Search
Search results
“OMG when is Purple Phoenix Games gonna review another Harry Potter game??” We listened. So here is the next installment of our unofficial Harry Potter games series. In Harry Potter: Hogwarts Battle – Defence Against the Dark Arts (which I will gladly reduce to Defence throughout the review, even though my American English Spidey-Senses are all over that spelling), players will be playing through a duel in the classroom using spells, allies, and items to push back and stun their opponent. Have you got the wand strength to stand up to your rival?
Like I just mentioned, Defence pits two players against each other in a sparring scenario. Players will be drafting cards that represent Spells to sling, Allies to aid, and Items to help knock opponents off their balance. The winner of Defence is the wizard who can stun their opponent three times. Only then will they be able to stand a chance against their dark foes.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup a game, follow the rulebook instructions to lay out the main duel board and its shuffled decks that will surround it. These include the Hogwarts deck (from which players will be purchasing cards to add to their discard piles), the Library deck (which includes only Books cards that add influence or the ability to draw the top card of the player deck), Hexes (which are placed directly in the opponent’s discard pile and must be dealt with first when in hand), and Banished cards. Each player will choose a House card and a matching mover token to be placed on the board. Likewise, each player will have a starting hand of seven Alohomora! cards, one Wand, one Cauldron, and one starter Ally: Owl, Toad, or Cat. Each player will shuffle their starting deck, drawing five for their starting hand. Determine the starting player and the duel may begin!
On a player’s turn they will first deal with any Hex cards they have acquired, following the instructions written on the card. Once cleared, the active player will play cards from their hand in any order they wish to gain Influence to purchase cards from the Classroom (market), Attack points to push back their opponent towards the Stun space, or Health points to move their own mover token one space closer to the Starting space on the board.
Cards that are purchased from the Classroom can be Items, Spells, or even Allies. Items and Spells typically provide Influence, Health, or Attack, and some will have House bonuses in addition to normal effects. In order to take advantage of the House bonus, a player will either need to be from the affiliated House, or have an active Ally belonging to the affiliated House. This is a new mechanic in this game and adds another layer of strategy to a player’s purchasing.
As wizards duel back and forth slinging Spells, recruiting and activating Allies, and using Items to push back their opponent, one wizard will be stunned. When this happens the players will reset their play areas by combining all of their cards they have in their possession. Shuffle the lot of them, draw another hand of five cards and reset their mover token back to the Starting space. The next round is ready to begin and the wizard who stuns their opponent thrice will be crowned champion! Or get an A for the day… or whatever the Common Core equivalent is nowadays.
Components. I have many great things to say about the components in this box and a couple little gripes. Gripelets, really. First gripe: the box comes with a cardstock sleeve. It is very cool and looks great, but it’s unnecessary and I find it keeps snagging on other boxes and such. Not a big deal, as I can always get rid of it, but that’s an opinion. Second, the board is very dark. It features a very dark purple (yay purple!) with black spaces upon which players move their tokens. The colors are very close under certain lighting and I wish there was even just a faint outline of the spaces in a white or gray. Lastly, and probably just me and the way I play, the Attack and Health trackers are almost completely unnecessary. I know you are supposed to take a token every time you “Gain” a Health or Attack point, but I always just keep track in my head thus negating the need for the tokens.
But onto the great. Literally everything else is great. I have always enjoyed the components in the original game, and as this one contains many of the same, I also enjoy these. The art style is interesting and pretty cool, and I really don’t mind screencaps as much as many others do. So for me, overall, I really enjoy the components here.
All in all I truly love this game. I am almost always in the mood to play Harry Potter: Hogwarts Battle, but it is cooperative and my wife doesn’t really enjoy the OG HP game. This one, however, she does enjoy because she can just flex on me and stun me into oblivion with her superior deckbuilding abilities. This one is quicker to setup and play, and holds a much smaller footprint. The mechanics are familiar without being totally duplicating, and I just love deckbuilders in general. So this one was bound to be a big hit with me from the start.
If you are looking for a great Harry Potter-themed deckbuilding game and are not completely sold on the bigger cooperative game, take a look at this much smaller two-player competitive title. Do try to take some of the cards with a grain of salt, as I am sure it is difficult to imagine having both Hermione and Draco as allies simultaneously, but it can happen in the game. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a very enthusiastic 11 / 12. Just a word of caution, try not to Flipendo your table when you lose. It won’t end well.
Like I just mentioned, Defence pits two players against each other in a sparring scenario. Players will be drafting cards that represent Spells to sling, Allies to aid, and Items to help knock opponents off their balance. The winner of Defence is the wizard who can stun their opponent three times. Only then will they be able to stand a chance against their dark foes.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup a game, follow the rulebook instructions to lay out the main duel board and its shuffled decks that will surround it. These include the Hogwarts deck (from which players will be purchasing cards to add to their discard piles), the Library deck (which includes only Books cards that add influence or the ability to draw the top card of the player deck), Hexes (which are placed directly in the opponent’s discard pile and must be dealt with first when in hand), and Banished cards. Each player will choose a House card and a matching mover token to be placed on the board. Likewise, each player will have a starting hand of seven Alohomora! cards, one Wand, one Cauldron, and one starter Ally: Owl, Toad, or Cat. Each player will shuffle their starting deck, drawing five for their starting hand. Determine the starting player and the duel may begin!
On a player’s turn they will first deal with any Hex cards they have acquired, following the instructions written on the card. Once cleared, the active player will play cards from their hand in any order they wish to gain Influence to purchase cards from the Classroom (market), Attack points to push back their opponent towards the Stun space, or Health points to move their own mover token one space closer to the Starting space on the board.
Cards that are purchased from the Classroom can be Items, Spells, or even Allies. Items and Spells typically provide Influence, Health, or Attack, and some will have House bonuses in addition to normal effects. In order to take advantage of the House bonus, a player will either need to be from the affiliated House, or have an active Ally belonging to the affiliated House. This is a new mechanic in this game and adds another layer of strategy to a player’s purchasing.
As wizards duel back and forth slinging Spells, recruiting and activating Allies, and using Items to push back their opponent, one wizard will be stunned. When this happens the players will reset their play areas by combining all of their cards they have in their possession. Shuffle the lot of them, draw another hand of five cards and reset their mover token back to the Starting space. The next round is ready to begin and the wizard who stuns their opponent thrice will be crowned champion! Or get an A for the day… or whatever the Common Core equivalent is nowadays.
Components. I have many great things to say about the components in this box and a couple little gripes. Gripelets, really. First gripe: the box comes with a cardstock sleeve. It is very cool and looks great, but it’s unnecessary and I find it keeps snagging on other boxes and such. Not a big deal, as I can always get rid of it, but that’s an opinion. Second, the board is very dark. It features a very dark purple (yay purple!) with black spaces upon which players move their tokens. The colors are very close under certain lighting and I wish there was even just a faint outline of the spaces in a white or gray. Lastly, and probably just me and the way I play, the Attack and Health trackers are almost completely unnecessary. I know you are supposed to take a token every time you “Gain” a Health or Attack point, but I always just keep track in my head thus negating the need for the tokens.
But onto the great. Literally everything else is great. I have always enjoyed the components in the original game, and as this one contains many of the same, I also enjoy these. The art style is interesting and pretty cool, and I really don’t mind screencaps as much as many others do. So for me, overall, I really enjoy the components here.
All in all I truly love this game. I am almost always in the mood to play Harry Potter: Hogwarts Battle, but it is cooperative and my wife doesn’t really enjoy the OG HP game. This one, however, she does enjoy because she can just flex on me and stun me into oblivion with her superior deckbuilding abilities. This one is quicker to setup and play, and holds a much smaller footprint. The mechanics are familiar without being totally duplicating, and I just love deckbuilders in general. So this one was bound to be a big hit with me from the start.
If you are looking for a great Harry Potter-themed deckbuilding game and are not completely sold on the bigger cooperative game, take a look at this much smaller two-player competitive title. Do try to take some of the cards with a grain of salt, as I am sure it is difficult to imagine having both Hermione and Draco as allies simultaneously, but it can happen in the game. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a very enthusiastic 11 / 12. Just a word of caution, try not to Flipendo your table when you lose. It won’t end well.
Sassy Brit (97 KP) rated The Other Woman in Books
Jun 5, 2019
When Sophie discovers her husband is having an affair, she sets out to tackle the problem head on and confront his mistress face-to-face, in her own home, so his mistress can see her happy idyllic home life with their teenage children for herself, and perhaps back off. But they get into a tussle and the mistress accidentally gets killed, from then on one disaster after another happens to poor Sophie who is just trying to get rid of the body, but with such a busy household she ends up hiding the dead mistress in the freezer until she has more time to dispose of it. This idea had me thinking of that Fawlty Towers episode where a man dies in his hotel room and Basil ends up hiding him in the laundry basket, instead of doing the sensible, normal thing and owning up.
Although I did read this very fast and strangely have to admit I also thoroughly enjoyed this story, I did have a chuckle at quite a few of the things that happened. The nosy neighbour seemed to be constantly following Sophie around as if she had nothing better to do. The housekeeper who spotted everything going on! The twist at the end (featuring the truth about the mistress and what was really going on with the husband), was totally unexpected, and possibly pulled out of a hat to surprise us. Then the final wrap up session kind of happened far too easily for my liking. It was also a tad unbelievable, too. But hey, the way I looked at it was the husband needed to repent and unleash some of this guilt, and maybe even needed to prove his love for Sophie. Whilst Sophie (it turns out) was most certainly not a woman to be messed with, even though I doubted she realised it at the time until these disasters kept happening to her.
Overall, I did enjoy how fast I read this book, and how it kept me on tenterhooks whipping through the pages eager to get to the end to find out how they were going to round this off without getting caught. Seriously, Sophie was just trying to dispose of a body, and yet everything that could go wrong for her, did go wrong and I was constantly wondering just how was she going to get out of this mess! I also loved the ‘mysterious’ ending, which kind of made everything Sophie tried to avoid, come true and all her past efforts just a waste of time… comeuppance? Karma can be a bitch, even if the whole thing was just one big mistake. Worth a read if you don’t take it too seriously.
Although I did read this very fast and strangely have to admit I also thoroughly enjoyed this story, I did have a chuckle at quite a few of the things that happened. The nosy neighbour seemed to be constantly following Sophie around as if she had nothing better to do. The housekeeper who spotted everything going on! The twist at the end (featuring the truth about the mistress and what was really going on with the husband), was totally unexpected, and possibly pulled out of a hat to surprise us. Then the final wrap up session kind of happened far too easily for my liking. It was also a tad unbelievable, too. But hey, the way I looked at it was the husband needed to repent and unleash some of this guilt, and maybe even needed to prove his love for Sophie. Whilst Sophie (it turns out) was most certainly not a woman to be messed with, even though I doubted she realised it at the time until these disasters kept happening to her.
Overall, I did enjoy how fast I read this book, and how it kept me on tenterhooks whipping through the pages eager to get to the end to find out how they were going to round this off without getting caught. Seriously, Sophie was just trying to dispose of a body, and yet everything that could go wrong for her, did go wrong and I was constantly wondering just how was she going to get out of this mess! I also loved the ‘mysterious’ ending, which kind of made everything Sophie tried to avoid, come true and all her past efforts just a waste of time… comeuppance? Karma can be a bitch, even if the whole thing was just one big mistake. Worth a read if you don’t take it too seriously.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Nomadland (2020) in Movies
Mar 2, 2021
Pseudo-Documentary
Frances McDormand is an interesting character actress to watch, one that uses her character actress looks to disguise the fact that she is, in fact, a strong leading actress that draws our attention to her in whatever project she is in. This facet of her on-screen personae is going full throttle in her new film NOMADLAND.
And, thank goodness it is, for without McDormand on the screen, this “slice-of-life” pseudo-documentary disguised as a feature film would be almost unwatchable as McDormand’s character floats through “slice of life” after “slice of life” in what is referred to as the “Nomad Lifestyle”.
Earnestly Directed by Chloe Zao, NOMADLAND tells the tale of Fern (McDormand) who loses her life, her job and her husband during the recession of the late 2000’s and starts to float through life - and experiences - as a “Nomad”, a person with no permanent address who goes from place to place, catching on to the random odd job and living her life in her van.
Zao and McDormand spent years filming in actual Nomad communities with the others in this film often times not realizing that McDormand was an actress playing a part. For McDormand, it had to be the ultimate acting challenge - living in the real world as a character - and she brings a watchable, lost Fern to the screen and she genuinely and earnestly interacts with the real-life characters she encounters. She is very watchable and is a pleasant character to spend the time with.
Most of these real life people she encounters open up about their lifestyle and the movie took on the feel of documentary with Fern as the interviewer/narrator of the story. This made for an intriguing glimpse into a heretofore unknown world (at least to me), but not a compelling film does it make.
Zao does try to drive a narrative as the only other notable actor in this film - David Straitharn - shows up as a fellow Nomad that develops a crush on Fern and is interested in leaving the Nomad life and invites Fern to join him.
This is the only real conflict in this story as we spend an hour-forty-five watching Fern flit from place to place and person to person not really trying to find herself, but letting the wind blow her to wherever the trail takes her next.
An intriguing (enough) slice of life, with a watchable central performance by McDormand, but not substantial enough to engage me as a feature film.
Letter Grade: B (I applaud the attempt)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
And, thank goodness it is, for without McDormand on the screen, this “slice-of-life” pseudo-documentary disguised as a feature film would be almost unwatchable as McDormand’s character floats through “slice of life” after “slice of life” in what is referred to as the “Nomad Lifestyle”.
Earnestly Directed by Chloe Zao, NOMADLAND tells the tale of Fern (McDormand) who loses her life, her job and her husband during the recession of the late 2000’s and starts to float through life - and experiences - as a “Nomad”, a person with no permanent address who goes from place to place, catching on to the random odd job and living her life in her van.
Zao and McDormand spent years filming in actual Nomad communities with the others in this film often times not realizing that McDormand was an actress playing a part. For McDormand, it had to be the ultimate acting challenge - living in the real world as a character - and she brings a watchable, lost Fern to the screen and she genuinely and earnestly interacts with the real-life characters she encounters. She is very watchable and is a pleasant character to spend the time with.
Most of these real life people she encounters open up about their lifestyle and the movie took on the feel of documentary with Fern as the interviewer/narrator of the story. This made for an intriguing glimpse into a heretofore unknown world (at least to me), but not a compelling film does it make.
Zao does try to drive a narrative as the only other notable actor in this film - David Straitharn - shows up as a fellow Nomad that develops a crush on Fern and is interested in leaving the Nomad life and invites Fern to join him.
This is the only real conflict in this story as we spend an hour-forty-five watching Fern flit from place to place and person to person not really trying to find herself, but letting the wind blow her to wherever the trail takes her next.
An intriguing (enough) slice of life, with a watchable central performance by McDormand, but not substantial enough to engage me as a feature film.
Letter Grade: B (I applaud the attempt)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Word Swag - Cool fonts & typography generator
Photo & Video and Utilities
6.0
Rate It
App
You've found the authentic Word Swag™ app! Word Swag magically turns your words into beautiful...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Zombie Tidal Wave (2019) in Movies
Jun 3, 2020
A zombie film made for the SyFy Channel starring Ian Ziering you say? Sign me up.
While out fishing a group of friends catch something sinister. They haul a putrid looking dead body out of the water and very quickly realise that it isn't quite as dead as they'd have hoped. That body is the first in an army of the undead that takes over the town as an unexpected tidal wave gives them a helping hand.
Is this film bad? Yes. Is it an entertaining watch? Also yes, but on that SyFy Original movie level of yes.
Bless Ian Ziering and his movie decision. In Zombie Tidal Wave (I really love saying the whole title) he plays Hunter, a fisherman who's about to leave town for a fresh start. Hunter is everything you hope he will be. I also noticed on IMDb that Ziering has a story credit... well colour me surprised... it's a super-duper amazing tale about zombies by the sea.
I'm not going to insult you by saying that this would win any awards, we all know it wouldn't even without watching it. It wouldn't even win a Razzie, that's how good it is! Everything about this is in fact distinctly average, apart from the following...
That story... it's got a great idea with twists and turns that "make sense". It could almost have been a serious zombie film if someone at some point hadn't gone "You know what? We need more." "More what?" "Everything."
Those special effects... are terrible. I have never seen such badly CGId water, and that's something you should take seriously coming from someone who has seen as many made for TV movies as I have.
The consistency... there are facts about locations and objects that the film just throws out the window, there are some continuity errors as well... but while that sounds like a bad thing it's really an essential part of the enjoyment/
This couldn't be a typical review so to complete it I just want to share with you some of my notes/interactions with the film, I'll include some cryptic highlights to look out for too.
- The zombie that must have unnaturally long legs or be standing on a zombie pyramid.
- Synchronised swimming zombies.
- I snort laughed so hard at a big reveal point that I nearly choked on my breakfast.
- A stunning Bond girl moment that might have been the best shot of the film.
- The different densities of glass.
- The Sharknado reference.
- ... and the result of that reference.
- Douchebag and his girlfriend.
- Family banter with a zombie.
- "Reinforcements".
- Zombie's styling flip flops.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/06/zombie-tidal-wave-movie-review.html
While out fishing a group of friends catch something sinister. They haul a putrid looking dead body out of the water and very quickly realise that it isn't quite as dead as they'd have hoped. That body is the first in an army of the undead that takes over the town as an unexpected tidal wave gives them a helping hand.
Is this film bad? Yes. Is it an entertaining watch? Also yes, but on that SyFy Original movie level of yes.
Bless Ian Ziering and his movie decision. In Zombie Tidal Wave (I really love saying the whole title) he plays Hunter, a fisherman who's about to leave town for a fresh start. Hunter is everything you hope he will be. I also noticed on IMDb that Ziering has a story credit... well colour me surprised... it's a super-duper amazing tale about zombies by the sea.
I'm not going to insult you by saying that this would win any awards, we all know it wouldn't even without watching it. It wouldn't even win a Razzie, that's how good it is! Everything about this is in fact distinctly average, apart from the following...
That story... it's got a great idea with twists and turns that "make sense". It could almost have been a serious zombie film if someone at some point hadn't gone "You know what? We need more." "More what?" "Everything."
Those special effects... are terrible. I have never seen such badly CGId water, and that's something you should take seriously coming from someone who has seen as many made for TV movies as I have.
The consistency... there are facts about locations and objects that the film just throws out the window, there are some continuity errors as well... but while that sounds like a bad thing it's really an essential part of the enjoyment/
This couldn't be a typical review so to complete it I just want to share with you some of my notes/interactions with the film, I'll include some cryptic highlights to look out for too.
- The zombie that must have unnaturally long legs or be standing on a zombie pyramid.
- Synchronised swimming zombies.
- I snort laughed so hard at a big reveal point that I nearly choked on my breakfast.
- A stunning Bond girl moment that might have been the best shot of the film.
- The different densities of glass.
- The Sharknado reference.
- ... and the result of that reference.
- Douchebag and his girlfriend.
- Family banter with a zombie.
- "Reinforcements".
- Zombie's styling flip flops.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/06/zombie-tidal-wave-movie-review.html
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Finch (2021) in Movies
Nov 18, 2021
Very Effective
There are times when there is a “Perfect Storm” of film material, performance, mood, style and execution of said material and the headspace that I am in when I sit down to view the movie that elevates a film viewing experience above the norm.
Such was my experience when I sat down and watched the Tom Hanks Post-Apocalyptic film FINCH on AppleTV+. On paper, it looks like a run-of-the-mill “last few survivors on Earth struggle to remain alive” film, but - in my experience - it was much better than that.
Starring Tom Hanks as loner scientist Finch, who is scraping by in the remains of St. Louis with a dog and 2 robot helpers - robots of his own creation. When conditions in St. Louis worsen, Finch must pack up (with his 3 companions in tow) and head to a place where he thinks that life might be better - San Francisco.
Pretty standard “road movie” stuff, right? But in the hands of an Actor like Hanks, Emmy Winning GAME OF THRONES Director Miguel Sapochnik, a script by Craig Luck and Ivor Powell that digs into the humanity of Finch (and the situation) and some top-notch Computer animation of the Robots (especially “Jeff” voiced by Caleb Landry Jones), this film elevates itself above the norm.
There are not too many actors who could hold the attention of an audience for 2 hours speaking with 2 robots and a dog, but Hanks manages to do this - and do this very well. He brings his basic decency to the fore and makes us root for him from the start.
The surprise for me was the voice work of Caleb Landry Jones (GET OUT) who matches Hanks beat for beat and brings the same level of decency to his character. It is a testament to Jones’ work in a Motion Capture suit - and the “mo-cap” (Supervised by Scott Stokdyk) that makes the audience see and feel emotions on the face of the robot that just aren’t there. It’s that good.
Director Sapochnik really moves the film at the correct pace as he stops for the humanity, but doesn’t dwell on it too long - and, thus, avoids making the film too sentimental and mawkish. It is a delicate balancing act that this film walks very well.
Probably the biggest movie-going surprise of the year for me. A film that, at this point, will end up in my Top 10 of 2021.
Yes, I am as surprised as you are by this.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Such was my experience when I sat down and watched the Tom Hanks Post-Apocalyptic film FINCH on AppleTV+. On paper, it looks like a run-of-the-mill “last few survivors on Earth struggle to remain alive” film, but - in my experience - it was much better than that.
Starring Tom Hanks as loner scientist Finch, who is scraping by in the remains of St. Louis with a dog and 2 robot helpers - robots of his own creation. When conditions in St. Louis worsen, Finch must pack up (with his 3 companions in tow) and head to a place where he thinks that life might be better - San Francisco.
Pretty standard “road movie” stuff, right? But in the hands of an Actor like Hanks, Emmy Winning GAME OF THRONES Director Miguel Sapochnik, a script by Craig Luck and Ivor Powell that digs into the humanity of Finch (and the situation) and some top-notch Computer animation of the Robots (especially “Jeff” voiced by Caleb Landry Jones), this film elevates itself above the norm.
There are not too many actors who could hold the attention of an audience for 2 hours speaking with 2 robots and a dog, but Hanks manages to do this - and do this very well. He brings his basic decency to the fore and makes us root for him from the start.
The surprise for me was the voice work of Caleb Landry Jones (GET OUT) who matches Hanks beat for beat and brings the same level of decency to his character. It is a testament to Jones’ work in a Motion Capture suit - and the “mo-cap” (Supervised by Scott Stokdyk) that makes the audience see and feel emotions on the face of the robot that just aren’t there. It’s that good.
Director Sapochnik really moves the film at the correct pace as he stops for the humanity, but doesn’t dwell on it too long - and, thus, avoids making the film too sentimental and mawkish. It is a delicate balancing act that this film walks very well.
Probably the biggest movie-going surprise of the year for me. A film that, at this point, will end up in my Top 10 of 2021.
Yes, I am as surprised as you are by this.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Life Itself (2018) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
This film is hard to watch, not because it's not good but because there's a lot of chaos to the story at the beginning. We're then treated to a portion that's entirely in Spanish which kicks off an emotional rollercoaster that brings us into the end.
One of the things we see near the beginning of this story almost instantly made me dislike the film, the story line exposes the fact that what we're hearing might not be what actually happened. It plays on the point that one person's view of something isn't the same as another person's. This will sound silly when I say it but I was annoyed that it had pointed out that the film might be lying to me. The reason it's particularly silly is that this same scenario happens a lot in all sorts of films. I know films lie to me but I don't want to know it.
I'm sitting here tapping my pen as I try and write this review, the film left me perplexed in so many ways. I went into the film prepared for what I thought I was going to see and yet it opened with Samuel L. Jackson. You read that right, I haven't lost the plot, Samuel L. "MFing" Jackson. Admittedly he was there doing what I love best about him but he only added to my confusion. The sort of film this is, opening with him, even with the context it makes no sense.
We're treated to lots of great actors in this one but I have to say that I was most happy to see Annette Bening pop up. (The American President used to be one of my go to films. I've also just noticed Captain Marvel in her filmography... *wheezes into a paper bag*) Her part may have been fleeting but in the chaotic part of the film she was the only grounded point. From my high to my low point... Oscar Isaac. It actually upsets me to put him in this position as I've enjoyed him in most of his recent films but I wasn't feeling the love for his character Will. In nearly every scene I could see a style I associate with Jake Johnson and honestly I'd much rather have seen him trying that role.
If you can make it to the mid-way point of the movie then you do get a much more palatable film, and a predictable one. There is a point where you absolutely know what is going to happen at the end of the film and from thereon in you look for the connections before they happen. Despite that point it's a satisfactory ending to a rather mixed bag.
We were also treated to a Q&A after the film featuring Dan Fogelman (writer and director) and actress Olivia Cooke. Sadly it was a bit of an anti-climax, I often find that these featurettes can offer some fascinating insights into the goings on but this seemed more like an after thought for this preview.
What you should do
As if to add insult to injury you don't need to leave the house to see this film as it is made by Sky (although I'm also seeing Amazon Studios coming up in places, but I'm sure the film actually said Sky) and premieres on Sky Cinema at the same time as being released at cinemas. If you can see it on there then go for it, I'm not sure it's cinema worthy.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
A life picking olives in the Spanish countryside?
One of the things we see near the beginning of this story almost instantly made me dislike the film, the story line exposes the fact that what we're hearing might not be what actually happened. It plays on the point that one person's view of something isn't the same as another person's. This will sound silly when I say it but I was annoyed that it had pointed out that the film might be lying to me. The reason it's particularly silly is that this same scenario happens a lot in all sorts of films. I know films lie to me but I don't want to know it.
I'm sitting here tapping my pen as I try and write this review, the film left me perplexed in so many ways. I went into the film prepared for what I thought I was going to see and yet it opened with Samuel L. Jackson. You read that right, I haven't lost the plot, Samuel L. "MFing" Jackson. Admittedly he was there doing what I love best about him but he only added to my confusion. The sort of film this is, opening with him, even with the context it makes no sense.
We're treated to lots of great actors in this one but I have to say that I was most happy to see Annette Bening pop up. (The American President used to be one of my go to films. I've also just noticed Captain Marvel in her filmography... *wheezes into a paper bag*) Her part may have been fleeting but in the chaotic part of the film she was the only grounded point. From my high to my low point... Oscar Isaac. It actually upsets me to put him in this position as I've enjoyed him in most of his recent films but I wasn't feeling the love for his character Will. In nearly every scene I could see a style I associate with Jake Johnson and honestly I'd much rather have seen him trying that role.
If you can make it to the mid-way point of the movie then you do get a much more palatable film, and a predictable one. There is a point where you absolutely know what is going to happen at the end of the film and from thereon in you look for the connections before they happen. Despite that point it's a satisfactory ending to a rather mixed bag.
We were also treated to a Q&A after the film featuring Dan Fogelman (writer and director) and actress Olivia Cooke. Sadly it was a bit of an anti-climax, I often find that these featurettes can offer some fascinating insights into the goings on but this seemed more like an after thought for this preview.
What you should do
As if to add insult to injury you don't need to leave the house to see this film as it is made by Sky (although I'm also seeing Amazon Studios coming up in places, but I'm sure the film actually said Sky) and premieres on Sky Cinema at the same time as being released at cinemas. If you can see it on there then go for it, I'm not sure it's cinema worthy.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
A life picking olives in the Spanish countryside?
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Illumination in Tabletop Games
Oct 5, 2021
Ancient Medieval books. We all love ’em, right? Full of bright beautiful pictures of angels fighting demons, knights fighting dragons, dogs fighting squirrels(?), and monks fighting armed bunnies?? Hey, what’s going on here? Okay, I have played enough Alf Seegert games to know that everything comes with a hint of quirk, but now I need to pore through my non-existent collection of old tomes to find instances of monks warding off sword-brandishing rabbits. Ohhhhh, maybe this is about children’s books! Man, times were weird back in the day.
Illumination is a game about two monks who are tasked with illuminating the pages of manuscripts with drawings in the hopes of becoming the next head of the Scriptorium: The Scriptmaster, one might say. However, one of the monks gets a little itch and begins to draw irreverent subjects, like demons, dragons, and such. Which monk will earn the made-up-by-me title of Scriptmaster? Guess you will have to play to find out.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
As with many games that are well endowed with components, setup can be a bit of a task. The game will be focused around a few main areas. First, the three manuscript pages are placed on the table in any orientation, with the purple wild Drollery tiles placed on one text box on each page. The Monastery mat is placed nearby as well, with the Abbot pawn randomly placed on a blank station. This pawn will be moved around the map during play to determine which rituals may be performed at any one time. Each player will have their own player mat, upon which will be placed their starting gold (1 for the Reverent player and 5 for the Irreverent player), as well as their starting nine Illumination tiles. The rules mention separating all the Illumination tiles into stacks of three, choosing three of these stacks to flip over and place on the play mat without altering the order. This is very important to keep the tiles in their randomized order. The remainder of the tiles are to be placed nearby in stacks of three. Each player is dealt one starting Scriptorium card and a random Crusade card that will offer bonuses at the end of the game. Once all setup, the game may begin with the Reverent player’s turn.
On a turn, the active player will choose from their mat one row or column of three tiles to be played. They take the three tiles and place them upon one of the three book pages on the table, in the margins. From there the player can choose any tile from the margin to place onto the page in any order they wish, upon any quill icon they choose (except for coin tiles – those simply grant two coins immediately). If the tile is placed on a quill of a matching color to that of the tile, the player will immediately collect one coin and place it on the player mat. If the tile is placed on a quill and orthogonally touches a tile of the matching color, the player then collects a Ritual token of the same color. These Ritual tokens are used in sets of three, four, or five in order to earn VP for end of game scoring. Each purple Drollery tile is wild for the purpose of placement and Ritual token collection. Each tile placed will collect its earnings immediately, and any coins earned may be spent immediately as well.
A player may use coins for several purposes throughout the game: move a tile from the margin of one book to the margin of a different book, move the Abbot one space along the track for Ritual purposes, or to draw a Scriptorium card. The other resources are Ritual tokens, and may be spent during the turn as well. In order to spend these, the Abbot must be on the matching location on the Monastery board, and the player may spend three, four, or five matching tokens to perform the Ritual. They discard the tokens, place one of their cubes upon the appropriate icon on the Monastery mat for VP at game end.
At any time during the turn Scriptorium cards may be played. These are very special cards that allow the player to complete certain actions that break the normal rules. This could be a free movement of the Abbot, or switching places of two tiles on the player mat, or even banishing one of the opponent’s tiles to another book entirely.
Why mention the battles in the intro if they are not part of the game? They are. Once opposing foes are placed orthogonally from each other, and all involved tiles are completely enclosed by other tiles or board obstacles, a Bounded Battle will begin. Battles are simple to resolve as it requires players to count the number of combatants on both sides and whichever side has more forces wins the battle. The winner places their cube on the appropriate battle card near the Monastery mat, and the loser gains coins equal to the number of their tiles lost to battle. Tiles that are lost are simply flipped to its opposite side.
Play continues in this fashion of players choosing and placing tiles, drawing and using Scriptorium cards, performing Rituals, and resolving Bounded Battles until both players pass their turn. The game is then over and VP counted in all their places around the play area. The player with the most points becomes the next Scriptmaster Flex and is able to enhance or defile as many manuscripts as they like!
Components. This game has a lot of components, but they are mostly cardboard tiles, cardstock cards and mats, and wooden cubes. The quality is all very fine, as to be expected with Eagle-Gryphon games. The art, for me, is the biggest drawback of the game. I UNDERSTAND why it looks the way it does – in trying to stick with a Medieval manuscript theme some decision were made on the style. It just doesn’t vibe with me. I took a look at the new edition of The Road to Canterbury, by the same designer and publisher, and loved the look of it. I REALIZE that the tiles are supposed to be not only reminiscent of the art style of that time period, but also imaginations of monks and their doodles, but it’s just not for me. I do like the looks of everything else except the art on the tiles, and when that’s the majority of the components I am looking at, I sigh a little. I am absolutely no artist, and I can acknowledge that the art presented is very good and in line with the theme. Oh well.
The game play is very solid, and I do like it quite a bit. Everything makes a lot of sense as to why you are doing the actions, and the most difficult thing to comprehend the first time through is the Bounded Battles. You see, battles don’t immediately happen when you pit one foe against another. In fact, all tiles engaged need to be surrounded by other tiles or battleground obstacles before battle can begin. This allows both sides to add more tiles to help sway the balance of power, and can get a little confusing for some players. Not ME, of course, but SOME players (ok it was totally me the first time through). I am thankful that resolving the battles are pretty simple, and winning battles gives the victor a cool five points.
Other aspects I really enjoy are the Scriptorium cards and the Rituals. Again, the Scriptorium cards can be drawn for two coins during the game and can provide excellent rule-breaking choices to the players. Any time a game has cards that bend the rules, I generally am a fan. The Rituals are merely tokens that are collected and then turned in for points. This doesn’t necessarily sound that interesting until I reveal that a player board only has space for seven items: Ritual tokens AND coins included. So a player may be stacking up coins, and not have space for Ritual tokens or vice versa. Hard choices need to be made sometimes, but to help with that Ritual tokens can also be used like a coin, but not the other way around. So there is no buying Ritual tokens. Having that restriction of seven items on hand is a really nice touch, and makes each turn important.
So all in all I enjoyed my plays of Illumination. I have yet to try the solo version that is included, but I will soon. I feel that of the two Medieval series games I have played I prefer The Road to Canterbury, but I do like the different feel of Illumination. Having a solo mode is also very attractive to me because my wife and I do not always have matching schedules where we can game together. I like Illumination for the actual gameplay, but the art is a turn-off for me. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one an irreverent 4 / 6. If you are looking for something a little different that features some interesting game play, tons of choices, yet is restrictive as well, take a look at Illumination. Try not to complete too many wine and candle rituals though. Those two things don’t mix very well in my experience.
Illumination is a game about two monks who are tasked with illuminating the pages of manuscripts with drawings in the hopes of becoming the next head of the Scriptorium: The Scriptmaster, one might say. However, one of the monks gets a little itch and begins to draw irreverent subjects, like demons, dragons, and such. Which monk will earn the made-up-by-me title of Scriptmaster? Guess you will have to play to find out.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
As with many games that are well endowed with components, setup can be a bit of a task. The game will be focused around a few main areas. First, the three manuscript pages are placed on the table in any orientation, with the purple wild Drollery tiles placed on one text box on each page. The Monastery mat is placed nearby as well, with the Abbot pawn randomly placed on a blank station. This pawn will be moved around the map during play to determine which rituals may be performed at any one time. Each player will have their own player mat, upon which will be placed their starting gold (1 for the Reverent player and 5 for the Irreverent player), as well as their starting nine Illumination tiles. The rules mention separating all the Illumination tiles into stacks of three, choosing three of these stacks to flip over and place on the play mat without altering the order. This is very important to keep the tiles in their randomized order. The remainder of the tiles are to be placed nearby in stacks of three. Each player is dealt one starting Scriptorium card and a random Crusade card that will offer bonuses at the end of the game. Once all setup, the game may begin with the Reverent player’s turn.
On a turn, the active player will choose from their mat one row or column of three tiles to be played. They take the three tiles and place them upon one of the three book pages on the table, in the margins. From there the player can choose any tile from the margin to place onto the page in any order they wish, upon any quill icon they choose (except for coin tiles – those simply grant two coins immediately). If the tile is placed on a quill of a matching color to that of the tile, the player will immediately collect one coin and place it on the player mat. If the tile is placed on a quill and orthogonally touches a tile of the matching color, the player then collects a Ritual token of the same color. These Ritual tokens are used in sets of three, four, or five in order to earn VP for end of game scoring. Each purple Drollery tile is wild for the purpose of placement and Ritual token collection. Each tile placed will collect its earnings immediately, and any coins earned may be spent immediately as well.
A player may use coins for several purposes throughout the game: move a tile from the margin of one book to the margin of a different book, move the Abbot one space along the track for Ritual purposes, or to draw a Scriptorium card. The other resources are Ritual tokens, and may be spent during the turn as well. In order to spend these, the Abbot must be on the matching location on the Monastery board, and the player may spend three, four, or five matching tokens to perform the Ritual. They discard the tokens, place one of their cubes upon the appropriate icon on the Monastery mat for VP at game end.
At any time during the turn Scriptorium cards may be played. These are very special cards that allow the player to complete certain actions that break the normal rules. This could be a free movement of the Abbot, or switching places of two tiles on the player mat, or even banishing one of the opponent’s tiles to another book entirely.
Why mention the battles in the intro if they are not part of the game? They are. Once opposing foes are placed orthogonally from each other, and all involved tiles are completely enclosed by other tiles or board obstacles, a Bounded Battle will begin. Battles are simple to resolve as it requires players to count the number of combatants on both sides and whichever side has more forces wins the battle. The winner places their cube on the appropriate battle card near the Monastery mat, and the loser gains coins equal to the number of their tiles lost to battle. Tiles that are lost are simply flipped to its opposite side.
Play continues in this fashion of players choosing and placing tiles, drawing and using Scriptorium cards, performing Rituals, and resolving Bounded Battles until both players pass their turn. The game is then over and VP counted in all their places around the play area. The player with the most points becomes the next Scriptmaster Flex and is able to enhance or defile as many manuscripts as they like!
Components. This game has a lot of components, but they are mostly cardboard tiles, cardstock cards and mats, and wooden cubes. The quality is all very fine, as to be expected with Eagle-Gryphon games. The art, for me, is the biggest drawback of the game. I UNDERSTAND why it looks the way it does – in trying to stick with a Medieval manuscript theme some decision were made on the style. It just doesn’t vibe with me. I took a look at the new edition of The Road to Canterbury, by the same designer and publisher, and loved the look of it. I REALIZE that the tiles are supposed to be not only reminiscent of the art style of that time period, but also imaginations of monks and their doodles, but it’s just not for me. I do like the looks of everything else except the art on the tiles, and when that’s the majority of the components I am looking at, I sigh a little. I am absolutely no artist, and I can acknowledge that the art presented is very good and in line with the theme. Oh well.
The game play is very solid, and I do like it quite a bit. Everything makes a lot of sense as to why you are doing the actions, and the most difficult thing to comprehend the first time through is the Bounded Battles. You see, battles don’t immediately happen when you pit one foe against another. In fact, all tiles engaged need to be surrounded by other tiles or battleground obstacles before battle can begin. This allows both sides to add more tiles to help sway the balance of power, and can get a little confusing for some players. Not ME, of course, but SOME players (ok it was totally me the first time through). I am thankful that resolving the battles are pretty simple, and winning battles gives the victor a cool five points.
Other aspects I really enjoy are the Scriptorium cards and the Rituals. Again, the Scriptorium cards can be drawn for two coins during the game and can provide excellent rule-breaking choices to the players. Any time a game has cards that bend the rules, I generally am a fan. The Rituals are merely tokens that are collected and then turned in for points. This doesn’t necessarily sound that interesting until I reveal that a player board only has space for seven items: Ritual tokens AND coins included. So a player may be stacking up coins, and not have space for Ritual tokens or vice versa. Hard choices need to be made sometimes, but to help with that Ritual tokens can also be used like a coin, but not the other way around. So there is no buying Ritual tokens. Having that restriction of seven items on hand is a really nice touch, and makes each turn important.
So all in all I enjoyed my plays of Illumination. I have yet to try the solo version that is included, but I will soon. I feel that of the two Medieval series games I have played I prefer The Road to Canterbury, but I do like the different feel of Illumination. Having a solo mode is also very attractive to me because my wife and I do not always have matching schedules where we can game together. I like Illumination for the actual gameplay, but the art is a turn-off for me. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one an irreverent 4 / 6. If you are looking for something a little different that features some interesting game play, tons of choices, yet is restrictive as well, take a look at Illumination. Try not to complete too many wine and candle rituals though. Those two things don’t mix very well in my experience.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Martyrs (2008) in Movies
Dec 28, 2019
Entertaining In a Crazy Way
Sometimes it helps to watch a movie with another person to get an extra perspective on what makes a movie special. I’ll admit, I would have reamed Martyrs on my own merit, but I definitely looked at it differently once I got an alternate opinion from my wife who watched is as well. The movie follows the story of two friends Anna (Morjana Aloui) and Lucie (Mylene Jampanoi). Lucie finds herself looking out for Anna when Anna can’t stop seeing an apparition that makes her do terrible things. Anna’s got a secret that no one believes, including Lucie who has her doubts.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
In the beginning we see Anna running away from what can only be seen as an abusive situation. She’s cut up and bleeding. It doesn’t take long to be drawn into her story and want to know more about what happened.
Characters: 6
I appreciated the depth of Anna’s character. She has issues, layers of them. You feel bad for her and terrified of her at the same time. The other characters, however, left a bit to be desired. We don’t really get a deep dive into Lucie’s situation, only that she has this need to take care of Anna. Outside of these two, the rest of the characters definitely fall a bit flat.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 6
There are some truly tense moments in Martyrs, but a good portion of the movie feels more like torture porn. The action comes in brief pockets and isn’t always effective when it does happen. There were some solid sequences that were truly terrifying, but overall things could have been better.
Entertainment Value: 7
This movie succeeds with intrigue and originality. If charisma alone was enough to pass a movie, my overall score would be a lot higher. I enjoyed the mystery of it all which held my attention throughout the film. Will Lucie get to the bottom of what’s going on with Anna? Is Anna telling the truth? You really don’t know what to expect.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 9
Plot: 5
I think Martyrs eventually becomes a victim of it’s own trope as it focuses too much on leaving you in the dark and not necessarily pushing a legit story. I definitely feel there are certain elements that could have made the story a lot better, but I’m hesitant to dive in too much for fear of ruining the story. The plot progression is mediocre at best and leaves too much to interpretation.
Resolution: 8
For what it’s worth, Martyrs has absolutely one of the craziest endings I have ever seen. If you would have told me at the start of the movie that the road would have led there, I wouldn’t believe you. The shock factor is definitely there.
Overall: 74
Had the story been stronger and a bit more character development considered, Martyrs might have had more success with me. As it stands, I consider it an interesting enough film to watch at least once. it will keep you guessing right up until the end.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
In the beginning we see Anna running away from what can only be seen as an abusive situation. She’s cut up and bleeding. It doesn’t take long to be drawn into her story and want to know more about what happened.
Characters: 6
I appreciated the depth of Anna’s character. She has issues, layers of them. You feel bad for her and terrified of her at the same time. The other characters, however, left a bit to be desired. We don’t really get a deep dive into Lucie’s situation, only that she has this need to take care of Anna. Outside of these two, the rest of the characters definitely fall a bit flat.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 6
There are some truly tense moments in Martyrs, but a good portion of the movie feels more like torture porn. The action comes in brief pockets and isn’t always effective when it does happen. There were some solid sequences that were truly terrifying, but overall things could have been better.
Entertainment Value: 7
This movie succeeds with intrigue and originality. If charisma alone was enough to pass a movie, my overall score would be a lot higher. I enjoyed the mystery of it all which held my attention throughout the film. Will Lucie get to the bottom of what’s going on with Anna? Is Anna telling the truth? You really don’t know what to expect.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 9
Plot: 5
I think Martyrs eventually becomes a victim of it’s own trope as it focuses too much on leaving you in the dark and not necessarily pushing a legit story. I definitely feel there are certain elements that could have made the story a lot better, but I’m hesitant to dive in too much for fear of ruining the story. The plot progression is mediocre at best and leaves too much to interpretation.
Resolution: 8
For what it’s worth, Martyrs has absolutely one of the craziest endings I have ever seen. If you would have told me at the start of the movie that the road would have led there, I wouldn’t believe you. The shock factor is definitely there.
Overall: 74
Had the story been stronger and a bit more character development considered, Martyrs might have had more success with me. As it stands, I consider it an interesting enough film to watch at least once. it will keep you guessing right up until the end.
