Search
Search results
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Killer of Enemies (Killer of Enemies, #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
Original Rating: 3.5 out of 5
This review and more can be found at <a href="http://www.bookwyrmingthoughts.com/2015/07/review-killer-of-enemies-by-joseph-bruchac.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
I never thought I would ever come across a book that dumps information on you AND like it.
With a post-apocalyptic world where people are ruled over genetically modified people who are barely human anymore, Joseph Bruchac has obviously planned this book very well and vividly, even with the amount of information he dumps on you for most of the book. I find that the information dump actually goes very well with the amount of action there is. Take away all of the information, and you'll be left with an empty husk of a book that is just full of nonstop action, which would definitely backfire big time on the author because it would be pretty undeveloped.
Bruchac is very detail-oriented throughout the book it's not just the information being dumped. Lozen, our main character who is a monster hunter for the genetically modified people ruling over her home, apparently goes into excruciating detail about some things, such as talking about someone's body odor or eating a monster's heart (that was gross).
Killer of Enemies also promotes diversity in the young adult genre Lozen is a Native American, and I can honestly say I have never had a Native American in any book I've read so far until now. There are hints of Native American traditions and culture woven throughout, and I find that it's probably one of the reasons why I actually enjoyed this a lot more than I would have without the Native American aspect.
Despite how awesome and diverse Killer of Enemies, there were just some things that knocked down some points. Throughout the information dumping, I don't think Bruchac actually mentions why or how the four rulers of Haven actually got their names. The Dreamer and Lady Time make sense, but the Jester doesn't really make sense, and Diablita Loca (how do you even say that?) makes no sense whatsoever.
There also doesn't seem to be a purpose, and while there does seem to be one, I just can't really tell at all. The entire book is pretty much described in less than ten words: hunting weird monsters, telling stories, flashbacks, and information dump.
I did, however, like how Bruchac ends Killer of Enemies by saying something along the lines of, "Just because this story is over doesn't mean everything is now peachy and happily ever after. It's just uncertain, but right now, everything is great."
This review and more can be found at <a href="http://www.bookwyrmingthoughts.com/2015/07/review-killer-of-enemies-by-joseph-bruchac.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
I never thought I would ever come across a book that dumps information on you AND like it.
With a post-apocalyptic world where people are ruled over genetically modified people who are barely human anymore, Joseph Bruchac has obviously planned this book very well and vividly, even with the amount of information he dumps on you for most of the book. I find that the information dump actually goes very well with the amount of action there is. Take away all of the information, and you'll be left with an empty husk of a book that is just full of nonstop action, which would definitely backfire big time on the author because it would be pretty undeveloped.
Bruchac is very detail-oriented throughout the book it's not just the information being dumped. Lozen, our main character who is a monster hunter for the genetically modified people ruling over her home, apparently goes into excruciating detail about some things, such as talking about someone's body odor or eating a monster's heart (that was gross).
Killer of Enemies also promotes diversity in the young adult genre Lozen is a Native American, and I can honestly say I have never had a Native American in any book I've read so far until now. There are hints of Native American traditions and culture woven throughout, and I find that it's probably one of the reasons why I actually enjoyed this a lot more than I would have without the Native American aspect.
Despite how awesome and diverse Killer of Enemies, there were just some things that knocked down some points. Throughout the information dumping, I don't think Bruchac actually mentions why or how the four rulers of Haven actually got their names. The Dreamer and Lady Time make sense, but the Jester doesn't really make sense, and Diablita Loca (how do you even say that?) makes no sense whatsoever.
There also doesn't seem to be a purpose, and while there does seem to be one, I just can't really tell at all. The entire book is pretty much described in less than ten words: hunting weird monsters, telling stories, flashbacks, and information dump.
I did, however, like how Bruchac ends Killer of Enemies by saying something along the lines of, "Just because this story is over doesn't mean everything is now peachy and happily ever after. It's just uncertain, but right now, everything is great."
Gareth von Kallenbach (968 KP) rated Man Down (2016) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
This Dito Montiel (Fighting, The Son of No One) directed film is a look at mental health and how soldiers returning from war can be affected by the tragedy of war and life.
This film tries to put us inside the mind of a soldier and they lead up to his deployment to war, the trauma that can be suffered at war and the result of seeing things that can’t be unseen. It begins with U.S. Marine Gabriel Drummer (Shia LaBeouf) searching for his son, Johnathan (Charlie Shotwell), and wife, Natalie (Kate Mara), in a post-apocalyptic America.
His only company is his best friend and fellow war veteran Devin Roberts (Jai Courtney). We then flash back to a counseling session between Gabriel and Counselor Peyton (Gary Oldman). They are recounting an incident that happened while Gabriel and Devin were in the field as well as talk about the relationship between the two brothers in arms. Peyton probes Gabriel for answers to what happened in the field and what his life at home will be like when he returns. The story takes us through Gabriel’s journey from boot camp to his search to be reunited with his wife and child.
The beginning of the film is so scattered with flash backs and flash forwards it is not the easiest story to follow. Montiel tries to tie the story all together at the end but it really done quickly and sloppily. There was no really good flow to the film.
The message at the end was really powerful but there execution to get there really didn’t work for me. The cast individual performances were good but I thought that as a whole there was not cohesion.
The relationships between all the characters seemed forced and it was hard to get emotionally invested in what should have been and emotionally compelling story. LaBeouf does commit and his performance I would say the bright spot. I think the intention was that the end of the movie should be a surprise or twist but the ending for me was never really in doubt.
There were points when the film seemed to have momentum but that was stopped by a flash back or forward that would take you out of the moment. All trying to set up a conclusion that seemed inevitable.
The idea of bringing awareness to a real issue in our country, of returning veterans suffering from PTSD, is a noble one and I applaud them for trying. I just wish the execution would have been better overall.
This film tries to put us inside the mind of a soldier and they lead up to his deployment to war, the trauma that can be suffered at war and the result of seeing things that can’t be unseen. It begins with U.S. Marine Gabriel Drummer (Shia LaBeouf) searching for his son, Johnathan (Charlie Shotwell), and wife, Natalie (Kate Mara), in a post-apocalyptic America.
His only company is his best friend and fellow war veteran Devin Roberts (Jai Courtney). We then flash back to a counseling session between Gabriel and Counselor Peyton (Gary Oldman). They are recounting an incident that happened while Gabriel and Devin were in the field as well as talk about the relationship between the two brothers in arms. Peyton probes Gabriel for answers to what happened in the field and what his life at home will be like when he returns. The story takes us through Gabriel’s journey from boot camp to his search to be reunited with his wife and child.
The beginning of the film is so scattered with flash backs and flash forwards it is not the easiest story to follow. Montiel tries to tie the story all together at the end but it really done quickly and sloppily. There was no really good flow to the film.
The message at the end was really powerful but there execution to get there really didn’t work for me. The cast individual performances were good but I thought that as a whole there was not cohesion.
The relationships between all the characters seemed forced and it was hard to get emotionally invested in what should have been and emotionally compelling story. LaBeouf does commit and his performance I would say the bright spot. I think the intention was that the end of the movie should be a surprise or twist but the ending for me was never really in doubt.
There were points when the film seemed to have momentum but that was stopped by a flash back or forward that would take you out of the moment. All trying to set up a conclusion that seemed inevitable.
The idea of bringing awareness to a real issue in our country, of returning veterans suffering from PTSD, is a noble one and I applaud them for trying. I just wish the execution would have been better overall.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Posthuman in Tabletop Games
Aug 25, 2021
So many storytellers have attempted to predict, or at least depict, the future of humanity. Many assert that a cataclysmic event will trigger some dark post-apocalyptic culture of humanity’s last breath on Earth. Others would have us fleeing to the stars to colonize and begin our species anew. But what if the former was correct and instead of becoming X-Men humans would rapidly mutate and become… something else entirely?
Posthuman is set in that dark post-apocalyptic horrorscape and is an exploration adventure game with character upgrading and dice-driven combat. The twist here is that humans are trying to escape the mutant creatures to The Fortress, a safe haven for all, but once infected may turn mutant and also turn on the party to prevent that glorious end. In this review, however, I will be playing through the solo rules, and they do not have players turning into mutants during the game. Bummer, eh?
DISCLAIMER: We are using the Kickstarter Deluxe version of the game. We do have the Defiant expansion from the KS campaign, but will not be using it for this review (I don’t think). Also, we do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rule book, 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 from the publisher directly or from your FLGS. -T
To setup consult the rulebook, as there are so many decks of cards and character setup steps that need to happen that I just cannot detail here. Once setup your play area will look something like the photo below. Once setup is complete you are ready to begin your journey to The Fortress.
Posthuman is played over a series of rounds until the player wins or loses. The only way to win is to enter The Fortress before the Event deck runs out, and obviously the only way to lose is to run the Event deck out of cards or become a mutant by suffering five scars.
A round consists of several phases. The first phase is Event Resolution. The player will flip the top Event card and resolve its text. These Events could be a one-shot bad (or good) thing for the player, or may be an ongoing Seasonal Event that will stay in play until another Seasonal Event is drawn.
After the Events, characters will need to Eat to survive. Characters will be able to forage for food in a subsequent phase, but know that food is very important and if characters go too long without eating they will be suffering penalties of their Health and Morale.
Once fed (or starved, I suppose), the player will Declare an Action from the following: Camp, Forage, Scout, or Move (in multiplayer there is an additional action as well). To Camp players will forego any other action to heal their character. When a character Forages they will flip the current tile’s marker to show it may no longer be foraged and draw a Supplies card to see what supplies they will be able to gather. These could be more food tokens, ammo, equipment or weapons. To Scout a character will draw terrain tiles equal to the number of exits shown on their current terrain tile. The player will place the tiles however they want and this will provide insight into future locations and what they may hold. Lastly a player may Move into a connected terrain tile and begin having encounters upon it.
Most of the action in Posthuman comes as a result of having encounters on terrain tiles. Depending on where the character meeple is located on the Central Board track encounters will be drawn from the level one, two, or three decks and encountered immediately. Most of the encounters are combats, and I could write another whole post on combat, but I will spare you the details and merely say that combat is very involved and encompasses many steps to resolve. At the end of the combat a character may receive the encountered creature card as a VP trophy to be spent later on upgrades. The VP card may also instruct the player to move the meeple one space closer to The Fortress on the Central Board track. The other type of encounter card presents choices for the player to make or stat tests to overcome via die rolls.
Play continues in this fashion until the player wins by reaching The Fortress, or by losing to the forces set against them.
Components. This box is chock FULL of components and they are all super high-quality and enjoyable to play with. I do have a couple issues with some bits. Firstly, the player boards are quite small, and the tracking cubes are not meant for big meaty paws at all. Similarly, the tracking chits to be used for stats on the player board are flimsy and don’t really stay in place too well. Also the game comes with two different shades of gray player meeple colors and NOT a purple option. Shame! Shame! Shame!
When all is said and done Posthuman delivers an exciting experience on the table for a solo player and indulges the player’s need to roll dice on the regular. Just me? Didn’t think so. The combat is great, but I found myself discarding more enemies than defeating in some games and that is quite annoying. One game I refused to Scout at all and that totally bit me in the booty. So Scout, y’all.
Just know that playing this solo is NOT a cakewalk at all. I watched a playthrough video where the host won the game but nearly every roll of the die was favorable and every combat successful. Even still, she nearly ran out of time and lost the game. So games really can come down to the wire. Now, I haven’t really gotten very close to winning yet, but my day is coming!
I like this one a lot, and will certainly be going back to it for my solo plays. I have been playing some really great solo games lately, and I am very thankful for that. Posthuman, however, I don’t think will get much multiplayer action at my house. The rules are plentiful and the people I normally game with do not enjoy rules-heavy games. Similarly, I don’t think the theme is for everyone. I dig it, but different strokes and all. If you are in the market for a new (to you) game that can be played solo or multiplayer with an interesting theme and is pretty difficult, look up Posthuman. Just stay away from the mutants. These do NOT want to recruit you to their school for gifted people.
Posthuman is set in that dark post-apocalyptic horrorscape and is an exploration adventure game with character upgrading and dice-driven combat. The twist here is that humans are trying to escape the mutant creatures to The Fortress, a safe haven for all, but once infected may turn mutant and also turn on the party to prevent that glorious end. In this review, however, I will be playing through the solo rules, and they do not have players turning into mutants during the game. Bummer, eh?
DISCLAIMER: We are using the Kickstarter Deluxe version of the game. We do have the Defiant expansion from the KS campaign, but will not be using it for this review (I don’t think). Also, we do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rule book, 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 from the publisher directly or from your FLGS. -T
To setup consult the rulebook, as there are so many decks of cards and character setup steps that need to happen that I just cannot detail here. Once setup your play area will look something like the photo below. Once setup is complete you are ready to begin your journey to The Fortress.
Posthuman is played over a series of rounds until the player wins or loses. The only way to win is to enter The Fortress before the Event deck runs out, and obviously the only way to lose is to run the Event deck out of cards or become a mutant by suffering five scars.
A round consists of several phases. The first phase is Event Resolution. The player will flip the top Event card and resolve its text. These Events could be a one-shot bad (or good) thing for the player, or may be an ongoing Seasonal Event that will stay in play until another Seasonal Event is drawn.
After the Events, characters will need to Eat to survive. Characters will be able to forage for food in a subsequent phase, but know that food is very important and if characters go too long without eating they will be suffering penalties of their Health and Morale.
Once fed (or starved, I suppose), the player will Declare an Action from the following: Camp, Forage, Scout, or Move (in multiplayer there is an additional action as well). To Camp players will forego any other action to heal their character. When a character Forages they will flip the current tile’s marker to show it may no longer be foraged and draw a Supplies card to see what supplies they will be able to gather. These could be more food tokens, ammo, equipment or weapons. To Scout a character will draw terrain tiles equal to the number of exits shown on their current terrain tile. The player will place the tiles however they want and this will provide insight into future locations and what they may hold. Lastly a player may Move into a connected terrain tile and begin having encounters upon it.
Most of the action in Posthuman comes as a result of having encounters on terrain tiles. Depending on where the character meeple is located on the Central Board track encounters will be drawn from the level one, two, or three decks and encountered immediately. Most of the encounters are combats, and I could write another whole post on combat, but I will spare you the details and merely say that combat is very involved and encompasses many steps to resolve. At the end of the combat a character may receive the encountered creature card as a VP trophy to be spent later on upgrades. The VP card may also instruct the player to move the meeple one space closer to The Fortress on the Central Board track. The other type of encounter card presents choices for the player to make or stat tests to overcome via die rolls.
Play continues in this fashion until the player wins by reaching The Fortress, or by losing to the forces set against them.
Components. This box is chock FULL of components and they are all super high-quality and enjoyable to play with. I do have a couple issues with some bits. Firstly, the player boards are quite small, and the tracking cubes are not meant for big meaty paws at all. Similarly, the tracking chits to be used for stats on the player board are flimsy and don’t really stay in place too well. Also the game comes with two different shades of gray player meeple colors and NOT a purple option. Shame! Shame! Shame!
When all is said and done Posthuman delivers an exciting experience on the table for a solo player and indulges the player’s need to roll dice on the regular. Just me? Didn’t think so. The combat is great, but I found myself discarding more enemies than defeating in some games and that is quite annoying. One game I refused to Scout at all and that totally bit me in the booty. So Scout, y’all.
Just know that playing this solo is NOT a cakewalk at all. I watched a playthrough video where the host won the game but nearly every roll of the die was favorable and every combat successful. Even still, she nearly ran out of time and lost the game. So games really can come down to the wire. Now, I haven’t really gotten very close to winning yet, but my day is coming!
I like this one a lot, and will certainly be going back to it for my solo plays. I have been playing some really great solo games lately, and I am very thankful for that. Posthuman, however, I don’t think will get much multiplayer action at my house. The rules are plentiful and the people I normally game with do not enjoy rules-heavy games. Similarly, I don’t think the theme is for everyone. I dig it, but different strokes and all. If you are in the market for a new (to you) game that can be played solo or multiplayer with an interesting theme and is pretty difficult, look up Posthuman. Just stay away from the mutants. These do NOT want to recruit you to their school for gifted people.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Mad Max (1979) in Movies
Jan 5, 2018
Decent
Guilty confession: Typically when I watch a "classic" or a film I've really been looking forward to, I go into it expecting to like it. In other words, the film is already ahead of the curve when it comes to my grading scale. It has to do a lot to let me down. I hate to say it, but Mad Max? It let me down. Not in the sense that it was bad, but rather in the sense that I was hoping for more.
Max is a police officer in a post-apocalyptic world where biker gangs rule the road. After his partner is brutally burned by one of the most dangerous gangs, Max decides to retire but a terrible turn of events sucks him right back in.
The film got off to a slow start for me. I was confused by what was happening and why it was happening. It's not a good sign when I have to jump on to Wikipedia to clarify things. Unfortunately things never quite bounced back for me after that. I spent a good majority of the film thinking, "What are the stakes for Max? Why should I care about his character?" You're not really given a ton of insight into who he is and why he's a hero you want to root for. Read to kids in the hospital. Pull a cat out of a tree. Do something! Give me a reason to care. I don't think that's too much to ask for.
Despite my issues with the film, Mad Max is carried by a solid performance from Gibson. Visceral rage just oozes from the man as he goes out for his revenge. He's got that look, one we've seen in many films before. A look that says, "I'm crazy and I want you to know it." His passion in the role is a shining spot.
The film also benefits from solid world-building. Though you're only given a small taste, it's all you need to see. The road is what's important, the heartbeat of the film. You witness it in the attention to detail behind the cars (Max's car in the end was dope) and the gangs' constant power struggle over maintaining territory. The road is a wasteland, yet extremely vital for those living in it.
I'm giving Mad Max a 73. Perhaps that's not a bad thing. For a movie to be missing some key components and still get a decent score says a lot. It's kind of like eating at an expensive restaurant: When you see your plate, you're slightly let down because you were hoping for more, but you quickly find that the portion you received was good enough.
Max is a police officer in a post-apocalyptic world where biker gangs rule the road. After his partner is brutally burned by one of the most dangerous gangs, Max decides to retire but a terrible turn of events sucks him right back in.
The film got off to a slow start for me. I was confused by what was happening and why it was happening. It's not a good sign when I have to jump on to Wikipedia to clarify things. Unfortunately things never quite bounced back for me after that. I spent a good majority of the film thinking, "What are the stakes for Max? Why should I care about his character?" You're not really given a ton of insight into who he is and why he's a hero you want to root for. Read to kids in the hospital. Pull a cat out of a tree. Do something! Give me a reason to care. I don't think that's too much to ask for.
Despite my issues with the film, Mad Max is carried by a solid performance from Gibson. Visceral rage just oozes from the man as he goes out for his revenge. He's got that look, one we've seen in many films before. A look that says, "I'm crazy and I want you to know it." His passion in the role is a shining spot.
The film also benefits from solid world-building. Though you're only given a small taste, it's all you need to see. The road is what's important, the heartbeat of the film. You witness it in the attention to detail behind the cars (Max's car in the end was dope) and the gangs' constant power struggle over maintaining territory. The road is a wasteland, yet extremely vital for those living in it.
I'm giving Mad Max a 73. Perhaps that's not a bad thing. For a movie to be missing some key components and still get a decent score says a lot. It's kind of like eating at an expensive restaurant: When you see your plate, you're slightly let down because you were hoping for more, but you quickly find that the portion you received was good enough.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Turbo Kid (2015) in Movies
Apr 21, 2018
Extremely Unique
You've never seen anything like it. It was a mashup of everything I loved, both as a kid and as an adult. Set in the post-apocalyptic year of 1997, a teenager becomes a superhero to save his girlfriend from the clutches of an evil villain.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 7
While it may not grab you immediately, Turbo Kid's beginning succeeds in establishing the world you'll be living in for the rest of the film. This world never left the 80's. Survivors get around on mostly bikes and use old-school technology like walkmen.
My interest was really piqued when I saw three heads on pikes out in the middle of the wasteland. What did those men do to deserve that? Who put them there? The only way to really find out is to watch more. On we go...
Characters: 9
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The visuals are extremely weird, but in a unique, good way. It's original in every way imaginable. A number of shots give you a nostalgic feel. Other shots panning the landscape leave you with a barren, hopeless feeling. So sad what their world has become, yet what an era to be stuck in!
There is violence. A lot of it. A surprising amount in fact. Heads roll, guts spew in brilliant fashion. Think Tarantino in a Mad Max type of setting. It's jarring to look at, but very entertaining and effective. If you are squeamish in anyway, you may find yourself averting your eyes. At one point, my wife actually had to leave the room.
Conflict: 10
Genre: 10
As far as action/adventure films go, this stands out as being extremely original. It was as if they took a number of films I had seen before and jumbled them all into one finished product. The action pops on screen and the adventure portions move the story along in swift fashion.
Memorability: 9
Pace: 10
The film never gets boring at any point. Between the crazy vibe that latches on to you with the help of an awesome soundtrack and the steady play of action, you're always engaged. I also appreciated that the film never took itself too seriously as the action is broken up by a few hilarious moments that keeps the film from getting too dark.
Plot: 8
While the plot may seem pretty straightforward at first, there are a couple twists that keep things interesting. Overall the story is a strong foundation and is intriguing enough to make you care about the action.
Resolution: 3
Overall: 86
Fun, enjoyable film. And AVAILABLE ON NETFLIX! Check it out tonight. If you're a fan of action and the 80's, you will have a blast.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 7
While it may not grab you immediately, Turbo Kid's beginning succeeds in establishing the world you'll be living in for the rest of the film. This world never left the 80's. Survivors get around on mostly bikes and use old-school technology like walkmen.
My interest was really piqued when I saw three heads on pikes out in the middle of the wasteland. What did those men do to deserve that? Who put them there? The only way to really find out is to watch more. On we go...
Characters: 9
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The visuals are extremely weird, but in a unique, good way. It's original in every way imaginable. A number of shots give you a nostalgic feel. Other shots panning the landscape leave you with a barren, hopeless feeling. So sad what their world has become, yet what an era to be stuck in!
There is violence. A lot of it. A surprising amount in fact. Heads roll, guts spew in brilliant fashion. Think Tarantino in a Mad Max type of setting. It's jarring to look at, but very entertaining and effective. If you are squeamish in anyway, you may find yourself averting your eyes. At one point, my wife actually had to leave the room.
Conflict: 10
Genre: 10
As far as action/adventure films go, this stands out as being extremely original. It was as if they took a number of films I had seen before and jumbled them all into one finished product. The action pops on screen and the adventure portions move the story along in swift fashion.
Memorability: 9
Pace: 10
The film never gets boring at any point. Between the crazy vibe that latches on to you with the help of an awesome soundtrack and the steady play of action, you're always engaged. I also appreciated that the film never took itself too seriously as the action is broken up by a few hilarious moments that keeps the film from getting too dark.
Plot: 8
While the plot may seem pretty straightforward at first, there are a couple twists that keep things interesting. Overall the story is a strong foundation and is intriguing enough to make you care about the action.
Resolution: 3
Overall: 86
Fun, enjoyable film. And AVAILABLE ON NETFLIX! Check it out tonight. If you're a fan of action and the 80's, you will have a blast.
Kelly (279 KP) rated The Passage in Books
Dec 4, 2018
In depth, well thought out characters (2 more)
Intelligent plot
A nobody is safe story line!
A ‘could not put it down’ read.
The passage is the first of three books which span centuries, covering before, during and after a vampire apocalypse.
I have to say, I was hooked on this novel from the start. Originally picking it up, without even reading the synopsis or reviews, I was surprised to find out that this is actually a novel about vampires (which I did not expect from the title). The build up to the vampire apocalypse is well thought out, flawless planned and written, demonstrating expert skill by Justin Cronin.
The characters are complex, and demonstrate both strengths and flaws, nobody is perfect in this novel not even Amy or Peter, who are the main characters the story centres around. We grow to love these characters, just as much as we grow to strongly dislike characters such as Babcock and Grey. I believe that the emotional connection that I was able to apply to these characters, is what drew me further into the novel. Equally all characters face hardships during the novel, some worse than others, but I found myself wishing that those characters I deemed to be good, would face better times, and those who I felt were bad individuals would soon face their comeuppance. Good or bad however, Cronins’ concentration on the back grounds of the characters does allow us to emphasise and understand why the primary characters within the novel act the way they did, even if this was in conflict with our own values and morals.
As the story unravels, Cronin does jump between different time periods (pre, during and post apocalypse). Although Cronin does give each period a fair amount of time within the book, I did find it difficult to leave the characters from one period behind, in order to move onto another, partially due to the attachment that I had created with the characters. Although the time jumps were carried out at deliberate timings and are not too frequent, I did find them a little distracting.
The story itself makes sense as a stand alone novel, but makes even more sense when read with the rest of the series. When read with the other two novels, The Passage is merely a scene setting novel, for the books that are to come, and as such, has a lot less of a biblical undertone than the series as an entirety (there are a lot of references to the Old Testament in the books that follow). Despite this, the book is a highly enjoyable read, and is not your usual vampire/ apocalyptic novel.
I have to say, I was hooked on this novel from the start. Originally picking it up, without even reading the synopsis or reviews, I was surprised to find out that this is actually a novel about vampires (which I did not expect from the title). The build up to the vampire apocalypse is well thought out, flawless planned and written, demonstrating expert skill by Justin Cronin.
The characters are complex, and demonstrate both strengths and flaws, nobody is perfect in this novel not even Amy or Peter, who are the main characters the story centres around. We grow to love these characters, just as much as we grow to strongly dislike characters such as Babcock and Grey. I believe that the emotional connection that I was able to apply to these characters, is what drew me further into the novel. Equally all characters face hardships during the novel, some worse than others, but I found myself wishing that those characters I deemed to be good, would face better times, and those who I felt were bad individuals would soon face their comeuppance. Good or bad however, Cronins’ concentration on the back grounds of the characters does allow us to emphasise and understand why the primary characters within the novel act the way they did, even if this was in conflict with our own values and morals.
As the story unravels, Cronin does jump between different time periods (pre, during and post apocalypse). Although Cronin does give each period a fair amount of time within the book, I did find it difficult to leave the characters from one period behind, in order to move onto another, partially due to the attachment that I had created with the characters. Although the time jumps were carried out at deliberate timings and are not too frequent, I did find them a little distracting.
The story itself makes sense as a stand alone novel, but makes even more sense when read with the rest of the series. When read with the other two novels, The Passage is merely a scene setting novel, for the books that are to come, and as such, has a lot less of a biblical undertone than the series as an entirety (there are a lot of references to the Old Testament in the books that follow). Despite this, the book is a highly enjoyable read, and is not your usual vampire/ apocalyptic novel.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Bird Box (2018) in Movies
Dec 26, 2018
It's easy to draw comparisons between Bird Box and one of this years biggest hits, A Quiet Place. As Malorie (Sandra Bullock), guides two young children towards a boat, all three of them blindfolded and terrified of the consequences should they remove them, the similarities with the post apocalyptic themes of A Quiet Place are clear. In that movie, you couldn't make a sound for fear of drawing the attentions of the ominous killers, while in this one you're unable to use your eyes to look at the world around you.
But Bird Box does what AQP didn't, by going back in time 5 years to see how the apocalypse all came about. A pregnant Malorie is visiting the hospital for a scan, along with sister Jessica (Sarah Paulson), while news reports detail events unfolding throughout the world. Something is causing thousands of people to suddenly commit suicide, and it has found its way to American shores. As Malorie and Jessica leave the hospital, everything around them descends into panic, chaos and destruction. Cars crash, people throw themselves in front of oncoming cars and thousands of others are running to escape from who knows what. As her sister meets an untimely death, the heavily pregnant Malorie is helped into a nearby house where a large number of people have already found refuge.
We manage to catch our breath for a short while, while the survivors piece together what has happened, offering their theories. As one of them explains - "Humanity has been judged and we've been found wanting. They go by different names. You got world religion and mythology that's full of mentions of demons or spirit creatures. People who’ve seen these creatures almost always describe their encounter as with an entity who takes on the form of your worst fears, your deepest sadness or your greatest loss. It’s not bullshit. It’s real talk, it’s facts."
Life continues in the house for a while, with all the windows covered to prevent anyone from seeing something that might lead to their death. There's a tense trip to the supermarket for supplies, driving a car with blacked out windows and only a satnav to guide them, along with various dramas between the group. Every so often, we rejoin the future timeline, as Malorie and the children (referred to only as boy and girl) make their way along the river.
Bird Box is more of a slow burn than A Quiet Place, and we never actually see what is responsible for causing the suicides either, but I still found much to enjoy with it. And as we become fully immersed in the present timeline, following the blindfolded journey, things build to a tense and satisfying climax.
But Bird Box does what AQP didn't, by going back in time 5 years to see how the apocalypse all came about. A pregnant Malorie is visiting the hospital for a scan, along with sister Jessica (Sarah Paulson), while news reports detail events unfolding throughout the world. Something is causing thousands of people to suddenly commit suicide, and it has found its way to American shores. As Malorie and Jessica leave the hospital, everything around them descends into panic, chaos and destruction. Cars crash, people throw themselves in front of oncoming cars and thousands of others are running to escape from who knows what. As her sister meets an untimely death, the heavily pregnant Malorie is helped into a nearby house where a large number of people have already found refuge.
We manage to catch our breath for a short while, while the survivors piece together what has happened, offering their theories. As one of them explains - "Humanity has been judged and we've been found wanting. They go by different names. You got world religion and mythology that's full of mentions of demons or spirit creatures. People who’ve seen these creatures almost always describe their encounter as with an entity who takes on the form of your worst fears, your deepest sadness or your greatest loss. It’s not bullshit. It’s real talk, it’s facts."
Life continues in the house for a while, with all the windows covered to prevent anyone from seeing something that might lead to their death. There's a tense trip to the supermarket for supplies, driving a car with blacked out windows and only a satnav to guide them, along with various dramas between the group. Every so often, we rejoin the future timeline, as Malorie and the children (referred to only as boy and girl) make their way along the river.
Bird Box is more of a slow burn than A Quiet Place, and we never actually see what is responsible for causing the suicides either, but I still found much to enjoy with it. And as we become fully immersed in the present timeline, following the blindfolded journey, things build to a tense and satisfying climax.
Gareth von Kallenbach (968 KP) rated The Book of Eli (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
In a post apocalyptic future, a loan man travels the desolate roads on a solitary quest. The man known only as Eli (Denzel Washington), has been travelling west for decades on a mission of faith after receiving what he believes to be a mission of divine origin.
The solitary life of Eli is interrupted now and then by bandits that roam the lands causing death and mayhem to all those unfortunate enough to cross their path.
This often ends very badly for the bandits as Eli is highly skilled at defending himself with all manner of weapons, especially a very large knife.
It is his deadly skills that lands Eli on the radar of as local dictator named Carnegie (Gary Oldman), who desires to add Eli to his army as he plans to restore society under his rule. The town Eli finds himself in is the first in a planned series of towns that Carnegie plans to rule, and a man with the knowledge and skill of Eli is simply too good to let get away.
In an attempt to entice Eli into his service, Carnegie provides Eli with food, water, shelter, and women. When Eli is presented with the lovely Solara (Mila Kunis), he refuses to take advantage of her and instead leads her in a prayer before sharing his food with her.
This kind act touches Solara who recites the mysterious words of the prayer to her mother in an attempt to learn the meaning of what Eli was saying. Carnegie discovers what Eli has said, and learns of a book in Eli’s possession that he has been guarding for many years.
Carnegie is obsessed with obtaining the book as he sees this as the missing piece to his planned empire and will stop at nothing to obtain it.
What follows is a deadly game of cat and mouse as Carnegie and his minions are in hot pursuit of Eli and Solara as the future of humanity rests in the balance.
“The Book of Eli” is a winning mix of action and story that cleverly balances the two so that one side never overshadows the other.
The film is driven by the strong performances of Oldman and Washington as well as the simple yet strong message of faith and determination.
Both lead characters have a mystery to them that is never fully explored as the audience is given only what we need to know about each character for the purpose of the story.
The most surprising thing about the film was the strong and inspirational message it contained that may be too strong for some, but to me was not only inspiring but unexpected in a Hollywood film.
In the end, the strong cast, good action, and story makes this a film worth seeing and a pleasant surprise.
The solitary life of Eli is interrupted now and then by bandits that roam the lands causing death and mayhem to all those unfortunate enough to cross their path.
This often ends very badly for the bandits as Eli is highly skilled at defending himself with all manner of weapons, especially a very large knife.
It is his deadly skills that lands Eli on the radar of as local dictator named Carnegie (Gary Oldman), who desires to add Eli to his army as he plans to restore society under his rule. The town Eli finds himself in is the first in a planned series of towns that Carnegie plans to rule, and a man with the knowledge and skill of Eli is simply too good to let get away.
In an attempt to entice Eli into his service, Carnegie provides Eli with food, water, shelter, and women. When Eli is presented with the lovely Solara (Mila Kunis), he refuses to take advantage of her and instead leads her in a prayer before sharing his food with her.
This kind act touches Solara who recites the mysterious words of the prayer to her mother in an attempt to learn the meaning of what Eli was saying. Carnegie discovers what Eli has said, and learns of a book in Eli’s possession that he has been guarding for many years.
Carnegie is obsessed with obtaining the book as he sees this as the missing piece to his planned empire and will stop at nothing to obtain it.
What follows is a deadly game of cat and mouse as Carnegie and his minions are in hot pursuit of Eli and Solara as the future of humanity rests in the balance.
“The Book of Eli” is a winning mix of action and story that cleverly balances the two so that one side never overshadows the other.
The film is driven by the strong performances of Oldman and Washington as well as the simple yet strong message of faith and determination.
Both lead characters have a mystery to them that is never fully explored as the audience is given only what we need to know about each character for the purpose of the story.
The most surprising thing about the film was the strong and inspirational message it contained that may be too strong for some, but to me was not only inspiring but unexpected in a Hollywood film.
In the end, the strong cast, good action, and story makes this a film worth seeing and a pleasant surprise.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Finch (2021) in Movies
Nov 18, 2021
Very Effective
There are times when there is a “Perfect Storm” of film material, performance, mood, style and execution of said material and the headspace that I am in when I sit down to view the movie that elevates a film viewing experience above the norm.
Such was my experience when I sat down and watched the Tom Hanks Post-Apocalyptic film FINCH on AppleTV+. On paper, it looks like a run-of-the-mill “last few survivors on Earth struggle to remain alive” film, but - in my experience - it was much better than that.
Starring Tom Hanks as loner scientist Finch, who is scraping by in the remains of St. Louis with a dog and 2 robot helpers - robots of his own creation. When conditions in St. Louis worsen, Finch must pack up (with his 3 companions in tow) and head to a place where he thinks that life might be better - San Francisco.
Pretty standard “road movie” stuff, right? But in the hands of an Actor like Hanks, Emmy Winning GAME OF THRONES Director Miguel Sapochnik, a script by Craig Luck and Ivor Powell that digs into the humanity of Finch (and the situation) and some top-notch Computer animation of the Robots (especially “Jeff” voiced by Caleb Landry Jones), this film elevates itself above the norm.
There are not too many actors who could hold the attention of an audience for 2 hours speaking with 2 robots and a dog, but Hanks manages to do this - and do this very well. He brings his basic decency to the fore and makes us root for him from the start.
The surprise for me was the voice work of Caleb Landry Jones (GET OUT) who matches Hanks beat for beat and brings the same level of decency to his character. It is a testament to Jones’ work in a Motion Capture suit - and the “mo-cap” (Supervised by Scott Stokdyk) that makes the audience see and feel emotions on the face of the robot that just aren’t there. It’s that good.
Director Sapochnik really moves the film at the correct pace as he stops for the humanity, but doesn’t dwell on it too long - and, thus, avoids making the film too sentimental and mawkish. It is a delicate balancing act that this film walks very well.
Probably the biggest movie-going surprise of the year for me. A film that, at this point, will end up in my Top 10 of 2021.
Yes, I am as surprised as you are by this.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Such was my experience when I sat down and watched the Tom Hanks Post-Apocalyptic film FINCH on AppleTV+. On paper, it looks like a run-of-the-mill “last few survivors on Earth struggle to remain alive” film, but - in my experience - it was much better than that.
Starring Tom Hanks as loner scientist Finch, who is scraping by in the remains of St. Louis with a dog and 2 robot helpers - robots of his own creation. When conditions in St. Louis worsen, Finch must pack up (with his 3 companions in tow) and head to a place where he thinks that life might be better - San Francisco.
Pretty standard “road movie” stuff, right? But in the hands of an Actor like Hanks, Emmy Winning GAME OF THRONES Director Miguel Sapochnik, a script by Craig Luck and Ivor Powell that digs into the humanity of Finch (and the situation) and some top-notch Computer animation of the Robots (especially “Jeff” voiced by Caleb Landry Jones), this film elevates itself above the norm.
There are not too many actors who could hold the attention of an audience for 2 hours speaking with 2 robots and a dog, but Hanks manages to do this - and do this very well. He brings his basic decency to the fore and makes us root for him from the start.
The surprise for me was the voice work of Caleb Landry Jones (GET OUT) who matches Hanks beat for beat and brings the same level of decency to his character. It is a testament to Jones’ work in a Motion Capture suit - and the “mo-cap” (Supervised by Scott Stokdyk) that makes the audience see and feel emotions on the face of the robot that just aren’t there. It’s that good.
Director Sapochnik really moves the film at the correct pace as he stops for the humanity, but doesn’t dwell on it too long - and, thus, avoids making the film too sentimental and mawkish. It is a delicate balancing act that this film walks very well.
Probably the biggest movie-going surprise of the year for me. A film that, at this point, will end up in my Top 10 of 2021.
Yes, I am as surprised as you are by this.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (968 KP) rated Seeking a Friend for the End of the World (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
How many times have you seen this premise played out in film or other forms of entertainment: The world is going to end and there’s one last ditch plan or effort to save it (It inevitably succeeds, of course!); alternatively, the world has ended already and we’re left with post-apocalyptic society picking up the pieces. The premise is everywhere; the fascination with the end of days has been evident throughout our popular culture for decades. Yet, the thing about these two premises is that it avoids a (quite large) important question about the nature of the situation. What if our last ditch effort doesn’t succeed? What if there is no post-apocalyptic setting giving us hope for a re-built future. “Seeking a Friend for the End of the World”, a brand new film directed and written by Lorene Scafaria (“Nick and Nora’s Infinite Playlist”) attempts to focus on that gap often glossed over by apocalyptic fiction. It assumes there is no hope, there is a conclusion, and how do we deal with that?
It’s a comedy drama that pokes fun of the absurdity of a monotonous society coping with the conclusion of all civilization, while interweaving a touching romance between two people with broken pasts and deep regrets. Yet, it is a movie with some notable flaws, mainly in how it focuses its attention.
The premise is fairly simple, and rightly so. There is a large asteroid named “Matilda” barreling towards Earth and its impact will wipe out all life on our beloved planet. The film starts with the announcement that the last chance for Earth’s survival, a space mission to destroy the asteroid, has failed due to a fire on board the vessel. With only three weeks left to live, insurance salesman Dodge Peterson (Steve Carell) must decide how to spend the rest of his life. He decides to chase down an old highschool sweetheart and is accompanied by his neighbor, Penny (Keira Knightley) who wishes to return home to see her family one last time. They meet several characters in their roadtrip journey through pre-apocalyptica, including characters played by Rob Corddry and Martin Sheen.
The simple premise seems familiar due to its subject matter (C’mon, it’s 2012. I’m surprised there hasn’t been even more apocalypse movies flooding the theaters). Yet, strangely it feels fresh simply in how it handles itself. As said, most movies focus on the last daring mission to save mankind from certain destruction, or assumes that certain destruction really isn’t the end. People like to see hope, they don’t want to be confined by fate. This movie takes a different approach. Right off the bat it basically tells you there is zero hope, zero chance of getting out of this mess. Now what do you do? This particular premise lets comedy shine for the first two acts of the movie. There are subtle jokes, like the absurdity of naming a rock about to destroy all of mankind “Matilda”.
There are more traditional joke set-ups, favoring quick joke-punchline material that is mostly laugh-out-loud funny. And there is a fair amount of dark humor, simple funniness in the absurdity of how people treat the end of days. People mowing their lawns, still cleaning houses, even cops who continue to pull people over all poke fun of how people cannot let go of even the most monotonous of tasks that define their lift – regardless of how pointless they are due to the situation. Or the people who just let go and want to spend their last days without care, throwing themselves into orgies, drugs or riots. However, the tone of the drama limits the humor of the movie, favoring those kinds of moderate laughs over hysterical or hilarious moments. That’s the underlying issue of the film: that it feels like the humor is constrained due to fear of it undermining its drama.
Those who expect a comedy movie will only get two-thirds of one. And those who expect a drama movie will get mostly one. By no means does it fail at comedy or drama, but it just does not strike that delicate balance to be both in the same setting. The last act of the movie almost completely drops the comedy in favor of a dramatic and romantic conclusion. It’s not a huge fault, because the writing, and well-paced relationship development between the two main protagonists (Dodge and Penny), means that their inevitable romance seems natural, honest, and believable. The comedy is really only around in the first two thirds of the movie to try and keep your attention away from the obvious conclusion to their story – the fact that they end up together (and, perhaps, another conclusion entirely). So, when it does eventually happen, even though it was obvious from the start that it would, it does feel very endearing. The natural chemistry between Steve Carell and Keira Knightley is quite good, so buying their romance is not difficult in the slightest.
Yet, even still, that underlying issue keeps coming back. The fact that the comedy feels like a tool to facilitate a good dramatic ending ,instead of natural focus of the movie, undermines the experience for those who want to get some laughs. If there was a more natural balance between the romantic elements and comedy elements throughout the whole movie and not just the first two thirds, it could bring forth much more powerful comedy and/or drama. That way those who desire comedy or romance would be delighted to get a good deal of both intertwined.
I commend the film for how it handles the subject matter of inevitability. Even though it pokes fun at absurdity and really garners good laughs, it always has this underlying sense of regret, sadness and dread. You’re always reminded in the back of your mind that the world is going to end, but it does a good enough job pulling you into the characters’ last struggle to piece together their lives after decades of failure and regret that you end up really wanting to see them pull through somehow. Its last act is especially poignant, and definitely emotionally strong. Even though the themes of throwing away your past in favor of a happier future (despite it being such a short future) are not well concealed, they still end up being particularly strong. A film that can really make you appreciate what you have outside the film and the limited time you have left to enjoy it has to be commended for making you think.
“Seeking a Friend for the End of the World” is a fairly powerful romance drama that focuses on how people deal with loss, regret and the prospect of inevitable fate. More importantly, though, is that it focuses on how people can build something profoundly beautiful even in the last moments of their lives – regardless of their pasts or (lack) of future prospects. It has comedy in the movie, but it never really shines nor intertwines with the drama. They almost feel like two separate elements that struggle to mix together. Yet, the comedy is mostly laugh-out-loud funny and the drama is quite poignant and endearing. It definitely had the potential to make us laugh to tears or even bring us to tears through drama, but instead it settles for simply making us laugh and reflect.
It’s a comedy drama that pokes fun of the absurdity of a monotonous society coping with the conclusion of all civilization, while interweaving a touching romance between two people with broken pasts and deep regrets. Yet, it is a movie with some notable flaws, mainly in how it focuses its attention.
The premise is fairly simple, and rightly so. There is a large asteroid named “Matilda” barreling towards Earth and its impact will wipe out all life on our beloved planet. The film starts with the announcement that the last chance for Earth’s survival, a space mission to destroy the asteroid, has failed due to a fire on board the vessel. With only three weeks left to live, insurance salesman Dodge Peterson (Steve Carell) must decide how to spend the rest of his life. He decides to chase down an old highschool sweetheart and is accompanied by his neighbor, Penny (Keira Knightley) who wishes to return home to see her family one last time. They meet several characters in their roadtrip journey through pre-apocalyptica, including characters played by Rob Corddry and Martin Sheen.
The simple premise seems familiar due to its subject matter (C’mon, it’s 2012. I’m surprised there hasn’t been even more apocalypse movies flooding the theaters). Yet, strangely it feels fresh simply in how it handles itself. As said, most movies focus on the last daring mission to save mankind from certain destruction, or assumes that certain destruction really isn’t the end. People like to see hope, they don’t want to be confined by fate. This movie takes a different approach. Right off the bat it basically tells you there is zero hope, zero chance of getting out of this mess. Now what do you do? This particular premise lets comedy shine for the first two acts of the movie. There are subtle jokes, like the absurdity of naming a rock about to destroy all of mankind “Matilda”.
There are more traditional joke set-ups, favoring quick joke-punchline material that is mostly laugh-out-loud funny. And there is a fair amount of dark humor, simple funniness in the absurdity of how people treat the end of days. People mowing their lawns, still cleaning houses, even cops who continue to pull people over all poke fun of how people cannot let go of even the most monotonous of tasks that define their lift – regardless of how pointless they are due to the situation. Or the people who just let go and want to spend their last days without care, throwing themselves into orgies, drugs or riots. However, the tone of the drama limits the humor of the movie, favoring those kinds of moderate laughs over hysterical or hilarious moments. That’s the underlying issue of the film: that it feels like the humor is constrained due to fear of it undermining its drama.
Those who expect a comedy movie will only get two-thirds of one. And those who expect a drama movie will get mostly one. By no means does it fail at comedy or drama, but it just does not strike that delicate balance to be both in the same setting. The last act of the movie almost completely drops the comedy in favor of a dramatic and romantic conclusion. It’s not a huge fault, because the writing, and well-paced relationship development between the two main protagonists (Dodge and Penny), means that their inevitable romance seems natural, honest, and believable. The comedy is really only around in the first two thirds of the movie to try and keep your attention away from the obvious conclusion to their story – the fact that they end up together (and, perhaps, another conclusion entirely). So, when it does eventually happen, even though it was obvious from the start that it would, it does feel very endearing. The natural chemistry between Steve Carell and Keira Knightley is quite good, so buying their romance is not difficult in the slightest.
Yet, even still, that underlying issue keeps coming back. The fact that the comedy feels like a tool to facilitate a good dramatic ending ,instead of natural focus of the movie, undermines the experience for those who want to get some laughs. If there was a more natural balance between the romantic elements and comedy elements throughout the whole movie and not just the first two thirds, it could bring forth much more powerful comedy and/or drama. That way those who desire comedy or romance would be delighted to get a good deal of both intertwined.
I commend the film for how it handles the subject matter of inevitability. Even though it pokes fun at absurdity and really garners good laughs, it always has this underlying sense of regret, sadness and dread. You’re always reminded in the back of your mind that the world is going to end, but it does a good enough job pulling you into the characters’ last struggle to piece together their lives after decades of failure and regret that you end up really wanting to see them pull through somehow. Its last act is especially poignant, and definitely emotionally strong. Even though the themes of throwing away your past in favor of a happier future (despite it being such a short future) are not well concealed, they still end up being particularly strong. A film that can really make you appreciate what you have outside the film and the limited time you have left to enjoy it has to be commended for making you think.
“Seeking a Friend for the End of the World” is a fairly powerful romance drama that focuses on how people deal with loss, regret and the prospect of inevitable fate. More importantly, though, is that it focuses on how people can build something profoundly beautiful even in the last moments of their lives – regardless of their pasts or (lack) of future prospects. It has comedy in the movie, but it never really shines nor intertwines with the drama. They almost feel like two separate elements that struggle to mix together. Yet, the comedy is mostly laugh-out-loud funny and the drama is quite poignant and endearing. It definitely had the potential to make us laugh to tears or even bring us to tears through drama, but instead it settles for simply making us laugh and reflect.