Search
Search results
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Fantasy Ranch in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019 (Updated Jun 12, 2019)
Little known fact: my family used to be involved with local harness racing and horse training. Not much actually rubbed off on me, personally, but I do remember going to the stables to visit with the horses, and I was even allowed to ride the stable goat since I wasn’t yet big enough to get on the horses. Ahh, memories. So when I heard that a game existed with a horse ranching theme, I just HAD to get it to the table. Is it a good game though? Let’s find out! (spoilers: IT’S EXCELLENT!)
DISCLAIMER: The game comes with three modes of difficulty AND an included children’s game that also can be played on three modes of difficulty. For this review we are concentrating only on adult mode two. We felt mode one was too introductory, but we did not want to go all in right away on mode three. -T
As with most board games, you are trying to amass trophies (VP) and the winner at the end of five rounds is the rancher with the most trophies. On your turn you can take one Limited (standard) Action and as many Free Actions as you would like. Limited Actions include: buy a horse, buy a location on your ranch board, or farm your ranch for goods. Free Actions include: sell a horse, move horses to/from your home area to/from a different area on your ranch board, or trade goods at a 2:1 ratio. Once every player has taken their turn, you enter a show using the horses you have collected.
Buying a horse requires different amounts of food (in carrots) that you gain from different actions (farming your ranch, selling a horse). Luckily, spending food is a one-time action and you don’t have to feed your horses every turn. A great improvement over other “feed your villagers” games, in my opinion – yeah, I said it. Buying a location on your ranch board/playmat requires “tack,” which is symbolized by boot tokens (as seen below). You can always get more food and tack by farming your ranch, and you receive six goods of any combination, but that’s a Limited Action and prevents you from doing the other actions.
Selling a horse is easy, yet the separation anxiety is real, as you simply discard the horse for the amount of food it costs to purchase. Moving horses is easy too – your Home area of your ranch/playmat can only hold so many horses, so you will need to move horses of certain types to unlocked (purchased) matching areas on your ranch. This is important, as you cannot keep buying red horses or you will certainly run out of room for them, even if you unlock the red area on your ranch board. Plus unlocking sections of your ranch provides you with trophies at game end. The last free action is trading goods, which you do at a 2:1 ratio. So trade in two food for a tack or vice versa.
At shows you use horses for their specific specialty skills plus a die roll. Each horse has specialty in one area, and some skill in other areas. The number associated with a skill icon indicates the starting skill “strength” that you will add to your die roll. You roll all three dice of your color, take the highest result from the roll, and add the skill strength of the horse skill. That’s your score for the show. The highest number is awarded 1st place and the rewards printed, and so on and so forth for the other placing horses. This could result in more food or tack, or even your choice of horses for free from the sales barn.
On the very last turn of the game you will compete in three shows (instead of the normal two shows at the end of each turn) and can only use World Class horses, or buy your way into the show with food. The show process is the same, but it is the final push to earn as many trophies as possible before game end. And that’s it!
Components: This game is FULL of components. It’s a pretty stocked and heavy box, but still only the size of a Ticket to Ride box. The playmats, game boards, and cardboard chits are all of really great quality. The cards are great quality as well with photos of real existing horses (as well as the photos of real existing ranches on the giant ranch cards that are essentially beautiful player reference cards and resource holders). The best components of the game are the super cute little horeeples (oh no, that can’t possibly be correct). Horse-meeples. They come in different colors to match the areas on your ranch that you need to unlock and move them into so you don’t overcrowd your Home area. Even though my copy came with a green horse who lost his front legs, we know that he competes hard and lives his best life. The art is really really great and, though busy on the board at times, the game looks really good on the table. No qualms with the components on this one at all.
Here’s what I really like about this one. It’s a euro through and through, but it’s a euro that is actually exciting, with a unique theme, and one that I genuinely cannot wait to play again. I want to try mode three as soon as I can, and I really want to introduce my son to the game as soon as he is able to handle it. I am finding it really really hard to think of a game that comes ready to play three ways for adults, has components included to play the game three ways with children, and is actually super fun. I can’t think of any. This game is truly in a class by itself.
I love that no matter how tactical you play or how strategic you want to make it, sometimes the dice love/hate you and it could make all the difference. As you can see in the scores, we all love it (with the exception of my cousin Tony who rated it a three because of the dice – WHICH is odd because it is his father that was the harness racing jockey of the family). This review would have been live a week ago, but immediately after playing last weekend Josh said he would like to bring it home to play with his family. His wife is from Kentucky, and they kinda like horses and horse racing there. Well, his wife and son also rated this game out of 6. His wife gave Fantasy Ranch a 15 and his son rated it a 16. As that completely throws off my rating scale I did not add them, but as you can see we at Purple Phoenix Games give this one a very boot-kickin’ 19 / 24. If only we hadn’t invited Tony over to destroy the scores… We highly recommend you check this winner out. Seriously, it’s great.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/06/04/fantasy-ranch-review/
DISCLAIMER: The game comes with three modes of difficulty AND an included children’s game that also can be played on three modes of difficulty. For this review we are concentrating only on adult mode two. We felt mode one was too introductory, but we did not want to go all in right away on mode three. -T
As with most board games, you are trying to amass trophies (VP) and the winner at the end of five rounds is the rancher with the most trophies. On your turn you can take one Limited (standard) Action and as many Free Actions as you would like. Limited Actions include: buy a horse, buy a location on your ranch board, or farm your ranch for goods. Free Actions include: sell a horse, move horses to/from your home area to/from a different area on your ranch board, or trade goods at a 2:1 ratio. Once every player has taken their turn, you enter a show using the horses you have collected.
Buying a horse requires different amounts of food (in carrots) that you gain from different actions (farming your ranch, selling a horse). Luckily, spending food is a one-time action and you don’t have to feed your horses every turn. A great improvement over other “feed your villagers” games, in my opinion – yeah, I said it. Buying a location on your ranch board/playmat requires “tack,” which is symbolized by boot tokens (as seen below). You can always get more food and tack by farming your ranch, and you receive six goods of any combination, but that’s a Limited Action and prevents you from doing the other actions.
Selling a horse is easy, yet the separation anxiety is real, as you simply discard the horse for the amount of food it costs to purchase. Moving horses is easy too – your Home area of your ranch/playmat can only hold so many horses, so you will need to move horses of certain types to unlocked (purchased) matching areas on your ranch. This is important, as you cannot keep buying red horses or you will certainly run out of room for them, even if you unlock the red area on your ranch board. Plus unlocking sections of your ranch provides you with trophies at game end. The last free action is trading goods, which you do at a 2:1 ratio. So trade in two food for a tack or vice versa.
At shows you use horses for their specific specialty skills plus a die roll. Each horse has specialty in one area, and some skill in other areas. The number associated with a skill icon indicates the starting skill “strength” that you will add to your die roll. You roll all three dice of your color, take the highest result from the roll, and add the skill strength of the horse skill. That’s your score for the show. The highest number is awarded 1st place and the rewards printed, and so on and so forth for the other placing horses. This could result in more food or tack, or even your choice of horses for free from the sales barn.
On the very last turn of the game you will compete in three shows (instead of the normal two shows at the end of each turn) and can only use World Class horses, or buy your way into the show with food. The show process is the same, but it is the final push to earn as many trophies as possible before game end. And that’s it!
Components: This game is FULL of components. It’s a pretty stocked and heavy box, but still only the size of a Ticket to Ride box. The playmats, game boards, and cardboard chits are all of really great quality. The cards are great quality as well with photos of real existing horses (as well as the photos of real existing ranches on the giant ranch cards that are essentially beautiful player reference cards and resource holders). The best components of the game are the super cute little horeeples (oh no, that can’t possibly be correct). Horse-meeples. They come in different colors to match the areas on your ranch that you need to unlock and move them into so you don’t overcrowd your Home area. Even though my copy came with a green horse who lost his front legs, we know that he competes hard and lives his best life. The art is really really great and, though busy on the board at times, the game looks really good on the table. No qualms with the components on this one at all.
Here’s what I really like about this one. It’s a euro through and through, but it’s a euro that is actually exciting, with a unique theme, and one that I genuinely cannot wait to play again. I want to try mode three as soon as I can, and I really want to introduce my son to the game as soon as he is able to handle it. I am finding it really really hard to think of a game that comes ready to play three ways for adults, has components included to play the game three ways with children, and is actually super fun. I can’t think of any. This game is truly in a class by itself.
I love that no matter how tactical you play or how strategic you want to make it, sometimes the dice love/hate you and it could make all the difference. As you can see in the scores, we all love it (with the exception of my cousin Tony who rated it a three because of the dice – WHICH is odd because it is his father that was the harness racing jockey of the family). This review would have been live a week ago, but immediately after playing last weekend Josh said he would like to bring it home to play with his family. His wife is from Kentucky, and they kinda like horses and horse racing there. Well, his wife and son also rated this game out of 6. His wife gave Fantasy Ranch a 15 and his son rated it a 16. As that completely throws off my rating scale I did not add them, but as you can see we at Purple Phoenix Games give this one a very boot-kickin’ 19 / 24. If only we hadn’t invited Tony over to destroy the scores… We highly recommend you check this winner out. Seriously, it’s great.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/06/04/fantasy-ranch-review/
Gareth von Kallenbach (968 KP) rated Kingsman: The Secret Service (2015) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
When it was delayed from a planned October 2014 release to be placed against “50 Shades of Grey”, many worried that the new film “Kingsman: The Secret Service” was being relegated to nothing more than counter-programming by the studio. Thankfully the film is a hyper kinetic romp that gives audiences a new approach to the traditional spy film genre with a tongue in cheek approach.
The film revolves around a secret group of agents who take their operational names from the Knights of the Round Table. The organization was started by wealthy clothiers of London to make the world a better place, and since they operate outside the influence or control of any government, they have maintained a small but effective operational force for decades.
Following the loss of an operative, Galahad (Collin Firth), struggles to come to grips with being partially to blame for the death of his friend and trainee. Years later, Galahad recruits the son of the deceased agent, Eggsy (Taron Egerton), to train and join the ranks of The Kingsman. His working class upbringing rubs some of his more posh fellow trainees the wrong way, but Eggsy’s past scholastic and military skills are evident as he takes on the challenges of his highly-competitive and dangerous training.
At the same time, billionaire tech mogul Valentine (Samuel L. Jackson), is hatching a diabolical plan to cull the population of the world to make those that are left more manageable and under his control. Facing a race against time to literally save the word, the Kingsman, new and old, must battle an army to save the day.
While the plot of the film follows what the James Bond series have long established, an evil person with an army of deadly henchmen under their control bent on destroying/conquering the world, this film takes it in a new direction. The action is fast and frantic but despite the R rated violence is never as gory or overly gratuitous as one may expect. The blood is actually restrained to smaller red spots and a splash here or there which is interesting given the large number of slicing, impalings, close range gunshots, and bladed weapons deployed in the film.
The plot does at times seem absurd and naturally there are tons of questions like why they would use their two new recruits rather than calling in more experienced agents in their current crisis for help. All that aside, the film has a wink-and-a- smile attitude as it unfolds, almost as if they were trying to tell the audience to just accept that parts of it will play as a parody on the genre so just sit back and enjoy the ride.
In the end the film has enough action and interesting characters to make it a fun, if flawed, romp and the cast is interesting enough that I am already hoping for future adventures for the Kingsman.
http://sknr.net/2015/02/13/kingsman-secret-service/
The film revolves around a secret group of agents who take their operational names from the Knights of the Round Table. The organization was started by wealthy clothiers of London to make the world a better place, and since they operate outside the influence or control of any government, they have maintained a small but effective operational force for decades.
Following the loss of an operative, Galahad (Collin Firth), struggles to come to grips with being partially to blame for the death of his friend and trainee. Years later, Galahad recruits the son of the deceased agent, Eggsy (Taron Egerton), to train and join the ranks of The Kingsman. His working class upbringing rubs some of his more posh fellow trainees the wrong way, but Eggsy’s past scholastic and military skills are evident as he takes on the challenges of his highly-competitive and dangerous training.
At the same time, billionaire tech mogul Valentine (Samuel L. Jackson), is hatching a diabolical plan to cull the population of the world to make those that are left more manageable and under his control. Facing a race against time to literally save the word, the Kingsman, new and old, must battle an army to save the day.
While the plot of the film follows what the James Bond series have long established, an evil person with an army of deadly henchmen under their control bent on destroying/conquering the world, this film takes it in a new direction. The action is fast and frantic but despite the R rated violence is never as gory or overly gratuitous as one may expect. The blood is actually restrained to smaller red spots and a splash here or there which is interesting given the large number of slicing, impalings, close range gunshots, and bladed weapons deployed in the film.
The plot does at times seem absurd and naturally there are tons of questions like why they would use their two new recruits rather than calling in more experienced agents in their current crisis for help. All that aside, the film has a wink-and-a- smile attitude as it unfolds, almost as if they were trying to tell the audience to just accept that parts of it will play as a parody on the genre so just sit back and enjoy the ride.
In the end the film has enough action and interesting characters to make it a fun, if flawed, romp and the cast is interesting enough that I am already hoping for future adventures for the Kingsman.
http://sknr.net/2015/02/13/kingsman-secret-service/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Woman in the Window (2021) in Movies
May 24, 2021
It is NOT Rear Window
A piece of advice for you when you start to watch the “Alfred Hitchcock-esque” thriller, THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW. If you are at all a Hitchcock fan, you will be spending the first part of this film comparing it to the 1954 classic REAR WINDOW and this would be a disservice to this film.
For…THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is no Rear Window, nor is it intended to be. It has many, many elements that are the same as Rear Window (most notably, the setup: a housebound person thinks they have witnessed a murder in a neighboring apartment), and THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is just like Rear Window…until it isn’t.
And that’s when I started to like this film, when I stopped comparing it (in my head) to Rear Window.
Based on the Best Seller by A.J. Finn (adapted for the screen by Tracy Letts who also appears in the film), THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW tells the tale of Anna Fox, an agoraphobic who watches life go on outside her window. When she thinks she has witnessed a murder, she (and the audience) must decide is it real? Did she truly witness a murder? If so, who dunnit? If not, is she just hallucinating things? Is Anna crazy?
The answers to these questions were satisfying enough to me that I ended up enjoying the film experience that I had - but I have to be honest and tell you that, for awhile, my enjoyment of this film was hanging by a thread.
Amy Adams (ENCHANTED) is terrific - if unspectacular - in the title role. Her Anna Fox is murkey (that is meant as a compliment) and struggles through most of the film trying to determine what is real and what is an illusion. Adams does a “journeyman’s” job with this role. She acts her way through it in such a workmanlike fashion that I almost forgot that it is Adams on the screen.
Wyatt Russell (Kurt’s son who is also the new Captain America in THE FALCON AND THE WINTER SOLDIER) fares the best of the Supporting players for he has the most to do. Unfortunately, Director Joe Wright (ATONEMENT) and Screenwriter Letts wastes such strong actors as Gary Oldman (DARKEST HOUR), Julianne Moore (STILL ALICE), Anthony Mackie (The Falcon in the Marvel Movies), Jennifer Jason Leigh (HATEFUL 8), Brian Tyree Henry (GET OUT) and Letts himself in terribly underwritten roles that serve (mostly) as red herrings - and each of their characters are interchangeable and forgettable.
And that, ultimately, is where this film comes apart. While I cared about Anna and the solution to the mystery - I didn’t care very much about the other characters involved.
Which is why, I think, I’ll pull my DVD of Rear Window out and watch that film for the umpteenth time.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
For…THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is no Rear Window, nor is it intended to be. It has many, many elements that are the same as Rear Window (most notably, the setup: a housebound person thinks they have witnessed a murder in a neighboring apartment), and THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is just like Rear Window…until it isn’t.
And that’s when I started to like this film, when I stopped comparing it (in my head) to Rear Window.
Based on the Best Seller by A.J. Finn (adapted for the screen by Tracy Letts who also appears in the film), THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW tells the tale of Anna Fox, an agoraphobic who watches life go on outside her window. When she thinks she has witnessed a murder, she (and the audience) must decide is it real? Did she truly witness a murder? If so, who dunnit? If not, is she just hallucinating things? Is Anna crazy?
The answers to these questions were satisfying enough to me that I ended up enjoying the film experience that I had - but I have to be honest and tell you that, for awhile, my enjoyment of this film was hanging by a thread.
Amy Adams (ENCHANTED) is terrific - if unspectacular - in the title role. Her Anna Fox is murkey (that is meant as a compliment) and struggles through most of the film trying to determine what is real and what is an illusion. Adams does a “journeyman’s” job with this role. She acts her way through it in such a workmanlike fashion that I almost forgot that it is Adams on the screen.
Wyatt Russell (Kurt’s son who is also the new Captain America in THE FALCON AND THE WINTER SOLDIER) fares the best of the Supporting players for he has the most to do. Unfortunately, Director Joe Wright (ATONEMENT) and Screenwriter Letts wastes such strong actors as Gary Oldman (DARKEST HOUR), Julianne Moore (STILL ALICE), Anthony Mackie (The Falcon in the Marvel Movies), Jennifer Jason Leigh (HATEFUL 8), Brian Tyree Henry (GET OUT) and Letts himself in terribly underwritten roles that serve (mostly) as red herrings - and each of their characters are interchangeable and forgettable.
And that, ultimately, is where this film comes apart. While I cared about Anna and the solution to the mystery - I didn’t care very much about the other characters involved.
Which is why, I think, I’ll pull my DVD of Rear Window out and watch that film for the umpteenth time.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated The Other Boleyn Girl in Books
Feb 15, 2019
Going into <b>The Other Boleyn Girl</b> I already knew that the historical details weren't very factual, but I had this laying around and needed something both light and set in the past, so I figured this would do nicely. The writing itself is perfectly fine, and mostly, I did enjoy the book. Although, for the first half, it seemed as if everyone only wore red and by the end I got so sick of hearing about Anne's "B" for Boleyn necklace I could scream.
Mary Boleyn, the narrator, is a strange character: sympathetic and of reasonable intelligence one minute, a moronic irritant the next. Personality-wise she went up and down and back and forth. First she was fine not being the King's favorite anymore and seeming to want to leave the court life for the country to be with her children, then she was jealous of a title Anne received, years after the affair between Mary and Henry was over. Possibly this was put in as part of the rivalry between the sisters, but it didn't contextually fit. Her development could have used more work and she didn't mature or change much throughout the whole book, especially between the years 1522 to 1533. I seriously got tired of everybody's patronizing and calling her a fool all the time. They should have just named the book, <b>The Foolish Boleyn Girl</b>. I find it hard to believe Mary was so ignorant the king would have continued to have her as mistress for four years, give or take. She had to offer something other than good looks and being great in the bedroom. Anne herself sure was a piece of work, and even though she was pretty much evil throughout the book, I did still feel sorry for her at the end. Jane Parker was a one-dimensional malicious harpy who wasn't given a reason why she was that way; she was just the resident baddy to the Boleyns. To me, it felt like defamation of character.
Politics and the separation of the Church of England from the Catholic Church were merely mentioned in passing as court life and its primary players took center stage. The whole incest plot, I could have done without. Now if it were the absolute truth then it'd be okay, but since it's highly debatable and based on hearsay, I found it unnecessary and gratuitous. Around the two-thirds mark, the pace let up and it became more sluggish and boring, and it wasn't until the last sixty pages that it recaptured my attention again.
As long as readers know going into this book that the history has been twisted around and invented for pure sensation, then it's fine as a fictional read, but take any "facts" with a grain of salt. While it was an okay read, I didn't love it, but it managed to divert my attention for a few days.
One last note dealing with the fourth question in the Q&A with Philippa Gregory in the back of the book:
<blockquote>How about Mary and Anne's brother, George? Did he really sleep with his sister so that she could give Henry a son?
<i>Nobody can know the answer to this one. Anne was accused of adultery with George at their trials and his wife gave evidence against them both. Most people think the trial was a show trial, but it is an interesting accusation. Anne had three miscarriages by the time of her trial, and she was not a woman to let something like sin or crime stand in her way--she was clearly guilty of one murder. I think if she had thought that Henry could not bear a son she was quite capable of finding someone to father a child on her. If she thought that, then George would have been the obvious choice.</i></blockquote>
Obvious? How in the world is that obvious? You cannot be serious, Ms. Gregory. Now I'm far from an expert in Tudor England, but I cannot imagine that being a common practice. Maybe someone more knowledgeable about this time could tell me if that ever happened, because it just boggles my mind that George would be the "<i>obvious choice</i>." Not to mention, who the hell did Anne supposedly kill? I hadn't heard that anywhere. Even my searches are coming up blank.
Mary Boleyn, the narrator, is a strange character: sympathetic and of reasonable intelligence one minute, a moronic irritant the next. Personality-wise she went up and down and back and forth. First she was fine not being the King's favorite anymore and seeming to want to leave the court life for the country to be with her children, then she was jealous of a title Anne received, years after the affair between Mary and Henry was over. Possibly this was put in as part of the rivalry between the sisters, but it didn't contextually fit. Her development could have used more work and she didn't mature or change much throughout the whole book, especially between the years 1522 to 1533. I seriously got tired of everybody's patronizing and calling her a fool all the time. They should have just named the book, <b>The Foolish Boleyn Girl</b>. I find it hard to believe Mary was so ignorant the king would have continued to have her as mistress for four years, give or take. She had to offer something other than good looks and being great in the bedroom. Anne herself sure was a piece of work, and even though she was pretty much evil throughout the book, I did still feel sorry for her at the end. Jane Parker was a one-dimensional malicious harpy who wasn't given a reason why she was that way; she was just the resident baddy to the Boleyns. To me, it felt like defamation of character.
Politics and the separation of the Church of England from the Catholic Church were merely mentioned in passing as court life and its primary players took center stage. The whole incest plot, I could have done without. Now if it were the absolute truth then it'd be okay, but since it's highly debatable and based on hearsay, I found it unnecessary and gratuitous. Around the two-thirds mark, the pace let up and it became more sluggish and boring, and it wasn't until the last sixty pages that it recaptured my attention again.
As long as readers know going into this book that the history has been twisted around and invented for pure sensation, then it's fine as a fictional read, but take any "facts" with a grain of salt. While it was an okay read, I didn't love it, but it managed to divert my attention for a few days.
One last note dealing with the fourth question in the Q&A with Philippa Gregory in the back of the book:
<blockquote>How about Mary and Anne's brother, George? Did he really sleep with his sister so that she could give Henry a son?
<i>Nobody can know the answer to this one. Anne was accused of adultery with George at their trials and his wife gave evidence against them both. Most people think the trial was a show trial, but it is an interesting accusation. Anne had three miscarriages by the time of her trial, and she was not a woman to let something like sin or crime stand in her way--she was clearly guilty of one murder. I think if she had thought that Henry could not bear a son she was quite capable of finding someone to father a child on her. If she thought that, then George would have been the obvious choice.</i></blockquote>
Obvious? How in the world is that obvious? You cannot be serious, Ms. Gregory. Now I'm far from an expert in Tudor England, but I cannot imagine that being a common practice. Maybe someone more knowledgeable about this time could tell me if that ever happened, because it just boggles my mind that George would be the "<i>obvious choice</i>." Not to mention, who the hell did Anne supposedly kill? I hadn't heard that anywhere. Even my searches are coming up blank.
Sassy Brit (97 KP) rated Vendetta in Books
Jun 5, 2019
Vendetta by Iris Johansen brings back characters introduced in the Eve Duncan books. Although it is billed as an “Eve Duncan” she is only mentioned briefly. But, this does not take anything away from the plot and the main characters, Rachel Venable and Jude Brandon. The story centers on these two and their attempts to bring down Max Huber, the head of Red Star, a terrorist organization with immense power.
The story begins with the shooting of a top CIA official, Carl Venable. His dying breath to the operative, Jude Brandon, to save his daughter, Dr. Rachel Venable, and give her the choice of eliminating Huber to prevent him from wreaking further havoc on a global scale. Huber wants revenge on Rachel, believing that she killed his father by poisoning him. Enlisting the help of her good friend, CIA operative Catherine Ling and her on again, off again boyfriend, Richard Cameron, they work together to bring Huber down.
Johansen noted, “Every other chapter has a choice come into play. It is all about making choices. Rachel had to decide if she would go after the bad guys. Brandon whether he would involve himself emotionally with Rachel. Catherine made the choice not to hide from her desire for Cameron, as well as knowing she had to give Rachel space and control over her own destiny. The bad guy Huber is pure evil without redeeming qualities and his choice was to inflict as much collateral damage as possible. Even though I have a choice as a writer, I just wanted to kill Huber for doing terrible things to the people I love in my books.”
Both Rachel and Catherine had similar experiences of having to overcome rape. At the age of fifteen Rachel was captured by the Taliban in Afghanistan, watched them kill her mother and brother, and was brutally raped as well as tortured. What Johansen does wonderfully is to show how Rachel is determined to overcome her past experiences. One of the reasons she becomes a medical doctor is to heal people. Both Catherine and Rachel are intelligent, tough, strong, independent, and stubborn.
The book quote has Rachel determined to not be seen as a cripple. “I wrote that because I consider it the bravest thing she ever said. She went through a terrible event, but she fought and conquered it. Catherine also had a tough life, growing up on the Hong Kong waterfronts. She learned from it to become stronger. These two women are more similar than different. They had rough teenage years that they had to overcome. I think they are more sisters than friends and will always go to bat for each other. I think Catherine is more like the older sister because she has a son, which makes a big difference.”
Johansen writes female characters that are something other than constant damsels in distress. They find a way to survive and have come out even stronger. This story shows how a character’s past and the decisions made influence the present and future, sometimes to the point of getting revenge by pursuing a vendetta.
The story begins with the shooting of a top CIA official, Carl Venable. His dying breath to the operative, Jude Brandon, to save his daughter, Dr. Rachel Venable, and give her the choice of eliminating Huber to prevent him from wreaking further havoc on a global scale. Huber wants revenge on Rachel, believing that she killed his father by poisoning him. Enlisting the help of her good friend, CIA operative Catherine Ling and her on again, off again boyfriend, Richard Cameron, they work together to bring Huber down.
Johansen noted, “Every other chapter has a choice come into play. It is all about making choices. Rachel had to decide if she would go after the bad guys. Brandon whether he would involve himself emotionally with Rachel. Catherine made the choice not to hide from her desire for Cameron, as well as knowing she had to give Rachel space and control over her own destiny. The bad guy Huber is pure evil without redeeming qualities and his choice was to inflict as much collateral damage as possible. Even though I have a choice as a writer, I just wanted to kill Huber for doing terrible things to the people I love in my books.”
Both Rachel and Catherine had similar experiences of having to overcome rape. At the age of fifteen Rachel was captured by the Taliban in Afghanistan, watched them kill her mother and brother, and was brutally raped as well as tortured. What Johansen does wonderfully is to show how Rachel is determined to overcome her past experiences. One of the reasons she becomes a medical doctor is to heal people. Both Catherine and Rachel are intelligent, tough, strong, independent, and stubborn.
The book quote has Rachel determined to not be seen as a cripple. “I wrote that because I consider it the bravest thing she ever said. She went through a terrible event, but she fought and conquered it. Catherine also had a tough life, growing up on the Hong Kong waterfronts. She learned from it to become stronger. These two women are more similar than different. They had rough teenage years that they had to overcome. I think they are more sisters than friends and will always go to bat for each other. I think Catherine is more like the older sister because she has a son, which makes a big difference.”
Johansen writes female characters that are something other than constant damsels in distress. They find a way to survive and have come out even stronger. This story shows how a character’s past and the decisions made influence the present and future, sometimes to the point of getting revenge by pursuing a vendetta.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Wanderers in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
“As they look to the stars, what are they missing back home?” </i>In a handful of year’s time, it can be presumed that dreams of humans on Mars will become closer to a reality. In Meg Howey’s <i>The Wanderers</i>, the time has come to select the potential candidates to participate in the first crewed mission to the Red Planet. Yet, as the astronauts prepare to walk among the stars, their families are left to consider a life without them.
The story is told through the perspectives of seven characters. Perhaps the most important are the three astronauts: Helen, Sergei and Yoshi, who are enclosed in a tiny mock-spacecraft, as they practice the hypothetical challenges and experiences they may encounter on a real trip to Mars. The remaining chapters are shared out amongst family members: Mireille, Helen’s adult daughter; Dmitri, Sergei’s fifteen-year old son; and Madoka, Yoshi’s wife – the final character being Luke, a psychiatrist tasked with observing the mental state of the astronauts throughout the experiment.
Interestingly, those being left behind are less concerned about their parent or spouse, choosing to focus on their own, everyday life, problems. Left to their own devices, they worry about their careers, their sexuality and the ways in which others perceive them. All, presumably as a result of the lack of contact with their significant family member, have become capable of surviving independently, however do not appear to realize how lonely they are.
The astronauts, on the other hand, are preoccupied with thoughts of space, concentrating so hard on the mission ahead of them that they fail to think of anything else. However, after months of only having each other for company, their thoughts begin to drift in the direction of home, their childhood, worries about their family, guilt – all notions that are fairly alien to the career driven characters.
Whilst it is interesting to witness the character developments, there is not a significant storyline. The book only encompasses the training period for the prospective space mission, and does not appear to have a substantial conclusion. Whether the astronauts eventually make it to Mars, and whether their consciences encourage them to behave differently towards their families, remains unknown.
<i>The Wanderers</i> has the essence of a work of fiction that English Literature students or professors would enjoy pulling apart, examining the language and literary techniques as they seek the understanding of the various emotions portrayed. Unfortunately, the majority will not have chosen to read this book for this precise purpose, expecting a science fiction novel full of excitement and interesting plot. Without either of these elements taking precedence, many are bound to be disappointed.
My rating for this book (two of five stars) is on the basis of the storyline, rather than the concept of family versus space. Yes, Howey writes well, is informed of the ins and outs of space programmes, and is knowledgeable enough to write an accurate representation of an astronaut’s experience, however as a form of entertainment, it is considerably lacking. Those expecting a narrative similar to other well-written science fiction novels will be sorely disappointed.
“As they look to the stars, what are they missing back home?” </i>In a handful of year’s time, it can be presumed that dreams of humans on Mars will become closer to a reality. In Meg Howey’s <i>The Wanderers</i>, the time has come to select the potential candidates to participate in the first crewed mission to the Red Planet. Yet, as the astronauts prepare to walk among the stars, their families are left to consider a life without them.
The story is told through the perspectives of seven characters. Perhaps the most important are the three astronauts: Helen, Sergei and Yoshi, who are enclosed in a tiny mock-spacecraft, as they practice the hypothetical challenges and experiences they may encounter on a real trip to Mars. The remaining chapters are shared out amongst family members: Mireille, Helen’s adult daughter; Dmitri, Sergei’s fifteen-year old son; and Madoka, Yoshi’s wife – the final character being Luke, a psychiatrist tasked with observing the mental state of the astronauts throughout the experiment.
Interestingly, those being left behind are less concerned about their parent or spouse, choosing to focus on their own, everyday life, problems. Left to their own devices, they worry about their careers, their sexuality and the ways in which others perceive them. All, presumably as a result of the lack of contact with their significant family member, have become capable of surviving independently, however do not appear to realize how lonely they are.
The astronauts, on the other hand, are preoccupied with thoughts of space, concentrating so hard on the mission ahead of them that they fail to think of anything else. However, after months of only having each other for company, their thoughts begin to drift in the direction of home, their childhood, worries about their family, guilt – all notions that are fairly alien to the career driven characters.
Whilst it is interesting to witness the character developments, there is not a significant storyline. The book only encompasses the training period for the prospective space mission, and does not appear to have a substantial conclusion. Whether the astronauts eventually make it to Mars, and whether their consciences encourage them to behave differently towards their families, remains unknown.
<i>The Wanderers</i> has the essence of a work of fiction that English Literature students or professors would enjoy pulling apart, examining the language and literary techniques as they seek the understanding of the various emotions portrayed. Unfortunately, the majority will not have chosen to read this book for this precise purpose, expecting a science fiction novel full of excitement and interesting plot. Without either of these elements taking precedence, many are bound to be disappointed.
My rating for this book (two of five stars) is on the basis of the storyline, rather than the concept of family versus space. Yes, Howey writes well, is informed of the ins and outs of space programmes, and is knowledgeable enough to write an accurate representation of an astronaut’s experience, however as a form of entertainment, it is considerably lacking. Those expecting a narrative similar to other well-written science fiction novels will be sorely disappointed.
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Knives Out (2019) in Movies
Oct 24, 2019
Due to its ensemble cast, gorgeous aesthetics and whodunit storyline, it’s safe to say that I had high expectations for Knives Out.
I’m pleased to report that it surpassed each and every one of them.
Rian Johnson’s tale of mystery follows the death of renowned crime novelist Harlan Thrombey (Christopher Plummer), which took place after his 85th birthday. Presumed to be a murder, his eccentric and very large family are soon under investigation by Detective Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) and his team.
Straight away, Daniel Craig steals the show with his hilarious performance of Detective Blanc. From his deep Southern American drawl to his quirky mannerisms, this is so far removed from what you’d expect from a Craig performance. I’ve never seen him have this much fun in a role before.
He’s tasked with getting to the bottom of what happened, which involves a delightful series of interviews in which the family are sitting in front of several display knives, just one of the many eccentricities of the Thrombey manor house. In terms of set design it’s just glorious to look at, and even one of the characters compares it to a Cluedo board.
Even the characters themselves are quirky enough to be boxed up inside the classic board game, and could give the likes of Miss Scarlet and Colonel Mustard a run for their money.
Characters include Thrombey’s daughter and real estate mogul Linda Drysdale (Jamie Lee Curtis), her husband Richard (Don Johnson), and outcast trust fund son Ransom (Chris Evans), who form quite the dysfunctional family even when you remove them from the bigger picture.
Then there’s the rather insufferable, yet hugely entertaining, lifestyle guru Joni Thrombey (Toni Collette) and her daughter and social activist Meg (Katherine Langford). These two characters are parodies of popular blogging culture and ‘social justice warriors’, and they’re hilarious.
Each character has been wonderfully crafted by Rian Johnson, who both wrote and directed Knives Out. They’re essentially caricatures, but the result of this is a thoroughly entertaining cinema experience. What a brilliant use of such a talented cast.
The only seemingly normal person wrapped up in all this is caretaker Marta Cabrera (Ana de Armas), who acted as both a friend and nurse to Harlan prior to his death. Even against a backdrop of such bold characters, de Armas’ performance shines just as brightly.
Mysteries are hard to get right, and being able to predict the ending is a bragging right for many cinephiles. Well unfortunately, this script absolutely floored me with how fantastic it was, and I was unable to predict anything that went down. Johnson has serious talent when it comes to crafting a murder-mystery.
Don’t even get me started on how gorgeous the wardrobe in this film is either. If anyone knows where I can get Jamie Lee Curtis’ striking red suit, you need to tell me immediately.
Watching Knives Out was the most fun I’ve had in the cinema this year, perhaps ever. I was fully engrossed from start to finish, and walked out with the biggest smile on my face.
If you see one film this autumn, make it this one. You won’t regret it.
I’m pleased to report that it surpassed each and every one of them.
Rian Johnson’s tale of mystery follows the death of renowned crime novelist Harlan Thrombey (Christopher Plummer), which took place after his 85th birthday. Presumed to be a murder, his eccentric and very large family are soon under investigation by Detective Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) and his team.
Straight away, Daniel Craig steals the show with his hilarious performance of Detective Blanc. From his deep Southern American drawl to his quirky mannerisms, this is so far removed from what you’d expect from a Craig performance. I’ve never seen him have this much fun in a role before.
He’s tasked with getting to the bottom of what happened, which involves a delightful series of interviews in which the family are sitting in front of several display knives, just one of the many eccentricities of the Thrombey manor house. In terms of set design it’s just glorious to look at, and even one of the characters compares it to a Cluedo board.
Even the characters themselves are quirky enough to be boxed up inside the classic board game, and could give the likes of Miss Scarlet and Colonel Mustard a run for their money.
Characters include Thrombey’s daughter and real estate mogul Linda Drysdale (Jamie Lee Curtis), her husband Richard (Don Johnson), and outcast trust fund son Ransom (Chris Evans), who form quite the dysfunctional family even when you remove them from the bigger picture.
Then there’s the rather insufferable, yet hugely entertaining, lifestyle guru Joni Thrombey (Toni Collette) and her daughter and social activist Meg (Katherine Langford). These two characters are parodies of popular blogging culture and ‘social justice warriors’, and they’re hilarious.
Each character has been wonderfully crafted by Rian Johnson, who both wrote and directed Knives Out. They’re essentially caricatures, but the result of this is a thoroughly entertaining cinema experience. What a brilliant use of such a talented cast.
The only seemingly normal person wrapped up in all this is caretaker Marta Cabrera (Ana de Armas), who acted as both a friend and nurse to Harlan prior to his death. Even against a backdrop of such bold characters, de Armas’ performance shines just as brightly.
Mysteries are hard to get right, and being able to predict the ending is a bragging right for many cinephiles. Well unfortunately, this script absolutely floored me with how fantastic it was, and I was unable to predict anything that went down. Johnson has serious talent when it comes to crafting a murder-mystery.
Don’t even get me started on how gorgeous the wardrobe in this film is either. If anyone knows where I can get Jamie Lee Curtis’ striking red suit, you need to tell me immediately.
Watching Knives Out was the most fun I’ve had in the cinema this year, perhaps ever. I was fully engrossed from start to finish, and walked out with the biggest smile on my face.
If you see one film this autumn, make it this one. You won’t regret it.
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Abominable Snowman (1957) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019 (Updated Oct 24, 2019)
Due to its ensemble cast, gorgeous aesthetics and whodunit storyline, it’s safe to say that I had high expectations for Knives Out.
I’m pleased to report that it surpassed each and every one of them.
Rian Johnson’s tale of mystery follows the death of renowned crime novelist Harlan Thrombey (Christopher Plummer), which took place after his 85th birthday. Presumed to be a murder, his eccentric and very large family are soon under investigation by Detective Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) and his team.
Straight away, Daniel Craig steals the show with his hilarious performance of Detective Blanc. From his deep Southern American drawl to his quirky mannerisms, this is so far removed from what you’d expect from a Craig performance. I’ve never seen him have this much fun in a role before.
He’s tasked with getting to the bottom of what happened, which involves a delightful series of interviews in which the family are sitting in front of several display knives, just one of the many eccentricities of the Thrombey manor house. In terms of set design it’s just glorious to look at, and even one of the characters compares it to a Cluedo board.
Even the characters themselves are quirky enough to be boxed up inside the classic board game, and could give the likes of Miss Scarlet and Colonel Mustard a run for their money.
Characters include Thrombey’s daughter and real estate mogul Linda Drysdale (Jamie Lee Curtis), her husband Richard (Don Johnson), and outcast trust fund son Ransom (Chris Evans), who form quite the dysfunctional family even when you remove them from the bigger picture.
Then there’s the rather insufferable, yet hugely entertaining, lifestyle guru Joni Thrombey (Toni Collette) and her daughter and social activist Meg (Katherine Langford). These two characters are parodies of popular blogging culture and ‘social justice warriors’, and they’re hilarious.
Each character has been wonderfully crafted by Rian Johnson, who both wrote and directed Knives Out. They’re essentially caricatures, but the result of this is a thoroughly entertaining cinema experience. What a brilliant use of such a talented cast.
The only seemingly normal person wrapped up in all this is caretaker Marta Cabrera (Ana de Armas), who acted as both a friend and nurse to Harlan prior to his death. Even against a backdrop of such bold characters, de Armas’ performance shines just as brightly.
Mysteries are hard to get right, and being able to predict the ending is a bragging right for many cinephiles. Well unfortunately, this script absolutely floored me with how fantastic it was, and I was unable to predict anything that went down. Johnson has serious talent when it comes to crafting a murder-mystery.
Don’t even get me started on how gorgeous the wardrobe in this film is either. If anyone knows where I can get Jamie Lee Curtis’ striking red suit, you need to tell me immediately.
Watching Knives Out was the most fun I’ve had in the cinema this year, perhaps ever. I was fully engrossed from start to finish, and walked out with the biggest smile on my face.
If you see one film this autumn, make it this one. You won’t regret it.
I’m pleased to report that it surpassed each and every one of them.
Rian Johnson’s tale of mystery follows the death of renowned crime novelist Harlan Thrombey (Christopher Plummer), which took place after his 85th birthday. Presumed to be a murder, his eccentric and very large family are soon under investigation by Detective Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) and his team.
Straight away, Daniel Craig steals the show with his hilarious performance of Detective Blanc. From his deep Southern American drawl to his quirky mannerisms, this is so far removed from what you’d expect from a Craig performance. I’ve never seen him have this much fun in a role before.
He’s tasked with getting to the bottom of what happened, which involves a delightful series of interviews in which the family are sitting in front of several display knives, just one of the many eccentricities of the Thrombey manor house. In terms of set design it’s just glorious to look at, and even one of the characters compares it to a Cluedo board.
Even the characters themselves are quirky enough to be boxed up inside the classic board game, and could give the likes of Miss Scarlet and Colonel Mustard a run for their money.
Characters include Thrombey’s daughter and real estate mogul Linda Drysdale (Jamie Lee Curtis), her husband Richard (Don Johnson), and outcast trust fund son Ransom (Chris Evans), who form quite the dysfunctional family even when you remove them from the bigger picture.
Then there’s the rather insufferable, yet hugely entertaining, lifestyle guru Joni Thrombey (Toni Collette) and her daughter and social activist Meg (Katherine Langford). These two characters are parodies of popular blogging culture and ‘social justice warriors’, and they’re hilarious.
Each character has been wonderfully crafted by Rian Johnson, who both wrote and directed Knives Out. They’re essentially caricatures, but the result of this is a thoroughly entertaining cinema experience. What a brilliant use of such a talented cast.
The only seemingly normal person wrapped up in all this is caretaker Marta Cabrera (Ana de Armas), who acted as both a friend and nurse to Harlan prior to his death. Even against a backdrop of such bold characters, de Armas’ performance shines just as brightly.
Mysteries are hard to get right, and being able to predict the ending is a bragging right for many cinephiles. Well unfortunately, this script absolutely floored me with how fantastic it was, and I was unable to predict anything that went down. Johnson has serious talent when it comes to crafting a murder-mystery.
Don’t even get me started on how gorgeous the wardrobe in this film is either. If anyone knows where I can get Jamie Lee Curtis’ striking red suit, you need to tell me immediately.
Watching Knives Out was the most fun I’ve had in the cinema this year, perhaps ever. I was fully engrossed from start to finish, and walked out with the biggest smile on my face.
If you see one film this autumn, make it this one. You won’t regret it.
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated Half a King (Shattered Sea #1) in Books
Nov 14, 2019
It seems to have been a long wait since Red Country for another book from Lord Grimdark himself, Joe Abercrombie. Not only is this the first book in a new sequence, but it is also labelled as Young Adult. I have to say I had my reservations about that since I wondered how the author of the very grim and very dark First Law books would be able to make a book suitable for young adults... it would be like Quentin Tarantino making a Disney film...
I needn't have worried. It seems all Abercrombie has done is create his usual cast of dark, mysterious, vengeful and misfit characters, set them on a bloody quest during which they can philosophise, complain and make pithy remarks to each other while hacking their enemies into pieces. It seems the only nods to being a 'Young Adult' book is that there is no sex and maybe some of the gore has been turned down a notch. The writing, the plot or the characters don't suffer from this at all.
The plot concerns Yarvi, youngest son of the king in a land where strength and ability in battle is everything. However Yarvi was born with a deformed hand and he is an embarrassment to his father and fated to join the ministry - which normally only women do - to become and adviser to a king rather than a king himself.
However destiny strikes a cruel blow when his father and older brother are both killed. Yarvi is now the king - unprepared as he is and as unpopular as he is with his subjects. He is soon betrayed and sets out on a quest for revenge.
This is pure Abercrombie from start to finish. Yarvi's journey takes him from being a king to being the lowest of the low - if not lower. He might lack the strength or ability to fight but he has wisdom, knowledge, cunning and a thirst for revenge to make up for that. From a lonely and unhappy child he becomes a leader of men - and women - and has to fight for survival across a continent to get home to take his rightful place at the throne.
The book is perhaps a little slow to start - until Yarvi is betrayed - but it is essential that this time is taken to lay the groundwork for what follows. Once it gets going the book races along with barely a stop for breath as events carry the young hero along, sometimes with some control of the situation but often just as much a bystander as the reader. There are characters aplenty - some plain mean and nasty, some friendly and amusing, some mean and nasty and amusing. As would be expected from Abercrombie nobody falls into a neat pigeonhole or trope. When deaths among Yarvi's comrades occur they are touchingly written - but with the senseless random nature of war and death writ large across their last words.
Definitely a great read, hope it will not be so long before the next in the series.
I needn't have worried. It seems all Abercrombie has done is create his usual cast of dark, mysterious, vengeful and misfit characters, set them on a bloody quest during which they can philosophise, complain and make pithy remarks to each other while hacking their enemies into pieces. It seems the only nods to being a 'Young Adult' book is that there is no sex and maybe some of the gore has been turned down a notch. The writing, the plot or the characters don't suffer from this at all.
The plot concerns Yarvi, youngest son of the king in a land where strength and ability in battle is everything. However Yarvi was born with a deformed hand and he is an embarrassment to his father and fated to join the ministry - which normally only women do - to become and adviser to a king rather than a king himself.
However destiny strikes a cruel blow when his father and older brother are both killed. Yarvi is now the king - unprepared as he is and as unpopular as he is with his subjects. He is soon betrayed and sets out on a quest for revenge.
This is pure Abercrombie from start to finish. Yarvi's journey takes him from being a king to being the lowest of the low - if not lower. He might lack the strength or ability to fight but he has wisdom, knowledge, cunning and a thirst for revenge to make up for that. From a lonely and unhappy child he becomes a leader of men - and women - and has to fight for survival across a continent to get home to take his rightful place at the throne.
The book is perhaps a little slow to start - until Yarvi is betrayed - but it is essential that this time is taken to lay the groundwork for what follows. Once it gets going the book races along with barely a stop for breath as events carry the young hero along, sometimes with some control of the situation but often just as much a bystander as the reader. There are characters aplenty - some plain mean and nasty, some friendly and amusing, some mean and nasty and amusing. As would be expected from Abercrombie nobody falls into a neat pigeonhole or trope. When deaths among Yarvi's comrades occur they are touchingly written - but with the senseless random nature of war and death writ large across their last words.
Definitely a great read, hope it will not be so long before the next in the series.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Lucky Grandma (2019) in Movies
Nov 7, 2019
The synopsis for this sounded okay but I can't say I was blown away. I popped this in my third tier films to watch at the London Film Festival, the "I'll try and see this if there's a gap" films. There was a gap so this ended up being my first film of the festival.
Grandma Wong doesn't have a lot to live on, her son wants her to move in with his family but she likes her independence. When her doctor/fortune teller says she's got a change in fortunes coming she decides to throw caution to the wind and test this new luck out. The experiment goes well until she crosses paths with Mr Lin, a member of the Red Dragon gang.
Tsai Chin is a delight, a grumpy delight as Grandma. She's a face I recognised but of course I couldn't remember from what... to IMDb... Two Bond films! I'm a terrible movie viewer right now. As well as those there are lods of other films and shows to her name, lots that you'd recognise. Her portrayal of Grandma is wonderful, she's hardened but funny, her reaction to everything was hilarious to me. This is exactly how I see myself being as an old lady, without the life threatening situations... probably. Chin brought just the right feeling to this role and captured all her ups and downs with just the right amount of stubborn.
The reltionship forged with Big Pong, plays by Hsiao-Yuan Ha, is lovely. The strange little friendship is a sweet inclusion and even when it take a turn they manage to make it through. Big Pong is her bodyguard, it was never a conventional employer/employee relationship and their interactions are very protective towards each other. Big Pong has a real moment of sheer joy when eating Grandma's food and that expression along with a lot of Ha's performance brought me a really happy feeling.
Michael Tow as Little Handsome deserves a special mention, the pure nutball rage is really quite insane and I don't know how someone would manage to do that.
There are some great montages that sum up Grandma's life. The one at the beginning is amusing but the next proves to be a brilliant contrast after her luck has changed. I like its consistency and how it managed to accomodate the story without affecting her day to day life too much.
On a whole the film felt just the right length, it moved along fairly quickly and the quirky relationships keep you interested. It potentially could have focused on some more of the peripheral characters a little, but I actually enjoyed the main focus. The shots are quite traditional but there's one shot of Grandma's apartment as she hears intruders, it captures the whole apartment and we see her edge into shot hiding. It created a really tense moment and if gave the instinctive desire to try and look round the corner.
I'm sure this won't be to everyone's taste as there are a fair amount of subtitled bits but it really doesn't distract that much from the film.
What you should do
It's a fun little film and if it makes it into a release somewhere then it would be something fun to watch.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
A big bag of money wouldn't go amiss.
Grandma Wong doesn't have a lot to live on, her son wants her to move in with his family but she likes her independence. When her doctor/fortune teller says she's got a change in fortunes coming she decides to throw caution to the wind and test this new luck out. The experiment goes well until she crosses paths with Mr Lin, a member of the Red Dragon gang.
Tsai Chin is a delight, a grumpy delight as Grandma. She's a face I recognised but of course I couldn't remember from what... to IMDb... Two Bond films! I'm a terrible movie viewer right now. As well as those there are lods of other films and shows to her name, lots that you'd recognise. Her portrayal of Grandma is wonderful, she's hardened but funny, her reaction to everything was hilarious to me. This is exactly how I see myself being as an old lady, without the life threatening situations... probably. Chin brought just the right feeling to this role and captured all her ups and downs with just the right amount of stubborn.
The reltionship forged with Big Pong, plays by Hsiao-Yuan Ha, is lovely. The strange little friendship is a sweet inclusion and even when it take a turn they manage to make it through. Big Pong is her bodyguard, it was never a conventional employer/employee relationship and their interactions are very protective towards each other. Big Pong has a real moment of sheer joy when eating Grandma's food and that expression along with a lot of Ha's performance brought me a really happy feeling.
Michael Tow as Little Handsome deserves a special mention, the pure nutball rage is really quite insane and I don't know how someone would manage to do that.
There are some great montages that sum up Grandma's life. The one at the beginning is amusing but the next proves to be a brilliant contrast after her luck has changed. I like its consistency and how it managed to accomodate the story without affecting her day to day life too much.
On a whole the film felt just the right length, it moved along fairly quickly and the quirky relationships keep you interested. It potentially could have focused on some more of the peripheral characters a little, but I actually enjoyed the main focus. The shots are quite traditional but there's one shot of Grandma's apartment as she hears intruders, it captures the whole apartment and we see her edge into shot hiding. It created a really tense moment and if gave the instinctive desire to try and look round the corner.
I'm sure this won't be to everyone's taste as there are a fair amount of subtitled bits but it really doesn't distract that much from the film.
What you should do
It's a fun little film and if it makes it into a release somewhere then it would be something fun to watch.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
A big bag of money wouldn't go amiss.