Search
Search results
Book Creator One
Education and Book
App
Keen to try Book Creator? This app allows you to create one book. Unlock unlimited books (and comic...
NAVIONICS SKI
Navigation and Sports
App
The most comprehensive app for ski and snowboard! Navionics Ski app includes maps of over 2,000...
Read4Kids - Kids learn to read in 20 easy lessons
Education and Book
App
Read is a 20-lesson program designed to help kindergarten and elementary school age children (4–8...
Kids Learning - Photo Touch Concepts
Education and Games
App
"Learning concepts has never been this fun. My kids and students love this game!" Kathy Fox ...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Army of Thieves (2021) in Movies
Nov 4, 2021
“Did He Just Say Gulp?”
I have Covid-19, and am confined to quarters. So time to catch up on some streaming films. New on Netflix is “Army of Thieves”, a quirky prequel, of sorts, to Zac Snyder’s “Army of the Dead“.
Plot Summary:
Sebastian Schlencht-Wöhnert (Matthias Schweighöfer) is a geek obsessed with the work of legendary safe-manufacturer Hans Wagner whose magnum opus was a series of four intricate safes named after the four parts of his namesake’s Ring cycle: The Rhinegold, The Valkyrie, Siegfried and Götterdämmerung.
Seeking more the glory of cracking the legendary safes (rather than the riches within), high-class jewel-thief Gwendoline (Nathalie Emmanuel) teams with Sebastian to crack the three known safes (in Paris, Prague and St Moritz) before they are officially ‘retired’. Together with Korina (Ruby O. Fee), muscle-man Brad (Stuart Martin) and getaway driver Rolph (Guz Khan) the gang try to stay one step ahead of obsessed Interpol agent Delacroix (Jonathan Cohen).
Certification:
US: TV-MA. UK: 15.
Talent:
Starring: Matthias Schweighöfer, Nathalie Emmanuel, Ruby O. Fee, Stuart Martin, Guz Khan, Jonathan Cohen.
Directed by: Matthias Schweighöfer.
Written by: Shay Hatten (from a story by Shay Hatten and Zack Snyder).
“Army of Thieves” Review: Positives:
I really wasn’t expecting much from this offering. For me, the character of Dieter in “Army of the Dead” was an annoyingly quirky comedy character in a zombie-actioner that you just wanted to punch in the face…. repeatedly. But in contrast, this Dieter-centric film is deliberately quirky throughout and it just all worked for me. Under his own direction, Schweighöfer’s Sebastian/Dieter becomes a genuinely quirky, lovelorn and loveable loser that you want to root for.
The look and feel of the film is utterly glorious. The wonderful cinematography by Bernhard Jasper makes the introduction to the European locations feel Bond-like and the combination of Production Design and Special Effects make the safe-cracking scenes tense, dynamic and beautiful to watch. It’s all nicely rounded off by a quirky Steve Mazzaro / Hans Zimmer score.
Shay Hatten’s script delivers a nice balance of action and exposition. It actually – shock horror – takes time to flesh out some character behind the generic heist-movie stereotypes. Setting the movie in the same timeline as the emerging Nevada zombie-apocalypse as “Army of the Dead” is neat: (although those expecting extensive zombie-action will feel short-changed). And having the Las Vegas safe as the mythical Götterdämmerung is a nice touch. Above all – “SURPRISE!!!” – the script surpassed the essential six-laughs test.
The acting is above par, with Schweighöfer putting in a fabulous turn and the stunningly beautiful Nathalie Emmanuel (best known for being Ramsey in the Fast and Furious series) gets to be a lot more than mere window-dressing here. Stuart Martin is notable here for looking astonishingly like Hugh Jackman…. I mean, really, they could be twins.
Negatives:
I mean, honestly, there are more holes in this story than a St Moritz swiss-cheese. Why would all of the safes, owned by different private institutions, be being “decommissioned” due to a Zombie outbreak on the other side of the world? Can the Interpol team really be that incompetent? And however clever he is, I don’t buy that you can open safes like that!
Although I liked the balance of the script overall, the story is pretty simplistic and linear.
Summary Thoughts on “Army of Thieves”
Sometimes a little movie appears that surprises and delights you, and this was one of those for me. It’s not big and it’s not clever. But it is very nicely made, thoroughly entertained me and was – for me – way better than its source movie. A recommended watch on Netflix.
Plot Summary:
Sebastian Schlencht-Wöhnert (Matthias Schweighöfer) is a geek obsessed with the work of legendary safe-manufacturer Hans Wagner whose magnum opus was a series of four intricate safes named after the four parts of his namesake’s Ring cycle: The Rhinegold, The Valkyrie, Siegfried and Götterdämmerung.
Seeking more the glory of cracking the legendary safes (rather than the riches within), high-class jewel-thief Gwendoline (Nathalie Emmanuel) teams with Sebastian to crack the three known safes (in Paris, Prague and St Moritz) before they are officially ‘retired’. Together with Korina (Ruby O. Fee), muscle-man Brad (Stuart Martin) and getaway driver Rolph (Guz Khan) the gang try to stay one step ahead of obsessed Interpol agent Delacroix (Jonathan Cohen).
Certification:
US: TV-MA. UK: 15.
Talent:
Starring: Matthias Schweighöfer, Nathalie Emmanuel, Ruby O. Fee, Stuart Martin, Guz Khan, Jonathan Cohen.
Directed by: Matthias Schweighöfer.
Written by: Shay Hatten (from a story by Shay Hatten and Zack Snyder).
“Army of Thieves” Review: Positives:
I really wasn’t expecting much from this offering. For me, the character of Dieter in “Army of the Dead” was an annoyingly quirky comedy character in a zombie-actioner that you just wanted to punch in the face…. repeatedly. But in contrast, this Dieter-centric film is deliberately quirky throughout and it just all worked for me. Under his own direction, Schweighöfer’s Sebastian/Dieter becomes a genuinely quirky, lovelorn and loveable loser that you want to root for.
The look and feel of the film is utterly glorious. The wonderful cinematography by Bernhard Jasper makes the introduction to the European locations feel Bond-like and the combination of Production Design and Special Effects make the safe-cracking scenes tense, dynamic and beautiful to watch. It’s all nicely rounded off by a quirky Steve Mazzaro / Hans Zimmer score.
Shay Hatten’s script delivers a nice balance of action and exposition. It actually – shock horror – takes time to flesh out some character behind the generic heist-movie stereotypes. Setting the movie in the same timeline as the emerging Nevada zombie-apocalypse as “Army of the Dead” is neat: (although those expecting extensive zombie-action will feel short-changed). And having the Las Vegas safe as the mythical Götterdämmerung is a nice touch. Above all – “SURPRISE!!!” – the script surpassed the essential six-laughs test.
The acting is above par, with Schweighöfer putting in a fabulous turn and the stunningly beautiful Nathalie Emmanuel (best known for being Ramsey in the Fast and Furious series) gets to be a lot more than mere window-dressing here. Stuart Martin is notable here for looking astonishingly like Hugh Jackman…. I mean, really, they could be twins.
Negatives:
I mean, honestly, there are more holes in this story than a St Moritz swiss-cheese. Why would all of the safes, owned by different private institutions, be being “decommissioned” due to a Zombie outbreak on the other side of the world? Can the Interpol team really be that incompetent? And however clever he is, I don’t buy that you can open safes like that!
Although I liked the balance of the script overall, the story is pretty simplistic and linear.
Summary Thoughts on “Army of Thieves”
Sometimes a little movie appears that surprises and delights you, and this was one of those for me. It’s not big and it’s not clever. But it is very nicely made, thoroughly entertained me and was – for me – way better than its source movie. A recommended watch on Netflix.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Truly Madly Guilty in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Erika has the whole event planned: an afternoon tea with her friend, Clementine, Clementine's husband, Sam, and the couple's two young daughters, Holly and Ruby. She even has a glittery art table set up for the youngsters. But the day is derailed when Erika runs into her next-door neighbor, Vid, who invites both couples over for a last minute barbecue. Erika and her husband, Oliver, aren't the last minute types; besides, they had something they needed to talk about with Clementine and Sam. But, Erika feels like obligated to say yes. Clementine and Sam are secretly relieved, as Vid and his beautiful wife Tiffany are far more personable than Erika and Oliver. The afternoon starts off well enough; Tiffany and Vid's daughter, Dakota, is even happy enough to hang out with Holly and Ruby. But by the time the night is over, lives will be changed, and all the adults--Sam and Clementine in particular--will find themselves wishing they never attended this impromptu event.
So we all know the drill by now. Liane Moriarty is a well-known master of dramatic suspense, especially at capturing the tension that hides behind ordinary lives. I went through a period where I read all of Moriarty's books; [b:What Alice Forgot|6469165|What Alice Forgot|Liane Moriarty|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1377159022s/6469165.jpg|6659752] and her last novel, [b:Big Little Lies|19486412|Big Little Lies|Liane Moriarty|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1399582436s/19486412.jpg|27570886], rank as two of my particular favorites. Anyway, Moriarty has become rather famous in the book world, with [b:Big Little Lies|19486412|Big Little Lies|Liane Moriarty|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1399582436s/19486412.jpg|27570886] being made into a 7-episode HBO TV series, starring Reese Witherspoon and Nicole Kidman.
Of course, with such fame comes great responsibility. And pressure. Can a new work live up to the hype and excitement of the previous? This one will divide readers. It certainly has all the hallmarks of a typical Moriarty novel: a cast of women (and men) living ordinary lives on the surface, with a hidden veneer beneath. There's a secret layer to all of Moriarty's characters, though the drama associated with those in [b:Truly Madly Guilty|26247008|Truly Madly Guilty|Liane Moriarty|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1467061262s/26247008.jpg|49997474] may not live up to some of her other novels.
First of all, this book will frustrate you. The beginning is incredibly maddening, as Moriarty starts leading up to the events that happened at the barbecue... in slow, excruciating detail. As she does so, we alternate chapters with the present, with the point-of-view told from our various characters. We have Erika, a slightly repressed accountant whose life has been formed around her stressful childhood as the only daughter of her hoarder mother, and Erika's husband, Oliver, her equally steady mate, who grew up with alcoholic parents and longs for the same order in life as Erika. Clementine and Erika have been friends since childhood, when Clementine basically felt Erika's friendship was forced upon her by Clementine's social worker mother, who felt bad for Erika and her flea-infested home. Clementine is a cellist and a bit of a free spirit, but she's balanced by her more grounded husband Sam, who works in business at an energy drink company. They are parents to five-year-old Holly and two-year-old, Ruby. And then, finally, we have Erika and Oliver's neighbors, Vid and Tiffany. Swarthy, wealthy Vid is a joyous, open man who loves sharing his home (and his food) with friends and family. His gorgeous wife Tiffany is his pride and joy. Their quiet 10-year-old daughter, Dakota, just loves to read.
See how I just distracted you from the events of the barbecue by a description of the characters? Imagine that, for pages and pages! It's a great technique, don't get me wrong, but there was one point where I truly wanted to fling the book across the room. "JUST TELL ME WHAT HAPPENS!" I actually shouted in my (thankfully empty) bedroom. I've read some reviews that state that the big reveal, when it happens, isn't shocking enough, but I disagree: I think that event would certainly change my life and haunt my dreams (no more than that; a spoiler will truly ruin this book).
So while this novel can be a bit frustrating, it really is a Liane Moriarty book. It's compulsively readable. At first, I thought it was a very detailed look at three self-involved couples, but over time, I realized I had really fallen for Erika and Oliver and eventually, Tiffany and Vid, too (and Dakota, I loved Dakota!). Moriarty has a way of humanizing her characters and differentiating each from another: they all stand as individuals. Even Sam and Clementine, who were my least favorites, were their own people. It's the tiny details and pieces about each that she sticks in that really build your picture of each character in your mind. Much of the book takes place in the rain, and I could truly visualize each character and every event, unspooling, in this torrential Sydney downpour.
Overall, this book connected with me less on a dramatic, "oh my gosh" level (though that exists) but more on an emotional one. It speaks to the guilt we can all feel about life events--adults and kids alike--and potentially carry with us all of our days. Not a lot may happen in the book, per se, yet it's really a strong story of friendship, marriage, life, and loss. When I framed it in that perspective, versus looking purely for moments of dramatic tension, I realized I'd really enjoyed it. A strong 3.5 stars and definitely worth picking up. Just keep an open mind.
<a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">My Blog</a> ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/mwcmoto">Twitter</a>;
So we all know the drill by now. Liane Moriarty is a well-known master of dramatic suspense, especially at capturing the tension that hides behind ordinary lives. I went through a period where I read all of Moriarty's books; [b:What Alice Forgot|6469165|What Alice Forgot|Liane Moriarty|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1377159022s/6469165.jpg|6659752] and her last novel, [b:Big Little Lies|19486412|Big Little Lies|Liane Moriarty|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1399582436s/19486412.jpg|27570886], rank as two of my particular favorites. Anyway, Moriarty has become rather famous in the book world, with [b:Big Little Lies|19486412|Big Little Lies|Liane Moriarty|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1399582436s/19486412.jpg|27570886] being made into a 7-episode HBO TV series, starring Reese Witherspoon and Nicole Kidman.
Of course, with such fame comes great responsibility. And pressure. Can a new work live up to the hype and excitement of the previous? This one will divide readers. It certainly has all the hallmarks of a typical Moriarty novel: a cast of women (and men) living ordinary lives on the surface, with a hidden veneer beneath. There's a secret layer to all of Moriarty's characters, though the drama associated with those in [b:Truly Madly Guilty|26247008|Truly Madly Guilty|Liane Moriarty|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1467061262s/26247008.jpg|49997474] may not live up to some of her other novels.
First of all, this book will frustrate you. The beginning is incredibly maddening, as Moriarty starts leading up to the events that happened at the barbecue... in slow, excruciating detail. As she does so, we alternate chapters with the present, with the point-of-view told from our various characters. We have Erika, a slightly repressed accountant whose life has been formed around her stressful childhood as the only daughter of her hoarder mother, and Erika's husband, Oliver, her equally steady mate, who grew up with alcoholic parents and longs for the same order in life as Erika. Clementine and Erika have been friends since childhood, when Clementine basically felt Erika's friendship was forced upon her by Clementine's social worker mother, who felt bad for Erika and her flea-infested home. Clementine is a cellist and a bit of a free spirit, but she's balanced by her more grounded husband Sam, who works in business at an energy drink company. They are parents to five-year-old Holly and two-year-old, Ruby. And then, finally, we have Erika and Oliver's neighbors, Vid and Tiffany. Swarthy, wealthy Vid is a joyous, open man who loves sharing his home (and his food) with friends and family. His gorgeous wife Tiffany is his pride and joy. Their quiet 10-year-old daughter, Dakota, just loves to read.
See how I just distracted you from the events of the barbecue by a description of the characters? Imagine that, for pages and pages! It's a great technique, don't get me wrong, but there was one point where I truly wanted to fling the book across the room. "JUST TELL ME WHAT HAPPENS!" I actually shouted in my (thankfully empty) bedroom. I've read some reviews that state that the big reveal, when it happens, isn't shocking enough, but I disagree: I think that event would certainly change my life and haunt my dreams (no more than that; a spoiler will truly ruin this book).
So while this novel can be a bit frustrating, it really is a Liane Moriarty book. It's compulsively readable. At first, I thought it was a very detailed look at three self-involved couples, but over time, I realized I had really fallen for Erika and Oliver and eventually, Tiffany and Vid, too (and Dakota, I loved Dakota!). Moriarty has a way of humanizing her characters and differentiating each from another: they all stand as individuals. Even Sam and Clementine, who were my least favorites, were their own people. It's the tiny details and pieces about each that she sticks in that really build your picture of each character in your mind. Much of the book takes place in the rain, and I could truly visualize each character and every event, unspooling, in this torrential Sydney downpour.
Overall, this book connected with me less on a dramatic, "oh my gosh" level (though that exists) but more on an emotional one. It speaks to the guilt we can all feel about life events--adults and kids alike--and potentially carry with us all of our days. Not a lot may happen in the book, per se, yet it's really a strong story of friendship, marriage, life, and loss. When I framed it in that perspective, versus looking purely for moments of dramatic tension, I realized I'd really enjoyed it. A strong 3.5 stars and definitely worth picking up. Just keep an open mind.
<a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">My Blog</a> ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/mwcmoto">Twitter</a>;
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of Dark Souls Remastered in Video Games
Aug 14, 2019
I admit it, I never was able to beat the original Dark Souls when it was released on Xbox 360 and PS3 back in 2011. A PC port of the game was also released but had limited 30FPS and clearly hadn’t taken mouse and keyboard controls into account. The game was difficult, but I’m the type of player who’s happy to replay an area on a level multiple times, however if I get to a point where I don’t feel like I’m making progress, it’s usually on to the next game for me. That being said, I do love the Dark Souls games, regardless of how difficult they are and how horrible I am at them. I love the atmosphere, I love the weight of your armor and weapons, I love the scenery, and at times I even love the challenge. This isn’t a review specifically about Dark Souls however, as the gameplay hasn’t changed at all from the original (DLC’s included of course), but rather a review of whether the remastered version is the definitive version that folks should play.
For those of you who have led a sheltered life, Dark Souls is a third-person action role-playing game developed by FromSoftware. It was the successor to their previous game Demon Souls (which was a PS3 exclusive) and carried over much of the game mechanics. The game takes place in what I call a semi-open world environment connected to a central area. You are free to travel to and from areas at will, although some areas will be inaccessible until you complete specific tasks. Bonfires act as checkpoints for each level, and at a bonfire the player can heal, refill their healing flasks, and level up if they have collected enough souls to do so. The downside to resting at a bonfire is that it resets the enemies, so areas that you worked hard to clear out must be cleared out again. The game is lauded for its difficulty, and for players to learn from previous mistakes to overcome obstacles, present company excluded of course.
The release of Dark Souls Remastered was an effort to address many of the shortcomings of the original from a purely control and aesthetic point of view. I was lucky enough to review the game on my Xbox One X and the new 4K visuals and lighting effects are truly a site to behold. The world while still dark and dreary, now boasted cleaner lines. While it’s difficult to describe how good it looks (there are plenty of websites dedicated to comparing pictures between the original HD version and the new 4K version) it is absolutely noticeable. The textures no longer look muddy, and the creatures almost pop off the screen. This IS the definitive version if you are looking for the absolute best console version of the original Dark Souls game out there.
While folks may balk at the need for 60FPS on a game that was clearly playable at 30FPS, it does make a noticeable difference. Your character responds more fluidly and there is never any perceivable stutter. When a game’s FPS drops below 30FPS as it did in various areas of the original, it can have a horrible affect on the player and lead to some unnecessary deaths. While many will argue about the ability to distinguish between 60FPS and 30FPS, there is no denying that consistent frame rates in this game can literally mean the difference between life and death. This is not an issue with the remastered version as there were not discernable drops in FPS in even the most crowded of areas.
This leads to what you are probably reading this review for…is it worth the price of admission? If you have never played Dark Souls before, then this is absolutely the version you should purchase. Not only are the FPS and visuals greatly improved, but it includes all the DLC from the previous version as well. If you have played it before but are interested in going through it again, then I certainly would play through this version as the graphics and frame rates make it well worth your time. If you have no desire to replay the game, or if it didn’t appeal to you the first time around, then there is little reason to pick it up. While there are notable visual improvements, there is no additional content (outside the DLC) or any changes to the game mechanics themselves to warrant a replay.
As I mentioned in the beginning of this review the original version came out in 2011 and I’ve had seven years of playing numerous other games under my belt to go back and best the enemies that lie within. So, with the much-improved graphics and smoother gameplay was I able to beat Dark Souls this time??? Well sadly no, apparently I still haven’t improved enough over the years to beat this game (and while I have Dark Souls II and Dark Souls III, I haven’t beaten those game either). I was able to play through most of the levels to see how the visuals had improved, but the same bosses still took no pity on me. Maybe another seven years of practice will make all the difference, until then maybe I’ll go back for one more try.
Pros: Smooth 60FPS, Incredible 4K visuals, Smoother game control
Cons: Still too tough for me, Lacking additional content
For those of you who have led a sheltered life, Dark Souls is a third-person action role-playing game developed by FromSoftware. It was the successor to their previous game Demon Souls (which was a PS3 exclusive) and carried over much of the game mechanics. The game takes place in what I call a semi-open world environment connected to a central area. You are free to travel to and from areas at will, although some areas will be inaccessible until you complete specific tasks. Bonfires act as checkpoints for each level, and at a bonfire the player can heal, refill their healing flasks, and level up if they have collected enough souls to do so. The downside to resting at a bonfire is that it resets the enemies, so areas that you worked hard to clear out must be cleared out again. The game is lauded for its difficulty, and for players to learn from previous mistakes to overcome obstacles, present company excluded of course.
The release of Dark Souls Remastered was an effort to address many of the shortcomings of the original from a purely control and aesthetic point of view. I was lucky enough to review the game on my Xbox One X and the new 4K visuals and lighting effects are truly a site to behold. The world while still dark and dreary, now boasted cleaner lines. While it’s difficult to describe how good it looks (there are plenty of websites dedicated to comparing pictures between the original HD version and the new 4K version) it is absolutely noticeable. The textures no longer look muddy, and the creatures almost pop off the screen. This IS the definitive version if you are looking for the absolute best console version of the original Dark Souls game out there.
While folks may balk at the need for 60FPS on a game that was clearly playable at 30FPS, it does make a noticeable difference. Your character responds more fluidly and there is never any perceivable stutter. When a game’s FPS drops below 30FPS as it did in various areas of the original, it can have a horrible affect on the player and lead to some unnecessary deaths. While many will argue about the ability to distinguish between 60FPS and 30FPS, there is no denying that consistent frame rates in this game can literally mean the difference between life and death. This is not an issue with the remastered version as there were not discernable drops in FPS in even the most crowded of areas.
This leads to what you are probably reading this review for…is it worth the price of admission? If you have never played Dark Souls before, then this is absolutely the version you should purchase. Not only are the FPS and visuals greatly improved, but it includes all the DLC from the previous version as well. If you have played it before but are interested in going through it again, then I certainly would play through this version as the graphics and frame rates make it well worth your time. If you have no desire to replay the game, or if it didn’t appeal to you the first time around, then there is little reason to pick it up. While there are notable visual improvements, there is no additional content (outside the DLC) or any changes to the game mechanics themselves to warrant a replay.
As I mentioned in the beginning of this review the original version came out in 2011 and I’ve had seven years of playing numerous other games under my belt to go back and best the enemies that lie within. So, with the much-improved graphics and smoother gameplay was I able to beat Dark Souls this time??? Well sadly no, apparently I still haven’t improved enough over the years to beat this game (and while I have Dark Souls II and Dark Souls III, I haven’t beaten those game either). I was able to play through most of the levels to see how the visuals had improved, but the same bosses still took no pity on me. Maybe another seven years of practice will make all the difference, until then maybe I’ll go back for one more try.
Pros: Smooth 60FPS, Incredible 4K visuals, Smoother game control
Cons: Still too tough for me, Lacking additional content
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Greatest Showman (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
I can’t claim to know much about musicals. I don’t actively avoid them, but I don’t go out of my way to see them either. The few that I have seen and liked don’t seem to sit well with the musical theater crowd either. For instance, recently in conversation my defense of Russell Crowe as Javert in the latest adaptation of Les Misérables was shot down in a matter of seconds. My wife, with some frequency, reminds me that my (until now) secret admiration of Tim Burton’s Sweeney Todd is something that should never be declared in a public forum. For me, one of the best achievements in musical film will always be South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut; and though there is a general positivity about it, I’ve never seen it taken all that seriously as a contemporary musical (it was certainly a hell of a lot more memorable than 2003’s Best Picture winner, Chicago). So, if you haven’t already decided my opinion will be moot and stopped reading, I will, with the limited appreciation I have for this genre, give The Greatest Showman the fairest shake I can.
At a surprisingly short hour and forty-five minutes, this high-concept imagining of the meteoric rise of P.T. Barnum (Hugh Jackman), from the impoverished son of a tailor to one of the biggest names in the history of entertainment, should absolutely fly by. Tragically, it doesn’t. Beginning with an irresponsibly rushed first act that condenses decades of backstory into a few minutes, it dramatically stops dead between its second and third acts as we’re subjected to three songs in a row that not all that subtly beat us over the head with the inevitably that our leads are going to have to face some predictable, life-changing conflict before the big finale. Showman also suffers from the delusion that period pieces will be more engaging and relatable with a modern-inspired soundtrack, à la Baz Luhrmann’s misguided attempt at The Great Gatsby. The idea being that the music of the time, though antiquated to us now, would have sounded modern to people then, so why not put modern music, whether original or sourced, over period images in an attempt to bridge the gap between their world and ours? It’s a concept that might sound great on paper, but as Luhrmann already proved, the final results don’t so much complement each other as they expose each other’s weaknesses.
Its major flaw though, and why The Greatest Showman fails to be a great anything, is the insistence on force-feeding moments of attempted catharsis every 15-20 minutes, having earned almost none of them. A great many of the numbers are presented as such grand, climactic set pieces that they don’t feel as though they are working to serve a cohesive, larger whole. We are inundated with a blur of crescendo after crescendo and left little time to reflect on what we have just seen and heard before the film clumsily bounds off to the next song-and-dance laden plot point; and if you asked me to name any of the individual tunes now three days later, I’d be hard-pressed to do so. It’s an odd juxtaposition, and one I’ve very rarely experienced, wanting so badly for a film to end and at the same time wishing it had been given more time to fully realize its scope. Keep your ears open as well for an ill-advised line in which Barnum proudly compares himself to Napoleon. Isn’t Barnum supposed to be the “hero” of this piece, someone we are supposed to identify with and for whom we want to find success? Somebody please provide Showman’s writers a history lesson that didn’t just come off a Wikipedia page (for Barnum and Napoleon’s sakes).
With any negative criticism, I do like to try and go out on something positive, and if I have to concede anything to this movie, it’s that it finds its footing, albeit temporarily, while addressing issues of equality. Showman shines in the few moments where the supporting players portraying Barnum’s “oddities”, Keala Settle as Lettie Lutz in particular, are given the opportunity to stand toe-to-toe with the leads and, in many of these scenes, they rise above even the likes of Hugh Jackman. Another member of the cast who merits a little bit of praise (and I reserve the right to retract this at any time of my choosing, more than likely with whatever juvenile comedy he’ll be seen in next) is Zac Efron. Exposure to the likes of Nicole Kidman and John Cusack in 2012’s sadly overlooked The Paperboy, may finally be yielding results as he is the only lead who leaves an impression. Though his journey as a high society playwright begrudgingly brought into Barnum’s world definitely leans heavily on the saccharine side, it does provide a break of plausibility in amongst the unbridled chaos of the rest of the picture. I wouldn’t doubt that there is a much better movie that could have been made from expanding into its own feature the subplot of his character bucking the expectations of his status to fall in love with a circus performer.
At a surprisingly short hour and forty-five minutes, this high-concept imagining of the meteoric rise of P.T. Barnum (Hugh Jackman), from the impoverished son of a tailor to one of the biggest names in the history of entertainment, should absolutely fly by. Tragically, it doesn’t. Beginning with an irresponsibly rushed first act that condenses decades of backstory into a few minutes, it dramatically stops dead between its second and third acts as we’re subjected to three songs in a row that not all that subtly beat us over the head with the inevitably that our leads are going to have to face some predictable, life-changing conflict before the big finale. Showman also suffers from the delusion that period pieces will be more engaging and relatable with a modern-inspired soundtrack, à la Baz Luhrmann’s misguided attempt at The Great Gatsby. The idea being that the music of the time, though antiquated to us now, would have sounded modern to people then, so why not put modern music, whether original or sourced, over period images in an attempt to bridge the gap between their world and ours? It’s a concept that might sound great on paper, but as Luhrmann already proved, the final results don’t so much complement each other as they expose each other’s weaknesses.
Its major flaw though, and why The Greatest Showman fails to be a great anything, is the insistence on force-feeding moments of attempted catharsis every 15-20 minutes, having earned almost none of them. A great many of the numbers are presented as such grand, climactic set pieces that they don’t feel as though they are working to serve a cohesive, larger whole. We are inundated with a blur of crescendo after crescendo and left little time to reflect on what we have just seen and heard before the film clumsily bounds off to the next song-and-dance laden plot point; and if you asked me to name any of the individual tunes now three days later, I’d be hard-pressed to do so. It’s an odd juxtaposition, and one I’ve very rarely experienced, wanting so badly for a film to end and at the same time wishing it had been given more time to fully realize its scope. Keep your ears open as well for an ill-advised line in which Barnum proudly compares himself to Napoleon. Isn’t Barnum supposed to be the “hero” of this piece, someone we are supposed to identify with and for whom we want to find success? Somebody please provide Showman’s writers a history lesson that didn’t just come off a Wikipedia page (for Barnum and Napoleon’s sakes).
With any negative criticism, I do like to try and go out on something positive, and if I have to concede anything to this movie, it’s that it finds its footing, albeit temporarily, while addressing issues of equality. Showman shines in the few moments where the supporting players portraying Barnum’s “oddities”, Keala Settle as Lettie Lutz in particular, are given the opportunity to stand toe-to-toe with the leads and, in many of these scenes, they rise above even the likes of Hugh Jackman. Another member of the cast who merits a little bit of praise (and I reserve the right to retract this at any time of my choosing, more than likely with whatever juvenile comedy he’ll be seen in next) is Zac Efron. Exposure to the likes of Nicole Kidman and John Cusack in 2012’s sadly overlooked The Paperboy, may finally be yielding results as he is the only lead who leaves an impression. Though his journey as a high society playwright begrudgingly brought into Barnum’s world definitely leans heavily on the saccharine side, it does provide a break of plausibility in amongst the unbridled chaos of the rest of the picture. I wouldn’t doubt that there is a much better movie that could have been made from expanding into its own feature the subplot of his character bucking the expectations of his status to fall in love with a circus performer.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Divinus in Tabletop Games
Aug 10, 2021
Bragi. Hercules. Percy Jackson. All excellent examples of successful demigods. As you well know, demigods are offspring of a god and a mortal. Of all the things I have conjured in my lifetime to answer the old, “What do you want to be when you grow up?” question, I never really answered, “a demigod.” Well, that’s because I KNOW my parents and have a hard time believing I could be a son of a god or goddess. Unless it was some weird NPCs (novel series by Drew Hayes) universe with Grumble as my patron/parent. In any case, my new dream of becoming the greatest demigod alive must be played out in today’s preview: Divinus.
Divinus is a competitive tile placement, campaign, drafting, dice game in which players assume the roles of upcoming demigods fighting over the one last spot at the table. By appeasing the gods of the warring ancient Roman and Norse cultures players will earn their place among them. This game uses some interesting hybrid app-driven story mechanics along with legacy-style component alterations to create this world that is constantly under refurbishment and ripe for the claiming of the future Divinus.
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 Gamefound campaign, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup, place the main board on the table, sort out the Map tiles by player count, and populate the board per the rulebook. Each player chooses their Demigod box and takes all components contained within. As Divinus is intended to be played either as a scenario session or its Eternal Mode, which is infinitely replayable using the board and components already altered by previously-played scenarios, open the chosen Scenario Box to be played and allow the app to instruct on how to setup with these components. All players roll their dice and place them in the “ready” pile to be used on their first turn. The first player takes the token (a black meeple in the prototype version) and the game is ready to be played!
Divinus is played in turns starting with the first player and continuing around the table until one player places their final Map tile signaling the end of the game. On a turn, players will have a choice of using an Explore action or a Rest action. More actions may be available in future scenarios, but for the prototype scenarios, these are the two available choices. During an Explore action, the active player will choose any number of their rolled dice in order to create a mathematical equation that matches with one of the Map tiles on the main board. These spaces range from 1-12 in value, so an appropriate dice combination could be 5 + 4 – 1 = 8 in order to claim the Map tile on the 8 spot. Any number of dice can be used to claim tiles, and once a tile is claimed, it must be placed within the player’s personal play area map. In order to add these tiles, the edges will need to match up by terrain type with tiles already presently in play (see below), or may also be placed atop an existing tile. Map tiles may or may not contain symbols for factions, locations, and also Sacred Places. These will all be used in scenarios for different purposes.
Once a player decides they do not wish to (or cannot) take more Explore actions, they must Rest. To Rest, the active player reclaims all spent (and unspent ready) dice and rerolls them for the next turn, replacing empty spaces on the board with new Map tiles.
Play continues in this fashion of Exploring and Resting until one player places their 16th tile, thus completing their 4×4 personal map. Players will consult the app for scoring instructions and the winner will be announced. Should the players wish to play another scenario (or many, as we would have liked), they simply use the same Demigods and open a new Scenario Box. Inside these boxes are different gods to appease, new quests to fulfill (more on these later), and stickers to be applied to game components to improve their usefulness.
Components. Again, this is a prototype version of the game, and it includes two introductory scenarios, a bunch of sticker sheets, and a developmental app. That said, I really enjoyed my plays of the scenarios and they felt like great first steps to lure me into what I just know is going to be somewhat of a lifestyle game (assuming more and more expansions are in the plans). The sticker sheets are all fine, and as I understand it, the stickers that are placed on the Map tiles will have non-removable glue, but the stickers placed on the dice faces will have removable glue. As I am not a glue expert, I can’t really vouch for either. The app is somewhat similar to those that are used in the Chronicles of Crime series, but Divinus promises to deliver an app that can scan the components WITHOUT the use of QR codes. For those gamers who think the QRs are an eye-sore, then Divinus is taking a promising first step for you! I haven’t even touched on the artwork yet, and that’s usually my favorite aspect of a game’s components. The visual style and art on Divinus really make the game pop on the table, and just draw you into the lore and setting. I love it!
So while initially Divinus is a simple roll-and-draft game of building a 4×4 grid akin to Kingdomino, the addition and usage of the Quests and, later, the Charge Actions, morph this into something quite a bit meatier. Each Scenario Box (at least in this version) contains two god cards (that affect how the end of the scenario is scored) and some Quest cards (that are side-quests players can follow to earn some extra VP and other goodies). I imagine as the game progresses through Scenario Boxes that Quests will get more difficult and the god cards more interesting as well.
All in all Divinus has roped me in, and I am very much looking forward to all the other great things that Lucky Duck Games has planned for it. I can foresee soooooo many expansions being built on this excellent chassis, and I am very eager to finish the entire legacy aspect in order to play through the Eternal Mode a bunch of times. Can I divulge a little dirty secret of mine here? I have never before played any type of legacy board game, and if this is what they are like, then I will be breaking out my copy of Betrayal Legacy way sooner than I originally planned.
I believe that the theming here is great, the gameplay is relatively simple to grasp, and the hybrid app-driven story really adds to the entire experience. If you are someone who, like me, has yet to delve into legacy-style games where the components are constantly changing due to choices made at the table, and you have a penchant for dice games with a splash of ACTUAL math skills used, I urge you to take a look at backing Divinus on Gamefound ASAP. With just the initial two scenarios included, I am already addicted to the game and cannot wait to sink my teeth into more scenarios and more crucial decisions that will alter the landscape of my copy of the game. I know that as of the publish date of this preview, the campaign is already about 1000% funded and so many stretch goals have already been unlocked. It is a great time to hop on board and grab a big ol’ chunk of goodies for this one. You may have a preference for Roman or Norse mythology before playing, but be warned: your loyalties may change as a result of playing Divinus… or maybe you will learn to accept both at the harmonious center of activity in your own little section of the world.
Divinus is a competitive tile placement, campaign, drafting, dice game in which players assume the roles of upcoming demigods fighting over the one last spot at the table. By appeasing the gods of the warring ancient Roman and Norse cultures players will earn their place among them. This game uses some interesting hybrid app-driven story mechanics along with legacy-style component alterations to create this world that is constantly under refurbishment and ripe for the claiming of the future Divinus.
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 Gamefound campaign, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup, place the main board on the table, sort out the Map tiles by player count, and populate the board per the rulebook. Each player chooses their Demigod box and takes all components contained within. As Divinus is intended to be played either as a scenario session or its Eternal Mode, which is infinitely replayable using the board and components already altered by previously-played scenarios, open the chosen Scenario Box to be played and allow the app to instruct on how to setup with these components. All players roll their dice and place them in the “ready” pile to be used on their first turn. The first player takes the token (a black meeple in the prototype version) and the game is ready to be played!
Divinus is played in turns starting with the first player and continuing around the table until one player places their final Map tile signaling the end of the game. On a turn, players will have a choice of using an Explore action or a Rest action. More actions may be available in future scenarios, but for the prototype scenarios, these are the two available choices. During an Explore action, the active player will choose any number of their rolled dice in order to create a mathematical equation that matches with one of the Map tiles on the main board. These spaces range from 1-12 in value, so an appropriate dice combination could be 5 + 4 – 1 = 8 in order to claim the Map tile on the 8 spot. Any number of dice can be used to claim tiles, and once a tile is claimed, it must be placed within the player’s personal play area map. In order to add these tiles, the edges will need to match up by terrain type with tiles already presently in play (see below), or may also be placed atop an existing tile. Map tiles may or may not contain symbols for factions, locations, and also Sacred Places. These will all be used in scenarios for different purposes.
Once a player decides they do not wish to (or cannot) take more Explore actions, they must Rest. To Rest, the active player reclaims all spent (and unspent ready) dice and rerolls them for the next turn, replacing empty spaces on the board with new Map tiles.
Play continues in this fashion of Exploring and Resting until one player places their 16th tile, thus completing their 4×4 personal map. Players will consult the app for scoring instructions and the winner will be announced. Should the players wish to play another scenario (or many, as we would have liked), they simply use the same Demigods and open a new Scenario Box. Inside these boxes are different gods to appease, new quests to fulfill (more on these later), and stickers to be applied to game components to improve their usefulness.
Components. Again, this is a prototype version of the game, and it includes two introductory scenarios, a bunch of sticker sheets, and a developmental app. That said, I really enjoyed my plays of the scenarios and they felt like great first steps to lure me into what I just know is going to be somewhat of a lifestyle game (assuming more and more expansions are in the plans). The sticker sheets are all fine, and as I understand it, the stickers that are placed on the Map tiles will have non-removable glue, but the stickers placed on the dice faces will have removable glue. As I am not a glue expert, I can’t really vouch for either. The app is somewhat similar to those that are used in the Chronicles of Crime series, but Divinus promises to deliver an app that can scan the components WITHOUT the use of QR codes. For those gamers who think the QRs are an eye-sore, then Divinus is taking a promising first step for you! I haven’t even touched on the artwork yet, and that’s usually my favorite aspect of a game’s components. The visual style and art on Divinus really make the game pop on the table, and just draw you into the lore and setting. I love it!
So while initially Divinus is a simple roll-and-draft game of building a 4×4 grid akin to Kingdomino, the addition and usage of the Quests and, later, the Charge Actions, morph this into something quite a bit meatier. Each Scenario Box (at least in this version) contains two god cards (that affect how the end of the scenario is scored) and some Quest cards (that are side-quests players can follow to earn some extra VP and other goodies). I imagine as the game progresses through Scenario Boxes that Quests will get more difficult and the god cards more interesting as well.
All in all Divinus has roped me in, and I am very much looking forward to all the other great things that Lucky Duck Games has planned for it. I can foresee soooooo many expansions being built on this excellent chassis, and I am very eager to finish the entire legacy aspect in order to play through the Eternal Mode a bunch of times. Can I divulge a little dirty secret of mine here? I have never before played any type of legacy board game, and if this is what they are like, then I will be breaking out my copy of Betrayal Legacy way sooner than I originally planned.
I believe that the theming here is great, the gameplay is relatively simple to grasp, and the hybrid app-driven story really adds to the entire experience. If you are someone who, like me, has yet to delve into legacy-style games where the components are constantly changing due to choices made at the table, and you have a penchant for dice games with a splash of ACTUAL math skills used, I urge you to take a look at backing Divinus on Gamefound ASAP. With just the initial two scenarios included, I am already addicted to the game and cannot wait to sink my teeth into more scenarios and more crucial decisions that will alter the landscape of my copy of the game. I know that as of the publish date of this preview, the campaign is already about 1000% funded and so many stretch goals have already been unlocked. It is a great time to hop on board and grab a big ol’ chunk of goodies for this one. You may have a preference for Roman or Norse mythology before playing, but be warned: your loyalties may change as a result of playing Divinus… or maybe you will learn to accept both at the harmonious center of activity in your own little section of the world.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Savages (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Over the past 15 years, Oliver Stone’s films have been kind of hit or miss to me. It’s as if Stone is still trying to make the same controversial films he became popular for in the 80’s and early 90’s. Only, as an audience, we have become keen to his filmmaking style and therefore his more recent work suffers from the apathy of a “show me something new” culture. Still, despite his failures, Stone does not makes apologies for his work while he continues in his quest to make films about controversial subjects. This time around Stone strives to take us into the violent world of the Mexican drug cartels though a film adaptation of the novel Savages by Don Winslow.
As the film opens we are introduced to “O” (Blake Lively) who, as our narrator, acquaints us with the open yet loving relationship she shares with our two protagonists, Chon and Ben. Chon (Taylor Kitsch), an ex-Navy SEAL, is unquestionably the muscle of the trio’s operation. Chon was the original financier for his high school friend Ben, (Aaron Johnson) the peaceful, charitable, botany genius who has created the most potent marijuana in the world. Together these two embody the perfect man for O, while the three of them enjoy the spoils of the small marijuana empire they created in southern California.
That is until they gain the attention from a Mexican cartel intent on creating a stronger foothold in the southern California area. The cartel offers them a partnership and explains that by teaming up their business will triple in three years. But when the trio refuse the offer, the ruthless head of the cartel, Elena (Selma Hayek), instructs her enforcer, Lado (Benicio Del Toro), to kidnap O and hold her hostage so the boys will cooperate. Soon our heroes use their network of connections, like crooked DEA agent Dennis (John Travolta) and financial broker Spin (Emile Hirsch), to battle the cartel in a series of savage maneuvers to get back their one “shared” love.
Stone has been known to inspire his actors to give Oscar worthy performances. Sadly, you will not find any such performances here. That is not to say that the acting was terrible. It just seemed that the characters themselves are uninspired which is a shame because I would have liked to have seen some growth in this young cast, especially from Taylor Kitsch.
I feel that many critics will be hard on Taylor Kitsch because of his previous epic fails of 2012 (John Carter and Battleship) however I am surprised to admit that, for this movie at least, he gets a pass in my book. Not because he delivers a fantastic performance that makes me believe he’s truly an up and coming talent, but rather because he is convincing in his portrayal of Chon. When O describes our protagonists as each being one half of the perfect man, she refers to Chon as “Hard Steel,” which is exactly what Kitsch plays him as, a one-dimensional, emotionally devoid character with no growth or any real redeeming qualities other than the ability to go to war. Regardless of whether or not Kitsch has any additional acting range not showcased in this film, I cannot penalize him for his performance in this movie. He fit the part that he was cast in fine.
Blake Lively (Gossip Girl, Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants) plays O, short for Ophelia. And yes she channels the mad, love-struck, melancholic character from Hamlet after whom she is named. And while it is easy to make those comparisons to the character of this film, they only appear to be on the surface, if anything. And herein lies the problem. Regardless of how you feel about her open relationship with Ben and Chon, the more I learned about her, the less I cared. Like Kitsch’s character, O is boring and one dimensional. She is the product of being a pretty little rich girl whose mother is off somewhere with husband number twelve. She has been getting stoned every day since she was young and the only place she finds herself loved is in with the company of Chon and Ben. Tragic, I know. While watching the film I honestly thought to myself, if I was Ben or Chon, I would say, “Fuck it. Cut her loose and let’s go to Asia.” She has no redeeming qualities other than being good looking and a good lay. So why would they go through so much trouble for her? The trio’s relationship is weakly tied together by her telling us through narration but never really materializes on screen. At times you get some of a feeling that Ben actually loves her but that love is never really reciprocated from O. It is safe to say that that I did not derive any loving connection from Lively’s performance, though her deliver as a narrator was tolerable.
Aaron Johnson (Kick-Ass) is the one redeeming performance from this young cast. In contrast to Chon, O describes Ben as “Soft Wood” which makes him the better half. Ben is the one character who actually goes through some kind of character arc and growth. Using the wood analogy, we watch him bend from the peaceful Buddhist businessman to the man who will sacrifice everything, to get back this woman he loves. Nowhere is this better embodied than when Ben is faced with the tough choice of sticking to his peaceful beliefs or incinerating a man in cold blood during one of their moves against the cartel. I found myself actually curious about what Ben would do next. Unlike Chon and O, Ben has some depth and struggles with his personal beliefs, his love for O and what needs to be done. Needless to say, Johnson delivers a believable performance that actually helps move along the action and was the only protagonist that kept me interested in their battle.
In addition to Johnson, the film is littered with several strong supporting cast members who all deliver solid performances. Selma Hayek is strong as Elena, the leader of the cartel that challenges Ben and Chon. She is a ruthless and shrewd businesswoman and yet has a better “sense of morality” as she explains during her interactions with O and her own daughter. Her enforcer Lado is played by Benicio Del Toro who, with the help of an uncomfortable rapist mustache, comes off as an extremely menacing character. Del Toro solidifies himself on screen by being down right creepy and yet intelligent in his own savage way. During every moment of screen time you expect him to kill someone just because it is good for business.
A needed bit of change of pace is provided by an unexpected performance by Emile Hirsch (Into the Wild) as Ben and Chon’s witty financial broker, Spin. As well as by John Travolta who plays Dennis, the dirty DEA agent who’s in Ben and Chon’s pocket. In fact, even though Travolta’s screen time is maybe a total of 12 minutes, his performance steals the show with his sole bit of comic relief, for lack of a better explanation. Perhaps the strongest acted moment of this film is during a standoff scene between Del Toro and Travolta that in many ways makes me want to know more about those characters. And what that movie would be about.
In typical Stone fashion the movie is shot in a variety of film angles and stylistic devices used to foreshadow and at times create a foreboding presence. Visually the movie provides a strong and believable feeling for the world these characters live in and the way that they operate their business. In addition, narration is used at points to move along the action and provide the audience with insight that otherwise would not have been possible on performances alone. I personally have no problem with narration as long as it is set up from the beginning and used to advance the story, which it is. However in the final act, the movie introduces a film device from left field that completely kills the already weak pacing of the movie. I cannot get into it without giving away the story, but I can see how this device could completely ruin the movie for those patrons who are already disinterested by the time the final act rolls around. Especially for those who do not find any connection to any of the characters. In which case, the pacing of this film will seem slow and drawn out.
I am torn about my review of this film. Savages is something that I wanted to like more than I did. Two of the three protagonists are one dimensional and if it was not for Johnson and the strong supporting cast I might have found the movie boring. It was also completely different from the expectations set by the commercials. Those looking for an action movie will feel misled and will more than likely be disappointed with the film. Not that there is not any action, only it comes between very long periods of dialogue and slow pacing. By the end of the movie, you are either invested in these characters or just waiting for the lights to come up in the theater. And in typical Oliver Stone fashion the movie tries to make us question our own perception of just what it means to be a savage.
As the film opens we are introduced to “O” (Blake Lively) who, as our narrator, acquaints us with the open yet loving relationship she shares with our two protagonists, Chon and Ben. Chon (Taylor Kitsch), an ex-Navy SEAL, is unquestionably the muscle of the trio’s operation. Chon was the original financier for his high school friend Ben, (Aaron Johnson) the peaceful, charitable, botany genius who has created the most potent marijuana in the world. Together these two embody the perfect man for O, while the three of them enjoy the spoils of the small marijuana empire they created in southern California.
That is until they gain the attention from a Mexican cartel intent on creating a stronger foothold in the southern California area. The cartel offers them a partnership and explains that by teaming up their business will triple in three years. But when the trio refuse the offer, the ruthless head of the cartel, Elena (Selma Hayek), instructs her enforcer, Lado (Benicio Del Toro), to kidnap O and hold her hostage so the boys will cooperate. Soon our heroes use their network of connections, like crooked DEA agent Dennis (John Travolta) and financial broker Spin (Emile Hirsch), to battle the cartel in a series of savage maneuvers to get back their one “shared” love.
Stone has been known to inspire his actors to give Oscar worthy performances. Sadly, you will not find any such performances here. That is not to say that the acting was terrible. It just seemed that the characters themselves are uninspired which is a shame because I would have liked to have seen some growth in this young cast, especially from Taylor Kitsch.
I feel that many critics will be hard on Taylor Kitsch because of his previous epic fails of 2012 (John Carter and Battleship) however I am surprised to admit that, for this movie at least, he gets a pass in my book. Not because he delivers a fantastic performance that makes me believe he’s truly an up and coming talent, but rather because he is convincing in his portrayal of Chon. When O describes our protagonists as each being one half of the perfect man, she refers to Chon as “Hard Steel,” which is exactly what Kitsch plays him as, a one-dimensional, emotionally devoid character with no growth or any real redeeming qualities other than the ability to go to war. Regardless of whether or not Kitsch has any additional acting range not showcased in this film, I cannot penalize him for his performance in this movie. He fit the part that he was cast in fine.
Blake Lively (Gossip Girl, Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants) plays O, short for Ophelia. And yes she channels the mad, love-struck, melancholic character from Hamlet after whom she is named. And while it is easy to make those comparisons to the character of this film, they only appear to be on the surface, if anything. And herein lies the problem. Regardless of how you feel about her open relationship with Ben and Chon, the more I learned about her, the less I cared. Like Kitsch’s character, O is boring and one dimensional. She is the product of being a pretty little rich girl whose mother is off somewhere with husband number twelve. She has been getting stoned every day since she was young and the only place she finds herself loved is in with the company of Chon and Ben. Tragic, I know. While watching the film I honestly thought to myself, if I was Ben or Chon, I would say, “Fuck it. Cut her loose and let’s go to Asia.” She has no redeeming qualities other than being good looking and a good lay. So why would they go through so much trouble for her? The trio’s relationship is weakly tied together by her telling us through narration but never really materializes on screen. At times you get some of a feeling that Ben actually loves her but that love is never really reciprocated from O. It is safe to say that that I did not derive any loving connection from Lively’s performance, though her deliver as a narrator was tolerable.
Aaron Johnson (Kick-Ass) is the one redeeming performance from this young cast. In contrast to Chon, O describes Ben as “Soft Wood” which makes him the better half. Ben is the one character who actually goes through some kind of character arc and growth. Using the wood analogy, we watch him bend from the peaceful Buddhist businessman to the man who will sacrifice everything, to get back this woman he loves. Nowhere is this better embodied than when Ben is faced with the tough choice of sticking to his peaceful beliefs or incinerating a man in cold blood during one of their moves against the cartel. I found myself actually curious about what Ben would do next. Unlike Chon and O, Ben has some depth and struggles with his personal beliefs, his love for O and what needs to be done. Needless to say, Johnson delivers a believable performance that actually helps move along the action and was the only protagonist that kept me interested in their battle.
In addition to Johnson, the film is littered with several strong supporting cast members who all deliver solid performances. Selma Hayek is strong as Elena, the leader of the cartel that challenges Ben and Chon. She is a ruthless and shrewd businesswoman and yet has a better “sense of morality” as she explains during her interactions with O and her own daughter. Her enforcer Lado is played by Benicio Del Toro who, with the help of an uncomfortable rapist mustache, comes off as an extremely menacing character. Del Toro solidifies himself on screen by being down right creepy and yet intelligent in his own savage way. During every moment of screen time you expect him to kill someone just because it is good for business.
A needed bit of change of pace is provided by an unexpected performance by Emile Hirsch (Into the Wild) as Ben and Chon’s witty financial broker, Spin. As well as by John Travolta who plays Dennis, the dirty DEA agent who’s in Ben and Chon’s pocket. In fact, even though Travolta’s screen time is maybe a total of 12 minutes, his performance steals the show with his sole bit of comic relief, for lack of a better explanation. Perhaps the strongest acted moment of this film is during a standoff scene between Del Toro and Travolta that in many ways makes me want to know more about those characters. And what that movie would be about.
In typical Stone fashion the movie is shot in a variety of film angles and stylistic devices used to foreshadow and at times create a foreboding presence. Visually the movie provides a strong and believable feeling for the world these characters live in and the way that they operate their business. In addition, narration is used at points to move along the action and provide the audience with insight that otherwise would not have been possible on performances alone. I personally have no problem with narration as long as it is set up from the beginning and used to advance the story, which it is. However in the final act, the movie introduces a film device from left field that completely kills the already weak pacing of the movie. I cannot get into it without giving away the story, but I can see how this device could completely ruin the movie for those patrons who are already disinterested by the time the final act rolls around. Especially for those who do not find any connection to any of the characters. In which case, the pacing of this film will seem slow and drawn out.
I am torn about my review of this film. Savages is something that I wanted to like more than I did. Two of the three protagonists are one dimensional and if it was not for Johnson and the strong supporting cast I might have found the movie boring. It was also completely different from the expectations set by the commercials. Those looking for an action movie will feel misled and will more than likely be disappointed with the film. Not that there is not any action, only it comes between very long periods of dialogue and slow pacing. By the end of the movie, you are either invested in these characters or just waiting for the lights to come up in the theater. And in typical Oliver Stone fashion the movie tries to make us question our own perception of just what it means to be a savage.