Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Interstellar (2014) in Movies
Aug 9, 2018
Another top notch cinematic experience by the best director of our time
2014's INTERSTELLAR is one of Christopher Nolan's most ambitious works - and that is saying alot. It also is one of his best. Nolan - and his brother, the screenwriter of this film, Jonathan Nolan - wanted to make a "real" science fiction film, with the emphasis on the science, so they enlisted the help of noted theoretical physicist, Dr. Kip Thorne to ensure that they were not violating any established physical laws and that all speculations would spring from science and not fantasy.
And, for the most part, they succeed.
Following the adventures of "everyman" Cooper (if you call a farmer who is also a top notch astronaut, pilot and engineer an everyman), Interstellar tells of an Earth of the not-too-distant future that is running out of food and mankind must find a new planet to inhabit or else face extinction. Talked into leaving his family and heading into space, Cooper must face the challenges of his mission while fighting the emotions of leaving his family behind on a dying world.
As Cooper, Matthew McConaughey (at the height of his "McConnaissance") is perfectly cast as this "everyman". He brings the right balance of charisma, heroism, emotional maturity, intelligence and a "down to earth" behavior that has us rooting for him from the start. His acting is at the highest level and is matched, beat by beat by Jessica Chastain and (surprisingly to me at the time) Anne Hathaway as a fellow astronaut/scientist.
The special effects, worlds, circumstances, narrow escapes and deflating defeats are all handled in typical top-notch Nolan fashion, but it is the emotional stakes - specifically between McConaughey and Chastain (as his grown up daughter) are what keeps this film "grounded" and rises it above the standard sci-fi fair.
Nolan regular Michael Caine, the always great John Lithgow, Wes Bentley, Ellen Burstyn, a "before he was famous" Timothee Chalamet, another "before he was famous" David Oyelowo, Casey Affleck and a "surprise apperance" by a very famous "A" lister (who I will not name, so as not to ruin it) are all equally as good and give the proceedings the gravitas it needs.
Special notice needs to be made of the performance of Bill Irwin as the robot TARS (all space movies need a robot, right?). He performs the puppetry of the robot (Nolan wished to do everything as "practical" as possible) and adds large doses of humanity - and humor - to this non-human.
Another bit of special notice needs to be given to frequent Nolan collaborator - the brilliant Composer Hans Zimmer. He was tasked by Nolan to create a "unique" score - one that does not rely heavily on crescendoing strings and horns - and he succeeds tremendously with a hauntingly, melodic and driving score that heightens - but never overpowers - the scenes playing on the screen.
The decision as to whether or not you like this film will hinge on your "believability" of the final chapter - one where I "went with the flow" and was all right with, but (I'm sure) others will struggle with.
All in all, another top notch film by the best director of our day. If you have never seen INTERSTELLAR - or if you haven't seen it in awhile - I suggest you check it out, you'll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
And, for the most part, they succeed.
Following the adventures of "everyman" Cooper (if you call a farmer who is also a top notch astronaut, pilot and engineer an everyman), Interstellar tells of an Earth of the not-too-distant future that is running out of food and mankind must find a new planet to inhabit or else face extinction. Talked into leaving his family and heading into space, Cooper must face the challenges of his mission while fighting the emotions of leaving his family behind on a dying world.
As Cooper, Matthew McConaughey (at the height of his "McConnaissance") is perfectly cast as this "everyman". He brings the right balance of charisma, heroism, emotional maturity, intelligence and a "down to earth" behavior that has us rooting for him from the start. His acting is at the highest level and is matched, beat by beat by Jessica Chastain and (surprisingly to me at the time) Anne Hathaway as a fellow astronaut/scientist.
The special effects, worlds, circumstances, narrow escapes and deflating defeats are all handled in typical top-notch Nolan fashion, but it is the emotional stakes - specifically between McConaughey and Chastain (as his grown up daughter) are what keeps this film "grounded" and rises it above the standard sci-fi fair.
Nolan regular Michael Caine, the always great John Lithgow, Wes Bentley, Ellen Burstyn, a "before he was famous" Timothee Chalamet, another "before he was famous" David Oyelowo, Casey Affleck and a "surprise apperance" by a very famous "A" lister (who I will not name, so as not to ruin it) are all equally as good and give the proceedings the gravitas it needs.
Special notice needs to be made of the performance of Bill Irwin as the robot TARS (all space movies need a robot, right?). He performs the puppetry of the robot (Nolan wished to do everything as "practical" as possible) and adds large doses of humanity - and humor - to this non-human.
Another bit of special notice needs to be given to frequent Nolan collaborator - the brilliant Composer Hans Zimmer. He was tasked by Nolan to create a "unique" score - one that does not rely heavily on crescendoing strings and horns - and he succeeds tremendously with a hauntingly, melodic and driving score that heightens - but never overpowers - the scenes playing on the screen.
The decision as to whether or not you like this film will hinge on your "believability" of the final chapter - one where I "went with the flow" and was all right with, but (I'm sure) others will struggle with.
All in all, another top notch film by the best director of our day. If you have never seen INTERSTELLAR - or if you haven't seen it in awhile - I suggest you check it out, you'll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Snow Child in Books
Dec 14, 2018
“Terrific”, “Spellbinding” and “Enchanting” are just three of the many words that critics have used to describe this book; they are also a slight exaggeration. Obviously it is a matter of personal opinion but this novel, whilst having an interesting storyline, was a little too drawn out and, at times… not exactly boring but not all that gripping.
Set in Alaska during the 1920s this is the story of a couple, Jack and Mabel, who, aside from a stillbirth, have not had any children despite their desperate longing. Now that they are both approaching fifty years of age they know that they will never be able to have a son or daughter of their own. One winter, during the first snowfall, the two of them on an uncharacteristic, spur of the moment impulse build a snowman next to their cabin. Rather than building a large snowman they make a smaller one in the shape of a girl, decorating her with scarves and mittens – they have made a snow girl.
Eowyn Ivey has based her novel on a Russian fairy tale, <i>Snegurochka</i>, which in English translates to <i>The Snow Maiden</i>. It was Arthur Ransome’s retelling, <i>Little Daughter of the Snow</i>, which inspired Ivey, but the general storyline is essentially the same, although some versions have alternative endings. For those who are familiar with <i>Snegurochka</i> and its variants will know that it does not end happily therefore it seems inevitable that <i>The Snow Child</i> will head in the same direction. However which ending will it most resemble?
Throughout the novel it is impossible to be absolutely sure that the little girl who turns up outside the cabin the day after the snowman has been built (and destroyed) is in fact the snow girl magically transformed into flesh and bone; or whether it is a lost child and the circumstance are purely coincidental. There is a third option: Jack and Mabel could be imagining things through their desperate longing, but this is easy to rule out.
The snow is understandably a key theme throughout the story. At the beginning the anticipated Alaskan winter is imagined as a “cold on the valley like a coming death”. Not only will it be unbearably freezing, Jack and Mabel will struggle to make do with their limited amount of food and supplies. After the arrival of the child the winter becomes a happy occasion. Jack and Mabel’s relationship improves and they become less isolated after befriending some neighbours. The only heartbreak is when the girl, Faina, disappears in the spring; but as she comes back as soon as it snows, winter becomes something to look forward to. Another snowy link in the story is Faina’s name, which she claims means “the colour on snow when the sun turns” in Russian. This also makes the idea of her truly being the snow girl more convincing.
The novel does predictably have an unhappy ending but the epilogue makes up for this by revealing the contentment of the remaining characters a few years into the future.
As already mentioned, <i>The Snow Child</i> was not a very gripping read, but it was a beautiful tale in the way that fairy tales, even those with unhappy endings, often can be.
Set in Alaska during the 1920s this is the story of a couple, Jack and Mabel, who, aside from a stillbirth, have not had any children despite their desperate longing. Now that they are both approaching fifty years of age they know that they will never be able to have a son or daughter of their own. One winter, during the first snowfall, the two of them on an uncharacteristic, spur of the moment impulse build a snowman next to their cabin. Rather than building a large snowman they make a smaller one in the shape of a girl, decorating her with scarves and mittens – they have made a snow girl.
Eowyn Ivey has based her novel on a Russian fairy tale, <i>Snegurochka</i>, which in English translates to <i>The Snow Maiden</i>. It was Arthur Ransome’s retelling, <i>Little Daughter of the Snow</i>, which inspired Ivey, but the general storyline is essentially the same, although some versions have alternative endings. For those who are familiar with <i>Snegurochka</i> and its variants will know that it does not end happily therefore it seems inevitable that <i>The Snow Child</i> will head in the same direction. However which ending will it most resemble?
Throughout the novel it is impossible to be absolutely sure that the little girl who turns up outside the cabin the day after the snowman has been built (and destroyed) is in fact the snow girl magically transformed into flesh and bone; or whether it is a lost child and the circumstance are purely coincidental. There is a third option: Jack and Mabel could be imagining things through their desperate longing, but this is easy to rule out.
The snow is understandably a key theme throughout the story. At the beginning the anticipated Alaskan winter is imagined as a “cold on the valley like a coming death”. Not only will it be unbearably freezing, Jack and Mabel will struggle to make do with their limited amount of food and supplies. After the arrival of the child the winter becomes a happy occasion. Jack and Mabel’s relationship improves and they become less isolated after befriending some neighbours. The only heartbreak is when the girl, Faina, disappears in the spring; but as she comes back as soon as it snows, winter becomes something to look forward to. Another snowy link in the story is Faina’s name, which she claims means “the colour on snow when the sun turns” in Russian. This also makes the idea of her truly being the snow girl more convincing.
The novel does predictably have an unhappy ending but the epilogue makes up for this by revealing the contentment of the remaining characters a few years into the future.
As already mentioned, <i>The Snow Child</i> was not a very gripping read, but it was a beautiful tale in the way that fairy tales, even those with unhappy endings, often can be.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Hancock (2008) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
Throughout the annals of cinema, the big screen has been home to some of the most larger-than-life heroes ever to spring from the pages of comic books. Recent adaptations of Spider-Man, Batman, and Superman, all went on to box office gold and with several more character adaptations in the works, there seems to be no end to the public’s desire to see tales based on costumed heroes with amazing powers.
In one of the more original twists on the hero genre, Will Smith stars as Hancock, a surly lush, who is more concerned about his next drink than he is about saving the day. Despite being blessed with amazing strength, invulnerability, and the ability to fly, Hancock is looked upon with disdain by most of the people of Los Angeles because his attitude is second only to the amazing amount of damage he causes in bringing local hoodlums to justice.
Shortly after causing nine million dollars in damage after his latest crime fighting effort, the mayor of L.A. places a warrant out for Hancock, having decided it was time for Hancock to be held accountable for the mayhem he has caused. At the same time, publicist Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman) is returning home after failing in his pitch to get a major pharmaceutical company to donate their new wonder drug in an effort to make the world better.
When danger arises during a traffic jam, Ray is saved by Hancock in the nick of time and is grateful for the efforts of the hero. Unfortunately a group of bystanders are convinced that Hancock could have saved Ray without making wreaking such havoc. In the midst of some heated verbal exchanges, Ray steps up for Hancock and expresses his gratitude to the hero and invites him home for dinner with his son and wife Mary (Charlize Theron). Undaunted by the gruff mannerisms of Hancock, Ray eventually convinces Hancock to let Ray represent him and sets out on a plan to remake Hancock’s image more positive and civic-friendly.
While this scenario presents several comedic moments, the film eventually changes tact, and becomes much darker in tone, and mired in a subplot of fate and mysticism that honestly seems greatly out-of-place with the tone established in the first three quarters of the film.
While it is notable that the filmmakers decided to try something different, the final result is a muddled effort that greatly undermines the laughs and momentum that were established earlier in the film. Smith does a great job but when he is not unleashing his sardonic quips, he seems to be disinterested and going through the motion for much of the last half of the film. Bateman does the best he can with a stock part and Theron seems woefully underused in a role that, while promising, really is not worthy of an actress of her skills.
Director Peter Berg does a solid job with the action and FX of the film, and clearly shows he has a knack for humor. Unfortunately the script by “X-Files” alum Vince Gilligan and Vince Ngo fails to live up to the potential of the premise and in the end leaves “Hancock” grounded.
In one of the more original twists on the hero genre, Will Smith stars as Hancock, a surly lush, who is more concerned about his next drink than he is about saving the day. Despite being blessed with amazing strength, invulnerability, and the ability to fly, Hancock is looked upon with disdain by most of the people of Los Angeles because his attitude is second only to the amazing amount of damage he causes in bringing local hoodlums to justice.
Shortly after causing nine million dollars in damage after his latest crime fighting effort, the mayor of L.A. places a warrant out for Hancock, having decided it was time for Hancock to be held accountable for the mayhem he has caused. At the same time, publicist Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman) is returning home after failing in his pitch to get a major pharmaceutical company to donate their new wonder drug in an effort to make the world better.
When danger arises during a traffic jam, Ray is saved by Hancock in the nick of time and is grateful for the efforts of the hero. Unfortunately a group of bystanders are convinced that Hancock could have saved Ray without making wreaking such havoc. In the midst of some heated verbal exchanges, Ray steps up for Hancock and expresses his gratitude to the hero and invites him home for dinner with his son and wife Mary (Charlize Theron). Undaunted by the gruff mannerisms of Hancock, Ray eventually convinces Hancock to let Ray represent him and sets out on a plan to remake Hancock’s image more positive and civic-friendly.
While this scenario presents several comedic moments, the film eventually changes tact, and becomes much darker in tone, and mired in a subplot of fate and mysticism that honestly seems greatly out-of-place with the tone established in the first three quarters of the film.
While it is notable that the filmmakers decided to try something different, the final result is a muddled effort that greatly undermines the laughs and momentum that were established earlier in the film. Smith does a great job but when he is not unleashing his sardonic quips, he seems to be disinterested and going through the motion for much of the last half of the film. Bateman does the best he can with a stock part and Theron seems woefully underused in a role that, while promising, really is not worthy of an actress of her skills.
Director Peter Berg does a solid job with the action and FX of the film, and clearly shows he has a knack for humor. Unfortunately the script by “X-Files” alum Vince Gilligan and Vince Ngo fails to live up to the potential of the premise and in the end leaves “Hancock” grounded.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Hitch (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
February is the time of year when thoughts turn to romance and the coming spring. It is also the time of year when Hollywood brings new romantic themed films to the theaters in an effort to open big, thanks to the date movie crowd.
Some of the efforts, such as last weekend’s The Wedding Date, never take off, while others, such as Hitch provide a nice mix of romance and comedy which, for the most part, work very well.
The film follows the exploits of urban legend Alex Hitch Hitchens (Will Smith), a self-styled date doctor who specializes in helping men romance the lady of their dreams. Hitch does not provide a dating service but rather helps his clients with their confidence and instructs them on the true way to win and keep and ladies heart.
With his proven results and good rapport with his clients, Hitch is a man in demand, yet due to his policy of privacy and secrecy, to many, the so-called love doctor is little more than an urban myth which is just fine with Hitch. He would rather work in the shadows than bask in the limelight. The adoration of his clients is all he needs. Well, that and a steady supply of ladies to charm at the days end.
Hitch is about to face his toughest case yet in a kind but portly accountant named Albert (Kevin James) who is desperate to win the heart of his wealthy socialite client Allegra (Amber Valletta). When Albert and Allegra start to be seen with one another in public, they catch the eye of celebrity snoop Sara (Eve Mendes), who becomes determined to see what is behind this unexpected couple, which in turn leads her to believe that the so-called Date Doctor is a reality.
If matters were not complicated enough, Hitch starts to see Sara on a social basis with each of them unaware of what the other really does. Sparks fly despite the unflappable and smooth Hitch having one thing after another go awry. Sara really seems to be effecting him, and the more pathetic and hopeless he seems, the more they are drawn to one another.
Instead of turning the film into a whimsical lark, Director Andy Tennant, who helmed the recent Sweet Home Alabama manages to balance comedy with romance, all the while keeping a little bit of drama involved.
Mendes and Smith have good chemistry with one another, as do Smith and James. Smith is very solid and likeable as the charming Hitch. He plays him as a smooth and confident guy, who is actually more reserved and cautious on the inside. The duality of his character is clear without being overwhelming, leaving him not only likeable, but as a character that is easy to root for. The biggest surprise of the film would be Kevin James. His portrayal of Albert is a solid mix of humor and decency. James gets many laughs with Albert’s attempt at being suave, as he portrays a very realistic and believable character who is struggling to find his inner confidence and let his body and voice convey what he has in his heart.
The film does lose momentum during the final twenty minutes when it becomes lazy, resorting to many standard situations that have been done many times before. That being said Hitch as a whole works, and if you are willing to overlook a few blemishes, you may find yourself enjoying the warmth, humor and charm.
Some of the efforts, such as last weekend’s The Wedding Date, never take off, while others, such as Hitch provide a nice mix of romance and comedy which, for the most part, work very well.
The film follows the exploits of urban legend Alex Hitch Hitchens (Will Smith), a self-styled date doctor who specializes in helping men romance the lady of their dreams. Hitch does not provide a dating service but rather helps his clients with their confidence and instructs them on the true way to win and keep and ladies heart.
With his proven results and good rapport with his clients, Hitch is a man in demand, yet due to his policy of privacy and secrecy, to many, the so-called love doctor is little more than an urban myth which is just fine with Hitch. He would rather work in the shadows than bask in the limelight. The adoration of his clients is all he needs. Well, that and a steady supply of ladies to charm at the days end.
Hitch is about to face his toughest case yet in a kind but portly accountant named Albert (Kevin James) who is desperate to win the heart of his wealthy socialite client Allegra (Amber Valletta). When Albert and Allegra start to be seen with one another in public, they catch the eye of celebrity snoop Sara (Eve Mendes), who becomes determined to see what is behind this unexpected couple, which in turn leads her to believe that the so-called Date Doctor is a reality.
If matters were not complicated enough, Hitch starts to see Sara on a social basis with each of them unaware of what the other really does. Sparks fly despite the unflappable and smooth Hitch having one thing after another go awry. Sara really seems to be effecting him, and the more pathetic and hopeless he seems, the more they are drawn to one another.
Instead of turning the film into a whimsical lark, Director Andy Tennant, who helmed the recent Sweet Home Alabama manages to balance comedy with romance, all the while keeping a little bit of drama involved.
Mendes and Smith have good chemistry with one another, as do Smith and James. Smith is very solid and likeable as the charming Hitch. He plays him as a smooth and confident guy, who is actually more reserved and cautious on the inside. The duality of his character is clear without being overwhelming, leaving him not only likeable, but as a character that is easy to root for. The biggest surprise of the film would be Kevin James. His portrayal of Albert is a solid mix of humor and decency. James gets many laughs with Albert’s attempt at being suave, as he portrays a very realistic and believable character who is struggling to find his inner confidence and let his body and voice convey what he has in his heart.
The film does lose momentum during the final twenty minutes when it becomes lazy, resorting to many standard situations that have been done many times before. That being said Hitch as a whole works, and if you are willing to overlook a few blemishes, you may find yourself enjoying the warmth, humor and charm.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated The Sky Throne in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>The author/publisher provided a free copy of the book for review purposes - thank you! Receiving a review copy does not guarantee a positive review and therefore do not affect the opinion or content of the review.</i></b>
I haven't been on a blog tour in so long, it's weirddd. How do I format things again?
Honestly, I'm starting to trust Chris Ledbetter's ideas because all of the books I've come across/read that are by him all have one thing in common: they're different, they're unique and they refreshing take on something. <b>Please don't ever let me down with bookish concepts. I'm picky now, and I'd probably cry.</b>
Ledbetter doesn't disappoint, of course. Well before the demigods of Mount Olympus and Percy Jackson existed, there were the Titans and the Olympians. "<b>WAIT, you ask. DOES THIS MEAN IF I LIKE RICK RIORDAN'S BOOKS, I MIGHT LIKE <i>THE SKY THRONE</i>."</b>
And let's be honest: the Olympians probably didn't spring into adulthood straight from birth, so they have to start somewhere, even if it starts with Hyperion attacking young Zeus and killing his best friend in the process. <b>This would be a highly tragic way for Lupe to die because she IS my best friend.</b> He is then sent to Mount Olympus Preparatory, which if we're putting two things together, all of the students who go there will later be known as the Olympians.
Considering the fact Greek mythology is vast, there is a large cast of characters - anyone who knows little to nothing about Greek mythology might end up lost keeping track of all the characters and who they are. We've got the major players: Chronos/Kronos, Rhea, Zeus, the rest of the Olympians, the Titans, etc. - most of them have nicknames that are remotely similar to their original name, but it may be difficult to keep track regardless. <b>Or maybe I'm very strange and have a shabby memory. My brain cries when I try to remember too hard.</b>
"Okay, but the Olympians and Titans usually bicker like nobody's business. Is that included and will it give me headache (aka make me want to throw the book against the wall)?" Despite the somewhat large cast of characters, Ledbetter has a great balance between what <i style="font-weight: bold;">we</i> as readers know about Greek figures depicted in media and a personality each character has of their own. The Olympians have their bickering and putting each other down sometimes, but it's a lot less bickering and more familial than what I know of, which is 10 tablespoons of bickering and 1/2 teaspoon of actually getting along. <b>Yes, Percy Jackson. I'm eyeballing you, even if I loved you in my middle school days.</b>
<i>The Sky Throne</i> brings back great middle school reading memories without trying to replace them - fans of Rick Riordan's <i>Percy Jackson and the Olympians</i> and <i>The Heroes of Olympus</i> will most likely find themselves enjoying the first book in Ledbetter's new series.
<b>
</b> And lo and behold, Ledbetter has confirmed! There is a sequel in the works! Secretly I'm dancing around. Shh.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/blog-tour-sky-throne-by-chris-ledbetter/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
I haven't been on a blog tour in so long, it's weirddd. How do I format things again?
Honestly, I'm starting to trust Chris Ledbetter's ideas because all of the books I've come across/read that are by him all have one thing in common: they're different, they're unique and they refreshing take on something. <b>Please don't ever let me down with bookish concepts. I'm picky now, and I'd probably cry.</b>
Ledbetter doesn't disappoint, of course. Well before the demigods of Mount Olympus and Percy Jackson existed, there were the Titans and the Olympians. "<b>WAIT, you ask. DOES THIS MEAN IF I LIKE RICK RIORDAN'S BOOKS, I MIGHT LIKE <i>THE SKY THRONE</i>."</b>
And let's be honest: the Olympians probably didn't spring into adulthood straight from birth, so they have to start somewhere, even if it starts with Hyperion attacking young Zeus and killing his best friend in the process. <b>This would be a highly tragic way for Lupe to die because she IS my best friend.</b> He is then sent to Mount Olympus Preparatory, which if we're putting two things together, all of the students who go there will later be known as the Olympians.
Considering the fact Greek mythology is vast, there is a large cast of characters - anyone who knows little to nothing about Greek mythology might end up lost keeping track of all the characters and who they are. We've got the major players: Chronos/Kronos, Rhea, Zeus, the rest of the Olympians, the Titans, etc. - most of them have nicknames that are remotely similar to their original name, but it may be difficult to keep track regardless. <b>Or maybe I'm very strange and have a shabby memory. My brain cries when I try to remember too hard.</b>
"Okay, but the Olympians and Titans usually bicker like nobody's business. Is that included and will it give me headache (aka make me want to throw the book against the wall)?" Despite the somewhat large cast of characters, Ledbetter has a great balance between what <i style="font-weight: bold;">we</i> as readers know about Greek figures depicted in media and a personality each character has of their own. The Olympians have their bickering and putting each other down sometimes, but it's a lot less bickering and more familial than what I know of, which is 10 tablespoons of bickering and 1/2 teaspoon of actually getting along. <b>Yes, Percy Jackson. I'm eyeballing you, even if I loved you in my middle school days.</b>
<i>The Sky Throne</i> brings back great middle school reading memories without trying to replace them - fans of Rick Riordan's <i>Percy Jackson and the Olympians</i> and <i>The Heroes of Olympus</i> will most likely find themselves enjoying the first book in Ledbetter's new series.
<b>
</b> And lo and behold, Ledbetter has confirmed! There is a sequel in the works! Secretly I'm dancing around. Shh.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/blog-tour-sky-throne-by-chris-ledbetter/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Sarah (7798 KP) rated The Hunt (2020) in Movies
Nov 14, 2020
Darkly fun
The Hunt follows twelve strangers as they wake up in a clearing with no recollection of how they got there, and soon find themselves hunted for sport by a group of liberal elites.
Starring Betty Gilpin, Hilary Swank, Emma Roberts, Ethan Suplee and Justin Hartley, and written by Nick Cuse and Damon Lindelof, The Hunt’s original release was delayed in 2019 due to a number of mass shootings in America. It was pushed back to Spring 2020 only for it to come out just before the big lockdown for COVID-19, so to say this film has suffered a few setbacks would be an understatement, and this is a shame as it’s actually one of the most enjoyable new releases I’ve seen in 2020 so far.
Right from the opening scene, The Hunt shows you what it’s made of - understated and subtle it is not. It’s a riotously funny and witty parody, poking fun at absolutely everyone in it with it’s on the nose references that are so relevant to today’s political and social climate. Neither the prey or the hunters escape unscathed, in all manner of the word, and everything from climate change to racial prejudices and political ideology feature heavily in the running satire on offer here. This is a darkly funny and very smart film, and it knows it.
What this film is not though, is a horror film. Gory yes and brilliantly so, but it is in no means scary or horrifying. The plot itself is of course reminiscent of Battle Royale and even The Hunger Games, but The Hunt is very much it’s own film. It starts with an overly dramatic score and a decent amount of tension, and shifts into the action virtually straight away - with a short 90 minute runtime, this doesn’t waste it’s time on unnecessary exposition. Whilst I wouldn’t say this isn’t entirely unpredictable, The Hunt still has a few surprises to throw at you. The first half hour plays out a lot differently than you’d expect and makes you wonder if it’s played out it’s hand a little too soon.
But then in walks Betty Gilpin who is by far the star of the show and leads the remaining hour almost single handedly. Gilpin’s Crystal is a kickass, strong, smart heroine and she’s a delight to watch, although even she can’t quite save the lull half way through. Fortunately the lull doesn’t last long and watching Crystal exact her revenge on the hunters is wonderful to watch. Hilary Swank however is on the sidelines for most of the film, and for some bizarre reason whenever she is featured earlier on her face is kept hidden which is a rather strange move when we all know who it is. But despite this, when Swank is finally revealed in the final act she plays the cold, cruel and calculating Athena as a perfect callous bitch. The final exchange and reveal between Athena and Crystal is smart, tense and wickedly funny, and the ensuing fight scene is beautifully choreographed with some great laughs thrown in, and is probably the best fight scene I’ve seen in any film in quite some time.
The Hunt is gloriously over the top and mocks everyone and everything, yet also proves to be an equally thought provoking and relevant commentary on today’s society. As long as you’re not easily offended and don’t take it too seriously, it’ll prove to be hugely entertaining.
Starring Betty Gilpin, Hilary Swank, Emma Roberts, Ethan Suplee and Justin Hartley, and written by Nick Cuse and Damon Lindelof, The Hunt’s original release was delayed in 2019 due to a number of mass shootings in America. It was pushed back to Spring 2020 only for it to come out just before the big lockdown for COVID-19, so to say this film has suffered a few setbacks would be an understatement, and this is a shame as it’s actually one of the most enjoyable new releases I’ve seen in 2020 so far.
Right from the opening scene, The Hunt shows you what it’s made of - understated and subtle it is not. It’s a riotously funny and witty parody, poking fun at absolutely everyone in it with it’s on the nose references that are so relevant to today’s political and social climate. Neither the prey or the hunters escape unscathed, in all manner of the word, and everything from climate change to racial prejudices and political ideology feature heavily in the running satire on offer here. This is a darkly funny and very smart film, and it knows it.
What this film is not though, is a horror film. Gory yes and brilliantly so, but it is in no means scary or horrifying. The plot itself is of course reminiscent of Battle Royale and even The Hunger Games, but The Hunt is very much it’s own film. It starts with an overly dramatic score and a decent amount of tension, and shifts into the action virtually straight away - with a short 90 minute runtime, this doesn’t waste it’s time on unnecessary exposition. Whilst I wouldn’t say this isn’t entirely unpredictable, The Hunt still has a few surprises to throw at you. The first half hour plays out a lot differently than you’d expect and makes you wonder if it’s played out it’s hand a little too soon.
But then in walks Betty Gilpin who is by far the star of the show and leads the remaining hour almost single handedly. Gilpin’s Crystal is a kickass, strong, smart heroine and she’s a delight to watch, although even she can’t quite save the lull half way through. Fortunately the lull doesn’t last long and watching Crystal exact her revenge on the hunters is wonderful to watch. Hilary Swank however is on the sidelines for most of the film, and for some bizarre reason whenever she is featured earlier on her face is kept hidden which is a rather strange move when we all know who it is. But despite this, when Swank is finally revealed in the final act she plays the cold, cruel and calculating Athena as a perfect callous bitch. The final exchange and reveal between Athena and Crystal is smart, tense and wickedly funny, and the ensuing fight scene is beautifully choreographed with some great laughs thrown in, and is probably the best fight scene I’ve seen in any film in quite some time.
The Hunt is gloriously over the top and mocks everyone and everything, yet also proves to be an equally thought provoking and relevant commentary on today’s society. As long as you’re not easily offended and don’t take it too seriously, it’ll prove to be hugely entertaining.
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Strange Weather in Tokyo in Books
Oct 5, 2020
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Book-Review-Banner-33.png"/>;
Being born in Macedonia, I grew up reading books that were mostly translated. Because of that, I always appreciate the amazing job that translators do and have always cherished translated copies of my books. Strange Weather in Tokyo is no different, and Allison Markin Powell did an amazing job translating this book.
I read this book in August as part of the Tandem and Granta Books Instagram readalong - to celebrate #Kawakamimonth as well as Women in Translation month - and I am so glad I was able to join.
<b><i>Synopsis:</i></b>
One night when she is drinking alone in a local bar, Tsukiko finds herself sitting next to her former high school teacher. Over the coming months they share food and drink sake, and as seasons pass - from spring cherry blossom to autumnal mushrooms - Tsukiko and her teacher develop a hesitant intimacy that tilts awkwardly and poignantly towards love.
<b><i>My Thoughts:</i></b>
From the very first chapter, we travel to Japan and the whole mood changes. I could grasp the culture, taste the food and feel the weather changing through the seasons. The writing is brief and concise, yet full of emotion and wisdom. Both the characters and the scene had something very special about their description - they appeared so close, so real, as if you could just reach out your hand and touch them, feel them, taste them. This feeling stayed with me and I will cling on to it, because it happens so rarely these days.
Even though I am not a fan of student-teacher relationships, this relationship in particular kept me intrigued, simply because it was so much different than anything I have encountered before.
Tsukiko is young and tries to live in the modern world, while Sensei is much older and very traditional. They meet in the bar and talk. There are no dates, nor arranged meetings. They may see each other, and they may not. Sometimes it could be months before they bump into each other again. And that’s the beauty of their relationship. They live their own lives independently, and having each other as company is an added bonus.
A few plot twists lingered in the way of their love. Tsukiko’s potential boyfriend, who is the same age as her, Sensei’s old age and what that might mean, and the numerous arguments that seem bizarre, but test their relationship on deeper levels. It was very refreshing to see the brutally honest issue that is age between couples. Sensei knows he doesn’t have too long to live, and he is honest with Tsukiko, as he wants her to truly understand what this means, and once she understands it, he wants to ensure she is okay to proceed the relationship, given those circumstances.
<b><i>I have mixed feelings about the ending of Strange Weather in Tokyo.</i></b>
I was surprised at how it ended, but then I understood why. Perhaps I wanted a complete closure, but I learned that life doesn’t do closures. There is no perfect or right time to do something. We only have the “now” and we should enjoy every moment while we can.
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Book-Review-Banner-33.png"/>;
Being born in Macedonia, I grew up reading books that were mostly translated. Because of that, I always appreciate the amazing job that translators do and have always cherished translated copies of my books. Strange Weather in Tokyo is no different, and Allison Markin Powell did an amazing job translating this book.
I read this book in August as part of the Tandem and Granta Books Instagram readalong - to celebrate #Kawakamimonth as well as Women in Translation month - and I am so glad I was able to join.
<b><i>Synopsis:</i></b>
One night when she is drinking alone in a local bar, Tsukiko finds herself sitting next to her former high school teacher. Over the coming months they share food and drink sake, and as seasons pass - from spring cherry blossom to autumnal mushrooms - Tsukiko and her teacher develop a hesitant intimacy that tilts awkwardly and poignantly towards love.
<b><i>My Thoughts:</i></b>
From the very first chapter, we travel to Japan and the whole mood changes. I could grasp the culture, taste the food and feel the weather changing through the seasons. The writing is brief and concise, yet full of emotion and wisdom. Both the characters and the scene had something very special about their description - they appeared so close, so real, as if you could just reach out your hand and touch them, feel them, taste them. This feeling stayed with me and I will cling on to it, because it happens so rarely these days.
Even though I am not a fan of student-teacher relationships, this relationship in particular kept me intrigued, simply because it was so much different than anything I have encountered before.
Tsukiko is young and tries to live in the modern world, while Sensei is much older and very traditional. They meet in the bar and talk. There are no dates, nor arranged meetings. They may see each other, and they may not. Sometimes it could be months before they bump into each other again. And that’s the beauty of their relationship. They live their own lives independently, and having each other as company is an added bonus.
A few plot twists lingered in the way of their love. Tsukiko’s potential boyfriend, who is the same age as her, Sensei’s old age and what that might mean, and the numerous arguments that seem bizarre, but test their relationship on deeper levels. It was very refreshing to see the brutally honest issue that is age between couples. Sensei knows he doesn’t have too long to live, and he is honest with Tsukiko, as he wants her to truly understand what this means, and once she understands it, he wants to ensure she is okay to proceed the relationship, given those circumstances.
<b><i>I have mixed feelings about the ending of Strange Weather in Tokyo.</i></b>
I was surprised at how it ended, but then I understood why. Perhaps I wanted a complete closure, but I learned that life doesn’t do closures. There is no perfect or right time to do something. We only have the “now” and we should enjoy every moment while we can.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Oppenheimer (2023) in Movies
Jul 27, 2023
Gonna Win A Ton of Awards
Clear your shelves, Christopher Nolan and many of those involved in the making of his new movie OPPENHEIMER, you’re going to need the space for the many, many trophies you are going to receive next spring.
Based on the life of the “Father of the Atomic Bomb”, J. Robert Oppenheimer, Nolan’s latest epic is a rarity in today’s Motion Picture landscape - a prestige picture, bankrolled lavishly, filmed gorgeously and populated with a veritable who’s who of “A” list actors that tells a complex story of a complicated man who ends up remorseful of what he has unleashed in this world.
And it works very, very well.
Nolan regular, Cillian Murphy, is equal parts quirky, driven, determined and haunted in his multi-layered performance as the titular character - who is in almost every scene of this 3 hour film. He is fascinating to watch and his “more internal than external” performance draws the audience in throughout the events depicted in this film. It is the Best Performance of the career of one of the most interesting actors of this generation and one should not be surprised if his name is called during awards season next year.
Murphy is capably supported by a long list of strong performers giving strong performances in roles that are much smaller than ones they normally receive. Matt Damon, Florence Pugh, Josh Hartnett(!), Casey Affleck, Rami Malek, Matthew Modine, Kenneth Branagh (of course, it’s a Nolan film), Jason Clarke and Alden Ehrenreich bring their “A” game to roles that could have been thrown away.
Also, good ol’ Tom Conti (one of the most interesting actors from the late ‘70’s and early ‘80’s) shows up in this film as Albert Einstein and reminds us all why he is such a good performer…and…wait until you see who shows up for one scene in this film as President Harry S. Truman!
Oh…and don’t forget Emily Blunt (as Oppenheimer’s wife) and (surprisingly) Robert Downey, Jr. (as a politician using Oppenheimer for his own purposes). Both of them put in Award-winning-level uspporting performances, elevating two “A” list actors to the “A+ list”.
But this film is more than just it’s performers. Nolan demands - and receives - top notch work from the Cinematographer, the Sound Designer, the Editor, the Costume Designer and the Composer (Ludwig Goranssson, NOT Nolan regular Hans Zimmer). They (along with Nolan) craft a beautifully made and put together film that will dazzle the senses. If you get a chance, see this film in a movie theater and, if you can, see it in either iMAX or 70mm, you will be glad you did.
What holds this film back - just a little bit - is the story that is being told. Nolan (as he is want to do) plays with time and pretty frenetically cuts back and forth between about 4 different timelines to tell this story. It’s effective most of the time, but at other times, it becomes distracting and….with a 3 hour run time…does drag a bit at times.
But these are quibbles to a film that is “as good as it gets” by the BEST DIRECTOR plying his trade today. It is another triumph for Nolan and he will be making many, many acceptance speeches in just a few short months.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Based on the life of the “Father of the Atomic Bomb”, J. Robert Oppenheimer, Nolan’s latest epic is a rarity in today’s Motion Picture landscape - a prestige picture, bankrolled lavishly, filmed gorgeously and populated with a veritable who’s who of “A” list actors that tells a complex story of a complicated man who ends up remorseful of what he has unleashed in this world.
And it works very, very well.
Nolan regular, Cillian Murphy, is equal parts quirky, driven, determined and haunted in his multi-layered performance as the titular character - who is in almost every scene of this 3 hour film. He is fascinating to watch and his “more internal than external” performance draws the audience in throughout the events depicted in this film. It is the Best Performance of the career of one of the most interesting actors of this generation and one should not be surprised if his name is called during awards season next year.
Murphy is capably supported by a long list of strong performers giving strong performances in roles that are much smaller than ones they normally receive. Matt Damon, Florence Pugh, Josh Hartnett(!), Casey Affleck, Rami Malek, Matthew Modine, Kenneth Branagh (of course, it’s a Nolan film), Jason Clarke and Alden Ehrenreich bring their “A” game to roles that could have been thrown away.
Also, good ol’ Tom Conti (one of the most interesting actors from the late ‘70’s and early ‘80’s) shows up in this film as Albert Einstein and reminds us all why he is such a good performer…and…wait until you see who shows up for one scene in this film as President Harry S. Truman!
Oh…and don’t forget Emily Blunt (as Oppenheimer’s wife) and (surprisingly) Robert Downey, Jr. (as a politician using Oppenheimer for his own purposes). Both of them put in Award-winning-level uspporting performances, elevating two “A” list actors to the “A+ list”.
But this film is more than just it’s performers. Nolan demands - and receives - top notch work from the Cinematographer, the Sound Designer, the Editor, the Costume Designer and the Composer (Ludwig Goranssson, NOT Nolan regular Hans Zimmer). They (along with Nolan) craft a beautifully made and put together film that will dazzle the senses. If you get a chance, see this film in a movie theater and, if you can, see it in either iMAX or 70mm, you will be glad you did.
What holds this film back - just a little bit - is the story that is being told. Nolan (as he is want to do) plays with time and pretty frenetically cuts back and forth between about 4 different timelines to tell this story. It’s effective most of the time, but at other times, it becomes distracting and….with a 3 hour run time…does drag a bit at times.
But these are quibbles to a film that is “as good as it gets” by the BEST DIRECTOR plying his trade today. It is another triumph for Nolan and he will be making many, many acceptance speeches in just a few short months.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated 13 Dead End Drive in Tabletop Games
Jul 17, 2020 (Updated Jul 18, 2020)
The Traps (3 more)
Its like Clue
Excellent Bluff Game
High replayablity
Dont know who has who (2 more)
Its easy to hit and knock off the traps.
The set up is long
Excellent Murder Mystery Bluff Deduction Game
13 Dead End Drive- is a excellent bluff deduction murder mystery board game. I learned about it through the Funhaus channel. Its like clue but so much different. Let me explain.
13 Dead End Drive is a murder-themed board game originally from Milton Bradley. Released in 1993, it was followed in 2002 by a sequel, 1313 Dead End Drive. Currently, Winning Moves Games USA Winning Moves publishes the game in the USA.
The story behind the game involves the death of a wealthy old woman triggering a feud over her will. The players utilize traps located on the game board, which represents a mansion, to kill characters controlled by other players in order to claim the estate for themselves.
The Gameplay:
At the start of gameplay, players are dealt "Character cards" which correspond to matching pawns on the board. Since there are 12 characters, it is often the case that players control more than one character. However, which player controls which character is not revealed. Along with the character cards, there are also Portrait Cards, which determine who the current favorite for the inheritance is, and Trap Cards, which are used to spring traps and knock off other players.
During each turn, a player rolls two dice and moves two pawns, one pawn for each die. It is legal for players to move a pawn that is not theirs in order to bring it closer to or onto a Trap Space. All pawns must be moved off the red chair spaces before any pawns can be moved a second time or onto a trap space. If a pawn is moved onto a trap space by exact roll only, the player must have the corresponding trap card in his or her possession in order to spring the trap. Springing traps is not mandatory, however. After that, play proceeds on to the next player. A pawn can not pass through or land on the same space as another pawn during the same turn.
During the game, a Portrait Card is displayed in the picture frame above the fireplace. That character is now the current favorite to inherit the fortune. At that moment, for all intents and purposes, that character is now marked for death and must try to escape the mansion before he or she is either knocked off or the portrait changes (see "Special Spaces and Rules" below).
Also, during the game, a Detective is waiting outside, slowly advancing toward the front door. His arrival signifies the reading of the will and the announcement of the winner. The Detective can only move one space at a time, and only when a Detective Card (hidden inside the Trap Card pile) is drawn. There are 13 steps to the front door. If the Detective makes it to the front door before all other characters have been eliminated, the game is over.
Ways to win:
There are three ways to win 13 Dead End Drive:
Be the last character alive.
Escape the Mansion while your character's picture is displayed in the Picture Frame.
Have your character's picture displayed in the Picture Frame when the Detective reaches the front door.
Traps:
13 Dead End Drive has five different booby traps that are used to dispose of other characters. In the story of the game, the traps are designed to make deaths appear accidental. The traps are the Chandelier, the Bookcase, the Stairs, a Statue in a suit of armor, and the Fireplace: if a pawn has the misfortune to land on the trap space in front of or under one of these traps, the Trap card is played and the trap is sprung in the following ways:
To activate the Chandelier, flip a switch in the music room that drops the chandelier onto the pawn, eliminating it from play.
To activate the Bookcase, move that pawn up onto the top of the ladder and rest that pawn on top of the bookcase in the library, and flip a switch that will send the pawn flying back onto the board and eliminating it from play.
In order to activate the Stairs, a player can move it up onto the top of the stairs in the hall and flip a switch that will violently toss the pawn back down the stairs and onto the board, resulting in its elimination.
To activate the Statue, in the gallery, a player can flip a switch that will send a statue in a full suit of armor crashing down onto the pawn.
The Fireplace is activated in the dining room when a player flips a switch that will send the pawn flying backwards and into the figurative fire, though the box describes it as a Trap Door.
When a player moves a pawn onto a Trap Space, they must draw a card from the Trap Card pile (if they do not already have the matching trap card in their possession). If the player draws the matching Trap Card, they can either play it immediately or hold the card for future use. If the player does not have the matching Trap Card, the trap cannot be sprung, but the card can be saved for future use. There are also "Wild" Trap Cards which permit all traps to be used anytime a pawn is in that space. If, however, the player draws a Detective card, the Detective is moved one space forward, but the player is permitted to draw another Trap Card before ending the turn.
Once a trap is sprung, that pawn and the matching Character Card are laid down on the "Discard" pile on the board (the couch). If during the course of play, a Portrait Card comes up for a character that has been knocked off, that card is immediately taken down and placed on the "Discard" pile, revealing a new Portrait. The Portrait cards are shuffled at the beginning of gameplay and concealed by an "Aunt Agatha" portrait card to hide the known deck order.
Special spaces and rules:
Rolling Doubles: If a player rolls doubles that player chooses whether or not to move the current Portrait card to the back of the pack to reveal new Portrait. The player then has the choice of:
Moving one pawn the total number of spaces shown on the dice, or
Moving two pawns, one pawn for each die.
Secret Passages: On the board are special spaces that represent "Secret Passages."
Any character can enter any secret passage at any time, regardless of whether or not it is by exact roll. Moving from one secret passage to another counts as one space move for a character. Secret passages are often used to bring opponent's pawns closer to traps or to bring a player's own pawn closer to the door.
Bluffing: Bluffing is permitted in "13 Dead End Drive." In terms of strategy, a player may move their own pieces towards or even onto trap spaces in an attempt to fool opponents. Even if that player has the matching trap card for the space their own character is on, they do not have to play it. Instead, they can pretend that they do not have the correct card and draw another one. If they happen to draw the right trap card, they can pretend that the card is the wrong one, and play continues as normal.
Its a excellent game, if you like clue than you will love this game. Its a excellent bluff deduction murder mystery game.
13 Dead End Drive is a murder-themed board game originally from Milton Bradley. Released in 1993, it was followed in 2002 by a sequel, 1313 Dead End Drive. Currently, Winning Moves Games USA Winning Moves publishes the game in the USA.
The story behind the game involves the death of a wealthy old woman triggering a feud over her will. The players utilize traps located on the game board, which represents a mansion, to kill characters controlled by other players in order to claim the estate for themselves.
The Gameplay:
At the start of gameplay, players are dealt "Character cards" which correspond to matching pawns on the board. Since there are 12 characters, it is often the case that players control more than one character. However, which player controls which character is not revealed. Along with the character cards, there are also Portrait Cards, which determine who the current favorite for the inheritance is, and Trap Cards, which are used to spring traps and knock off other players.
During each turn, a player rolls two dice and moves two pawns, one pawn for each die. It is legal for players to move a pawn that is not theirs in order to bring it closer to or onto a Trap Space. All pawns must be moved off the red chair spaces before any pawns can be moved a second time or onto a trap space. If a pawn is moved onto a trap space by exact roll only, the player must have the corresponding trap card in his or her possession in order to spring the trap. Springing traps is not mandatory, however. After that, play proceeds on to the next player. A pawn can not pass through or land on the same space as another pawn during the same turn.
During the game, a Portrait Card is displayed in the picture frame above the fireplace. That character is now the current favorite to inherit the fortune. At that moment, for all intents and purposes, that character is now marked for death and must try to escape the mansion before he or she is either knocked off or the portrait changes (see "Special Spaces and Rules" below).
Also, during the game, a Detective is waiting outside, slowly advancing toward the front door. His arrival signifies the reading of the will and the announcement of the winner. The Detective can only move one space at a time, and only when a Detective Card (hidden inside the Trap Card pile) is drawn. There are 13 steps to the front door. If the Detective makes it to the front door before all other characters have been eliminated, the game is over.
Ways to win:
There are three ways to win 13 Dead End Drive:
Be the last character alive.
Escape the Mansion while your character's picture is displayed in the Picture Frame.
Have your character's picture displayed in the Picture Frame when the Detective reaches the front door.
Traps:
13 Dead End Drive has five different booby traps that are used to dispose of other characters. In the story of the game, the traps are designed to make deaths appear accidental. The traps are the Chandelier, the Bookcase, the Stairs, a Statue in a suit of armor, and the Fireplace: if a pawn has the misfortune to land on the trap space in front of or under one of these traps, the Trap card is played and the trap is sprung in the following ways:
To activate the Chandelier, flip a switch in the music room that drops the chandelier onto the pawn, eliminating it from play.
To activate the Bookcase, move that pawn up onto the top of the ladder and rest that pawn on top of the bookcase in the library, and flip a switch that will send the pawn flying back onto the board and eliminating it from play.
In order to activate the Stairs, a player can move it up onto the top of the stairs in the hall and flip a switch that will violently toss the pawn back down the stairs and onto the board, resulting in its elimination.
To activate the Statue, in the gallery, a player can flip a switch that will send a statue in a full suit of armor crashing down onto the pawn.
The Fireplace is activated in the dining room when a player flips a switch that will send the pawn flying backwards and into the figurative fire, though the box describes it as a Trap Door.
When a player moves a pawn onto a Trap Space, they must draw a card from the Trap Card pile (if they do not already have the matching trap card in their possession). If the player draws the matching Trap Card, they can either play it immediately or hold the card for future use. If the player does not have the matching Trap Card, the trap cannot be sprung, but the card can be saved for future use. There are also "Wild" Trap Cards which permit all traps to be used anytime a pawn is in that space. If, however, the player draws a Detective card, the Detective is moved one space forward, but the player is permitted to draw another Trap Card before ending the turn.
Once a trap is sprung, that pawn and the matching Character Card are laid down on the "Discard" pile on the board (the couch). If during the course of play, a Portrait Card comes up for a character that has been knocked off, that card is immediately taken down and placed on the "Discard" pile, revealing a new Portrait. The Portrait cards are shuffled at the beginning of gameplay and concealed by an "Aunt Agatha" portrait card to hide the known deck order.
Special spaces and rules:
Rolling Doubles: If a player rolls doubles that player chooses whether or not to move the current Portrait card to the back of the pack to reveal new Portrait. The player then has the choice of:
Moving one pawn the total number of spaces shown on the dice, or
Moving two pawns, one pawn for each die.
Secret Passages: On the board are special spaces that represent "Secret Passages."
Any character can enter any secret passage at any time, regardless of whether or not it is by exact roll. Moving from one secret passage to another counts as one space move for a character. Secret passages are often used to bring opponent's pawns closer to traps or to bring a player's own pawn closer to the door.
Bluffing: Bluffing is permitted in "13 Dead End Drive." In terms of strategy, a player may move their own pieces towards or even onto trap spaces in an attempt to fool opponents. Even if that player has the matching trap card for the space their own character is on, they do not have to play it. Instead, they can pretend that they do not have the correct card and draw another one. If they happen to draw the right trap card, they can pretend that the card is the wrong one, and play continues as normal.
Its a excellent game, if you like clue than you will love this game. Its a excellent bluff deduction murder mystery game.
Gotham is the kind of show where I wonder whether they tried to save money by just having the interns write the script. It's got that stilted, on-the-nose kind of dialogue that makes me just feel bad for the actors. For a while I thought the quality of the writing varied from scene to scene, but it was really just that a certain few actors (those that play Fish Mooney, Ed Nygma, and Harvey Bullock spring to mind) that were able to transcend the material they were working with, while others struggled and some just seemed to give up.
Season one starts off promisingly enough for a superhero themed crime show. The premise is solid - we get to watch how these superheroes and supervillians come to be. And that is really the draw that keeps me watching - the character driven moments where we see Nygma descend into madness, the Penguin rise through the ranks of the underworld, Mooney wrestle to keep control of her little patch of Gotham. The conflict James Gordon faces in the first season - a Lawful Good character up against rampant, insidious, and impossible to root up corruption throughout every level of Gotham's government is genuinely interesting and feels like a relevant emotional thread that keeps you going through all of the schlocky and improbable events. All three seasons seem to have a firm grasp of their season plot arc and tentpole moments, setting up the next season nicely for whatever main villain and evil will be explored, but I feel like the tone of the show has shifted wildly. The show can't decide if it's gritty or campy, whether it's a comic book or a crime procedural. It handwaves technology and superpowers in a way that fails to establish in-world rules or limitations. So every super power is all-powerful until plot convenient. I also just personally hate the third season "blood virus" arc and the non-canonical Mad Hatter who speaks in rhyming couplets.
Speaking of which, I'd love to tell the writers that a mass of contradictory, plot-convenient impulses does not a strong female character make. Barbara Kean's story arc makes absolutely no sense. Lee Thompkins seems only to exist to push Gordon to do things he wouldn't otherwise, and Selina Kyle is easily swapped out with every spunky street urchin ever.
I almost want to be offended that every single queer character is, or ends up being, a baddie, but honestly I think that's probably just because the antagonists are more interesting and fleshed out characters to begin with. Still, there's some serious issues with representation (shocker). The third season introduces a really icky variant of the Born Sexy Yesterday trope (watch the video by the Pop Culture Detective, it's worth it.)
Still, I think the casting is pretty great, acting ability aside. The costuming is good, although everything is hampered by the show's refusal to nail down any sort of time period. The dream sequences in the first two seasons are beautiful. I love Oswald Cobblepot and Ed Nygma, and I'd love to see the actor who plays Bruce Wayne master more than just his admittedly very good "holding back tears" expression.
If you're looking for something campy, if you like your villians and your superheroes, and if you need something to watch while you fold laundry or go to sleep, I would recommend this show. It's a show that thrives on tired old tropes, but it lifts those tropes from its source material, so fans of comics might enjoy it, or might be aggrieved at the retconning of beloved old character's backstories.
Whatever you do, don't call Nymga insane. He's better now. He has a certificate.
Season one starts off promisingly enough for a superhero themed crime show. The premise is solid - we get to watch how these superheroes and supervillians come to be. And that is really the draw that keeps me watching - the character driven moments where we see Nygma descend into madness, the Penguin rise through the ranks of the underworld, Mooney wrestle to keep control of her little patch of Gotham. The conflict James Gordon faces in the first season - a Lawful Good character up against rampant, insidious, and impossible to root up corruption throughout every level of Gotham's government is genuinely interesting and feels like a relevant emotional thread that keeps you going through all of the schlocky and improbable events. All three seasons seem to have a firm grasp of their season plot arc and tentpole moments, setting up the next season nicely for whatever main villain and evil will be explored, but I feel like the tone of the show has shifted wildly. The show can't decide if it's gritty or campy, whether it's a comic book or a crime procedural. It handwaves technology and superpowers in a way that fails to establish in-world rules or limitations. So every super power is all-powerful until plot convenient. I also just personally hate the third season "blood virus" arc and the non-canonical Mad Hatter who speaks in rhyming couplets.
Speaking of which, I'd love to tell the writers that a mass of contradictory, plot-convenient impulses does not a strong female character make. Barbara Kean's story arc makes absolutely no sense. Lee Thompkins seems only to exist to push Gordon to do things he wouldn't otherwise, and Selina Kyle is easily swapped out with every spunky street urchin ever.
I almost want to be offended that every single queer character is, or ends up being, a baddie, but honestly I think that's probably just because the antagonists are more interesting and fleshed out characters to begin with. Still, there's some serious issues with representation (shocker). The third season introduces a really icky variant of the Born Sexy Yesterday trope (watch the video by the Pop Culture Detective, it's worth it.)
Still, I think the casting is pretty great, acting ability aside. The costuming is good, although everything is hampered by the show's refusal to nail down any sort of time period. The dream sequences in the first two seasons are beautiful. I love Oswald Cobblepot and Ed Nygma, and I'd love to see the actor who plays Bruce Wayne master more than just his admittedly very good "holding back tears" expression.
If you're looking for something campy, if you like your villians and your superheroes, and if you need something to watch while you fold laundry or go to sleep, I would recommend this show. It's a show that thrives on tired old tropes, but it lifts those tropes from its source material, so fans of comics might enjoy it, or might be aggrieved at the retconning of beloved old character's backstories.
Whatever you do, don't call Nymga insane. He's better now. He has a certificate.