Search
Search results
InMyBar - Drink & Cocktail Recipes
Food & Drink and Lifestyle
App
InMyBar is the best drink & cocktail app available because it can tell you what you can make with...
Boat Beacon
Navigation and Sports
App
Boat Beacon is an AIS receiver for your iPhone and iPad. It is the only AIS ship tracking app to...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Hell or High Water (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“Sometimes a blind pig finds a truffle”.
One of the joys (and stresses) of the run up to the Oscar weekend is to try to catch all the major award films before the big event. As I bitched about in my BAFTA write-up, UK release dates do NOT make this an easy task, with some films like Paul Verhoeven’s “Elle”, featuring Best Actress nominee Isabelle Huppert, not released until mid March.
This week I have had the chance to catch up on two of the films with award potential that I missed at the cinema, and this is the write up of the first of those: “Hell or High Water”, was first released in September 2016, and what an excellent film it is.
Bank robberies have been featured in many hundreds of films since the early days of cinema: The Great Train Robbery for example dates back to 1903! More recent heist classics such as “Oceans 11”, “Die Hard”, “Run Lola Run” and “The Dark Knight Rises” tend towards the stylised end of the act. Where this film delivers interest is in aligning the protagonists’ drivers with the banking and mortgage ‘crimes’ featured in last year’s “The Big Short”. Add in to the movie Nutribullet a soupçon of the West Texan setting from Arthur Penn’s 1967 “Bonnie and Clyde”, turn it on and you have “Hell or High Water”.
Chris Pine (“Star Trek”) and Ben Foster (“Inferno“, “The Program“) play brothers Toby and Tanner Howard trying to rescue their deceased mother’s ranch from being foreclosed on by Texas Midlands bank. Rather than taking one of the “get out of debt” offers advertised on billboards – cleverly and insistently introduced in long panning highway shots – the brothers have their own financial plan: a scheme that involves early morning raids of the cash drawers of small-town Texas Midlands branches. But the meticulous planning of Toby, as the calm and intelligent one, are constantly at risk of upset by the unpredictable and violent actions of the loose-cannon Tanner.
Since the amounts of cash stolen are in the thousands rather than the millions, the FBI aren’t interested and the case is handed instead by aged and grumpy Texas Ranger Marcus Hamilton (Jeff Bridges, “True Grit”) and his partner Alberto (Gil Birmingham). The pair have a respectful relationship but one built around racial banter, with Hamilton constantly referring to Alberto’s Mexican/Comanche heritage. A cat and mouse game ensues with the lawmen staking out the most likely next hits. The sonorous cello strings of the soundtrack portend a dramatic finale, and we as viewers are not disappointed.
The performances of the main leads are all excellent, with Chris Pine given the chance to show more acting chops than he has had chance to with his previous Kirk/Jack Ryan characters. His chemistry with Ben Foster is just sublime. Similarly, Jeff Bridges and Gil Birmingham make for a formidable double act. It is Jeff Bridges though who has the standout performance and one that is Oscar nominated for Best Supporting Actor. (In fact with Michael Shannon also getting nominated in the same category for “Nocturnal Animals”, we can add ‘West Texan lawman’ to ‘Holocaust movies’ (a Winslet “Extras” reference there!) as the prime bait for Oscar nomination glory!)
The real winner here though is the whip-smart screenplay by Taylor Sheridan (“Sicario“) which sizzles with great lines: lines that make you grin inanely at the screen regularly through the running time.”In your last days in the nursing home, you’ll think of me and giggle” schmoozes Tanner to the pretty hotel check-in girl: a come-on clearly worth remembering as it delivers the goods, as it were.
The trick here is in building up a degree of empathy and sympathy for the characters on both sides. The ‘bad guys’ here are successfully portrayed as the banks. At the moment you can get 25/1 odds on this winning the Best Original Screenplay Oscar – but I would personally rate it right up there with “Manchester by the Sea“.
Deftly directed by Scot David Mackenzie (“Starred Up”) this is a film (the first of two!) that might well have elbowed it’s way into my Top 10 of 2016 if I’d seen it during its cinema release. Well worth catching on the small screen.
This week I have had the chance to catch up on two of the films with award potential that I missed at the cinema, and this is the write up of the first of those: “Hell or High Water”, was first released in September 2016, and what an excellent film it is.
Bank robberies have been featured in many hundreds of films since the early days of cinema: The Great Train Robbery for example dates back to 1903! More recent heist classics such as “Oceans 11”, “Die Hard”, “Run Lola Run” and “The Dark Knight Rises” tend towards the stylised end of the act. Where this film delivers interest is in aligning the protagonists’ drivers with the banking and mortgage ‘crimes’ featured in last year’s “The Big Short”. Add in to the movie Nutribullet a soupçon of the West Texan setting from Arthur Penn’s 1967 “Bonnie and Clyde”, turn it on and you have “Hell or High Water”.
Chris Pine (“Star Trek”) and Ben Foster (“Inferno“, “The Program“) play brothers Toby and Tanner Howard trying to rescue their deceased mother’s ranch from being foreclosed on by Texas Midlands bank. Rather than taking one of the “get out of debt” offers advertised on billboards – cleverly and insistently introduced in long panning highway shots – the brothers have their own financial plan: a scheme that involves early morning raids of the cash drawers of small-town Texas Midlands branches. But the meticulous planning of Toby, as the calm and intelligent one, are constantly at risk of upset by the unpredictable and violent actions of the loose-cannon Tanner.
Since the amounts of cash stolen are in the thousands rather than the millions, the FBI aren’t interested and the case is handed instead by aged and grumpy Texas Ranger Marcus Hamilton (Jeff Bridges, “True Grit”) and his partner Alberto (Gil Birmingham). The pair have a respectful relationship but one built around racial banter, with Hamilton constantly referring to Alberto’s Mexican/Comanche heritage. A cat and mouse game ensues with the lawmen staking out the most likely next hits. The sonorous cello strings of the soundtrack portend a dramatic finale, and we as viewers are not disappointed.
The performances of the main leads are all excellent, with Chris Pine given the chance to show more acting chops than he has had chance to with his previous Kirk/Jack Ryan characters. His chemistry with Ben Foster is just sublime. Similarly, Jeff Bridges and Gil Birmingham make for a formidable double act. It is Jeff Bridges though who has the standout performance and one that is Oscar nominated for Best Supporting Actor. (In fact with Michael Shannon also getting nominated in the same category for “Nocturnal Animals”, we can add ‘West Texan lawman’ to ‘Holocaust movies’ (a Winslet “Extras” reference there!) as the prime bait for Oscar nomination glory!)
The real winner here though is the whip-smart screenplay by Taylor Sheridan (“Sicario“) which sizzles with great lines: lines that make you grin inanely at the screen regularly through the running time.”In your last days in the nursing home, you’ll think of me and giggle” schmoozes Tanner to the pretty hotel check-in girl: a come-on clearly worth remembering as it delivers the goods, as it were.
The trick here is in building up a degree of empathy and sympathy for the characters on both sides. The ‘bad guys’ here are successfully portrayed as the banks. At the moment you can get 25/1 odds on this winning the Best Original Screenplay Oscar – but I would personally rate it right up there with “Manchester by the Sea“.
Deftly directed by Scot David Mackenzie (“Starred Up”) this is a film (the first of two!) that might well have elbowed it’s way into my Top 10 of 2016 if I’d seen it during its cinema release. Well worth catching on the small screen.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Moonlight (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Waxing or Waning?
Seldom do I go to see a movie where I know so little about the plot as this one. I knew it was a “coming of age” drama about a young man growing up in a black neighbourhood in Miami. Period. That ignorance was bliss (so that’s the way this review will stay: I will avoid my usual high-level summary here). For there are twists in this story that you don’t see coming, and moments of such dramatic force that they are cinematically searing.
Playing the young man, Chiron, over three stages of his life are the actors Alex Hibbert, Ashton Sanders and Trevante Rhodes. However, Mahershala Ali, who plays Juan – the drug dealer with a heart – has been the one with all the awards visibility (having this week won the Screen Actors Guild Supporting Actor award, as well as being within the ensemble cast award for the upcoming “Hidden Numbers”). For the avoidance of doubt, Ali and all of these other actors are excellent, as is Jharrel Jerome (in his feature film debut) as Chiron’s 16-year old friend Kevin. But the performance that really spoke to me was that of Ashton Sanders, who has both an uplifting and heartbreaking role as the “middle” Chiron and delivers it supremely well. A real breakout role for him.
Also shining with a dramatic and extremely emotional performance is London’s own Naomie Harris (“Spectre“), justifiably nominated for a Supporting Actress Oscar. Unlike last year’s insipid and dull “Our Kind of Traitor“, where she was given criminally little to do, here she is blisteringly real as a caring mother spiralling down an addiction plug-hole. A career best.
Grammy-nominated musician Janelle Monáe, in her feature film debut, is also eminently watchable alongside Mahershala Ali as Juan’s girlfriend Teresa.
Above all, this powerful ensemble is the best evidence possible that the diversity arguments all over last year’s Oscars were 100% correct. These are all indisputably realistic performances by black actors that must surely move viewers regardless of their colour or creed.
The film has eight Oscar nominations, and I definitely agree with the acting nominations to Maharhala Ali and Naomie Harris. I’d also agree with the award for music to Nicolas Britell (“The Big Short”) which is astonishingly eclectic and jarringly appropriate to the story that unfolds. I could even go along with the Best Film Editing nomination, although I am hardly an expert in the subject.
The remaining nominations are for Best Picture, Best Director (Barry Jenkins), Best Writing Adapted Screenplay (also Barry Jenkins) and Best Cinematography (James Laxton). However, here my opinion diverges with the Academy and – I suspect – many critics. Yes, this is a really engrossing film with a fine and surprisingly non-standard Hollywood ending. It is certainly well worth watching, but is it a top film of the year? No, I don’t think so. There are some aspects of the film that just plain irritated me.
Firstly, the camera work is frequently of the hand-held variety, particularly in the first half of the film, that leads to a serious case of seasickness if you are sitting anywhere other than the back row of the cinema.
More crucially for me, the film introduces two fantastic and atypical characters, but then – inexplicably – the script just unceremoniously dumps them with hardly any further reference made. I found that enormously frustrating and mystifying and spent the rest of the film waiting for a closure that never came.
There is also enormously pervasive use of the “N-word”, right from the opening music track. I appreciate this is probably perfectly appropriate to the ‘hood that the characters occupy, but the continual usage is shocking (at least to a white audience). It is probably designed to shock, but after a while the shock wears off and it becomes more tiresome than offensive.
Based on all the Oscar hype then, this was a bit of a disappointment. But that view is purely relative to all of the great Oscar Best Film candidates I’ve seen in the last few weeks. It is still a very interesting film due to the story that goes off in a novel and surprising direction, and one that is worthy of your movie dollar investment.
Playing the young man, Chiron, over three stages of his life are the actors Alex Hibbert, Ashton Sanders and Trevante Rhodes. However, Mahershala Ali, who plays Juan – the drug dealer with a heart – has been the one with all the awards visibility (having this week won the Screen Actors Guild Supporting Actor award, as well as being within the ensemble cast award for the upcoming “Hidden Numbers”). For the avoidance of doubt, Ali and all of these other actors are excellent, as is Jharrel Jerome (in his feature film debut) as Chiron’s 16-year old friend Kevin. But the performance that really spoke to me was that of Ashton Sanders, who has both an uplifting and heartbreaking role as the “middle” Chiron and delivers it supremely well. A real breakout role for him.
Also shining with a dramatic and extremely emotional performance is London’s own Naomie Harris (“Spectre“), justifiably nominated for a Supporting Actress Oscar. Unlike last year’s insipid and dull “Our Kind of Traitor“, where she was given criminally little to do, here she is blisteringly real as a caring mother spiralling down an addiction plug-hole. A career best.
Grammy-nominated musician Janelle Monáe, in her feature film debut, is also eminently watchable alongside Mahershala Ali as Juan’s girlfriend Teresa.
Above all, this powerful ensemble is the best evidence possible that the diversity arguments all over last year’s Oscars were 100% correct. These are all indisputably realistic performances by black actors that must surely move viewers regardless of their colour or creed.
The film has eight Oscar nominations, and I definitely agree with the acting nominations to Maharhala Ali and Naomie Harris. I’d also agree with the award for music to Nicolas Britell (“The Big Short”) which is astonishingly eclectic and jarringly appropriate to the story that unfolds. I could even go along with the Best Film Editing nomination, although I am hardly an expert in the subject.
The remaining nominations are for Best Picture, Best Director (Barry Jenkins), Best Writing Adapted Screenplay (also Barry Jenkins) and Best Cinematography (James Laxton). However, here my opinion diverges with the Academy and – I suspect – many critics. Yes, this is a really engrossing film with a fine and surprisingly non-standard Hollywood ending. It is certainly well worth watching, but is it a top film of the year? No, I don’t think so. There are some aspects of the film that just plain irritated me.
Firstly, the camera work is frequently of the hand-held variety, particularly in the first half of the film, that leads to a serious case of seasickness if you are sitting anywhere other than the back row of the cinema.
More crucially for me, the film introduces two fantastic and atypical characters, but then – inexplicably – the script just unceremoniously dumps them with hardly any further reference made. I found that enormously frustrating and mystifying and spent the rest of the film waiting for a closure that never came.
There is also enormously pervasive use of the “N-word”, right from the opening music track. I appreciate this is probably perfectly appropriate to the ‘hood that the characters occupy, but the continual usage is shocking (at least to a white audience). It is probably designed to shock, but after a while the shock wears off and it becomes more tiresome than offensive.
Based on all the Oscar hype then, this was a bit of a disappointment. But that view is purely relative to all of the great Oscar Best Film candidates I’ve seen in the last few weeks. It is still a very interesting film due to the story that goes off in a novel and surprising direction, and one that is worthy of your movie dollar investment.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Abstract Academy in Tabletop Games
Feb 25, 2022
There’s just something about a well-thought out and appealing box cover to really get you into it, am I right? Look at that graphic. The negative space used for the A and Y in AcademY is just sublime! Wait, I recognize those names on the box. Didn’t they also design some other games I enjoy? (1 minute later after consulting BGG) IT’S THE TEAM BEHIND TRUFFLE SHUFFLE, POINT SALAD, AND DOLLARS TO DONUTS?? I love those games! Oh, this is going to be good! AND it’s from Crafty Games? Boom. Gotta be a hit, I just know it. But where is all the food?
Abstract Academy is a card laying, hand management, pattern building game for two to four players. In it, players become art school students trying to impress their teachers. The only problem is that they must share a canvas, as the costs of school allow them very few luxuries. The player who can most effectively build masterpieces and satisfy all tested requirements over three rounds will ace the class and claim victory over the other starving artists.
DISCLAIMER 1: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
DISCLAIMER 2: My current temporary housing did not want me to have great lighting for photos in this review. Please try to ignore the yellow tint; I do not enjoy over-editing game photos.
To setup, shuffle each deck type and place the decks on the table. The rulebook does not specify where, so just throw them wherever. This is a game about art, so be creative. Each player draws a hand of three Canvas cards (with the whitish back and colors on the faces). The starting Teacher’s Pet player will then reveal cards according to the round from the respective decks, per the rules and provided reference cards. Each round will reveal different sets of Assignment and Professor cards. Players also draw one Inspiration card and the game is ready to begin! Paintbrushes at the ready!
Turns could not be simpler: Play a Canvas card, and then Draw a Canvas card. Both of these actions are self-explanatory, but let me expound on this a bit. Once the first Canvas card has been played by the current Teacher’s Pet, each subsequent card must be played orthogonally adjacent to another card on the table. To define the size of the entire project’s canvas, players will be confined to a 4 x 4 grid of cards. Once a column (the cards that would lead a path to the opponent) has been completed with four cards, the rows gain special rules. Firstly, the row closest to each player becomes the “Home Row.” Players may only play cards into their own Home Row, unless the only legal place to play a card is in the opponent’s Home Row. Secondly, the Home Row and the row above it is now consider the Scoring Zone, and will dictate which cards are able to be used to satisfy Inspiration, Professor, and Assignment requirements for VP. Therefore, until the 4 x 4 grid has been solidified, players are unaware which cards may end up in their Home Rows or Scoring Zones!
Victory Points are earned by scoring the special requirements of Inspiration, Professor, and Assignment cards once the entire 4 x 4 grid of Canvas cards is complete. Oftentimes players will need to compare scores to determine which player earns the points. For example, the Moret Professor card states that five VP are earned when the player controls the “most color areas with four or more quadrants.” Each Canvas card is divided into four quadrants, and quadrants are colored with one of the primary colors. A “color area” is simply a connected network of the same color within the player’s Scoring Zone. So, to satisfy Professor Moret, the player who controls the most amount of color areas that are four quadrants or larger.
Assignment cards come in Red, Blue, and Yellow, and pertain to those colors. For example, the red “Get to the Point!” Assignment requires the “most red areas with only one quadrant.” So the assignment is asking players to dapple their canvas with unconnected red quadrants.
In stark contrast, the Inspiration card requirements resemble shapes of quadrants, as opposed to colors or numbers of quadrants. Most of the shapes on these cards are reminiscent of Tetris-style shapes, where players will score their Inspiration cards by building the correct shape of connected quadrants of the same color within their Scoring Zone.
Once these cards are all scored for the round, the Teacher’s Pet sets up for the next round per the rulebook/reference cards. The subsequent rounds will require alternate decks to reveal cards, or choice of decks. When the third and final round has been scored, the points are tallied and the victor is crowned! With a construction paper and macaroni crown, most likely. They ARE starving artists, after all.
Components. This game is a double-card-deck box with 90+ cards and a rulebook. The cards are great quality, but the true hero here is, and appropriately so, the artwork. Every card is very stylish, the Professors are all nods to real artists (well, except maybe not the promo), and it has just a really great look overall. While being played, it just has an amazing table presence. I like that a lot.
I struggled with assigning a score to this one for a few reasons. First, I like so much about this game, and I dislike a few things. I very much enjoy having so many ways to score points each round, as it keeps my mind busy with trying to put the puzzle together. The monkey wrench, though, is that when you start a round, you play cards that may not even end up in your Scoring Zone. As your hand is always three cards, it is difficult to really plan too far in advance to create a perfect Scoring Zone. Is that a bad thing? Maybe, but I think it is also quite necessary to add a little chaos to this specific game. I will explain what I mean in a bit. Perhaps a few points docked for that.
Playing Canvas cards effectively is absolutely the crux of this game, because if a pattern or shape is being built to your benefit, your opponent can easily (and definitely accidentally) ruin your best laid plans with an ill-placed card to wonkify the grid. I think that is both delicious and very very frustrating. You know what? I will decide to give a few points back for this.
The ability for the Teacher’s Pet, a title that can be passed to the other player throughout the game, to choose which two of the three Assignment decks to reveal during Round 3 just adds to the replayability factor of Abstract Academy. True, there are only five cards in each Assignments deck, and there are mathematical or statistical formulae that can calculate the exact number of possible different unique games, the ever-changing grid of cards is what makes this nearly infinitely replayable. Okay, more points earned here.
I guess I judged too harshly, and my true rating is a little lower than perhaps this little game deserves. I absolutely know that I will be playing this a whole lot more – with gamers of all ages and weight preferences. It is easy to teach, keeps the brain engaged throughout, and forces players to step back and truly appreciate that which they have equally built together. I can completely foresee my score for Abstract Academy increasing with more and more plays, so please do not regard a 4 / 6 from Purple Phoenix Games as an absolute and inflexible score.
If you are a gamer who enjoys just a little chaos added to their careful planning, light and quick card games that pack more punch than expected, and some truly awesome table presence, then you most certainly need to grab a copy of Abstract Academy. I am soon to be culling my collection and curating it to only include games I thoroughly enjoy. I have a feeling Abstract Academy is going to make the cut. It checks off so many boxes for me and how I game, and I cannot wait to introduce my kiddos to it when they can grasp the concepts.
Abstract Academy is a card laying, hand management, pattern building game for two to four players. In it, players become art school students trying to impress their teachers. The only problem is that they must share a canvas, as the costs of school allow them very few luxuries. The player who can most effectively build masterpieces and satisfy all tested requirements over three rounds will ace the class and claim victory over the other starving artists.
DISCLAIMER 1: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
DISCLAIMER 2: My current temporary housing did not want me to have great lighting for photos in this review. Please try to ignore the yellow tint; I do not enjoy over-editing game photos.
To setup, shuffle each deck type and place the decks on the table. The rulebook does not specify where, so just throw them wherever. This is a game about art, so be creative. Each player draws a hand of three Canvas cards (with the whitish back and colors on the faces). The starting Teacher’s Pet player will then reveal cards according to the round from the respective decks, per the rules and provided reference cards. Each round will reveal different sets of Assignment and Professor cards. Players also draw one Inspiration card and the game is ready to begin! Paintbrushes at the ready!
Turns could not be simpler: Play a Canvas card, and then Draw a Canvas card. Both of these actions are self-explanatory, but let me expound on this a bit. Once the first Canvas card has been played by the current Teacher’s Pet, each subsequent card must be played orthogonally adjacent to another card on the table. To define the size of the entire project’s canvas, players will be confined to a 4 x 4 grid of cards. Once a column (the cards that would lead a path to the opponent) has been completed with four cards, the rows gain special rules. Firstly, the row closest to each player becomes the “Home Row.” Players may only play cards into their own Home Row, unless the only legal place to play a card is in the opponent’s Home Row. Secondly, the Home Row and the row above it is now consider the Scoring Zone, and will dictate which cards are able to be used to satisfy Inspiration, Professor, and Assignment requirements for VP. Therefore, until the 4 x 4 grid has been solidified, players are unaware which cards may end up in their Home Rows or Scoring Zones!
Victory Points are earned by scoring the special requirements of Inspiration, Professor, and Assignment cards once the entire 4 x 4 grid of Canvas cards is complete. Oftentimes players will need to compare scores to determine which player earns the points. For example, the Moret Professor card states that five VP are earned when the player controls the “most color areas with four or more quadrants.” Each Canvas card is divided into four quadrants, and quadrants are colored with one of the primary colors. A “color area” is simply a connected network of the same color within the player’s Scoring Zone. So, to satisfy Professor Moret, the player who controls the most amount of color areas that are four quadrants or larger.
Assignment cards come in Red, Blue, and Yellow, and pertain to those colors. For example, the red “Get to the Point!” Assignment requires the “most red areas with only one quadrant.” So the assignment is asking players to dapple their canvas with unconnected red quadrants.
In stark contrast, the Inspiration card requirements resemble shapes of quadrants, as opposed to colors or numbers of quadrants. Most of the shapes on these cards are reminiscent of Tetris-style shapes, where players will score their Inspiration cards by building the correct shape of connected quadrants of the same color within their Scoring Zone.
Once these cards are all scored for the round, the Teacher’s Pet sets up for the next round per the rulebook/reference cards. The subsequent rounds will require alternate decks to reveal cards, or choice of decks. When the third and final round has been scored, the points are tallied and the victor is crowned! With a construction paper and macaroni crown, most likely. They ARE starving artists, after all.
Components. This game is a double-card-deck box with 90+ cards and a rulebook. The cards are great quality, but the true hero here is, and appropriately so, the artwork. Every card is very stylish, the Professors are all nods to real artists (well, except maybe not the promo), and it has just a really great look overall. While being played, it just has an amazing table presence. I like that a lot.
I struggled with assigning a score to this one for a few reasons. First, I like so much about this game, and I dislike a few things. I very much enjoy having so many ways to score points each round, as it keeps my mind busy with trying to put the puzzle together. The monkey wrench, though, is that when you start a round, you play cards that may not even end up in your Scoring Zone. As your hand is always three cards, it is difficult to really plan too far in advance to create a perfect Scoring Zone. Is that a bad thing? Maybe, but I think it is also quite necessary to add a little chaos to this specific game. I will explain what I mean in a bit. Perhaps a few points docked for that.
Playing Canvas cards effectively is absolutely the crux of this game, because if a pattern or shape is being built to your benefit, your opponent can easily (and definitely accidentally) ruin your best laid plans with an ill-placed card to wonkify the grid. I think that is both delicious and very very frustrating. You know what? I will decide to give a few points back for this.
The ability for the Teacher’s Pet, a title that can be passed to the other player throughout the game, to choose which two of the three Assignment decks to reveal during Round 3 just adds to the replayability factor of Abstract Academy. True, there are only five cards in each Assignments deck, and there are mathematical or statistical formulae that can calculate the exact number of possible different unique games, the ever-changing grid of cards is what makes this nearly infinitely replayable. Okay, more points earned here.
I guess I judged too harshly, and my true rating is a little lower than perhaps this little game deserves. I absolutely know that I will be playing this a whole lot more – with gamers of all ages and weight preferences. It is easy to teach, keeps the brain engaged throughout, and forces players to step back and truly appreciate that which they have equally built together. I can completely foresee my score for Abstract Academy increasing with more and more plays, so please do not regard a 4 / 6 from Purple Phoenix Games as an absolute and inflexible score.
If you are a gamer who enjoys just a little chaos added to their careful planning, light and quick card games that pack more punch than expected, and some truly awesome table presence, then you most certainly need to grab a copy of Abstract Academy. I am soon to be culling my collection and curating it to only include games I thoroughly enjoy. I have a feeling Abstract Academy is going to make the cut. It checks off so many boxes for me and how I game, and I cannot wait to introduce my kiddos to it when they can grasp the concepts.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Black Panther (2018) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
Is the MCU all out of surprises?
The Marvel Cinematic Universe has become one of the most successful movie franchises ever made, and it’s easy to see why. Featuring incredible actors, up-and-coming directors and that trademark sense of humour, each film in the MCU has something to offer.
That doesn’t mean they’re perfect however. The MCU has a distinct lack of decent villains, strong female characters and characters from ethnic minorities. In the run-up to this year’s Infinity War, Black Panther aims to turn what we know about Marvel on its head. But has it succeeded?
After the death of his father, T’Challa (Chadwick Boseman) returns home to the African nation of Wakanda to take his rightful place as king. When a powerful enemy suddenly reappears, T’Challa’s mettle as king – and as Black Panther – gets tested when he’s drawn into a conflict that puts the fate of Wakanda and the entire world at risk. Faced with treachery and danger, the young king must rally his allies and release the full power of Black Panther to defeat his foes and secure the safety of his people.
The opening sequence of Black Panther is an absolute treat as the audience are given a brief history of Wakanda and the tribes from which it grew. It’s a great montage to kick off a film that’s packed with stunning visuals and gorgeous landscapes, even though some of the special effects are left wanting at times.
Cast wise, this is one of the strongest entries into the MCU. Chadwick Boseman absolutely embodies the young, naïve yet warm T’Challa beautifully and it’s nice to see his character given some reference points after his sudden inclusion in Captain America: Civil War. Elsewhere, Lupita Nyong’o is always a pleasure to see on screen and her love interest to Boseman keeps him grounded over the course of the runtime.
For me the standout character is Danai Gurira’s Okoye, leader of a group of female warriors ordered to protect Wakanda and its king no matter what the cost. She’s certainly not to be messed with and gets a pleasing arc throughout. The script also seems to work best when she’s on screen.
When it comes to the bad guy, director Ryan Coogler (Creed) gets it nearly spot on. After dozens of, shall we say, lacklustre villains, the MCU receives its best yet. Michael B. Jordan’s Killmonger is, despite his ridiculous name, absolutely brilliant. Menacing and oddly charming in equal measure, he does away with the tradition of bizarre villain motives in the MCU. In fact, his motives throughout feel entirely believable and the film feels more grounded because of this.
Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion
Martin Freeman’s Agent Ross is a strange addition to the cast, simply because his character isn’t essential to the plot. Freeman is always a magnetic presence but he really doesn’t have all that much to do. Finally, Andy Serkis reprises his role as arms dealer Ulysses Klaue and is great fun.
Looking at Wakanda itself, Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion. It certainly feels more real than the hollow golden towers of Asgard (something thankfully fixed in last year’s Thor: Ragnarok), and Wakanda is a great addition to the many locations the Marvel Cinematic Universe has created.
So, I’ve mentioned disappointing special effects twice in this review and whilst they aren’t terrible, there are a few occasions where they are a little poor – especially evident in the film’s finale. For all his exciting filming style, Coogler’s shot choices occasionally jar with the uninspiring and lifeless CGI. Some of the landscapes also feel like a brochure for Disney’s upcoming The Lion King live-action remake.
I think it’s time to talk about film politics, because as much as Black Panther is a great addition to the MCU and a fine solo movie in itself, the legacy it will leave on the industry will be absolutely huge. With a majority black cast, strong female characters and a black director, it’s progressive and incredibly brave in its choices.
Any less of a story, director or cast wouldn’t have made it work and despite some poor CGI and slight pacing issues at the start, Black Panther is one of the best solo Marvel movies in years. Bring on Infinity War.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/02/15/black-panther-review-is-the-mcu-all-out-of-surprises/
That doesn’t mean they’re perfect however. The MCU has a distinct lack of decent villains, strong female characters and characters from ethnic minorities. In the run-up to this year’s Infinity War, Black Panther aims to turn what we know about Marvel on its head. But has it succeeded?
After the death of his father, T’Challa (Chadwick Boseman) returns home to the African nation of Wakanda to take his rightful place as king. When a powerful enemy suddenly reappears, T’Challa’s mettle as king – and as Black Panther – gets tested when he’s drawn into a conflict that puts the fate of Wakanda and the entire world at risk. Faced with treachery and danger, the young king must rally his allies and release the full power of Black Panther to defeat his foes and secure the safety of his people.
The opening sequence of Black Panther is an absolute treat as the audience are given a brief history of Wakanda and the tribes from which it grew. It’s a great montage to kick off a film that’s packed with stunning visuals and gorgeous landscapes, even though some of the special effects are left wanting at times.
Cast wise, this is one of the strongest entries into the MCU. Chadwick Boseman absolutely embodies the young, naïve yet warm T’Challa beautifully and it’s nice to see his character given some reference points after his sudden inclusion in Captain America: Civil War. Elsewhere, Lupita Nyong’o is always a pleasure to see on screen and her love interest to Boseman keeps him grounded over the course of the runtime.
For me the standout character is Danai Gurira’s Okoye, leader of a group of female warriors ordered to protect Wakanda and its king no matter what the cost. She’s certainly not to be messed with and gets a pleasing arc throughout. The script also seems to work best when she’s on screen.
When it comes to the bad guy, director Ryan Coogler (Creed) gets it nearly spot on. After dozens of, shall we say, lacklustre villains, the MCU receives its best yet. Michael B. Jordan’s Killmonger is, despite his ridiculous name, absolutely brilliant. Menacing and oddly charming in equal measure, he does away with the tradition of bizarre villain motives in the MCU. In fact, his motives throughout feel entirely believable and the film feels more grounded because of this.
Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion
Martin Freeman’s Agent Ross is a strange addition to the cast, simply because his character isn’t essential to the plot. Freeman is always a magnetic presence but he really doesn’t have all that much to do. Finally, Andy Serkis reprises his role as arms dealer Ulysses Klaue and is great fun.
Looking at Wakanda itself, Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion. It certainly feels more real than the hollow golden towers of Asgard (something thankfully fixed in last year’s Thor: Ragnarok), and Wakanda is a great addition to the many locations the Marvel Cinematic Universe has created.
So, I’ve mentioned disappointing special effects twice in this review and whilst they aren’t terrible, there are a few occasions where they are a little poor – especially evident in the film’s finale. For all his exciting filming style, Coogler’s shot choices occasionally jar with the uninspiring and lifeless CGI. Some of the landscapes also feel like a brochure for Disney’s upcoming The Lion King live-action remake.
I think it’s time to talk about film politics, because as much as Black Panther is a great addition to the MCU and a fine solo movie in itself, the legacy it will leave on the industry will be absolutely huge. With a majority black cast, strong female characters and a black director, it’s progressive and incredibly brave in its choices.
Any less of a story, director or cast wouldn’t have made it work and despite some poor CGI and slight pacing issues at the start, Black Panther is one of the best solo Marvel movies in years. Bring on Infinity War.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/02/15/black-panther-review-is-the-mcu-all-out-of-surprises/
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Strife: Legacy of the Eternals in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019
I cannot tell you how hard it is to organize a game night with the full group. And I probably don’t have to – I’m sure you understand the struggle too. So for those times when only 2 of us are available, it’s always nice to have 2-player only games to play. But sometimes deciding on a game can cause a bit of strife…
War rages across the land as the Eternals (immortal beings) fight each other for dominance over the realm. Calling forth their chosen Champions, battle after battle is fought until one Eternal emerges victorious. Will your Champions aid you on your quest for supremacy, or will you be forced to cede to another Eternal in the end? Choose your Champions wisely, and may your legacy and power reign supreme!
Strife: Legacy of the Eternals is a competitive two-player game of perfect information – each player has an identical hand of 10 cards from which to play. At its core, Strife is like War – players simultaneously reveal their chosen card and the highest number wins that battle. Players earn Victory Points for battles won. But there’s a twist. Each card has a unique ability (Battle Ability) that, when played, can influence the total power of either your or your opponent’s card for the given turn. And that’s not all – each card also has a secondary ability (Legacy Ability) that can be used the turn after it was initially played to also influence the total power for that next turn. Strategy is key! How can you play your cards in a way that both the initial and secondary powers can benefit you? One power is immediate and one is delayed by a turn, so think carefully about how to best combo your cards/powers! Don’t forget, as a game of perfect information you also know exactly what your opponent is working with too! Use your deduction skills to determine which card they might play and figure out how to use your remaining cards to undermine their total power. The game is played over the course of 3 rounds, and the player with the most Victory Points at the end is the winner!
For a game that seems so simple, Strife actually has a steep learning curve. Every card in your hand has a unique Battle Ability AND Legacy Ability that you have to learn to successfully play. You can’t just pick this game up and play if you don’t know the powers and understand how they work. It might be a little easier to learn if there was a player reference guide for all of the powers so you could just look in one place, but there isn’t one. So I’m left flipping through all of my cards trying to find a power that I thought I saw that could maybe combo with a power on a different card. The rule sheet suggests using ONLY Legacy Abilities your first game to get a feel for the flow, which I appreciate. But when you finally add in the Battle Abilities, you have to be paying attention to 2 different powers on 2 different cards each turn and it can be confusing if you don’t fully know all of those powers.
That being said, I think this game would be great if it used ONLY a Battle Ability or ONLY a Legacy Ability. Having both just feels like too much to me. Until you understand all of the abilities, it’s hard to decide on a strategy since you don’t really know how certain powers will work with each other across different cards. I have played this game multiple times, but since I don’t play 2-player only games often, I haven’t had the opportunity to totally learn all of the powers. And if you play with someone that has never played Strife before, it feels a little unfair if YOU know the abilities and how they work while your opponent is totally in the dark. It would be a much easier game to grasp if there was only 1 power on 1 card to consider for each turn.
I got Strife from Travis when he was doing a small purge of his collection, and I can see why he was getting rid of it. It’s a part of my collection, but I can’t guarantee how long it’ll stay there. In theory, it’s a cool game. But in actual execution, it’s just a little too complicated for what I feel it should be. Give Strife a try if you want, but I don’t really think you’re missing much if you don’t. That’s why Purple Phoenix Games gives Strife a 4/12.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/03/20/strife-legacy-of-the-eternals-review/
War rages across the land as the Eternals (immortal beings) fight each other for dominance over the realm. Calling forth their chosen Champions, battle after battle is fought until one Eternal emerges victorious. Will your Champions aid you on your quest for supremacy, or will you be forced to cede to another Eternal in the end? Choose your Champions wisely, and may your legacy and power reign supreme!
Strife: Legacy of the Eternals is a competitive two-player game of perfect information – each player has an identical hand of 10 cards from which to play. At its core, Strife is like War – players simultaneously reveal their chosen card and the highest number wins that battle. Players earn Victory Points for battles won. But there’s a twist. Each card has a unique ability (Battle Ability) that, when played, can influence the total power of either your or your opponent’s card for the given turn. And that’s not all – each card also has a secondary ability (Legacy Ability) that can be used the turn after it was initially played to also influence the total power for that next turn. Strategy is key! How can you play your cards in a way that both the initial and secondary powers can benefit you? One power is immediate and one is delayed by a turn, so think carefully about how to best combo your cards/powers! Don’t forget, as a game of perfect information you also know exactly what your opponent is working with too! Use your deduction skills to determine which card they might play and figure out how to use your remaining cards to undermine their total power. The game is played over the course of 3 rounds, and the player with the most Victory Points at the end is the winner!
For a game that seems so simple, Strife actually has a steep learning curve. Every card in your hand has a unique Battle Ability AND Legacy Ability that you have to learn to successfully play. You can’t just pick this game up and play if you don’t know the powers and understand how they work. It might be a little easier to learn if there was a player reference guide for all of the powers so you could just look in one place, but there isn’t one. So I’m left flipping through all of my cards trying to find a power that I thought I saw that could maybe combo with a power on a different card. The rule sheet suggests using ONLY Legacy Abilities your first game to get a feel for the flow, which I appreciate. But when you finally add in the Battle Abilities, you have to be paying attention to 2 different powers on 2 different cards each turn and it can be confusing if you don’t fully know all of those powers.
That being said, I think this game would be great if it used ONLY a Battle Ability or ONLY a Legacy Ability. Having both just feels like too much to me. Until you understand all of the abilities, it’s hard to decide on a strategy since you don’t really know how certain powers will work with each other across different cards. I have played this game multiple times, but since I don’t play 2-player only games often, I haven’t had the opportunity to totally learn all of the powers. And if you play with someone that has never played Strife before, it feels a little unfair if YOU know the abilities and how they work while your opponent is totally in the dark. It would be a much easier game to grasp if there was only 1 power on 1 card to consider for each turn.
I got Strife from Travis when he was doing a small purge of his collection, and I can see why he was getting rid of it. It’s a part of my collection, but I can’t guarantee how long it’ll stay there. In theory, it’s a cool game. But in actual execution, it’s just a little too complicated for what I feel it should be. Give Strife a try if you want, but I don’t really think you’re missing much if you don’t. That’s why Purple Phoenix Games gives Strife a 4/12.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/03/20/strife-legacy-of-the-eternals-review/
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated TaleSpins in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>).
I love alternate takes on fairy tales, so I was super happy when I was asked if I wanted to review TaleSpins (TaleSpins #1-3) by Michael Mullin! I must say that I loved this book!
The three stories are all short and are written in rhyming verse and can be bought individually. TaleSpins (TaleSpins #1-3) is just the collection of three stories in one place.
I must say that I do like the cover! It has to do with the story of 8th Dwarf.
For my review, I will be reviewing each story individually.
*
8th Dwarf
This is a retelling of Snow White. In this story, there was an eighth dwarf called Creepy who was locked int he basement so he'd be out of sight and out of mind. He was disfigured and lived up to his name. Creepy tells us the story of what really happened.
I enjoyed the story of 8th Dwarf. I felt bad for Creepy though because all he wanted was to be treated like a normal person and not like a criminal. He tries to save Snow White from the evil witch so many times, yet Snow White is too thick to realize that the witch is taking advantage of her. I enjoyed the rhyming, and I loved the font changes and little pictures during the story. I don't know if this is included in the ebook version, but it is in the paperback version.
8th Dwarf gets a 5 out of 5.
*
The Plight and Plot of Princess Penny
This is the story of a 15 year old princess named Penny who is bullied at school by a girl named Darcy. Penny is tired of being bullied by Darcy and seeks out a witch to help her get back at Darcy. Along the way she meets a troll named Jink. Jink warns her to stay away from the witch, but Penny will not listen. When Penny steals from the witch, Penny is taken prisoner by her. It's up to Jink to help Penny.
The Plight and Plot of Princess Penny references many fairy tales. I enjoyed all the references because it took me back to back to my childhood, especially the reference to Hansel and Gretel. While I didn't find this story as interesting as 8th Dwarf, it was still fun to read. Sometimes, I felt as if it had gotten to be a bit long winded and found my eyes were starting to glaze over. However, the pacing would pick back up, and I'd be enthralled in the story once again. I believe this story helps to teach us that nothing is ever as it seems.
The Plight and Plot of Princess Penny gets a 3.75 out of 5.
*
Jack'd
Jack'd is a take on the original Jack and the Beanstalk story. A doctor comes home to find a valuable treasure of his has been stolen by a teenager named Jack. While trying to locate Jack, the doctor comes across an elf like person who spray paints choices as doors for the doctor to make/take. The doctor becomes responsible for what happens to Jack.
Wow, wow, wow! This is definitely my favorite story in the book! Mr. Mullin sure did save the best for last! Jack'd read like one of those old film noir detective stories....at least, that's how it read to me. I found it interesting the way that the doctor had the choice as to what would happen to Jack...kind of like those choose your own ending books. I also loved how the verse was written in this story. I never even saw the plot twist coming!
Jack'd gets a definite 5 out of 5.
*
TaleSpins (TaleSpins #1-3) is a fantastic take on classic fairy tales. Michael Mullin brings in his own style of writing to make the fairy tales we've all come to know become fresh again.
I'd recommend this book to anyone aged 8+ (except Jack'd due to the theme. Jack'd, I'd recommend to those age 13+) who wants to get a thrill out of fairy tales again.
TaleSpins (TaleSpins #1-3) by Michael Mullin gets a 4.5 out of 5 overall.
(I received a free paperback copy of this title from the author in exchange for a fair and honest review).
I love alternate takes on fairy tales, so I was super happy when I was asked if I wanted to review TaleSpins (TaleSpins #1-3) by Michael Mullin! I must say that I loved this book!
The three stories are all short and are written in rhyming verse and can be bought individually. TaleSpins (TaleSpins #1-3) is just the collection of three stories in one place.
I must say that I do like the cover! It has to do with the story of 8th Dwarf.
For my review, I will be reviewing each story individually.
*
8th Dwarf
This is a retelling of Snow White. In this story, there was an eighth dwarf called Creepy who was locked int he basement so he'd be out of sight and out of mind. He was disfigured and lived up to his name. Creepy tells us the story of what really happened.
I enjoyed the story of 8th Dwarf. I felt bad for Creepy though because all he wanted was to be treated like a normal person and not like a criminal. He tries to save Snow White from the evil witch so many times, yet Snow White is too thick to realize that the witch is taking advantage of her. I enjoyed the rhyming, and I loved the font changes and little pictures during the story. I don't know if this is included in the ebook version, but it is in the paperback version.
8th Dwarf gets a 5 out of 5.
*
The Plight and Plot of Princess Penny
This is the story of a 15 year old princess named Penny who is bullied at school by a girl named Darcy. Penny is tired of being bullied by Darcy and seeks out a witch to help her get back at Darcy. Along the way she meets a troll named Jink. Jink warns her to stay away from the witch, but Penny will not listen. When Penny steals from the witch, Penny is taken prisoner by her. It's up to Jink to help Penny.
The Plight and Plot of Princess Penny references many fairy tales. I enjoyed all the references because it took me back to back to my childhood, especially the reference to Hansel and Gretel. While I didn't find this story as interesting as 8th Dwarf, it was still fun to read. Sometimes, I felt as if it had gotten to be a bit long winded and found my eyes were starting to glaze over. However, the pacing would pick back up, and I'd be enthralled in the story once again. I believe this story helps to teach us that nothing is ever as it seems.
The Plight and Plot of Princess Penny gets a 3.75 out of 5.
*
Jack'd
Jack'd is a take on the original Jack and the Beanstalk story. A doctor comes home to find a valuable treasure of his has been stolen by a teenager named Jack. While trying to locate Jack, the doctor comes across an elf like person who spray paints choices as doors for the doctor to make/take. The doctor becomes responsible for what happens to Jack.
Wow, wow, wow! This is definitely my favorite story in the book! Mr. Mullin sure did save the best for last! Jack'd read like one of those old film noir detective stories....at least, that's how it read to me. I found it interesting the way that the doctor had the choice as to what would happen to Jack...kind of like those choose your own ending books. I also loved how the verse was written in this story. I never even saw the plot twist coming!
Jack'd gets a definite 5 out of 5.
*
TaleSpins (TaleSpins #1-3) is a fantastic take on classic fairy tales. Michael Mullin brings in his own style of writing to make the fairy tales we've all come to know become fresh again.
I'd recommend this book to anyone aged 8+ (except Jack'd due to the theme. Jack'd, I'd recommend to those age 13+) who wants to get a thrill out of fairy tales again.
TaleSpins (TaleSpins #1-3) by Michael Mullin gets a 4.5 out of 5 overall.
(I received a free paperback copy of this title from the author in exchange for a fair and honest review).
BookblogbyCari (345 KP) rated A Short History of the World in Books
Aug 5, 2018
Best known for his classic fiction, HG Wells also wrote a non-fiction book summarising the history of the world, going from the history of the solar system, right up to the date the book was published in 1922.
As I hoped, the book often reads like a novel, with 67 distinct sections, each like a mini story. In order to fit the history of the whole world into one book, by nature the story telling ranges from nice and rapid, to a little too rapid. I found it rather like a catalogue of numerous interesting little nuggets of information. Despite covering events from all over the world, the topics often flow seamlessly from one topic to the next. Due to so many overlapping topics, this history of the world isn't told in a linear purely chronological pattern, but has to go backwards a little, now and again.
At various times throughout, the stories are gripping and Wells successfully brings history to life. I particularly liked the various sections on religious leaders. Appropriately, Wells tackles religion as would any unbiased historian-become storyteller. I also enjoyed the beginning, where Wells paints a crystal clear picture of our solar system and the vast empty space that our dramas are within. His description of our galaxy sounds nothing short of beautiful.
The book was meant to be predominantly factual, but Wells did include a substantial amount of speculation and opinion. This does not distract from the storyline, but adds value in generating the concepts of the time periods.
It covers progress and prosperity as much as carnage and decimation, and provides good explanations of everything it covers. (Although it would benefit from more illustrations). At times it feels detail heavy but also gives the reader a feel for each age - the book is not limited to which country went to war with which country and when, but also examines changes in ways of thinking through the ages. Including the Ancient Greek philosophers, Arabian progress in maths and science, the advent of experimental science, and the development of political and social ideas in Wells’ time.
I was reassured to learn that despite not studying the history of the world in its entirety in school, I was already familiar with much of the book’s content. Having said that, there were also topics where I really felt I was learning something. I read Wells’ opinion on why the Roman Empire fell, and how the industrial revolution was not merely a revolution in machinery, but rather a revolution in how people conducted their everyday lives. There were also some important figures from history described that were never mentioned in my school days, particularly Charlemagne and Roger Bacon.
Towards the end of the book, Wells correctly predicts another war like that of the Great War. However his final message was one of faith and hope in humanity’s progress.
With such a huge scope, Wells must have struggled with deciding what topics to include and what to exclude. I thought he ought to have included a touch more detail on Ancient Egypt, and on the causes of the Great War (World War 1). As a British person myself I would have liked to have seen more on British history.
Likewise, if the book were written now rather than 1922 I began to speculate on what he would and wouldn’t have included. I imagine there would certainly be a section on World War 2, rockets into space, the internet, and 9/11. He would have provided an excellently conducted section on how humans are destroying the planet.
One of the beauties of this book has to be its availability. If you type “short history of the world” into Google, the free PDF of this book takes up much of the first 2 pages of results. If you’re sketchy on world history, this book will fill in the main blanks, and is worth a read if this is your aim, especially if you wish to do so quickly. The fact that it’s split up into so many succinct sections also means that you can pick up and put down the book as often as opportunity allows. It also works well as a reference book, as it does not need to be read from cover to cover in order to look up one particular event or time period.
In summary, this book would be a welcome addition to bookshelf (or ebook library) of the general non-fiction fan or historian.
Find more of my book review on www.bookblogbycari.com
As I hoped, the book often reads like a novel, with 67 distinct sections, each like a mini story. In order to fit the history of the whole world into one book, by nature the story telling ranges from nice and rapid, to a little too rapid. I found it rather like a catalogue of numerous interesting little nuggets of information. Despite covering events from all over the world, the topics often flow seamlessly from one topic to the next. Due to so many overlapping topics, this history of the world isn't told in a linear purely chronological pattern, but has to go backwards a little, now and again.
At various times throughout, the stories are gripping and Wells successfully brings history to life. I particularly liked the various sections on religious leaders. Appropriately, Wells tackles religion as would any unbiased historian-become storyteller. I also enjoyed the beginning, where Wells paints a crystal clear picture of our solar system and the vast empty space that our dramas are within. His description of our galaxy sounds nothing short of beautiful.
The book was meant to be predominantly factual, but Wells did include a substantial amount of speculation and opinion. This does not distract from the storyline, but adds value in generating the concepts of the time periods.
It covers progress and prosperity as much as carnage and decimation, and provides good explanations of everything it covers. (Although it would benefit from more illustrations). At times it feels detail heavy but also gives the reader a feel for each age - the book is not limited to which country went to war with which country and when, but also examines changes in ways of thinking through the ages. Including the Ancient Greek philosophers, Arabian progress in maths and science, the advent of experimental science, and the development of political and social ideas in Wells’ time.
I was reassured to learn that despite not studying the history of the world in its entirety in school, I was already familiar with much of the book’s content. Having said that, there were also topics where I really felt I was learning something. I read Wells’ opinion on why the Roman Empire fell, and how the industrial revolution was not merely a revolution in machinery, but rather a revolution in how people conducted their everyday lives. There were also some important figures from history described that were never mentioned in my school days, particularly Charlemagne and Roger Bacon.
Towards the end of the book, Wells correctly predicts another war like that of the Great War. However his final message was one of faith and hope in humanity’s progress.
With such a huge scope, Wells must have struggled with deciding what topics to include and what to exclude. I thought he ought to have included a touch more detail on Ancient Egypt, and on the causes of the Great War (World War 1). As a British person myself I would have liked to have seen more on British history.
Likewise, if the book were written now rather than 1922 I began to speculate on what he would and wouldn’t have included. I imagine there would certainly be a section on World War 2, rockets into space, the internet, and 9/11. He would have provided an excellently conducted section on how humans are destroying the planet.
One of the beauties of this book has to be its availability. If you type “short history of the world” into Google, the free PDF of this book takes up much of the first 2 pages of results. If you’re sketchy on world history, this book will fill in the main blanks, and is worth a read if this is your aim, especially if you wish to do so quickly. The fact that it’s split up into so many succinct sections also means that you can pick up and put down the book as often as opportunity allows. It also works well as a reference book, as it does not need to be read from cover to cover in order to look up one particular event or time period.
In summary, this book would be a welcome addition to bookshelf (or ebook library) of the general non-fiction fan or historian.
Find more of my book review on www.bookblogbycari.com
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Okja (2017) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020 (Updated Mar 3, 2020)
Okja (pronounced ok-cha, as far as I can discern from hearing it said) was a film I had on my radar from its release, but it took the impetus of Parasite and director Bong Joon Ho winning the Oscar to kick me into settling down to watch it. It is the kind of film I would have seen as a matter of course when I worked at the beloved Cameo Cinema, Edinburgh, back in the day… but the kind of film it takes me a while to get around to these days.
What I had heard was that it was quirky, had a very black humour and involved a giant pig. Other than that I was going in blind. Which is always preferable, with almost any film! Hype and too much information can ruin your experience of a thing, simply by putting preconceptions and ideas in your head that may influence your thinking and true reaction to something. I was very grateful then to avoid too much information regarding this unique movie.
The cast is full of people I like, outside of the Korean cast that were strangers to me, in all honesty. Jake Gyllenhaal and Paul Dano, especially, are two actors that have been high on my list of consistent performers you can trust for some years; both making interesting and compelling career choices in terms of subject matter and working with strong directors. Tilda Swinton too is usually good value for a promising watch, almost guaranteeing something slightly leftfield and worth thinking about.
Dano gets away with being the one likeable, if morally ambiguous, character out of the three; with Swinton and Gyllenhaal giving bizarre, heightened comic performances that it is hard to reference to anything else! As the main story of eco-consciousness and a girl’s love for her giant pig progresses in charming fashion, it is these starkly bonkers performances that stick out like very sore thumbs – sometimes raising awkward chuckles, but mostly making you go “what the hell is going on!?”
Well, what is going on is an exploration of corporate evil, the lies, deviousness and manipulation used to make a profit that ignores life and nature as anything worth preserving, or even loving. It wants us to look at meat eating for what it is, and imagines how we might think more about it as a species if we truly accept that animals have rights, personalities, even souls. Of course many people watching wouldn’t need to be converted to this way of thinking at all, so I am very curious (as a non vegetarian / vegan) what reaction a person whose consciousness of these things has been awake for years might have…?
It is possible to watch this without involving yourself too much in that whole debate, however. At its heart, it is a film about innocent love, and a rescue movie that sets unlikely heroes against a gargantuan nemesis against all odds. Naturally, it is a very smart script, that doesn’t ignore the notion of making fun of itself and keeping it mostly fun. In many ways, it seems like a family friendly film, apart from the underlying seriousness of the subject of cruelty, torture and, essentially, murder for the private gain of unscrupulous suits who would watch the world burn in the name of profit.
At the time of watching it, I caught myself in the right mood and really enjoyed it for what it was. Seo-Hyun Ahn as Mija is utterly lovely, and you do find yourself falling for Okja (rendered with marvelous CGI work) and sympathising with the warmth of their relationship as friends. The moments of the film that show nature and the calm of a non-modern world are the most compelling. The parts of the film with cities and noise and guns are more jarring – which, perhaps, is the point and fully intentional. Clearly, this is a director with serious vision and talent that was almost, if not quite, getting it right. As we now know, with Parasite he nailed it…
This is a film I’d be a little cautious of recommending to some people. It is just too odd in parts. It is a good film, not a great one. And perhaps more likely to impress in the hands of viewers that are already converted to the cause and way of thinking it champions.
What I had heard was that it was quirky, had a very black humour and involved a giant pig. Other than that I was going in blind. Which is always preferable, with almost any film! Hype and too much information can ruin your experience of a thing, simply by putting preconceptions and ideas in your head that may influence your thinking and true reaction to something. I was very grateful then to avoid too much information regarding this unique movie.
The cast is full of people I like, outside of the Korean cast that were strangers to me, in all honesty. Jake Gyllenhaal and Paul Dano, especially, are two actors that have been high on my list of consistent performers you can trust for some years; both making interesting and compelling career choices in terms of subject matter and working with strong directors. Tilda Swinton too is usually good value for a promising watch, almost guaranteeing something slightly leftfield and worth thinking about.
Dano gets away with being the one likeable, if morally ambiguous, character out of the three; with Swinton and Gyllenhaal giving bizarre, heightened comic performances that it is hard to reference to anything else! As the main story of eco-consciousness and a girl’s love for her giant pig progresses in charming fashion, it is these starkly bonkers performances that stick out like very sore thumbs – sometimes raising awkward chuckles, but mostly making you go “what the hell is going on!?”
Well, what is going on is an exploration of corporate evil, the lies, deviousness and manipulation used to make a profit that ignores life and nature as anything worth preserving, or even loving. It wants us to look at meat eating for what it is, and imagines how we might think more about it as a species if we truly accept that animals have rights, personalities, even souls. Of course many people watching wouldn’t need to be converted to this way of thinking at all, so I am very curious (as a non vegetarian / vegan) what reaction a person whose consciousness of these things has been awake for years might have…?
It is possible to watch this without involving yourself too much in that whole debate, however. At its heart, it is a film about innocent love, and a rescue movie that sets unlikely heroes against a gargantuan nemesis against all odds. Naturally, it is a very smart script, that doesn’t ignore the notion of making fun of itself and keeping it mostly fun. In many ways, it seems like a family friendly film, apart from the underlying seriousness of the subject of cruelty, torture and, essentially, murder for the private gain of unscrupulous suits who would watch the world burn in the name of profit.
At the time of watching it, I caught myself in the right mood and really enjoyed it for what it was. Seo-Hyun Ahn as Mija is utterly lovely, and you do find yourself falling for Okja (rendered with marvelous CGI work) and sympathising with the warmth of their relationship as friends. The moments of the film that show nature and the calm of a non-modern world are the most compelling. The parts of the film with cities and noise and guns are more jarring – which, perhaps, is the point and fully intentional. Clearly, this is a director with serious vision and talent that was almost, if not quite, getting it right. As we now know, with Parasite he nailed it…
This is a film I’d be a little cautious of recommending to some people. It is just too odd in parts. It is a good film, not a great one. And perhaps more likely to impress in the hands of viewers that are already converted to the cause and way of thinking it champions.