Search
Search results
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated Cinderella is Dead in Books
Jun 6, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
Thank you to Netgalley and Kalynn Bayron for giving me the opportunity to read an advance copy of Cinderella is Dead in exchange for an honest review.
With such a strong title to a novel, it’s easy to predict that an author would struggle to maintain the sense of danger and mystery that is immediately evoked. However, as Kalynn Bayron opens on the revelation that Cinderella has been dead for 200 years and introduces us to two young women hiding from those who are sure to kill them, I think it is safe to say that she has the drama side of things covered!
The kingdom of Mersaille was once ruled by none other than Prince Charming and Cinderella. After her untimely death, Cinderella’s tale is held in almost biblical stature for generations, with young girls reciting it each night in preparation for their own chance to attend an annual ball once they turn 16 and wishing for their own fairy godmother to grant their happily ever after.
However, as the reader enters the town of Lille 200 years later, we witness that life within the kingdom is far from that of a fairytale. The balls that act as a tribute to Cinderella are mandatory meat markets with lecherous “suitors”, domestic violence and the suppression of women is commonplace and the ruler, Prince Manford, thrives on the power, fear and violence.
The reader witnesses this abysmal society through Bayron’s use of a first-person perspective: that of our protagonist Sophia. Sophia is everything a modern protagonist should be: she questions the unjust world around her and, having just turned 16 is preparing to attend her first ball, not with excitement, but with trepidation.
Sophia reveals to the reader that a girl only has three chances to be chosen by a suitor at the ball, after that she is considered forfeit, taken away from her family in disgrace and placed either into a workhouse or service. Men, however, are under no such conditions: they can attend balls when they wish and can choose a number of girls if they want to. Many girls’ singular hope is to be chosen by a good man at the ball, one who will not beat her, perhaps even one who will take them away from Lille. This is not enough for Sophia, she wants more for her life and, as she says herself:
“I don’t want to be saved by some knight in shining armor. I’d like to be the one in the armor, and I’d like to be the one doing the saving.”
At the beginning of the book, Sophia’s main gripe with the society she lives in is that it will not allow her to be with Erin, the girl she loves. As the book continues, the underlying theme of the rights and treatment of women strengthens, along with Sophia, but the first few pages at least are centered on the teenage relationship between Sophia and Erin.
What I absolutely adored about Bayron’s writing style here is the complete lack of shock or awe in this relationship: it is mentioned right from the start and at no point in this novel does Sophia “come out”, there is simply no need. All those around Sophia, who know her and care for her, are aware of her feelings for Erin and, although Sophia is occasionally referred to as “different”, the author chooses to abolish any unnecessary labels within her novel.
Unfortunately, Bayron does not have an easy ride in store for Sophia: reeling from a firm separation from Erin, Sophia is cast a lifeline, an “easy way out” in the form of a local boy who is also “different”. Sadly, this option is quickly and dramatically ripped away from her: forcing her to find her strength pretty damn quickly as she begins a life as an outlaw.
Along her path, Sophia meets two strong female characters: Constance and Amina. Although, wildly different, both these women play a significant role in Sophia’s self-discovery.
Amina is as far from the traditional fairy godmother image as you can get and, although she feels guilt for her previous actions, it takes meeting Sophia for her to recognise her previous denial and to help change the way of the world. Amina is a protector to Sophia right to the end, in her own unique way.
Constance, what can we say about Constance? I defy anyone to read this book and not fall in love with this girl! Constance possesses the strength that Sophia does not yet recognise within herself; she is fiery and, as a descendant of an “evil stepsister”, leads a resistance movement to uncover and publicise the truth about the real tale of Cinderella. Despite, technically saving Sophia towards the beginning of the story, Constance is not Sophia’s saviour: nor is Sophia the saviour; however, the power that they find together is monumental.
Constance is a complete juxtaposition to Erin: whereas Erin accepts the rules of society out of fear for herself and her family, Constance actively rebels against them. It is almost as if they represent the paths Sophia has to choose from. Nevertheless, along their adventure, Sophia and Constance’s relationship strengthens into love. This is no fairytale, love at first sight deal though! If anything, the slow-burning romance between the two made it more believable and I really appreciated that Sophia didn’t just rebound due to Erin’s choices: she had been burnt and she was still unsure of her own feelings never mind anyone else’s.
At the hands of Bayron, Sophia experiences heartbreak, friendship, murder, love and conspiracy: she is on the brink of danger too many times to count and is constantly second guessing who she can trust. Yet, it is clear that the author adores her main character: Sophia’s journey to realise that she is enough is incredible and the strength that she finds within herself is inspirational. Sophia is also surrounded by a cast of strong female characters: there are no Prince Charming’s in this novel that’s for sure!
I wasn’t that far into this book when I decided I need to read more of Kalynn Bayron’s work. I love how there are no chapters in this novel, we are taken on this relentless journey with Sophia: the reader is not given a chance to stop and take stock, reflect or rest until it is all over and this creates the tensest experience. Even we don’t know who to trust towards the end!
‘Cinderella is Dead’ is powerful, thought-provoking and is constantly leaving the reader guessing. On a basic level the novel deals with violence, love, politics and a little bit of necromancy thrown in there for good measure. However, the intelligent writing as well as the massive plot twist and the subjects of LGBTQ love, women’s rights and domestic violence lifts this novel from that basic level into, what I predict could be a bestseller.
With such a strong title to a novel, it’s easy to predict that an author would struggle to maintain the sense of danger and mystery that is immediately evoked. However, as Kalynn Bayron opens on the revelation that Cinderella has been dead for 200 years and introduces us to two young women hiding from those who are sure to kill them, I think it is safe to say that she has the drama side of things covered!
The kingdom of Mersaille was once ruled by none other than Prince Charming and Cinderella. After her untimely death, Cinderella’s tale is held in almost biblical stature for generations, with young girls reciting it each night in preparation for their own chance to attend an annual ball once they turn 16 and wishing for their own fairy godmother to grant their happily ever after.
However, as the reader enters the town of Lille 200 years later, we witness that life within the kingdom is far from that of a fairytale. The balls that act as a tribute to Cinderella are mandatory meat markets with lecherous “suitors”, domestic violence and the suppression of women is commonplace and the ruler, Prince Manford, thrives on the power, fear and violence.
The reader witnesses this abysmal society through Bayron’s use of a first-person perspective: that of our protagonist Sophia. Sophia is everything a modern protagonist should be: she questions the unjust world around her and, having just turned 16 is preparing to attend her first ball, not with excitement, but with trepidation.
Sophia reveals to the reader that a girl only has three chances to be chosen by a suitor at the ball, after that she is considered forfeit, taken away from her family in disgrace and placed either into a workhouse or service. Men, however, are under no such conditions: they can attend balls when they wish and can choose a number of girls if they want to. Many girls’ singular hope is to be chosen by a good man at the ball, one who will not beat her, perhaps even one who will take them away from Lille. This is not enough for Sophia, she wants more for her life and, as she says herself:
“I don’t want to be saved by some knight in shining armor. I’d like to be the one in the armor, and I’d like to be the one doing the saving.”
At the beginning of the book, Sophia’s main gripe with the society she lives in is that it will not allow her to be with Erin, the girl she loves. As the book continues, the underlying theme of the rights and treatment of women strengthens, along with Sophia, but the first few pages at least are centered on the teenage relationship between Sophia and Erin.
What I absolutely adored about Bayron’s writing style here is the complete lack of shock or awe in this relationship: it is mentioned right from the start and at no point in this novel does Sophia “come out”, there is simply no need. All those around Sophia, who know her and care for her, are aware of her feelings for Erin and, although Sophia is occasionally referred to as “different”, the author chooses to abolish any unnecessary labels within her novel.
Unfortunately, Bayron does not have an easy ride in store for Sophia: reeling from a firm separation from Erin, Sophia is cast a lifeline, an “easy way out” in the form of a local boy who is also “different”. Sadly, this option is quickly and dramatically ripped away from her: forcing her to find her strength pretty damn quickly as she begins a life as an outlaw.
Along her path, Sophia meets two strong female characters: Constance and Amina. Although, wildly different, both these women play a significant role in Sophia’s self-discovery.
Amina is as far from the traditional fairy godmother image as you can get and, although she feels guilt for her previous actions, it takes meeting Sophia for her to recognise her previous denial and to help change the way of the world. Amina is a protector to Sophia right to the end, in her own unique way.
Constance, what can we say about Constance? I defy anyone to read this book and not fall in love with this girl! Constance possesses the strength that Sophia does not yet recognise within herself; she is fiery and, as a descendant of an “evil stepsister”, leads a resistance movement to uncover and publicise the truth about the real tale of Cinderella. Despite, technically saving Sophia towards the beginning of the story, Constance is not Sophia’s saviour: nor is Sophia the saviour; however, the power that they find together is monumental.
Constance is a complete juxtaposition to Erin: whereas Erin accepts the rules of society out of fear for herself and her family, Constance actively rebels against them. It is almost as if they represent the paths Sophia has to choose from. Nevertheless, along their adventure, Sophia and Constance’s relationship strengthens into love. This is no fairytale, love at first sight deal though! If anything, the slow-burning romance between the two made it more believable and I really appreciated that Sophia didn’t just rebound due to Erin’s choices: she had been burnt and she was still unsure of her own feelings never mind anyone else’s.
At the hands of Bayron, Sophia experiences heartbreak, friendship, murder, love and conspiracy: she is on the brink of danger too many times to count and is constantly second guessing who she can trust. Yet, it is clear that the author adores her main character: Sophia’s journey to realise that she is enough is incredible and the strength that she finds within herself is inspirational. Sophia is also surrounded by a cast of strong female characters: there are no Prince Charming’s in this novel that’s for sure!
I wasn’t that far into this book when I decided I need to read more of Kalynn Bayron’s work. I love how there are no chapters in this novel, we are taken on this relentless journey with Sophia: the reader is not given a chance to stop and take stock, reflect or rest until it is all over and this creates the tensest experience. Even we don’t know who to trust towards the end!
‘Cinderella is Dead’ is powerful, thought-provoking and is constantly leaving the reader guessing. On a basic level the novel deals with violence, love, politics and a little bit of necromancy thrown in there for good measure. However, the intelligent writing as well as the massive plot twist and the subjects of LGBTQ love, women’s rights and domestic violence lifts this novel from that basic level into, what I predict could be a bestseller.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated First Man (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
He captured a feeling. Sky with no ceiling.
A memorable event
I am a child of the 60’s, born in 1961. The “Space Race” for me was not some historical concept but a pervasive backdrop to my childhood. I still recall, at the age of 8, being marched into my junior school’s assembly hall. We all peered at the grainy black-and-white pictures of Neil Armstrong as he spoke his famously fluffed line before stepping onto the lunar surface. The event happened at 3:54am UK time, so clearly my recollection of “seeing it live” is bogus. (I read that the BBC stayed on air until 10:30 in the morning, so it was probably a ‘final review’ of the night’s events I saw). It is probably lodged in my memory less for the historical event and more due to the fact that there was TELEVISION ON IN THE MORNING! (Kids, ask your grandparents!)
A very personal connection. My personal copy of Waddington’s “Blast Off” board game, briefly shown in the film.
The plot
But back to Damien Chazelle‘s film. We start early in the 60’s with America getting well and truly kicked up the proberbial by the Russians in the space race: they fail to get the first man in space; they fail to carry out the first spacewalk. So the Americans, following the famous JFK speech, set their sights on the moon. It’s the equivalent of making a mess of cutting your toenails but then deciding to have a go at brain surgery. NASA develop the Gemini programme to practice the essential docking manoevers required as a precursor for the seemingly impossible (‘two blackboard’) mission that is Apollo.
But the price paid for such ambition is high.
Ryan Gosling plays Neil Armstrong as a dedicated, prickly, professional; altogether not a terribly likeable individual. Claire Foy plays his long-suffering wife Janet, putting her support for her husband’s dangerous profession ahead of her natural fears of becoming a single mother.
Review
There is obviously little tension to be mined from a film that has such a well-known historical context. Those with even a subliminal knowledge of the subject will be aware of the key triumphs and tragedies along the way. The script (by Josh Singer, “The Post“; “Spotlight“) is very well done in developing a creeping dread of knowing what is shortly to come.
Even with these inherent spoilers, Chazelle still manages to evoke armrest-squeezing tension into the space flight sequences. A lot of this is achieved through disorientating camera movements and flashing images that may irritate some but I found to be highly effective. (Did anyone else flash back to that excellent “Mission Space” ride at Epcot during the launch sequences?) This hand-held cinematography by Linus Sandgren (Chazelle’s “La La Land” collaborator) is matched by some utterly drop-dead gorgeous shots – beautifully framed; beautifully lit – that would be worthy of a Kaminski/Spielberg collaboration.
Those expecting a rollercoaster thrill-ride of the likes of “Apollo 13” will be disappointed. The film has more of the slow-and-long-burn feeling of “The Right Stuff” in mood and, at 141 minutes, some might even find it quite boring. There is significant time, for example, spent within the family home. These scenes include turbulent events of which I wasn’t previously aware: events that form the cornerstone of the film’s drama. For me, the balance of the personal and the historical background was perfectly done. I found it curious though that with such a family-oriented drama Chazelle chose to ditch completely any cuts away to the earthbound onlookers during the tense lunar landing sequence. (Compare and contrast with Ron Howard‘s masterly inter-cutting in the re-entry scene of “Apollo 13”). With the outcome foretold, perhaps such tension building was considered unnecessary? I’m not suggesting it was wrong to ‘stay in the moment’ with the astronauts, but it’s a bold directorial move.
Overall, the foolhardiness of NASA trying to do what they did with the 60’s technology at their disposal is well-portrayed. If you’ve been lucky enough, as I have, to view the Apollo 11 capsule in the National Air and Space museum in Washington you can’t help but be impressed by the bravery of Armstong, Aldrin and Collins in getting in that bucket of bolts and putting their lives on the line. True American heroes.
On that topic, the “flag issue” has generated much self-righteous heat within the US media; that is regarding Chazelle not showing the American flag being planted. This seems fatuous to me. Not only is the flag shown on the moon, but the film ably demonstrates the American know-how and bravery behind the mission. If Clint Eastwood had been directing he would have probably gone there: but for me it certainly didn’t need any further patriotism rubbed in the viewer’s face.
The turns
Are Oscar nominations on the cards for Ryan Gosling and Claire Foy? For me, it would be staggering if they are not: this film has “Oscar nomination” written all over it. I’d also certainly not bet against Foy winning for Best Actress: her portrayal of a wife on the edge is nothing short of brilliant. And perhaps, just perhaps, this might be Gosling’s year too.
Elsewhere there are strong supporting performances from Kyle Chandler (as Deke Slayton), Corey Stoll (as the ‘tell it how it is’ Buzz Aldrin) and Jason Clarke (as Ed White). It’s also great to see Belfast-born Ciarán Hinds in another mainstream Hollywood release.
For me, another dead cert Oscar nomination will be Justin Hurwitz for the score which is breathtakingly brilliant, not just in its compelling themes but also in its orchestration: the use of the eerie theremin and melodic harp are just brilliant together. I haven’t heard a score this year that’s more fitting to the visuals: although it’s early in the Oscar season to be calling it, I’d be very surprised if this didn’t walk away with the statuette.
Summary
Loved this. Damien Chazelle – with “Whiplash“, “La La Land” and now “First Man” – has hit all of three out of the park in my book. It’s not really a film for thrill-seekers, who might get bored, but anyone, like me, with an interest in the history of space exploration will I think lap it up: for this was surely the most memorable decade in space history… so far.
On leaving the cinema I looked up at the rising moon and marvelled once more at the audacity of man. My eyes then drifted across to the red dot that was Mars. How long I wonder? And how many dramatic film biographies still to come?
I am a child of the 60’s, born in 1961. The “Space Race” for me was not some historical concept but a pervasive backdrop to my childhood. I still recall, at the age of 8, being marched into my junior school’s assembly hall. We all peered at the grainy black-and-white pictures of Neil Armstrong as he spoke his famously fluffed line before stepping onto the lunar surface. The event happened at 3:54am UK time, so clearly my recollection of “seeing it live” is bogus. (I read that the BBC stayed on air until 10:30 in the morning, so it was probably a ‘final review’ of the night’s events I saw). It is probably lodged in my memory less for the historical event and more due to the fact that there was TELEVISION ON IN THE MORNING! (Kids, ask your grandparents!)
A very personal connection. My personal copy of Waddington’s “Blast Off” board game, briefly shown in the film.
The plot
But back to Damien Chazelle‘s film. We start early in the 60’s with America getting well and truly kicked up the proberbial by the Russians in the space race: they fail to get the first man in space; they fail to carry out the first spacewalk. So the Americans, following the famous JFK speech, set their sights on the moon. It’s the equivalent of making a mess of cutting your toenails but then deciding to have a go at brain surgery. NASA develop the Gemini programme to practice the essential docking manoevers required as a precursor for the seemingly impossible (‘two blackboard’) mission that is Apollo.
But the price paid for such ambition is high.
Ryan Gosling plays Neil Armstrong as a dedicated, prickly, professional; altogether not a terribly likeable individual. Claire Foy plays his long-suffering wife Janet, putting her support for her husband’s dangerous profession ahead of her natural fears of becoming a single mother.
Review
There is obviously little tension to be mined from a film that has such a well-known historical context. Those with even a subliminal knowledge of the subject will be aware of the key triumphs and tragedies along the way. The script (by Josh Singer, “The Post“; “Spotlight“) is very well done in developing a creeping dread of knowing what is shortly to come.
Even with these inherent spoilers, Chazelle still manages to evoke armrest-squeezing tension into the space flight sequences. A lot of this is achieved through disorientating camera movements and flashing images that may irritate some but I found to be highly effective. (Did anyone else flash back to that excellent “Mission Space” ride at Epcot during the launch sequences?) This hand-held cinematography by Linus Sandgren (Chazelle’s “La La Land” collaborator) is matched by some utterly drop-dead gorgeous shots – beautifully framed; beautifully lit – that would be worthy of a Kaminski/Spielberg collaboration.
Those expecting a rollercoaster thrill-ride of the likes of “Apollo 13” will be disappointed. The film has more of the slow-and-long-burn feeling of “The Right Stuff” in mood and, at 141 minutes, some might even find it quite boring. There is significant time, for example, spent within the family home. These scenes include turbulent events of which I wasn’t previously aware: events that form the cornerstone of the film’s drama. For me, the balance of the personal and the historical background was perfectly done. I found it curious though that with such a family-oriented drama Chazelle chose to ditch completely any cuts away to the earthbound onlookers during the tense lunar landing sequence. (Compare and contrast with Ron Howard‘s masterly inter-cutting in the re-entry scene of “Apollo 13”). With the outcome foretold, perhaps such tension building was considered unnecessary? I’m not suggesting it was wrong to ‘stay in the moment’ with the astronauts, but it’s a bold directorial move.
Overall, the foolhardiness of NASA trying to do what they did with the 60’s technology at their disposal is well-portrayed. If you’ve been lucky enough, as I have, to view the Apollo 11 capsule in the National Air and Space museum in Washington you can’t help but be impressed by the bravery of Armstong, Aldrin and Collins in getting in that bucket of bolts and putting their lives on the line. True American heroes.
On that topic, the “flag issue” has generated much self-righteous heat within the US media; that is regarding Chazelle not showing the American flag being planted. This seems fatuous to me. Not only is the flag shown on the moon, but the film ably demonstrates the American know-how and bravery behind the mission. If Clint Eastwood had been directing he would have probably gone there: but for me it certainly didn’t need any further patriotism rubbed in the viewer’s face.
The turns
Are Oscar nominations on the cards for Ryan Gosling and Claire Foy? For me, it would be staggering if they are not: this film has “Oscar nomination” written all over it. I’d also certainly not bet against Foy winning for Best Actress: her portrayal of a wife on the edge is nothing short of brilliant. And perhaps, just perhaps, this might be Gosling’s year too.
Elsewhere there are strong supporting performances from Kyle Chandler (as Deke Slayton), Corey Stoll (as the ‘tell it how it is’ Buzz Aldrin) and Jason Clarke (as Ed White). It’s also great to see Belfast-born Ciarán Hinds in another mainstream Hollywood release.
For me, another dead cert Oscar nomination will be Justin Hurwitz for the score which is breathtakingly brilliant, not just in its compelling themes but also in its orchestration: the use of the eerie theremin and melodic harp are just brilliant together. I haven’t heard a score this year that’s more fitting to the visuals: although it’s early in the Oscar season to be calling it, I’d be very surprised if this didn’t walk away with the statuette.
Summary
Loved this. Damien Chazelle – with “Whiplash“, “La La Land” and now “First Man” – has hit all of three out of the park in my book. It’s not really a film for thrill-seekers, who might get bored, but anyone, like me, with an interest in the history of space exploration will I think lap it up: for this was surely the most memorable decade in space history… so far.
On leaving the cinema I looked up at the rising moon and marvelled once more at the audacity of man. My eyes then drifted across to the red dot that was Mars. How long I wonder? And how many dramatic film biographies still to come?
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Kim-Joy's Magic Bakery in Tabletop Games
Apr 8, 2022
A magical bakery in a forest co-owned by a quirky board game loving contestant on The Great British Bake Off? If there was ever a game specifically designed for my wife, this is it. She loves baking, cute card games, and that super-famous show (she was always a fan of Mary Berry). That said, I don’t think I would ever be able to live with myself if I didn’t bring this one home and share it with my wife. Let’s see what we liked and what we didn’t.
Kim-Joy’s Magic Bakery is a cooperative hand management scenario-based card game for two to five players. In it, players are employees of the Magic Bakery and are tasked with baking wondrous items to satisfy a group of customers requesting their favourite (it’s British, I’m just doing my part) dishes. The game ends once all customers have been served or are otherwise no longer in the game. Depending on the current scenario, the group scores points based on how many customers they were able to serve. All players win together or they do not win.
Setup the Customers card deck according to the number of players, shuffle them, and deal out one or two (depending on number of players as well) face up to the table to begin the Customer Row. Do NOT shuffle the Layers cards. Instead, separate them by type and place them all face-up in decks by type. Do shuffle the yellow Ingredients cards and place out five face up (or face down depending on scenario) to form the Pantry Row. Each player draws a starting hand of three Ingredient cards from the deck, and the starting player takes the Kim-Joy standee to begin!
On a turn, the active player will have choices of actions to be taken, in any order they choose, from among the following: take an Ingredient card, pass a card to another player, bake a Layer, fulfill a Customer order, or refresh the Pantry. Depending on the number of players, each turn will consist of either two or three actions being taken. Most actions are self-explanatory, but I will give a quick hit to them all. The active player may see an interesting Ingredient card in the offer row and may simply draw it into their hand for an action. Once the player has enough Ingredients to bake a Layer (by discarding the requisite Ingredient cards) they may do so for an action. If the player has a card they believe another player could utilize, they may simply pass them that card as an action – either Ingredient or Layer. The goal of the game is help fulfill customer orders, so by using an action to fulfill an order, the player discards all the necessary cards and helps the group inch one step closer to victory. At a loss and need a suggestion for an action? Discard all cards from the Ingredient Row and draw new ones.
Once each player has completed their actions, the Customer Row is shifted one space to the right and a new Customer comes into the bakery. The bakery can only accommodate three customers, so if a new hungry Customer visits, they force out the Customer who has been there the longest, and the players lose the opportunity to serve that (possibly irate) Customer. Play continues in this fashion of players completing actions working toward satisfying as many Customers as possible until there are no more Customers in the deck nor in the bakery. Players then count the number of Customers they served, and score points according to the goals set by the scenario card! As the game typically takes 15-30 minutes, player usually request another try, so be prepared for that eventuality.
Components. This is simply a card game that includes an unnecessary, but cute, standee to mark the starting player. The cards are nice, and come in two sizes. Surprisingly, the cards sport a non-linen low-gloss finish (I’m just saying that many games nowadays are linen and as thick as possible) and feature whimsical and wonderful artwork. The game as a whole is very stylish and boasts a super fun theme. I have no issues with the components, artwork, or theme here. It all works together really well.
I will definitely suggest that new bakers player their first game without the added challenges of the scenarios. They throw in some extra complexity and difficulty that younger bakers just will not appreciate. The different scenarios are all very interesting and add in a little wrinkle to the game to make it just that much more intriguing. I have enjoyed all the different scenarios I have played, though I have not played all of them. In time, my dears. In time. Luckily, the designer has aptly seen it fit to include Helpful Duck cards that act as any Ingredient card needed at the time. These little cuties are God-sends in certain situations, and can also be included in more numbers to make scenarios easier to complete.
Being big fans of the show, I knew my wife and I would love this one. It is cute, challenging, but doesn’t try to be much more than what it is. With so many games out there competing to be bigger, more complex, and more aggressive, it is so nice to settle down with a light and jolly little card game like Kim-Joy’s Magic Bakery. I feel like I am working in a bakery while I’m playing – orders are coming in too quickly and I need just one or two more actions each turn to gather ingredients and bake new layers. It’s a really great theme and a really great game regardless of theme. The weight is perfect for young and older players, and good cooperative games that are not susceptible to quarterbacking are sometimes hard to find. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a quite scrumptious 10 / 12. I wonder if Kim-Joy herself plays this game. If so, I officially challenge her to play with my wife and I… and maybe show us a couple tricks in the actual bakery as well. I could go for a killer Chocolate Bombe, Millionaire’s Shortbread, or a vegetarian Old Fashioned Trifle! And if you get THAT joke, my brother will love you.
Kim-Joy’s Magic Bakery is a cooperative hand management scenario-based card game for two to five players. In it, players are employees of the Magic Bakery and are tasked with baking wondrous items to satisfy a group of customers requesting their favourite (it’s British, I’m just doing my part) dishes. The game ends once all customers have been served or are otherwise no longer in the game. Depending on the current scenario, the group scores points based on how many customers they were able to serve. All players win together or they do not win.
Setup the Customers card deck according to the number of players, shuffle them, and deal out one or two (depending on number of players as well) face up to the table to begin the Customer Row. Do NOT shuffle the Layers cards. Instead, separate them by type and place them all face-up in decks by type. Do shuffle the yellow Ingredients cards and place out five face up (or face down depending on scenario) to form the Pantry Row. Each player draws a starting hand of three Ingredient cards from the deck, and the starting player takes the Kim-Joy standee to begin!
On a turn, the active player will have choices of actions to be taken, in any order they choose, from among the following: take an Ingredient card, pass a card to another player, bake a Layer, fulfill a Customer order, or refresh the Pantry. Depending on the number of players, each turn will consist of either two or three actions being taken. Most actions are self-explanatory, but I will give a quick hit to them all. The active player may see an interesting Ingredient card in the offer row and may simply draw it into their hand for an action. Once the player has enough Ingredients to bake a Layer (by discarding the requisite Ingredient cards) they may do so for an action. If the player has a card they believe another player could utilize, they may simply pass them that card as an action – either Ingredient or Layer. The goal of the game is help fulfill customer orders, so by using an action to fulfill an order, the player discards all the necessary cards and helps the group inch one step closer to victory. At a loss and need a suggestion for an action? Discard all cards from the Ingredient Row and draw new ones.
Once each player has completed their actions, the Customer Row is shifted one space to the right and a new Customer comes into the bakery. The bakery can only accommodate three customers, so if a new hungry Customer visits, they force out the Customer who has been there the longest, and the players lose the opportunity to serve that (possibly irate) Customer. Play continues in this fashion of players completing actions working toward satisfying as many Customers as possible until there are no more Customers in the deck nor in the bakery. Players then count the number of Customers they served, and score points according to the goals set by the scenario card! As the game typically takes 15-30 minutes, player usually request another try, so be prepared for that eventuality.
Components. This is simply a card game that includes an unnecessary, but cute, standee to mark the starting player. The cards are nice, and come in two sizes. Surprisingly, the cards sport a non-linen low-gloss finish (I’m just saying that many games nowadays are linen and as thick as possible) and feature whimsical and wonderful artwork. The game as a whole is very stylish and boasts a super fun theme. I have no issues with the components, artwork, or theme here. It all works together really well.
I will definitely suggest that new bakers player their first game without the added challenges of the scenarios. They throw in some extra complexity and difficulty that younger bakers just will not appreciate. The different scenarios are all very interesting and add in a little wrinkle to the game to make it just that much more intriguing. I have enjoyed all the different scenarios I have played, though I have not played all of them. In time, my dears. In time. Luckily, the designer has aptly seen it fit to include Helpful Duck cards that act as any Ingredient card needed at the time. These little cuties are God-sends in certain situations, and can also be included in more numbers to make scenarios easier to complete.
Being big fans of the show, I knew my wife and I would love this one. It is cute, challenging, but doesn’t try to be much more than what it is. With so many games out there competing to be bigger, more complex, and more aggressive, it is so nice to settle down with a light and jolly little card game like Kim-Joy’s Magic Bakery. I feel like I am working in a bakery while I’m playing – orders are coming in too quickly and I need just one or two more actions each turn to gather ingredients and bake new layers. It’s a really great theme and a really great game regardless of theme. The weight is perfect for young and older players, and good cooperative games that are not susceptible to quarterbacking are sometimes hard to find. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a quite scrumptious 10 / 12. I wonder if Kim-Joy herself plays this game. If so, I officially challenge her to play with my wife and I… and maybe show us a couple tricks in the actual bakery as well. I could go for a killer Chocolate Bombe, Millionaire’s Shortbread, or a vegetarian Old Fashioned Trifle! And if you get THAT joke, my brother will love you.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Voltage in Tabletop Games
Jan 8, 2022
One thing that I truly love about the board gaming hobby is the ability to discover new games at nearly every turn. Just when I think I’ve seen it all, I come across a post on BGG or a social media game group that blows my mind. Either with unique gameplay, or sweet components, I’m always in awe at how many games are new to me every day. Enter Voltage. I came across this game at The Table when I visited Travis in Tennessee this summer. This game has apparently been around since 2006, but I never came across it until 2021. The box was unassuming on the shelf, but the gameplay seemed interesting. Added bonus: it’s a 2-player game that doesn’t take forever to play, which was perfect for a quick game night out. So I guess I am very late to the Voltage party, but as you can tell from my rating above, I think it’s a pretty stellar game. Keep reading to find out why!
Voltage is a competitive game for 2 players in which players are trying to be the first to earn 4 total points. To setup for the game, place the board between the two players. Take the double-sized Terminal blocks and place them on their corresponding spaces of the board. The starting orientation for the Terminal blocks should read + – – + horizontally across the board. Shuffle the deck of cards and deal 4 to each player. Each player selects a Score Marker and places it on the first space of their score track. Choose a starting player, and the game is ready to begin! Pictured below is the starting setup for a game.
Over a series of turns, players will be playing cards to their corresponding colored Terminals in an attempt to win the set. If the Terminal is set to a + then the player with the highest value will win the set. Alternately, if the Terminal is set to a – then the player with the lowest value will win the set. Cards are played to Terminals until a Terminal has a set of 5 total cards. The Terminal is then scored, the cards used are discarded, and the winning player earns a point. The game continues in this fashion until one player has earned 4 total points.
On your turn, you must perform one of these three actions: Play a card & draw a card, Play 2 cards, or Draw 2 cards. Simple enough, but the strategy is what makes this game. When playing cards to the different Terminals, there are a few placement rules to keep in mind. Of course, you may only play cards to the Terminal of the matching color. You are allowed to play cards on your side of the Terminal, or on your opponent’s side. Now to get to the actions themselves. If you choose to play a card and draw a card, you must do so in that order. If you choose to play 2 cards, you must play both cards on different colors – you cannot play both to the same Terminal. The last action, draw 2 cards, is self-explanatory.
The cards of the game are numbered from 1-3, and are of the 4 Terminal colors. There are 3 types of special cards: Bypass, Blown Fuse, and Transformer. A Bypass card allows you to move a card from your opponent’s side to your side of the Terminal, and a Blown Fuse allows you to remove a card from your opponent’s side completely from play. Both of these types of cards count toward the 5-card maximum of the Terminals, so use them wisely. A Transformer is identified by the card back – if the V logo is colored Yellow. When you draw a Transformer, you must then flip one of the Terminal blocks to its opposite side. Since the draw deck is always visible, you can see when a Transformer card is next, so that could help inform your strategy for your turn. The game continues in this fashion of alternating player turns until one player has earned 4 total points. They are declared the winner!
I have to say that the gameplay of Voltage really surprised me. I went into my first play expecting a light little game, and what I got was so much more. There really is a pretty decent strategic element to this game that caught me a little off guard at first. The gameplay itself seems simple – draw cards, play cards, win sets to earn points. But how you accomplish that is more challenging that it seems. The ability to play cards to your side or your opponent’s allows you to try to tip the scales in your favor. You can’t simply focus on your side alone, you need to keep tabs across the entire board to inform your next move. And then if your opponent draws a Transformer, they could just as easily reverse the polarity of that Terminal and now you’re on the wrong end! When playing 2 cards, they must be played to different colored Terminals, so how can you place your cards so they are most beneficial to you? Do you risk placing the big numbers right away in hopes of winning a + Terminal, or do you play lower-numbered cards in case that Terminal gets flipped? All things to consider throughout the game. Along with the strategy, one thing that I love about Voltage is that there really is no runaway winner each time – the direction of a set can literally change with one card, and neither player can really feel secure during the game. You have to anticipate your opponent’s moves while trying to complete sets that are currently favorable to you. That all being said, I guess there is a bit of a ‘take that’ element in the gameplay that might seem a little aggressive to some players, but that’s kind of just the nature of this head-to-head gameplay.
To touch on components, this game is pretty basic. The cards are nice quality, and the artwork is electrical and thematic. The board itself is nice and thick, and the spaces are all clearly marked. The Terminal blocks are probably my favorite components of this game. They are nice chunky plastic blocks, and the colors are bright neon colors – some of my favorites! For a game with such few components, the quality of them is appreciated.
After playing Voltage with Travis at The Table, I actually came home and found a copy for myself – that’s how much I liked it! I don’t think it’s my all-time favorite 2-player game yet, but it’s certainly working its way up the list…. If you’re in the market for a fast, yet strategic, 2-player game, I would highly recommend giving Voltage a try. The simplicity of the gameplay coupled with the vast strategic options makes for an engaging and entertaining game. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one an electrifying 9 / 12.
Voltage is a competitive game for 2 players in which players are trying to be the first to earn 4 total points. To setup for the game, place the board between the two players. Take the double-sized Terminal blocks and place them on their corresponding spaces of the board. The starting orientation for the Terminal blocks should read + – – + horizontally across the board. Shuffle the deck of cards and deal 4 to each player. Each player selects a Score Marker and places it on the first space of their score track. Choose a starting player, and the game is ready to begin! Pictured below is the starting setup for a game.
Over a series of turns, players will be playing cards to their corresponding colored Terminals in an attempt to win the set. If the Terminal is set to a + then the player with the highest value will win the set. Alternately, if the Terminal is set to a – then the player with the lowest value will win the set. Cards are played to Terminals until a Terminal has a set of 5 total cards. The Terminal is then scored, the cards used are discarded, and the winning player earns a point. The game continues in this fashion until one player has earned 4 total points.
On your turn, you must perform one of these three actions: Play a card & draw a card, Play 2 cards, or Draw 2 cards. Simple enough, but the strategy is what makes this game. When playing cards to the different Terminals, there are a few placement rules to keep in mind. Of course, you may only play cards to the Terminal of the matching color. You are allowed to play cards on your side of the Terminal, or on your opponent’s side. Now to get to the actions themselves. If you choose to play a card and draw a card, you must do so in that order. If you choose to play 2 cards, you must play both cards on different colors – you cannot play both to the same Terminal. The last action, draw 2 cards, is self-explanatory.
The cards of the game are numbered from 1-3, and are of the 4 Terminal colors. There are 3 types of special cards: Bypass, Blown Fuse, and Transformer. A Bypass card allows you to move a card from your opponent’s side to your side of the Terminal, and a Blown Fuse allows you to remove a card from your opponent’s side completely from play. Both of these types of cards count toward the 5-card maximum of the Terminals, so use them wisely. A Transformer is identified by the card back – if the V logo is colored Yellow. When you draw a Transformer, you must then flip one of the Terminal blocks to its opposite side. Since the draw deck is always visible, you can see when a Transformer card is next, so that could help inform your strategy for your turn. The game continues in this fashion of alternating player turns until one player has earned 4 total points. They are declared the winner!
I have to say that the gameplay of Voltage really surprised me. I went into my first play expecting a light little game, and what I got was so much more. There really is a pretty decent strategic element to this game that caught me a little off guard at first. The gameplay itself seems simple – draw cards, play cards, win sets to earn points. But how you accomplish that is more challenging that it seems. The ability to play cards to your side or your opponent’s allows you to try to tip the scales in your favor. You can’t simply focus on your side alone, you need to keep tabs across the entire board to inform your next move. And then if your opponent draws a Transformer, they could just as easily reverse the polarity of that Terminal and now you’re on the wrong end! When playing 2 cards, they must be played to different colored Terminals, so how can you place your cards so they are most beneficial to you? Do you risk placing the big numbers right away in hopes of winning a + Terminal, or do you play lower-numbered cards in case that Terminal gets flipped? All things to consider throughout the game. Along with the strategy, one thing that I love about Voltage is that there really is no runaway winner each time – the direction of a set can literally change with one card, and neither player can really feel secure during the game. You have to anticipate your opponent’s moves while trying to complete sets that are currently favorable to you. That all being said, I guess there is a bit of a ‘take that’ element in the gameplay that might seem a little aggressive to some players, but that’s kind of just the nature of this head-to-head gameplay.
To touch on components, this game is pretty basic. The cards are nice quality, and the artwork is electrical and thematic. The board itself is nice and thick, and the spaces are all clearly marked. The Terminal blocks are probably my favorite components of this game. They are nice chunky plastic blocks, and the colors are bright neon colors – some of my favorites! For a game with such few components, the quality of them is appreciated.
After playing Voltage with Travis at The Table, I actually came home and found a copy for myself – that’s how much I liked it! I don’t think it’s my all-time favorite 2-player game yet, but it’s certainly working its way up the list…. If you’re in the market for a fast, yet strategic, 2-player game, I would highly recommend giving Voltage a try. The simplicity of the gameplay coupled with the vast strategic options makes for an engaging and entertaining game. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one an electrifying 9 / 12.
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Fury of Fire (Dragonfury, #1) in Books
Feb 15, 2019
<b>NOTE:</b> I did not finish Fury of Fire. I reached page 207, out of 412, before I called it quits. My review reflects on what I read and no more, which is more than enough to be indicative to how the author creates her book.
During the course of reading, everyone comes across a book that just doesn't connect with them. That doesn't mean the book is bad or that others shouldn't read it, it just means the it isn't a good fit that particular person. This is that book for me. I had a very difficult time getting through what I read, mostly due to a bunch of little things that stood out and were what I consider oddities, especially in context to situations in the book. If I had to describe this book in one word, it'd be abrasive. The characters, the dialogue, and most importantly, the writing felt like rubbing sandpaper over a wound. Over and over again.
<b>THE BAD</b>
The constant bombardment of internalizing that both Myst and Bastian provide in this book was like a splinter under my fingernail. The more I dug, the more painful it became, and I started to dislike the book and main characters more and more as I read on. Admittedly, it was pretty easy to loathe Bastian and Myst when it became apparent that they are both boring and stupid, and I didn't find Bastian all that likeable in the first place. Call me crazy, but I just feel uneasy when a character wants to immediately jump the bones of a person he just met in horrific situation while she is frightened beyond belief. But apparently that's okay because he acknowledges his creepiness in a fit of mental self-flagellation. Sorry, but that doesn't fly with me. Maybe if that had been mentioned only once, I would have let it slide, but it keeps on like that for way too long. Apparently he's all alpha on the outside and emo on the inside. What a winning combination! Not. Myst herself starts off, uh, decent enough but then quickly becomes the nitwit I was hoping to avoid. She gets the fastest case of Stockholm Syndrome I've ever come across. For all intents and purposes, Bastian kidnapped her. Sure, we the readers know it's for Myst and the baby's safety from the evil Razorbacks, but she certainly doesn't know that, therefore I found her reactions extremely unrealistic and bizarre to the situations she was in. One minute she's fighting, and by fighting I mean being stubbornly spunky, or somewhat thinking of escape, the next she's imagining wild, hot monkey sex with Bastian. I'm sorry but if some big, six-foot-six (apparently every male is 6'6 in this book, even the human cop. Obviously, if a guy is under that height, he's not really a man.), scary dude who can turn into a dragon kidnaps me, I am so not going to be thinking about how hot they are or what they're like in the sack. Yeah, uh-huh, that makes perfect sense. Oy! Anyway, they end up making out that night due to Bastian's alpha going crazy and some supernatural roofie that dragons put out to females. God, this is not romantic at all. And it's only been a few hours since they "met"! The morning after Myst is kidnapped, she wakes up naked and finds out Bastian bathed her, can you say mondo creepy? So after she dresses, she goes meandering through the Nightfury's lair, admiring his artwork and crap, then ends up in the kitchen with the rest of the freaky-tall Nightfuries. I'd be high-tailing it out of there, in fact, I would have been plotting escape long before this point. It appears she only thinks of escape once a day. While she's in the kitchen, Bastian has her sit at the table so she can eat her breakfast. He sets down a plate in front of her and as she goes to have a bite, she notices he cut her waffles into little, perfect, bite-size pieces and she's apparently overcome by this act. How weird is that?! All feminist angles aside, who cuts up someone else's food unless: A, it's for a small child, two, their arms and hands are broken, or D, they're handicapped in some way that prevents them from feeding themselves? W.T.F.? Frankly, I think it's just odd. And then she gets misty-eyed (Myst is all misty, how cute. *gag*) when he asks her to help name the baby he kidnapped. I've already doubted her sanity before but now it's gone to even more ridiculous heights by this point.
The magical Rohypnol I mentioned before creeped me the heck out. So when a dragon guy needs his energy fix, he picks out a woman, roofies her, feeds off her energy, sleeps with her, and then wipes her memory! Say what? That's too close to rape for my liking. This wasn't just the bad guys doing this, but the next book's "hero" did that to a woman in a hospital (note: she wasn't a patient, I think she was a researcher or something, I don't remember). How sweet.
The excessive swearing needed edited down. Normally I don't mind a little cursing here and there, but so much of it didn't need to be added to the dialogue or characters and showed a lack of creativity.
The "dragons" are really shape-shifting vampires. They have to feed off women, only it's energy instead of blood, they can't be out in the sun, they heal quickly, live a long time, are super-strong, amongst other attributes. If you're going to have shape-shifting dragons, don't make them so similar to other paranormal species. Differentiate them so they're unique, not a near-clone.
I didn't like the whole reading of minds thing. If it was something that happened when mated, fine, but I don't like the thought of someone just arbitrarily getting into someone else's brain whenever they want. It's a violation. Bastian did this to Myst way too often.
The characters sound a lot like each other. They don't all have individual voices so there isn't much beyond a name separating one from the other.
<b>THE GOOD</b>
The first fight scene was actually quite well-done, although it was very early on in the book so it might not hold up on a second reading. The next fight scene wasn't too bad, maybe a little confusing at times.
The other characters in the Dragonfury series have the potential to be more interesting if they can be given some individuality, but since I didn't connect with the author's writing style and don't like most of the ideas, I won't be looking for any sequels to this oh-so-romantic series. I wouldn't recommend this book, but hey, if it sounds right up your alley or you have masochistic tendencies, by all means try it out for yourself.
As a final note, I just wanted to thank <a href="http://homealone.wikia.com/wiki/Buzz_McCallister"; target="_blank">Buzz McCallister</a> for his mad counting/alphabetizing skillz in writing this review. I couldn't have done it without you, buddy.
<img src="http://kindbooksandcoronets.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/buzzmccallister1.jpg">;
During the course of reading, everyone comes across a book that just doesn't connect with them. That doesn't mean the book is bad or that others shouldn't read it, it just means the it isn't a good fit that particular person. This is that book for me. I had a very difficult time getting through what I read, mostly due to a bunch of little things that stood out and were what I consider oddities, especially in context to situations in the book. If I had to describe this book in one word, it'd be abrasive. The characters, the dialogue, and most importantly, the writing felt like rubbing sandpaper over a wound. Over and over again.
<b>THE BAD</b>
The constant bombardment of internalizing that both Myst and Bastian provide in this book was like a splinter under my fingernail. The more I dug, the more painful it became, and I started to dislike the book and main characters more and more as I read on. Admittedly, it was pretty easy to loathe Bastian and Myst when it became apparent that they are both boring and stupid, and I didn't find Bastian all that likeable in the first place. Call me crazy, but I just feel uneasy when a character wants to immediately jump the bones of a person he just met in horrific situation while she is frightened beyond belief. But apparently that's okay because he acknowledges his creepiness in a fit of mental self-flagellation. Sorry, but that doesn't fly with me. Maybe if that had been mentioned only once, I would have let it slide, but it keeps on like that for way too long. Apparently he's all alpha on the outside and emo on the inside. What a winning combination! Not. Myst herself starts off, uh, decent enough but then quickly becomes the nitwit I was hoping to avoid. She gets the fastest case of Stockholm Syndrome I've ever come across. For all intents and purposes, Bastian kidnapped her. Sure, we the readers know it's for Myst and the baby's safety from the evil Razorbacks, but she certainly doesn't know that, therefore I found her reactions extremely unrealistic and bizarre to the situations she was in. One minute she's fighting, and by fighting I mean being stubbornly spunky, or somewhat thinking of escape, the next she's imagining wild, hot monkey sex with Bastian. I'm sorry but if some big, six-foot-six (apparently every male is 6'6 in this book, even the human cop. Obviously, if a guy is under that height, he's not really a man.), scary dude who can turn into a dragon kidnaps me, I am so not going to be thinking about how hot they are or what they're like in the sack. Yeah, uh-huh, that makes perfect sense. Oy! Anyway, they end up making out that night due to Bastian's alpha going crazy and some supernatural roofie that dragons put out to females. God, this is not romantic at all. And it's only been a few hours since they "met"! The morning after Myst is kidnapped, she wakes up naked and finds out Bastian bathed her, can you say mondo creepy? So after she dresses, she goes meandering through the Nightfury's lair, admiring his artwork and crap, then ends up in the kitchen with the rest of the freaky-tall Nightfuries. I'd be high-tailing it out of there, in fact, I would have been plotting escape long before this point. It appears she only thinks of escape once a day. While she's in the kitchen, Bastian has her sit at the table so she can eat her breakfast. He sets down a plate in front of her and as she goes to have a bite, she notices he cut her waffles into little, perfect, bite-size pieces and she's apparently overcome by this act. How weird is that?! All feminist angles aside, who cuts up someone else's food unless: A, it's for a small child, two, their arms and hands are broken, or D, they're handicapped in some way that prevents them from feeding themselves? W.T.F.? Frankly, I think it's just odd. And then she gets misty-eyed (Myst is all misty, how cute. *gag*) when he asks her to help name the baby he kidnapped. I've already doubted her sanity before but now it's gone to even more ridiculous heights by this point.
The magical Rohypnol I mentioned before creeped me the heck out. So when a dragon guy needs his energy fix, he picks out a woman, roofies her, feeds off her energy, sleeps with her, and then wipes her memory! Say what? That's too close to rape for my liking. This wasn't just the bad guys doing this, but the next book's "hero" did that to a woman in a hospital (note: she wasn't a patient, I think she was a researcher or something, I don't remember). How sweet.
The excessive swearing needed edited down. Normally I don't mind a little cursing here and there, but so much of it didn't need to be added to the dialogue or characters and showed a lack of creativity.
The "dragons" are really shape-shifting vampires. They have to feed off women, only it's energy instead of blood, they can't be out in the sun, they heal quickly, live a long time, are super-strong, amongst other attributes. If you're going to have shape-shifting dragons, don't make them so similar to other paranormal species. Differentiate them so they're unique, not a near-clone.
I didn't like the whole reading of minds thing. If it was something that happened when mated, fine, but I don't like the thought of someone just arbitrarily getting into someone else's brain whenever they want. It's a violation. Bastian did this to Myst way too often.
The characters sound a lot like each other. They don't all have individual voices so there isn't much beyond a name separating one from the other.
<b>THE GOOD</b>
The first fight scene was actually quite well-done, although it was very early on in the book so it might not hold up on a second reading. The next fight scene wasn't too bad, maybe a little confusing at times.
The other characters in the Dragonfury series have the potential to be more interesting if they can be given some individuality, but since I didn't connect with the author's writing style and don't like most of the ideas, I won't be looking for any sequels to this oh-so-romantic series. I wouldn't recommend this book, but hey, if it sounds right up your alley or you have masochistic tendencies, by all means try it out for yourself.
As a final note, I just wanted to thank <a href="http://homealone.wikia.com/wiki/Buzz_McCallister"; target="_blank">Buzz McCallister</a> for his mad counting/alphabetizing skillz in writing this review. I couldn't have done it without you, buddy.
<img src="http://kindbooksandcoronets.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/buzzmccallister1.jpg">;
The Bandersnatch (199 KP) rated Dracula in Books
Nov 7, 2019
Dracula was written by author Bram Stoker during the late 1890's and is set around the character of Dracula and his attempt to move from Transylvania to England so he can spread the curse of the undead (I.e. the creation of more vampires). English solicitor Jonathan Harker who'd originally gone to Transylvania to be legal aide for Dracula stops him with the help of Van Helsing and others which ends the life of one of them – Quincey-, the book ends with a note from Jonathan Harker that several people lived happily married and Jonathan has a son nicknamed for Quincey.
Dracula was published in London in May 1897 by Archibald Constable & Company and was later copyrighted in the U.S in 1899 and published by Doubleday & McClure of New York. Despite having decent praise form reviewers it wasn't an immediate bestseller. Although the English newspaper the Daily Mail ranked Stoker's writing prowess in Dracula above that of Mary Shelly, Edgar Allen Poe and Emily Bronte's Wuthering heights. Unfortunately it didn't make Stoker that much money and he'd had to petition for a compassionate grant from the royal literary fund. When he died his widow was forced to sell his notes and outlines of the book at an auction in 1913. It was the unauthorised adaption of Nosferatu by F. W. Murnau in 1922 and the resulting legal battle made when Stokers widow took affront that the novels popularity began to grow.
Before writing Dracula Bram Stoker had been researching European folklore and stories of vampires having been most influenced by Emily Gerard's “Transylvania Superstitions” 1885 essay...which included content about the vampire myth. Some historians insist that Vlad iii Dracula (More commonly known as Vlad the impaler) was the model for Stokers count but there's been no supporting evidence to make that true. According to one expert Stoker only borrowed the barest minimum of information of the Wallachian tyrant and he's not even mentioned in Stokers notes. Stoker was a member of the London library during the 1890's where books by Sabine Baring-Gould, Thomas Browne, AF Crosse and Charles Boner are attributed to Stokers research. Stoker would later claim he'd had a nightmare caused by over-eating crab meat about a “Vampire king” rising from his grave. Whitby on the Yorkshire coast contributed its landscape since Bram Stoker often holidayed there during the summer.
Dracula wasn't Stokers first choice as title for the story since he cycled through The Dead Un-Dead then simply the Un-Dead the count wasn't even supposed to be Count Dracula having had the name Count Wampyr for several drafts before Stoker became intrigued by the name Dracula. After reading “An account of the principles of Wallachia and Moldavia with political observations relative to them” written by author William Wilkinson (Published in 1820). the descendants of Vlad ii of Wallachia took the name Dracula or Dracul after being invested in the Order of the Dragon in 1431. In the old Romanian language the word Dracul mean “the Dragon” and Dracula meant “Son of the Dragon”. Nowadays however Dracul means “the Devil”
Whilst Dracula is known as THE Vampire novel its not the first. Johan Wolfgang Von Goethe had his book the Bride of Corinth published in 1797, 1871's Carmilla (a story about a lesbian vampire) was written by Sheridan Le Frau and James Malcolm Rymer's penny dreadful series Venny the Vampire was a product from the mid Victorian period. Even John Polidori created an image of a vampyric aristocrat in his 1819 story The Vampyre when he spent a summer with Merry Shelly (creator of Frankenstein) and her poet husband Percy Bysshe Shelly and Lord Bryon in 1816.
I really love Dracula. It showed the madness, the ethereal quality and the ultimate danger of what a vampire could do. Like many other goth inclined teenagers trying to find their feet in the world Dracula definitely added its two cents to my self worth and love of all things macabre. The fact it was written by a Victorian writer has added a unusual depth to the story as only a Victorian writer could. The culture of the Vampire has become deep rooted and wide spread in its acceptance and Dracula has definitely spearheaded such a phenomenon.
Abraham “Bram” Stoker was Born in Dublin, Ireland on the 8th of November 1847, He was the third of seven children born to Abraham and Charlotte Stoker and was bedridden with an unknown illness until he recovered at seven. He started schooling at a private school run by the Reverend William Woods and grew up without serious illness. Stoker excelled at sports at Trinity College Dublin having graduated in 1870 with a BA (Bachelor of Arts). He was an Auditor of the College Historical Society and the president of the University Philosophical Society where his first paper was on Sensationalism in fiction and society.
Thanks to his friend Dr. Maunsell, Stoker became interested in the theatre as a student and whilst working for the Irish civil service he became a theatre critic for the Dublin evening mail where he attracted notice for the quality of his reviews. Stoker gave a favourable review of Henry Irving's adaption of Hamlet in December 1876, this prompted Irving to invite him to dinner where they ended up becoming friends. Stoker wrote The Crystal Cup which was published by the London society in 1872 and The chain of Destiny which was released in four parts in the Shamrock. Stoker also wrote the non-fiction book the duties of clerks of petty sessions in Ireland which was published in 1879.
Bram stoker married Florence Balcombe the daughter of a lieutenent-colonel in 1978 and they moved to London. Where Stoker ended up the Business manager of the Lyceum theatre as well as manager for Henry Irving- a position he held for 27 years. Despite being a very busy man Stoker ended up writing several novels (as well as Dracula) Including The Snakes pass in 1890, the lady of the shroud in 1909 and the lair of the white worm in 1911. when Henry Irving died in 1906 he published his personal reminiscences of Henry Irving. Stoker also managed productions at the Prince of Wales theatre.
Bram stoker died after a series of strokes in London on April 20th 1912, the cause of death is split between the possibility of Tertiary Syphilis or overwork. He was cremated and was placed in a display urn at Golders Green Crematorium in North London, he was later joined by the ashes of his Son Irving Noel Stoker in 1961, his wife Florence was meant to join them but her ashes were scattered at the Gardens of rest.
Stoker was honoured with a Google Doogle (the banner on goggles homepage) on November 8th 2012 commemorating the 165th anniversary of his birth. An annual festival in honour of Bram Stoker happens in Dublin, its supported by the Bram stoker estate and was/is usually funded by Dublin City Council and Failte Ireland.
My opinion of Bran stoker is that of a decent hard working man who loved life. Stoker epitomises the phrases of “a man on a mission” and “a man who hussles”. Having worked extremely hard both creatively as a novelist and business wise as a theatre manager Stoker pretty much showed that if you work hard you could pretty much do anything you set your mind to.
And there you have it a book for all the ages, definitely under the banner of AWESOME!!!.
Dracula was published in London in May 1897 by Archibald Constable & Company and was later copyrighted in the U.S in 1899 and published by Doubleday & McClure of New York. Despite having decent praise form reviewers it wasn't an immediate bestseller. Although the English newspaper the Daily Mail ranked Stoker's writing prowess in Dracula above that of Mary Shelly, Edgar Allen Poe and Emily Bronte's Wuthering heights. Unfortunately it didn't make Stoker that much money and he'd had to petition for a compassionate grant from the royal literary fund. When he died his widow was forced to sell his notes and outlines of the book at an auction in 1913. It was the unauthorised adaption of Nosferatu by F. W. Murnau in 1922 and the resulting legal battle made when Stokers widow took affront that the novels popularity began to grow.
Before writing Dracula Bram Stoker had been researching European folklore and stories of vampires having been most influenced by Emily Gerard's “Transylvania Superstitions” 1885 essay...which included content about the vampire myth. Some historians insist that Vlad iii Dracula (More commonly known as Vlad the impaler) was the model for Stokers count but there's been no supporting evidence to make that true. According to one expert Stoker only borrowed the barest minimum of information of the Wallachian tyrant and he's not even mentioned in Stokers notes. Stoker was a member of the London library during the 1890's where books by Sabine Baring-Gould, Thomas Browne, AF Crosse and Charles Boner are attributed to Stokers research. Stoker would later claim he'd had a nightmare caused by over-eating crab meat about a “Vampire king” rising from his grave. Whitby on the Yorkshire coast contributed its landscape since Bram Stoker often holidayed there during the summer.
Dracula wasn't Stokers first choice as title for the story since he cycled through The Dead Un-Dead then simply the Un-Dead the count wasn't even supposed to be Count Dracula having had the name Count Wampyr for several drafts before Stoker became intrigued by the name Dracula. After reading “An account of the principles of Wallachia and Moldavia with political observations relative to them” written by author William Wilkinson (Published in 1820). the descendants of Vlad ii of Wallachia took the name Dracula or Dracul after being invested in the Order of the Dragon in 1431. In the old Romanian language the word Dracul mean “the Dragon” and Dracula meant “Son of the Dragon”. Nowadays however Dracul means “the Devil”
Whilst Dracula is known as THE Vampire novel its not the first. Johan Wolfgang Von Goethe had his book the Bride of Corinth published in 1797, 1871's Carmilla (a story about a lesbian vampire) was written by Sheridan Le Frau and James Malcolm Rymer's penny dreadful series Venny the Vampire was a product from the mid Victorian period. Even John Polidori created an image of a vampyric aristocrat in his 1819 story The Vampyre when he spent a summer with Merry Shelly (creator of Frankenstein) and her poet husband Percy Bysshe Shelly and Lord Bryon in 1816.
I really love Dracula. It showed the madness, the ethereal quality and the ultimate danger of what a vampire could do. Like many other goth inclined teenagers trying to find their feet in the world Dracula definitely added its two cents to my self worth and love of all things macabre. The fact it was written by a Victorian writer has added a unusual depth to the story as only a Victorian writer could. The culture of the Vampire has become deep rooted and wide spread in its acceptance and Dracula has definitely spearheaded such a phenomenon.
Abraham “Bram” Stoker was Born in Dublin, Ireland on the 8th of November 1847, He was the third of seven children born to Abraham and Charlotte Stoker and was bedridden with an unknown illness until he recovered at seven. He started schooling at a private school run by the Reverend William Woods and grew up without serious illness. Stoker excelled at sports at Trinity College Dublin having graduated in 1870 with a BA (Bachelor of Arts). He was an Auditor of the College Historical Society and the president of the University Philosophical Society where his first paper was on Sensationalism in fiction and society.
Thanks to his friend Dr. Maunsell, Stoker became interested in the theatre as a student and whilst working for the Irish civil service he became a theatre critic for the Dublin evening mail where he attracted notice for the quality of his reviews. Stoker gave a favourable review of Henry Irving's adaption of Hamlet in December 1876, this prompted Irving to invite him to dinner where they ended up becoming friends. Stoker wrote The Crystal Cup which was published by the London society in 1872 and The chain of Destiny which was released in four parts in the Shamrock. Stoker also wrote the non-fiction book the duties of clerks of petty sessions in Ireland which was published in 1879.
Bram stoker married Florence Balcombe the daughter of a lieutenent-colonel in 1978 and they moved to London. Where Stoker ended up the Business manager of the Lyceum theatre as well as manager for Henry Irving- a position he held for 27 years. Despite being a very busy man Stoker ended up writing several novels (as well as Dracula) Including The Snakes pass in 1890, the lady of the shroud in 1909 and the lair of the white worm in 1911. when Henry Irving died in 1906 he published his personal reminiscences of Henry Irving. Stoker also managed productions at the Prince of Wales theatre.
Bram stoker died after a series of strokes in London on April 20th 1912, the cause of death is split between the possibility of Tertiary Syphilis or overwork. He was cremated and was placed in a display urn at Golders Green Crematorium in North London, he was later joined by the ashes of his Son Irving Noel Stoker in 1961, his wife Florence was meant to join them but her ashes were scattered at the Gardens of rest.
Stoker was honoured with a Google Doogle (the banner on goggles homepage) on November 8th 2012 commemorating the 165th anniversary of his birth. An annual festival in honour of Bram Stoker happens in Dublin, its supported by the Bram stoker estate and was/is usually funded by Dublin City Council and Failte Ireland.
My opinion of Bran stoker is that of a decent hard working man who loved life. Stoker epitomises the phrases of “a man on a mission” and “a man who hussles”. Having worked extremely hard both creatively as a novelist and business wise as a theatre manager Stoker pretty much showed that if you work hard you could pretty much do anything you set your mind to.
And there you have it a book for all the ages, definitely under the banner of AWESOME!!!.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Dreams of Tomorrow in Tabletop Games
Sep 17, 2020
Let’s talk about dreams. They can range from simply reliving a stressful day at work, to remembering THAT embarrassing moment from your past, to maybe even discovering that you have superpowers. In your dreams, there are endless possibilities – but what if they meant something more? According to Dreams of Tomorrow, our dreams actually serve a bigger purpose!
Dreams of Tomorrow is game of set collection that utilizes a shifting rondel (I had to look up the definition too) in which players are working to weave a series of dreams into a complete Dream Sequence. Set in the future, players take on the roles of Dream Engineers, who are tasked with creating Dream Sequences to be sent to the past in an effort to save the future. Can you weave the most powerful Dream Sequence to alter the path of your present life, or is the future doomed to fall?
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. -L
To setup the game, place the Collective Consciousness (the rondel) in numerical order within reach of all players. Reveal a number of Dream cards from the Dream deck, based on the number of players, and these cards will create the communal Dreamscape. Each player receives a player card, cubes, and meeple in their chosen color, and sets their resources to the starting numbers, as described in the rulebook. All players begin with their meeples in the first space of the rondel, and in clockwise order, will select and pay for a Dream from the Dreamscape to be placed in their Dream Catcher (waiting area). Once all players have selected a Dream, and adjusted their resources accordingly, the game is ready to begin.
Dreams of Tomorrow is played over a series of rounds in which players will take turns performing 2 actions: Move and Take Action. Movement happens sequentially around the rondel, and players may choose how many spaces to move. To move 1-3 spaces is free, but to move more than 3 spaces will cost a number of resources. When a player decides to end their movement, they will then take the action indicated on the space on which they landed. These actions include: Gaining resources, Catching a Dream, Weaving a Dream, or Activating a Dream Ability. Gaining resources is pretty self-explanatory, and there is one neat thing to note: even if it is not your active turn, most of the rondel spaces have a Shared Effect, which grants an off-turn action to all non-active players. Catching a Dream means that you pay the requisite resources and select a Dream from the Dreamscape. Any caught Dreams go into your Dream Catcher until you are able to perform the Weave a Dream action. When you Weave a Dream, you again pay the requisite resources displayed on the Dream card and move the Dream from your Dream Catcher into your Dream Sequence (play area). To Activate a Dream Ability, you select a Dream card in your tableau, and use the ability printed on it. It is important to note that once Dreams are woven into your Dream Sequence, they will overlap each other, and only one Dream Ability will ever be available for use, so create that sequence wisely! Play continues in turns until one player has woven a Dream Sequence of five Dreams total. The round ends once all players have taken the same number of turns, and then final points are counted. The player with the highest score is the winner!
So all-in-all, how is Dreams of Tomorrow as a whole? I actually was very surprised at how much I enjoyed this game. When reading through the rules, it seemed kind of complicated and I was a bit worried before my first play. Once you actually get playing, however, the game is pretty intuitive and simple to play. One thing I particularly enjoyed about this game is its iconography. With only three resources and four actions, there are only seven icons of which to keep track. It keeps the cards from being cluttered with text, and makes the costs/abilities clear to understand. The iconography of the Dream Abilities, however, can be a liiiittle more complicated, but the game does come with Reference Cards which explain what every single icon means!
Another neat thing I enjoyed about this gameplay is the addition of Shared Effects. Even if you are not the active player, you will always gain some resource on everyone else’s turn. That adds an extra element of strategy because you have to amass your own resources for Dreams, but you have to be careful not to be giving your opponents too much extra help for themselves! Probably my favorite part of Dreams of Tomorrow are the actual Dream Abilities themselves. Performing the regular turn actions are pretty straight-forward, but Dream Abilities are more special and allow you to do even more on your turn. For example, some Dream Abilities allow you to change directions, move extra spaces, or even alter the Collective Consciousness, re-arranging the cards in a way to benefit you and hopefully hinder your opponents. The Dream Abilities are literal game-changers, and they really keep all players on their toes.
Talking about components, this game is of a pretty good quality. The cards are nice and sturdy, the player boards are decent, and the meeples and cubes are your standard wooden tokens. I’ve said in reviews before, but I always appreciate when games include Reference Cards for players, and Dreams of Tomorrow certainly delivered on theirs. The cards are clear, concise, and helpful during play. The artwork of this game is very vibrantly colorful and just plain pretty to look at. I found myself getting distracted by admiring the artwork, or catching Dreams based on their artwork, instead of taking their point-values or resources requirements into consideration. Oops. That’s just my bad, but the artwork really helps make the game more immersive.
Overall, I would say that Dreams of Tomorrow is a great little game. Admittedly, the rulebook is kind of daunting and seems a little overly complicated at first, but once you get into an actual game, it flows very quickly and easily. After just one turn, I got exactly what was happening and had no further questions about the gameplay. It really went above and beyond my expectations, and is one that I definitely look forward to bringing out in future game nights. Purple Phoenix Games gives it a dreamy 10 / 12. Check this one out if you haven’t before, it may just be the game of your dreams. (Ha, get it?)
Dreams of Tomorrow is game of set collection that utilizes a shifting rondel (I had to look up the definition too) in which players are working to weave a series of dreams into a complete Dream Sequence. Set in the future, players take on the roles of Dream Engineers, who are tasked with creating Dream Sequences to be sent to the past in an effort to save the future. Can you weave the most powerful Dream Sequence to alter the path of your present life, or is the future doomed to fall?
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. -L
To setup the game, place the Collective Consciousness (the rondel) in numerical order within reach of all players. Reveal a number of Dream cards from the Dream deck, based on the number of players, and these cards will create the communal Dreamscape. Each player receives a player card, cubes, and meeple in their chosen color, and sets their resources to the starting numbers, as described in the rulebook. All players begin with their meeples in the first space of the rondel, and in clockwise order, will select and pay for a Dream from the Dreamscape to be placed in their Dream Catcher (waiting area). Once all players have selected a Dream, and adjusted their resources accordingly, the game is ready to begin.
Dreams of Tomorrow is played over a series of rounds in which players will take turns performing 2 actions: Move and Take Action. Movement happens sequentially around the rondel, and players may choose how many spaces to move. To move 1-3 spaces is free, but to move more than 3 spaces will cost a number of resources. When a player decides to end their movement, they will then take the action indicated on the space on which they landed. These actions include: Gaining resources, Catching a Dream, Weaving a Dream, or Activating a Dream Ability. Gaining resources is pretty self-explanatory, and there is one neat thing to note: even if it is not your active turn, most of the rondel spaces have a Shared Effect, which grants an off-turn action to all non-active players. Catching a Dream means that you pay the requisite resources and select a Dream from the Dreamscape. Any caught Dreams go into your Dream Catcher until you are able to perform the Weave a Dream action. When you Weave a Dream, you again pay the requisite resources displayed on the Dream card and move the Dream from your Dream Catcher into your Dream Sequence (play area). To Activate a Dream Ability, you select a Dream card in your tableau, and use the ability printed on it. It is important to note that once Dreams are woven into your Dream Sequence, they will overlap each other, and only one Dream Ability will ever be available for use, so create that sequence wisely! Play continues in turns until one player has woven a Dream Sequence of five Dreams total. The round ends once all players have taken the same number of turns, and then final points are counted. The player with the highest score is the winner!
So all-in-all, how is Dreams of Tomorrow as a whole? I actually was very surprised at how much I enjoyed this game. When reading through the rules, it seemed kind of complicated and I was a bit worried before my first play. Once you actually get playing, however, the game is pretty intuitive and simple to play. One thing I particularly enjoyed about this game is its iconography. With only three resources and four actions, there are only seven icons of which to keep track. It keeps the cards from being cluttered with text, and makes the costs/abilities clear to understand. The iconography of the Dream Abilities, however, can be a liiiittle more complicated, but the game does come with Reference Cards which explain what every single icon means!
Another neat thing I enjoyed about this gameplay is the addition of Shared Effects. Even if you are not the active player, you will always gain some resource on everyone else’s turn. That adds an extra element of strategy because you have to amass your own resources for Dreams, but you have to be careful not to be giving your opponents too much extra help for themselves! Probably my favorite part of Dreams of Tomorrow are the actual Dream Abilities themselves. Performing the regular turn actions are pretty straight-forward, but Dream Abilities are more special and allow you to do even more on your turn. For example, some Dream Abilities allow you to change directions, move extra spaces, or even alter the Collective Consciousness, re-arranging the cards in a way to benefit you and hopefully hinder your opponents. The Dream Abilities are literal game-changers, and they really keep all players on their toes.
Talking about components, this game is of a pretty good quality. The cards are nice and sturdy, the player boards are decent, and the meeples and cubes are your standard wooden tokens. I’ve said in reviews before, but I always appreciate when games include Reference Cards for players, and Dreams of Tomorrow certainly delivered on theirs. The cards are clear, concise, and helpful during play. The artwork of this game is very vibrantly colorful and just plain pretty to look at. I found myself getting distracted by admiring the artwork, or catching Dreams based on their artwork, instead of taking their point-values or resources requirements into consideration. Oops. That’s just my bad, but the artwork really helps make the game more immersive.
Overall, I would say that Dreams of Tomorrow is a great little game. Admittedly, the rulebook is kind of daunting and seems a little overly complicated at first, but once you get into an actual game, it flows very quickly and easily. After just one turn, I got exactly what was happening and had no further questions about the gameplay. It really went above and beyond my expectations, and is one that I definitely look forward to bringing out in future game nights. Purple Phoenix Games gives it a dreamy 10 / 12. Check this one out if you haven’t before, it may just be the game of your dreams. (Ha, get it?)
