the vibrant animation and incredible voice acting that only Disney Pixar can offer, we find ourselves once again sharing a grand adventure with this lovable superhero family. This will be a spoiler free review so feel free to read on and prepare for a journey of epic proportions.
Not much has changed since we last left off with the original Incredibles. Superheroes are still outlawed, seemingly because the damage they cause when fighting crime is far more expensive than the actual crime itself. This is proven in the very first scene of the movie, where our crime fighting family attempts to stop a bank robbery and they end up causing more havoc and mayhem than would have occurred had they not been involved at all. It seems there isn’t a place anywhere left in the world for superheroes…or is there?
The family is then offered an opportunity to prove how important superheroes are to the world and the impact they can have on the good of humanity. This mission only needs the talents of Elastigirl (Holly Hunter) however, so Elastigirl goes off to fight crime while Mr. Incredible (Craig T. Nelson) stays back at the homestead to take care of the three kids.
As with all Pixar movies, Incredibles 2 is far more than simply a cute movie about a family of crime fighting heroes. It is about how Mr. Incredible must learn to be a hero by taking care of his family instead of fighting crime. It shows how even without a secret identity and super suit that a parent helping their kids with “new math” or reading them a bedtime story can makes them the greatest hero of all. I loved that the underlying message to this movie was that being there for your family is as equally as important as saving the town from the next evil menace.
In a similar reversal of roles, Elastigirl takes on the role of the family provider. While she excels with her superhero duties, she struggles with not always being there for her kids. For Elastigirl it’s about letting go and trusting that her husband and family can learn to manage on their own when she can’t be there. We also learn that sometimes being a hero means making sacrifices for the good of the family as a whole.
As you’d expect from any film with Pixar behind it, the animation is beautiful and colorful. I would warn those that might be sensitive to strobe lights to be a bit cautious during a few scenes. There weren’t any warnings for those who might be photosensitive, and the scenes don’t last long, but I feel it’s still important to note. As already mentioned, the voice acting is also excellent. Sarah Vowell does a great job as Violet and Huck Milner is adorable as the voice of Dash. As you might have already guessed, Samuel L. Jackson does an outstanding job at reprising his role of Frozone. Unfortunately, Frozone isn’t in the movie too much but he definitely steals any scene he is in. The story was fun, entertaining and at times downright hilarious. Even though baby Jack-Jack hasn’t been a big part of this review, he is a huge part of the movie. Jack-Jack’s emerging powers mean an even greater challenge for everyone and some of the most entertaining scenes revolve around Jack-Jack and his ever-growing list of powers.
Incredibles 2 is a heartwarming film that shows us all that heroes come in different shapes and sizes, and how important it is for everyone to come together as a family in order to succeed at life (and occasionally take down a bad guy). It’s a worthy successor to the original in every way and will certainly appeal to both young and old alike. So, gather up your own superhero family and run/fly/warp your way to see Incredibles 2 when it releases in theatres on June 15th!
Not much has changed since we last left off with the original Incredibles. Superheroes are still outlawed, seemingly because the damage they cause when fighting crime is far more expensive than the actual crime itself. This is proven in the very first scene of the movie, where our crime fighting family attempts to stop a bank robbery and they end up causing more havoc and mayhem than would have occurred had they not been involved at all. It seems there isn’t a place anywhere left in the world for superheroes…or is there?
The family is then offered an opportunity to prove how important superheroes are to the world and the impact they can have on the good of humanity. This mission only needs the talents of Elastigirl (Holly Hunter) however, so Elastigirl goes off to fight crime while Mr. Incredible (Craig T. Nelson) stays back at the homestead to take care of the three kids.
As with all Pixar movies, Incredibles 2 is far more than simply a cute movie about a family of crime fighting heroes. It is about how Mr. Incredible must learn to be a hero by taking care of his family instead of fighting crime. It shows how even without a secret identity and super suit that a parent helping their kids with “new math” or reading them a bedtime story can makes them the greatest hero of all. I loved that the underlying message to this movie was that being there for your family is as equally as important as saving the town from the next evil menace.
In a similar reversal of roles, Elastigirl takes on the role of the family provider. While she excels with her superhero duties, she struggles with not always being there for her kids. For Elastigirl it’s about letting go and trusting that her husband and family can learn to manage on their own when she can’t be there. We also learn that sometimes being a hero means making sacrifices for the good of the family as a whole.
As you’d expect from any film with Pixar behind it, the animation is beautiful and colorful. I would warn those that might be sensitive to strobe lights to be a bit cautious during a few scenes. There weren’t any warnings for those who might be photosensitive, and the scenes don’t last long, but I feel it’s still important to note. As already mentioned, the voice acting is also excellent. Sarah Vowell does a great job as Violet and Huck Milner is adorable as the voice of Dash. As you might have already guessed, Samuel L. Jackson does an outstanding job at reprising his role of Frozone. Unfortunately, Frozone isn’t in the movie too much but he definitely steals any scene he is in. The story was fun, entertaining and at times downright hilarious. Even though baby Jack-Jack hasn’t been a big part of this review, he is a huge part of the movie. Jack-Jack’s emerging powers mean an even greater challenge for everyone and some of the most entertaining scenes revolve around Jack-Jack and his ever-growing list of powers.
Incredibles 2 is a heartwarming film that shows us all that heroes come in different shapes and sizes, and how important it is for everyone to come together as a family in order to succeed at life (and occasionally take down a bad guy). It’s a worthy successor to the original in every way and will certainly appeal to both young and old alike. So, gather up your own superhero family and run/fly/warp your way to see Incredibles 2 when it releases in theatres on June 15th!
Versusyours (757 KP) rated Trading Places (1983) in Movies
Dec 14, 2019
Laugh out loud (4 more)
Gorilla based hijinx
The good Eddie Murphy
The classic bet goes wrong
Drunken, gun toting Santa
Xmas never looked so good
One of my favourite Xmas films and it goes beyond the season with some great performances from a on form Eddie Murphy and a wacky and deranged Dan Aykroyd. The interplay between them and there descent and rise through the class system allows them to show some different character traits that make this film interesting and thoughtful. The classic bet between 2 unscrupulous and Rick characters pits nature against nurture and is the key plot for the film. Murphy is a product of the mean streets and lives a fast changing life to hustle money and Dan Aykroyd is an elite and upper class snob with everything going right in his life. A complete reversal of their fortunes is arranged due to the bet and this is where the comedic journey really begins with drugs, hookers, thefts, dodgy deals and the scene stealing bi curious goriila who I believe is and unshaven James Belushi
In another world it would have been that duo of Wilder and Pryor who were considered to play the lead roles with the working title of Black and White. I think it may have had a different edge if that was the case.
There was a law made called the Eddie Murphy Rule in America that banned insider trading so this film had a lasting effect but I think there are more better uses of the term Eddie Murphy Rule for some of his shenanigans he has been involved in since this film.
Overall this film takes pride of place at Xmas time but I have often enjoyed it outside of this period, one of the 80s funniest and eccentric films and it just gets me on that basic level that makes me love it dearly like only a gorrila based love triangle can
In another world it would have been that duo of Wilder and Pryor who were considered to play the lead roles with the working title of Black and White. I think it may have had a different edge if that was the case.
There was a law made called the Eddie Murphy Rule in America that banned insider trading so this film had a lasting effect but I think there are more better uses of the term Eddie Murphy Rule for some of his shenanigans he has been involved in since this film.
Overall this film takes pride of place at Xmas time but I have often enjoyed it outside of this period, one of the 80s funniest and eccentric films and it just gets me on that basic level that makes me love it dearly like only a gorrila based love triangle can