Search
Search results
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated The House That Jack Built (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Danish director Lars Von Trier is no stranger to controversy. He has certainly divided film fans with some praising his work and some condemning it. The House That Jack Built is his most recent creation, causing audience members at Cannes to either walk out in disgust or stand up and applaud. This seriously mixed reception caught my interest and I wanted to find out what he’d done to generate such a response.
I’ve only seen two of his previous films; Antichrist and Melancholia, the former being a film that disturbed me so much I haven’t been able to watch it a second time. Its visceral, raw and harrowing portrayal of sex, violence, and self-mutilation is something that is a thoroughly uncomfortable and unpleasant watch. Because of Antichrist, I felt nervous yet strangely excited to see what The House That Jack Built had in store for me. I was surprised, however, to discover that it is arguably his tamest film to date, with a lot of the more graphic content happening off-screen. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t have its disturbing moments, but it was a lot less visceral than I was expecting based on its recent backlash.
The film is split into five chapters labelled ‘The Incidents’ and an epilogue, detailing some of the murders that Jack carried out over a 12-year span. Two of these incidents include child abuse and female mutilation, but is presented in a much more psychologically disturbing way rather than uncomfortable close-ups and drawn out scenes that you watch from behind your hands. The House That Jack Built spends more time tapping into Jack’s own psyche than it does the atrocities he commits, with Matt Dillon really stealing the show as the titular character.
It’s also darkly funny in places, which I certainly wasn’t expecting. Dillon’s portrayal of a psychotic killer with OCD is both terrifying and amusing. He is simultaneously charming and unhinged, which is a difficult thing to pull off. He was by far my favourite thing about the film, reminiscent of so many iconic serial killers that have fascinated the general public. The film relied heavily on Jack’s character and inner thoughts so it was great to see Dillon pull it off so brilliantly.
Much like Von Trier’s previous work, The House That Jack Built features lots of symbolism throughout the narrative. In this case, it focuses heavily on religion, art and family, with Jack being challenged on all of these as he recounts the incidents. The voice challenging him is a mystery to us until the third act, where Bruno Ganz’s character is finally revealed to us. I found this reveal to be a little jarring and strange, but not unexpected from one of his films. For me, the third act is where it started to go downhill and I lost interest, which is a real shame after the strength of the first two. Despite seeing some really great analyses online, it wasn’t enough to change my own views on the way it ended. It just seemed a little too out of place for my liking.
The visual style is interesting and combines live action with animation and still images. This feels very random but in the context of this particular film, it actually works in its favour. Both Dillon and Ganz narrate over the animation and still images, giving us monologues that act as food for thought and raise questions about morality, life, death and so on. It’s an intense film in that regard and one that you have to really concentrate on in order to enjoy properly.
The House That Jack Built is a depressing, harrowing and strange film. Its blend of sadistic violence and humour makes it a truly unique horror film that seems to appeal to a very specific audience. It’s not for the faint of heart, and Jack’s misogynistic killing sprees teamed with his nihilistic outlook on life is bound to be uncomfortable for many to witness. As a case study on a serial killer it’s a fascinating watch, but out of the three films I’ve seen, this one is unfortunately the weakest in my eyes.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/review-the-house-that-jack-built-2018/
I’ve only seen two of his previous films; Antichrist and Melancholia, the former being a film that disturbed me so much I haven’t been able to watch it a second time. Its visceral, raw and harrowing portrayal of sex, violence, and self-mutilation is something that is a thoroughly uncomfortable and unpleasant watch. Because of Antichrist, I felt nervous yet strangely excited to see what The House That Jack Built had in store for me. I was surprised, however, to discover that it is arguably his tamest film to date, with a lot of the more graphic content happening off-screen. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t have its disturbing moments, but it was a lot less visceral than I was expecting based on its recent backlash.
The film is split into five chapters labelled ‘The Incidents’ and an epilogue, detailing some of the murders that Jack carried out over a 12-year span. Two of these incidents include child abuse and female mutilation, but is presented in a much more psychologically disturbing way rather than uncomfortable close-ups and drawn out scenes that you watch from behind your hands. The House That Jack Built spends more time tapping into Jack’s own psyche than it does the atrocities he commits, with Matt Dillon really stealing the show as the titular character.
It’s also darkly funny in places, which I certainly wasn’t expecting. Dillon’s portrayal of a psychotic killer with OCD is both terrifying and amusing. He is simultaneously charming and unhinged, which is a difficult thing to pull off. He was by far my favourite thing about the film, reminiscent of so many iconic serial killers that have fascinated the general public. The film relied heavily on Jack’s character and inner thoughts so it was great to see Dillon pull it off so brilliantly.
Much like Von Trier’s previous work, The House That Jack Built features lots of symbolism throughout the narrative. In this case, it focuses heavily on religion, art and family, with Jack being challenged on all of these as he recounts the incidents. The voice challenging him is a mystery to us until the third act, where Bruno Ganz’s character is finally revealed to us. I found this reveal to be a little jarring and strange, but not unexpected from one of his films. For me, the third act is where it started to go downhill and I lost interest, which is a real shame after the strength of the first two. Despite seeing some really great analyses online, it wasn’t enough to change my own views on the way it ended. It just seemed a little too out of place for my liking.
The visual style is interesting and combines live action with animation and still images. This feels very random but in the context of this particular film, it actually works in its favour. Both Dillon and Ganz narrate over the animation and still images, giving us monologues that act as food for thought and raise questions about morality, life, death and so on. It’s an intense film in that regard and one that you have to really concentrate on in order to enjoy properly.
The House That Jack Built is a depressing, harrowing and strange film. Its blend of sadistic violence and humour makes it a truly unique horror film that seems to appeal to a very specific audience. It’s not for the faint of heart, and Jack’s misogynistic killing sprees teamed with his nihilistic outlook on life is bound to be uncomfortable for many to witness. As a case study on a serial killer it’s a fascinating watch, but out of the three films I’ve seen, this one is unfortunately the weakest in my eyes.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/review-the-house-that-jack-built-2018/
Despite running in very different circles in school, Sam Jones and Zoe Miller have more in common than they think: they both want to escape the difficulty that is their home lives. Sam is a quiet loner, content to spend Sundays with her best friend, Will. She loves the stars, but isn't sure she'll ever be able to study them, thanks to her mom, whose life is ruled by obsessive compulsive disorder. Ever since her Dad moved overseas, the burden of caring for her Mom falls squarely on Sam. Meanwhile, at school, Zoe seems carefree and popular. But her charisma hides her secrets: she struggles with the fact that she's adopted. She also has a mom in remission from cancer and a disabled younger brother who is the main focus of her parents. When the girls have a chance meeting at school, they exchange phone numbers, and suddenly find themselves bonding over text messages and a land they've created together: Starworld. Starworld gives Zoe and Sam the escape from reality they both so desperately need. But can it survive all the outside influences and stress each are facing?
"If I have a superpower, it's invisibility. Like the perpetually overcast skies of Portland in winter, I'm part of the background -- a robot with a disappearance drive, the dullness against which everyone else shines."
~Sam
This was an interesting and somewhat different YA novel. I enjoyed the story of two brave girls battling tough circumstances. Boy, poor Zoe and Sam certainly had the weight of the world on their shoulders. I really liked both of our main characters. The book tells the story from each of their perspectives, making it easy to know each girl. I found myself a bit more aligned to Sam--probably because she was queer and shy (like drawn to like, right?). As other reviews have mentioned, some of the book is in texting format, as Sam and Zoe fall into Starworld. Being far removed from teenagehood myself (sigh), I will admit that I did sometimes sort of "fast read" or skim those sections. I appreciated them--because Starworld meant so much to these girls and their friendship--but the text-speak wasn't always the easiest to read and digest.
I had picked this up thinking it was a love story, but it's not a true romance, though there's love in other forms. There's some great representation in this book: a queer character in Sam, plus discussion of adoption, mental illness (OCD and anxiety), disabilities, and more. All were very well treated too, I felt.
The book felt a little slow at times. It felt a little repetitive in its insistence on Zoe feeling different due to being adopted. Still, I was very drawn to Sam and Zoe's story. There was a strength in each of them, and I was intrigued to see what was going to happen. Sam's arc as she struggled with her romantic feelings was especially strong and wonderfully done.
Even though much of the book is serious, it's also very funny at times, with some excellent quotes and zingers. (I really did love Sam and her sense of humor; she was right up my alley.)
"I hate using phones for their original intended purpose. It's like Alexander Graham Bell wondered, Hey, what could maximize the awkwardeness of human-to-human communication? And then answered himself by giving us the ability to speak to one another through stupid disembodied little boxes."
I mean, right? One of the best quotes ever.
So, overall, this book is really a love story of friendship and triumph. It's very easy to root for the characters and get caught up in their lives. I was often just aghast at how much these poor girls had to go through. If you're not necessarily used to text-speak, it may give you a pause, but Starworld is a big part of the book (obviously!) and it's woven well into the story. This was a different and intriguing read, and I'm glad I picked it up. 3.5+ stars (rounded up to 4 here).
"If I have a superpower, it's invisibility. Like the perpetually overcast skies of Portland in winter, I'm part of the background -- a robot with a disappearance drive, the dullness against which everyone else shines."
~Sam
This was an interesting and somewhat different YA novel. I enjoyed the story of two brave girls battling tough circumstances. Boy, poor Zoe and Sam certainly had the weight of the world on their shoulders. I really liked both of our main characters. The book tells the story from each of their perspectives, making it easy to know each girl. I found myself a bit more aligned to Sam--probably because she was queer and shy (like drawn to like, right?). As other reviews have mentioned, some of the book is in texting format, as Sam and Zoe fall into Starworld. Being far removed from teenagehood myself (sigh), I will admit that I did sometimes sort of "fast read" or skim those sections. I appreciated them--because Starworld meant so much to these girls and their friendship--but the text-speak wasn't always the easiest to read and digest.
I had picked this up thinking it was a love story, but it's not a true romance, though there's love in other forms. There's some great representation in this book: a queer character in Sam, plus discussion of adoption, mental illness (OCD and anxiety), disabilities, and more. All were very well treated too, I felt.
The book felt a little slow at times. It felt a little repetitive in its insistence on Zoe feeling different due to being adopted. Still, I was very drawn to Sam and Zoe's story. There was a strength in each of them, and I was intrigued to see what was going to happen. Sam's arc as she struggled with her romantic feelings was especially strong and wonderfully done.
Even though much of the book is serious, it's also very funny at times, with some excellent quotes and zingers. (I really did love Sam and her sense of humor; she was right up my alley.)
"I hate using phones for their original intended purpose. It's like Alexander Graham Bell wondered, Hey, what could maximize the awkwardeness of human-to-human communication? And then answered himself by giving us the ability to speak to one another through stupid disembodied little boxes."
I mean, right? One of the best quotes ever.
So, overall, this book is really a love story of friendship and triumph. It's very easy to root for the characters and get caught up in their lives. I was often just aghast at how much these poor girls had to go through. If you're not necessarily used to text-speak, it may give you a pause, but Starworld is a big part of the book (obviously!) and it's woven well into the story. This was a different and intriguing read, and I'm glad I picked it up. 3.5+ stars (rounded up to 4 here).
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
You’ll never guess who dunnit…
There’s a big problem with Kenneth Branagh’s 2017 filming of the Hercule Poirot-based murder mystery…. and that’s the 1974 Sidney Lumet classic featuring Albert Finney in the starring role. For that film was so memorable – at least, the “who” of the “whodunnit” (no spoilers here) was so memorable – that any remake is likely to be tarnished by that knowledge. If you go into this film blissfully unaware of the plot, you are a lucky man/woman. For this is a classic Agatha Christie yarn.
The irascible, borderline OCD, but undeniably great Belgian detective, Poirot, is dragged around the world by grateful police forces to help solve unsolvable crimes. After solving a case in Jerusalem, Poirot is called back to the UK with his mode of transport being the famous Orient Express. Trapped in the mountains by an avalanche, a murder is committed and with multiple suspects and a plethora of clues it is up to Poirot to solve the case.
Branagh enjoys himself enormously as Poirot, sporting the most distractingly magnificent facial hair since Daniel Day-Lewis in “The Gangs of New York”. The moustache must have had its own trailer and make-up team!
Above all, the film is glorious to look at, featuring a rich and exotic colour palette that is reminiscent of the early colour films of the 40’s. Cinematography was by Haris Zambarloukos (“Mamma Mia” and who also collaborated with Branagh on “Thor) with lots of innovative “ceiling down” shots and artful point-of-view takes that might be annoying to some but which I consider as deserving of Oscar/BAFTA nominations.
The pictures are accompanied by a lush score by Patrick Doyle (who also scored Branagh’s “Thor”). Hats off also to the special effects crew, who made the alpine bridge scenes look decidedly more alpine than where they were actually filmed (on a specially made bridge in the Surrey Hills!).
All these technical elements combine to make the film’s early stages look and feel truly epic.
And the cast… what a cast! Dame Judi Dench (“Victoria and Abdul“); Olivia Coleman (“The Lobster“); Johnny Depp (“Black Mass“); Daisy Ridley (“Star Wars: The Force Awakens“); Penélope Cruz (“Zoolander 2“); Josh Gad (Olaf!); Derek Jacobi (“I, Claudius”); Willem Dafoe (“The Great Wall“) and Michelle Pfeiffer (“mother!“). A real case again of an “oh, it’s you” film again at the cinema – when’s the last time we saw that?
It’s also great to see young Lucy Boynton, so magnificent in last year’s excellent “Sing Street“, getting an A-list role as the twitchy and disturbed countess.
With all these ingredients in the pot, it should be great, right? Unfortunately, in my view, no, not quite. The film’s opening momentum is really not maintained by the screenplay by Michael Green (“Blade Runner 2049“; “Logan“). At heart, it’s a fairly static and “stagey” piece at best, set as it is on the rather claustrophobic train (just three carriages… on the Orient Express… really?). But the tale is made even more static by the train’s derailment in the snow. Branagh and Green try to sex up the action where they can, but there are lengthy passages of fairly repetitive dialogue. One encounter in particular between Branagh and Depp seems to last interminably: you wonder if the problem was that the director wasn’t always looking on to yell “Cut”!
All this leads to the “revelation” of the murderer as being a bit of an anticlimactic “thank heavens for that” rather than the gasping denouement it should have been. (Perhaps this would be different if you didn’t know the twist).
However, these reservations aside, it’s an enjoyable night out at the flicks, although a bit of a disappointment from the level of expectation I had for it. I can’t be too grumpy about it, given it’s a return to good old-fashioned yarn-spinning at the cinema, with great visuals and an epic cast. And that has to be good news.
For sure, Branagh does make for an amusing and engaging Poirot, even if his dialogue did need some ‘tuning in’ to. There was a suggestion at the end of the film that we might be seeing his return in “Death on the Nile” – the most lush and decorous of Peter Ustinov’s outings – which I would certainly welcome. He will have to find another 10 A-list stars though to decorate the boat, which will be a challenge for casting!
The irascible, borderline OCD, but undeniably great Belgian detective, Poirot, is dragged around the world by grateful police forces to help solve unsolvable crimes. After solving a case in Jerusalem, Poirot is called back to the UK with his mode of transport being the famous Orient Express. Trapped in the mountains by an avalanche, a murder is committed and with multiple suspects and a plethora of clues it is up to Poirot to solve the case.
Branagh enjoys himself enormously as Poirot, sporting the most distractingly magnificent facial hair since Daniel Day-Lewis in “The Gangs of New York”. The moustache must have had its own trailer and make-up team!
Above all, the film is glorious to look at, featuring a rich and exotic colour palette that is reminiscent of the early colour films of the 40’s. Cinematography was by Haris Zambarloukos (“Mamma Mia” and who also collaborated with Branagh on “Thor) with lots of innovative “ceiling down” shots and artful point-of-view takes that might be annoying to some but which I consider as deserving of Oscar/BAFTA nominations.
The pictures are accompanied by a lush score by Patrick Doyle (who also scored Branagh’s “Thor”). Hats off also to the special effects crew, who made the alpine bridge scenes look decidedly more alpine than where they were actually filmed (on a specially made bridge in the Surrey Hills!).
All these technical elements combine to make the film’s early stages look and feel truly epic.
And the cast… what a cast! Dame Judi Dench (“Victoria and Abdul“); Olivia Coleman (“The Lobster“); Johnny Depp (“Black Mass“); Daisy Ridley (“Star Wars: The Force Awakens“); Penélope Cruz (“Zoolander 2“); Josh Gad (Olaf!); Derek Jacobi (“I, Claudius”); Willem Dafoe (“The Great Wall“) and Michelle Pfeiffer (“mother!“). A real case again of an “oh, it’s you” film again at the cinema – when’s the last time we saw that?
It’s also great to see young Lucy Boynton, so magnificent in last year’s excellent “Sing Street“, getting an A-list role as the twitchy and disturbed countess.
With all these ingredients in the pot, it should be great, right? Unfortunately, in my view, no, not quite. The film’s opening momentum is really not maintained by the screenplay by Michael Green (“Blade Runner 2049“; “Logan“). At heart, it’s a fairly static and “stagey” piece at best, set as it is on the rather claustrophobic train (just three carriages… on the Orient Express… really?). But the tale is made even more static by the train’s derailment in the snow. Branagh and Green try to sex up the action where they can, but there are lengthy passages of fairly repetitive dialogue. One encounter in particular between Branagh and Depp seems to last interminably: you wonder if the problem was that the director wasn’t always looking on to yell “Cut”!
All this leads to the “revelation” of the murderer as being a bit of an anticlimactic “thank heavens for that” rather than the gasping denouement it should have been. (Perhaps this would be different if you didn’t know the twist).
However, these reservations aside, it’s an enjoyable night out at the flicks, although a bit of a disappointment from the level of expectation I had for it. I can’t be too grumpy about it, given it’s a return to good old-fashioned yarn-spinning at the cinema, with great visuals and an epic cast. And that has to be good news.
For sure, Branagh does make for an amusing and engaging Poirot, even if his dialogue did need some ‘tuning in’ to. There was a suggestion at the end of the film that we might be seeing his return in “Death on the Nile” – the most lush and decorous of Peter Ustinov’s outings – which I would certainly welcome. He will have to find another 10 A-list stars though to decorate the boat, which will be a challenge for casting!
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Death on the Nile (2022) in Movies
Feb 10, 2022
Most of the female cast. (2 more)
Poirot's backstory.
Kenneth Branagh's mustache.
Slow-moving with little payoff. (2 more)
Nothing substantial happens for the first hour.
Not entertaining. Perfect example of first world problems.
A Drowzy Whodunit Loaded with Mediocrity
Death on the Nile is the sequel to 2017’s Murder on the Orient Express with director and lead actor Kenneth Branagh returning. The mystery thriller is based on the 1937 novel of the same name by Agatha Christie. Death on the Nile has been adapted before as a 1978 film and as a 2004 episode of the Poirot television series starring David Suchet.
The 2022 film has been completed since December of 2019. The film was moved around several times due to COVID and was pushed back even further after Armie Hammer’s abuse allegations.
Mostly occurring shortly after the events of Murder on the Orient Express, Death on the Nile offers a bit of a look into the past of Hercule Poirot (Branagh). Taking place on the Yser Bridge in Belgium In 1914, a young Poirot advises his Belgian captain to attack the Germans spontaneously without warning. The attack is a success, but Poirot’s captain triggers an explosive after their victory. The explosion leaves Poirot’s face heavily scarred and offers an explanation as to why he always has a mustache.
Poirot reunites with his friend Bouc (Tom Bateman, who also returns from Murder on the Orient Express) in Egypt. Bouc is traveling with his mother Euphemia (Annette Bening) and their friends as they celebrate the marriage of Linnet Ridgeway (Gal Gadot) and Simon Doyle (Armie Hammer). To make matters more complicated, Simon was originally romantically involved with Jaqueline (Emma Mackey) who was also a former friend of Linnet. She now scornfully follows Simon and Linnet around Egypt.
The party travels on the S. S. Karnak, a steamship, along the river Nile. A murder eventually takes place on the steamship, which ignites a desire within Poirot to discover who the killer is before more suffer the same fate.
CGI and visual effects are used to make Kenneth Branagh look younger in the opening sequence of the film. The issue is he looks almost as bad as Henry Cavill did as Superman during the reshoots for Justice League. Branagh’s upper lip is almost nonexistent during this sequence and his philtrum seems to barely move when he speaks. It’s a visual nightmare and a terrible way to jump start a murder mystery.
Poirot travels to a Jazz nightclub where he’s first introduced to Simon, Jacqueline, and Linnet. Poirot spends much of the film embracing his OCD habits and people watching. This first nightclub sequence is about ten minutes long and you’re basically forced to watch people do nothing but dance for that entire time. Armie Hammer’s overly sexual dancing combined with his heavy breathing and constant sweating with both Gal Gadot and Emma Mackey is nauseating even without taking his sexual allegations into consideration.
Nothing really happens in the film for the first hour. Death on the Nile takes its time getting to the murder as little things begin to disappear (like a tube of paint) and Simon and Linnet are nearly crushed to death by a falling rock as they’re practically mid-coitus while sightseeing some pyramids. Emma Mackey gives a particularly strong performance. She is blinded by one-sided love in the film and her performance is a combination of passion, borderline insanity, and a broken heart.
Annette Bening is so cynical that it’s humorous and Jennifer Saunders adds just enough sarcastic bite to remind us ever so slightly of Absolutely Fabulous. Letitia Wright portrays business manager Rosalie Otterbourne. Her performance is intriguing because she’s always fighting for what she feels like she’s rightfully owed; whether it’s the right amount of money for her services or her happiness away from the limelight.
Like Murder on the Orient Express and other Agatha Christie adaptations, the enticing aspect of Death on the Nile is not only its massive and recognizable cast but also the fact that the story is written in a way that everyone is a suspect. The film’s nonchalant way of meandering towards that first murder is frustrating. A deliberate pace is one thing, but Death on the Nile is boring for the most part. Poirot is asked to take a case involving Jacqueline and the safety of Simon and Linnet, but is then mocked for being heartless and not being able to solve the case sooner. The people on board are likely meant to be scared, but come off as rich people not getting what they want the instant they want it.
Death on the Nile crawls towards a resolution you don’t feel invested in. Poirot’s backstory is interesting and there are some solid performances especially from the female cast, but the film otherwise feels like an unwanted game of Guess Who after you unwillingly chug two bottles of NyQuil and are asked to predict who the killer is after two long hours of tediousness.
The 2022 film has been completed since December of 2019. The film was moved around several times due to COVID and was pushed back even further after Armie Hammer’s abuse allegations.
Mostly occurring shortly after the events of Murder on the Orient Express, Death on the Nile offers a bit of a look into the past of Hercule Poirot (Branagh). Taking place on the Yser Bridge in Belgium In 1914, a young Poirot advises his Belgian captain to attack the Germans spontaneously without warning. The attack is a success, but Poirot’s captain triggers an explosive after their victory. The explosion leaves Poirot’s face heavily scarred and offers an explanation as to why he always has a mustache.
Poirot reunites with his friend Bouc (Tom Bateman, who also returns from Murder on the Orient Express) in Egypt. Bouc is traveling with his mother Euphemia (Annette Bening) and their friends as they celebrate the marriage of Linnet Ridgeway (Gal Gadot) and Simon Doyle (Armie Hammer). To make matters more complicated, Simon was originally romantically involved with Jaqueline (Emma Mackey) who was also a former friend of Linnet. She now scornfully follows Simon and Linnet around Egypt.
The party travels on the S. S. Karnak, a steamship, along the river Nile. A murder eventually takes place on the steamship, which ignites a desire within Poirot to discover who the killer is before more suffer the same fate.
CGI and visual effects are used to make Kenneth Branagh look younger in the opening sequence of the film. The issue is he looks almost as bad as Henry Cavill did as Superman during the reshoots for Justice League. Branagh’s upper lip is almost nonexistent during this sequence and his philtrum seems to barely move when he speaks. It’s a visual nightmare and a terrible way to jump start a murder mystery.
Poirot travels to a Jazz nightclub where he’s first introduced to Simon, Jacqueline, and Linnet. Poirot spends much of the film embracing his OCD habits and people watching. This first nightclub sequence is about ten minutes long and you’re basically forced to watch people do nothing but dance for that entire time. Armie Hammer’s overly sexual dancing combined with his heavy breathing and constant sweating with both Gal Gadot and Emma Mackey is nauseating even without taking his sexual allegations into consideration.
Nothing really happens in the film for the first hour. Death on the Nile takes its time getting to the murder as little things begin to disappear (like a tube of paint) and Simon and Linnet are nearly crushed to death by a falling rock as they’re practically mid-coitus while sightseeing some pyramids. Emma Mackey gives a particularly strong performance. She is blinded by one-sided love in the film and her performance is a combination of passion, borderline insanity, and a broken heart.
Annette Bening is so cynical that it’s humorous and Jennifer Saunders adds just enough sarcastic bite to remind us ever so slightly of Absolutely Fabulous. Letitia Wright portrays business manager Rosalie Otterbourne. Her performance is intriguing because she’s always fighting for what she feels like she’s rightfully owed; whether it’s the right amount of money for her services or her happiness away from the limelight.
Like Murder on the Orient Express and other Agatha Christie adaptations, the enticing aspect of Death on the Nile is not only its massive and recognizable cast but also the fact that the story is written in a way that everyone is a suspect. The film’s nonchalant way of meandering towards that first murder is frustrating. A deliberate pace is one thing, but Death on the Nile is boring for the most part. Poirot is asked to take a case involving Jacqueline and the safety of Simon and Linnet, but is then mocked for being heartless and not being able to solve the case sooner. The people on board are likely meant to be scared, but come off as rich people not getting what they want the instant they want it.
Death on the Nile crawls towards a resolution you don’t feel invested in. Poirot’s backstory is interesting and there are some solid performances especially from the female cast, but the film otherwise feels like an unwanted game of Guess Who after you unwillingly chug two bottles of NyQuil and are asked to predict who the killer is after two long hours of tediousness.
HerCrazyReviews (247 KP) rated Turtles All The Way Down in Books
Aug 24, 2019
Marketed As A Mystery But It Isn't (2 more)
Unhealthy Friendships
Unsatisfactory Ending
Mental Illness Representation But No Mystery
Contains spoilers, click to show
As a casual fan who has watched a few of John Green’s YouTube videos and read a few books of his, I can honestly say he seems like such a genuinely honest and funny person. Plus, I have read a book or two of his in the past (Example: Paper Towns) and while I did enjoy this book there were quite a few things that made me stray away from a five or even four-star review.
The first thing that I felt was a let down in this novel was the fact that the book was actually not a mystery novel but instead dealt with more of Aza’s own anxiety. While I do love the fact that the book dealt with the topic of anxiety and mental illness in what I felt like was a realistic way I am disappointed that there was not as much mystery. To me, it seemed like the book was marketed around the fact that Aza was trying to solve the mystery of Russell Pickett and where he went. I incorrectly assumed that this novel would be some kind of Scooby-Doo mystery. We did see the characters wonder about Mr. Pickett’s “magical” escape and we did get an ending where everything was wrapped up and solved but it didn’t seem like the characters worked that hard towards it and the book was more about Aza’s own self-realization.
Speaking (or technically typing) about Aza’s struggle with anxiety and mental health I felt like the book did a good job of realistically representing the struggles and many difficulties people experience. I will say that I have personally never had a problem with mental illness and while I do have people I love and care for go through it my experiences are mainly from trying to help them. Therefore, I am not necessarily an accurate source when it comes to the reality of mental illness. I am able to see what my loved ones experience but those are on two different scales.
The simple fact is there is nothing pretty about struggling with mental illness. No matter how hard people try no one is able to always able to stay above the rainbow. Everyone has their bad days and Aza’s experiences, while cringe-worthy in some cases (Ex: digging into her fingernail and swallowing hand sanitizer) is the reality for many people.
While I am pleased by the fact that this book dealt with mental illness and the struggles that come along with it there are a few things that I am disappointed by besides the let down on the mystery front. Overall, the ending was not satisfying. While yes, we were able to see Aza grow and confront the fact that she will always have bad days and good days I felt like certain endings or wrap-ups were not satisfactory. One huge thing I felt strongly about was Aza’s relationships. With Daisy, her best friend, we eventually find out she has been writing about Aza in her fanfiction. But that isn’t the issue. The issue is that Daisy finally exposes her true feelings about her best friend. Turns out Daisy more or less has a lot of bottled up issues resolving Aza and reading Aza’s reaction to this is simply heartbreaking. I also felt that the ending where they simply go back to being friends was not good enough for me. If I found out one of my best friends had been writing hurtful things about me behind my back I would, of course, do what Aza did and confront them but I also do not think I could go back to being friends. Friendships are based on trust and respect for one another and Daisy was not being a true friend.
Now that I have gotten through my thoughts and let downs of the novel there were redeeming qualities. As mentioned above I am a huge fan of representation from several different areas such as mental health as is represented in this novel. This book gave representation to people who on a regular basis may not receive the care they are entitled to or feel like they are alone in the world. This book gives these people ownage and that is a truly beautiful thing. John Green, I believe, wrote this based on his own experiences with anxiety (though obviously, it is not his exact account) and I, therefore, feel like this is a fairly accurate source to read when wondering about the realities of anxiety. Now, I know this book is fiction but I personally feel like it did a great job on that front, which is what I believe John Green was aiming for.
Would I Recommend It?: Maybe. I do enjoy certain aspects of this book such as the amazing representation of mental illness such as OCD (Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder) and anxiety. Not to mention I truly loved the mentions of fanfiction. However, there were a few bits here and there that made my rating decrease down to three-stars. One of the main things was the fact that the book, from my point of view, appeared to be marketed with the mystery factor and while it was solved the solution was a letdown and the book wasn’t truly focused on the mystery. Plus, Aza’s relationships with her friends seemed to be unhealthy and the last chapter or two of the book did not hold a satisfactory ending for me.
The first thing that I felt was a let down in this novel was the fact that the book was actually not a mystery novel but instead dealt with more of Aza’s own anxiety. While I do love the fact that the book dealt with the topic of anxiety and mental illness in what I felt like was a realistic way I am disappointed that there was not as much mystery. To me, it seemed like the book was marketed around the fact that Aza was trying to solve the mystery of Russell Pickett and where he went. I incorrectly assumed that this novel would be some kind of Scooby-Doo mystery. We did see the characters wonder about Mr. Pickett’s “magical” escape and we did get an ending where everything was wrapped up and solved but it didn’t seem like the characters worked that hard towards it and the book was more about Aza’s own self-realization.
Speaking (or technically typing) about Aza’s struggle with anxiety and mental health I felt like the book did a good job of realistically representing the struggles and many difficulties people experience. I will say that I have personally never had a problem with mental illness and while I do have people I love and care for go through it my experiences are mainly from trying to help them. Therefore, I am not necessarily an accurate source when it comes to the reality of mental illness. I am able to see what my loved ones experience but those are on two different scales.
The simple fact is there is nothing pretty about struggling with mental illness. No matter how hard people try no one is able to always able to stay above the rainbow. Everyone has their bad days and Aza’s experiences, while cringe-worthy in some cases (Ex: digging into her fingernail and swallowing hand sanitizer) is the reality for many people.
While I am pleased by the fact that this book dealt with mental illness and the struggles that come along with it there are a few things that I am disappointed by besides the let down on the mystery front. Overall, the ending was not satisfying. While yes, we were able to see Aza grow and confront the fact that she will always have bad days and good days I felt like certain endings or wrap-ups were not satisfactory. One huge thing I felt strongly about was Aza’s relationships. With Daisy, her best friend, we eventually find out she has been writing about Aza in her fanfiction. But that isn’t the issue. The issue is that Daisy finally exposes her true feelings about her best friend. Turns out Daisy more or less has a lot of bottled up issues resolving Aza and reading Aza’s reaction to this is simply heartbreaking. I also felt that the ending where they simply go back to being friends was not good enough for me. If I found out one of my best friends had been writing hurtful things about me behind my back I would, of course, do what Aza did and confront them but I also do not think I could go back to being friends. Friendships are based on trust and respect for one another and Daisy was not being a true friend.
Now that I have gotten through my thoughts and let downs of the novel there were redeeming qualities. As mentioned above I am a huge fan of representation from several different areas such as mental health as is represented in this novel. This book gave representation to people who on a regular basis may not receive the care they are entitled to or feel like they are alone in the world. This book gives these people ownage and that is a truly beautiful thing. John Green, I believe, wrote this based on his own experiences with anxiety (though obviously, it is not his exact account) and I, therefore, feel like this is a fairly accurate source to read when wondering about the realities of anxiety. Now, I know this book is fiction but I personally feel like it did a great job on that front, which is what I believe John Green was aiming for.
Would I Recommend It?: Maybe. I do enjoy certain aspects of this book such as the amazing representation of mental illness such as OCD (Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder) and anxiety. Not to mention I truly loved the mentions of fanfiction. However, there were a few bits here and there that made my rating decrease down to three-stars. One of the main things was the fact that the book, from my point of view, appeared to be marketed with the mystery factor and while it was solved the solution was a letdown and the book wasn’t truly focused on the mystery. Plus, Aza’s relationships with her friends seemed to be unhealthy and the last chapter or two of the book did not hold a satisfactory ending for me.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Pirate's Mark in Tabletop Games
Mar 29, 2021
I simply cannot get enough of pirate games! I know some gamers are tired of pirates and zombies and Mediterranean trading, and I most certainly understand that. However, I’m just a sucker for some themes, and pirates are one. I am also growing to love press-your-luck style games for that giant helping of luck. I mean, how different is it from rolling a die and basing turns on those results? In this case it is flipping over cards instead of flipping the number of cards rolled. Similar, but different. In any case, today I take a look at Pirate’s Mark from first-time designers, artist, and publisher. Let’s see if I have found a treasure or contracted scurvy from the ordeal.
Pirate’s Mark is a bluffing, bidding, press-your-luck card game about finding treasure in the sea and avoiding contracting the Pirate’s Mark: the mark of death. In it players are pirates searching the seas by boasting about how many treasures they expect they will find, flipping over cards, and dealing with any consequences of their pulls. The last pirate to remain unmarked at the end of the game will be the winner and richest of all pirates on the vast seas.
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, include the correct number of cards as described in the rulebook for the number of players. Once the cards are shuffled they will be laid out in a 10 x 15 grid on the table, face-down. The Compass Rose card and die are placed near the card grid and the game is ready to begin!
On a turn a short bidding round commences with players announcing how many cards they believe they can pull from the grid without uncovering a Pirate’s Mark card. This bidding goes around the table with bids increasing with each player until one player calls the bluff and forces the last player to bid to take their turn. That player then pulls a number of cards face-up from the sea and resolves any cards that are immediate, stashes cards that are treasures, and holds cards that contain the phrase, “Play this card,” to be used at a later time.
If the turn is uneventful, by not revealing any Pirate’s Mark cards, then the game continues with bidding and pulling. However, once a pirate reveals a Pirate’s Mark card, they are marked and cannot participate in the bidding any longer (unless they find a way to unmark themselves, which IS possible). Marked players can get back in the game by calling another player’s bluff correctly. There is indeed risk here as a marked player that incorrectly calls a bluff is permanently dead and out of the game.
There are some more rules for the end of the game phase called, “Duel Mode,” but I will let you discover those on your own. Play continues in this fashion until one player is standing and unmarked. This player wins the game and the others need to pack up the 130 cards that were setup. Okay, I added that last part.
Components. This game is a ton of square cards and a fantastic d12 that is only used for the two-player variant. The cards are all glossy, but good quality, and feature photos (akin to screencaps from movies) instead of illustrations. I find the theme to be very present in not only the press-your-luck and bidding/bluffing mechanics, but also in the design of the cards and the photos used. It feels like a piratey game and plays like a piratey game. Like I said, the d12 is fabulous, and I actually happen to own a set of dice that I use for my RPG campaigns… sometimes. All in all the game has some good components and looks great on the table.
So I have some good AND bad news to deliver. First the bad. Some cards that are pulled are way too overpowered. One is called “Blackbeard’s Sword.” It allows the player to “peek under the number of cards left in your bid.” I used this card on a bid of 22 cards and was able to pull all safe cards because this allowed me to see 22 cards and avoid any Pirate’s Marks. Super OP if you ask me. The only other bad I have here is setup. There are 130 cards to be sorted, shuffled, and laid out in a nice-looking grid before the game can be played. For those of us with slight or full-blown OCD that is a nightmare. Luckily, I only stress if the cards are way out of whack instead of just slightly askew.
Now for all the good. I like this game quite a bit. To offset some of the OP of the aforementioned card, the game comes with some pretty great Lucky and Curse cards to be pulled. A couple Lucky cards are, “Drop Anchor,” which ends the player’s turn when revealed, thus negating any Mark pulls, and “Flying Dutchman,” which can be played on a marked player to instantly kill them. Now, I do not condone murder normally, but when playing a pirate game, it is to be expected. The Curses pulled are equally unlucky. “Winds of Fate” allows the person who called the bluff to choose the rest of the cards to be pulled for your turn. OUCH! Especially if they had used “Blackbeard’s Sword” and know where one or more Pirate’s Marks are hidden. Similarly unlucky is “Isla Muerta” which penalizes the player if they have 10 or more treasure cards and pull a Pirate’s Mark – they die instantly from the curse! These are just a few examples of some cards that can be encountered during play, and there are a whole lot more of them included.
I do so enjoy bluffing and luck-based games more and more, and Pirate’s Mark certainly gives it to me on those fronts. Being able to just whisk away 20 or more cards because you happen to have that coveted card you used is devilishly fun. Watching the other players seethe with envy as you pull treasure after treasure and avoid Marks is like winning $20 on a scratch-off. It won’t change your life, but it will give a shot of adrenaline and euphoria for a few minutes. I think Pirate’s Mark fills a void of straight bidding, bluffing, and luck that certainly matches the theme perfectly, and remains a good game as well.
Also, if you happen across one of the expansions, “Parrghty Mode,” it adds another five players to the game and bumps up the count of cards in play from 130 to a whopping 168! This is not for the small of table. I wish there was room inside the base game’s box to fit these extra cards, but alas, there is not.
So if you are like me and enjoy games on the lighter side that perfectly match game to theme, then you have to check out Pirate’s Mark. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a haunting 8 / 12. I certainly recommend it and will now be finding a place in my main shelf unit for it. Hmm, which game do I make walk the plank…?
Pirate’s Mark is a bluffing, bidding, press-your-luck card game about finding treasure in the sea and avoiding contracting the Pirate’s Mark: the mark of death. In it players are pirates searching the seas by boasting about how many treasures they expect they will find, flipping over cards, and dealing with any consequences of their pulls. The last pirate to remain unmarked at the end of the game will be the winner and richest of all pirates on the vast seas.
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, include the correct number of cards as described in the rulebook for the number of players. Once the cards are shuffled they will be laid out in a 10 x 15 grid on the table, face-down. The Compass Rose card and die are placed near the card grid and the game is ready to begin!
On a turn a short bidding round commences with players announcing how many cards they believe they can pull from the grid without uncovering a Pirate’s Mark card. This bidding goes around the table with bids increasing with each player until one player calls the bluff and forces the last player to bid to take their turn. That player then pulls a number of cards face-up from the sea and resolves any cards that are immediate, stashes cards that are treasures, and holds cards that contain the phrase, “Play this card,” to be used at a later time.
If the turn is uneventful, by not revealing any Pirate’s Mark cards, then the game continues with bidding and pulling. However, once a pirate reveals a Pirate’s Mark card, they are marked and cannot participate in the bidding any longer (unless they find a way to unmark themselves, which IS possible). Marked players can get back in the game by calling another player’s bluff correctly. There is indeed risk here as a marked player that incorrectly calls a bluff is permanently dead and out of the game.
There are some more rules for the end of the game phase called, “Duel Mode,” but I will let you discover those on your own. Play continues in this fashion until one player is standing and unmarked. This player wins the game and the others need to pack up the 130 cards that were setup. Okay, I added that last part.
Components. This game is a ton of square cards and a fantastic d12 that is only used for the two-player variant. The cards are all glossy, but good quality, and feature photos (akin to screencaps from movies) instead of illustrations. I find the theme to be very present in not only the press-your-luck and bidding/bluffing mechanics, but also in the design of the cards and the photos used. It feels like a piratey game and plays like a piratey game. Like I said, the d12 is fabulous, and I actually happen to own a set of dice that I use for my RPG campaigns… sometimes. All in all the game has some good components and looks great on the table.
So I have some good AND bad news to deliver. First the bad. Some cards that are pulled are way too overpowered. One is called “Blackbeard’s Sword.” It allows the player to “peek under the number of cards left in your bid.” I used this card on a bid of 22 cards and was able to pull all safe cards because this allowed me to see 22 cards and avoid any Pirate’s Marks. Super OP if you ask me. The only other bad I have here is setup. There are 130 cards to be sorted, shuffled, and laid out in a nice-looking grid before the game can be played. For those of us with slight or full-blown OCD that is a nightmare. Luckily, I only stress if the cards are way out of whack instead of just slightly askew.
Now for all the good. I like this game quite a bit. To offset some of the OP of the aforementioned card, the game comes with some pretty great Lucky and Curse cards to be pulled. A couple Lucky cards are, “Drop Anchor,” which ends the player’s turn when revealed, thus negating any Mark pulls, and “Flying Dutchman,” which can be played on a marked player to instantly kill them. Now, I do not condone murder normally, but when playing a pirate game, it is to be expected. The Curses pulled are equally unlucky. “Winds of Fate” allows the person who called the bluff to choose the rest of the cards to be pulled for your turn. OUCH! Especially if they had used “Blackbeard’s Sword” and know where one or more Pirate’s Marks are hidden. Similarly unlucky is “Isla Muerta” which penalizes the player if they have 10 or more treasure cards and pull a Pirate’s Mark – they die instantly from the curse! These are just a few examples of some cards that can be encountered during play, and there are a whole lot more of them included.
I do so enjoy bluffing and luck-based games more and more, and Pirate’s Mark certainly gives it to me on those fronts. Being able to just whisk away 20 or more cards because you happen to have that coveted card you used is devilishly fun. Watching the other players seethe with envy as you pull treasure after treasure and avoid Marks is like winning $20 on a scratch-off. It won’t change your life, but it will give a shot of adrenaline and euphoria for a few minutes. I think Pirate’s Mark fills a void of straight bidding, bluffing, and luck that certainly matches the theme perfectly, and remains a good game as well.
Also, if you happen across one of the expansions, “Parrghty Mode,” it adds another five players to the game and bumps up the count of cards in play from 130 to a whopping 168! This is not for the small of table. I wish there was room inside the base game’s box to fit these extra cards, but alas, there is not.
So if you are like me and enjoy games on the lighter side that perfectly match game to theme, then you have to check out Pirate’s Mark. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a haunting 8 / 12. I certainly recommend it and will now be finding a place in my main shelf unit for it. Hmm, which game do I make walk the plank…?
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain in Video Games
Nov 2, 2017 (Updated Nov 2, 2017)
Gameplay (1 more)
Graphics
Characters (1 more)
Twist ending
A Review By A Disappointed Long Time Fan
Before this game was released, I was certain that it was going to be my Game Of The Year for 2015, and in a lot of ways it is a worthy contender. As an open world stealth game, it is groundbreaking. The gameplay is some of the best I’ve ever seen, the controls feel tight, the underlying systems and features, (such as reflex mode and the buddy system,) are solid and the AI is responsive and fair. This is KojiPro’s first attempt at an open world game, and as far as first attempts go, this is ‘pretty good.’ The world is breathtaking as well, the graphics that the Fox engine can produce are stunning in every way, the world feels alive, with both enemies and wildlife, the textures, the particle systems, the gun models, every visual in this game has been created with an insane amount of attention to detail and all of it really pays off. I experienced little to no glitches while making my way through the single player campaign and the presentation overall is great. Motherbase is also awesome, you genuinely feel as if you are assembling an army and even though the Fulton is daft, it is a nice touch. And the amount of variety this game provides is vast, you can take 4 different buddies with you, each with unique skills, you can infiltrate in the morning or at night, you can choose your guns and customise them to suit, you can also customise your buddy’s gear, your helicopter and to a small extent Motherbase too, although that could have went deeper. Now, if that is all that you are looking for, then seriously, stop reading this review right now and go buy the game, you will love it and there is so much to do, I sank a good 75+ hours into this game and my overall completion rate is still only at 75%. If however, like me, you are looking for something more than just great gameplay, you will be left feeling as empty as I do. Like I keep reiterating, the gameplay is phenomenal, but that’s the problem, I have never played MGS for the gameplay. It wasn’t the gameplay that made me fall in love with the series growing up and if anything you would always suffer through the stiff gameplay in order to experience the deep and complex story and that was okay, because it would always be so worth it. This game throws all of that out of the window.
The way that this game is structured is awful. You play a few main missions in a row, the story is beginning to hook you, but then OCD kicks in and you realise that you have 4 or 5 side missions building up to be completed, so you go and do them, but then you come back to the main story and forget what was going on in the last mission, but who cares when you can Fulton a goat, right?
The writing in this game is possibly the laziest it’s ever been, one example of this is the ‘controversial’ character known as Quiet. This character has been masterly debated over a lot (see what I did there?) and thrown more gasoline on the fire that is the over-sexualisation of women in video games. My stance on it is somewhere in between, the reason for her lack of clothes and speech is silly, however she is running around Afghanistan and Africa, which are very hot countries, so really they could have put her in a bikini top and a pair of cargo pants and I doubt anyone would have batted an eyelid. Now, the Metal Gear series has always been known for its odd Japanese perviness, but when it is a main character that has been sexualised, it’s always been for a justified narrative reason, such as EVA in MGS3 walking about with the front of her jacket unzipped showing off her bikini clad chest, but the whole point of her mission in that game, was to seduce Snake, so it made sense within the context of the story, in this game the reason for Quiet’s over exposure is much lazier and feels tacked on as a cheap excuse.
The worst part about all of this is the fact that, this is it, Kojima’s definite last Metal Gear game, there is no going back to redeem anything, like in MGS2 when everyone hated it, but because 4 solved some of the problems that were created in 2 people are now okay with 2, that can’t happen with this game because Kojima and Konami are no more. Now I could write a whole other paper on Konami vs Kojima and my stance on it but this is the jist, Kojima was spending too much money and taking too much time with this game, Konami demanded he finish it so they can make their money and add their microtransaction’s etc Kojima told them where they can stick it and the partnership was dead. This has had an effect on the game, there is clearly content missing, Konami has confirmed that at least one mission was cut, where Snake would have went to Africa to have another battle with Eli and Sahalanthropus, which is the Metal Gear in this game, which is unacceptable really. Also, I assume there was a lot of other content that was cut that we weren’t told about. Sahalanthropus is another problem I have, how is it that this Metal Gear created in the 80’s is more advanced than REX, which was created in the early 2000’s. Also, when you fight Sahalanthropus, there is no one in the thing, it is an empty robot being controlled by Mantis, who floats beside the giant mech. That is actually a decent metaphor for the lack of villains in this game. Skull Face is hardly in the game and his eventual death, like every other significant event in this game, just kind of happens with no build up and packing little punch. The team of bosses in the original Metal Gear, headed up by Liquid and Ocelot, were probably the best team of villains in any game ever, since then the bosses have gone slowly downhill. The Sons of Big Boss were great, Dead Cell were pretty cool, The Cobras were okay, The Beauty & The Beast Corps were pretty lame and The Skulls in this game are emotionless zombies who don’t even have individual names and Skull Face is such a disappointing antagonist, he is hardly in the main game and then he shows up at the end, gives some silly speech that we have heard before in the trailers and then just dies, no boss fight or anything. Also, no customisable Metal Gear, which I feel like is a huge missed opportunity and no Sims like Motherbase customisation, interior or exterior.
David Hayter was missed in this game, Keifer was fine on the rare occasion he did speak, but the phantom Snake twist was the perfect opportunity to reintroduce Hayter’s voice and they didn’t take it. Also no Campbell or EVA, not even a reference. And it is never explained why the last time we see the real Big Boss, he is rescuing a child and a young girl and the next time we see him he has become modern day Hitler. Ultimately, this game just makes me sad, it is hard not to focus on the fallout from the Konima debacle, P.T/Silent Hills is no more, that promisingly terrifying demo we were teased with will amount to nothing and this game is all we will ever get again in terms of the Metal Gear saga. This is the end of an era, and it’s an end that doesn’t sit perfectly with me.
The way that this game is structured is awful. You play a few main missions in a row, the story is beginning to hook you, but then OCD kicks in and you realise that you have 4 or 5 side missions building up to be completed, so you go and do them, but then you come back to the main story and forget what was going on in the last mission, but who cares when you can Fulton a goat, right?
The writing in this game is possibly the laziest it’s ever been, one example of this is the ‘controversial’ character known as Quiet. This character has been masterly debated over a lot (see what I did there?) and thrown more gasoline on the fire that is the over-sexualisation of women in video games. My stance on it is somewhere in between, the reason for her lack of clothes and speech is silly, however she is running around Afghanistan and Africa, which are very hot countries, so really they could have put her in a bikini top and a pair of cargo pants and I doubt anyone would have batted an eyelid. Now, the Metal Gear series has always been known for its odd Japanese perviness, but when it is a main character that has been sexualised, it’s always been for a justified narrative reason, such as EVA in MGS3 walking about with the front of her jacket unzipped showing off her bikini clad chest, but the whole point of her mission in that game, was to seduce Snake, so it made sense within the context of the story, in this game the reason for Quiet’s over exposure is much lazier and feels tacked on as a cheap excuse.
The worst part about all of this is the fact that, this is it, Kojima’s definite last Metal Gear game, there is no going back to redeem anything, like in MGS2 when everyone hated it, but because 4 solved some of the problems that were created in 2 people are now okay with 2, that can’t happen with this game because Kojima and Konami are no more. Now I could write a whole other paper on Konami vs Kojima and my stance on it but this is the jist, Kojima was spending too much money and taking too much time with this game, Konami demanded he finish it so they can make their money and add their microtransaction’s etc Kojima told them where they can stick it and the partnership was dead. This has had an effect on the game, there is clearly content missing, Konami has confirmed that at least one mission was cut, where Snake would have went to Africa to have another battle with Eli and Sahalanthropus, which is the Metal Gear in this game, which is unacceptable really. Also, I assume there was a lot of other content that was cut that we weren’t told about. Sahalanthropus is another problem I have, how is it that this Metal Gear created in the 80’s is more advanced than REX, which was created in the early 2000’s. Also, when you fight Sahalanthropus, there is no one in the thing, it is an empty robot being controlled by Mantis, who floats beside the giant mech. That is actually a decent metaphor for the lack of villains in this game. Skull Face is hardly in the game and his eventual death, like every other significant event in this game, just kind of happens with no build up and packing little punch. The team of bosses in the original Metal Gear, headed up by Liquid and Ocelot, were probably the best team of villains in any game ever, since then the bosses have gone slowly downhill. The Sons of Big Boss were great, Dead Cell were pretty cool, The Cobras were okay, The Beauty & The Beast Corps were pretty lame and The Skulls in this game are emotionless zombies who don’t even have individual names and Skull Face is such a disappointing antagonist, he is hardly in the main game and then he shows up at the end, gives some silly speech that we have heard before in the trailers and then just dies, no boss fight or anything. Also, no customisable Metal Gear, which I feel like is a huge missed opportunity and no Sims like Motherbase customisation, interior or exterior.
David Hayter was missed in this game, Keifer was fine on the rare occasion he did speak, but the phantom Snake twist was the perfect opportunity to reintroduce Hayter’s voice and they didn’t take it. Also no Campbell or EVA, not even a reference. And it is never explained why the last time we see the real Big Boss, he is rescuing a child and a young girl and the next time we see him he has become modern day Hitler. Ultimately, this game just makes me sad, it is hard not to focus on the fallout from the Konima debacle, P.T/Silent Hills is no more, that promisingly terrifying demo we were teased with will amount to nothing and this game is all we will ever get again in terms of the Metal Gear saga. This is the end of an era, and it’s an end that doesn’t sit perfectly with me.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) in Movies
Jul 24, 2017
Batfleck (1 more)
It's every comic fan's childhood dream
Sloppy editing (2 more)
Bad performances
Poor script
A Whole Mess Of Awesome
Contains spoilers, click to show
Okay, if you are reading this I assume you have at least read a few other reviews of the movie, as it is all that anyone is talking about online at the minute, so what is left to say I hear you ask? Well first off I’ll give you some context, for the last three years I have been reading and collecting comics to an obsessive level and it is due to this movie. I have always been a superhero fan (especially Batman,) and I had read some comics in the past, but when this movie was announced at San Diego Comic-Con in 2013, (3 years ago!!) I was so hyped and I decided that I had to read the comic that this film was taking inspiration from. So I went to my local A1 Comics and bought The Dark Knight Returns, which underwhelmed me but that’s another story. Since then I have become a huge comic book fan and that is thanks to this movie. Seriously what was not to like here, it would have been so difficult to get this wrong, it’s Batman fighting Superman, how amazing is it that this actually happened? And yet they still managed to fuck it up…
Do you read? You will. And then realise how superior the comic that this is based on is to the actual movie itself, (and I’m not even a massive fan of the comic.)
I saw 10 Cloverfield Lane last week and while that movie wasn’t perfect, what made that a great movie is exactly what makes BvS a subpar movie. 10CL had a small team of people working on a restrictive budget, so every aspect of the movie was scrutinised and perfected to make up the end product and that attention to detail really paid off. BvS had a huge budget and a massive team of people working on it and I think that is what gives the movie it’s unfocused and sloppy feel. The script is a mess, there are clearly scenes cut, the editing is jarring, not all of the performances were up to scratch and while the imagery and visuals are incredible, the best way to describe this movie is all style and no substance. I like Zack Snyder, I love his Watchmen movie, I like 300 and I enjoyed Man of Steel, but I can’t help but feel that this is his fault. His decision to make years of comic book stories into one two and a half hour movie honestly baffles me. The events of this movie should have taken place over at least three movies, which I will discuss more in the spoiler section of this review, so stick around for that if you have seen the movie already. This movie really is all over the place and the pace and tone are random at best and if you have seen the trailers then you have essentially seen the movie. Let’s talk about the best part of the movie, which is quite easily Ben Affleck’s Batman and Jeremy Irons’ Alfred. Seeing the two characters and their chemistry are worth the ticket price of the film alone. This is probably the most faithful to the source material Batman that we have had on the big screen to date, except for one pretty major change. Batman in DoJ is pretty much Punisher in a cowl. During the Batmobile chase (which was really fucking awesome by the way,) he questionably kills some goons. I mean, some of them could have survived like, if they had Wolverine’s healing powers I guess? But then there is that badass warehouse scene that we see in the trailers and during that he near enough shoots some guys himself. If you can get over this and see this as an alternate version of Batman you should be able to appreciate Affleck’s performance though, which by the way is amazing, he knocks it out of the park. I would have liked some kind of reference to it, even a scene where he discusses breaking his code with Alfred, just a few lines would have made me get on board with this version of the character a lot quicker. Critics have been calling Henry Cavil’s Superman performance wooden, but I think that is too harsh, he is perfectly serviceable but he isn’t going to be praised for his memorable performance either. Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman is badass, my only complaint is that she isn’t in the movie enough as Wonder Woman. Jesse Eisenberg is the stand out worst performance in the movie. It isn’t necessarily a bad performance, it just does not fit that character at all. He was truly miscast here, if they had cast him as Riddler in the Batman solo movie and he put in this performance I would be praising him like mad. Lex Luthor shouldn’t be crazy on a surface level, he should be a respectable businessman and an intellectual force to be reckoned with and he will go out of his way to ensure that this is what everyone sees him as, it is only ever the people closest to him that that he allows to see him crack. He certainly shouldn’t be making strange noises and gestures like someone with OCD or a mental issue. Also Doomsday is silly and is just shoehorned in at the end for the sake of giving the trinity and enemy to battle against.
Do you pee? You will. After sitting though near three hours of this garbage.
So to give my overall opinion before I get into spoilers, I will say that I enjoyed this movie better than Man of Steel, but only slightly and I dislike it for a lot of the same reasons. Just like Man of Steel there are parts of this movie that I adored and parts that I hated. Mixed emotions is an understatement. In my mind any movie above a 7 is a great movie and unfortunately I can’t call this a great movie. I fully believe that everyone should see this movie and form their own opinion, especially since reactions have been so mixed, but I felt that it simply didn’t live up to the hype that it set for itself and I feel like Zack Snyder may be doing more harm than good setting up the DCU. 6.5/10.
Do you see? You will. Or at least you better have seen it by now because I am about to spoil the shit out of the whole movie.
Like I said earlier, the events of the movie really should have been split across several movies and explored more rather than rushed through at a breakneck speed. We should have had a whole movie on Batman V Superman, the conflict ideals between them and the discussion of whether or not this world needs a Superman. Then we should have had a movie just based on the dawn of the justice league, with Batman and Superman eventually understanding each other and becoming friends and with way more scenes with Wonder Woman and a proper introduction to the other characters rather than the literal plot device USB stick we got in BvS. Then we should have had a few Justice League movies and once Superman was an established character within the universe, they should have killed him off then and did the Death and Return of Superman story, not in this one where Batman and Wonder Woman hardly know him and the public still don’t know whether he is good or bad. Also if Batman kills now, what reason is there for the Joker to still be alive? The whole point of their relationship is that Batman won’t kill Joker because of his code and Joker won’t kill Batman because he loves fighting him, but if Batman has no code and he has been Batman for years then he really should have killed Joker a long time ago. I did enjoy Batfleck and I am very much looking forward to his solo Batman movie, but BvS is rushed and sloppy. So I’ve said my piece, now let the fanboy hate commence.
Do you read? You will. And then realise how superior the comic that this is based on is to the actual movie itself, (and I’m not even a massive fan of the comic.)
I saw 10 Cloverfield Lane last week and while that movie wasn’t perfect, what made that a great movie is exactly what makes BvS a subpar movie. 10CL had a small team of people working on a restrictive budget, so every aspect of the movie was scrutinised and perfected to make up the end product and that attention to detail really paid off. BvS had a huge budget and a massive team of people working on it and I think that is what gives the movie it’s unfocused and sloppy feel. The script is a mess, there are clearly scenes cut, the editing is jarring, not all of the performances were up to scratch and while the imagery and visuals are incredible, the best way to describe this movie is all style and no substance. I like Zack Snyder, I love his Watchmen movie, I like 300 and I enjoyed Man of Steel, but I can’t help but feel that this is his fault. His decision to make years of comic book stories into one two and a half hour movie honestly baffles me. The events of this movie should have taken place over at least three movies, which I will discuss more in the spoiler section of this review, so stick around for that if you have seen the movie already. This movie really is all over the place and the pace and tone are random at best and if you have seen the trailers then you have essentially seen the movie. Let’s talk about the best part of the movie, which is quite easily Ben Affleck’s Batman and Jeremy Irons’ Alfred. Seeing the two characters and their chemistry are worth the ticket price of the film alone. This is probably the most faithful to the source material Batman that we have had on the big screen to date, except for one pretty major change. Batman in DoJ is pretty much Punisher in a cowl. During the Batmobile chase (which was really fucking awesome by the way,) he questionably kills some goons. I mean, some of them could have survived like, if they had Wolverine’s healing powers I guess? But then there is that badass warehouse scene that we see in the trailers and during that he near enough shoots some guys himself. If you can get over this and see this as an alternate version of Batman you should be able to appreciate Affleck’s performance though, which by the way is amazing, he knocks it out of the park. I would have liked some kind of reference to it, even a scene where he discusses breaking his code with Alfred, just a few lines would have made me get on board with this version of the character a lot quicker. Critics have been calling Henry Cavil’s Superman performance wooden, but I think that is too harsh, he is perfectly serviceable but he isn’t going to be praised for his memorable performance either. Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman is badass, my only complaint is that she isn’t in the movie enough as Wonder Woman. Jesse Eisenberg is the stand out worst performance in the movie. It isn’t necessarily a bad performance, it just does not fit that character at all. He was truly miscast here, if they had cast him as Riddler in the Batman solo movie and he put in this performance I would be praising him like mad. Lex Luthor shouldn’t be crazy on a surface level, he should be a respectable businessman and an intellectual force to be reckoned with and he will go out of his way to ensure that this is what everyone sees him as, it is only ever the people closest to him that that he allows to see him crack. He certainly shouldn’t be making strange noises and gestures like someone with OCD or a mental issue. Also Doomsday is silly and is just shoehorned in at the end for the sake of giving the trinity and enemy to battle against.
Do you pee? You will. After sitting though near three hours of this garbage.
So to give my overall opinion before I get into spoilers, I will say that I enjoyed this movie better than Man of Steel, but only slightly and I dislike it for a lot of the same reasons. Just like Man of Steel there are parts of this movie that I adored and parts that I hated. Mixed emotions is an understatement. In my mind any movie above a 7 is a great movie and unfortunately I can’t call this a great movie. I fully believe that everyone should see this movie and form their own opinion, especially since reactions have been so mixed, but I felt that it simply didn’t live up to the hype that it set for itself and I feel like Zack Snyder may be doing more harm than good setting up the DCU. 6.5/10.
Do you see? You will. Or at least you better have seen it by now because I am about to spoil the shit out of the whole movie.
Like I said earlier, the events of the movie really should have been split across several movies and explored more rather than rushed through at a breakneck speed. We should have had a whole movie on Batman V Superman, the conflict ideals between them and the discussion of whether or not this world needs a Superman. Then we should have had a movie just based on the dawn of the justice league, with Batman and Superman eventually understanding each other and becoming friends and with way more scenes with Wonder Woman and a proper introduction to the other characters rather than the literal plot device USB stick we got in BvS. Then we should have had a few Justice League movies and once Superman was an established character within the universe, they should have killed him off then and did the Death and Return of Superman story, not in this one where Batman and Wonder Woman hardly know him and the public still don’t know whether he is good or bad. Also if Batman kills now, what reason is there for the Joker to still be alive? The whole point of their relationship is that Batman won’t kill Joker because of his code and Joker won’t kill Batman because he loves fighting him, but if Batman has no code and he has been Batman for years then he really should have killed Joker a long time ago. I did enjoy Batfleck and I am very much looking forward to his solo Batman movie, but BvS is rushed and sloppy. So I’ve said my piece, now let the fanboy hate commence.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Buru in Tabletop Games
Feb 22, 2021
I would consider myself somewhat of a world traveler. I haven’t quite visited as many places as I would like, and certain worldwide pandemics have prevented me from scheduling any international travel plans. My family and I enjoy cruises and visiting all sorts of different countries. Now, Buru has never been specifically on our list of places to visit, but should we ever get the chance to head to Indonesia, now after playing this game I think I will want to visit this little island.
Buru (http://burugame.com/)is a mid-weight economic worker placement game with a large dose of bidding thrown in for fun. In it players are visitors to the island sent to compete to become the governor of Buru by hiring indigenous peoples to assist with tasks, by providing fish for the peoples, pleasing the island’s elders, and by paying homages to the spirits of the land. The emissary who can utilize all their resources efficiently and impactfully will be deemed governor of Buru and winner of the game.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, as there are just too many. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup, follow the instructions in the rulebook. There are just too many steps to detail here and the rulebook is fantastic. Once setup, the play area should look similar to the photo below.
The game of Buru lasts five rounds, and each round consists of five phases of the day: Dawn, Morning, Noon, Afternoon, and Dusk. At the end of the fifth round the game is over and players will tally points to arrive at the winner.
During the Dawn phase players will flip over the top two Decrees tokens from the middle of the main circular board. These Decrees will be placed in certain areas and are worth bonus points or other advantages for the round. Also during this phase the Forest cards will be reset from the previous round. Once complete play moves to the Morning phase.
In the Morning players will be sending out their numbered Explorer tokens (from 1-5) onto the various board areas in turn starting with the current Emissary (first player). Each player will place one of their Explorer tokens at a time until each player has only one Explorer token left. Players may place multiple Explorers in a location to increase their bid for majority, but these Explorer tokens are placed face-up (literally with the face showing and the number on the board not showing) so that their values are hidden. Once Explorers are placed, play moves to the Noon phase.
At Noon the people must fish for food and have lunch. The leftover Explorer token that was not used in the Morning is then revealed and its value is converted to fish. Fish are needed to recruit islanders and are converted into other resources. Fish are tracked on the individual player boards. After a hearty lunch play continues into the Afternoon.
The Afternoon is where much of the action in Buru takes place. During this phase the Explorer tokens that were placed in the Morning are revealed and players take actions in each area by order of majority in each area. First the highest-bidding player will claim their chosen action space, then the next highest bidder, and so on. The Forest is resolved first. Players reveal the Explorer tokens in the Forest and whichever player has majority in this area is able to place their tokens a claim space on the board and will receive a Forest card of their choice. Forest cards are typically resources immediately earned by the player. Resources include Clay, Palm Leaves, and Ebony. The player with majority also earns the favor of Gunung (green spirit) and takes its giant statueeple.
Next, the Shore is resolved in the same manner. The Shore is where players may use their supplies of fish to recruit islanders to their taskforces and carry out tasks. The majority leader in this area chooses a space to place their Explorer tokens and resolves the action. This could include purchasing islander cards and refreshing the offer of islander cards in whichever order the player chooses. The player with the majority also earns the favor of Banyu (blue spirit) and takes its giant statueeple.
The Village is the area where islanders are able to complete tasks. The majority leader in this area chooses a space and takes the actions. These actions include activating islanders for the actions printed on the bottom of their cards and possibly even earning more fish. The player with the majority also earns the favor of Manuk (orange spirit) and takes its giant statueeple.
Finally, The Sacred Lake is resolved in the same manner. Here players are able to pay tributes to the spirits in order to earn bonuses from them. The majority leader in this area chooses a space to place their Explorer tokens, earns an immediate Esteem (VP tracked along the outer edge of the board), and takes the action of the space claimed. These spaces offer opportunities to pay tribute to one or more of the spirits as well as earning an Elder card, which provides conditions for earning bonus points at the end of the game. When a spirit is tributed they offer bonus Esteem cards and other benefits to be used. Once this area is completely resolved and players have all taken their turns play moves onto Dusk.
In Dusk players will reset the board for the next round of play. Players retrieve all their Explorer tokens from the board and untask their islanders that have completed tasks this day. After the fifth round the game is over and players tally their scores from their position on the Esteem track, any spirit Tribute cards earned, and Elder card point conditions met. The player with the most points will be crowned the winner!
Components. Okay, I have to give a giant shout-out to the team at Crafty Games. This is one of the highest-quality prototypes I have ever played in terms of component quality. When I opened the game box all components were separated into baggies and card cases and LABELED with the number of components, the titles, and even a picture of the components to be placed within. I don’t even organize my games to this level and I feel I am a tad OCD about my game organization. Kudos here. But also the components are all fine quality and the finished product promises to be just spectacular if this is what is received as a prototype.
I love the art and art style throughout this game. It is difficult to have theme shine through in a very Euro-style game, but I did feel the theme here. The art is very suggestive of island life, and Crafty Games even hired Cultural Consultants to assure all avenues are culturally appropriate. What a great call. I wish all publishers would be so thorough.
The gameplay is also quite stunning. The game just flows so naturally and everything makes complete sense. Of course you need to collect natural resources before recruiting islanders before asking said islanders to complete tasks before you pay respects to their spirits. I like the flow, and after a couple rounds I no longer needed the rulebook as a crutch.
I have very much enjoyed my plays of Buru for many reasons. The game is absolutely gorgeous. The art sings and truly adds to the gameplay. The rules are not light, but not over my head, and I appreciate that. The choices given to each player are crunchy without being too burdensome, and players of many skill levels will be able to find joy contemplating when and where to send their Explorers in each area. The game builds up to a big ending where many points are scored from places unknown to opponents and bulleting ahead from last place to first from exploiting bonus cards is so satisfying.
It is easy to understand why I love this game and would certainly recommend it to all gamers. If you have been looking for something a little heavier in your collection but don’t want to go TOO heavy, please do yourself a favor and consider backing Buru. Crafty Games has been working on some truly great games here the past couple years and I am excited to see where Buru ends up after another undoubtedly successful Kickstarter campaign. I will always be up for a game of Buru, and I hope to play it often as the years continue.
Buru (http://burugame.com/)is a mid-weight economic worker placement game with a large dose of bidding thrown in for fun. In it players are visitors to the island sent to compete to become the governor of Buru by hiring indigenous peoples to assist with tasks, by providing fish for the peoples, pleasing the island’s elders, and by paying homages to the spirits of the land. The emissary who can utilize all their resources efficiently and impactfully will be deemed governor of Buru and winner of the game.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, as there are just too many. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup, follow the instructions in the rulebook. There are just too many steps to detail here and the rulebook is fantastic. Once setup, the play area should look similar to the photo below.
The game of Buru lasts five rounds, and each round consists of five phases of the day: Dawn, Morning, Noon, Afternoon, and Dusk. At the end of the fifth round the game is over and players will tally points to arrive at the winner.
During the Dawn phase players will flip over the top two Decrees tokens from the middle of the main circular board. These Decrees will be placed in certain areas and are worth bonus points or other advantages for the round. Also during this phase the Forest cards will be reset from the previous round. Once complete play moves to the Morning phase.
In the Morning players will be sending out their numbered Explorer tokens (from 1-5) onto the various board areas in turn starting with the current Emissary (first player). Each player will place one of their Explorer tokens at a time until each player has only one Explorer token left. Players may place multiple Explorers in a location to increase their bid for majority, but these Explorer tokens are placed face-up (literally with the face showing and the number on the board not showing) so that their values are hidden. Once Explorers are placed, play moves to the Noon phase.
At Noon the people must fish for food and have lunch. The leftover Explorer token that was not used in the Morning is then revealed and its value is converted to fish. Fish are needed to recruit islanders and are converted into other resources. Fish are tracked on the individual player boards. After a hearty lunch play continues into the Afternoon.
The Afternoon is where much of the action in Buru takes place. During this phase the Explorer tokens that were placed in the Morning are revealed and players take actions in each area by order of majority in each area. First the highest-bidding player will claim their chosen action space, then the next highest bidder, and so on. The Forest is resolved first. Players reveal the Explorer tokens in the Forest and whichever player has majority in this area is able to place their tokens a claim space on the board and will receive a Forest card of their choice. Forest cards are typically resources immediately earned by the player. Resources include Clay, Palm Leaves, and Ebony. The player with majority also earns the favor of Gunung (green spirit) and takes its giant statueeple.
Next, the Shore is resolved in the same manner. The Shore is where players may use their supplies of fish to recruit islanders to their taskforces and carry out tasks. The majority leader in this area chooses a space to place their Explorer tokens and resolves the action. This could include purchasing islander cards and refreshing the offer of islander cards in whichever order the player chooses. The player with the majority also earns the favor of Banyu (blue spirit) and takes its giant statueeple.
The Village is the area where islanders are able to complete tasks. The majority leader in this area chooses a space and takes the actions. These actions include activating islanders for the actions printed on the bottom of their cards and possibly even earning more fish. The player with the majority also earns the favor of Manuk (orange spirit) and takes its giant statueeple.
Finally, The Sacred Lake is resolved in the same manner. Here players are able to pay tributes to the spirits in order to earn bonuses from them. The majority leader in this area chooses a space to place their Explorer tokens, earns an immediate Esteem (VP tracked along the outer edge of the board), and takes the action of the space claimed. These spaces offer opportunities to pay tribute to one or more of the spirits as well as earning an Elder card, which provides conditions for earning bonus points at the end of the game. When a spirit is tributed they offer bonus Esteem cards and other benefits to be used. Once this area is completely resolved and players have all taken their turns play moves onto Dusk.
In Dusk players will reset the board for the next round of play. Players retrieve all their Explorer tokens from the board and untask their islanders that have completed tasks this day. After the fifth round the game is over and players tally their scores from their position on the Esteem track, any spirit Tribute cards earned, and Elder card point conditions met. The player with the most points will be crowned the winner!
Components. Okay, I have to give a giant shout-out to the team at Crafty Games. This is one of the highest-quality prototypes I have ever played in terms of component quality. When I opened the game box all components were separated into baggies and card cases and LABELED with the number of components, the titles, and even a picture of the components to be placed within. I don’t even organize my games to this level and I feel I am a tad OCD about my game organization. Kudos here. But also the components are all fine quality and the finished product promises to be just spectacular if this is what is received as a prototype.
I love the art and art style throughout this game. It is difficult to have theme shine through in a very Euro-style game, but I did feel the theme here. The art is very suggestive of island life, and Crafty Games even hired Cultural Consultants to assure all avenues are culturally appropriate. What a great call. I wish all publishers would be so thorough.
The gameplay is also quite stunning. The game just flows so naturally and everything makes complete sense. Of course you need to collect natural resources before recruiting islanders before asking said islanders to complete tasks before you pay respects to their spirits. I like the flow, and after a couple rounds I no longer needed the rulebook as a crutch.
I have very much enjoyed my plays of Buru for many reasons. The game is absolutely gorgeous. The art sings and truly adds to the gameplay. The rules are not light, but not over my head, and I appreciate that. The choices given to each player are crunchy without being too burdensome, and players of many skill levels will be able to find joy contemplating when and where to send their Explorers in each area. The game builds up to a big ending where many points are scored from places unknown to opponents and bulleting ahead from last place to first from exploiting bonus cards is so satisfying.
It is easy to understand why I love this game and would certainly recommend it to all gamers. If you have been looking for something a little heavier in your collection but don’t want to go TOO heavy, please do yourself a favor and consider backing Buru. Crafty Games has been working on some truly great games here the past couple years and I am excited to see where Buru ends up after another undoubtedly successful Kickstarter campaign. I will always be up for a game of Buru, and I hope to play it often as the years continue.
