Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated First Man (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
He captured a feeling. Sky with no ceiling.
A memorable event
I am a child of the 60’s, born in 1961. The “Space Race” for me was not some historical concept but a pervasive backdrop to my childhood. I still recall, at the age of 8, being marched into my junior school’s assembly hall. We all peered at the grainy black-and-white pictures of Neil Armstrong as he spoke his famously fluffed line before stepping onto the lunar surface. The event happened at 3:54am UK time, so clearly my recollection of “seeing it live” is bogus. (I read that the BBC stayed on air until 10:30 in the morning, so it was probably a ‘final review’ of the night’s events I saw). It is probably lodged in my memory less for the historical event and more due to the fact that there was TELEVISION ON IN THE MORNING! (Kids, ask your grandparents!)
A very personal connection. My personal copy of Waddington’s “Blast Off” board game, briefly shown in the film.
The plot
But back to Damien Chazelle‘s film. We start early in the 60’s with America getting well and truly kicked up the proberbial by the Russians in the space race: they fail to get the first man in space; they fail to carry out the first spacewalk. So the Americans, following the famous JFK speech, set their sights on the moon. It’s the equivalent of making a mess of cutting your toenails but then deciding to have a go at brain surgery. NASA develop the Gemini programme to practice the essential docking manoevers required as a precursor for the seemingly impossible (‘two blackboard’) mission that is Apollo.
But the price paid for such ambition is high.
Ryan Gosling plays Neil Armstrong as a dedicated, prickly, professional; altogether not a terribly likeable individual. Claire Foy plays his long-suffering wife Janet, putting her support for her husband’s dangerous profession ahead of her natural fears of becoming a single mother.
Review
There is obviously little tension to be mined from a film that has such a well-known historical context. Those with even a subliminal knowledge of the subject will be aware of the key triumphs and tragedies along the way. The script (by Josh Singer, “The Post“; “Spotlight“) is very well done in developing a creeping dread of knowing what is shortly to come.
Even with these inherent spoilers, Chazelle still manages to evoke armrest-squeezing tension into the space flight sequences. A lot of this is achieved through disorientating camera movements and flashing images that may irritate some but I found to be highly effective. (Did anyone else flash back to that excellent “Mission Space” ride at Epcot during the launch sequences?) This hand-held cinematography by Linus Sandgren (Chazelle’s “La La Land” collaborator) is matched by some utterly drop-dead gorgeous shots – beautifully framed; beautifully lit – that would be worthy of a Kaminski/Spielberg collaboration.
Those expecting a rollercoaster thrill-ride of the likes of “Apollo 13” will be disappointed. The film has more of the slow-and-long-burn feeling of “The Right Stuff” in mood and, at 141 minutes, some might even find it quite boring. There is significant time, for example, spent within the family home. These scenes include turbulent events of which I wasn’t previously aware: events that form the cornerstone of the film’s drama. For me, the balance of the personal and the historical background was perfectly done. I found it curious though that with such a family-oriented drama Chazelle chose to ditch completely any cuts away to the earthbound onlookers during the tense lunar landing sequence. (Compare and contrast with Ron Howard‘s masterly inter-cutting in the re-entry scene of “Apollo 13”). With the outcome foretold, perhaps such tension building was considered unnecessary? I’m not suggesting it was wrong to ‘stay in the moment’ with the astronauts, but it’s a bold directorial move.
Overall, the foolhardiness of NASA trying to do what they did with the 60’s technology at their disposal is well-portrayed. If you’ve been lucky enough, as I have, to view the Apollo 11 capsule in the National Air and Space museum in Washington you can’t help but be impressed by the bravery of Armstong, Aldrin and Collins in getting in that bucket of bolts and putting their lives on the line. True American heroes.
On that topic, the “flag issue” has generated much self-righteous heat within the US media; that is regarding Chazelle not showing the American flag being planted. This seems fatuous to me. Not only is the flag shown on the moon, but the film ably demonstrates the American know-how and bravery behind the mission. If Clint Eastwood had been directing he would have probably gone there: but for me it certainly didn’t need any further patriotism rubbed in the viewer’s face.
The turns
Are Oscar nominations on the cards for Ryan Gosling and Claire Foy? For me, it would be staggering if they are not: this film has “Oscar nomination” written all over it. I’d also certainly not bet against Foy winning for Best Actress: her portrayal of a wife on the edge is nothing short of brilliant. And perhaps, just perhaps, this might be Gosling’s year too.
Elsewhere there are strong supporting performances from Kyle Chandler (as Deke Slayton), Corey Stoll (as the ‘tell it how it is’ Buzz Aldrin) and Jason Clarke (as Ed White). It’s also great to see Belfast-born Ciarán Hinds in another mainstream Hollywood release.
For me, another dead cert Oscar nomination will be Justin Hurwitz for the score which is breathtakingly brilliant, not just in its compelling themes but also in its orchestration: the use of the eerie theremin and melodic harp are just brilliant together. I haven’t heard a score this year that’s more fitting to the visuals: although it’s early in the Oscar season to be calling it, I’d be very surprised if this didn’t walk away with the statuette.
Summary
Loved this. Damien Chazelle – with “Whiplash“, “La La Land” and now “First Man” – has hit all of three out of the park in my book. It’s not really a film for thrill-seekers, who might get bored, but anyone, like me, with an interest in the history of space exploration will I think lap it up: for this was surely the most memorable decade in space history… so far.
On leaving the cinema I looked up at the rising moon and marvelled once more at the audacity of man. My eyes then drifted across to the red dot that was Mars. How long I wonder? And how many dramatic film biographies still to come?
I am a child of the 60’s, born in 1961. The “Space Race” for me was not some historical concept but a pervasive backdrop to my childhood. I still recall, at the age of 8, being marched into my junior school’s assembly hall. We all peered at the grainy black-and-white pictures of Neil Armstrong as he spoke his famously fluffed line before stepping onto the lunar surface. The event happened at 3:54am UK time, so clearly my recollection of “seeing it live” is bogus. (I read that the BBC stayed on air until 10:30 in the morning, so it was probably a ‘final review’ of the night’s events I saw). It is probably lodged in my memory less for the historical event and more due to the fact that there was TELEVISION ON IN THE MORNING! (Kids, ask your grandparents!)
A very personal connection. My personal copy of Waddington’s “Blast Off” board game, briefly shown in the film.
The plot
But back to Damien Chazelle‘s film. We start early in the 60’s with America getting well and truly kicked up the proberbial by the Russians in the space race: they fail to get the first man in space; they fail to carry out the first spacewalk. So the Americans, following the famous JFK speech, set their sights on the moon. It’s the equivalent of making a mess of cutting your toenails but then deciding to have a go at brain surgery. NASA develop the Gemini programme to practice the essential docking manoevers required as a precursor for the seemingly impossible (‘two blackboard’) mission that is Apollo.
But the price paid for such ambition is high.
Ryan Gosling plays Neil Armstrong as a dedicated, prickly, professional; altogether not a terribly likeable individual. Claire Foy plays his long-suffering wife Janet, putting her support for her husband’s dangerous profession ahead of her natural fears of becoming a single mother.
Review
There is obviously little tension to be mined from a film that has such a well-known historical context. Those with even a subliminal knowledge of the subject will be aware of the key triumphs and tragedies along the way. The script (by Josh Singer, “The Post“; “Spotlight“) is very well done in developing a creeping dread of knowing what is shortly to come.
Even with these inherent spoilers, Chazelle still manages to evoke armrest-squeezing tension into the space flight sequences. A lot of this is achieved through disorientating camera movements and flashing images that may irritate some but I found to be highly effective. (Did anyone else flash back to that excellent “Mission Space” ride at Epcot during the launch sequences?) This hand-held cinematography by Linus Sandgren (Chazelle’s “La La Land” collaborator) is matched by some utterly drop-dead gorgeous shots – beautifully framed; beautifully lit – that would be worthy of a Kaminski/Spielberg collaboration.
Those expecting a rollercoaster thrill-ride of the likes of “Apollo 13” will be disappointed. The film has more of the slow-and-long-burn feeling of “The Right Stuff” in mood and, at 141 minutes, some might even find it quite boring. There is significant time, for example, spent within the family home. These scenes include turbulent events of which I wasn’t previously aware: events that form the cornerstone of the film’s drama. For me, the balance of the personal and the historical background was perfectly done. I found it curious though that with such a family-oriented drama Chazelle chose to ditch completely any cuts away to the earthbound onlookers during the tense lunar landing sequence. (Compare and contrast with Ron Howard‘s masterly inter-cutting in the re-entry scene of “Apollo 13”). With the outcome foretold, perhaps such tension building was considered unnecessary? I’m not suggesting it was wrong to ‘stay in the moment’ with the astronauts, but it’s a bold directorial move.
Overall, the foolhardiness of NASA trying to do what they did with the 60’s technology at their disposal is well-portrayed. If you’ve been lucky enough, as I have, to view the Apollo 11 capsule in the National Air and Space museum in Washington you can’t help but be impressed by the bravery of Armstong, Aldrin and Collins in getting in that bucket of bolts and putting their lives on the line. True American heroes.
On that topic, the “flag issue” has generated much self-righteous heat within the US media; that is regarding Chazelle not showing the American flag being planted. This seems fatuous to me. Not only is the flag shown on the moon, but the film ably demonstrates the American know-how and bravery behind the mission. If Clint Eastwood had been directing he would have probably gone there: but for me it certainly didn’t need any further patriotism rubbed in the viewer’s face.
The turns
Are Oscar nominations on the cards for Ryan Gosling and Claire Foy? For me, it would be staggering if they are not: this film has “Oscar nomination” written all over it. I’d also certainly not bet against Foy winning for Best Actress: her portrayal of a wife on the edge is nothing short of brilliant. And perhaps, just perhaps, this might be Gosling’s year too.
Elsewhere there are strong supporting performances from Kyle Chandler (as Deke Slayton), Corey Stoll (as the ‘tell it how it is’ Buzz Aldrin) and Jason Clarke (as Ed White). It’s also great to see Belfast-born Ciarán Hinds in another mainstream Hollywood release.
For me, another dead cert Oscar nomination will be Justin Hurwitz for the score which is breathtakingly brilliant, not just in its compelling themes but also in its orchestration: the use of the eerie theremin and melodic harp are just brilliant together. I haven’t heard a score this year that’s more fitting to the visuals: although it’s early in the Oscar season to be calling it, I’d be very surprised if this didn’t walk away with the statuette.
Summary
Loved this. Damien Chazelle – with “Whiplash“, “La La Land” and now “First Man” – has hit all of three out of the park in my book. It’s not really a film for thrill-seekers, who might get bored, but anyone, like me, with an interest in the history of space exploration will I think lap it up: for this was surely the most memorable decade in space history… so far.
On leaving the cinema I looked up at the rising moon and marvelled once more at the audacity of man. My eyes then drifted across to the red dot that was Mars. How long I wonder? And how many dramatic film biographies still to come?
Mothergamer (1514 KP) rated The Last of Us in Video Games
Apr 3, 2019
I have been slowly but surely going through my backlog of games, so I chose The Last Of Us Remastered to play next because I have been curious about it and many of my friends have been telling me I needed to play this game. To them I say you were right. I did need to play this game because it wasn't just fun to play; it was phenomenal story telling. When a game's story has me getting choked up about something within the first few minutes, I know it's going to be a heck of a ride and be great.
I couldn't help, but like Joel. This is a character that has been through something that is so devastating to him and yet somehow he's kept going on and had to do things that are not necessarily good, but that he felt had to be done in order to keep surviving especially since the world as everyone knows it has ended and a post-apocalyptic world is the new normal.
Is Joel a good person? No, not really. He's not really a terrible person either. His partner Tess was interesting also and she's another character that's not really good or evil. The Last Of Us really showcases that this world isn't really that black and white; there are varying shades of grey and not everyone is completely good or bad and that many of the people are just trying to survive any way they can.
It wasn't long before the story progressed to meeting Ellie. I loved Ellie. She was this mouthy 14 year old kid, but you come to realize that a lot of why she's like that is because she's scared of losing those she cares about and having to parent herself. In spite of that, Ellie always managed to dig down deep and find the courage to do what needed to be done and I admired and respected that level of strength in her. The interaction between Ellie and Joel at first was rather terse, but I understood that was normal especially for Joel because he just wanted to finish the mission and not get attached.
I really got into it because the game was that good for me. The combat controls are great; not clunky at all. Sometimes I would get nailed by an infected and have to start over from that point (I really HATE the Clickers and Bloaters, they're terrifying), but I didn't really mind because I was enjoying the story and wanted to know what happened next. There are human factions as well such as military, the Fireflies, and Hunters. This is definitely a game for adults because of how dark the story can be at certain points and because of the harsh violence.
Infected are scary!
The environments in the game are beautifully done. I found myself stopping and just looking at everything often. From riding a horse in the woods to an abandoned college campus with a herd of giraffes, all of it looks great and really stands out. The music in the game is perfectly done as well with some hauntingly beautiful melodies that add to the emotions of moments in the story.
Horse riding in the woods
Even an abandoned campus can be pretty
There were points in the story where I got pretty emotional because I came to care about the characters. I had to remind myself it was just a game, but it was difficult especially when it came to the characters of Henry and Sam. I actually had to walk away for a few minutes because I was so saddened by what happened to them especially with Sam because he and Ellie were close to the same age and they had bonded and became friends.
The big thing that stood out for me is the relationship between Joel and Ellie. I loved how it slowly progressed from Joel being reluctant about getting to know Ellie to during some slower moments like navigating an area to look for supplies there would be a bit of talking between them back and forth about different things such as what a type of video game was like or that an ice cream truck was a real thing. I also found myself chuckling at some of the awful puns that Ellie would read from her book of puns.
As I got further in the game I recognized that Joel is a very angry and desperate man, but when it came to Ellie he could have these moments of kindness and really seemed to look out for her. The story isn't in your face about it and it becomes this gradual evolution of Joel treating her like a daughter and her coming to trust him while they both support each other in a situation that is pretty dangerous and exhausting on many levels. It's poignant and the emotions from both characters is so incredible that it draws you into the story fully which shows how fantastic the voice acting was in this.
Joel and Ellie watching some giraffes.
When I got to the ending of the game, it made me think about a lot. It made me ask questions like could I do what Joel had done? Was the leader of the Fireflies right about sacrificing a few for the many? It brought up a lot of ideas about the choices that people have to make in this world and not all of them are easy; much of it involves hard choices. I liked the ending, but it definitely wasn't a sunshine happy ending because that's not the kind of game The Last of Us is.
I played the Left Behind DLC also and I thought it was interesting to get a chance to see what Ellie was like before she met Joel. It also shows you some moments that are pivotal in the main story line that focus on Ellie which are also great. I liked the interaction between her and Riley because it brings some lightheartedness to the game with them just being kids and having fun, forgetting about the dark things going on in their world for a moment. It also shows some great emotional moments between Ellie and Riley that don't feel forced and seem to happen quite naturally. Of course the cheerful stuff only lasts for so long and then it's back to some very sad things happening. The final conversation between Ellie and Riley just before Left Behind ends had me choking back some tears because it was this heartfelt moment between two characters that truly cared for and loved each other.
Ellie and Riley having fun in a photo booth.
This is exactly why I loved The Last Of Us. It is hands down one of the best games I've ever played because of how intelligent the writing for this was creating a game that is perfectly story driven with some very memorable characters; characters that you find yourself caring about a great deal. The exploration of the various relationships are wonderfully executed making for a fantastic gaming and story experience. The game play is excellent and it shows that a lot of thought was put into getting things just right. The Last Of Us is a game title that I am thrilled to have in my gaming collection and it's absolutely worth playing.
I couldn't help, but like Joel. This is a character that has been through something that is so devastating to him and yet somehow he's kept going on and had to do things that are not necessarily good, but that he felt had to be done in order to keep surviving especially since the world as everyone knows it has ended and a post-apocalyptic world is the new normal.
Is Joel a good person? No, not really. He's not really a terrible person either. His partner Tess was interesting also and she's another character that's not really good or evil. The Last Of Us really showcases that this world isn't really that black and white; there are varying shades of grey and not everyone is completely good or bad and that many of the people are just trying to survive any way they can.
It wasn't long before the story progressed to meeting Ellie. I loved Ellie. She was this mouthy 14 year old kid, but you come to realize that a lot of why she's like that is because she's scared of losing those she cares about and having to parent herself. In spite of that, Ellie always managed to dig down deep and find the courage to do what needed to be done and I admired and respected that level of strength in her. The interaction between Ellie and Joel at first was rather terse, but I understood that was normal especially for Joel because he just wanted to finish the mission and not get attached.
I really got into it because the game was that good for me. The combat controls are great; not clunky at all. Sometimes I would get nailed by an infected and have to start over from that point (I really HATE the Clickers and Bloaters, they're terrifying), but I didn't really mind because I was enjoying the story and wanted to know what happened next. There are human factions as well such as military, the Fireflies, and Hunters. This is definitely a game for adults because of how dark the story can be at certain points and because of the harsh violence.
Infected are scary!
The environments in the game are beautifully done. I found myself stopping and just looking at everything often. From riding a horse in the woods to an abandoned college campus with a herd of giraffes, all of it looks great and really stands out. The music in the game is perfectly done as well with some hauntingly beautiful melodies that add to the emotions of moments in the story.
Horse riding in the woods
Even an abandoned campus can be pretty
There were points in the story where I got pretty emotional because I came to care about the characters. I had to remind myself it was just a game, but it was difficult especially when it came to the characters of Henry and Sam. I actually had to walk away for a few minutes because I was so saddened by what happened to them especially with Sam because he and Ellie were close to the same age and they had bonded and became friends.
The big thing that stood out for me is the relationship between Joel and Ellie. I loved how it slowly progressed from Joel being reluctant about getting to know Ellie to during some slower moments like navigating an area to look for supplies there would be a bit of talking between them back and forth about different things such as what a type of video game was like or that an ice cream truck was a real thing. I also found myself chuckling at some of the awful puns that Ellie would read from her book of puns.
As I got further in the game I recognized that Joel is a very angry and desperate man, but when it came to Ellie he could have these moments of kindness and really seemed to look out for her. The story isn't in your face about it and it becomes this gradual evolution of Joel treating her like a daughter and her coming to trust him while they both support each other in a situation that is pretty dangerous and exhausting on many levels. It's poignant and the emotions from both characters is so incredible that it draws you into the story fully which shows how fantastic the voice acting was in this.
Joel and Ellie watching some giraffes.
When I got to the ending of the game, it made me think about a lot. It made me ask questions like could I do what Joel had done? Was the leader of the Fireflies right about sacrificing a few for the many? It brought up a lot of ideas about the choices that people have to make in this world and not all of them are easy; much of it involves hard choices. I liked the ending, but it definitely wasn't a sunshine happy ending because that's not the kind of game The Last of Us is.
I played the Left Behind DLC also and I thought it was interesting to get a chance to see what Ellie was like before she met Joel. It also shows you some moments that are pivotal in the main story line that focus on Ellie which are also great. I liked the interaction between her and Riley because it brings some lightheartedness to the game with them just being kids and having fun, forgetting about the dark things going on in their world for a moment. It also shows some great emotional moments between Ellie and Riley that don't feel forced and seem to happen quite naturally. Of course the cheerful stuff only lasts for so long and then it's back to some very sad things happening. The final conversation between Ellie and Riley just before Left Behind ends had me choking back some tears because it was this heartfelt moment between two characters that truly cared for and loved each other.
Ellie and Riley having fun in a photo booth.
This is exactly why I loved The Last Of Us. It is hands down one of the best games I've ever played because of how intelligent the writing for this was creating a game that is perfectly story driven with some very memorable characters; characters that you find yourself caring about a great deal. The exploration of the various relationships are wonderfully executed making for a fantastic gaming and story experience. The game play is excellent and it shows that a lot of thought was put into getting things just right. The Last Of Us is a game title that I am thrilled to have in my gaming collection and it's absolutely worth playing.
KittyMiku (138 KP) rated Sold to the Werewolf Prince in Books
May 23, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
This book is very short and has a good thought behind it. Since the world Hannah is now trying to integrate into is all about being kind and polite at all costs, its easy to see why she would have troubles with some of it. If offending someone meant execution, any human would have a problem living there without issue. I think that is the biggest idea I found to be enjoyable in the book. I love the idea of aliens and space travel, but the view point on having to keep your tongue tied to always be able to be kind to someone is what pique my interest. However, its not just your voice and words, its in your actions too. That whole world made sure everyone at all times are kept in a pleasured and blissful state.
At first, I was intrigued on the aliens and the life on their planet, but I found my interest leading me more towards how Hannah explained how Humans act to one another and how its hard to come by people who are naturally kind and respectful. Though the idea of being executed for saying anything in any way that could offend someone is kind of hard to get behind, I also feel like its something we should all strive for anyways. I can see the disadvantages of always being kind and polite as well though. In the book, Hannah had made it clear she was never sure what would offend someone and get her possibly killed and so she kept a lot of questions and thoughts to herself. I can completely understand that. To a degree though, I think keeping unkind things or questions that could be offense to yourself to be a great idea. However, when it comes to asking things about someone's religion or culture, I would think that wouldn't create a lot of offense. After all, we are all curious about something we don't understand or don't know. It did bring up a lot of things that we allow our children to say and do that isn't kind and allows others to feel unworthy or disrespected. For example name calling. In the story Hannah had tried to explain there are ways to say something to make in endearing. She used the term "bookworm". She went on to explain that in school people called her a bookworm to be mean and hurtful, it was an insult, but at home her mother used the term endearingly because Hannah always had her nose in a book. And if we are honest with ourselves, we know this is often a true case. Kids at school can be mean and hurtful if you don't fit in, but sometimes the insults they deal can also be ones of endearment from those we love. An example of this is the label gamer. In schools being a gamer meant you didn't have a ton of friends and often were picked on because you preferred to be at home playing your games than going to parties. However, if your wife is playfully teasing you by calling you a gamer, or uses it as an endearing term, it is not hurtful at all. Isn't it funny how something so silly as a single word used to describe you can have duel purposes; Hurtful and endearing?
I think Hannah's explanation of that was pretty dead on, but that wasn't all she brought up that reminded me of how awful humans can be. She has brought up how possessive humans can be to materials, enough to kill or have a hand in killing someone else for it. This is something we actually see everyday, if we allow ourselves too. People kill other people for money and material objects. People kill animals, and we aren't talking about for food purposes, because they want to or because it will allow them to make money for certain pieces of the animal. They aren't just hurtful, they are lethal to others and their environment. I found myself cringing at how real her words were. I know these things are going on in the world, we all do, but to have it spoken out loud so bluntly makes you wish it would just stop. In the book, Hannah had stated the American Government had stated that aliens had visited and they covered it up. And Prince Tamkin had stated because of human hostile nature, they didn't see why they should bother with the humans. He said most aliens didn't see the humans worth the hassle. That brings me to question if it is possible that this is also true.
Think about it. Let's say this particular book is correct in the fact aliens exist and they gave up trying to communicate with us because of our hostile natures. Always putting ourselves first and anyone, anything else last. It would make sense in a way, don't you think? I know this is a Sci-fi romance book, but at the same time, it does make a lot of sense. Hannah had said we were egotistical and self centered, thinking we had the best technology in the universe and that we can take anything we want and its true. As a race, humans are horrible creatures. That's not to say there aren't good ones out there. Even Hannah had explained that there were groups of people who fought for the Earth and others. Just as there are people in the real world who do that same. So if Wright can have a lot of truth in the book, who is not to say she was able to come up with a reason on why aliens stay away from Earth? Even though the space travel seems still to far for us to know if that was that is a real thing or not, it is still something worth thinking about.
I do have one major compliant about the book. The intercourse scenes. There were a total of three heavily detailed scenes that I don't completely understand. Do not get my wrong, the first scene was to make it so you understood that pleasing the woman in the bedroom was extremely important and it completely proved this case. However, I do not feels that so much needed to be in the book. The story could have used more details on the alien planet and the major city they resided in. I would have loved to know more about it. I would have loved to actually have seen the different communities and wild life. I was disappointed there wasn't more but instead I got steamy intercourse scenes that would make adult movie stars blush.
I would rate this book 3 stars out of 5 stars. It had brought up a lot of topics to discuss and ponder on and definitely left me wanting more, but the intercourse scenes were over the top and just too much for me. I would have been find with just the first one and maybe shorter scenes for the others. To me it just took away from the story in a way I didn't like.
At first, I was intrigued on the aliens and the life on their planet, but I found my interest leading me more towards how Hannah explained how Humans act to one another and how its hard to come by people who are naturally kind and respectful. Though the idea of being executed for saying anything in any way that could offend someone is kind of hard to get behind, I also feel like its something we should all strive for anyways. I can see the disadvantages of always being kind and polite as well though. In the book, Hannah had made it clear she was never sure what would offend someone and get her possibly killed and so she kept a lot of questions and thoughts to herself. I can completely understand that. To a degree though, I think keeping unkind things or questions that could be offense to yourself to be a great idea. However, when it comes to asking things about someone's religion or culture, I would think that wouldn't create a lot of offense. After all, we are all curious about something we don't understand or don't know. It did bring up a lot of things that we allow our children to say and do that isn't kind and allows others to feel unworthy or disrespected. For example name calling. In the story Hannah had tried to explain there are ways to say something to make in endearing. She used the term "bookworm". She went on to explain that in school people called her a bookworm to be mean and hurtful, it was an insult, but at home her mother used the term endearingly because Hannah always had her nose in a book. And if we are honest with ourselves, we know this is often a true case. Kids at school can be mean and hurtful if you don't fit in, but sometimes the insults they deal can also be ones of endearment from those we love. An example of this is the label gamer. In schools being a gamer meant you didn't have a ton of friends and often were picked on because you preferred to be at home playing your games than going to parties. However, if your wife is playfully teasing you by calling you a gamer, or uses it as an endearing term, it is not hurtful at all. Isn't it funny how something so silly as a single word used to describe you can have duel purposes; Hurtful and endearing?
I think Hannah's explanation of that was pretty dead on, but that wasn't all she brought up that reminded me of how awful humans can be. She has brought up how possessive humans can be to materials, enough to kill or have a hand in killing someone else for it. This is something we actually see everyday, if we allow ourselves too. People kill other people for money and material objects. People kill animals, and we aren't talking about for food purposes, because they want to or because it will allow them to make money for certain pieces of the animal. They aren't just hurtful, they are lethal to others and their environment. I found myself cringing at how real her words were. I know these things are going on in the world, we all do, but to have it spoken out loud so bluntly makes you wish it would just stop. In the book, Hannah had stated the American Government had stated that aliens had visited and they covered it up. And Prince Tamkin had stated because of human hostile nature, they didn't see why they should bother with the humans. He said most aliens didn't see the humans worth the hassle. That brings me to question if it is possible that this is also true.
Think about it. Let's say this particular book is correct in the fact aliens exist and they gave up trying to communicate with us because of our hostile natures. Always putting ourselves first and anyone, anything else last. It would make sense in a way, don't you think? I know this is a Sci-fi romance book, but at the same time, it does make a lot of sense. Hannah had said we were egotistical and self centered, thinking we had the best technology in the universe and that we can take anything we want and its true. As a race, humans are horrible creatures. That's not to say there aren't good ones out there. Even Hannah had explained that there were groups of people who fought for the Earth and others. Just as there are people in the real world who do that same. So if Wright can have a lot of truth in the book, who is not to say she was able to come up with a reason on why aliens stay away from Earth? Even though the space travel seems still to far for us to know if that was that is a real thing or not, it is still something worth thinking about.
I do have one major compliant about the book. The intercourse scenes. There were a total of three heavily detailed scenes that I don't completely understand. Do not get my wrong, the first scene was to make it so you understood that pleasing the woman in the bedroom was extremely important and it completely proved this case. However, I do not feels that so much needed to be in the book. The story could have used more details on the alien planet and the major city they resided in. I would have loved to know more about it. I would have loved to actually have seen the different communities and wild life. I was disappointed there wasn't more but instead I got steamy intercourse scenes that would make adult movie stars blush.
I would rate this book 3 stars out of 5 stars. It had brought up a lot of topics to discuss and ponder on and definitely left me wanting more, but the intercourse scenes were over the top and just too much for me. I would have been find with just the first one and maybe shorter scenes for the others. To me it just took away from the story in a way I didn't like.
Bong Mines Entertainment (15 KP) rated The Life of Pablo by Kanye West in Music
Jun 7, 2019
Kanye West is an iconic rapper from Chicago, Illinois. Not too long ago, he released his seventh studio album, entitled, “The Life of Pablo“.
ULTRA LIGHT BEAMS
The opening track functions as a Sunday-morning church revival, where Kanye is the ordained minister. He’s standing in the pulpit, preaching a time-sensitive sermon to his loyal congregation.
His message: God over Satan, keep the faith, pray for Paris, pray for parents, and we’re living God’s dream.
West sets the tone and declares where he stands on religious and socially-driven issues.
A Gospel choir emerges. The Dream and Kelly Price reinforce West’s message by singing verses of encouragement, leading to a heartfelt testimonial by Chance The Rapper.
While the collection plates are being filled with hopes of a better tomorrow, Kirk Franklin concludes the service by praying for everyone. He uplifts those who feel they are not good enough or have said, “I’m sorry,” too many times.
Father Stretch My Hands (Pt. 1)
A spiritual figure, Pastor T.L. Barrett, ushers in the second track with praises to The Most High. Future appears for a brief moment and Kid Cudi delivers a stunning chorus.
A liberated West returns to the pulpit and gives a brief, but somewhat explicit testimony of his past and present relationships to Amber Rose and Kim Kardashian.
Father Stretch My Hands (Pt. 2)
West continues his testimony and raps about his personal experiences. He speaks on the importance of returning his wife’s phone calls and not wanting to make the same mistakes his father made. Also, he mentions the passing of the mother in Hollywood, being broke, and the reason why he broke his jaw.
West’s words hit home, making room for another liberated soul to tell his story of triumph.
Desiigner, a newly-signed artist of G.O.O.D. Music, emerges from the underbelly of the ghetto. He raps about getting money illegally, drugs, and violence-familiarized by urban-street hustlers.
Though his grim subject matter contradicts the song’s hopeful message of liberation, it somehow adds mysticism or substance to Kanye’s brutally-honest testimony.
Desiigner, blessed with a futuristic flow, highlights a few things that West’s congregation needs to examine in order to be totally liberated.
FAMOUS
Whenever an important event occurs in an urban community, an after party is sure to follow. And a host of celebrities are always on standby to attend it. The Life of Pablo is no exception.
The fourth song features Rihanna and legendary-producer Swizz Beatz. Also, it contains timeless vocals from Sister Nancy and Nina Simone.
West, no longer in church clothes, stands out lyrically with witty, braggadocios lyrics.
Whether that statement is factual or not, it’s doesn’t really matter because West believes it is.
FEEDBACK
The fifth song serves as a transformational period, where West shows signs of the old Kanye.
West doesn’t need a psychiatrist to diagnose his problems. He does that himself by wearing them on his sleeves.
LOW LIGHTS
On the sixth track, West wrote via Twitter, “I put Low Lights on my album just thinking about all the moms driving their kids to school, then going to work.”
Listeners can now relate to the everyday struggle that mothers endure.
The song features an acapella sample from “So Alive” by Kings of Tomorrow.
The woman gives a grateful-testimony of God’s graciousness over a laid-back, simple piano groove. Her honesty is felt. Also, she sounds liberated because her Creator has accepted her for who she is.
HIGH LIGHTS
From lows to high, the seventh track is in direct correlation to “Low Lights”.
West and Young Thug put on their festive robes because it’s time to celebrate life. El Debarge and The Dream chime in, and West addresses a lingering issue.
But this is only the beginning. West finishes strong with more thought-provoking lyrics.
FREESTYLE 4
The eighth track features Desiigner. Again, when he and West are together, all hell breaks loose.
The once festive scene transforms into a grimy underworld filled with a prostitute that West is explicitly lusting after. The temptation makes it difficult for him to stand on his opening statement of Jesus over Satan. But the power of darkness is more powerful than West thinks. So, he subconsciously indulges in sexual misconduct.
I LOVE KANYE
On the ninth track, West realizes that he’s at war with himself. The old Kanye, known for chopping up soul records is fighting against the new Kanye that everyone hates. But Kanye wants to go back to being sweet again if that’s even possible. His multiple egos are fighting for control over the ‘real’ Kanye.
WAVE
West doesn’t stare in the mirror for too long. On the tenth track, redemption happens. Chris Brown, disguised as an angel, comes to West’s aid by providing much-needed light.
Miraculously, the sun emerges from the shade, a bird flies out its cage, and a nostalgic feeling is felt.
West realizes that nothing is impossible because waves don’t die and feelings don’t really go away.
FML (FOR MY LADY)
On the eleventh track, West realizes what’s really important to him and that’s his wife. Someone he won’t jeopardize for no other woman. Also, his children are all layers of his soul.
The Weeknd appears in the form of West’s conscience.
West remains focused and listeners can feel the positive aura of God surrounding him. He is determined to remain faithful to only Kim, no other woman.
REAL FRIENDS
West continues his introspective outlook and raps about trust issues that everyone can relate to. His honest, down-to-earth lyrics, mixed in with Ty Dolla $ign’s vocals, paints a vivid picture. Also, it forms a collectible souvenir that hangs nicely in listeners’ collective memories.
WOLVES
The thirteenth track provides a cooling effect with wild emotions and bizarre-sounds.
The setting, maybe an extraterritorial realm in West’s subconscious mind. Perhaps, it’s the Milky Way Galaxy or a dream-state of Saturn.
A time for relaxation, preparing listeners for a surprise guest.
SILVER SURFER INTERMISSION
The fourteenth track features a phone conversation between incarcerated Max B and French Montana. Also, Max voices his gratitude to West for showing him love.
30 HOURS
On the fifteenth track, West takes a trip down memory lane and raps about an ex-girlfriend that he used to drive 30-hours to see. He used to drive from Chicago to St. Louis, St. Louis to Chicago. He recalls the good times they shared. But unfortunately, her infidelity was the reason why they broke up.
NO PARTIES IN L.A.
The sixteenth track will go down in history as a legendary bar-fest between two elite emcees. Kendrick Lamar and West rap with dope punchlines and clever metaphors over a Madlib-produced track. Once again, West is flowing like the old Kanye that people love.
FACTS
The seventeenth track is a standout anthem where West brags that Yeezy just jumped over Jumpman. He’s in boss-mode, talking that big-money talk.
FADE
The final track features Post Malone and Ty Dollar $ign. The song has a reoccurring sample from Rare Earth, “Your love is fading/I feel it fade.”
The Eli Linnetz-directed video shows Teyana Taylor explicitly dancing.
CONCLUSION
Kanye West’s “The Life of Pablo” is a memorable hip-hop album with solid content and heavy replay value.
https://www.bongminesentertainment.com/kanye-west-life-pablo/
ULTRA LIGHT BEAMS
The opening track functions as a Sunday-morning church revival, where Kanye is the ordained minister. He’s standing in the pulpit, preaching a time-sensitive sermon to his loyal congregation.
His message: God over Satan, keep the faith, pray for Paris, pray for parents, and we’re living God’s dream.
West sets the tone and declares where he stands on religious and socially-driven issues.
A Gospel choir emerges. The Dream and Kelly Price reinforce West’s message by singing verses of encouragement, leading to a heartfelt testimonial by Chance The Rapper.
While the collection plates are being filled with hopes of a better tomorrow, Kirk Franklin concludes the service by praying for everyone. He uplifts those who feel they are not good enough or have said, “I’m sorry,” too many times.
Father Stretch My Hands (Pt. 1)
A spiritual figure, Pastor T.L. Barrett, ushers in the second track with praises to The Most High. Future appears for a brief moment and Kid Cudi delivers a stunning chorus.
A liberated West returns to the pulpit and gives a brief, but somewhat explicit testimony of his past and present relationships to Amber Rose and Kim Kardashian.
Father Stretch My Hands (Pt. 2)
West continues his testimony and raps about his personal experiences. He speaks on the importance of returning his wife’s phone calls and not wanting to make the same mistakes his father made. Also, he mentions the passing of the mother in Hollywood, being broke, and the reason why he broke his jaw.
West’s words hit home, making room for another liberated soul to tell his story of triumph.
Desiigner, a newly-signed artist of G.O.O.D. Music, emerges from the underbelly of the ghetto. He raps about getting money illegally, drugs, and violence-familiarized by urban-street hustlers.
Though his grim subject matter contradicts the song’s hopeful message of liberation, it somehow adds mysticism or substance to Kanye’s brutally-honest testimony.
Desiigner, blessed with a futuristic flow, highlights a few things that West’s congregation needs to examine in order to be totally liberated.
FAMOUS
Whenever an important event occurs in an urban community, an after party is sure to follow. And a host of celebrities are always on standby to attend it. The Life of Pablo is no exception.
The fourth song features Rihanna and legendary-producer Swizz Beatz. Also, it contains timeless vocals from Sister Nancy and Nina Simone.
West, no longer in church clothes, stands out lyrically with witty, braggadocios lyrics.
Whether that statement is factual or not, it’s doesn’t really matter because West believes it is.
FEEDBACK
The fifth song serves as a transformational period, where West shows signs of the old Kanye.
West doesn’t need a psychiatrist to diagnose his problems. He does that himself by wearing them on his sleeves.
LOW LIGHTS
On the sixth track, West wrote via Twitter, “I put Low Lights on my album just thinking about all the moms driving their kids to school, then going to work.”
Listeners can now relate to the everyday struggle that mothers endure.
The song features an acapella sample from “So Alive” by Kings of Tomorrow.
The woman gives a grateful-testimony of God’s graciousness over a laid-back, simple piano groove. Her honesty is felt. Also, she sounds liberated because her Creator has accepted her for who she is.
HIGH LIGHTS
From lows to high, the seventh track is in direct correlation to “Low Lights”.
West and Young Thug put on their festive robes because it’s time to celebrate life. El Debarge and The Dream chime in, and West addresses a lingering issue.
But this is only the beginning. West finishes strong with more thought-provoking lyrics.
FREESTYLE 4
The eighth track features Desiigner. Again, when he and West are together, all hell breaks loose.
The once festive scene transforms into a grimy underworld filled with a prostitute that West is explicitly lusting after. The temptation makes it difficult for him to stand on his opening statement of Jesus over Satan. But the power of darkness is more powerful than West thinks. So, he subconsciously indulges in sexual misconduct.
I LOVE KANYE
On the ninth track, West realizes that he’s at war with himself. The old Kanye, known for chopping up soul records is fighting against the new Kanye that everyone hates. But Kanye wants to go back to being sweet again if that’s even possible. His multiple egos are fighting for control over the ‘real’ Kanye.
WAVE
West doesn’t stare in the mirror for too long. On the tenth track, redemption happens. Chris Brown, disguised as an angel, comes to West’s aid by providing much-needed light.
Miraculously, the sun emerges from the shade, a bird flies out its cage, and a nostalgic feeling is felt.
West realizes that nothing is impossible because waves don’t die and feelings don’t really go away.
FML (FOR MY LADY)
On the eleventh track, West realizes what’s really important to him and that’s his wife. Someone he won’t jeopardize for no other woman. Also, his children are all layers of his soul.
The Weeknd appears in the form of West’s conscience.
West remains focused and listeners can feel the positive aura of God surrounding him. He is determined to remain faithful to only Kim, no other woman.
REAL FRIENDS
West continues his introspective outlook and raps about trust issues that everyone can relate to. His honest, down-to-earth lyrics, mixed in with Ty Dolla $ign’s vocals, paints a vivid picture. Also, it forms a collectible souvenir that hangs nicely in listeners’ collective memories.
WOLVES
The thirteenth track provides a cooling effect with wild emotions and bizarre-sounds.
The setting, maybe an extraterritorial realm in West’s subconscious mind. Perhaps, it’s the Milky Way Galaxy or a dream-state of Saturn.
A time for relaxation, preparing listeners for a surprise guest.
SILVER SURFER INTERMISSION
The fourteenth track features a phone conversation between incarcerated Max B and French Montana. Also, Max voices his gratitude to West for showing him love.
30 HOURS
On the fifteenth track, West takes a trip down memory lane and raps about an ex-girlfriend that he used to drive 30-hours to see. He used to drive from Chicago to St. Louis, St. Louis to Chicago. He recalls the good times they shared. But unfortunately, her infidelity was the reason why they broke up.
NO PARTIES IN L.A.
The sixteenth track will go down in history as a legendary bar-fest between two elite emcees. Kendrick Lamar and West rap with dope punchlines and clever metaphors over a Madlib-produced track. Once again, West is flowing like the old Kanye that people love.
FACTS
The seventeenth track is a standout anthem where West brags that Yeezy just jumped over Jumpman. He’s in boss-mode, talking that big-money talk.
FADE
The final track features Post Malone and Ty Dollar $ign. The song has a reoccurring sample from Rare Earth, “Your love is fading/I feel it fade.”
The Eli Linnetz-directed video shows Teyana Taylor explicitly dancing.
CONCLUSION
Kanye West’s “The Life of Pablo” is a memorable hip-hop album with solid content and heavy replay value.
https://www.bongminesentertainment.com/kanye-west-life-pablo/
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Jun 23, 2019)
Nancy (Rooney Mara) thinks she's suffering from an average case of nightmares that are causing her to lose sleep. A burned man with blades on his fingers haunts her dreams. She doesn't think much of it until her friends start getting picked off one by one while they sleep and are dreaming of the same man. Something happened during their childhood that connects them to this man that their parents are trying to cover up. As far as anyone else is concerned, Freddy Krueger (Jackie Earle Haley) never existed. What their parents refuse to believe is that Freddy exists in the dreams of their children causing them to remember their past and kill them. Now it's up to Nancy and her friend Quentin (Kyle Gallner) to figure out how the pieces of the puzzle fit before they become Freddy's next victims.
A Nightmare on Elm Street is one of the most beloved horror classics of all time. The original introduced us to Fred Krueger who would later be known as "Freddy" and evolve into one of the most popular icons in the horror genre. 26 years later, the film has been remade and Jackie Earle Haley has replaced Robert Englund as the dream-stalking child killer. Fans of the original franchise were left wondering if there was a slight chance of this being somewhat decent and if Haley's version of Freddy wouldn't be cringeworthy. Truth be told, the film may not be as bad as you're expecting.
This remake rests on the shoulders of Haley's portrayal of Freddy. If die hard horror fans can get past constantly comparing him to Englund, then they'll realize that Haley doesn't do a bad job. His Rorschach voice was actually a great choice for the role as it seemed to reverberate off the walls of the theater throughout the entire film. His stalking methods were a bit different than expected. Haley's Freddy doesn't talk as much as Englund's and seems to be off-screen just as often as he is on. The wisecracking has been toned way down, as well, but he does manage to squeeze in, "How's this for a wet dream?" Haley's version of Freddy is angry. He is PISSED that these kids squealed on him and he wants them to pay, but wants to dish out his revenge in a way that lets him have fun at the same time. His body language speaks volumes, too. His bladed fingers itch in anticipation of the kill. In fact, it seems like his fingers talk more than he does. The realistic burn victim route with the make-up seems like it's just as much a blessing as it is a curse. Freddy's eyes look really weird. They're too small and beady. He looks like kind of like a monkey when you do catch a full glimpse of his face. That's a shame, too. Since everything else looks pretty fantastic.
The storyline seems to basically follow the same path as the original film, but it probably should have skipped some of the new detours it makes along the way. Kris dreams of herself as a child with bloody claw marks across her torso and then finds the same dress with four gashes in her attic, but she doesn't have any scars from this rather severe injury she obtained when she was five? Even if the explanation was she had some sort of cosmetic surgery, wouldn't that be just as traumatic for a child? The CG version of the scene where we see Freddy coming out of the wall in the remake is probably the weakest in the entire film. The scene in the original is one of its most memorable visuals. In the remake, it's botched thanks to crummy CG. Even in comparison to the rest of the CG in the film, it doesn't measure up. It's the one scene that I wasn't able to look past. However, the micronaps idea is truly fantastic for the film. That was one thing I highly approved of going into it. The way that is pulled off is one of the highlights of the remake. It's one of those ideas that fits so perfectly, you're surprised it wasn't in the original film. Fred Krueger's background is where the film really goes into its own territory though. Fred was a gardener who lived in the basement of Badham Pre-School and the children were his life. He apparently took them to his "cave" where they emerged with scratches on their bodies. The parents of Elm Street don't bother trying to inform the police. They just burn Krueger alive as retribution to what he did to their children. While the original franchise never really came right out and said that Freddy was a child molester, it always strongly hinted at it. The remake seems to basically come right out and say that he is one without actually saying it. The evidence they find in his "cave" solidifies that fact. Maybe they felt like they needed to do that since this is such a "serious" version of Freddy...? Certain things just don't add up in the long run. Quentin and Nancy are driving in a car at one point and Quentin has a micronap where he sees Freddy in front of the car. He swerves out of the way to avoid hitting him and winds up in this boggy marsh off the side of the road. The question is WHY would you swerve out of the way of a man who was trying to kill you?
The kills seem to get more gruesome as the film goes on. It's a nice route to go, really. The last kill of the film is probably the one you'll remember most. I wasn't too incredibly attached to Nancy in the original film, but Rooney Mara's version was really boring. You don't care about what happens to her at all. You're more interested in what happens to her friends. She's an art student that can't sleep and is connected to Freddy somehow. That's pretty much all that's revealed. Why should we care that she may die?
A Nightmare on Elm Street certainly has its misfires when it comes to special effects and its storyline, but the problems it has aren't really any different than the problems most modern day horror movies have. At least the acting wasn't terrible like in an 80s slasher and the CG effects aren't incredibly outdated or anything. The film was designed to appeal to the demographic going to movie theaters to see a horror movie in 2010 and it seems to do that very well. Sure, it probably doesn't live up to the original film, but not many remakes do. If people see this without seeing the original film first, they'll probably love the remake. For original Freddy fans though, it'll probably come down to Haley's portrayal of Freddy. If you can see the film without any expectations or with finally accepting the fact that Robert Englund is no longer Freddy, it actually isn't quite as terrible as you may have originally thought. Strangely enough, it's even entertaining at times. Go figure.
A Nightmare on Elm Street is one of the most beloved horror classics of all time. The original introduced us to Fred Krueger who would later be known as "Freddy" and evolve into one of the most popular icons in the horror genre. 26 years later, the film has been remade and Jackie Earle Haley has replaced Robert Englund as the dream-stalking child killer. Fans of the original franchise were left wondering if there was a slight chance of this being somewhat decent and if Haley's version of Freddy wouldn't be cringeworthy. Truth be told, the film may not be as bad as you're expecting.
This remake rests on the shoulders of Haley's portrayal of Freddy. If die hard horror fans can get past constantly comparing him to Englund, then they'll realize that Haley doesn't do a bad job. His Rorschach voice was actually a great choice for the role as it seemed to reverberate off the walls of the theater throughout the entire film. His stalking methods were a bit different than expected. Haley's Freddy doesn't talk as much as Englund's and seems to be off-screen just as often as he is on. The wisecracking has been toned way down, as well, but he does manage to squeeze in, "How's this for a wet dream?" Haley's version of Freddy is angry. He is PISSED that these kids squealed on him and he wants them to pay, but wants to dish out his revenge in a way that lets him have fun at the same time. His body language speaks volumes, too. His bladed fingers itch in anticipation of the kill. In fact, it seems like his fingers talk more than he does. The realistic burn victim route with the make-up seems like it's just as much a blessing as it is a curse. Freddy's eyes look really weird. They're too small and beady. He looks like kind of like a monkey when you do catch a full glimpse of his face. That's a shame, too. Since everything else looks pretty fantastic.
The storyline seems to basically follow the same path as the original film, but it probably should have skipped some of the new detours it makes along the way. Kris dreams of herself as a child with bloody claw marks across her torso and then finds the same dress with four gashes in her attic, but she doesn't have any scars from this rather severe injury she obtained when she was five? Even if the explanation was she had some sort of cosmetic surgery, wouldn't that be just as traumatic for a child? The CG version of the scene where we see Freddy coming out of the wall in the remake is probably the weakest in the entire film. The scene in the original is one of its most memorable visuals. In the remake, it's botched thanks to crummy CG. Even in comparison to the rest of the CG in the film, it doesn't measure up. It's the one scene that I wasn't able to look past. However, the micronaps idea is truly fantastic for the film. That was one thing I highly approved of going into it. The way that is pulled off is one of the highlights of the remake. It's one of those ideas that fits so perfectly, you're surprised it wasn't in the original film. Fred Krueger's background is where the film really goes into its own territory though. Fred was a gardener who lived in the basement of Badham Pre-School and the children were his life. He apparently took them to his "cave" where they emerged with scratches on their bodies. The parents of Elm Street don't bother trying to inform the police. They just burn Krueger alive as retribution to what he did to their children. While the original franchise never really came right out and said that Freddy was a child molester, it always strongly hinted at it. The remake seems to basically come right out and say that he is one without actually saying it. The evidence they find in his "cave" solidifies that fact. Maybe they felt like they needed to do that since this is such a "serious" version of Freddy...? Certain things just don't add up in the long run. Quentin and Nancy are driving in a car at one point and Quentin has a micronap where he sees Freddy in front of the car. He swerves out of the way to avoid hitting him and winds up in this boggy marsh off the side of the road. The question is WHY would you swerve out of the way of a man who was trying to kill you?
The kills seem to get more gruesome as the film goes on. It's a nice route to go, really. The last kill of the film is probably the one you'll remember most. I wasn't too incredibly attached to Nancy in the original film, but Rooney Mara's version was really boring. You don't care about what happens to her at all. You're more interested in what happens to her friends. She's an art student that can't sleep and is connected to Freddy somehow. That's pretty much all that's revealed. Why should we care that she may die?
A Nightmare on Elm Street certainly has its misfires when it comes to special effects and its storyline, but the problems it has aren't really any different than the problems most modern day horror movies have. At least the acting wasn't terrible like in an 80s slasher and the CG effects aren't incredibly outdated or anything. The film was designed to appeal to the demographic going to movie theaters to see a horror movie in 2010 and it seems to do that very well. Sure, it probably doesn't live up to the original film, but not many remakes do. If people see this without seeing the original film first, they'll probably love the remake. For original Freddy fans though, it'll probably come down to Haley's portrayal of Freddy. If you can see the film without any expectations or with finally accepting the fact that Robert Englund is no longer Freddy, it actually isn't quite as terrible as you may have originally thought. Strangely enough, it's even entertaining at times. Go figure.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Christmas Lights in Tabletop Games
Dec 29, 2020
A Christmas game? Me?? I have never really been super into Christmastime. My wife (and kids obvs) are mega Christmas fiends, and I am trying to get more into the spirit all the time. So when a call for reviewers went out for this one, I wanted to give it a shot especially now during mid-December. For my wife, of course. Certainly not for me… Certainly not for me.
Christmas Lights is a card game for two to six players that has each player attempting to organize their tangle of light strands into some sort of order. However, as the lights aren’t yet on players are working in the dark. Therefore players cannot see the lights they are untangling and will need help from other players along the way.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup a game shuffle and place out the Event, Pattern, and Bulb card decks into their piles. Deal each player five Bulb cards face-down and two Pattern cards. Each player will also be given a random Character card and player aid card. Whomever is dealt the Santa character will be the first player. The players will consult their Pattern cards and choose one to begin working on initially. The game is now ready to begin!
On a turn a player has the opportunity to take four different actions, in their specific order: Play, Swap, Sale, and Refill. To Play one or more cards, simply choose it/them from hand and place it/them down to begin or continue the strand pictured on the first Pattern card in exact sequence order. Should a player wish to Swap cards with another player, they simply take the swap card from their hand and grab whichever card they please from an opponent’s hand to be placed in their own. Next the player may offer a card from their hand to be sold to other players during the Sale phase. Should another player wish to purchase the card, they spend not money but information to the seller. This information comes in the form of answers to yes/no questions about cards in the active player’s hand. Wait, why, you ask? Because player hands in this game are played facing away from the player, exactly like are played in Hanabi. That’s right, players do not see the cards in their own hands, but rather every other player’s hand. Once some or all of these phases have been played, the active player will need to Refill their hand back up to five cards. It is now the next player’s turn.
Each of these steps will need to be taken in order. Should a player not wish to Swap, for example, they may not hold a Sale and then decide to Swap afterward.
Some Bulb cards are special. These include the Broken Bulb, the Bubble Bulb, and the Plug. A player may place a Broken Bulb anywhere in their strand sequence as a temporary placeholder, but it will need to be covered up by the correctly-colored Bulb card in the future before the player is able to score the strand. The Bubble Bulb is essentially a Wild Bulb and can be played in place of any colored Bulb. However, once played it will remind the player to draw and play an Event card immediately. These Event cards may be either good or bad for the active player, so there is risk in playing the wild Bubble Bulbs. Once the first strand is completed per the appropriate Pattern card, the player will need to play a Plug card in order to connect their first strand to their next. Then the player will be able to begin work on their second strand.
Play continues in this fashion of blind play and deduction of held cards until one player successfully completes both of their Pattern cards. Every player will be able to take the same amount of turns, and if there is a tie between players the used Broken and Bubble Bulb cards will be taken into consideration to determine the winner.
Components. This is a card game. There are a lot of cards. The cards are all great quality, and though I have seen reports of flimsy stock or even see-through quality thickness, I have not had this issue (though I believe I have the second edition of the game, so that might be a difference existing between the editions). The art on the cards is very cute and endearing. Each color of bulb is also a different shape so our colorblind friends should have an easier time playing as well. Each card is laid out well and I have no complaints about components at all.
The gameplay is such that I believe players will either love or hate. Not being able to see the cards in your hand can certainly be stressful and frustrating, but it is a very light card game. Get over it. Again, if you have played Hanabi before, you know the feeling. But it changes the game so drastically when you have to remember what’s in your hand at all times, and when players are swapping with you left and right it is definitely easy to forget what’s going on in your hand. Not that I ever had that problem… Okay, it happens all the time, but I just laugh it off.
I do love this little game and am so happy I took a chance on it. Though I am still learning to love Christmas (Halloween is my jam), this game has a ton going for it. In addition to the game I have loosely described in this review Christmas Lights comes with a booklet that has rule sets for 12 different games that can be played with the included components. TWELVE EXTRA GAME MODES. That’s crazy! So when purchasing Christmas Lights people are actually purchasing 13 games in one box, with two of those modes being for Solo players. The variety and replayability here is off the charts and I am excited to play through the other game modes as soon as I can, and I know my wife will be into as well.
That said, having a Christmas-themed game that delights my wife and I equally is certainly something that I can easily recommend. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a cheery 10 / 12 for its portability, variability, cute art, and great game play. If you see it in stores, pick up a copy. I am going out on a limb and saying that you could even play this game when it’s NOT Christmastime and still have a great experience with it. If you are looking for something a little different and like Hanabi but wish for something else, give Christmas Lights a shot. Hopefully you will find it as charming as we both do. Oh, and a little pro tip: pour yourself a mug of chai and grab a gingerbread cookie whilst playing. Not necessary, but it certainly works for us. Happy Holidays, ALL holidays, everyone!
Christmas Lights is a card game for two to six players that has each player attempting to organize their tangle of light strands into some sort of order. However, as the lights aren’t yet on players are working in the dark. Therefore players cannot see the lights they are untangling and will need help from other players along the way.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup a game shuffle and place out the Event, Pattern, and Bulb card decks into their piles. Deal each player five Bulb cards face-down and two Pattern cards. Each player will also be given a random Character card and player aid card. Whomever is dealt the Santa character will be the first player. The players will consult their Pattern cards and choose one to begin working on initially. The game is now ready to begin!
On a turn a player has the opportunity to take four different actions, in their specific order: Play, Swap, Sale, and Refill. To Play one or more cards, simply choose it/them from hand and place it/them down to begin or continue the strand pictured on the first Pattern card in exact sequence order. Should a player wish to Swap cards with another player, they simply take the swap card from their hand and grab whichever card they please from an opponent’s hand to be placed in their own. Next the player may offer a card from their hand to be sold to other players during the Sale phase. Should another player wish to purchase the card, they spend not money but information to the seller. This information comes in the form of answers to yes/no questions about cards in the active player’s hand. Wait, why, you ask? Because player hands in this game are played facing away from the player, exactly like are played in Hanabi. That’s right, players do not see the cards in their own hands, but rather every other player’s hand. Once some or all of these phases have been played, the active player will need to Refill their hand back up to five cards. It is now the next player’s turn.
Each of these steps will need to be taken in order. Should a player not wish to Swap, for example, they may not hold a Sale and then decide to Swap afterward.
Some Bulb cards are special. These include the Broken Bulb, the Bubble Bulb, and the Plug. A player may place a Broken Bulb anywhere in their strand sequence as a temporary placeholder, but it will need to be covered up by the correctly-colored Bulb card in the future before the player is able to score the strand. The Bubble Bulb is essentially a Wild Bulb and can be played in place of any colored Bulb. However, once played it will remind the player to draw and play an Event card immediately. These Event cards may be either good or bad for the active player, so there is risk in playing the wild Bubble Bulbs. Once the first strand is completed per the appropriate Pattern card, the player will need to play a Plug card in order to connect their first strand to their next. Then the player will be able to begin work on their second strand.
Play continues in this fashion of blind play and deduction of held cards until one player successfully completes both of their Pattern cards. Every player will be able to take the same amount of turns, and if there is a tie between players the used Broken and Bubble Bulb cards will be taken into consideration to determine the winner.
Components. This is a card game. There are a lot of cards. The cards are all great quality, and though I have seen reports of flimsy stock or even see-through quality thickness, I have not had this issue (though I believe I have the second edition of the game, so that might be a difference existing between the editions). The art on the cards is very cute and endearing. Each color of bulb is also a different shape so our colorblind friends should have an easier time playing as well. Each card is laid out well and I have no complaints about components at all.
The gameplay is such that I believe players will either love or hate. Not being able to see the cards in your hand can certainly be stressful and frustrating, but it is a very light card game. Get over it. Again, if you have played Hanabi before, you know the feeling. But it changes the game so drastically when you have to remember what’s in your hand at all times, and when players are swapping with you left and right it is definitely easy to forget what’s going on in your hand. Not that I ever had that problem… Okay, it happens all the time, but I just laugh it off.
I do love this little game and am so happy I took a chance on it. Though I am still learning to love Christmas (Halloween is my jam), this game has a ton going for it. In addition to the game I have loosely described in this review Christmas Lights comes with a booklet that has rule sets for 12 different games that can be played with the included components. TWELVE EXTRA GAME MODES. That’s crazy! So when purchasing Christmas Lights people are actually purchasing 13 games in one box, with two of those modes being for Solo players. The variety and replayability here is off the charts and I am excited to play through the other game modes as soon as I can, and I know my wife will be into as well.
That said, having a Christmas-themed game that delights my wife and I equally is certainly something that I can easily recommend. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a cheery 10 / 12 for its portability, variability, cute art, and great game play. If you see it in stores, pick up a copy. I am going out on a limb and saying that you could even play this game when it’s NOT Christmastime and still have a great experience with it. If you are looking for something a little different and like Hanabi but wish for something else, give Christmas Lights a shot. Hopefully you will find it as charming as we both do. Oh, and a little pro tip: pour yourself a mug of chai and grab a gingerbread cookie whilst playing. Not necessary, but it certainly works for us. Happy Holidays, ALL holidays, everyone!
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Mank (2020) in Movies
Dec 10, 2020
Cinematography - glorious to look at (1 more)
A fabulous ensemble cast, with Oldham, Seyfried, Arliss and Dance excelling
"Mank" is a biopic slice of the career of Herman Jacob Mankiewicz (Gary Oldman), the Hollywood screenwriter who was the pen behind what is regularly voted by critics as being the greatest movie of all time - "Citizen Kane". "Citizen Kane" was written in 1940 (and released the following year) and much of the action in "Mank" takes place in a retreat in the Mojave desert when Mank, crippled by a full-cast on the leg, has been 'sent' by Orson Welles (Tom Burke) to complete the screenplay without alcohol and other worldly distractions. Helping administer to his writing and care needs are English typist Rita Alexander (Lily Collins) and carer Fraulein Freda (Monika Gossmann). However, although Mank produces brilliant stuff, his speed of progress exasperates his 'minder' and editor John Houseman (Sam Troughton). (Yes, THAT John Houseman, the actor.)
In developing the story, we continuously flash-back six years - - nicely indicated by typed 'script notes' - - to 1934 where Mank is working at MGM studios for Louis B. Mayer (Arliss Howard) and mixing in the circles of millionaire publisher William Randolph Hearst (Charles Dance) and his glamorous young wife, actress Marion Davies (Amanda Seyfried). Allegedly, the "Citizen Kane" script was based on Hearst. But what souring of the relationship could have led to such a stinging betrayal during those six years?
Mank has an embarrassment of acting riches. Mankiewicz is a fascinating character: charismatic, reckless, passionate and the definition of a loose cannon. Basically, a dream for a great actor to portray. And Gary Oldham IS a great actor. After doing Churchill in "Darkest Hour", he here turns in a magnificent performance as the alcoholic writer. Never more so than in a furious tirade at a dinner table late in the film, which will likely be the equivalent to the Churchill "tiger" speech come Oscar time. Surely, there's a Best Actor nomination there?
Equally impressive though are some of the supporting cast.
- Tom Burke - so good as TV's "Strike" - gives a fine impersonation of the great Orson Welles: full of confidence and swagger. It's only a cameo role, but he genuinely 'feels' like the young Welles.
- Amanda Seyfried: It took me almost half of the film to recognize her as Marion Davies, and her performance is pitch perfect - the best of her career in my view, and again Oscar-worthy.
- Arliss Howard for me almost steals the show as the megalomaniac Mayer: his introduction to Mank's brother Joe (Tom Pelphrey) has a memorable "walk with me" walkthrough of the studio with Mayer preaching on the real meaning of MGM and the movies in general. Breathtakingly good.
- But - I said "nearly steals the show".... the guy who made off with it in a swag-bag for me was our own Charles Dance as Hearst. Quietly impressive throughout, he just completely nails it with his "organ-grinder's monkey" speech towards the end of the movie. Probably my favourite monologue of 2020. Chilling. I'd really like to see Dance get a Supporting Actor nomination for this.
The screenplay was originally written by director David Fincher's late father Jack. Jack Fincher died in 2002, and this project has literally been decades in the planning. Mankiewicz has a caustic turn of phrase, and there are laugh-out lines of dialogue scattered throughout the script. "Write hard, aim low" implores Houseman at one point. And my personal favourite: Mank's puncturing of the irony that the Screen Writers Guild has been formed without an apostrophe! A huge LOL!
Aside from the witty dialogue, the script has a nuance to the storytelling that continually surprises. A revelation from Freda about Mank's philanthropic tendencies brings you up short in your face-value impression of his character. And the drivers that engineer the rift between Mankiewicz and Hearst - based around the story of the (fictional) director Shelly Metcalf (Jamie McShane) - are not slapped in your face, but elegantly slipped into your subconscious.
In addition, certain aspects are frustratingly withheld from you. Mank's long-suffering wife (a definition of the phrase) Sara (Tuppence Middleton) only occasionally comes into focus. The only reference to his kids are a crash in the background as they "remodel" the family home. Is the charismatic Mank a faithful husband or a philanderer? Is the relationship with Rita Alexander just professional and platonic (you assume so), or is there more going on? There's a tension there in the storytelling that never quite gets resolved: and that's a good thing.
Mank also has an embarrassment of technical riches. Even from the opening titles, you get the impression that this is a work of genius. All in black and white, and with the appearance of 40's titling, they scroll majestically in the sky and then - after "Charles Dance" - effortlessly scroll down to the desert highway. It's evidence of an attention to detail perhaps forced by lockdown. ("MUM - I'm bored". "Go up to your room and do some more work on that movie then".)
It's deliciously modern, yet retro. I love the fact that the cross-reel "circle" cue-marks appear so prominently... the indicators that the projectionist needs to spin up the next reel. I think they are still used in most modern films, but not as noticeably as in the old films... and this one!
A key contributor to the movie is cinematographer Erik Messerschmidt. Everything looks just BEAUTIFUL, and it is now a big regret that I didn't go to watch this on the big screen after all. Surely there will be a cinematography Oscar nomination for this one. Unbelievably, this is Messerschmidt's debut feature as director of cinematography!
Elsewhere, you can imagine multiple other technical Oscar noms. The tight and effective editing is by Kirk Baxter. And the combination of the glorious production design (Donald Graham Burt) and the costume design (Trish Summerville) make the movie emanate the same nostalgia for Hollywood as did last year's "Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood".... albeit set forty years earlier. Even the music (by the regular team of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross) might get nominated, since I had to go back and check that it actually HAD music at all: it's subtly unobtrusive and effective.
The only area I had any issue with here was the sound mixing, since I had trouble picking up some of the dialogue.
Although I can gush about this movie as a technical work of art, I'm going to hold off a 10* review on this one. For one reason only. I just didn't feel 100% engaged with the story (at least with a first watch). The illustrious Mrs Movie Man summed it up with the phrase "I just didn't care enough what happened to any of the characters". I think though that this one is sufficiently subtle and cerebral that it deserves another watch.
Will it win Oscars. Yes, for sure. Hell, I would like to put a bet on that "Mank" will top the list of the "most nominations" when they are announced. (Hollywood likes nothing more than a navel-gazing look at its history of course). And an obvious nomination here will be David Fincher for Best Director. But, for me, this falls into a similar bucket as that other black and white multi-Oscar winner of two year's ago "Roma". It's glorious to look at; brilliantly directed; but not a movie I would choose to readily reach for to repeatedly watch again.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/12/10/mank-divines-for-oscar-gold-in-a-sea-of-pyrites/. Thanks.)
In developing the story, we continuously flash-back six years - - nicely indicated by typed 'script notes' - - to 1934 where Mank is working at MGM studios for Louis B. Mayer (Arliss Howard) and mixing in the circles of millionaire publisher William Randolph Hearst (Charles Dance) and his glamorous young wife, actress Marion Davies (Amanda Seyfried). Allegedly, the "Citizen Kane" script was based on Hearst. But what souring of the relationship could have led to such a stinging betrayal during those six years?
Mank has an embarrassment of acting riches. Mankiewicz is a fascinating character: charismatic, reckless, passionate and the definition of a loose cannon. Basically, a dream for a great actor to portray. And Gary Oldham IS a great actor. After doing Churchill in "Darkest Hour", he here turns in a magnificent performance as the alcoholic writer. Never more so than in a furious tirade at a dinner table late in the film, which will likely be the equivalent to the Churchill "tiger" speech come Oscar time. Surely, there's a Best Actor nomination there?
Equally impressive though are some of the supporting cast.
- Tom Burke - so good as TV's "Strike" - gives a fine impersonation of the great Orson Welles: full of confidence and swagger. It's only a cameo role, but he genuinely 'feels' like the young Welles.
- Amanda Seyfried: It took me almost half of the film to recognize her as Marion Davies, and her performance is pitch perfect - the best of her career in my view, and again Oscar-worthy.
- Arliss Howard for me almost steals the show as the megalomaniac Mayer: his introduction to Mank's brother Joe (Tom Pelphrey) has a memorable "walk with me" walkthrough of the studio with Mayer preaching on the real meaning of MGM and the movies in general. Breathtakingly good.
- But - I said "nearly steals the show".... the guy who made off with it in a swag-bag for me was our own Charles Dance as Hearst. Quietly impressive throughout, he just completely nails it with his "organ-grinder's monkey" speech towards the end of the movie. Probably my favourite monologue of 2020. Chilling. I'd really like to see Dance get a Supporting Actor nomination for this.
The screenplay was originally written by director David Fincher's late father Jack. Jack Fincher died in 2002, and this project has literally been decades in the planning. Mankiewicz has a caustic turn of phrase, and there are laugh-out lines of dialogue scattered throughout the script. "Write hard, aim low" implores Houseman at one point. And my personal favourite: Mank's puncturing of the irony that the Screen Writers Guild has been formed without an apostrophe! A huge LOL!
Aside from the witty dialogue, the script has a nuance to the storytelling that continually surprises. A revelation from Freda about Mank's philanthropic tendencies brings you up short in your face-value impression of his character. And the drivers that engineer the rift between Mankiewicz and Hearst - based around the story of the (fictional) director Shelly Metcalf (Jamie McShane) - are not slapped in your face, but elegantly slipped into your subconscious.
In addition, certain aspects are frustratingly withheld from you. Mank's long-suffering wife (a definition of the phrase) Sara (Tuppence Middleton) only occasionally comes into focus. The only reference to his kids are a crash in the background as they "remodel" the family home. Is the charismatic Mank a faithful husband or a philanderer? Is the relationship with Rita Alexander just professional and platonic (you assume so), or is there more going on? There's a tension there in the storytelling that never quite gets resolved: and that's a good thing.
Mank also has an embarrassment of technical riches. Even from the opening titles, you get the impression that this is a work of genius. All in black and white, and with the appearance of 40's titling, they scroll majestically in the sky and then - after "Charles Dance" - effortlessly scroll down to the desert highway. It's evidence of an attention to detail perhaps forced by lockdown. ("MUM - I'm bored". "Go up to your room and do some more work on that movie then".)
It's deliciously modern, yet retro. I love the fact that the cross-reel "circle" cue-marks appear so prominently... the indicators that the projectionist needs to spin up the next reel. I think they are still used in most modern films, but not as noticeably as in the old films... and this one!
A key contributor to the movie is cinematographer Erik Messerschmidt. Everything looks just BEAUTIFUL, and it is now a big regret that I didn't go to watch this on the big screen after all. Surely there will be a cinematography Oscar nomination for this one. Unbelievably, this is Messerschmidt's debut feature as director of cinematography!
Elsewhere, you can imagine multiple other technical Oscar noms. The tight and effective editing is by Kirk Baxter. And the combination of the glorious production design (Donald Graham Burt) and the costume design (Trish Summerville) make the movie emanate the same nostalgia for Hollywood as did last year's "Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood".... albeit set forty years earlier. Even the music (by the regular team of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross) might get nominated, since I had to go back and check that it actually HAD music at all: it's subtly unobtrusive and effective.
The only area I had any issue with here was the sound mixing, since I had trouble picking up some of the dialogue.
Although I can gush about this movie as a technical work of art, I'm going to hold off a 10* review on this one. For one reason only. I just didn't feel 100% engaged with the story (at least with a first watch). The illustrious Mrs Movie Man summed it up with the phrase "I just didn't care enough what happened to any of the characters". I think though that this one is sufficiently subtle and cerebral that it deserves another watch.
Will it win Oscars. Yes, for sure. Hell, I would like to put a bet on that "Mank" will top the list of the "most nominations" when they are announced. (Hollywood likes nothing more than a navel-gazing look at its history of course). And an obvious nomination here will be David Fincher for Best Director. But, for me, this falls into a similar bucket as that other black and white multi-Oscar winner of two year's ago "Roma". It's glorious to look at; brilliantly directed; but not a movie I would choose to readily reach for to repeatedly watch again.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/12/10/mank-divines-for-oscar-gold-in-a-sea-of-pyrites/. Thanks.)
It’s about 6 weeks since I finished season 3 of this incredible show from Netflix. I have been putting off writing about it, because I wanted to let it settle. And also because I have a hell of a lot to say about it. I am gonna try and be comprehensive, without giving too much away in terms of spoilers. I am going to assume you have seen some of it, or have heard the hype, at least. If you haven’t got around to it yet, then all I can say is: what are you doing with your entertainment life? Get on it, now! It is as ubiquitous as Breaking Bad, The Sopranos, or The Wire, and sits comfortably in that group for consistent quality and lasting impressions.
Season one first aired in July 2017. I heard good things very quickly, albeit with some hesitation. It was dark, sometimes literally, utilising a trademark washed-out effect visually, that instantly gave it a bleak feel, which was not to everyone’s taste, but I loved. General consensus had it that the writing was great; the situation and concept drew you in from minute one. In fact, I believe the first episode is one of the best pilots seen in the last decade, bar none. It made no bones about what we were to expect from the start: intelligent dialogue, a lot of tension and a hefty chunk of jaw-dropping brutality.
Jason Bateman has enjoyed a remarkable career in the last ten years, putting behind him a patchy child-star and B actor tag, to emerge as the go to guy for deadpan comedy pathos, rivalled only, perhaps by Paul Rudd. Ozark is Bateman’s show in many regards, fulfilling his ambition to produce and direct as well as act, and he is a superb central pivot to the show, as hard nosed accountant turned drug cartel puppet, Marty Byrde. He excels in all three roles on every level, and if you are a fan of his lighter work, chances are you will fall head over heels for his dubious charm in Ozark.
But, whilst he is the lynchpin of the show, and a compelling character in every subtley drawn way, there is so much more to the show than him. Laura Linney, as his initially timid wife, Wendy, is never less than interesting. Perfectly cast, utilising her skill for portraying strong yet flawed women at every turn; she grows into a character so full of contradictions and conflicts, that you change your mind whether you like her or not almost episode to episode. Time will tell, but she may yet emerge in season 4 as the most fully realised character in the show, depending on how her arc ends. The potential is huge, and despite a CV of solid roles over the years, this could be the defining work of her career. It’s already close.
Then there are the kids in this very modern nuclear family, Charlotte and Jonah, played by Sofia Hublitz and Skylar Gaetner. These characters could have been set decoration in lesser hands, but in this show they are given the chance to grow and become pivotal to the ongoing story in remarkable ways. There is nothing stereotypical about either of them, and the two young actors more than rise to the challenge of matching the more experienced pros. Many a show has been ruined by miscast youths that can’t match the more sophisticated adult content, but I remain impressed by these two, both as characters and actors. Again, they have the scope to go into very fascinating places within the story when season four emerges.
The true strength of the show, however, may lie in its consistently solid output of great supporting characters. Julia Gartner, as older than her years redneck with ambitions to rise above it, Ruth, has garnered all the plaudits, quite rightly. You grow to like her in usual ways. At first mistrusting her and then ended up 100% on her side. At times, she is the only one making sense and making the right decisions. The continual ways she is forced to grow up fast and bounce back from traumatic situations is so beautifully handled, that when she does show her vulnerable side it is at once shocking and heart- rending.
A lot of characters come and go; some forever, much quicker than you anticipated… for the sake of non spoilers, I won’t go into a who’s who here, but many meet a very sticky end, and it isn’t always who you think it will be. Especially by season 3, which largely drops the dark filter on the camera lens, but cranks up the body count exponentially, you start to feel that no one is safe, and anyone can go at any minute. Except, when they do, and why they do, is so well interwoven into the plot that you forget to look for the sucker punch and are still left with your jaw hitting the floor.
There were moments on season three where I was actually talking to the screen, begging certain characters not to do what they were doing; a sure sign of complete emotional investment. A big part of that was the addition of Tom Pelphrey as Wendy’s brother, who from the start puts a genius new spin on the family dynamic, becoming intertwined in interesting and ultimately devastating ways. His character takes a while to warm up, but by mid-season he is guaranteed to be your favourite person in it. And in episode 9, he delivers a monologue and a performance that I would quite honestly say is one of the absolute best things I’ve ever seen in a TV show.
I was moderately outraged then, to see he wasn’t rewarded with at least a nomination for the 2020 Emmy Awards. An oversight rather than a snub, for sure, but when Bateman, Linney and Garner all got nominated and he didn’t it felt like a real injustice, and a lot of online vitriol reflected that. Such a shame, especially if it turns out to be the best work he ever does – and I can’t imagine anything better, but who knows where he will go from here.
By the end of season 3 I felt exhausted. Each episode is slightly over an hour long, but can feel like you just watched a self contained movie. The quality certainly feels that way. I was both elated and shocked by the way it was left on a cliff edge, and relieved that I could take a break from it now. Although, waiting potentially up to two years to see how the story ends now seems like a long wait.
And it will be the end, one way or another, as the production announced season four will be the last, however stretching from 10 to 14 episodes, divided into 2 halves of 7; a trick Breaking Bad also did in its fifth and final season. I love that idea. Knowing the finish line is coming, rather than having it stretch out for years until the ideas and the momentum have long run out. Dexter springs to mind: a show that should have ended two seasons earlier, for sure.
I can really only see two ways it can go from here: either everyone dies, and that seems quite likely right now, or they win big. There simply is no inbetween I can imagine that would be satisfying. And I’m on the fence which I will prefer… The only certainty is that I will be very excited indeed when it comes around. And shows that make you feel that way are rare. In the meantime, I’m gonna watch a lot of comedies. I need a laugh after this…
Season one first aired in July 2017. I heard good things very quickly, albeit with some hesitation. It was dark, sometimes literally, utilising a trademark washed-out effect visually, that instantly gave it a bleak feel, which was not to everyone’s taste, but I loved. General consensus had it that the writing was great; the situation and concept drew you in from minute one. In fact, I believe the first episode is one of the best pilots seen in the last decade, bar none. It made no bones about what we were to expect from the start: intelligent dialogue, a lot of tension and a hefty chunk of jaw-dropping brutality.
Jason Bateman has enjoyed a remarkable career in the last ten years, putting behind him a patchy child-star and B actor tag, to emerge as the go to guy for deadpan comedy pathos, rivalled only, perhaps by Paul Rudd. Ozark is Bateman’s show in many regards, fulfilling his ambition to produce and direct as well as act, and he is a superb central pivot to the show, as hard nosed accountant turned drug cartel puppet, Marty Byrde. He excels in all three roles on every level, and if you are a fan of his lighter work, chances are you will fall head over heels for his dubious charm in Ozark.
But, whilst he is the lynchpin of the show, and a compelling character in every subtley drawn way, there is so much more to the show than him. Laura Linney, as his initially timid wife, Wendy, is never less than interesting. Perfectly cast, utilising her skill for portraying strong yet flawed women at every turn; she grows into a character so full of contradictions and conflicts, that you change your mind whether you like her or not almost episode to episode. Time will tell, but she may yet emerge in season 4 as the most fully realised character in the show, depending on how her arc ends. The potential is huge, and despite a CV of solid roles over the years, this could be the defining work of her career. It’s already close.
Then there are the kids in this very modern nuclear family, Charlotte and Jonah, played by Sofia Hublitz and Skylar Gaetner. These characters could have been set decoration in lesser hands, but in this show they are given the chance to grow and become pivotal to the ongoing story in remarkable ways. There is nothing stereotypical about either of them, and the two young actors more than rise to the challenge of matching the more experienced pros. Many a show has been ruined by miscast youths that can’t match the more sophisticated adult content, but I remain impressed by these two, both as characters and actors. Again, they have the scope to go into very fascinating places within the story when season four emerges.
The true strength of the show, however, may lie in its consistently solid output of great supporting characters. Julia Gartner, as older than her years redneck with ambitions to rise above it, Ruth, has garnered all the plaudits, quite rightly. You grow to like her in usual ways. At first mistrusting her and then ended up 100% on her side. At times, she is the only one making sense and making the right decisions. The continual ways she is forced to grow up fast and bounce back from traumatic situations is so beautifully handled, that when she does show her vulnerable side it is at once shocking and heart- rending.
A lot of characters come and go; some forever, much quicker than you anticipated… for the sake of non spoilers, I won’t go into a who’s who here, but many meet a very sticky end, and it isn’t always who you think it will be. Especially by season 3, which largely drops the dark filter on the camera lens, but cranks up the body count exponentially, you start to feel that no one is safe, and anyone can go at any minute. Except, when they do, and why they do, is so well interwoven into the plot that you forget to look for the sucker punch and are still left with your jaw hitting the floor.
There were moments on season three where I was actually talking to the screen, begging certain characters not to do what they were doing; a sure sign of complete emotional investment. A big part of that was the addition of Tom Pelphrey as Wendy’s brother, who from the start puts a genius new spin on the family dynamic, becoming intertwined in interesting and ultimately devastating ways. His character takes a while to warm up, but by mid-season he is guaranteed to be your favourite person in it. And in episode 9, he delivers a monologue and a performance that I would quite honestly say is one of the absolute best things I’ve ever seen in a TV show.
I was moderately outraged then, to see he wasn’t rewarded with at least a nomination for the 2020 Emmy Awards. An oversight rather than a snub, for sure, but when Bateman, Linney and Garner all got nominated and he didn’t it felt like a real injustice, and a lot of online vitriol reflected that. Such a shame, especially if it turns out to be the best work he ever does – and I can’t imagine anything better, but who knows where he will go from here.
By the end of season 3 I felt exhausted. Each episode is slightly over an hour long, but can feel like you just watched a self contained movie. The quality certainly feels that way. I was both elated and shocked by the way it was left on a cliff edge, and relieved that I could take a break from it now. Although, waiting potentially up to two years to see how the story ends now seems like a long wait.
And it will be the end, one way or another, as the production announced season four will be the last, however stretching from 10 to 14 episodes, divided into 2 halves of 7; a trick Breaking Bad also did in its fifth and final season. I love that idea. Knowing the finish line is coming, rather than having it stretch out for years until the ideas and the momentum have long run out. Dexter springs to mind: a show that should have ended two seasons earlier, for sure.
I can really only see two ways it can go from here: either everyone dies, and that seems quite likely right now, or they win big. There simply is no inbetween I can imagine that would be satisfying. And I’m on the fence which I will prefer… The only certainty is that I will be very excited indeed when it comes around. And shows that make you feel that way are rare. In the meantime, I’m gonna watch a lot of comedies. I need a laugh after this…
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Shadows of Kilforth: A Fantasy Quest Game in Tabletop Games
Sep 3, 2020
Have you ever sat down to read a rulebook and had to split it up into several reading sessions? I have multiple times. This happened just recently when I sat down to learn Shadows of Kilforth. Granted, I have two kids that take up the majority of my time and they provide plenty of adorable distraction, but even still, this absolute unit of a rulebook took me a good few days to actually finish. Was the time and effort worth it in the end? Yes. Absolutely. Keep reading.
Shadows of Kilforth is subtitled, “A Fantasy Quest Game.” Right there in the title you find out exactly what you are up against in the very foreboding but unassumingly-sized box. A game set in a fantasy world that is focused on questing. I have to admit up front that this review will be treated a little differently as the rulebook is hefty and nobody wants to read a thorough rules essay on Shadows. So I will give you a very high-level overview of the main steps and then give you my thoughts on how it all works together.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
Shadows of Kilforth is essentially a card and dice RPG-esque adventure game with an Asian-style theme but set in a fantasy world where locations will be devastated into gloom (building upon the first in the series Gloom of Kilforth). The players, as the heroes, have the daunting task of journeying throughout Kilforth’s 25 locations to collect items, allies, spells, and titles to overcome main quests and subquests before every location falls into gloom. These quests usually have the players gathering specific card types to satisfy and complete. Once main player storyline quests, called Sagas, are completed the hero levels up and when they complete their fourth quest in their main Saga they may attempt their Finale and then may finally assault the big boss, the Ancient.
Each turn players have Action Points (AP) to spend on doing different actions: movement, discovering rumours (yes, I know it’s the Queen’s English), confrontations, and regaling a Saga chapter, among several others. Some actions are free actions, called Deeds. These include resolving loot tokens, assaulting an ancient, exchanging items between players, and several others. By using combinations of Actions and Deeds players will be able to travel around collecting those items, allies, and so forth needed to complete their Saga chapters.
To complete objectives and quests, players will typically be rolling dice to meet requirements on the cards. This, as all role-players know, can be either supremely lucky or incredibly and predictably debilitating. Skill checks are abundant in Shadows and diversifying characters may or may not have advantages by being able to complete Fight, Study, Sneak, and Influence tests. Players will win if they can complete their Sagas and defeat the Ancient before all of the locations fall into gloom, signaling the end of the game.
All this, again, is very high-level and there are many intricacies in Shadows that I just cannot go over for the sake of time and the health of my typing fingers. But, the game can be played solo, cooperatively, or competitively. So depending on the mode of play and number of players Shadows can range from a 45 minute foray to multi-hour epics. This is why I have played this solo with one character for my plays.
Components. Shadows of Kilforth is very card-heavy, but also includes other goodies. The cards themselves are firstly quite numerous, but also good quality. I can see myself sleeving this and loving every minute of that process. Aside from the cards, the game includes standees for player pieces on the card map, wooden components to track HP, AP, Fate, Obstacles, Gold, Hidden characters, great swirly 6d6, and also cardboard chits for Loot tokens. I haven’t even mentioned the art yet and that may be the most stunning component in this game! I LOVE a game with great art, and Shadows has simply amazing art. This is not usually my style of game art either, but it is so pleasing and everything makes sense and gets me immersed in the game. Everything provided is wonderful quality and an absolute joy to use during play.
Ok so like always, we place our ratings graphic right at the top of our posts so our readers can see right away what we think of the game. As you can tell, I love Shadows of Kilforth. It has essences of so many games I enjoy pieced together in a very attractive and captivating package. The movement and subsequent destruction of map-cards are reminiscent of Forbidden Island/Desert and Tiny Epic Defenders, which I really love (don’t hate – it’s a good game). The gathering of select card types and returning to a location to complete feels like fetch quests in MMORPGs (Final Fantasy XI being my main squeeze for many years). Obviously dice skill checks and level ups from tabletop RPGs are in there as well.
Shadows is just such a great collection of mechanics that I love that I can see myself playing this game over and over and over. Caveat: I will never play this any way other than absolutely solo. My first play, yes a learning session, was just shy of two hours from setup to tear-down. Adding players will increase game length, and playing with AP-prone friends is a no-go for me on Shadows; I had to reference both the excellent provided cheat sheet and the rulebook throughout the play but I eventually got the hang of it and was able to fly through. I may play this solo but with multiple characters cooperatively someday, but I do not wish to play this with other people. Ever.
So here’s my final thought. Shadow of Kilforth is a beefy game, but is well worth the time and effort to learn and play a couple times before passing judgment. It has everything I love in a game and I can’t stop thinking about it. I want to play all the different Race/Class combinations and just dunk on all the Ancients. If only my dice didn’t hate me so much. I will certainly be keeping this one forever, and if you are a fan of fantasy themed adventure card games with heavy use of dice and cool components, DEFINITELY take a look at Shadows of Kilforth. As I am the only one who has played this, I speak for the team in saying Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a 6 / 6. Treat yoself to this one, folks.
Shadows of Kilforth is subtitled, “A Fantasy Quest Game.” Right there in the title you find out exactly what you are up against in the very foreboding but unassumingly-sized box. A game set in a fantasy world that is focused on questing. I have to admit up front that this review will be treated a little differently as the rulebook is hefty and nobody wants to read a thorough rules essay on Shadows. So I will give you a very high-level overview of the main steps and then give you my thoughts on how it all works together.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
Shadows of Kilforth is essentially a card and dice RPG-esque adventure game with an Asian-style theme but set in a fantasy world where locations will be devastated into gloom (building upon the first in the series Gloom of Kilforth). The players, as the heroes, have the daunting task of journeying throughout Kilforth’s 25 locations to collect items, allies, spells, and titles to overcome main quests and subquests before every location falls into gloom. These quests usually have the players gathering specific card types to satisfy and complete. Once main player storyline quests, called Sagas, are completed the hero levels up and when they complete their fourth quest in their main Saga they may attempt their Finale and then may finally assault the big boss, the Ancient.
Each turn players have Action Points (AP) to spend on doing different actions: movement, discovering rumours (yes, I know it’s the Queen’s English), confrontations, and regaling a Saga chapter, among several others. Some actions are free actions, called Deeds. These include resolving loot tokens, assaulting an ancient, exchanging items between players, and several others. By using combinations of Actions and Deeds players will be able to travel around collecting those items, allies, and so forth needed to complete their Saga chapters.
To complete objectives and quests, players will typically be rolling dice to meet requirements on the cards. This, as all role-players know, can be either supremely lucky or incredibly and predictably debilitating. Skill checks are abundant in Shadows and diversifying characters may or may not have advantages by being able to complete Fight, Study, Sneak, and Influence tests. Players will win if they can complete their Sagas and defeat the Ancient before all of the locations fall into gloom, signaling the end of the game.
All this, again, is very high-level and there are many intricacies in Shadows that I just cannot go over for the sake of time and the health of my typing fingers. But, the game can be played solo, cooperatively, or competitively. So depending on the mode of play and number of players Shadows can range from a 45 minute foray to multi-hour epics. This is why I have played this solo with one character for my plays.
Components. Shadows of Kilforth is very card-heavy, but also includes other goodies. The cards themselves are firstly quite numerous, but also good quality. I can see myself sleeving this and loving every minute of that process. Aside from the cards, the game includes standees for player pieces on the card map, wooden components to track HP, AP, Fate, Obstacles, Gold, Hidden characters, great swirly 6d6, and also cardboard chits for Loot tokens. I haven’t even mentioned the art yet and that may be the most stunning component in this game! I LOVE a game with great art, and Shadows has simply amazing art. This is not usually my style of game art either, but it is so pleasing and everything makes sense and gets me immersed in the game. Everything provided is wonderful quality and an absolute joy to use during play.
Ok so like always, we place our ratings graphic right at the top of our posts so our readers can see right away what we think of the game. As you can tell, I love Shadows of Kilforth. It has essences of so many games I enjoy pieced together in a very attractive and captivating package. The movement and subsequent destruction of map-cards are reminiscent of Forbidden Island/Desert and Tiny Epic Defenders, which I really love (don’t hate – it’s a good game). The gathering of select card types and returning to a location to complete feels like fetch quests in MMORPGs (Final Fantasy XI being my main squeeze for many years). Obviously dice skill checks and level ups from tabletop RPGs are in there as well.
Shadows is just such a great collection of mechanics that I love that I can see myself playing this game over and over and over. Caveat: I will never play this any way other than absolutely solo. My first play, yes a learning session, was just shy of two hours from setup to tear-down. Adding players will increase game length, and playing with AP-prone friends is a no-go for me on Shadows; I had to reference both the excellent provided cheat sheet and the rulebook throughout the play but I eventually got the hang of it and was able to fly through. I may play this solo but with multiple characters cooperatively someday, but I do not wish to play this with other people. Ever.
So here’s my final thought. Shadow of Kilforth is a beefy game, but is well worth the time and effort to learn and play a couple times before passing judgment. It has everything I love in a game and I can’t stop thinking about it. I want to play all the different Race/Class combinations and just dunk on all the Ancients. If only my dice didn’t hate me so much. I will certainly be keeping this one forever, and if you are a fan of fantasy themed adventure card games with heavy use of dice and cool components, DEFINITELY take a look at Shadows of Kilforth. As I am the only one who has played this, I speak for the team in saying Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a 6 / 6. Treat yoself to this one, folks.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Spy Club in Tabletop Games
Aug 12, 2021
You guys have heard of “Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego?” The globetrotting super-spy who is hard to pin down? Well imagine what she may have been like as a young person. I bet she had her own spy club. And now we have a game to play to emulate what it may have been like in such a club. **This game has nothing to do with Carmen Sandiego.
Spy Club is a cooperative memory and deduction card game utilizing an action point system and sharing of resources. It is set in any neighborhood where kids can gather in groups and snuff out a mystery. The goal is to whittle the clues down to the correct Motive, Suspect, Location, Crime, and Object of the Crime. Are you intrepid youths up to the task?
To setup, place the main board on the table, and the Escape Marker upon it at the bottom of the track. Shuffle the Movement Deck cards separately by backs, remove one from each differently-backed set, and place them in day – sunset – night order in its space. Each player receives a play board according to the number of players and a spyglass in their favorite color to go upon their play board. The Idea markers can be in a rough pile near everything else. The Clue Deck is to be shuffled and placed face-down (or face-up, whichever you prefer; they are double-sided) and each player is dealt a number of Clues equal to the number of spaces on their play boards. Clues will also be dealt to an “Incoming Clues” area (an offer row or “market”). DO NOT LOOK AT THE BACKS OF THE CARDS. Like, EVER. Unless you use an action to do so. The Suspecteeple will be placed on the right-most Clue Card of the starting player’s board. The game of sleuthing may now begin!
A player’s turn will consist of three main steps with different phases in those steps. Step 1 is Use Actions. Players will be able to use three Actions on their turn. These Actions are: Investigate, Shift Focus, Confirm, and Scout. To Investigate the active player will flip a Clue Card from their collection to its back. They may then continue flipping their cards or stop at any time. To Shift Focus a player will simply move their spyglass to a different Clue and collect Ideas equal to the number of Clues whose aspects match the newly-focused one (two Ideas if moving to a Location and a player has two Location Clues). Skipping Confirm, to Scout simply means purchasing a card from the Incoming Clues area to a player’s board, with a discard of an existing card already there.
Confirming is where the main action in Spy Club lies. Players will be attempting to Confirm five Clues of matching aspect (Location, Motive, etc) in order to hone in on the correct aspect. To Confirm, a player can submit a Clue from their collection (hand) to the main board. The cost, in Ideas, depends on where the spyglass lies. If the spyglass is directly under the Clue to be submitted the cost is nothing. However, if a player wishes to complete three Confirm actions and they have matching Clues on either side of their spyglass, they would need to spend two Ideas for each Clue resting one space away from the spyglass.
There are also rules for taking “Teamwork Bonus Actions,” but I will let you discover those on your own.
After these Actions are carried out, Step 2 is Refill. Firstly the active player’s hand will need to be refilled from the Incoming Clues row, and more Incoming Clues come out to fill that row.
Step 3 is Move the Suspect. Drawing from the Movement Deck the active player will match up the Movement cards from the previous round and the current round to find out how many spaces the Suspecteeple will be moving through players’ cards. Depending upon which aspect Clue the Suspecteeple lands a negative action will be levied against the players. In some ways the Suspect could land on cards that trigger no negative action, but I will leave that for you to discover as well. I am a bit… distracted.
Play continues in this fashion of players Using Actions, Refilling the Clue cards, and Moving the Suspect until players win by solving all five aspects of the crime, the Suspect escapes, the players run out of Idea markers, the Suspect escapes due to running out of Movement cards, or there are insufficient Incoming Clues to refill a player’s hand. So there are four ways to lose and one way to win.
Components. I find the components in Spy Club to be good overall. Nothing really stands out as amazing, either in design or quality. The art is very good, though. One thing I will say about the components as a whole is that once the game is setup and in play it looks fascinating on the table. I love the way it looks and certainly assists with full immersion. Always a plus in my book.
There are so many things I love about this game. And there are so many things I didn’t even explain here! Ok I’ll tell you one. Spy Club can be played as a one-shot game night medium-length (60 minutes) game, or can be converted into a campaign game where players will play five connected scenarios using a giant stack of cards that are not in use for the one-shots. That is simply fabulous! I can play one game of this to get people hooked, then reel them in by offering to continue this as a campaign to see what the main story arc is really trying to tell us. Oh man, that’s just special and I love it!
I feel like I have been playing a lot of really great games lately, and Spy Club is certainly a GREAT game. In fact, I told the rest of the team that this one is a contender for my Top 10 Games of All Time list. It has everything I love in a game: it is difficult (my first game I would have lost had it lasted one more turn) without being too heavy, it is inviting me to play more games (especially with the campaign mode active), I just like looking at it on the table, and creates a stunning amount of tension as we race against the game clock to figure out the crime aspects.
I have had this in my collection for too long without it being played, and I am so sorry that it took me so long to get into it. I will certainly be playing this a LOT more, and introducing as many people to it as I can. I think in the gaming world it is flying under the radar, but I will be one of its champions and suggest it as much as possible. If you like certain aspects (hehe) of Clue, 13 Dead End Drive, Carmen Sandiego, and even Jaipur, then take a look at Spy Club. Purple Phoenix Games gives this a super-sleuth 11 / 12. I actually might go play it right now. Yes, at 11:07pm.
Spy Club is a cooperative memory and deduction card game utilizing an action point system and sharing of resources. It is set in any neighborhood where kids can gather in groups and snuff out a mystery. The goal is to whittle the clues down to the correct Motive, Suspect, Location, Crime, and Object of the Crime. Are you intrepid youths up to the task?
To setup, place the main board on the table, and the Escape Marker upon it at the bottom of the track. Shuffle the Movement Deck cards separately by backs, remove one from each differently-backed set, and place them in day – sunset – night order in its space. Each player receives a play board according to the number of players and a spyglass in their favorite color to go upon their play board. The Idea markers can be in a rough pile near everything else. The Clue Deck is to be shuffled and placed face-down (or face-up, whichever you prefer; they are double-sided) and each player is dealt a number of Clues equal to the number of spaces on their play boards. Clues will also be dealt to an “Incoming Clues” area (an offer row or “market”). DO NOT LOOK AT THE BACKS OF THE CARDS. Like, EVER. Unless you use an action to do so. The Suspecteeple will be placed on the right-most Clue Card of the starting player’s board. The game of sleuthing may now begin!
A player’s turn will consist of three main steps with different phases in those steps. Step 1 is Use Actions. Players will be able to use three Actions on their turn. These Actions are: Investigate, Shift Focus, Confirm, and Scout. To Investigate the active player will flip a Clue Card from their collection to its back. They may then continue flipping their cards or stop at any time. To Shift Focus a player will simply move their spyglass to a different Clue and collect Ideas equal to the number of Clues whose aspects match the newly-focused one (two Ideas if moving to a Location and a player has two Location Clues). Skipping Confirm, to Scout simply means purchasing a card from the Incoming Clues area to a player’s board, with a discard of an existing card already there.
Confirming is where the main action in Spy Club lies. Players will be attempting to Confirm five Clues of matching aspect (Location, Motive, etc) in order to hone in on the correct aspect. To Confirm, a player can submit a Clue from their collection (hand) to the main board. The cost, in Ideas, depends on where the spyglass lies. If the spyglass is directly under the Clue to be submitted the cost is nothing. However, if a player wishes to complete three Confirm actions and they have matching Clues on either side of their spyglass, they would need to spend two Ideas for each Clue resting one space away from the spyglass.
There are also rules for taking “Teamwork Bonus Actions,” but I will let you discover those on your own.
After these Actions are carried out, Step 2 is Refill. Firstly the active player’s hand will need to be refilled from the Incoming Clues row, and more Incoming Clues come out to fill that row.
Step 3 is Move the Suspect. Drawing from the Movement Deck the active player will match up the Movement cards from the previous round and the current round to find out how many spaces the Suspecteeple will be moving through players’ cards. Depending upon which aspect Clue the Suspecteeple lands a negative action will be levied against the players. In some ways the Suspect could land on cards that trigger no negative action, but I will leave that for you to discover as well. I am a bit… distracted.
Play continues in this fashion of players Using Actions, Refilling the Clue cards, and Moving the Suspect until players win by solving all five aspects of the crime, the Suspect escapes, the players run out of Idea markers, the Suspect escapes due to running out of Movement cards, or there are insufficient Incoming Clues to refill a player’s hand. So there are four ways to lose and one way to win.
Components. I find the components in Spy Club to be good overall. Nothing really stands out as amazing, either in design or quality. The art is very good, though. One thing I will say about the components as a whole is that once the game is setup and in play it looks fascinating on the table. I love the way it looks and certainly assists with full immersion. Always a plus in my book.
There are so many things I love about this game. And there are so many things I didn’t even explain here! Ok I’ll tell you one. Spy Club can be played as a one-shot game night medium-length (60 minutes) game, or can be converted into a campaign game where players will play five connected scenarios using a giant stack of cards that are not in use for the one-shots. That is simply fabulous! I can play one game of this to get people hooked, then reel them in by offering to continue this as a campaign to see what the main story arc is really trying to tell us. Oh man, that’s just special and I love it!
I feel like I have been playing a lot of really great games lately, and Spy Club is certainly a GREAT game. In fact, I told the rest of the team that this one is a contender for my Top 10 Games of All Time list. It has everything I love in a game: it is difficult (my first game I would have lost had it lasted one more turn) without being too heavy, it is inviting me to play more games (especially with the campaign mode active), I just like looking at it on the table, and creates a stunning amount of tension as we race against the game clock to figure out the crime aspects.
I have had this in my collection for too long without it being played, and I am so sorry that it took me so long to get into it. I will certainly be playing this a LOT more, and introducing as many people to it as I can. I think in the gaming world it is flying under the radar, but I will be one of its champions and suggest it as much as possible. If you like certain aspects (hehe) of Clue, 13 Dead End Drive, Carmen Sandiego, and even Jaipur, then take a look at Spy Club. Purple Phoenix Games gives this a super-sleuth 11 / 12. I actually might go play it right now. Yes, at 11:07pm.
