Search
Search results
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Fort in Tabletop Games
Jul 27, 2021
One activity my 5-year-old son will never tire of: building forts. Mostly pillow/blanket-based, but all I am doing is grooming him for an eventual treehouse fort of his own in the backyard someday. What an excellent theme for a game, and when I had a chance to speak with Brooke from Leder Games about reviewing this one, I absolutely jumped for joy for the opportunity. No guessing whether we like a game here at Purple Phoenix Games – we put our ratings right on the first graphic of every review, so you know already that I love Fort. Let’s see why.
Fort is a hand management, deck-building game with a follow mechanic for two to four players. In it, players are assuming the roles of everyday kids trying to build their forts, play with their toys, and eat pizza with their buddies. The winner of the game is they who is able to score the most victory points (VP) at the end of the game, which can end in one of three different fashions.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, each player chooses a player color and takes all items belonging to them, including the Best Friends cards from the stack. Every other component is then separated by type and cards shuffled. Per the rules, some decks of cards will only have a certain amount on the table, whereas the main deck of kid cards is always used. Each player will draw eight kid cards from the deck to add to their Best Friends and shuffle them. They will also place their score markers on the 0 space of the Victory Track board. Randomly determine the starting player and give them the coveted First Player card, and the game may now begin!
Fort is played in turns, with each turn consisting of five phases (the first phase is skipped on the first turn). The first phase is Cleanup. To Cleanup, the active player takes all kid cards remaining in their Yard and places them in their own discard pile. Next, the active player will Play a kid card from their hand. On each card is a space for up to two actions to be taken: the public action on top and the private action on bottom. The player may complete both, but MUST complete at least one of the actions in its entirety. If using the public action of the card, then other players at the table may also follow the action by discarding one card of the matching suit of the card originally played. However, the leader (active player) may also play additional cards from their hand, of the same suit, in order to boost the effects of the actions. Followers may not. These actions include gaining “stuff” (pizza and toys) to be placed in their Stuff area or backpack, trashing cards in their hands, or gaining VP.
After the players have Played cards, the next phase is Recruit. The active player may choose any kid card that exists in the Park (the space underneath the Victory Track that is always full of kids), another player’s Yard (the space above the player’s main board that they neglected to play with their previous turn), or they may simply draw a kid card blindly from the Park deck. These kids are sent directly to the discard pile to be drawn on a later turn.
Finally, phases four and five end a player’s turn. Phase four is Discard, where the active player will discard all their Best Friends, kid cards they played this turn, and recruited kids. The kid cards leftover that were not used are sent to the player’s Yard above their main boards to possibly be stolen by another player during their Recruit phase. After Discarding, the final phase is Draw, where the active player will draw another hand of five cards to prepare to follow other players and to prepare for the next round. Fort continues in this fashion of each player taking turns and following others’ actions until one player earns 25 VP on the track, any player increases their Fort to level 5, or the Park deck becomes empty. All players will finish their turns so that they all have played an equal amount of turns, and then the players total their scores to crown the winner!
Components. This game has super great components. The little pizza and toys bits are awesome, the double-layered boards are cool, and the art is amazing as well. If it looks familiar in style, it’s because you have seen this art on Root, Oath, and Vast, among others. I love it so much and it is a perfect match for this theme. I really have little negative to say about Fort except that I wish the player colors were different. The orange and yellow are a little close in hue, and the brownish/olive is drab. Everything else, though, *chef’s kiss.
It is probably no surprise why I love this one. Deck-building has long been one of my favorite mechanics, and I have always enjoyed the follow mechanic found in Tiny Epic Galaxies and Villages of Valeria. Mix those up with much more going on and an excellent theme and it’s definitely a big time winner for me. I think what puts me over the edge here is that cards can be used for a couple different actions, and they can be boosted with the right strategies. Get your deck in order to really maximize each turn and the game opens up for you. Several times I have been able to focus my deck and really pound some powerful abilities, but it certainly doesn’t always work out for me, especially when others catch on to what I am doing and hate-draft me into other tactics.
If you are into a fresh new look at deck-building and enjoy more wacky themes, as I do, then I urge you to check out Fort. Officially, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a playful 5 / 6, but even though it probably won’t break into my Top 10, I do think it will come to the table more often than most games in my Top 10. So should I reconsider my Top 10? Hmm. Anyway, Fort is awesome and everyone I have played with seem to agree with me. So grab a copy or two for yourself. Heck, the gift-giving season is fast approaching, and I know these fit very well under trees and other significant symbols of festivities…
Fort is a hand management, deck-building game with a follow mechanic for two to four players. In it, players are assuming the roles of everyday kids trying to build their forts, play with their toys, and eat pizza with their buddies. The winner of the game is they who is able to score the most victory points (VP) at the end of the game, which can end in one of three different fashions.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, each player chooses a player color and takes all items belonging to them, including the Best Friends cards from the stack. Every other component is then separated by type and cards shuffled. Per the rules, some decks of cards will only have a certain amount on the table, whereas the main deck of kid cards is always used. Each player will draw eight kid cards from the deck to add to their Best Friends and shuffle them. They will also place their score markers on the 0 space of the Victory Track board. Randomly determine the starting player and give them the coveted First Player card, and the game may now begin!
Fort is played in turns, with each turn consisting of five phases (the first phase is skipped on the first turn). The first phase is Cleanup. To Cleanup, the active player takes all kid cards remaining in their Yard and places them in their own discard pile. Next, the active player will Play a kid card from their hand. On each card is a space for up to two actions to be taken: the public action on top and the private action on bottom. The player may complete both, but MUST complete at least one of the actions in its entirety. If using the public action of the card, then other players at the table may also follow the action by discarding one card of the matching suit of the card originally played. However, the leader (active player) may also play additional cards from their hand, of the same suit, in order to boost the effects of the actions. Followers may not. These actions include gaining “stuff” (pizza and toys) to be placed in their Stuff area or backpack, trashing cards in their hands, or gaining VP.
After the players have Played cards, the next phase is Recruit. The active player may choose any kid card that exists in the Park (the space underneath the Victory Track that is always full of kids), another player’s Yard (the space above the player’s main board that they neglected to play with their previous turn), or they may simply draw a kid card blindly from the Park deck. These kids are sent directly to the discard pile to be drawn on a later turn.
Finally, phases four and five end a player’s turn. Phase four is Discard, where the active player will discard all their Best Friends, kid cards they played this turn, and recruited kids. The kid cards leftover that were not used are sent to the player’s Yard above their main boards to possibly be stolen by another player during their Recruit phase. After Discarding, the final phase is Draw, where the active player will draw another hand of five cards to prepare to follow other players and to prepare for the next round. Fort continues in this fashion of each player taking turns and following others’ actions until one player earns 25 VP on the track, any player increases their Fort to level 5, or the Park deck becomes empty. All players will finish their turns so that they all have played an equal amount of turns, and then the players total their scores to crown the winner!
Components. This game has super great components. The little pizza and toys bits are awesome, the double-layered boards are cool, and the art is amazing as well. If it looks familiar in style, it’s because you have seen this art on Root, Oath, and Vast, among others. I love it so much and it is a perfect match for this theme. I really have little negative to say about Fort except that I wish the player colors were different. The orange and yellow are a little close in hue, and the brownish/olive is drab. Everything else, though, *chef’s kiss.
It is probably no surprise why I love this one. Deck-building has long been one of my favorite mechanics, and I have always enjoyed the follow mechanic found in Tiny Epic Galaxies and Villages of Valeria. Mix those up with much more going on and an excellent theme and it’s definitely a big time winner for me. I think what puts me over the edge here is that cards can be used for a couple different actions, and they can be boosted with the right strategies. Get your deck in order to really maximize each turn and the game opens up for you. Several times I have been able to focus my deck and really pound some powerful abilities, but it certainly doesn’t always work out for me, especially when others catch on to what I am doing and hate-draft me into other tactics.
If you are into a fresh new look at deck-building and enjoy more wacky themes, as I do, then I urge you to check out Fort. Officially, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a playful 5 / 6, but even though it probably won’t break into my Top 10, I do think it will come to the table more often than most games in my Top 10. So should I reconsider my Top 10? Hmm. Anyway, Fort is awesome and everyone I have played with seem to agree with me. So grab a copy or two for yourself. Heck, the gift-giving season is fast approaching, and I know these fit very well under trees and other significant symbols of festivities…
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Greatest Showman (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
This IS the Greatest Show!
I sometimes wonder how “proper” UK film critics view films early for review. Is there a ‘special screening’ which all the film critics attend in London? The point I’m getting at is whether the collective critical opinion of a movie can be swayed by a critic leaping to their feet and wildly applauding a film like “Star Wars: The Last Jedi” or, alternatively, snorting in derision at a film like “The Greatest Showman”. For sometimes the critics seem to get it massively wrong across the board, panning a film that the general public will adore. Unfortunately, this has the effect of putting the general public off seeing it, especially in the lethargic post-Christmas period. I think here is a case in point. It’s not the best little film in the world, but as a musical crowd-pleaser it delivers in spades.
Will you like “The Greatest Showman”? This will be dictated almost entirely by whether you are a “musicals” person or not! For “The Greatest Showman” is a frothy, very loud, cheesy and high-energy musical, much more aligned, in fact, to the mainstream genre from the 40’s and 50’s than “La La Land” was.
Roll up, roll up. The circus cast entertain.
In a VERY loose interpretation of the early life of Phineas Taylor Barnum, the American huckster and impressario, we start the story with a pre-pubescent Barnum (Ellis Rubin, sung by Ziv Zaifman) as a young tailor’s assistant punching above his weight with young socialite Charity (Skylar Dunn), firmly against the wishes of her father. Spin forward (via song) and the hitched Barnum’s – now Hugh Jackman (“Logan“) and Michelle Williams (“Manchester By The Sea“) – are barely scraping a living. But Barnum has “A Million Dreams” and hits on the novel idea of opening an entertainment (coined “a circus” by journalist James Gordon Bennett (Paul Sparks)) where he offers both respect and a family to those of the city who are deformed, rejected and socially shunned. Barnum’s show is shockingly entertaining – as in both filling seats and shocking the morally-self-righteous upper classes. But never one to rest on his laurels, Barnum’s endless ambition drives him to break his social ceiling by importing the “Swedish songbird”, opera singer Jenny Lind (Rebecca Ferguson, “Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation“, “The Snowman“) ), for an ambitious and extravegant tour of the States. All does not exactly go to plan.
Washing day tunes. Hugh Jackman and Michelle Williams take to the rooftops.
As I’ve said, most critics have been making sniffy noises about this film. But I am not one of them…. I LOVED IT, have already bought the glorious soundtrack album and will be looking forwards to the DVD release. For this is joy in a box. Sure, the story is a bit weak, the characterisations of everyone (other than Barnum) pretty lightweight, but it’s a musical extravaganza! Live with it!
Hugh Jackman, who of course started his career in stage musicals, is marvellously charismatic as Barnum although his singing does tend to the “shouty” end of the scale in many of the numbers. He’s joined here by fellow musicals star Zac Efron (let’s forget “Dirty Grandpa“) as the fictitious Phillip Carlyle: a socialite playwright and partner.
But the acting and singing revelation for me was Zendaya (“Spider-Man: Homecoming“) as Efron’s (scandalous) inter-racial love interest, who has a fantastically athletic body, sings and dances wonderfully and has a magnetic stare. A marvellous trapeze routine between Efron and Zendaya (“Rewrite The Stars”) is one of the high-spots of the film for me.
An energetic dance. Zendaya and Efron take to the skies.
Elsewhere Williams proves she has a singing voice as well as being a top flight actress and the bearded lady (Broadway star Keala Settle) belts out one of the show-stopping numbers “This is Me” (although she is a little ‘shrill’ for my musical tastes).
It would be nice to extend that compliment to the wonderful Rebecca Ferguson as the “greatest singer in the world” – but she is (wisely I think) dubbed here by Loren Allred (a finalist on the US version of “The Voice”). It is a bit of a shock when “the great opera singer” opens her mouth and a modern love song comes out, but once you get over that then the combination of Ferguson’s acting and Allred’s singing makes “Never Enough” one of the standout songs in the movie. (It’s been described as “a bit Eurovision” by Kevin Maher, “The Times” critic, which I can see but I don’t care! I find it marvellously moving).
A dangerous songbird’s nest for the married Barnum. Rebecca Ferguson and Hugh Jackman.
If you haven’t guessed it, there are some fantastic songs in this movie, written by “La La Land” song composers Benj Pasek and Justin Paul and at least one of these surely must be Oscar nominated (I’m not sure what the cut-off would be for the 2018 Oscars?).
There’s also a lot of talent in the backroom with production design and memorable costumes. Where I’d single out particular praise though is in the choreography and the editing on show.
Firstly, the choreography of “beats” in the song to the action on screen is brilliantly done, done, probably at its most impressive in a shot-glass bar-room scene between Jackman and Efron. And never (hats off to the special effects guys and cinematographer Seamus McGarvey) have you seen washing on a washing line so cleverly in time with the music.
Secondly in terms of the film editing, I am a sucker for clever “transition” shots, and there are some in this movie that just took my breath away: a transition to a pregnant Charity; a transition from ballet practice to ballet performance; there are numerous others!
Inverted magnetism. Zendaya as the trapeze artist Anne Wheeler.
I have decided to park some of my minor criticisms within the greater joy of the whole: some of the dialogue (by Jenny Bicks and Bill Condon) is as cheesy as hell, but probably no more so than in some of the Judy Garland/Mickey Rooney musicals. Where I had my biggest problem is in some of the lip synching to the songs. This is an age where the live recording of songs in films like “Les Miserables” and “La La Land” has set the bar high, and returning to the norm (I had the same problem with “Beauty and the Beast“) becomes noticeable and irritating to me. (Perhaps this is just me!).
It’s certainly not a perfect film, but its energy and drive carry it through as a memorable movie musical that may well take on a life of its own as word-of-mouth gets it more widely viewed (outside of the rather difficult Christmas holiday season). It would also be a good film for youngsters, with a bit of judicious editing (there is one moment of violence in the first 10 minutes that I would choose to edit out). From my perspective it is certainly a truly impressive debut for advert director Michael Gracey. Recommended for musical fans.
Will you like “The Greatest Showman”? This will be dictated almost entirely by whether you are a “musicals” person or not! For “The Greatest Showman” is a frothy, very loud, cheesy and high-energy musical, much more aligned, in fact, to the mainstream genre from the 40’s and 50’s than “La La Land” was.
Roll up, roll up. The circus cast entertain.
In a VERY loose interpretation of the early life of Phineas Taylor Barnum, the American huckster and impressario, we start the story with a pre-pubescent Barnum (Ellis Rubin, sung by Ziv Zaifman) as a young tailor’s assistant punching above his weight with young socialite Charity (Skylar Dunn), firmly against the wishes of her father. Spin forward (via song) and the hitched Barnum’s – now Hugh Jackman (“Logan“) and Michelle Williams (“Manchester By The Sea“) – are barely scraping a living. But Barnum has “A Million Dreams” and hits on the novel idea of opening an entertainment (coined “a circus” by journalist James Gordon Bennett (Paul Sparks)) where he offers both respect and a family to those of the city who are deformed, rejected and socially shunned. Barnum’s show is shockingly entertaining – as in both filling seats and shocking the morally-self-righteous upper classes. But never one to rest on his laurels, Barnum’s endless ambition drives him to break his social ceiling by importing the “Swedish songbird”, opera singer Jenny Lind (Rebecca Ferguson, “Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation“, “The Snowman“) ), for an ambitious and extravegant tour of the States. All does not exactly go to plan.
Washing day tunes. Hugh Jackman and Michelle Williams take to the rooftops.
As I’ve said, most critics have been making sniffy noises about this film. But I am not one of them…. I LOVED IT, have already bought the glorious soundtrack album and will be looking forwards to the DVD release. For this is joy in a box. Sure, the story is a bit weak, the characterisations of everyone (other than Barnum) pretty lightweight, but it’s a musical extravaganza! Live with it!
Hugh Jackman, who of course started his career in stage musicals, is marvellously charismatic as Barnum although his singing does tend to the “shouty” end of the scale in many of the numbers. He’s joined here by fellow musicals star Zac Efron (let’s forget “Dirty Grandpa“) as the fictitious Phillip Carlyle: a socialite playwright and partner.
But the acting and singing revelation for me was Zendaya (“Spider-Man: Homecoming“) as Efron’s (scandalous) inter-racial love interest, who has a fantastically athletic body, sings and dances wonderfully and has a magnetic stare. A marvellous trapeze routine between Efron and Zendaya (“Rewrite The Stars”) is one of the high-spots of the film for me.
An energetic dance. Zendaya and Efron take to the skies.
Elsewhere Williams proves she has a singing voice as well as being a top flight actress and the bearded lady (Broadway star Keala Settle) belts out one of the show-stopping numbers “This is Me” (although she is a little ‘shrill’ for my musical tastes).
It would be nice to extend that compliment to the wonderful Rebecca Ferguson as the “greatest singer in the world” – but she is (wisely I think) dubbed here by Loren Allred (a finalist on the US version of “The Voice”). It is a bit of a shock when “the great opera singer” opens her mouth and a modern love song comes out, but once you get over that then the combination of Ferguson’s acting and Allred’s singing makes “Never Enough” one of the standout songs in the movie. (It’s been described as “a bit Eurovision” by Kevin Maher, “The Times” critic, which I can see but I don’t care! I find it marvellously moving).
A dangerous songbird’s nest for the married Barnum. Rebecca Ferguson and Hugh Jackman.
If you haven’t guessed it, there are some fantastic songs in this movie, written by “La La Land” song composers Benj Pasek and Justin Paul and at least one of these surely must be Oscar nominated (I’m not sure what the cut-off would be for the 2018 Oscars?).
There’s also a lot of talent in the backroom with production design and memorable costumes. Where I’d single out particular praise though is in the choreography and the editing on show.
Firstly, the choreography of “beats” in the song to the action on screen is brilliantly done, done, probably at its most impressive in a shot-glass bar-room scene between Jackman and Efron. And never (hats off to the special effects guys and cinematographer Seamus McGarvey) have you seen washing on a washing line so cleverly in time with the music.
Secondly in terms of the film editing, I am a sucker for clever “transition” shots, and there are some in this movie that just took my breath away: a transition to a pregnant Charity; a transition from ballet practice to ballet performance; there are numerous others!
Inverted magnetism. Zendaya as the trapeze artist Anne Wheeler.
I have decided to park some of my minor criticisms within the greater joy of the whole: some of the dialogue (by Jenny Bicks and Bill Condon) is as cheesy as hell, but probably no more so than in some of the Judy Garland/Mickey Rooney musicals. Where I had my biggest problem is in some of the lip synching to the songs. This is an age where the live recording of songs in films like “Les Miserables” and “La La Land” has set the bar high, and returning to the norm (I had the same problem with “Beauty and the Beast“) becomes noticeable and irritating to me. (Perhaps this is just me!).
It’s certainly not a perfect film, but its energy and drive carry it through as a memorable movie musical that may well take on a life of its own as word-of-mouth gets it more widely viewed (outside of the rather difficult Christmas holiday season). It would also be a good film for youngsters, with a bit of judicious editing (there is one moment of violence in the first 10 minutes that I would choose to edit out). From my perspective it is certainly a truly impressive debut for advert director Michael Gracey. Recommended for musical fans.
Erika (17788 KP) rated Loki - Season 1 in TV
Jul 16, 2021 (Updated Jul 16, 2021)
I’ll stick with Loki’s original story-arc.
Contains spoilers, click to show
Loki, featuring the return of Tom Hiddleston to the MCU, has escaped with the tesseract, and is subsequently caught by the TVA. He agrees to help Owen Wilson’s Mobius track down a variant that is conveniently a version of himself. What ensues is a painful setup for Ironman with Magic… oh, sorry, Dr. Strange and the Multiverse of Madness.
On one hand, my ma always told me, if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all, but on the other hand, I haven’t been this pissed off at a major franchise since Star Wars: The Last Jedi. My visceral, negative reaction was caused by many things.
First, this series did not need to be made. Loki had a perfect ending to his overall arc, and it really didn’t need to be messed with. I am a huge Tom Hiddleston fan, I went to NYC to see him in a play, waited outside freezing my butt off to meet him, all of that. I was so glad when Loki was killed off, so he’d be free to do other things, and not just be known for Loki. Alas, that did not happen.
This series was made for two subsets of fans: the fans that can’t accept the death of their favorite character, and the fans that are absolutely, irrationally obsessed with having their favorite character paired up romantically. I fall into neither of these categories. ‘More Stories to Tell’ was the tagline… it should have been ‘More Money to be Made’.
After watching the same movie in a different flavor for over ten years, I realized that maybe the MCU wasn’t for me anymore. But, when Loki was announced, I was promised something new and weird! I thought, maybe this will be the show to get me back into the MCU. That was not the case. I cannot believe the rave reviews about this series; did we all watch the same thing?
The first warning sign for me was when it was announced that Michael Waldron, who was a writer for Rick & Morty was going to be helming this series. Rick & Morty is funny… if you’re a dude-bro, drunk, or high. When I read a few of his interviews prior to the release of Loki, another warning sign, this guy kind of sounded like a huge douchebag. I was then calmed and reassured that maybe it wouldn’t be a train-wreck because Hiddleston was heavily involved in the series.
As I’ve mentioned before, we were promised something new, different, and weird. Don’t make promises you can’t keep, creative team behind Loki.
Episode 1 was cheap; did I need to see clips from previous movies used in a very uncreative way? No, I did not. There was also something just off about the casting of Wilson. Now, this may be on me because my teen-years were spent quoting Owen Wilson films. There were a few things I liked about Episode 1, like the Blade Runner robot reference. There was a red flag in this episode though. Pro-tip: never, EVER have a character verbalize/confirm that they’re smart. Because it’s probably not the case.
Episode 2 was the bright spot, it was my favorite, by far. It was fast-paced, amusing, and the most interesting episode out of the whole series. The Mt Vesuvius/unleashing of the goats thing was the sort of thing I was looking for in this series. I actually chuckled a little, which rarely happens. It moved the story along, and we get the big reveal of the Loki variant that’s causing all the havoc.
Episode 3 was, for lack of a better word, boring. The pace slowed, and it was the infamous Disney+ show filler episode. We’re introduced to Mary Sue, sorry, I mean Lady Loki, but not really, Sylvie, the Enchantress, right? No, wait, she’s a completely different, new character. Probably shouldn’t have opted for the name Sylvie in that case. She’s a brand new, *strong* female, that shows her strength by punching people and has no personality (see: Carol Danvers - Captain Marvel, Hope van Dyne - Ant-Man). Y’all, you told me you were going to give me something different, new, weird. A Mary Sue isn’t new, different, or weird. This episode was a get-to-know-each-other, and build a pseudo-sibling relationship, right? Because anything else would be weird in a bad way, not an interesting way. There was a considerable shift in our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki character evolution, he opened-up, announced that he was a member of the LGBTQQIAAP nation, progress! First bi-sexual character in the MCU, way to go Disney, getting with the times! It was still a filler episode though, and while the stakes seemed high, you knew that there were three more episodes to go, of course they would live.
Again, I was reassured after this lackluster episode by Hiddleston, that 4 and 5 were his favorite. That fact is now disturbing.
Episode 4 was the death knell. I think the response from the creative team afterwards was also incredibly tone-deaf, and, quite frankly, insulting. The 4th episode was so bad, I legitimately had to go cleanse my eyes and brain with a GBBO marathon. The fact that the creative team had no idea that the insta-love (see: Jane and Thor - Thor) between two characters that had seemingly formed a pseudo-sibling relationship wouldn’t come off a little incest-y is really strange to me. If a pseudo-sibling relationship was not the intention, then it was poor writing, directing and acting by all parties involved. Sometimes, when a Mary Sue punches our main character, he falls in love with her (see: Hope and Scott - Ant-Man). The whole narcissism thing was hilarious, I’m glad our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki was cured of that by Sylvie and another *strong* personality-lacking woman (see: Sif -Thor/Thor: the Dark World) kicking him between the legs was what he’d needed all along. If a small portion of this episode was actually utilizing the myth of Narcissus, then I’m glad they followed it through to the dying part. This is when everything clicked for me. Our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki’s character evolution made him a big ol’ bowl of mushy, overcooked oatmeal. HOW and WHY would you take one of the best anti-heroes in the MCU, or any superhero franchise, and make him so mushy? More importantly, I didn’t care about what happened to any of the characters, except B-15. Normally, that’s my cue to stop watching a show, but I wanted to see if they tried to convince audiences that this Oatmeal Loki was actually smart and logical.
Episode 5 was when things slightly improved. Again, I couldn’t forgive the events of Episode 4, and I totally fast-forwarded during whatever talk Loki and Mary Sue, sorry, Sylvie, had with a blankie around their shoulders. All of the other Lokis were better in their tiny amount of screen time than Oatmeal Loki and Mary Sue Loki. Alligator Loki had more personality than Sylvie. Richard Grant is the superior Loki in my opinion. This episode also reintroduced hand holding with CGI colors swirling around characters (see: Guardians of the Galaxy).
Episode 6 was our finale. Thank God. We’re introduced to the real head of the TVA, which was who everyone was expecting. This episode was a little slow-paced, with a lot of interesting chit-chat. Oatmeal Loki actually seemed like he had a brain cell or two for a few brief, fleeting moments. He even showed off some of his powers, which, by the way, we were told we’d see more of… but didn’t. Then, our Oatmeal Loki was distracted by his Mary Sue, went for a kiss, and plopped right on his ass, looking like a fool. I almost snorted my coffee as I watched. Then, they confirmed a Season 2.
Honestly, I was hoping Oatmeal Loki and Mary Sue Loki would get killed off. Sadly, it didn’t happen, and they’re getting another series, and an appearance in Ironman with Magic. I’m so glad this series was something new, different, and weird, not just the bog-standard, MCU drivel we normally get. Oh, wait… I probably don’t even need to state that this wasn’t my cup of tea, and, again, solidified the fact that I’m over the MCU. I also know that I should avoid anything Michael Waldron and Kate Herron touch. Eventually, I’ll stop feeling betrayed by Hiddleston, but it may take a while. Is that ridiculous? Probably.
On one hand, my ma always told me, if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all, but on the other hand, I haven’t been this pissed off at a major franchise since Star Wars: The Last Jedi. My visceral, negative reaction was caused by many things.
First, this series did not need to be made. Loki had a perfect ending to his overall arc, and it really didn’t need to be messed with. I am a huge Tom Hiddleston fan, I went to NYC to see him in a play, waited outside freezing my butt off to meet him, all of that. I was so glad when Loki was killed off, so he’d be free to do other things, and not just be known for Loki. Alas, that did not happen.
This series was made for two subsets of fans: the fans that can’t accept the death of their favorite character, and the fans that are absolutely, irrationally obsessed with having their favorite character paired up romantically. I fall into neither of these categories. ‘More Stories to Tell’ was the tagline… it should have been ‘More Money to be Made’.
After watching the same movie in a different flavor for over ten years, I realized that maybe the MCU wasn’t for me anymore. But, when Loki was announced, I was promised something new and weird! I thought, maybe this will be the show to get me back into the MCU. That was not the case. I cannot believe the rave reviews about this series; did we all watch the same thing?
The first warning sign for me was when it was announced that Michael Waldron, who was a writer for Rick & Morty was going to be helming this series. Rick & Morty is funny… if you’re a dude-bro, drunk, or high. When I read a few of his interviews prior to the release of Loki, another warning sign, this guy kind of sounded like a huge douchebag. I was then calmed and reassured that maybe it wouldn’t be a train-wreck because Hiddleston was heavily involved in the series.
As I’ve mentioned before, we were promised something new, different, and weird. Don’t make promises you can’t keep, creative team behind Loki.
Episode 1 was cheap; did I need to see clips from previous movies used in a very uncreative way? No, I did not. There was also something just off about the casting of Wilson. Now, this may be on me because my teen-years were spent quoting Owen Wilson films. There were a few things I liked about Episode 1, like the Blade Runner robot reference. There was a red flag in this episode though. Pro-tip: never, EVER have a character verbalize/confirm that they’re smart. Because it’s probably not the case.
Episode 2 was the bright spot, it was my favorite, by far. It was fast-paced, amusing, and the most interesting episode out of the whole series. The Mt Vesuvius/unleashing of the goats thing was the sort of thing I was looking for in this series. I actually chuckled a little, which rarely happens. It moved the story along, and we get the big reveal of the Loki variant that’s causing all the havoc.
Episode 3 was, for lack of a better word, boring. The pace slowed, and it was the infamous Disney+ show filler episode. We’re introduced to Mary Sue, sorry, I mean Lady Loki, but not really, Sylvie, the Enchantress, right? No, wait, she’s a completely different, new character. Probably shouldn’t have opted for the name Sylvie in that case. She’s a brand new, *strong* female, that shows her strength by punching people and has no personality (see: Carol Danvers - Captain Marvel, Hope van Dyne - Ant-Man). Y’all, you told me you were going to give me something different, new, weird. A Mary Sue isn’t new, different, or weird. This episode was a get-to-know-each-other, and build a pseudo-sibling relationship, right? Because anything else would be weird in a bad way, not an interesting way. There was a considerable shift in our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki character evolution, he opened-up, announced that he was a member of the LGBTQQIAAP nation, progress! First bi-sexual character in the MCU, way to go Disney, getting with the times! It was still a filler episode though, and while the stakes seemed high, you knew that there were three more episodes to go, of course they would live.
Again, I was reassured after this lackluster episode by Hiddleston, that 4 and 5 were his favorite. That fact is now disturbing.
Episode 4 was the death knell. I think the response from the creative team afterwards was also incredibly tone-deaf, and, quite frankly, insulting. The 4th episode was so bad, I legitimately had to go cleanse my eyes and brain with a GBBO marathon. The fact that the creative team had no idea that the insta-love (see: Jane and Thor - Thor) between two characters that had seemingly formed a pseudo-sibling relationship wouldn’t come off a little incest-y is really strange to me. If a pseudo-sibling relationship was not the intention, then it was poor writing, directing and acting by all parties involved. Sometimes, when a Mary Sue punches our main character, he falls in love with her (see: Hope and Scott - Ant-Man). The whole narcissism thing was hilarious, I’m glad our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki was cured of that by Sylvie and another *strong* personality-lacking woman (see: Sif -Thor/Thor: the Dark World) kicking him between the legs was what he’d needed all along. If a small portion of this episode was actually utilizing the myth of Narcissus, then I’m glad they followed it through to the dying part. This is when everything clicked for me. Our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki’s character evolution made him a big ol’ bowl of mushy, overcooked oatmeal. HOW and WHY would you take one of the best anti-heroes in the MCU, or any superhero franchise, and make him so mushy? More importantly, I didn’t care about what happened to any of the characters, except B-15. Normally, that’s my cue to stop watching a show, but I wanted to see if they tried to convince audiences that this Oatmeal Loki was actually smart and logical.
Episode 5 was when things slightly improved. Again, I couldn’t forgive the events of Episode 4, and I totally fast-forwarded during whatever talk Loki and Mary Sue, sorry, Sylvie, had with a blankie around their shoulders. All of the other Lokis were better in their tiny amount of screen time than Oatmeal Loki and Mary Sue Loki. Alligator Loki had more personality than Sylvie. Richard Grant is the superior Loki in my opinion. This episode also reintroduced hand holding with CGI colors swirling around characters (see: Guardians of the Galaxy).
Episode 6 was our finale. Thank God. We’re introduced to the real head of the TVA, which was who everyone was expecting. This episode was a little slow-paced, with a lot of interesting chit-chat. Oatmeal Loki actually seemed like he had a brain cell or two for a few brief, fleeting moments. He even showed off some of his powers, which, by the way, we were told we’d see more of… but didn’t. Then, our Oatmeal Loki was distracted by his Mary Sue, went for a kiss, and plopped right on his ass, looking like a fool. I almost snorted my coffee as I watched. Then, they confirmed a Season 2.
Honestly, I was hoping Oatmeal Loki and Mary Sue Loki would get killed off. Sadly, it didn’t happen, and they’re getting another series, and an appearance in Ironman with Magic. I’m so glad this series was something new, different, and weird, not just the bog-standard, MCU drivel we normally get. Oh, wait… I probably don’t even need to state that this wasn’t my cup of tea, and, again, solidified the fact that I’m over the MCU. I also know that I should avoid anything Michael Waldron and Kate Herron touch. Eventually, I’ll stop feeling betrayed by Hiddleston, but it may take a while. Is that ridiculous? Probably.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated The Bloody Inn in Tabletop Games
Feb 12, 2022
It’s cliche to post a game review like this so near to Halloween, so I will probably hold off on that. However, what a perfect game to go along with the macabre tone of the Halloween season! Get this: you and your family own a motel in a small town where many travelers stop to rest. You are strapped for cash, so what is a logical step in achieving wealth? Of course! Murdering and robbing your customers upon their stays! No? Not a typical business model? Unsustainable? Pfft. You just aren’t robbing the right customers…
The Bloody Inn is a card-drafting, hand management, horror game of recruiting accomplices and having them carry out dastardly deeds to secure the most money at the end of the game. In it, players take on the roles of one of the inn’s staff members and control pawns in their evil schemes in order to swindle and kill for mountains of francs (it’s set in France, pre-Euro).
To setup, place the main board on the table, give each player the components of their color choice, two Peasant cards, a 10 franc (f) check, and a player aid card. The “traveler deck” is assembled and shuffled per the rules, and placed on the Entrance side of the board. Players choose one room to place a key token in their color, and several gray neutral key tokens are placed in other rooms. Unsuspecting travelers will be staying in these rooms each night. Per the rules, the greediest player is given the first player card and the mischief may begin!
The Bloody Inn is played over several rounds, and each round has players completing three phases: Welcome Travelers, Player Actions, and End of Round. Players will Welcome Travelers to signify the start of the round by the first player drawing one card from the deck at a time and choosing in which room they will be placed.
After Travelers have been welcomed and turn in for the evening, the second phase may begin: Player Actions. In turn order players will be able to perform two actions each round. Players may choose from five different actions, and actions can be repeated for the second action of the round. Players may Bribe a Guest by discarding cards from hand equal to the printed value on the target card’s front. Initially all players simply employ the two starter Peasants, so Bribing is only performed on cards that show a value of 0-2. When a player Bribes a guest, they essentially spend cards from hand to recruit the new guest to their employ. These new employees (accomplices) are then available to be used on future actions. One or two Peasants may also be Bribed from the bistro, adding to a player’s hand of usable human resources.
A player may instead choose to Kill a Guest by similarly discarding the appropriate number of accomplices and adding the freshly-slain guest to their tableau, face-down. The card backs feature a coffin with their “rank” (action number) printed on it. Corpses normally cause no issues, but they will need to be buried under an Annex in order to collect the money in their pockets. Players may use an action to Build an Annex by discarding the appropriate number of accomplices and using a card from hand to build and staff the Annex. Annexes can be used for the action printed on the card bottom, and/or as a housing for corpses, with the Corpses being sent to any player’s Annex via the Bury a Corpse action. Discard the requisite number of accomplices to bury a corpse, and avoid suspicion from the Law.
If none of these actions are attractive to the player, or if they simply wish, they may instead Pass and launder money from the village notary. To do this, either reduce the number of francs from the Wealth Track on the main board in order to gain a 10f check, or turn in a check for 10f on the Wealth Track.
Once all players have taken their two actions, the End of Round is performed. Firstly, if any Travelers remain belonging to the Police type (signified by pistol icons on the top of the card), they will conduct an investigation, finding any unburied corpses. Should a corpse be found in this way, the owning player will need to pay 10f for the local undertaker to dispose of the body respectfully. This not only costs the player 10f, but also the amount of money that could have been gained if they had only buried them or dealt with the Police traveler prior. Next, the Travelers who remain all wake up feeling refreshed and leave the inn by being placed in the discard pile. Once the board has been cleared of all Travelers, accomplices must be paid their wages for their help. For each accomplice in hand, the players must pay 1f from the Wealth Track.
Play continues in this fashion until the main Traveler deck has been depleted twice. Then, players add up their francs and the player with the most in francs and checks is the winner, and just the greatest little murderer/robber/briber in all the land!
Components. This game really has a modest amount of components, but they are all similarly great quality. The main board acts as the inn’s room display, the Wealth Track, AND the bistro (where Peasants are discarded, as opposed to being placed in the normal discard pile). I love when components pull double or triple duty. That said, the player aids not only remind the players of the phases and actions from which they may choose, but it also provides the player with a starter Annex that can be used to bury their first corpse! HOW COOL IS THAT?! However, the greatest thing that stands out in regards to the components is the overall look and feel of the game. The character artist for this one is Weberson Santiago, and he has also illustrated games such as the new Quest (the new version of The Resistance: Avalon), Coup, and the new Whirling Witchcraft. I adore his art style, even though I shouldn’t. My typical preference of character art is semi-realism (like that of Kwanchai Moriya), but this style is really unique and perfectly applied to the theme. Great matchup of artist and game here. I do have one silly wish for this game: PLEASE change the player colors. I mean, I am so tired of having the choice between red, blue, green, and yellow. Take a Cue from my good friend Scott Brady and use one of the more interesting color choices. I mean, even to fit in with the theme here a more appropriate palette could include a brown, black, orange, and yellow or something. Be bold!!
I knew right away that this was a great game for me. Yes, the theme is super dark and macabre, which is rare for me to enjoy, but I would only play this with adults anyway so I am unbothered by it. However, the puzzle that lies within this box is one that I thoroughly enjoy solving every round. What I neglected to mention up top is the fact that when actions are taken (Bribing, Killing, Building Annexes, and Burying Corpses) if you happen to have certain card types in hand, then the cost of discards is reduced by the number of cards present. For example, if I were to Bribe a Police card from the rooms in my first action, they have an affinity for killing (messed up, I know) and will thus help me to perform a Kill action on the next turn by reducing the number of accomplices I would need to discard for that action. Side benefit: by taking the Police Travelers off the board, they then will not perform their investigations in the morning.
Another aspect I truly enjoy about The Bloody Inn is that many cards have that dual-purpose mechanic I appreciate. The player aid is also an Annex. Brilliant! Many of the Annex cards can also offer one-time or recurring powers. It’s just so satisfying to grab cards that can combo well with each other in order to fulfill your evil plans. Every card is important, and when they can offer more than one benefit, I am a happy gamer.
I cannot express how happy I am to have decided to purchase this one. I have seen the BGG ratings and rankings, but always thought I wouldn’t like it due to its very adult theme, but boy was I wrong! This is one of the best games I have played recently and I hope to even bling it out a bit, maybe even with new player colors like I suggested earlier. Laura and my wife were able to join me for this one and they agree with me – this one is excellent and definitely worth consideration into anyone’s collection. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a dastardly 15 / 18. Yeah, it’s perfect for Halloweentime, but also for ANY time. If you are looking for something a little grim and grisly with lighter rules and lots of interesting choices, you need to check out The Bloody Inn. Grab lots of Police cards and go on a killing spree for me!
The Bloody Inn is a card-drafting, hand management, horror game of recruiting accomplices and having them carry out dastardly deeds to secure the most money at the end of the game. In it, players take on the roles of one of the inn’s staff members and control pawns in their evil schemes in order to swindle and kill for mountains of francs (it’s set in France, pre-Euro).
To setup, place the main board on the table, give each player the components of their color choice, two Peasant cards, a 10 franc (f) check, and a player aid card. The “traveler deck” is assembled and shuffled per the rules, and placed on the Entrance side of the board. Players choose one room to place a key token in their color, and several gray neutral key tokens are placed in other rooms. Unsuspecting travelers will be staying in these rooms each night. Per the rules, the greediest player is given the first player card and the mischief may begin!
The Bloody Inn is played over several rounds, and each round has players completing three phases: Welcome Travelers, Player Actions, and End of Round. Players will Welcome Travelers to signify the start of the round by the first player drawing one card from the deck at a time and choosing in which room they will be placed.
After Travelers have been welcomed and turn in for the evening, the second phase may begin: Player Actions. In turn order players will be able to perform two actions each round. Players may choose from five different actions, and actions can be repeated for the second action of the round. Players may Bribe a Guest by discarding cards from hand equal to the printed value on the target card’s front. Initially all players simply employ the two starter Peasants, so Bribing is only performed on cards that show a value of 0-2. When a player Bribes a guest, they essentially spend cards from hand to recruit the new guest to their employ. These new employees (accomplices) are then available to be used on future actions. One or two Peasants may also be Bribed from the bistro, adding to a player’s hand of usable human resources.
A player may instead choose to Kill a Guest by similarly discarding the appropriate number of accomplices and adding the freshly-slain guest to their tableau, face-down. The card backs feature a coffin with their “rank” (action number) printed on it. Corpses normally cause no issues, but they will need to be buried under an Annex in order to collect the money in their pockets. Players may use an action to Build an Annex by discarding the appropriate number of accomplices and using a card from hand to build and staff the Annex. Annexes can be used for the action printed on the card bottom, and/or as a housing for corpses, with the Corpses being sent to any player’s Annex via the Bury a Corpse action. Discard the requisite number of accomplices to bury a corpse, and avoid suspicion from the Law.
If none of these actions are attractive to the player, or if they simply wish, they may instead Pass and launder money from the village notary. To do this, either reduce the number of francs from the Wealth Track on the main board in order to gain a 10f check, or turn in a check for 10f on the Wealth Track.
Once all players have taken their two actions, the End of Round is performed. Firstly, if any Travelers remain belonging to the Police type (signified by pistol icons on the top of the card), they will conduct an investigation, finding any unburied corpses. Should a corpse be found in this way, the owning player will need to pay 10f for the local undertaker to dispose of the body respectfully. This not only costs the player 10f, but also the amount of money that could have been gained if they had only buried them or dealt with the Police traveler prior. Next, the Travelers who remain all wake up feeling refreshed and leave the inn by being placed in the discard pile. Once the board has been cleared of all Travelers, accomplices must be paid their wages for their help. For each accomplice in hand, the players must pay 1f from the Wealth Track.
Play continues in this fashion until the main Traveler deck has been depleted twice. Then, players add up their francs and the player with the most in francs and checks is the winner, and just the greatest little murderer/robber/briber in all the land!
Components. This game really has a modest amount of components, but they are all similarly great quality. The main board acts as the inn’s room display, the Wealth Track, AND the bistro (where Peasants are discarded, as opposed to being placed in the normal discard pile). I love when components pull double or triple duty. That said, the player aids not only remind the players of the phases and actions from which they may choose, but it also provides the player with a starter Annex that can be used to bury their first corpse! HOW COOL IS THAT?! However, the greatest thing that stands out in regards to the components is the overall look and feel of the game. The character artist for this one is Weberson Santiago, and he has also illustrated games such as the new Quest (the new version of The Resistance: Avalon), Coup, and the new Whirling Witchcraft. I adore his art style, even though I shouldn’t. My typical preference of character art is semi-realism (like that of Kwanchai Moriya), but this style is really unique and perfectly applied to the theme. Great matchup of artist and game here. I do have one silly wish for this game: PLEASE change the player colors. I mean, I am so tired of having the choice between red, blue, green, and yellow. Take a Cue from my good friend Scott Brady and use one of the more interesting color choices. I mean, even to fit in with the theme here a more appropriate palette could include a brown, black, orange, and yellow or something. Be bold!!
I knew right away that this was a great game for me. Yes, the theme is super dark and macabre, which is rare for me to enjoy, but I would only play this with adults anyway so I am unbothered by it. However, the puzzle that lies within this box is one that I thoroughly enjoy solving every round. What I neglected to mention up top is the fact that when actions are taken (Bribing, Killing, Building Annexes, and Burying Corpses) if you happen to have certain card types in hand, then the cost of discards is reduced by the number of cards present. For example, if I were to Bribe a Police card from the rooms in my first action, they have an affinity for killing (messed up, I know) and will thus help me to perform a Kill action on the next turn by reducing the number of accomplices I would need to discard for that action. Side benefit: by taking the Police Travelers off the board, they then will not perform their investigations in the morning.
Another aspect I truly enjoy about The Bloody Inn is that many cards have that dual-purpose mechanic I appreciate. The player aid is also an Annex. Brilliant! Many of the Annex cards can also offer one-time or recurring powers. It’s just so satisfying to grab cards that can combo well with each other in order to fulfill your evil plans. Every card is important, and when they can offer more than one benefit, I am a happy gamer.
I cannot express how happy I am to have decided to purchase this one. I have seen the BGG ratings and rankings, but always thought I wouldn’t like it due to its very adult theme, but boy was I wrong! This is one of the best games I have played recently and I hope to even bling it out a bit, maybe even with new player colors like I suggested earlier. Laura and my wife were able to join me for this one and they agree with me – this one is excellent and definitely worth consideration into anyone’s collection. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a dastardly 15 / 18. Yeah, it’s perfect for Halloweentime, but also for ANY time. If you are looking for something a little grim and grisly with lighter rules and lots of interesting choices, you need to check out The Bloody Inn. Grab lots of Police cards and go on a killing spree for me!
I tried to avoid much about this before seeing it and despite the internet being what it is I somehow managed to avoid spoilers.
Harley is fresh off a breakup and she's looking for something to help her bounce back. When she finds the perfect way it's liberating, she's a whole new woman... she's also the managed to declare open season on herself. The who's who of Gotham villainy are looking for revenge and there's no one to protect her.
In the inevitable chaos she leaves in her wake she comes across a group of ladies who are all in need of some new friends.
I went in expecting something with a bit of sass, that's all I really had in mind before seeing it, violence and sass. It certainly didn't disappoint on that level. But there was some confusion for me because there was a lot of film without actually feeling we were into the meat of the story... or what I had assumed was the main point of the film. That fact left me pondering about whether this should have had a different title.
The opening was a particular surprise, it was so different and it really worked. It provided a quick recap on what we'd missed between previous offerings and did it in such a fun way. I loved the animation style and it had some nods of nostalgia in there too.
Being the villain with a touch of hero puts Harley on a level with other characters and films, there are many little flashes throughout that remind me of Deadpool and Suicide Squad. Even with those nods it definitely takes on its own twist. There's no denying that Harley is a great character, and Robbie plays her fantastically, but she's been done wrong by being given a film without the proper credit of it... Birds of Prey: And the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn... As I said above, perhaps this name was misplaced. Giving the Birds Of Prey headline billing makes you think you're getting something very different. Traditionally you would go from existing content to new... here's Harley and introducing Birds Of Prey... but while the story does that the title does the complete opposite. I don't know why they wouldn't just have given the honour to Harley instead of a rather fanciful footnote of a subtitle.
Harley has some great moments in this film, the emotion on her face when she works out how to get closure and then this...
[sadly no amazing gif in this review, you can see it on my blog, link below]
I can see the whole thing as being within her personality, but somehow not the end of the film, that's the bit that didn't feel right to me.
The whole film feels like a set up for an actual Birds Of Prey film, but I'm not sure any of the characters really got their due. Renee Montoya was originally a character made for Batman's part of Gotham, not Harley's, she was affected by the corruption of the Police Department and her story feels like it was much more serious and dark there than it was here. Black Canary, again, doesn't seem to live up to existing backstory, though her caring nature in this is a welcome addition and she probably does the best out of the story. Huntress' story is a general amalgam of existing things, but she doesn't develop much, the fact that she's "new" to this lifestyle is played on a lot and her inexperience is used for humour most of the time. Cassandra Cain is probably the worst pickpocket in Gotham and yet somehow manages to steal a lot of stuff, what's more frustrating here is that the name holds a lot of weight in the DCEU but not in this film.
There are a lot of "main" characters and that doesn't help matters, but when they interact they all work quite well together. I don't think it would have hurt to have Montoya there in a lesser capacity, and the same goes for Cain. Neither character in this incarnation do a lot, though Cain physically has an important part to play.
Ewan McGregor's Roman Sionis/Black Mask. From the trailer I was keen to see what McGregor would do with this villainous role. It looked like it was going to be great, but the final product wasn't what I'd hoped for. Whether it was the reshoots or it was never there in the first place I don't know but it's a chaotic performance that probably should have been left to a new character. Naming him would have been fine if they'd actually given him the necessary story to explain him. As it is we get a glimpse of Black Mask and his gang but it doesn't mean a lot, and in the end it's a rather wasted opportunity.
There are a lot of things I want to say so I think I'm just going to list them off for a bit and then get back to something sensible...
Bojana Novakovic scene where she's on the table. It's completely out of place, there are plenty of ways to show Roman's paranoia and his bizarrely toxic relationship with Zsasz and any of them would have been better than this. The only good thing to take from it is that Black Canary has a really strong performance in it.
LGBT representation. There's so much of it and yet none whatsoever. They show us that Harley had a girlfriend in the past. Montoya is gay and we see the tatters of her relationship with Ellen Yee in a couple of brief exchanges. Roman and Zsasz... their relationship is an odd one, while not acknowledged as being gay they do have a very close bond. It could just be that they enable the destructive kindred spirit in each other, but Zsasz does have a jealous side that appears randomly. So like I said, there's a lot of inclusivity and yet none of it really get much airtime, and certainly not positive airtime.
Harley's narration and what it means for the story. The internet loves its controversy and one of the things with Birds Of Prey is that it's feminism gone made because all men are depicted as bad in the film. What I would say to that is that Harley is the narrator. She's fresh off her breakup with the Joker and she's angry... if she's telling this story the men are either going to be non-descript (police officers minding their own business in her attack) or bad (actual villains, minions or people who have wronged her friends who would therefore be bad in her mind). By that logic it's a really consistent narrative.
I think I've covered most of the random musings there.
Action in Birds Of Prey is really fun, but a little frustrating at times. The police station raid that we see in the trailer is brilliant and I love Harley's fun gun, it's a magical thing to watch and the explosions of colour add a great twist. It's really well choreographed and I actually think it builds well on Harley's changing nature from Suicide Squad. I do have issues with this same sequence though. Those sprinklers, there's no need for it apart from some added flair when they fight... and of course the bad guys all queue up to fight her one by one, very considerate. It then progresses to the evidence room and I don't think they took enough advantage of that for comedic effect, though I did like that it taught me a great technique for escaping an attacker and Harley got a great trick shot in.
The other big sequence is the finale where our leading ladies face off against those evil men inside the fun house (not the Pat Sharp one). There are a lot of oversized props and Cain is just kind of tossed around the set like a ragdoll but there are some amusing moments to be had out of it. My issue with this one is that they don't think things through and they get themselves into something that was entirely avoidable.
Design of everything from costumes to sets is fabulous, the colours in particular really jump out. The camerawork is great too and I enjoyed the slightly hyper nature to it with the way it switches up within scenes. Music choices are brilliant too and I've been on Spotify and got the songs to listen to, none of this album malarkey though, I found a list online of all the song, don't do it by halves... Barracuda and Black Betty need to be on your playlist!
I know I kind of fluffed over those bits very quickly but honestly I don't know how you're still reading this review at this point.
So, in conclusion... there are a lot of flaws, on first viewing I loved the beginning but felt let down by the end. My second viewing went a very similar way, though the divide blurred away a little bit. Even with these issues I really enjoyed Birds Of Prey, the acting is all good (it's only the characters I have problems with) and it's just crazy fun. People pick at the way DCEU films have been going, but honestly, I'm loving it.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/02/birds-of-prey-movie-review.html
Harley is fresh off a breakup and she's looking for something to help her bounce back. When she finds the perfect way it's liberating, she's a whole new woman... she's also the managed to declare open season on herself. The who's who of Gotham villainy are looking for revenge and there's no one to protect her.
In the inevitable chaos she leaves in her wake she comes across a group of ladies who are all in need of some new friends.
I went in expecting something with a bit of sass, that's all I really had in mind before seeing it, violence and sass. It certainly didn't disappoint on that level. But there was some confusion for me because there was a lot of film without actually feeling we were into the meat of the story... or what I had assumed was the main point of the film. That fact left me pondering about whether this should have had a different title.
The opening was a particular surprise, it was so different and it really worked. It provided a quick recap on what we'd missed between previous offerings and did it in such a fun way. I loved the animation style and it had some nods of nostalgia in there too.
Being the villain with a touch of hero puts Harley on a level with other characters and films, there are many little flashes throughout that remind me of Deadpool and Suicide Squad. Even with those nods it definitely takes on its own twist. There's no denying that Harley is a great character, and Robbie plays her fantastically, but she's been done wrong by being given a film without the proper credit of it... Birds of Prey: And the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn... As I said above, perhaps this name was misplaced. Giving the Birds Of Prey headline billing makes you think you're getting something very different. Traditionally you would go from existing content to new... here's Harley and introducing Birds Of Prey... but while the story does that the title does the complete opposite. I don't know why they wouldn't just have given the honour to Harley instead of a rather fanciful footnote of a subtitle.
Harley has some great moments in this film, the emotion on her face when she works out how to get closure and then this...
[sadly no amazing gif in this review, you can see it on my blog, link below]
I can see the whole thing as being within her personality, but somehow not the end of the film, that's the bit that didn't feel right to me.
The whole film feels like a set up for an actual Birds Of Prey film, but I'm not sure any of the characters really got their due. Renee Montoya was originally a character made for Batman's part of Gotham, not Harley's, she was affected by the corruption of the Police Department and her story feels like it was much more serious and dark there than it was here. Black Canary, again, doesn't seem to live up to existing backstory, though her caring nature in this is a welcome addition and she probably does the best out of the story. Huntress' story is a general amalgam of existing things, but she doesn't develop much, the fact that she's "new" to this lifestyle is played on a lot and her inexperience is used for humour most of the time. Cassandra Cain is probably the worst pickpocket in Gotham and yet somehow manages to steal a lot of stuff, what's more frustrating here is that the name holds a lot of weight in the DCEU but not in this film.
There are a lot of "main" characters and that doesn't help matters, but when they interact they all work quite well together. I don't think it would have hurt to have Montoya there in a lesser capacity, and the same goes for Cain. Neither character in this incarnation do a lot, though Cain physically has an important part to play.
Ewan McGregor's Roman Sionis/Black Mask. From the trailer I was keen to see what McGregor would do with this villainous role. It looked like it was going to be great, but the final product wasn't what I'd hoped for. Whether it was the reshoots or it was never there in the first place I don't know but it's a chaotic performance that probably should have been left to a new character. Naming him would have been fine if they'd actually given him the necessary story to explain him. As it is we get a glimpse of Black Mask and his gang but it doesn't mean a lot, and in the end it's a rather wasted opportunity.
There are a lot of things I want to say so I think I'm just going to list them off for a bit and then get back to something sensible...
Bojana Novakovic scene where she's on the table. It's completely out of place, there are plenty of ways to show Roman's paranoia and his bizarrely toxic relationship with Zsasz and any of them would have been better than this. The only good thing to take from it is that Black Canary has a really strong performance in it.
LGBT representation. There's so much of it and yet none whatsoever. They show us that Harley had a girlfriend in the past. Montoya is gay and we see the tatters of her relationship with Ellen Yee in a couple of brief exchanges. Roman and Zsasz... their relationship is an odd one, while not acknowledged as being gay they do have a very close bond. It could just be that they enable the destructive kindred spirit in each other, but Zsasz does have a jealous side that appears randomly. So like I said, there's a lot of inclusivity and yet none of it really get much airtime, and certainly not positive airtime.
Harley's narration and what it means for the story. The internet loves its controversy and one of the things with Birds Of Prey is that it's feminism gone made because all men are depicted as bad in the film. What I would say to that is that Harley is the narrator. She's fresh off her breakup with the Joker and she's angry... if she's telling this story the men are either going to be non-descript (police officers minding their own business in her attack) or bad (actual villains, minions or people who have wronged her friends who would therefore be bad in her mind). By that logic it's a really consistent narrative.
I think I've covered most of the random musings there.
Action in Birds Of Prey is really fun, but a little frustrating at times. The police station raid that we see in the trailer is brilliant and I love Harley's fun gun, it's a magical thing to watch and the explosions of colour add a great twist. It's really well choreographed and I actually think it builds well on Harley's changing nature from Suicide Squad. I do have issues with this same sequence though. Those sprinklers, there's no need for it apart from some added flair when they fight... and of course the bad guys all queue up to fight her one by one, very considerate. It then progresses to the evidence room and I don't think they took enough advantage of that for comedic effect, though I did like that it taught me a great technique for escaping an attacker and Harley got a great trick shot in.
The other big sequence is the finale where our leading ladies face off against those evil men inside the fun house (not the Pat Sharp one). There are a lot of oversized props and Cain is just kind of tossed around the set like a ragdoll but there are some amusing moments to be had out of it. My issue with this one is that they don't think things through and they get themselves into something that was entirely avoidable.
Design of everything from costumes to sets is fabulous, the colours in particular really jump out. The camerawork is great too and I enjoyed the slightly hyper nature to it with the way it switches up within scenes. Music choices are brilliant too and I've been on Spotify and got the songs to listen to, none of this album malarkey though, I found a list online of all the song, don't do it by halves... Barracuda and Black Betty need to be on your playlist!
I know I kind of fluffed over those bits very quickly but honestly I don't know how you're still reading this review at this point.
So, in conclusion... there are a lot of flaws, on first viewing I loved the beginning but felt let down by the end. My second viewing went a very similar way, though the divide blurred away a little bit. Even with these issues I really enjoyed Birds Of Prey, the acting is all good (it's only the characters I have problems with) and it's just crazy fun. People pick at the way DCEU films have been going, but honestly, I'm loving it.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/02/birds-of-prey-movie-review.html