Search
Search results
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Gerald's Game (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Not a very fun game
The horror film market is huge. Hundreds, if not thousands, of horror films are made every year, with only few standing out of the blood-drenched crowd. Netflix, with a penchant for outstanding horrors and thrillers, decided to hop on the horror flick train, bringing about an adaptation of Stephen King’s terrifying novel ‘Gerald’s Game’.
The film follows Jessie (Carla Gugino) and her husband, Gerald (Bruce Greenwood), as they head to a remote lake house in order to spice up their marriage. One thing leads to another, and then Gerald has a heart attack and dies, leaving Jessie handcuffed to the bed with the keys out of reach. She must then fight to survive, whilst having a few disturbing flashbacks and encounters along the way.
This movie is really disturbing. Like, really, really disturbing. It’s not particularly scary, there’s the odd jump-scare or three, but its the imagery and the situation that really get your heart going.
Carla Gugino as the shackled wife is a stand-out in this film. She basically carries it, only with a few interruptions from inside her head, and this makes for very entertaining viewing. She’s amusing, in a way that you didn’t think anyone could be whilst fighting dehydration, a hungry dog at the end of her bed and death himself. In all honesty, it’s not a very fun game.
Her husband, however, is brilliant at being horrible. Greenwood really amps up the bad husband vibes in the 20 minutes he is alive, which then are exacerbated in Jessie’s head after he has died. He’s manipulative, seedy and slimy: something that Jessie realises at the end of the film.
It could be argued that this film isn’t really a horror film in the typical sense. It’s more a horror film about what has happened to Jessie, the main character, and how she comes to terms with her past and survives. She calls on past experiences to escape her confines on the bed, and her horrible history.
That’s not to say that it doesn’t have stereotypical horror movie attributes. The Moonlight Man is their contribution to the supernatural – or more the ‘is he actually there or am I insane?’ kind of gimmick that sometimes comes with this genre. The Moonlight Man is a shadowy figure, lurking in the shadows with his box of trinkets and bones. He’s absolutely terrifying.
He’s also real. In the film and book, he’s a necrophiliac who’s waiting for Jessie to die so he can add her wedding ring and one of her bones to his box. The Moonlight Man is the kind of horror movie villain that you have nightmares about. Which is why he is one of the highlights of Gerald’s Game.
The film isn’t exactly the most complex plot in the world. It plays a bit too much on the stereotypes in some cases and the ending, in true horror film fashion, is too happy, is too well put together after such a traumatic experience. It all ends a bit too neatly after such a messy first three-quarters.
Even though this isn’t the best horror film ever, it certainly is not the worst. It has it’s flaws, but the acting and the scriptwriting make up for the few it has. In an era of horror trying too hard, this film is simple and refreshing, bringing a new feeling to the horror industry as a whole.
So, the moral of the story is: don’t handcuff yourself to the bed because your husband will die on top of you and then a stray dog will eat him and a necrophiliac will come into your house at night. Quite an easy thing to remember, right?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/12/06/geralds-game-review-not-a-very-fun-game/
The film follows Jessie (Carla Gugino) and her husband, Gerald (Bruce Greenwood), as they head to a remote lake house in order to spice up their marriage. One thing leads to another, and then Gerald has a heart attack and dies, leaving Jessie handcuffed to the bed with the keys out of reach. She must then fight to survive, whilst having a few disturbing flashbacks and encounters along the way.
This movie is really disturbing. Like, really, really disturbing. It’s not particularly scary, there’s the odd jump-scare or three, but its the imagery and the situation that really get your heart going.
Carla Gugino as the shackled wife is a stand-out in this film. She basically carries it, only with a few interruptions from inside her head, and this makes for very entertaining viewing. She’s amusing, in a way that you didn’t think anyone could be whilst fighting dehydration, a hungry dog at the end of her bed and death himself. In all honesty, it’s not a very fun game.
Her husband, however, is brilliant at being horrible. Greenwood really amps up the bad husband vibes in the 20 minutes he is alive, which then are exacerbated in Jessie’s head after he has died. He’s manipulative, seedy and slimy: something that Jessie realises at the end of the film.
It could be argued that this film isn’t really a horror film in the typical sense. It’s more a horror film about what has happened to Jessie, the main character, and how she comes to terms with her past and survives. She calls on past experiences to escape her confines on the bed, and her horrible history.
That’s not to say that it doesn’t have stereotypical horror movie attributes. The Moonlight Man is their contribution to the supernatural – or more the ‘is he actually there or am I insane?’ kind of gimmick that sometimes comes with this genre. The Moonlight Man is a shadowy figure, lurking in the shadows with his box of trinkets and bones. He’s absolutely terrifying.
He’s also real. In the film and book, he’s a necrophiliac who’s waiting for Jessie to die so he can add her wedding ring and one of her bones to his box. The Moonlight Man is the kind of horror movie villain that you have nightmares about. Which is why he is one of the highlights of Gerald’s Game.
The film isn’t exactly the most complex plot in the world. It plays a bit too much on the stereotypes in some cases and the ending, in true horror film fashion, is too happy, is too well put together after such a traumatic experience. It all ends a bit too neatly after such a messy first three-quarters.
Even though this isn’t the best horror film ever, it certainly is not the worst. It has it’s flaws, but the acting and the scriptwriting make up for the few it has. In an era of horror trying too hard, this film is simple and refreshing, bringing a new feeling to the horror industry as a whole.
So, the moral of the story is: don’t handcuff yourself to the bed because your husband will die on top of you and then a stray dog will eat him and a necrophiliac will come into your house at night. Quite an easy thing to remember, right?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/12/06/geralds-game-review-not-a-very-fun-game/
Sanitarium
Games
App
In Sanitarium you play an amnesiac thrust into a morbid, really creepy universe. After a car...
Ring Fit Adventure
8.3
Rate It
Video Game Watch
Explore a fantasy adventure world to defeat a bodybuilding dragon and his minions using real-life...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Cloud Atlas (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
While I am not familiar with the novel, I was not excited to review the film adaptation of David Mitchell’s Cloud Atlas. Though the Screenplay was written and directed by the Wachowskis (The Matrix) and Tom Tykwer (Run Lola Run) I did not know exactly what I was getting into. The trailer shows it as an epic sci-fi film crossing the time and lives of several stories and how everything and everyone is connected. Needless to say my curiosity was piqued. But I was nervous because I knew it would take a grand effort to keep this epic and ambitious project from falling flat. And well, I can honestly say that I am not quite sure if the combined effort succeeded.
Allow me to explain. About an hour into the film I had a young film reviewer to my left and I noticed he started to nod his head in approval at each new developing story throughout the film. To my right was a friend of mine, I would consider as an average film viewer, who at this same time I could tell was counting the minutes till the lights came up but felt trapped with nowhere to go but forward. And for me, I can see both sides of these reactions.
The plot is comprised of a multi-narrative of six stories, each with a complete beginning, middle and end. These stories are told from different timelines following a group of souls throughout the ages to show how everything is woven together and the connection between them; From the 1849 slave trader, to a young composer in 1936 Britain, to a 1973 journalist attempting to uncover corruption of the big business ruling class, to a 2012 literary publisher who’s life becomes a daring escape from a geriatric home, to a 2144 Neo-Soul synthetic learning to become human, to a post-apocalyptic tribesman trying to save his world and family… Lost yet? Believe me you will want to focus during the first hour of this film as we are introduced to the sudden shift of timelines. All of the main actors appear as varying characters of significance in every narrative, each with different accents and types of language. It is a bit of an unexpected bother to keep everything straight at first, however if you pay attention it is fairly easy to follow. This first hour is where I feel the film becomes a make or break for those actively thinking about what they are watching and the average movie viewer who is just there to be entertained and see the new Tom Hanks (Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close) or Halle Berry (Perfect Stanger) movie. For those who make it through that first hour still engaged, the film moves along at a steady pace and provides everything from romance to action that keeps you guessing and intrigued at what is next to come.
The Wachowskis and Tykwer do an outstanding job of visually fleshing out each timeline in its own visual style, especially the futuristic ones, which subtlety organize each narrative for the viewer. Additionally, there are so many talented actors in this film and it is somewhat fascinating to try and pick them out throughout the film. It is almost like a giant game of Where’s Waldo on screen as the makeup and special effects artists do a fantastic job of making the actors fit each character in every timeline. In fact, during the fourth or fifth timeline a lady in my row asked her partner if the man on screen was Forrest Gump, which was surprising because Hanks was the easiest character to pick out among them all.
Tom Hanks delivers one of his better performances in years. We watch his character’s soul transition from a sinister and vile doctor to a tribesman making the righteous choice while struggling with that inkling of evil that is the devil within us all. It was refreshing to see Hanks play parts that were not just an “everyman” that he has played in recent years.
Halle Berry’s performance is mostly average in her parts with the exception of 1973 journalist role where she is the main protagonist. Hugo Weaving channels a bit of his Agent Smith role from The Matrix as he plays a villain throughout the timelines. Hugh Grant (Love Actually) makes unexpected soild appearances throughout the timelines. With Jim Sturgess (One Day), James D’Arcy (Mansfield Park) and Ben Whishaw (who is the new Q in the upcoming James Bond film Skyfall) rounding out the cast with a young contrast to the already heavy acting handled by the bigger names of this film. Each of these young actors hold’s their own against their older more notable counterparts. Whishaw’s performance as the lead in the 1936 composer role is especially noteworthy.
The other stand out performance in the film comes from Jim Broadbent best known in the states as Professor Slughorn in the Harry Potter Films. His performance in the 1936 composer and 2012 literary publisher are excellent. The Publisher story was my favorite timeline throughout the film. Not only did it deliver some much needed comic relief to an emotionally engaging and heavy film, but it also made me care the most about the elderly characters trying to escape the clutches of the geriatric prison of a nursing home. Unfortunately, other than the aforementioned comic relief this timeline seemed the most unnecessary to the overarching story at hand.
When I left the film and talked it over with my friend I was indifferent to the film. It was not great, it was not bad either. As my friend described it, it was a movie that was trying too hard. We agreed that somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but we were not sure if we watched it.
However as the days have passed I have found myself thinking about the stories constantly. More specifically about how the main protagonist played by a different actor in each narrative has the same birthmark of a shooting star that in some way symbolizes some universal soul encompassing a new shell of a body in each timeline. Like some kind of reincarnation of that soul is fighting the same revolution throughout the ages against the powerful class and illusion of natural order. Additionally how each of the central characters found themselves connected with the main characters in the stories that preceded them through some kind of medium; whether it was by an old journal, or love letters, or a written story, or film, or message of hope. These subtle insights of growth and change for this main soul leaping into a new life in each timeline has caused me to examine our world and how we as people can be truly connected to one another not only today, but throughout the ages. I want to view the film again and am inspired to read the novel in some sort of effort to better understand these concepts.
Nevertheless as a film that is almost three hours long it does its best to be an epic sci-fi film and give something for everyone. And while it succeeds in many aspects of feel, it also falls short in aspects that are probably best accomplished in a literary form. As I said above, somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but I am not sure if I watched it. Or maybe I am not intelligent enough to comprehend it. Because of that I can only give it an average score. Though I believe if you ask me after a second viewing, I may be inclined to raise it.
Allow me to explain. About an hour into the film I had a young film reviewer to my left and I noticed he started to nod his head in approval at each new developing story throughout the film. To my right was a friend of mine, I would consider as an average film viewer, who at this same time I could tell was counting the minutes till the lights came up but felt trapped with nowhere to go but forward. And for me, I can see both sides of these reactions.
The plot is comprised of a multi-narrative of six stories, each with a complete beginning, middle and end. These stories are told from different timelines following a group of souls throughout the ages to show how everything is woven together and the connection between them; From the 1849 slave trader, to a young composer in 1936 Britain, to a 1973 journalist attempting to uncover corruption of the big business ruling class, to a 2012 literary publisher who’s life becomes a daring escape from a geriatric home, to a 2144 Neo-Soul synthetic learning to become human, to a post-apocalyptic tribesman trying to save his world and family… Lost yet? Believe me you will want to focus during the first hour of this film as we are introduced to the sudden shift of timelines. All of the main actors appear as varying characters of significance in every narrative, each with different accents and types of language. It is a bit of an unexpected bother to keep everything straight at first, however if you pay attention it is fairly easy to follow. This first hour is where I feel the film becomes a make or break for those actively thinking about what they are watching and the average movie viewer who is just there to be entertained and see the new Tom Hanks (Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close) or Halle Berry (Perfect Stanger) movie. For those who make it through that first hour still engaged, the film moves along at a steady pace and provides everything from romance to action that keeps you guessing and intrigued at what is next to come.
The Wachowskis and Tykwer do an outstanding job of visually fleshing out each timeline in its own visual style, especially the futuristic ones, which subtlety organize each narrative for the viewer. Additionally, there are so many talented actors in this film and it is somewhat fascinating to try and pick them out throughout the film. It is almost like a giant game of Where’s Waldo on screen as the makeup and special effects artists do a fantastic job of making the actors fit each character in every timeline. In fact, during the fourth or fifth timeline a lady in my row asked her partner if the man on screen was Forrest Gump, which was surprising because Hanks was the easiest character to pick out among them all.
Tom Hanks delivers one of his better performances in years. We watch his character’s soul transition from a sinister and vile doctor to a tribesman making the righteous choice while struggling with that inkling of evil that is the devil within us all. It was refreshing to see Hanks play parts that were not just an “everyman” that he has played in recent years.
Halle Berry’s performance is mostly average in her parts with the exception of 1973 journalist role where she is the main protagonist. Hugo Weaving channels a bit of his Agent Smith role from The Matrix as he plays a villain throughout the timelines. Hugh Grant (Love Actually) makes unexpected soild appearances throughout the timelines. With Jim Sturgess (One Day), James D’Arcy (Mansfield Park) and Ben Whishaw (who is the new Q in the upcoming James Bond film Skyfall) rounding out the cast with a young contrast to the already heavy acting handled by the bigger names of this film. Each of these young actors hold’s their own against their older more notable counterparts. Whishaw’s performance as the lead in the 1936 composer role is especially noteworthy.
The other stand out performance in the film comes from Jim Broadbent best known in the states as Professor Slughorn in the Harry Potter Films. His performance in the 1936 composer and 2012 literary publisher are excellent. The Publisher story was my favorite timeline throughout the film. Not only did it deliver some much needed comic relief to an emotionally engaging and heavy film, but it also made me care the most about the elderly characters trying to escape the clutches of the geriatric prison of a nursing home. Unfortunately, other than the aforementioned comic relief this timeline seemed the most unnecessary to the overarching story at hand.
When I left the film and talked it over with my friend I was indifferent to the film. It was not great, it was not bad either. As my friend described it, it was a movie that was trying too hard. We agreed that somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but we were not sure if we watched it.
However as the days have passed I have found myself thinking about the stories constantly. More specifically about how the main protagonist played by a different actor in each narrative has the same birthmark of a shooting star that in some way symbolizes some universal soul encompassing a new shell of a body in each timeline. Like some kind of reincarnation of that soul is fighting the same revolution throughout the ages against the powerful class and illusion of natural order. Additionally how each of the central characters found themselves connected with the main characters in the stories that preceded them through some kind of medium; whether it was by an old journal, or love letters, or a written story, or film, or message of hope. These subtle insights of growth and change for this main soul leaping into a new life in each timeline has caused me to examine our world and how we as people can be truly connected to one another not only today, but throughout the ages. I want to view the film again and am inspired to read the novel in some sort of effort to better understand these concepts.
Nevertheless as a film that is almost three hours long it does its best to be an epic sci-fi film and give something for everyone. And while it succeeds in many aspects of feel, it also falls short in aspects that are probably best accomplished in a literary form. As I said above, somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but I am not sure if I watched it. Or maybe I am not intelligent enough to comprehend it. Because of that I can only give it an average score. Though I believe if you ask me after a second viewing, I may be inclined to raise it.
ArecRain (8 KP) rated Take Me for Granted (Take Me, #1) in Books
Jan 18, 2018
For someone who doesnt like reading bad boy/good girl tropes, I seem to be reading a lot of them lately. I dont even know why I picked up a copy of Take Me for Granted. The synopsis was one I have read a thousand times and the cover was nothing eye catching.
But let me tell you I am sure glad I did. If downloading it was whim then I dont even know what opening it up was. I was hooked from the very first page though. I identified with Ari more than most female leads. While I didnt grow up in a rich family nor do I attend an Ivy League school, I care more about schoolwork than I do most people. Reading Aris inner monologues and thoughts had me laughing because I understood. Its so easy to push people away, create a cold demeanor, and escape into school work. School doesnt hurt you the way people can.
Grant was also absolutely charming. He reminds me so much of my own fiancé in ways and I loved listening to him banter with Ari. At first, his pushiness rubbed me the wrong way. Having been in an abusive relationship, I wanted so much to just scream no in his face over and over again until he understood. However, he wasn't actually harmful in his pushiness, just persistent, and, honestly, had the patience of saint when it came to Ari considering how wishy washy she was at times.
I really enjoyed the story. Linde has a lovely, easy style and is a fantastic storyteller. I especially liked being able to read from both Grant's and Ari's POVs. The cliffhanger nearly destroyed me though, so you better believe I am going to continue the series. Somehow Lindes characters crawled their way beneath my skin, and I wont be content until I know they received a happy ending.
But let me tell you I am sure glad I did. If downloading it was whim then I dont even know what opening it up was. I was hooked from the very first page though. I identified with Ari more than most female leads. While I didnt grow up in a rich family nor do I attend an Ivy League school, I care more about schoolwork than I do most people. Reading Aris inner monologues and thoughts had me laughing because I understood. Its so easy to push people away, create a cold demeanor, and escape into school work. School doesnt hurt you the way people can.
Grant was also absolutely charming. He reminds me so much of my own fiancé in ways and I loved listening to him banter with Ari. At first, his pushiness rubbed me the wrong way. Having been in an abusive relationship, I wanted so much to just scream no in his face over and over again until he understood. However, he wasn't actually harmful in his pushiness, just persistent, and, honestly, had the patience of saint when it came to Ari considering how wishy washy she was at times.
I really enjoyed the story. Linde has a lovely, easy style and is a fantastic storyteller. I especially liked being able to read from both Grant's and Ari's POVs. The cliffhanger nearly destroyed me though, so you better believe I am going to continue the series. Somehow Lindes characters crawled their way beneath my skin, and I wont be content until I know they received a happy ending.
From Darkness to Diva
Book
Beyond the stereotypical expectation of glitter and sequins, comes a personal and inspirational...
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Harsh Shadows in Tabletop Games
Apr 20, 2021
I am definitely a social gamer, but if there is one positive thing to come from the year 2020, it was rediscovering my love of playing solo games. So when Wonderspell reached out about previewing their newest casual solo card game, I was hooked! Taking on the role of a secret agent trying to track down an enemy spy? Yes please! Keep reading to find out more.
Disclaimer: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this preview. The pictured components might not be finalized, and could differ after a successful Kickstarter campaign. -L
Harsh Shadows is a solo card game of hand management, grid movement, and deduction where you are an agent working to collect evidence necessary to apprehend an enemy spy. To setup for a game, randomly place the 9 Location cards in a 3×3 grid. Prepare the Discovery deck as described in the rules, place 1 face-down Discovery card to the right of each Location, and place the rest of the deck off to the side of the grid. Shuffle the Confiscated Item cards and deal the appropriate number to each of the Case File cards – 3 to Evidence, 1 to Red Herring, and 4 to False Leads. The Spy card is placed on the upper-left-most Location, and your Agent card on the lower-right-most Location. Shuffle the Spy Movement cards, and the game is ready to begin! It should look similar to the picture below.
The game is played over a series of rounds in which you will be moving your Agent, performing additional actions, and then moving the Spy. The goal is to track down the Spy, with the correct evidence in hand, before the Spy is able to flee the scene. The first thing that you will do each round is to move your Agent. You may only move to a Location that is adjacent or diagonal to your current Location. Once you move to a new Location, you will draw the top Discovery card from that Location. Discovery cards will either be Items, Clues, or Bombs. Items are collected as potential Evidence, Clues are used to reveal Confiscated Items from Case Files, and Bombs force you to discard a card from your tableau. After you have moved and collected a new Discovery card, you may perform any/all of these additional actions: Use Clue Cards, Place the Tracking Bug, Track the Spy, or Use your current Location’s ability. To Use Clue cards, you will discard a number of clues in order to reveal a Confiscated Item card from a Case File. The Confiscated Items under the Evidence Case File show the 3 items you are required to have in hand to apprehend the Spy by the end of the game. The item under the Red Herring, if you have it in hand at game’s end, will cause you to automatically lose. The 4 items under the False Leads will neither help you win, nor cause you to lose – they simply offer fodder for you to discard when necessary.
Another element required to win the game is to place the Tracking Bug on the Spy. On your turn, you may place the Tracking Bug at your current Location card – if the Spy moves to the Location on a future turn, they are considered to be ‘bugged’ and the Tracking Bug is live! Twice per game, you are allowed to Track the Spy. To do so, you will look at the top card of the Spy Movement deck, and return it to the top. This just lets you see to which Location the Spy is about to move. And finally, you can use your Location’s ability. Once you have taken as many of the additional actions as you want, it is time to move the Spy. Reveal the top card of the Spy Movement deck, and move the Spy in the appropriate direction to a new Location. At the Spy’s new Location, add a Discovery card to its pile. Play continues in this manner until either you make an accusation, or the Spy escapes. In order to make an accusation, you must have Evidence cards in hand, the Spy must be bugged, and you must be at the same Location as the Spy. When you make an accusation, you will reveal any remaining cards under the Evidence and Red Herring Case Files. If you have the 3 matching Evidence cards, you win and apprehend the Spy! BUT if you have the Red Herring card, or you are missing any of the required Evidence cards, you lose. If you haven’t made an accusation in time, the Spy could escape, causing you to lose the game as well – I’ll leave those details for you to discover on your own!
In theory, Harsh Shadows seems like a neat and strategic card game, but how does it hold up in reality? Pretty well, actually! The first thing I want to talk about is how strategic it is, even with its elements of deduction. You need to collect Evidence fast in order to catch the Spy, so what’s the best plan of movement? Also, each Location has a special ability, so is there an ability you need to use now or do you want to wait a bit longer? After using a Location’s ability, it is no longer available for the rest of the game, so you have to time those uses carefully. Along those lines comes the deduction. Sure, you can try to reveal all the Confiscated Items so that you’re 100% sure that you’ve got the right Evidence. But if you don’t work fast enough, the Spy could escape. Are you willing to risk only knowing for sure what 1 piece of Evidence in order to confront the Spy before it’s too late? Or do you want to save up Clues to purchase that coveted Red Herring, to know for sure what not to keep in order to win. There’s a balance of risk with deduction, as well as a real-time element in the sense that the game has a finite amount of rounds. You’re not racing a physical clock, but once the Discovery deck runs out, the Spy is considered to be on the run, on the verge of escaping. Overall, this is a casual card game, but it has a decent amount of strategy to keep you engaged and entertained.
Let’s touch on components for a second. Obviously, this is just a card game, and this is a preview copy. As I said earlier, the final production could differ from this version, but I have to say that this preview copy is good quality. The cards are nice and thick, the artwork thematic and clean. I imagine the rules would get some final edits for slight clarifications, but for the most part the production quality is already pretty decent.
I have to say that Harsh Shadows surprised me. I’d never played a solo game with deduction elements, and it was actually quite exciting. Usually the deduction games I’ve played are based around sussing out a traitor amongst a group of people, so there is that human interaction element that can really help guide your thoughts and decisions. In Harsh Shadows, there’s nobody but yourself – you can’t look for tells in other players because the cards won’t speak to you. It feels riskier in this way because it’s more a game of odds then, instead of your ability to pick out social cues. Other people may feel differently, but I thought this was a neat twist on the deduction mechanic. If you’re looking for a strategic solo game, that plays relatively quickly and casually, I would definitely recommend checking out Harsh Shadows. It goes live on Kickstarter here in April, and I look forward to following its progress!
Disclaimer: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this preview. The pictured components might not be finalized, and could differ after a successful Kickstarter campaign. -L
Harsh Shadows is a solo card game of hand management, grid movement, and deduction where you are an agent working to collect evidence necessary to apprehend an enemy spy. To setup for a game, randomly place the 9 Location cards in a 3×3 grid. Prepare the Discovery deck as described in the rules, place 1 face-down Discovery card to the right of each Location, and place the rest of the deck off to the side of the grid. Shuffle the Confiscated Item cards and deal the appropriate number to each of the Case File cards – 3 to Evidence, 1 to Red Herring, and 4 to False Leads. The Spy card is placed on the upper-left-most Location, and your Agent card on the lower-right-most Location. Shuffle the Spy Movement cards, and the game is ready to begin! It should look similar to the picture below.
The game is played over a series of rounds in which you will be moving your Agent, performing additional actions, and then moving the Spy. The goal is to track down the Spy, with the correct evidence in hand, before the Spy is able to flee the scene. The first thing that you will do each round is to move your Agent. You may only move to a Location that is adjacent or diagonal to your current Location. Once you move to a new Location, you will draw the top Discovery card from that Location. Discovery cards will either be Items, Clues, or Bombs. Items are collected as potential Evidence, Clues are used to reveal Confiscated Items from Case Files, and Bombs force you to discard a card from your tableau. After you have moved and collected a new Discovery card, you may perform any/all of these additional actions: Use Clue Cards, Place the Tracking Bug, Track the Spy, or Use your current Location’s ability. To Use Clue cards, you will discard a number of clues in order to reveal a Confiscated Item card from a Case File. The Confiscated Items under the Evidence Case File show the 3 items you are required to have in hand to apprehend the Spy by the end of the game. The item under the Red Herring, if you have it in hand at game’s end, will cause you to automatically lose. The 4 items under the False Leads will neither help you win, nor cause you to lose – they simply offer fodder for you to discard when necessary.
Another element required to win the game is to place the Tracking Bug on the Spy. On your turn, you may place the Tracking Bug at your current Location card – if the Spy moves to the Location on a future turn, they are considered to be ‘bugged’ and the Tracking Bug is live! Twice per game, you are allowed to Track the Spy. To do so, you will look at the top card of the Spy Movement deck, and return it to the top. This just lets you see to which Location the Spy is about to move. And finally, you can use your Location’s ability. Once you have taken as many of the additional actions as you want, it is time to move the Spy. Reveal the top card of the Spy Movement deck, and move the Spy in the appropriate direction to a new Location. At the Spy’s new Location, add a Discovery card to its pile. Play continues in this manner until either you make an accusation, or the Spy escapes. In order to make an accusation, you must have Evidence cards in hand, the Spy must be bugged, and you must be at the same Location as the Spy. When you make an accusation, you will reveal any remaining cards under the Evidence and Red Herring Case Files. If you have the 3 matching Evidence cards, you win and apprehend the Spy! BUT if you have the Red Herring card, or you are missing any of the required Evidence cards, you lose. If you haven’t made an accusation in time, the Spy could escape, causing you to lose the game as well – I’ll leave those details for you to discover on your own!
In theory, Harsh Shadows seems like a neat and strategic card game, but how does it hold up in reality? Pretty well, actually! The first thing I want to talk about is how strategic it is, even with its elements of deduction. You need to collect Evidence fast in order to catch the Spy, so what’s the best plan of movement? Also, each Location has a special ability, so is there an ability you need to use now or do you want to wait a bit longer? After using a Location’s ability, it is no longer available for the rest of the game, so you have to time those uses carefully. Along those lines comes the deduction. Sure, you can try to reveal all the Confiscated Items so that you’re 100% sure that you’ve got the right Evidence. But if you don’t work fast enough, the Spy could escape. Are you willing to risk only knowing for sure what 1 piece of Evidence in order to confront the Spy before it’s too late? Or do you want to save up Clues to purchase that coveted Red Herring, to know for sure what not to keep in order to win. There’s a balance of risk with deduction, as well as a real-time element in the sense that the game has a finite amount of rounds. You’re not racing a physical clock, but once the Discovery deck runs out, the Spy is considered to be on the run, on the verge of escaping. Overall, this is a casual card game, but it has a decent amount of strategy to keep you engaged and entertained.
Let’s touch on components for a second. Obviously, this is just a card game, and this is a preview copy. As I said earlier, the final production could differ from this version, but I have to say that this preview copy is good quality. The cards are nice and thick, the artwork thematic and clean. I imagine the rules would get some final edits for slight clarifications, but for the most part the production quality is already pretty decent.
I have to say that Harsh Shadows surprised me. I’d never played a solo game with deduction elements, and it was actually quite exciting. Usually the deduction games I’ve played are based around sussing out a traitor amongst a group of people, so there is that human interaction element that can really help guide your thoughts and decisions. In Harsh Shadows, there’s nobody but yourself – you can’t look for tells in other players because the cards won’t speak to you. It feels riskier in this way because it’s more a game of odds then, instead of your ability to pick out social cues. Other people may feel differently, but I thought this was a neat twist on the deduction mechanic. If you’re looking for a strategic solo game, that plays relatively quickly and casually, I would definitely recommend checking out Harsh Shadows. It goes live on Kickstarter here in April, and I look forward to following its progress!
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Spycies (2020) in Movies
Feb 22, 2020
A lot of the obscure kid's films I see at the cinema just appear with no warning, that means an exciting trip of uncertainty!
Vladimir the cat is a top spy at the Agency but after causing so much damage to property in a recent mission he's sent out to a remote station as penance. There he meets Hector, a tech genius rat who's isolation has left him craving company and eager to bond.
There isn't much excitement in their lives, just Hector's soaps on TV and trying to decide which pizza to heat up. Until one day the dullness is interrupted by a team who infiltrate the compound and steal something from the vault. After they make their escape Vlad and Hector head home to hunt down the perpetrators and get back what was stolen.
What I want to say about Spycies first is that the animation is amazing. I was blown away by some of the shots. The poster states it's from the animators of Despicable Me, Minions and The Secret Life Of Pets, I really thought this was an attempt to cash in on connections, and it is to an extent as this is relatively unknown but it does stand on its own once you see it.
The station that Hector and Vladimir are on is an oil rig out in open water and a lot of the shots are done during a storm, these scenes are incredible. One in particular felt like real footage and not animation, it was absolutely beautiful.
There's no denying that this is Zootropolis/Zootopia with spies, that thought bothered me more after watching it than it did during. It feels like they made a very specific selection of animals to be different. The other big difference is that it's clear it's set at some point in the future, and this is probably my only major issue.
Futuristic isn't something you really get from the world of Spycies, apart from when you look at the vehicles. The opening sequence, while epic on action movie scales, was very chaotic and the vehicles being new and unusual just added to that. With so much tradition around the film this felt out of place.
As an adult watching this film it was noticeable that it was made for a foreign market, it has clear regional influences that might not land for everyone but I suspect that the kids won't be too bothered about them.
I quite like the story but it isn't necessarily anything new. James Bond (yes, there's a Bond, James Bond moment in there) meets Zootropolis with flashes of Spies In Disguise. Familiar might feel stale but I enjoyed it. The script doesn't quite fit with the audience it's aimed at, it's probably not quite fun enough for kids but there's plenty of action and slapstick to keep them entertained as well as adults.
[On the title itself... I'm assuming it's a play on the word "species"?]
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/02/spycies-movie-review.html
Vladimir the cat is a top spy at the Agency but after causing so much damage to property in a recent mission he's sent out to a remote station as penance. There he meets Hector, a tech genius rat who's isolation has left him craving company and eager to bond.
There isn't much excitement in their lives, just Hector's soaps on TV and trying to decide which pizza to heat up. Until one day the dullness is interrupted by a team who infiltrate the compound and steal something from the vault. After they make their escape Vlad and Hector head home to hunt down the perpetrators and get back what was stolen.
What I want to say about Spycies first is that the animation is amazing. I was blown away by some of the shots. The poster states it's from the animators of Despicable Me, Minions and The Secret Life Of Pets, I really thought this was an attempt to cash in on connections, and it is to an extent as this is relatively unknown but it does stand on its own once you see it.
The station that Hector and Vladimir are on is an oil rig out in open water and a lot of the shots are done during a storm, these scenes are incredible. One in particular felt like real footage and not animation, it was absolutely beautiful.
There's no denying that this is Zootropolis/Zootopia with spies, that thought bothered me more after watching it than it did during. It feels like they made a very specific selection of animals to be different. The other big difference is that it's clear it's set at some point in the future, and this is probably my only major issue.
Futuristic isn't something you really get from the world of Spycies, apart from when you look at the vehicles. The opening sequence, while epic on action movie scales, was very chaotic and the vehicles being new and unusual just added to that. With so much tradition around the film this felt out of place.
As an adult watching this film it was noticeable that it was made for a foreign market, it has clear regional influences that might not land for everyone but I suspect that the kids won't be too bothered about them.
I quite like the story but it isn't necessarily anything new. James Bond (yes, there's a Bond, James Bond moment in there) meets Zootropolis with flashes of Spies In Disguise. Familiar might feel stale but I enjoyed it. The script doesn't quite fit with the audience it's aimed at, it's probably not quite fun enough for kids but there's plenty of action and slapstick to keep them entertained as well as adults.
[On the title itself... I'm assuming it's a play on the word "species"?]
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/02/spycies-movie-review.html
Adventure and Redemption
I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
Is the Bible really gospel truth? This is the question the honourable, academic Robert Babcock aims to find out on his quest to find the earliest copies of the gospels in order to prove the reliability of the story of Jesus as recounted in the King James Bible. However, this is not the key focus of Stephen Taylor’s fictional novel, Gospels. The main character is the perfidious John Campbell-John, a rogue, imposter and swindler who flees 19th-century England in an attempt to escape from his debts.
John meets the magnanimous Robert in Venice and, despite being polar opposites, become firm friends. After being honest for the first time in his life, admitting to owing thousands of pounds in gambling debts, Robert offers John the opportunity to accompany him on his quest through the deserts of Egypt. John accepts and the pair finds themselves on an adventure of discovery and personal redemption.
John and Robert make an unlikely but excellent team. Robert’s knowledge of the Bible and ancient history is vital, however, John’s propensity for falsehoods and cunningness gets them out of a few scrapes and tricky situations. Nonetheless, it is difficult for John to give up his old ways and his insular behaviour threatens to get them in more trouble.
Fortunately, Robert’s humility begins to influence the young scoundrel, as does his penchant for historical artefacts. As the story progresses, John begins to leave his past behind and becomes interested in Robert’s work, learning new things about Egyptian culture and the origins of the Bible. However, when a new gospel comes to light that threatens the whole of Christianity, Robert does not know what to do; and only John can give him counsel.
John Campbell-John is a character that the author introduced in a previous book. However, the timelines are not sequential, therefore Gospels is a stand-alone novel. The time frame for this book needed to be set in 1835 to correspond with historical truths. Although Robert’s discovery of a Gospel of Thaddeus Jude is an invention of the author, the quest itself is based on the journeys of three 19th-century Bible hunters. Stephen Taylor has conducted an enormous amount of research, including the biographies of Robert Curzon, Constantin von Tischendorf and Émile Amélineau who, on separate occasions, sought the same knowledge as the fictional Robert Babcock.
Despite being titled Gospels, the novel, for the most part, focuses on John Campbell-John and his wicked ways. Through a first-person narrative, John explains his past, his betrayal of a friend, and his addiction to gambling. Initially, he has no qualms about his behaviour and acts only for himself and his selfish greed. Whilst Robert goes in search of knowledge, John goes on a journey of redemption, coming to terms with his previous wrongdoings. However, acknowledging these faults is not enough, he needs to turn away from these roguish ways.
It is disappointing that the narrative does not focus more on the gospels, both real and imagined. There was enormous scope for an in-depth look at the life of Jesus and the inconsistencies in the Bible. The fictitious Gospel of Thaddeus Jude evokes a similar reaction in Robert as the Non-Canonical Gospel of Thomas found in the 19th-century had on many devout Christians. There was so much potential with this direction of thought, however, the author passes over it in preference to the life of John Campbell-John.
Slow to begin but increasingly interesting as it progresses, Gospels is a book of many themes. History, both 19th-century and ancient; religion, although not a Christian story; and achievement and absolution combine together to produce a unique tale that takes the reader from the back alleys of London to the River Nile and the deserts of Sinai. A subtle clue in the prologue keeps readers alert as they await the conclusion of the adventure – an ending that ambiguously reveals whether John moves on from the follies of his past.
Is the Bible really gospel truth? This is the question the honourable, academic Robert Babcock aims to find out on his quest to find the earliest copies of the gospels in order to prove the reliability of the story of Jesus as recounted in the King James Bible. However, this is not the key focus of Stephen Taylor’s fictional novel, Gospels. The main character is the perfidious John Campbell-John, a rogue, imposter and swindler who flees 19th-century England in an attempt to escape from his debts.
John meets the magnanimous Robert in Venice and, despite being polar opposites, become firm friends. After being honest for the first time in his life, admitting to owing thousands of pounds in gambling debts, Robert offers John the opportunity to accompany him on his quest through the deserts of Egypt. John accepts and the pair finds themselves on an adventure of discovery and personal redemption.
John and Robert make an unlikely but excellent team. Robert’s knowledge of the Bible and ancient history is vital, however, John’s propensity for falsehoods and cunningness gets them out of a few scrapes and tricky situations. Nonetheless, it is difficult for John to give up his old ways and his insular behaviour threatens to get them in more trouble.
Fortunately, Robert’s humility begins to influence the young scoundrel, as does his penchant for historical artefacts. As the story progresses, John begins to leave his past behind and becomes interested in Robert’s work, learning new things about Egyptian culture and the origins of the Bible. However, when a new gospel comes to light that threatens the whole of Christianity, Robert does not know what to do; and only John can give him counsel.
John Campbell-John is a character that the author introduced in a previous book. However, the timelines are not sequential, therefore Gospels is a stand-alone novel. The time frame for this book needed to be set in 1835 to correspond with historical truths. Although Robert’s discovery of a Gospel of Thaddeus Jude is an invention of the author, the quest itself is based on the journeys of three 19th-century Bible hunters. Stephen Taylor has conducted an enormous amount of research, including the biographies of Robert Curzon, Constantin von Tischendorf and Émile Amélineau who, on separate occasions, sought the same knowledge as the fictional Robert Babcock.
Despite being titled Gospels, the novel, for the most part, focuses on John Campbell-John and his wicked ways. Through a first-person narrative, John explains his past, his betrayal of a friend, and his addiction to gambling. Initially, he has no qualms about his behaviour and acts only for himself and his selfish greed. Whilst Robert goes in search of knowledge, John goes on a journey of redemption, coming to terms with his previous wrongdoings. However, acknowledging these faults is not enough, he needs to turn away from these roguish ways.
It is disappointing that the narrative does not focus more on the gospels, both real and imagined. There was enormous scope for an in-depth look at the life of Jesus and the inconsistencies in the Bible. The fictitious Gospel of Thaddeus Jude evokes a similar reaction in Robert as the Non-Canonical Gospel of Thomas found in the 19th-century had on many devout Christians. There was so much potential with this direction of thought, however, the author passes over it in preference to the life of John Campbell-John.
Slow to begin but increasingly interesting as it progresses, Gospels is a book of many themes. History, both 19th-century and ancient; religion, although not a Christian story; and achievement and absolution combine together to produce a unique tale that takes the reader from the back alleys of London to the River Nile and the deserts of Sinai. A subtle clue in the prologue keeps readers alert as they await the conclusion of the adventure – an ending that ambiguously reveals whether John moves on from the follies of his past.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Savage in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>).
When I read the blurb for this novella, I was a little bit interested especially when it came to the mysterious village. The whole creature thing isn't usually what I read when it comes to the horror genre, but as this was a short read, I thought I'd give it a try. However, it wasn't something I can say I enjoyed.
I don't really like or dislike the title. It's a bit plain and boring, and I don't really see what it has to do with the book unless it pertains to what the villagers call the undisciplined. No mention of the word savage was ever used.
The cover of this book reminds me of a book from the time of Alfred Hitchcock. I believe that the cover does suit the book.
The world building starts off being believable. It was quite easy to picture a man driving along a country road, his car dying, and then he mysteriously gets transported to a strange village. However, the author starts talking about angles and shapes, and I just found myself being really confused. I wouldn't say this made the world building any less believable but just confusing, at least for me.
I thought the pacing to be a bit too slow for my liking. There's not really any action until almost the very end of the book. Luckily this book is short or else I would've quit reading it before I was finished.
The plot is interesting enough. A man's car breaks down just outside some strange village. The man goes into the village and notices how perfectly angular the people and the landscape is. The villagers start talking about the undisciplined. The man ends up getting locked up but manages to escape. However, he runs into something a lot worse than the strange villagers. So yes, the plot line was interesting enough, but I just felt it was executed a bit poorly. I felt as if the ending didn't tie in with the whole book. I don't want to give away any spoilers, but I will say that if the author was going for that ending, maybe he should've rethought about whether or not to have a mysterious village in the book as the village and the ending don't really mesh well.
I did like Daryl. He seemed like your everyday, normal working man. However, I think he was a bit too intellectual for me to fully relate to. As for the villagers, I can't really comment on them because I felt like there wasn't enough back story on the village and its people to fully form an opinion. I would've liked more back story on the village, and I feel that with more back story, the book would've been less confusing and more interesting.
There wasn't much dialogue in the book which I found disappointing. It seemed like all that was in the book was adjectives and too much description for my liking. Not only that, but I felt that the words used were too intellectual for a common reader such as myself. A lot of the time I didn't even know what the words meant, and this lead to a lot of confusion and lack of interest for me. It's just too wordy of a book if that makes sense. There are a few swear words and a tiny bit of violence. There is also a little bit of sexual references but only in one or two scenes, and it's not very graphic.
Overall, Savage by Gary Fry has a promising story line, but with all the big words, too much description and not enough dialogue, it just falls flat. It doesn't help that the mysterious village has no back story and that the ending doesn't really mesh with the rest of the story.
Personally, I wouldn't recommend this book unless you know words that aren't used in every day conversations or if you're an English major. I'd say this book is written for those 18+.
<b>I'd give Savage by Gary Fry a 2 out of 5.</b>
(I received a free ecopy of this book from the publisher through Netgalley for an honest and unbiased review).
When I read the blurb for this novella, I was a little bit interested especially when it came to the mysterious village. The whole creature thing isn't usually what I read when it comes to the horror genre, but as this was a short read, I thought I'd give it a try. However, it wasn't something I can say I enjoyed.
I don't really like or dislike the title. It's a bit plain and boring, and I don't really see what it has to do with the book unless it pertains to what the villagers call the undisciplined. No mention of the word savage was ever used.
The cover of this book reminds me of a book from the time of Alfred Hitchcock. I believe that the cover does suit the book.
The world building starts off being believable. It was quite easy to picture a man driving along a country road, his car dying, and then he mysteriously gets transported to a strange village. However, the author starts talking about angles and shapes, and I just found myself being really confused. I wouldn't say this made the world building any less believable but just confusing, at least for me.
I thought the pacing to be a bit too slow for my liking. There's not really any action until almost the very end of the book. Luckily this book is short or else I would've quit reading it before I was finished.
The plot is interesting enough. A man's car breaks down just outside some strange village. The man goes into the village and notices how perfectly angular the people and the landscape is. The villagers start talking about the undisciplined. The man ends up getting locked up but manages to escape. However, he runs into something a lot worse than the strange villagers. So yes, the plot line was interesting enough, but I just felt it was executed a bit poorly. I felt as if the ending didn't tie in with the whole book. I don't want to give away any spoilers, but I will say that if the author was going for that ending, maybe he should've rethought about whether or not to have a mysterious village in the book as the village and the ending don't really mesh well.
I did like Daryl. He seemed like your everyday, normal working man. However, I think he was a bit too intellectual for me to fully relate to. As for the villagers, I can't really comment on them because I felt like there wasn't enough back story on the village and its people to fully form an opinion. I would've liked more back story on the village, and I feel that with more back story, the book would've been less confusing and more interesting.
There wasn't much dialogue in the book which I found disappointing. It seemed like all that was in the book was adjectives and too much description for my liking. Not only that, but I felt that the words used were too intellectual for a common reader such as myself. A lot of the time I didn't even know what the words meant, and this lead to a lot of confusion and lack of interest for me. It's just too wordy of a book if that makes sense. There are a few swear words and a tiny bit of violence. There is also a little bit of sexual references but only in one or two scenes, and it's not very graphic.
Overall, Savage by Gary Fry has a promising story line, but with all the big words, too much description and not enough dialogue, it just falls flat. It doesn't help that the mysterious village has no back story and that the ending doesn't really mesh with the rest of the story.
Personally, I wouldn't recommend this book unless you know words that aren't used in every day conversations or if you're an English major. I'd say this book is written for those 18+.
<b>I'd give Savage by Gary Fry a 2 out of 5.</b>
(I received a free ecopy of this book from the publisher through Netgalley for an honest and unbiased review).