Search
Search results
Erika (17789 KP) rated Loki - Season 1 in TV
Jul 16, 2021 (Updated Jul 16, 2021)
I’ll stick with Loki’s original story-arc.
Contains spoilers, click to show
Loki, featuring the return of Tom Hiddleston to the MCU, has escaped with the tesseract, and is subsequently caught by the TVA. He agrees to help Owen Wilson’s Mobius track down a variant that is conveniently a version of himself. What ensues is a painful setup for Ironman with Magic… oh, sorry, Dr. Strange and the Multiverse of Madness.
On one hand, my ma always told me, if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all, but on the other hand, I haven’t been this pissed off at a major franchise since Star Wars: The Last Jedi. My visceral, negative reaction was caused by many things.
First, this series did not need to be made. Loki had a perfect ending to his overall arc, and it really didn’t need to be messed with. I am a huge Tom Hiddleston fan, I went to NYC to see him in a play, waited outside freezing my butt off to meet him, all of that. I was so glad when Loki was killed off, so he’d be free to do other things, and not just be known for Loki. Alas, that did not happen.
This series was made for two subsets of fans: the fans that can’t accept the death of their favorite character, and the fans that are absolutely, irrationally obsessed with having their favorite character paired up romantically. I fall into neither of these categories. ‘More Stories to Tell’ was the tagline… it should have been ‘More Money to be Made’.
After watching the same movie in a different flavor for over ten years, I realized that maybe the MCU wasn’t for me anymore. But, when Loki was announced, I was promised something new and weird! I thought, maybe this will be the show to get me back into the MCU. That was not the case. I cannot believe the rave reviews about this series; did we all watch the same thing?
The first warning sign for me was when it was announced that Michael Waldron, who was a writer for Rick & Morty was going to be helming this series. Rick & Morty is funny… if you’re a dude-bro, drunk, or high. When I read a few of his interviews prior to the release of Loki, another warning sign, this guy kind of sounded like a huge douchebag. I was then calmed and reassured that maybe it wouldn’t be a train-wreck because Hiddleston was heavily involved in the series.
As I’ve mentioned before, we were promised something new, different, and weird. Don’t make promises you can’t keep, creative team behind Loki.
Episode 1 was cheap; did I need to see clips from previous movies used in a very uncreative way? No, I did not. There was also something just off about the casting of Wilson. Now, this may be on me because my teen-years were spent quoting Owen Wilson films. There were a few things I liked about Episode 1, like the Blade Runner robot reference. There was a red flag in this episode though. Pro-tip: never, EVER have a character verbalize/confirm that they’re smart. Because it’s probably not the case.
Episode 2 was the bright spot, it was my favorite, by far. It was fast-paced, amusing, and the most interesting episode out of the whole series. The Mt Vesuvius/unleashing of the goats thing was the sort of thing I was looking for in this series. I actually chuckled a little, which rarely happens. It moved the story along, and we get the big reveal of the Loki variant that’s causing all the havoc.
Episode 3 was, for lack of a better word, boring. The pace slowed, and it was the infamous Disney+ show filler episode. We’re introduced to Mary Sue, sorry, I mean Lady Loki, but not really, Sylvie, the Enchantress, right? No, wait, she’s a completely different, new character. Probably shouldn’t have opted for the name Sylvie in that case. She’s a brand new, *strong* female, that shows her strength by punching people and has no personality (see: Carol Danvers - Captain Marvel, Hope van Dyne - Ant-Man). Y’all, you told me you were going to give me something different, new, weird. A Mary Sue isn’t new, different, or weird. This episode was a get-to-know-each-other, and build a pseudo-sibling relationship, right? Because anything else would be weird in a bad way, not an interesting way. There was a considerable shift in our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki character evolution, he opened-up, announced that he was a member of the LGBTQQIAAP nation, progress! First bi-sexual character in the MCU, way to go Disney, getting with the times! It was still a filler episode though, and while the stakes seemed high, you knew that there were three more episodes to go, of course they would live.
Again, I was reassured after this lackluster episode by Hiddleston, that 4 and 5 were his favorite. That fact is now disturbing.
Episode 4 was the death knell. I think the response from the creative team afterwards was also incredibly tone-deaf, and, quite frankly, insulting. The 4th episode was so bad, I legitimately had to go cleanse my eyes and brain with a GBBO marathon. The fact that the creative team had no idea that the insta-love (see: Jane and Thor - Thor) between two characters that had seemingly formed a pseudo-sibling relationship wouldn’t come off a little incest-y is really strange to me. If a pseudo-sibling relationship was not the intention, then it was poor writing, directing and acting by all parties involved. Sometimes, when a Mary Sue punches our main character, he falls in love with her (see: Hope and Scott - Ant-Man). The whole narcissism thing was hilarious, I’m glad our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki was cured of that by Sylvie and another *strong* personality-lacking woman (see: Sif -Thor/Thor: the Dark World) kicking him between the legs was what he’d needed all along. If a small portion of this episode was actually utilizing the myth of Narcissus, then I’m glad they followed it through to the dying part. This is when everything clicked for me. Our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki’s character evolution made him a big ol’ bowl of mushy, overcooked oatmeal. HOW and WHY would you take one of the best anti-heroes in the MCU, or any superhero franchise, and make him so mushy? More importantly, I didn’t care about what happened to any of the characters, except B-15. Normally, that’s my cue to stop watching a show, but I wanted to see if they tried to convince audiences that this Oatmeal Loki was actually smart and logical.
Episode 5 was when things slightly improved. Again, I couldn’t forgive the events of Episode 4, and I totally fast-forwarded during whatever talk Loki and Mary Sue, sorry, Sylvie, had with a blankie around their shoulders. All of the other Lokis were better in their tiny amount of screen time than Oatmeal Loki and Mary Sue Loki. Alligator Loki had more personality than Sylvie. Richard Grant is the superior Loki in my opinion. This episode also reintroduced hand holding with CGI colors swirling around characters (see: Guardians of the Galaxy).
Episode 6 was our finale. Thank God. We’re introduced to the real head of the TVA, which was who everyone was expecting. This episode was a little slow-paced, with a lot of interesting chit-chat. Oatmeal Loki actually seemed like he had a brain cell or two for a few brief, fleeting moments. He even showed off some of his powers, which, by the way, we were told we’d see more of… but didn’t. Then, our Oatmeal Loki was distracted by his Mary Sue, went for a kiss, and plopped right on his ass, looking like a fool. I almost snorted my coffee as I watched. Then, they confirmed a Season 2.
Honestly, I was hoping Oatmeal Loki and Mary Sue Loki would get killed off. Sadly, it didn’t happen, and they’re getting another series, and an appearance in Ironman with Magic. I’m so glad this series was something new, different, and weird, not just the bog-standard, MCU drivel we normally get. Oh, wait… I probably don’t even need to state that this wasn’t my cup of tea, and, again, solidified the fact that I’m over the MCU. I also know that I should avoid anything Michael Waldron and Kate Herron touch. Eventually, I’ll stop feeling betrayed by Hiddleston, but it may take a while. Is that ridiculous? Probably.
On one hand, my ma always told me, if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all, but on the other hand, I haven’t been this pissed off at a major franchise since Star Wars: The Last Jedi. My visceral, negative reaction was caused by many things.
First, this series did not need to be made. Loki had a perfect ending to his overall arc, and it really didn’t need to be messed with. I am a huge Tom Hiddleston fan, I went to NYC to see him in a play, waited outside freezing my butt off to meet him, all of that. I was so glad when Loki was killed off, so he’d be free to do other things, and not just be known for Loki. Alas, that did not happen.
This series was made for two subsets of fans: the fans that can’t accept the death of their favorite character, and the fans that are absolutely, irrationally obsessed with having their favorite character paired up romantically. I fall into neither of these categories. ‘More Stories to Tell’ was the tagline… it should have been ‘More Money to be Made’.
After watching the same movie in a different flavor for over ten years, I realized that maybe the MCU wasn’t for me anymore. But, when Loki was announced, I was promised something new and weird! I thought, maybe this will be the show to get me back into the MCU. That was not the case. I cannot believe the rave reviews about this series; did we all watch the same thing?
The first warning sign for me was when it was announced that Michael Waldron, who was a writer for Rick & Morty was going to be helming this series. Rick & Morty is funny… if you’re a dude-bro, drunk, or high. When I read a few of his interviews prior to the release of Loki, another warning sign, this guy kind of sounded like a huge douchebag. I was then calmed and reassured that maybe it wouldn’t be a train-wreck because Hiddleston was heavily involved in the series.
As I’ve mentioned before, we were promised something new, different, and weird. Don’t make promises you can’t keep, creative team behind Loki.
Episode 1 was cheap; did I need to see clips from previous movies used in a very uncreative way? No, I did not. There was also something just off about the casting of Wilson. Now, this may be on me because my teen-years were spent quoting Owen Wilson films. There were a few things I liked about Episode 1, like the Blade Runner robot reference. There was a red flag in this episode though. Pro-tip: never, EVER have a character verbalize/confirm that they’re smart. Because it’s probably not the case.
Episode 2 was the bright spot, it was my favorite, by far. It was fast-paced, amusing, and the most interesting episode out of the whole series. The Mt Vesuvius/unleashing of the goats thing was the sort of thing I was looking for in this series. I actually chuckled a little, which rarely happens. It moved the story along, and we get the big reveal of the Loki variant that’s causing all the havoc.
Episode 3 was, for lack of a better word, boring. The pace slowed, and it was the infamous Disney+ show filler episode. We’re introduced to Mary Sue, sorry, I mean Lady Loki, but not really, Sylvie, the Enchantress, right? No, wait, she’s a completely different, new character. Probably shouldn’t have opted for the name Sylvie in that case. She’s a brand new, *strong* female, that shows her strength by punching people and has no personality (see: Carol Danvers - Captain Marvel, Hope van Dyne - Ant-Man). Y’all, you told me you were going to give me something different, new, weird. A Mary Sue isn’t new, different, or weird. This episode was a get-to-know-each-other, and build a pseudo-sibling relationship, right? Because anything else would be weird in a bad way, not an interesting way. There was a considerable shift in our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki character evolution, he opened-up, announced that he was a member of the LGBTQQIAAP nation, progress! First bi-sexual character in the MCU, way to go Disney, getting with the times! It was still a filler episode though, and while the stakes seemed high, you knew that there were three more episodes to go, of course they would live.
Again, I was reassured after this lackluster episode by Hiddleston, that 4 and 5 were his favorite. That fact is now disturbing.
Episode 4 was the death knell. I think the response from the creative team afterwards was also incredibly tone-deaf, and, quite frankly, insulting. The 4th episode was so bad, I legitimately had to go cleanse my eyes and brain with a GBBO marathon. The fact that the creative team had no idea that the insta-love (see: Jane and Thor - Thor) between two characters that had seemingly formed a pseudo-sibling relationship wouldn’t come off a little incest-y is really strange to me. If a pseudo-sibling relationship was not the intention, then it was poor writing, directing and acting by all parties involved. Sometimes, when a Mary Sue punches our main character, he falls in love with her (see: Hope and Scott - Ant-Man). The whole narcissism thing was hilarious, I’m glad our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki was cured of that by Sylvie and another *strong* personality-lacking woman (see: Sif -Thor/Thor: the Dark World) kicking him between the legs was what he’d needed all along. If a small portion of this episode was actually utilizing the myth of Narcissus, then I’m glad they followed it through to the dying part. This is when everything clicked for me. Our TVA ‘Smart’ Loki’s character evolution made him a big ol’ bowl of mushy, overcooked oatmeal. HOW and WHY would you take one of the best anti-heroes in the MCU, or any superhero franchise, and make him so mushy? More importantly, I didn’t care about what happened to any of the characters, except B-15. Normally, that’s my cue to stop watching a show, but I wanted to see if they tried to convince audiences that this Oatmeal Loki was actually smart and logical.
Episode 5 was when things slightly improved. Again, I couldn’t forgive the events of Episode 4, and I totally fast-forwarded during whatever talk Loki and Mary Sue, sorry, Sylvie, had with a blankie around their shoulders. All of the other Lokis were better in their tiny amount of screen time than Oatmeal Loki and Mary Sue Loki. Alligator Loki had more personality than Sylvie. Richard Grant is the superior Loki in my opinion. This episode also reintroduced hand holding with CGI colors swirling around characters (see: Guardians of the Galaxy).
Episode 6 was our finale. Thank God. We’re introduced to the real head of the TVA, which was who everyone was expecting. This episode was a little slow-paced, with a lot of interesting chit-chat. Oatmeal Loki actually seemed like he had a brain cell or two for a few brief, fleeting moments. He even showed off some of his powers, which, by the way, we were told we’d see more of… but didn’t. Then, our Oatmeal Loki was distracted by his Mary Sue, went for a kiss, and plopped right on his ass, looking like a fool. I almost snorted my coffee as I watched. Then, they confirmed a Season 2.
Honestly, I was hoping Oatmeal Loki and Mary Sue Loki would get killed off. Sadly, it didn’t happen, and they’re getting another series, and an appearance in Ironman with Magic. I’m so glad this series was something new, different, and weird, not just the bog-standard, MCU drivel we normally get. Oh, wait… I probably don’t even need to state that this wasn’t my cup of tea, and, again, solidified the fact that I’m over the MCU. I also know that I should avoid anything Michael Waldron and Kate Herron touch. Eventually, I’ll stop feeling betrayed by Hiddleston, but it may take a while. Is that ridiculous? Probably.
A Bibliophagist (113 KP) rated Wuthering Heights in Books
Feb 12, 2020
Stands up (2 more)
Enthralling
Unique
Dislikable characters (1 more)
Difficult accents without translations
I will do my best to review this, however, I didn't heed the intro, this tour de force really does leave you as quickly as it comes, and reading another book before reviewing this one was a mistake.
In reading reviews prior to reading this book, I learned three major things; 1, people either love or hate this book, 2. I had no idea what I was actually in for, and 3. this may have not been the romantic pick for February I was expecting it to be.
So yes, PSA for anyone out there considering going into this thinking it's a romance. It is NOT. There are love stories in this, absolutely, powerful love stories that made me read quotes to my boyfriend with snarky statements like "if you don't say this at my funeral, did you ever really love me?". But it is NOT a romance. If anything this has more in common with "The Count of Monte Cristo" than it does "Pride and Prejudice". Honestly, the only thing it has in common with other, romantic books of this time, is the time period. But beware, no balls and high society and Mr. Darcy's await you in this novel. I feel a number of the reviews decrying the book, calling the characters "monstrous" both were the orchestrators of their own disappointment by assuming it to be like an Austin, and really need to look in the mirror and reflect on if they are really as perfect as they think they are. Especially if they were in the circumstances that surround this tale.
I find that Heathcliff himself addresses this mistake many readers had going into this book.
"picturing in me a hero of romance, and expecting unlimited indulgences from my chivalrous devotion. I can hardly regard her in the light of a rational creature, so obstinately has she persisted in forming a fabulous notion of my character and actin gon false impressions she cherished."
SO many readers went into this expecting Heathcliff to be some misunderstood brute or one harsh but salvaged by the purity of his love of Catherine. But this isn't the case.
Wuthering Heights tells the story of (I guess technically 3) but really 2 generations of families. Living in the Yorkshire Moors, isolated from high society. We have the Liptons, primmer and properer and more in touch with society, and the Earnshaws which become a little rough around the edges in their isolation and loss. Papa Earnshaw has two children, Catherine and Hindley, and adopts a small boy of unknown heritage but is implied to be Romani or of mixed race (sorry Tom Hardy and nearly every portrayal of Heathcliff), that he names, simply, Heathcliff. He loves Heathcliff, and dotes on him greatly, much to the chagrin of Hindly who grows to resent Heathcliff, treating him terribly until Hindly leaves for school. Catherine and Heathcliff become great playmates, their care is given primarily to a maid scarcely older than them, as Papa Earnshaw is a single daddy. They are wild things, as children I would assume would be, in such isolation as the Yorkshire Moors in a time before the creature comforts and entertainment we have. They grow very close, obsessively close. Upon Papa Earnshaw's death, Hindley returns (at around the age of 23) to run the household, and take over the care of these two youngsters, one of which, he hates. So, Cinderella-style, Heathcliff gets treated worse and worse and treated like a servant rather than the adoptive child that Papa Earnshaw loved so dearly. Suddenly Heathcliff is nothing, treated terribly, and has the most important thing in his life banned from him, Catherine. Meanwhile, the Liptons also have two children, not wild, but spoilt in their own ways, Edgar and Isabella, close in age to Heathcliff and Catherine. When H and C run off on a camping adventure and find themselves at the Lipton's house, Catherine is injured and stays with the Liptons, in their higher society for 5 weeks. Leaving Heathcliff to the abuse of her brother and further isolation. She returns much more a lady and with her connection to Heathcliff slightly burned. In an attempt to protect Heathcliff, and because Heathcliff is now no more than a servant and not an option to marry, Catherine intends to marry Edgar. Causing our resident bad boy to run off for a number of years. Only to return a proper, but still broody gentleman, and confuse Catherine's affection much to the displeasure of Edgar.
Now, this is where a number of shows and movies end things. With a focus on Catherine and Heathcliff's whirlwind romance, obsession. It has some of the most to the point and beautiful lines regarding love, not all flowery, not "I love you most ardently" but rather cries of "I am Heathcliff" by Catherine. Absolutely heart-rending, even though I didn't like Catherine. But this is not where the book ends. The book goes on to follow Heathcliff's obsession with revenge, with his treatment as a child, his rage against Hindley, and against losing Catherine to Edgar. He spends years slowly ruining everyone's lives. Not that you could really ruin Hindley's life, he was a mean drunk. But he even goes as far as to meddle with the next generation, Hindley's son Hareton is raised terribly and is a bit of a wild thing (those his redemption and love story is quite beautiful), Catherine's daughter Cathy and Heathcliff's son Lipton are whisked up into a big scheme by Heathcliff to take everything. Heathcliff even marry's out of pure spite.
Love does not redeem this man, he's barely an antihero without his youth story. He is angry and passionate and obsessed. Which for the first half of the book I didn't fault him for, but he does do some damnable things in the second half that you cannot argue away. No matter how romantic and beautiful and heartrending his lamentations can be. I was quite the character arc, quite the tale of revenge and loss. He was unredeemable because of his big sprawling schemes and harsh intentions. Catherine for me was unredeemable because she was an obnoxious, selfish thing, that honestly if Heathcliff had stopped thinking about two minutes would have found a better woman in every town. She whined and treated Edgar (who was honestly super sweet) so terribly, she had an anger problem and would work herself up until she was sick. But it is in this imperfection that I fell in love more with the book. Here is something unique and real, this is no Elizabeth Bennett. The isolation and hermetic lifestyle created very different characters than what we see in Jane Austin or even in Emily's sister's novel.
It's no wonder this book was harshly critiqued upon release, here is a woman, writing a revenge story, with love stories in it. That based on the biographical intro had some parallels to her own life. She lived an isolated existence, surrounded by the death of the majority of her family young. She was in her late 20s when she wrote this and died a year after publication. She made humans of monsters and monsters of humans and wrote something unexpected and truly unique.
It's hard for me to explain, amongst the harshness and bleakness of this novel, why I loved it so much. But I did, I loved every bit. The anger, the passion, the love, the scheming, I loved it all.
I also feel it's important to note that this whole story is told by a maid to a new tenant. So the narrator is unreliable. Were these people truly this way? Or is it clouded by this maid's opinions of them? How much is omitted due to the maid not being privy to an event?
Truly a fantastic read, that punched me in my chest and gut, grabbed and twisted my insides and refuses to let go. I would argue it's a cult classic rather than a classic. So please, shed all preconceived notions of what this book is, shake that Austin out of your mind and read this tale of obsession and revenge. It's well worth it.
In reading reviews prior to reading this book, I learned three major things; 1, people either love or hate this book, 2. I had no idea what I was actually in for, and 3. this may have not been the romantic pick for February I was expecting it to be.
So yes, PSA for anyone out there considering going into this thinking it's a romance. It is NOT. There are love stories in this, absolutely, powerful love stories that made me read quotes to my boyfriend with snarky statements like "if you don't say this at my funeral, did you ever really love me?". But it is NOT a romance. If anything this has more in common with "The Count of Monte Cristo" than it does "Pride and Prejudice". Honestly, the only thing it has in common with other, romantic books of this time, is the time period. But beware, no balls and high society and Mr. Darcy's await you in this novel. I feel a number of the reviews decrying the book, calling the characters "monstrous" both were the orchestrators of their own disappointment by assuming it to be like an Austin, and really need to look in the mirror and reflect on if they are really as perfect as they think they are. Especially if they were in the circumstances that surround this tale.
I find that Heathcliff himself addresses this mistake many readers had going into this book.
"picturing in me a hero of romance, and expecting unlimited indulgences from my chivalrous devotion. I can hardly regard her in the light of a rational creature, so obstinately has she persisted in forming a fabulous notion of my character and actin gon false impressions she cherished."
SO many readers went into this expecting Heathcliff to be some misunderstood brute or one harsh but salvaged by the purity of his love of Catherine. But this isn't the case.
Wuthering Heights tells the story of (I guess technically 3) but really 2 generations of families. Living in the Yorkshire Moors, isolated from high society. We have the Liptons, primmer and properer and more in touch with society, and the Earnshaws which become a little rough around the edges in their isolation and loss. Papa Earnshaw has two children, Catherine and Hindley, and adopts a small boy of unknown heritage but is implied to be Romani or of mixed race (sorry Tom Hardy and nearly every portrayal of Heathcliff), that he names, simply, Heathcliff. He loves Heathcliff, and dotes on him greatly, much to the chagrin of Hindly who grows to resent Heathcliff, treating him terribly until Hindly leaves for school. Catherine and Heathcliff become great playmates, their care is given primarily to a maid scarcely older than them, as Papa Earnshaw is a single daddy. They are wild things, as children I would assume would be, in such isolation as the Yorkshire Moors in a time before the creature comforts and entertainment we have. They grow very close, obsessively close. Upon Papa Earnshaw's death, Hindley returns (at around the age of 23) to run the household, and take over the care of these two youngsters, one of which, he hates. So, Cinderella-style, Heathcliff gets treated worse and worse and treated like a servant rather than the adoptive child that Papa Earnshaw loved so dearly. Suddenly Heathcliff is nothing, treated terribly, and has the most important thing in his life banned from him, Catherine. Meanwhile, the Liptons also have two children, not wild, but spoilt in their own ways, Edgar and Isabella, close in age to Heathcliff and Catherine. When H and C run off on a camping adventure and find themselves at the Lipton's house, Catherine is injured and stays with the Liptons, in their higher society for 5 weeks. Leaving Heathcliff to the abuse of her brother and further isolation. She returns much more a lady and with her connection to Heathcliff slightly burned. In an attempt to protect Heathcliff, and because Heathcliff is now no more than a servant and not an option to marry, Catherine intends to marry Edgar. Causing our resident bad boy to run off for a number of years. Only to return a proper, but still broody gentleman, and confuse Catherine's affection much to the displeasure of Edgar.
Now, this is where a number of shows and movies end things. With a focus on Catherine and Heathcliff's whirlwind romance, obsession. It has some of the most to the point and beautiful lines regarding love, not all flowery, not "I love you most ardently" but rather cries of "I am Heathcliff" by Catherine. Absolutely heart-rending, even though I didn't like Catherine. But this is not where the book ends. The book goes on to follow Heathcliff's obsession with revenge, with his treatment as a child, his rage against Hindley, and against losing Catherine to Edgar. He spends years slowly ruining everyone's lives. Not that you could really ruin Hindley's life, he was a mean drunk. But he even goes as far as to meddle with the next generation, Hindley's son Hareton is raised terribly and is a bit of a wild thing (those his redemption and love story is quite beautiful), Catherine's daughter Cathy and Heathcliff's son Lipton are whisked up into a big scheme by Heathcliff to take everything. Heathcliff even marry's out of pure spite.
Love does not redeem this man, he's barely an antihero without his youth story. He is angry and passionate and obsessed. Which for the first half of the book I didn't fault him for, but he does do some damnable things in the second half that you cannot argue away. No matter how romantic and beautiful and heartrending his lamentations can be. I was quite the character arc, quite the tale of revenge and loss. He was unredeemable because of his big sprawling schemes and harsh intentions. Catherine for me was unredeemable because she was an obnoxious, selfish thing, that honestly if Heathcliff had stopped thinking about two minutes would have found a better woman in every town. She whined and treated Edgar (who was honestly super sweet) so terribly, she had an anger problem and would work herself up until she was sick. But it is in this imperfection that I fell in love more with the book. Here is something unique and real, this is no Elizabeth Bennett. The isolation and hermetic lifestyle created very different characters than what we see in Jane Austin or even in Emily's sister's novel.
It's no wonder this book was harshly critiqued upon release, here is a woman, writing a revenge story, with love stories in it. That based on the biographical intro had some parallels to her own life. She lived an isolated existence, surrounded by the death of the majority of her family young. She was in her late 20s when she wrote this and died a year after publication. She made humans of monsters and monsters of humans and wrote something unexpected and truly unique.
It's hard for me to explain, amongst the harshness and bleakness of this novel, why I loved it so much. But I did, I loved every bit. The anger, the passion, the love, the scheming, I loved it all.
I also feel it's important to note that this whole story is told by a maid to a new tenant. So the narrator is unreliable. Were these people truly this way? Or is it clouded by this maid's opinions of them? How much is omitted due to the maid not being privy to an event?
Truly a fantastic read, that punched me in my chest and gut, grabbed and twisted my insides and refuses to let go. I would argue it's a cult classic rather than a classic. So please, shed all preconceived notions of what this book is, shake that Austin out of your mind and read this tale of obsession and revenge. It's well worth it.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Outlaw King (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
After more than eight years of war with King Edward I of England (Stephen Dillane) the Scottish Nobles swear allegiance to the crown, ending the brutal. This includes Robert Bruce (Chris Pine) who is one of two men in line to be King of Scots. But by pledging his loyalty to they agree to be under the supervision of the Earl of Pembroke, Aymer de Valence (Sam Spruell). Robert’s father, Robert Bruce Senior (James Cosmo), had pushed for the peace with England but when he dies and the younger Robert is in charge a new fight for independence seems eminent. When the last remaining outlaw, William Wallace, is killed by the English Robert knows the time to fight is now. He decides to meet with his rival for the crown, John Comyn (Callan Mulvey), to have a united Scotland fighting for freedom. When Comyn denies Robert’s request and tells him he will use the information to be named King by Edward I, Robert kills him. This proves costly as it divides the Scottish Lords. Robert is determined and will take a small group loyal to him and fight one of the largest and most feared armies in the world.
This film is based on historical events and follows Robert the Bruce in his guerilla warfare battle for independence against the English. The film definitely seemed to take some poetic license with the story, but overall it feels realistic. Set in the medieval Scotland this is both a gritty and beautifully shot film. The wide shots show the beautiful country and coasts of Scotland. Then the day to day life and the battle scenes are dirty and grimy. The film is a brutal as advertised not only in the battle scenes but also throughout the film. Director David Mackenzie (Hell or High Water, Starred Up) crafts a well thought out story that moves briskly along. I had a couple of issues with the CGI not being super realistic. One brutal scene where someone drawn and quartered, I’ll let you research that, and the body looks like a blob rather than a torso. There were also some awkward cut scenes that didn’t make sense to me. Really not making sense. The opening sequence of the film is done in one shot and might be one of the most impressively shot sequences I have seen in a movie in a long time. The performances are also really good. Billy Howie, Prince of Wales, is a good antagonist and Aaron Taylor-Johnson, James Douglas, is a marvelous madman protector of the Robert the Bruce.
I enjoyed this movie in the theater and think a Netflix view is going to be perfect. It is brutal so the faint of heart should be prepared to look away multiple times. It may get compared to another famous Scottish film from not too long ago and I think this is a nice update. But this is not that film, both in good and bad ways. I enjoyed my watching experience and will definitely catch it streaming on its release date.
This film is based on historical events and follows Robert the Bruce in his guerilla warfare battle for independence against the English. The film definitely seemed to take some poetic license with the story, but overall it feels realistic. Set in the medieval Scotland this is both a gritty and beautifully shot film. The wide shots show the beautiful country and coasts of Scotland. Then the day to day life and the battle scenes are dirty and grimy. The film is a brutal as advertised not only in the battle scenes but also throughout the film. Director David Mackenzie (Hell or High Water, Starred Up) crafts a well thought out story that moves briskly along. I had a couple of issues with the CGI not being super realistic. One brutal scene where someone drawn and quartered, I’ll let you research that, and the body looks like a blob rather than a torso. There were also some awkward cut scenes that didn’t make sense to me. Really not making sense. The opening sequence of the film is done in one shot and might be one of the most impressively shot sequences I have seen in a movie in a long time. The performances are also really good. Billy Howie, Prince of Wales, is a good antagonist and Aaron Taylor-Johnson, James Douglas, is a marvelous madman protector of the Robert the Bruce.
I enjoyed this movie in the theater and think a Netflix view is going to be perfect. It is brutal so the faint of heart should be prepared to look away multiple times. It may get compared to another famous Scottish film from not too long ago and I think this is a nice update. But this is not that film, both in good and bad ways. I enjoyed my watching experience and will definitely catch it streaming on its release date.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated The Wanderers (The Wanderers, #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>I received this book for free from Publisher in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</i></b>
Kate Ormand takes a unique twist in <i>The Wanderers</i>, following a group of nomad shapeshifters traveling under the guise of a circus. Flo has been part of the circus ever since she was young but has always thought of what the world would be like if she were not a part of the circus. When she accidentally reveals what the circus really is to the public, shapeshifter hunters attack and take away everything she has ever known.
There aren't a lot of shapeshifter books out there all the ones I've come across so far typically have characters that shift into wolves (<i>technically</i> werewolves are like shapeshifters. They're interchangeable). <i>The Wanderers</i>, on the other hand, don't really have wolves (I don't think there are any here). Ormand takes the concept and expands the idea of shapeshifter to include all kinds of animals bears, seals, tigers, horses, etc. It's a breather to have all kinds of animals instead of the usual furry four-legged ones. Have I mentioned there's a shapeshifting parrot? Uber-cool.
Flo (I started imagining her as that Progressive chick) has elements of a good character she's realistic and brave, even though she's watching her back constantly for hunters. She has a constant inner battle with a desire and curiosity to see the world outside of the circus but has no clue if she wants to take that opportunity when she's old enough to be offered a life outside. But Flo is a bit of a mystery to me, and so are most of the shifters.
<i>The Wanderers</i> feels more like a discovery book no one aside from the "elders" know how the circus originated in the first place. Flo and the other shifters seem as though they've been there all their lives they all have a similar past and their way to the circus are all similar. The book becomes more of a survival book after the attack and the remaining shifters work together (albeit the tolerable tension some have towards Flo) to escape the clutches of the hunters going after them. In the midst of it all, Flo discovers a disturbing plot and sets about breaking it before other shifters get hurt as well.
Ormand pulls off an ending similar to <a title="Killer of Enemies by Joseph Bruchac" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-killer-of-enemies-by-joseph-bruchac/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">Bruchac's in <i>Killer of Enemies</i></a> there's a solid ending, but it's very open-ended and lots of things could potentially happen. The ending to <i>The Wanderers</i> feels very fitting with the story considering the title and the concept. Even though I'm not a huge fan of this book, Ormand has certainly left a mark with just the entire idea.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-the-wanderers-by-kate-ormand/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Kate Ormand takes a unique twist in <i>The Wanderers</i>, following a group of nomad shapeshifters traveling under the guise of a circus. Flo has been part of the circus ever since she was young but has always thought of what the world would be like if she were not a part of the circus. When she accidentally reveals what the circus really is to the public, shapeshifter hunters attack and take away everything she has ever known.
There aren't a lot of shapeshifter books out there all the ones I've come across so far typically have characters that shift into wolves (<i>technically</i> werewolves are like shapeshifters. They're interchangeable). <i>The Wanderers</i>, on the other hand, don't really have wolves (I don't think there are any here). Ormand takes the concept and expands the idea of shapeshifter to include all kinds of animals bears, seals, tigers, horses, etc. It's a breather to have all kinds of animals instead of the usual furry four-legged ones. Have I mentioned there's a shapeshifting parrot? Uber-cool.
Flo (I started imagining her as that Progressive chick) has elements of a good character she's realistic and brave, even though she's watching her back constantly for hunters. She has a constant inner battle with a desire and curiosity to see the world outside of the circus but has no clue if she wants to take that opportunity when she's old enough to be offered a life outside. But Flo is a bit of a mystery to me, and so are most of the shifters.
<i>The Wanderers</i> feels more like a discovery book no one aside from the "elders" know how the circus originated in the first place. Flo and the other shifters seem as though they've been there all their lives they all have a similar past and their way to the circus are all similar. The book becomes more of a survival book after the attack and the remaining shifters work together (albeit the tolerable tension some have towards Flo) to escape the clutches of the hunters going after them. In the midst of it all, Flo discovers a disturbing plot and sets about breaking it before other shifters get hurt as well.
Ormand pulls off an ending similar to <a title="Killer of Enemies by Joseph Bruchac" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-killer-of-enemies-by-joseph-bruchac/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">Bruchac's in <i>Killer of Enemies</i></a> there's a solid ending, but it's very open-ended and lots of things could potentially happen. The ending to <i>The Wanderers</i> feels very fitting with the story considering the title and the concept. Even though I'm not a huge fan of this book, Ormand has certainly left a mark with just the entire idea.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-the-wanderers-by-kate-ormand/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Night Reader Reviews (683 KP) rated What If... in Books
Jan 10, 2020
Honest Review for Free Copy of Book
What If… by Corrina Joy is one woman’s story as she explores her ‘what if..’. A word of warning though, this book is full of both happiness and heartbreak. Depending on the reader’s current emotional state and lifestyle this book could be very depressing or uplifting.
Joy Chambers feels like there is something missing in her life. Her husband is a hardworking man but puts money and sports above caring about her. He doesn't pay attention to her or her needs and lets her take care of the house and children alone. The crushing loneliness of her marriage mixed with her longing to feel true love and joy again propels her to take a half-hour break at the beach. This is so that she can emotionally let go before returning to her daily chores. A random wave knocks her into the water where she hits her head and comes across her “magical little relic”.
Upon twisting this relic Joy gets transported to a different dimension where her life is significantly different. There is one common theme in each dimension that she visits, Jerry. Unconditionally but was unable to be with him in her original dimension. For some reason on another each one of Joy’s visits is cut short and so is her time with Jerry. How Joy’s story ends is completely up to the reader thanks to two very clever options for endings by the author. Both of the endings are extremely different but as the book says “Her destiny is in your hands...”
What I liked best was all the different dimensions that Joy visited while trying to find what was missing from her life. I did notice one thing that may or may not have been true. It seemed to me that each ‘dimension’ was really just a different time period in the same dimension or the world. As if Joy only changed dimension once and visited important points in that dimension. What I did not like was in the first chapter Joy explains her life to the reader. She talks of just existing, not living, and an unnamed husband who does not seem to care for her or emotionally support her, and their children. After she finds her magical little relic they are not mentioned again. I can not help but wonder about Joy’s feelings about leaving them behind, especially her kids. What becomes of them?
This book is directed more towards adults. Specifically, those who find themselves wondering what their lives might be like if they had done things differently. At the same time, this book is just as enjoyable for everyone else. I rate this book 4 out of 4. This book was beautiful. Over its 188 pages, Joy finds what element in her life she needs in order to feel whole. The final twelve pages or so consist of two alternate endings (an amazing and unusual concept) so the reader can decide exactly how Joy’s life turns out.
https://www.facebook.com/nightreaderreviews
Joy Chambers feels like there is something missing in her life. Her husband is a hardworking man but puts money and sports above caring about her. He doesn't pay attention to her or her needs and lets her take care of the house and children alone. The crushing loneliness of her marriage mixed with her longing to feel true love and joy again propels her to take a half-hour break at the beach. This is so that she can emotionally let go before returning to her daily chores. A random wave knocks her into the water where she hits her head and comes across her “magical little relic”.
Upon twisting this relic Joy gets transported to a different dimension where her life is significantly different. There is one common theme in each dimension that she visits, Jerry. Unconditionally but was unable to be with him in her original dimension. For some reason on another each one of Joy’s visits is cut short and so is her time with Jerry. How Joy’s story ends is completely up to the reader thanks to two very clever options for endings by the author. Both of the endings are extremely different but as the book says “Her destiny is in your hands...”
What I liked best was all the different dimensions that Joy visited while trying to find what was missing from her life. I did notice one thing that may or may not have been true. It seemed to me that each ‘dimension’ was really just a different time period in the same dimension or the world. As if Joy only changed dimension once and visited important points in that dimension. What I did not like was in the first chapter Joy explains her life to the reader. She talks of just existing, not living, and an unnamed husband who does not seem to care for her or emotionally support her, and their children. After she finds her magical little relic they are not mentioned again. I can not help but wonder about Joy’s feelings about leaving them behind, especially her kids. What becomes of them?
This book is directed more towards adults. Specifically, those who find themselves wondering what their lives might be like if they had done things differently. At the same time, this book is just as enjoyable for everyone else. I rate this book 4 out of 4. This book was beautiful. Over its 188 pages, Joy finds what element in her life she needs in order to feel whole. The final twelve pages or so consist of two alternate endings (an amazing and unusual concept) so the reader can decide exactly how Joy’s life turns out.
https://www.facebook.com/nightreaderreviews
Night Reader Reviews (683 KP) rated The Core Fulcrum in Books
Apr 6, 2020
Honest Review for Free Copy of Book
The Core Fulcrum by Prashanti Talluri has multiple details that made me think it was largely inspired by Harry Potter. The school has rooms that move daily which were a big reminder of Harry Potter but there were multiple little things as well.
Snowball and Goldie are two kittens that have just started the fifth grade. Like the school's humans are used to there are classes that everyone has to take an optional class. It is one of these optional classes that Snowball, Goldie, and some of their friends choose that sends them on an amazing and scary adventure. They all choose to take part in the class called “Curiosity Kills the Cat”, but so does their class bully Hisky.
In this class, after passing a test they learn of the Core Fulcrum. They learn that the Core Fulcrum is a powerful artifact that is responsible for all the cat’s extraordinary abilities. The problem is that the Core Fulcrum is missing and that could cause major issues for all cats unless it is found soon. Their solution is to enlist the help of kittens in school to join the dangerous search for this all-important item. Can they find it before it it's too late and the rats figure out how to use it?
I like how it acknowledges how cats essentially got their independence from humans (although I can’t help but wonder what happened to the people). It was also interesting how the casts and rats have created separate kingdoms from each other and even seem to war with each other to some extent. Honestly things like the snakes that bite their tails to function as seat belts just seemed a bit farfetched, along with busses that seem to be living animals at the same time (or maybe just created to mimic animal abilities, I am not sure). Then there was how the cats were in harnesses to practice for their version of the Olympics yet they were going through tunnels without getting tangled and finishing in around fifteen seconds seemed unrealistic even for cats.
This is a children's book all the way. I don’t think may people past middle school would be all that interested in it or find it very enjoyable. It may even be questionable for some middle school readers. It all depends on how well a reader can accept the strangeness of this book. I rate this book 2 out of 4. This is because the base story is good but the details just felt awkward. I just don’t think anyone but younger readers are going to be into it. I could be wrong though.
https://www.facebook.com/nightreaderreviews/
https://smashbomb.com/nightreader
https://nightreaderreviews.blogspot.com/
Snowball and Goldie are two kittens that have just started the fifth grade. Like the school's humans are used to there are classes that everyone has to take an optional class. It is one of these optional classes that Snowball, Goldie, and some of their friends choose that sends them on an amazing and scary adventure. They all choose to take part in the class called “Curiosity Kills the Cat”, but so does their class bully Hisky.
In this class, after passing a test they learn of the Core Fulcrum. They learn that the Core Fulcrum is a powerful artifact that is responsible for all the cat’s extraordinary abilities. The problem is that the Core Fulcrum is missing and that could cause major issues for all cats unless it is found soon. Their solution is to enlist the help of kittens in school to join the dangerous search for this all-important item. Can they find it before it it's too late and the rats figure out how to use it?
I like how it acknowledges how cats essentially got their independence from humans (although I can’t help but wonder what happened to the people). It was also interesting how the casts and rats have created separate kingdoms from each other and even seem to war with each other to some extent. Honestly things like the snakes that bite their tails to function as seat belts just seemed a bit farfetched, along with busses that seem to be living animals at the same time (or maybe just created to mimic animal abilities, I am not sure). Then there was how the cats were in harnesses to practice for their version of the Olympics yet they were going through tunnels without getting tangled and finishing in around fifteen seconds seemed unrealistic even for cats.
This is a children's book all the way. I don’t think may people past middle school would be all that interested in it or find it very enjoyable. It may even be questionable for some middle school readers. It all depends on how well a reader can accept the strangeness of this book. I rate this book 2 out of 4. This is because the base story is good but the details just felt awkward. I just don’t think anyone but younger readers are going to be into it. I could be wrong though.
https://www.facebook.com/nightreaderreviews/
https://smashbomb.com/nightreader
https://nightreaderreviews.blogspot.com/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Seventh Son (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
After a two-year delay, Seventh Son has finally reached the big screen, and it will leave you conflicted.
Seventh Son is brought to us by director Sergey Bodrov. Originally set for a February 2013 release, the film had complicated distribution arrangements between Legendary and Warner Brothers, which kept causing delays.
Jeff Bridges plays one of the title characters: Master John Gregory. He is the last of an order of peacekeeper knights, which once used to be a thousand strong. All of these knights are seventh sons of seventh sons, and are self-tasked with keeping the evil creatures of the world at bay.
The movie starts off with a young Gregory completing a prison cell for an unknown woman. Years later, the prisoner, a draconic beast, breaks out and attacks a nearby town, specifically targeting the aged Knight and his apprentice (Kit Harington — Jon Snow from Game of Thrones). This recently released evil is Mother Malkin (Julianne Moore), the queen of witches.
During the battle, Harington’s brief existence in this film is brought to an end, causing Gregory to seek out another apprentice. This search leads him to young Thomas Ward (Ben Barnes). After Ward goes through some sad goodbyes with his family, he and Gregory set out to take down the Witch Queen before the blood moon sets.
His training would normally take 10 years, but they only have a week.
Put simply, this movie was very fragmented. It isn’t a good movie, but it isn’t a bad one either. It has reasonable special effects and decent fight scenes.
There is plenty of star power: Jeff Bridges, Julianne Moore, Kit Harington, Djimon Hounsou (one of my favorites), and Jason Scott Lee.
Jeff Bridges missed the mark on his character. It’s one thing to be disgruntled and war-torn with a curious sense of humor, but it’s something quite different to be outright silly.
There were no explanations. How did the order come about? Why seventh sons of seventh sons? How did Gregory KNOW there was a seventh son at that house? How did the war start? Why is Gregory the last? Why wasn’t there more about Gregory’s relationship with Malkin? Why did the skeleton in the armor attack Tom? Why do the swords hum? Where did the stone come from? Why was it powerful? Why anything, really? The story has no depth, failing to explain the “why” of any of its lore. There were only statements of fact, which confuses viewers and prevents them from becoming emotionally anchored to the story.
I simply didn’t care about the characters. The film was disorganized and rushed. Perhaps it would have been better served as two films, or a longer film, or even a mini series.
Seventh Son had the potential to be so much more. A combination of poor writing and bad direction made the movie lackluster to me and all three of my companions.
The actors delivered many campy one-liners, and the chuckles they drew from the crowd were quite unintentional.
If you are a fan of high fantasy, it’s probably worth seeing, but wait for it to arrive on Netflix and use it as background entertainment
Seventh Son is brought to us by director Sergey Bodrov. Originally set for a February 2013 release, the film had complicated distribution arrangements between Legendary and Warner Brothers, which kept causing delays.
Jeff Bridges plays one of the title characters: Master John Gregory. He is the last of an order of peacekeeper knights, which once used to be a thousand strong. All of these knights are seventh sons of seventh sons, and are self-tasked with keeping the evil creatures of the world at bay.
The movie starts off with a young Gregory completing a prison cell for an unknown woman. Years later, the prisoner, a draconic beast, breaks out and attacks a nearby town, specifically targeting the aged Knight and his apprentice (Kit Harington — Jon Snow from Game of Thrones). This recently released evil is Mother Malkin (Julianne Moore), the queen of witches.
During the battle, Harington’s brief existence in this film is brought to an end, causing Gregory to seek out another apprentice. This search leads him to young Thomas Ward (Ben Barnes). After Ward goes through some sad goodbyes with his family, he and Gregory set out to take down the Witch Queen before the blood moon sets.
His training would normally take 10 years, but they only have a week.
Put simply, this movie was very fragmented. It isn’t a good movie, but it isn’t a bad one either. It has reasonable special effects and decent fight scenes.
There is plenty of star power: Jeff Bridges, Julianne Moore, Kit Harington, Djimon Hounsou (one of my favorites), and Jason Scott Lee.
Jeff Bridges missed the mark on his character. It’s one thing to be disgruntled and war-torn with a curious sense of humor, but it’s something quite different to be outright silly.
There were no explanations. How did the order come about? Why seventh sons of seventh sons? How did Gregory KNOW there was a seventh son at that house? How did the war start? Why is Gregory the last? Why wasn’t there more about Gregory’s relationship with Malkin? Why did the skeleton in the armor attack Tom? Why do the swords hum? Where did the stone come from? Why was it powerful? Why anything, really? The story has no depth, failing to explain the “why” of any of its lore. There were only statements of fact, which confuses viewers and prevents them from becoming emotionally anchored to the story.
I simply didn’t care about the characters. The film was disorganized and rushed. Perhaps it would have been better served as two films, or a longer film, or even a mini series.
Seventh Son had the potential to be so much more. A combination of poor writing and bad direction made the movie lackluster to me and all three of my companions.
The actors delivered many campy one-liners, and the chuckles they drew from the crowd were quite unintentional.
If you are a fan of high fantasy, it’s probably worth seeing, but wait for it to arrive on Netflix and use it as background entertainment
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Tomorrow War (2021) in Movies
Jul 16, 2021
Slow to start but finishes as a fun Summer flick
The reviews that I had read before I watched the Chris Pratt/Alien Invaders flick THE TOMORROW WAR was that it was a pretty okay film for the first hour and a half, but goes “off the rails” in the last 1/2 hour.
I couldn’t disagree more. The Tomorrow War is a safe and confined film for the first hour and a half and only becomes interesting when they take off all constraints and “goes for it” in the last 1/2 hour.
Directed by Chris McKay (THE LEGO MOVIE), THE TOMORROW WAR follows a working class guy (Chris Pratt) who is recruited to head into the future to help fight alien invaders. He teams up with one of the leaders of the “Tomorrow War” (Yvonne Strahovski) for whom he has a special bond with to recapture Earth for the humans.
The premise is solid enough, but the Direction by McKay keeps the film in the “safe zone”, never veering away into anything interesting and original, almost like McKay wanted to keep the events of the future “believable”. This is a miscalculation by McKay (and Pratt) and makes the film “fine”, but not much more than that.
Pratt’s performance is also in the “safe zone” and tones down his usual daffy charm and charisma - rarely a good idea with a Movie Star who relies on these qualities. Strahovski is solid and believable (enough) as the tough-as-nails scientist as one of the leaders of the future humans. She and Pratt worked well off each other and this helped get me through the middle of this film (where it sags under the weight of it’s own pretentions).
Also along for the ride is Sam Richardson (VEEP) as a fellow Tomorrow War draftee who provides much needed comic relief in the first part of the film. But he does veer into the “over-acting/caricature” territory that these types of parts can lead to. It was also good to see Mary Lynn Rajskub (Chloe in the TV Series 24) up on the screen again. I was rooting for her throughout the film.
But it is the work of the always great J.K. Simmons that salvages the film. He only appears in 1 scene in the first 3/4 of this movie - he is the estranged father of Pratt’s character - but when these 2 join forces for the last 1/2 hour, the film takes a dramatic turn to the Summer Blockbuster over-the-top action hero fun flick that it probably needed to be from the beginning. Simmons looks like he is having a blast taking out Alien after Alien and Pratt suddenly looks interested and his natural charm and charisma comes out.
Watch the first hour and a half as a setup for the last 1/2 hour. If you are looking for mindless Summer entertainment, the final part of this film will fit the bill, indeed.
Letter Grade: B- (the first hour and a half takes some initiative to get through)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
I couldn’t disagree more. The Tomorrow War is a safe and confined film for the first hour and a half and only becomes interesting when they take off all constraints and “goes for it” in the last 1/2 hour.
Directed by Chris McKay (THE LEGO MOVIE), THE TOMORROW WAR follows a working class guy (Chris Pratt) who is recruited to head into the future to help fight alien invaders. He teams up with one of the leaders of the “Tomorrow War” (Yvonne Strahovski) for whom he has a special bond with to recapture Earth for the humans.
The premise is solid enough, but the Direction by McKay keeps the film in the “safe zone”, never veering away into anything interesting and original, almost like McKay wanted to keep the events of the future “believable”. This is a miscalculation by McKay (and Pratt) and makes the film “fine”, but not much more than that.
Pratt’s performance is also in the “safe zone” and tones down his usual daffy charm and charisma - rarely a good idea with a Movie Star who relies on these qualities. Strahovski is solid and believable (enough) as the tough-as-nails scientist as one of the leaders of the future humans. She and Pratt worked well off each other and this helped get me through the middle of this film (where it sags under the weight of it’s own pretentions).
Also along for the ride is Sam Richardson (VEEP) as a fellow Tomorrow War draftee who provides much needed comic relief in the first part of the film. But he does veer into the “over-acting/caricature” territory that these types of parts can lead to. It was also good to see Mary Lynn Rajskub (Chloe in the TV Series 24) up on the screen again. I was rooting for her throughout the film.
But it is the work of the always great J.K. Simmons that salvages the film. He only appears in 1 scene in the first 3/4 of this movie - he is the estranged father of Pratt’s character - but when these 2 join forces for the last 1/2 hour, the film takes a dramatic turn to the Summer Blockbuster over-the-top action hero fun flick that it probably needed to be from the beginning. Simmons looks like he is having a blast taking out Alien after Alien and Pratt suddenly looks interested and his natural charm and charisma comes out.
Watch the first hour and a half as a setup for the last 1/2 hour. If you are looking for mindless Summer entertainment, the final part of this film will fit the bill, indeed.
Letter Grade: B- (the first hour and a half takes some initiative to get through)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Shuffle Grand Prix in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019 (Updated Jun 12, 2019)
I very rarely reference video games in my reviews. Mostly because I have never really been a big video gamer. I was always more into RPG style video games (Final Fantasy XI ftw), but some styles of video games I also enjoyed quite a bit. Among those were the battle racing style games of Crash Team Racing and Mario Kart. So much fun not only to race to the finish but also to plant traps and equip weapons to slow your opponents’ progress. Such is your plight as you play Shuffle Grand Prix by new-to-the-board-game-scene publisher Games by Bicycle.
DISCLAIMER: While I will not be delving completely into the rulebook and describing every rule and scenario, I will give you a good idea of how the game plays and what I think of it. -T
Okay let’s setup this game in our minds. Shuffle the large deck of Distance Cards (in denominations of 25, 50, 75, and 100 distance) to form a draw deck. Each player will draft a team of racer and co-pilot, which means taking the racer’s deck and co-pilot’s deck to form their team. Each pilot is a different character with different decks and different special abilities that can be used throughout the game. For example, my first team was the wizard and the musician. Place the driver’s character card on top of the wheel (health) card at maximum wheel strength, and tuck the co-pilot’s card underneath them. You cannot use the co-pilot’s ability until they become the driver (when your main pilot spins out due to your opponents and their dastardly play). Now shuffle the driver’s and co-pilot’s decks together (a la Smash Up) to form your personal draw deck, draw three cards, and you are ready to begin!
On your turn you will flip over the top Distance Card and place it in front of yourself. This is how far you have driven this turn, and ultimately is your VP stack. From there you may play cards from your hand to affect your own cards, the cards of your opponents, or place traps. You may equip items to your car (max 2), switch out equipment, or pass your turn ? This structure continues until there are no more Distance Cards to draw, then the game ends and you count Distance to see who is the winner! I have intentionally left some rules out because they are fun to discover and play – like making your opponent spin out (for trophies), nerfing your opponents, card combo play, etc.
Components: this game is relatively light on components as it is a large number of playing cards and a collection of trophy chits. The chits are good quality, and were definitely too numerous for our plays. The cards are of great quality, which is what you expect from Bicycle, the playing card giant. The art in this game is VERY quirky. I wouldn’t say the art is amazing, but it’s fun and fits the theme. Think Munchkin art. In fact, think of this game as a whole as a combination of CTR/Mario Kart meets Munchkin.
Overall, I really dig this game. It’s pretty fast-playing, though those AP-prone players will hold up the game a bit on their turns. The rules are light, the game play is really fun, and the flavor text on the cards is quite humorous. I thought out loud as we were playing that this is a replacement for Munchkin for me, and I like Munchkin a lot. The take-that/screw-your-neighbor aspect is certainly there, but even when you pile on it doesn’t seem to slow you down so much that you can no longer do much on your turn. I appreciate that. The eight provided playable character decks feels like I can play this game for a really long time with different combinations and enjoy it each time. So for the ease of play, enjoyment of play, different combos we are excited to try, and absolute silliness, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a bashin’ 14 / 18. Check it out!
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/06/06/shuffle-grand-prix-review/
DISCLAIMER: While I will not be delving completely into the rulebook and describing every rule and scenario, I will give you a good idea of how the game plays and what I think of it. -T
Okay let’s setup this game in our minds. Shuffle the large deck of Distance Cards (in denominations of 25, 50, 75, and 100 distance) to form a draw deck. Each player will draft a team of racer and co-pilot, which means taking the racer’s deck and co-pilot’s deck to form their team. Each pilot is a different character with different decks and different special abilities that can be used throughout the game. For example, my first team was the wizard and the musician. Place the driver’s character card on top of the wheel (health) card at maximum wheel strength, and tuck the co-pilot’s card underneath them. You cannot use the co-pilot’s ability until they become the driver (when your main pilot spins out due to your opponents and their dastardly play). Now shuffle the driver’s and co-pilot’s decks together (a la Smash Up) to form your personal draw deck, draw three cards, and you are ready to begin!
On your turn you will flip over the top Distance Card and place it in front of yourself. This is how far you have driven this turn, and ultimately is your VP stack. From there you may play cards from your hand to affect your own cards, the cards of your opponents, or place traps. You may equip items to your car (max 2), switch out equipment, or pass your turn ? This structure continues until there are no more Distance Cards to draw, then the game ends and you count Distance to see who is the winner! I have intentionally left some rules out because they are fun to discover and play – like making your opponent spin out (for trophies), nerfing your opponents, card combo play, etc.
Components: this game is relatively light on components as it is a large number of playing cards and a collection of trophy chits. The chits are good quality, and were definitely too numerous for our plays. The cards are of great quality, which is what you expect from Bicycle, the playing card giant. The art in this game is VERY quirky. I wouldn’t say the art is amazing, but it’s fun and fits the theme. Think Munchkin art. In fact, think of this game as a whole as a combination of CTR/Mario Kart meets Munchkin.
Overall, I really dig this game. It’s pretty fast-playing, though those AP-prone players will hold up the game a bit on their turns. The rules are light, the game play is really fun, and the flavor text on the cards is quite humorous. I thought out loud as we were playing that this is a replacement for Munchkin for me, and I like Munchkin a lot. The take-that/screw-your-neighbor aspect is certainly there, but even when you pile on it doesn’t seem to slow you down so much that you can no longer do much on your turn. I appreciate that. The eight provided playable character decks feels like I can play this game for a really long time with different combinations and enjoy it each time. So for the ease of play, enjoyment of play, different combos we are excited to try, and absolute silliness, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a bashin’ 14 / 18. Check it out!
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/06/06/shuffle-grand-prix-review/
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Princess Diarist in Books
Feb 8, 2018
Carrie Fisher's latest memoir details a behind the scenes look of the first <i>Star Wars</i> film. Motivated by the recent discovery of the journals she wrote while filming <i>Star Wars</i> in the late 1970s, Fisher discusses her naive nineteen-year-old self: not yet famous (though with famous parents) and unprepared for the juggernaut that would become the <i>Star Wars</i> franchise. She also covers her now famous co-star, Harrison Ford, and their relationship during the three months of filming. Fisher presents excerpts from her discovered journals and ponders on her life and the fame and notoriety that playing Princess Leia has brought her.
I am new to the <i>Star Wars</i> fandom, having only recently discovered the films myself in the past two years or so. My four-year-old daughters love them (and Leia), so I was intrigued by the idea of Fisher's memoir. While I like the films, I don't consider myself a fanatic by any stretch of the imagination. Still, I was interested in hearing some behind the scenes tidbits about filming. And Fisher starts out with such facts, explaining how an early scene was re-written due to the physical limitations of Peter Mayhew, who played Chewbacca. It's that sort of information that I find fascinating--and imagine other <i>Star Wars</i> fans would as well.
And, I won't lie, I was also fascinated by Fisher's reported relationship with Harrison Ford, who is about 15 years her senior (and was married while they were filming). Her portrayal of Harrison in the book seems spot on and is actually quite humorous at times. Unfortunately, her actual detail of the relationship is scant at best, and we really don't get much insight into their romance. What we do get is a lot of particulars about Fisher's own insecurities about herself, her body, her acting, etc.
She includes actual excerpts of the journals she found in the middle of the book, and I confess, I eventually started skimming them, because they were just agony to read. I can understand how they resonate from the perspective of a lovestruck teenager (because, truly, she was just that at the time), but so many years later, they just seem like a lot of bad poetry and ramblings that make no sense out of context. And beyond a few stories about Harrison, we really get nothing in the book that explains them, which is unfortunate, as Fisher seems witty and interesting (albeit insecure, but hey, so am I). I understand her angst from the journals, I really do, but I'm not honestly sure I wanted to read it in such form.
Plus, after that section of the book, we move on to Fisher discussing her fans and how "being Leia" has affected her life. And, again, I get it: we all forget how no one expected <i>Star Wars</i> to be so big. You wouldn't at nineteen realize what you were getting into, and I'm sure this character has absorbed much of her identity. And maybe it was reading this on the heel of Anna Kendrick's memoir, but I can only take so much of celebrities complaining about their fame and lives. The second half of Fisher's book, basically, is her capturing "conversations" with awestruck fans explaining how much Leia and <i>Star Wars</i> meant to them. But, really, it's mocking them and illustrating how tiresome the "lap dance" (her words) of signing autographs and appearing at various conventions can be. But, you know, as she states, it's worth it for the money. You can't help but feel a little offended on the part of these devoted, crazy fans, and a little less sorry for Fisher, even if she was not included on merchandising shares for <i>Star Wars</i>.
Sigh. Overall, I'm a bit conflicted on this one. Bits and pieces were very interesting. But I would have enjoyed hearing more about the actual set and her interactions with the other actors beyond Harrison Ford. While I also didn't mind hearing about Fisher's impressions of how Leia impacted her life, the fandom sections just rubbed me the wrong way. 2.5 stars.
I am new to the <i>Star Wars</i> fandom, having only recently discovered the films myself in the past two years or so. My four-year-old daughters love them (and Leia), so I was intrigued by the idea of Fisher's memoir. While I like the films, I don't consider myself a fanatic by any stretch of the imagination. Still, I was interested in hearing some behind the scenes tidbits about filming. And Fisher starts out with such facts, explaining how an early scene was re-written due to the physical limitations of Peter Mayhew, who played Chewbacca. It's that sort of information that I find fascinating--and imagine other <i>Star Wars</i> fans would as well.
And, I won't lie, I was also fascinated by Fisher's reported relationship with Harrison Ford, who is about 15 years her senior (and was married while they were filming). Her portrayal of Harrison in the book seems spot on and is actually quite humorous at times. Unfortunately, her actual detail of the relationship is scant at best, and we really don't get much insight into their romance. What we do get is a lot of particulars about Fisher's own insecurities about herself, her body, her acting, etc.
She includes actual excerpts of the journals she found in the middle of the book, and I confess, I eventually started skimming them, because they were just agony to read. I can understand how they resonate from the perspective of a lovestruck teenager (because, truly, she was just that at the time), but so many years later, they just seem like a lot of bad poetry and ramblings that make no sense out of context. And beyond a few stories about Harrison, we really get nothing in the book that explains them, which is unfortunate, as Fisher seems witty and interesting (albeit insecure, but hey, so am I). I understand her angst from the journals, I really do, but I'm not honestly sure I wanted to read it in such form.
Plus, after that section of the book, we move on to Fisher discussing her fans and how "being Leia" has affected her life. And, again, I get it: we all forget how no one expected <i>Star Wars</i> to be so big. You wouldn't at nineteen realize what you were getting into, and I'm sure this character has absorbed much of her identity. And maybe it was reading this on the heel of Anna Kendrick's memoir, but I can only take so much of celebrities complaining about their fame and lives. The second half of Fisher's book, basically, is her capturing "conversations" with awestruck fans explaining how much Leia and <i>Star Wars</i> meant to them. But, really, it's mocking them and illustrating how tiresome the "lap dance" (her words) of signing autographs and appearing at various conventions can be. But, you know, as she states, it's worth it for the money. You can't help but feel a little offended on the part of these devoted, crazy fans, and a little less sorry for Fisher, even if she was not included on merchandising shares for <i>Star Wars</i>.
Sigh. Overall, I'm a bit conflicted on this one. Bits and pieces were very interesting. But I would have enjoyed hearing more about the actual set and her interactions with the other actors beyond Harrison Ford. While I also didn't mind hearing about Fisher's impressions of how Leia impacted her life, the fandom sections just rubbed me the wrong way. 2.5 stars.