Search
Search results
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Broken Dolls (Broken Dolls, #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>
<strong><em>Broken Dolls</em> is like a creepy version of <em>Toy Story</em></strong> (I suppose <em>Toy Story</em> could be creepy...) with live, animated dolls created from humans. They're supposed to be unemotional and feel nothing – not pain, not happiness, not loneliness...
For three decades, Ella lived her life as a doll, assisting the Professor in his creations. In those years, she's forgotten about her humanity and seems perfectly happy as a dancing doll until the Professor unveils his latest creation: a goth doll named Lisa.
Here are my thoughts on the Professor: I deem him an ingenious mad scientist. He is absolutely <em>insane</em>, feels guilty about the past, and wants to change the world. I honestly don't know what to say about the guy aside from the fact I actually feel just a tad bit bad for him in the long run.
But as odd as it might be, I enjoyed the aspect of humans being turned into dolls and living a supposedly ideal life with no emotions or feelings and a life controlled by the Professor. I didn't expect Ella to have much of a voice or a personality aside from what she knew during her time as a doll (also more robotic sounding), and it is definitely the case in the early parts of <em>Broken Dolls</em> when Puxty sets up Ella's world in a Toy Story-esque fashion.
Ella's world revolves around the Professor making her a comfy room (lots of pink) in a chest in the attic of his home (that sentence sounds weird). To pass the time away, Ella spends her days locked up in the attic practicing ballet and recording adventures from her imagination into a recorder. The attic comes out a little bland – nothing remotely interesting and Ella's day-to-day actions would have sounded repetitively boring if Puxty didn't bring Lisa and Gabby into the story.
When Ella meets Lisa, however, she doesn't like Lisa; Lisa makes multiple attempts to destroy Ella because of the theory she has about Ella and all the other dolls. Around the same time, Ella meets the Professor's granddaughter, Gabby, a girl who has a virus that will eventually lead her to an inevitable fate. Like many kids, Gabby is adventurous, and she adores and protects Ella from the moment they meet. Unfortunately for Gabby, the Professor also has plans to turn Gabby into a doll-like Ella and prevent her from dying.
In the time Ella meets Lisa and Gabby, she starts to develop feelings and emotions and becomes more curious about her time before she turned into a doll. With the help of Lisa and another doll, she also strives to dig out all of the Professor's secrets to his experiments before Gabby becomes an Ella-sized playmate. But not only does Ella uncovers the Professor's secrets, she uncovers hers as well and Puxty gives us a glimpse into Ella's human life before becoming a doll.
I personally think Ella is better off as a doll compared to being a human. With the brief glimpse of Ella's human life, she starts out extremely happy and becomes really pessimistic later on – I don't know how I would be able to handle human Ella. Since <em>Broken Dolls</em> has a sequel coming out sometime in 2016, I'm really curious how Ella will cope with her doll life as everyone around her knows who she really is and continues on with their lives.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-broken-dolls-by-tyrolin-puxty/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<strong><em>Broken Dolls</em> is like a creepy version of <em>Toy Story</em></strong> (I suppose <em>Toy Story</em> could be creepy...) with live, animated dolls created from humans. They're supposed to be unemotional and feel nothing – not pain, not happiness, not loneliness...
For three decades, Ella lived her life as a doll, assisting the Professor in his creations. In those years, she's forgotten about her humanity and seems perfectly happy as a dancing doll until the Professor unveils his latest creation: a goth doll named Lisa.
Here are my thoughts on the Professor: I deem him an ingenious mad scientist. He is absolutely <em>insane</em>, feels guilty about the past, and wants to change the world. I honestly don't know what to say about the guy aside from the fact I actually feel just a tad bit bad for him in the long run.
But as odd as it might be, I enjoyed the aspect of humans being turned into dolls and living a supposedly ideal life with no emotions or feelings and a life controlled by the Professor. I didn't expect Ella to have much of a voice or a personality aside from what she knew during her time as a doll (also more robotic sounding), and it is definitely the case in the early parts of <em>Broken Dolls</em> when Puxty sets up Ella's world in a Toy Story-esque fashion.
Ella's world revolves around the Professor making her a comfy room (lots of pink) in a chest in the attic of his home (that sentence sounds weird). To pass the time away, Ella spends her days locked up in the attic practicing ballet and recording adventures from her imagination into a recorder. The attic comes out a little bland – nothing remotely interesting and Ella's day-to-day actions would have sounded repetitively boring if Puxty didn't bring Lisa and Gabby into the story.
When Ella meets Lisa, however, she doesn't like Lisa; Lisa makes multiple attempts to destroy Ella because of the theory she has about Ella and all the other dolls. Around the same time, Ella meets the Professor's granddaughter, Gabby, a girl who has a virus that will eventually lead her to an inevitable fate. Like many kids, Gabby is adventurous, and she adores and protects Ella from the moment they meet. Unfortunately for Gabby, the Professor also has plans to turn Gabby into a doll-like Ella and prevent her from dying.
In the time Ella meets Lisa and Gabby, she starts to develop feelings and emotions and becomes more curious about her time before she turned into a doll. With the help of Lisa and another doll, she also strives to dig out all of the Professor's secrets to his experiments before Gabby becomes an Ella-sized playmate. But not only does Ella uncovers the Professor's secrets, she uncovers hers as well and Puxty gives us a glimpse into Ella's human life before becoming a doll.
I personally think Ella is better off as a doll compared to being a human. With the brief glimpse of Ella's human life, she starts out extremely happy and becomes really pessimistic later on – I don't know how I would be able to handle human Ella. Since <em>Broken Dolls</em> has a sequel coming out sometime in 2016, I'm really curious how Ella will cope with her doll life as everyone around her knows who she really is and continues on with their lives.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-broken-dolls-by-tyrolin-puxty/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Two Popes (2019) in Movies
Jan 26, 2020 (Updated Jan 26, 2020)
Fantastic performances from two old acting pros.
Being inaugurated as a new pope in the last century must have been a source of enormous pride. But there must also have been a nagging thought... at some point you are going to be paraded, stiff as a board, around your work courtyard before being taken back inside to your place of work and buried there!
All that changed in 2013 when Pope Benedict XVI resigned, the first pope to voluntarily do so since Pope Celestine V in 1294. (Pope Gregory XII also resigned in 1415, but he was effectively forced to).
This movie tells the story of that curious situation, when Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio (played by Jonathan Pryce) ended up as Pope Francis while Benedict (Anthony Hopkins) was still alive. The official reason for the pope's resignation appears to have been his advanced age. But the film paints a rather different picture.
The movie starts back in 2005 as we enter the papal conclave. Benedict (Cardinal Ratzinger, as was) is the highly-political German cardinal who desperately wants the papacy; Bergoglio is the highly respected Argentinian cardinal who doesn't seek the office but might have it thrust upon him. (Clearly, when the white smoke clears, history has dictated the outcome).
But flash forward to 2013 and Bergoglio will get another bite of the cherry. Is he worthy of the role? Through flashbacks we return to Perón's unsettling rule over Argentina and the events that made the man.
The two stars are simply outstanding together, and it's no surprise at all that both have been nominated in the Oscar acting categories. They are almost joint leads. But - perhaps to give the film its best awards-season shot - Pryce is down for Best Actor and Hopkins is down for Best Supporting Actor.
Anthony Hopkins in particular for me shone with the brilliant quietness and subtle facial movements that are the mark of a truly confident actor. Less is more.
I was enjoying this movie enormously up until we flashed back to the Argentinian sub-plot. Set in the time of Perón's "Dirty War" when a huge number of people - estimates range from 9,000 to 30,000 - simply went "missing". There's nothing wrong with this sequence of the film. For example, a reunion of Bergoglio with a persecuted priest, Father Jalics (Lisandro Fiks) - is brilliantly and movingly done. It's just that for me it seemed so disjointed. It was jarring to switch from this Evita-era drama to the gentle drama of the papal plot.
If the movie had been 30 minutes shorter and focused on the mental struggles of Benedict I would have preferred it. Curiously - we don't really get to fully understand his divergence from the faith. Bergoglio gets no end of back-story. But Ratzinger's is probably just as interesting, but not explored.
This is still a really fine movie and will appeal to older folks who like a story rich with character acting and not heavy on the action or special effects. The director is Fernando Meirelles (who interestingly directed the Rio Olympics opening ceremony!) and it's written by Anthony McCarten, the man behind the screenplays for "The Theory of Everything", "Darkest Hour" and "Bohemian Rhapsody".
You may still be able to find this in selected cinemas (e.g. Curzon) but it is also streaming on Netflix, which is where I had to watch it.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies at https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/01/26/one-manns-movies-film-review-the-two-popes-2019/ ).
All that changed in 2013 when Pope Benedict XVI resigned, the first pope to voluntarily do so since Pope Celestine V in 1294. (Pope Gregory XII also resigned in 1415, but he was effectively forced to).
This movie tells the story of that curious situation, when Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio (played by Jonathan Pryce) ended up as Pope Francis while Benedict (Anthony Hopkins) was still alive. The official reason for the pope's resignation appears to have been his advanced age. But the film paints a rather different picture.
The movie starts back in 2005 as we enter the papal conclave. Benedict (Cardinal Ratzinger, as was) is the highly-political German cardinal who desperately wants the papacy; Bergoglio is the highly respected Argentinian cardinal who doesn't seek the office but might have it thrust upon him. (Clearly, when the white smoke clears, history has dictated the outcome).
But flash forward to 2013 and Bergoglio will get another bite of the cherry. Is he worthy of the role? Through flashbacks we return to Perón's unsettling rule over Argentina and the events that made the man.
The two stars are simply outstanding together, and it's no surprise at all that both have been nominated in the Oscar acting categories. They are almost joint leads. But - perhaps to give the film its best awards-season shot - Pryce is down for Best Actor and Hopkins is down for Best Supporting Actor.
Anthony Hopkins in particular for me shone with the brilliant quietness and subtle facial movements that are the mark of a truly confident actor. Less is more.
I was enjoying this movie enormously up until we flashed back to the Argentinian sub-plot. Set in the time of Perón's "Dirty War" when a huge number of people - estimates range from 9,000 to 30,000 - simply went "missing". There's nothing wrong with this sequence of the film. For example, a reunion of Bergoglio with a persecuted priest, Father Jalics (Lisandro Fiks) - is brilliantly and movingly done. It's just that for me it seemed so disjointed. It was jarring to switch from this Evita-era drama to the gentle drama of the papal plot.
If the movie had been 30 minutes shorter and focused on the mental struggles of Benedict I would have preferred it. Curiously - we don't really get to fully understand his divergence from the faith. Bergoglio gets no end of back-story. But Ratzinger's is probably just as interesting, but not explored.
This is still a really fine movie and will appeal to older folks who like a story rich with character acting and not heavy on the action or special effects. The director is Fernando Meirelles (who interestingly directed the Rio Olympics opening ceremony!) and it's written by Anthony McCarten, the man behind the screenplays for "The Theory of Everything", "Darkest Hour" and "Bohemian Rhapsody".
You may still be able to find this in selected cinemas (e.g. Curzon) but it is also streaming on Netflix, which is where I had to watch it.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies at https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/01/26/one-manns-movies-film-review-the-two-popes-2019/ ).
Neil Goddard (3 KP) rated Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019) in Movies
Feb 27, 2020
No Actors Required
Contains spoilers, click to show
I have a theory about movies that are 100% CGI; when someone isn’t a great actor and they are required only to supply a voice and they still aren’t very good, it really stands out.
Now, imagine you’re watching a film. I don’t know, maybe a bit creature epic, larger than life with whole cities being destroyed. The creature’s look amazing and the carnage they are wreaking is fabulous; buildings, helicopters, cars, all flying around the screen with a swish of a mighty reptilian tale. Now imagine that the actors, real people, not CGI, are, at best, bland and in some instances just outright terrible.
Annoying isn’t it?
It would lead one to believe that the film makers didn’t really put any stock in the human interactions, rather just gave a huge wad of cash to an SFX company and said, “Fill your boots, the more the merrier, make everything f---ing enormous!”
Godzilla (2014) was the second time Hollywood has attempted to make a film featuring Japan’s kaiju supremo and it was the first successful attempt from Hollywood, given that the 1998 Roland Emmerich attempt was basically Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997) but with added daddy issues (Roland Emmerich’s trademark).
Gareth Edwards 2014 first entry in the MonsterVerse was a huge success, financially and artistically. We saw a Godzilla that was of a scale we’d always wanted, towering over buildings, a reptilian God and we’re just the ants trying to not get squished.
Godzilla: King of Monsters attempts to up the ante by throwing a dozen or so monsters at the story. “Godzilla fought two MUTO’s did he, well… hold my beer!” Yeah, we’ll hold your beer while you get Millie Bobby Brown to stand there teary eyed for most of the film (a waste), Vera Farmiga to go from bereaved workaholic, to eco-terrorist to pointless self-sacrifice (unfathomable), and for Kyle Chandler to… well, Christ knows what Kyle Chandler was doing, apart from spitting terrible dialogue badly and then standing/sitting/walking looking angry but unconvincingly. Bradley Whitford provided some nice comic relief, he does droll sarcasm immensely well, Charles Dance is underused (and then forgotten about) and Zhang Ziyi tries to out-Kyle-Chandler Kyle Chandler in the bland, borderline useless stakes.
Worse than any failing on the human emotion side of the story are the huge liberties they take with global travel, like, one of side of the world to the other in a very short space of time. I mean Godzilla can do it because of some tunnels under the sea that he uses, possible the ones used in the science-denying sci-fi car crash abomination The Core (2003), but for the humans to just pop to Venezuela or the Antarctic is unforgivable.
This kind of leaps of reality always leads me to lose interest in the events in a film and start thinking around the script. In a film where everything everyone says is of dire emergency or import and then we see them in another part of the world some time later, what have they been talking about for all that time. Have they been napping? If so, it’s hasn’t eased any of the pointless angry posturing. Have they been chatting about boring everyday stuff? There is no hint of a relationship between any of these people who are spending potentially their last moments on earth together with alarming regularity. The world is possible about to get destroyed and you are in direct harm’s way! Shut up and nut up.
Now, imagine you’re watching a film. I don’t know, maybe a bit creature epic, larger than life with whole cities being destroyed. The creature’s look amazing and the carnage they are wreaking is fabulous; buildings, helicopters, cars, all flying around the screen with a swish of a mighty reptilian tale. Now imagine that the actors, real people, not CGI, are, at best, bland and in some instances just outright terrible.
Annoying isn’t it?
It would lead one to believe that the film makers didn’t really put any stock in the human interactions, rather just gave a huge wad of cash to an SFX company and said, “Fill your boots, the more the merrier, make everything f---ing enormous!”
Godzilla (2014) was the second time Hollywood has attempted to make a film featuring Japan’s kaiju supremo and it was the first successful attempt from Hollywood, given that the 1998 Roland Emmerich attempt was basically Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997) but with added daddy issues (Roland Emmerich’s trademark).
Gareth Edwards 2014 first entry in the MonsterVerse was a huge success, financially and artistically. We saw a Godzilla that was of a scale we’d always wanted, towering over buildings, a reptilian God and we’re just the ants trying to not get squished.
Godzilla: King of Monsters attempts to up the ante by throwing a dozen or so monsters at the story. “Godzilla fought two MUTO’s did he, well… hold my beer!” Yeah, we’ll hold your beer while you get Millie Bobby Brown to stand there teary eyed for most of the film (a waste), Vera Farmiga to go from bereaved workaholic, to eco-terrorist to pointless self-sacrifice (unfathomable), and for Kyle Chandler to… well, Christ knows what Kyle Chandler was doing, apart from spitting terrible dialogue badly and then standing/sitting/walking looking angry but unconvincingly. Bradley Whitford provided some nice comic relief, he does droll sarcasm immensely well, Charles Dance is underused (and then forgotten about) and Zhang Ziyi tries to out-Kyle-Chandler Kyle Chandler in the bland, borderline useless stakes.
Worse than any failing on the human emotion side of the story are the huge liberties they take with global travel, like, one of side of the world to the other in a very short space of time. I mean Godzilla can do it because of some tunnels under the sea that he uses, possible the ones used in the science-denying sci-fi car crash abomination The Core (2003), but for the humans to just pop to Venezuela or the Antarctic is unforgivable.
This kind of leaps of reality always leads me to lose interest in the events in a film and start thinking around the script. In a film where everything everyone says is of dire emergency or import and then we see them in another part of the world some time later, what have they been talking about for all that time. Have they been napping? If so, it’s hasn’t eased any of the pointless angry posturing. Have they been chatting about boring everyday stuff? There is no hint of a relationship between any of these people who are spending potentially their last moments on earth together with alarming regularity. The world is possible about to get destroyed and you are in direct harm’s way! Shut up and nut up.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
When I first heard about this movie, I was expecting the worst. I’ve been exposed to my fair share of B-type horror movies (I was raised on “Critters,” “Ghoulies,” “Killer Clowns from Outerspace,” and everything else one can imagine as a kid). I laughed at the SyFy channel’s monster movie line-up and was sick unto death of zombie movies. That said, I wasn’t entirely excited for this movie’s premier. My boyfriend, however, was chomping at the bit. He adores B-type
movies and this was no exception. And, to my honest surprise, it wasn’t as awful as I had wholly envisioned in my head.
The movie starts with a young Abraham Lincoln (Benjamin Walker) defending his slave friend, Will Johnson (Anthony Mackie), from abuse at the hands of a slave trader. A scuffle ensues and Abraham’s father is ultimately met face-to-face with “Adam” (Rufus Sewell), a well-known and well-feared trader in the lands. The two exchange heated words with Adam threatening to extract his revenge by some unknown means. What seems later that evening, Abraham’s mother is attacked by Adam as young Abraham watches from the shadows. Adam, as one can guess, is a vampire and leaves Abraham’s mother in such a state she cannot recover. Upon her death, Abraham vows revenge, devoting the next ten years of his life to killing Adam.
As the reader can surmise, Abraham is ill-equipped to face Adam and when the day finally arrives, he finds himself wholly unprepared for the task. Cue the entrance of Henry Sturgess, Vampire Hunter. Saving Abraham from an early demise, Henry (Dominic Cooper) takes the young man under his wing and teaches him the way of vampire hunting. He teaches young Abe that the vampires control the whole of the south, using the slave trade as their means for fresh and easily accessible blood. Having never tolerated slavery of any kind, Abraham is infuriated by this and his desire to eradicate the vampire colony grows.
From there he is bequeathed his infamous axe, its edge lined in silver, and we watch as young Abe grows and matures as a skilled warrior before our eyes. When the time comes, Abraham is sent away on a mission to kill select vampires in a quiet town, vampires who pose as noted professionals and townspersons during the day. As a rule, Henry cautions Abraham not to make any friends or form any kind of attachments. Of course, it’s at this point he meets Mary Todd and that whole theory goes out the window. In addition to his vampire hunting, he also begins his career in politics and as a renowned orator. Given one’s knowledge of history, we can see where this all leads.
I won’t divulge the whole of the story here – I’m sure you can imagine where it goes and what comes of it. That said, aside from the over-the-top fighting scenes and certain drawn out moments (the horse stampede and train fight immediately come to mind), it wasn’t as awful as I had originally envisioned. The movie is entertaining and still
retains a fair amount of the B-movie cheesiness one hopes for in watching it. Obviously, the storyline is wracked with historical inaccuracies and unlikely moments (really, Abe Lincoln survives a horse being thrown at him?), but it’s a B-movie and I wasn’t expecting perfection.
If you’re looking for something that offers sheer entertainment and nothing further, this is a movie for you then. You won’t be blown away by the acting skills, the special effects are decent enough (don’t pay extra for 3-D though – it was awful), and while the movie feels slow and drags at parts, over-all it’s rather entertaining for what it is.
movies and this was no exception. And, to my honest surprise, it wasn’t as awful as I had wholly envisioned in my head.
The movie starts with a young Abraham Lincoln (Benjamin Walker) defending his slave friend, Will Johnson (Anthony Mackie), from abuse at the hands of a slave trader. A scuffle ensues and Abraham’s father is ultimately met face-to-face with “Adam” (Rufus Sewell), a well-known and well-feared trader in the lands. The two exchange heated words with Adam threatening to extract his revenge by some unknown means. What seems later that evening, Abraham’s mother is attacked by Adam as young Abraham watches from the shadows. Adam, as one can guess, is a vampire and leaves Abraham’s mother in such a state she cannot recover. Upon her death, Abraham vows revenge, devoting the next ten years of his life to killing Adam.
As the reader can surmise, Abraham is ill-equipped to face Adam and when the day finally arrives, he finds himself wholly unprepared for the task. Cue the entrance of Henry Sturgess, Vampire Hunter. Saving Abraham from an early demise, Henry (Dominic Cooper) takes the young man under his wing and teaches him the way of vampire hunting. He teaches young Abe that the vampires control the whole of the south, using the slave trade as their means for fresh and easily accessible blood. Having never tolerated slavery of any kind, Abraham is infuriated by this and his desire to eradicate the vampire colony grows.
From there he is bequeathed his infamous axe, its edge lined in silver, and we watch as young Abe grows and matures as a skilled warrior before our eyes. When the time comes, Abraham is sent away on a mission to kill select vampires in a quiet town, vampires who pose as noted professionals and townspersons during the day. As a rule, Henry cautions Abraham not to make any friends or form any kind of attachments. Of course, it’s at this point he meets Mary Todd and that whole theory goes out the window. In addition to his vampire hunting, he also begins his career in politics and as a renowned orator. Given one’s knowledge of history, we can see where this all leads.
I won’t divulge the whole of the story here – I’m sure you can imagine where it goes and what comes of it. That said, aside from the over-the-top fighting scenes and certain drawn out moments (the horse stampede and train fight immediately come to mind), it wasn’t as awful as I had originally envisioned. The movie is entertaining and still
retains a fair amount of the B-movie cheesiness one hopes for in watching it. Obviously, the storyline is wracked with historical inaccuracies and unlikely moments (really, Abe Lincoln survives a horse being thrown at him?), but it’s a B-movie and I wasn’t expecting perfection.
If you’re looking for something that offers sheer entertainment and nothing further, this is a movie for you then. You won’t be blown away by the acting skills, the special effects are decent enough (don’t pay extra for 3-D though – it was awful), and while the movie feels slow and drags at parts, over-all it’s rather entertaining for what it is.
NCERT Solutions for NCERT Books for Class 1 to 12
Education
App
NCERT Solutions by Meritnation is a completely free app which puts the solution to all NCERT Books &...
To the farm!
Book and Education
App
* Nominated for the prestigious Cybils Awards 2012 in the Books category * Best10APPS said: "The...
Fuel Hedging and Risk Management: Strategies for Airlines, Shippers and Other Consumers
S. Mohamed Dafir and Vishnu Nandan Gajjala
Book
A hands-on guide to navigating the new fuel markets Fuel Hedging and Risk Management: Strategies for...
The Facet LIS Textbook Collection
David Bawden, Alison Jane Pickard, Lyn Robinson and Karen Calhoun
Book
The Facet LIS Textbook Collection contains ten core textbooks for students studying library and...
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated GPS in Tabletop Games
Mar 23, 2021
One thing that I’m always on the hunt for is a good quality filler game. Something that is fun, light, fast, and entertaining for when you need a break between bigger games. So when I saw this Kickstarter for 3 small 10-minute games, I knew I was in luck! This review is for one of those games, GPS. Did it hold up to my expectations? Keep reading to find out!
GPS is a racing game in which players are launching satellites into orbit, and attempting to be the first to organize their satellite chain in numerical order. To setup the game, assemble the planet pieces and spinner, and give each player their 12 numbered satellites. Players shuffle their satellites face-down, and then flip 3 of them face-up. The game is now ready to begin!
Each turn, a player will spin the spinner. Once the spinner has stopped, every player will place one of their 3 face-up satellites in the pointed space. Players then each reveal a new face-down satellite, and turns continue in this fashion. After 12 turns, all players will have all of their satellites in play around the board. Now, instead of placing a new satellite when the spinner stops, players will move an already placed satellite to the pointed space. If the spinner ever stops on a space where you already have a satellite, you just move one of your satellites to the nearest space in either direction that doesn’t already have one of your satellites. The goal of the game is to arrange your satellites in ascending numerical order, starting from the start line on the board. At the start of a turn, if a player has completed that goal, then they win!
Seems simple enough, right? That’s the point! GPS is supposed to be a game that is easy to teach and fast to play. There is a small amount of strategy involved in decided which satellites to place where, to help set yourself up to be the fastest to organize them numerically. More often than not, though, the ‘right’ move is the obvious one to take, so don’t be expecting a brain burner with this one. All in all, simple gameplay and mechanics that are easy for pretty much any age to grasp.
The biggest issues I have with GPS actually are the components. Don’t get me wrong – the quality of the components is great! It’s just how they affect the gameplay that is disappointing. For starters, the satellites for each player are nice and sturdy cardboard. But the size of the spaces around the game board are a little smaller than the satellites, making it difficult to fit them properly and clearly in a specific space. The next issue is with the spinner/game board itself. The spinner has a small rubber bottom to help avoid unwanted movement, but unfortunately it does little to stop that problem. Almost every time the spinner is spun, the game board moves on the table. The movement of the board knocks any satellites that are in play out of alignment. With the oversized satellites and the small board spaces, it’s sometimes hard to tell in which space a satellite was originally placed. These issues just take a fast, light-hearted game and turn it into a frustrating filler for me.
Overall, I would say that GPS is a good game in theory, but it was just not necessarily executed well. Perhaps if the components were more conducive to the gameplay, I would have different thoughts, but those problems just leave a sour taste that makes me want to skip over it when looking for a filler. This is a game I might pull out for younger gamers, but not one that I see getting a lot of table time with my regular group. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a sputtering 6 / 12.
GPS is a racing game in which players are launching satellites into orbit, and attempting to be the first to organize their satellite chain in numerical order. To setup the game, assemble the planet pieces and spinner, and give each player their 12 numbered satellites. Players shuffle their satellites face-down, and then flip 3 of them face-up. The game is now ready to begin!
Each turn, a player will spin the spinner. Once the spinner has stopped, every player will place one of their 3 face-up satellites in the pointed space. Players then each reveal a new face-down satellite, and turns continue in this fashion. After 12 turns, all players will have all of their satellites in play around the board. Now, instead of placing a new satellite when the spinner stops, players will move an already placed satellite to the pointed space. If the spinner ever stops on a space where you already have a satellite, you just move one of your satellites to the nearest space in either direction that doesn’t already have one of your satellites. The goal of the game is to arrange your satellites in ascending numerical order, starting from the start line on the board. At the start of a turn, if a player has completed that goal, then they win!
Seems simple enough, right? That’s the point! GPS is supposed to be a game that is easy to teach and fast to play. There is a small amount of strategy involved in decided which satellites to place where, to help set yourself up to be the fastest to organize them numerically. More often than not, though, the ‘right’ move is the obvious one to take, so don’t be expecting a brain burner with this one. All in all, simple gameplay and mechanics that are easy for pretty much any age to grasp.
The biggest issues I have with GPS actually are the components. Don’t get me wrong – the quality of the components is great! It’s just how they affect the gameplay that is disappointing. For starters, the satellites for each player are nice and sturdy cardboard. But the size of the spaces around the game board are a little smaller than the satellites, making it difficult to fit them properly and clearly in a specific space. The next issue is with the spinner/game board itself. The spinner has a small rubber bottom to help avoid unwanted movement, but unfortunately it does little to stop that problem. Almost every time the spinner is spun, the game board moves on the table. The movement of the board knocks any satellites that are in play out of alignment. With the oversized satellites and the small board spaces, it’s sometimes hard to tell in which space a satellite was originally placed. These issues just take a fast, light-hearted game and turn it into a frustrating filler for me.
Overall, I would say that GPS is a good game in theory, but it was just not necessarily executed well. Perhaps if the components were more conducive to the gameplay, I would have different thoughts, but those problems just leave a sour taste that makes me want to skip over it when looking for a filler. This is a game I might pull out for younger gamers, but not one that I see getting a lot of table time with my regular group. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a sputtering 6 / 12.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Apollo 11 (2019) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021
This extraordinary documentary exploring the build up, launch and landing of the most famous mission in NASA history, and arguably the pinnacle of human space exploration to date, is a mesmeric and unique experience like no other factual film you have ever seen. You can find it tucked away on Netflix, and I urge you to do so if you ever found yourself wondering for one minute about the moon landing of ’69 and what all the fuss was about.
Director Todd Douglas Miller makes the bold choice to do away with all narrative, cutaway interviews and commentaries, and just shows you what happened in gorgeous detail, with a kind of retro super 8 camera vibe, and a very evocative sountrack. The degree of unseen footage of the entire project is jaw-dropping, especially if there is something of a science or even science fiction geek within you.
Some of what you see and hear is, of course, so iconic that when you see or hear them you feel a sense of deja vu that feels like a dream in the context of the full story. The rest is so amazing to contemplate as something that humanity actually achieved that it is tempting to see it as an odd retro sci-fi movie with quite bad effects and a dull plot; the control room, suits, the rocket itself, the sense of endless patience, anticipation and waiting – you just wouldn’t believe it would work if it was a fiction.
At several points I found myself reminding myself that it wasn’t a fiction, and then marvelling at the entire world that existed at the end of the 60s, and how so essentially different it was, and how ancient it feels now. I wasn’t quite born when all this happened, but it has been very much in my imagination all my life. I wanted to be an astronaut, as did most other kids in the Star Wars era of the late 70s and early 80s, and I only really gave up when I realised that meant being as smart and dedicated as Neil Armstrong and not as reckless and cool as Han Solo. Now I am older, I can appreciate things about it that I never could, and in understanding Human history, it is a riveting chapter.
What we see in this film is how detail and hard work and maths and safety precautions and thousands of team members made this happen. Every nut and bolt, and every drop of sweat and fuel is counted, recounted and considered. At times it seems mundane and without drama, boring even, and then the sheer scale of acheivement and wonder overtakes you as you catch yourself realising how incredible it was that any of this was done at all.
There is no political overtone or background here, no conspiracy theory, no other voice questioning the economic impact or wisdom of the entire endeavour, just a childlike but serious minded wonder at doing something because we could if we set our minds to it. And for that it has a beauty and transcendent elegance that rarely accompanies the subject. By the end, there is really only one word to describe the fact that over 50 years ago three men looked down on the Earthrise and beheld every other living thing in existence in one glance. And that word is: wow!
It is slow, for sure, but only because we have become used to pace and forced drama, from our fictions and our documentaries. Apollo 11 won’t be for everyone in that case, and may even be fairly called dull by some who can’t relate to it in any way. For me it was a trance like epiphany I can’t forget. Highly recommended if you are looking for something fascinating, educational and thought provoking out of your comfort zone and out of this world!
Director Todd Douglas Miller makes the bold choice to do away with all narrative, cutaway interviews and commentaries, and just shows you what happened in gorgeous detail, with a kind of retro super 8 camera vibe, and a very evocative sountrack. The degree of unseen footage of the entire project is jaw-dropping, especially if there is something of a science or even science fiction geek within you.
Some of what you see and hear is, of course, so iconic that when you see or hear them you feel a sense of deja vu that feels like a dream in the context of the full story. The rest is so amazing to contemplate as something that humanity actually achieved that it is tempting to see it as an odd retro sci-fi movie with quite bad effects and a dull plot; the control room, suits, the rocket itself, the sense of endless patience, anticipation and waiting – you just wouldn’t believe it would work if it was a fiction.
At several points I found myself reminding myself that it wasn’t a fiction, and then marvelling at the entire world that existed at the end of the 60s, and how so essentially different it was, and how ancient it feels now. I wasn’t quite born when all this happened, but it has been very much in my imagination all my life. I wanted to be an astronaut, as did most other kids in the Star Wars era of the late 70s and early 80s, and I only really gave up when I realised that meant being as smart and dedicated as Neil Armstrong and not as reckless and cool as Han Solo. Now I am older, I can appreciate things about it that I never could, and in understanding Human history, it is a riveting chapter.
What we see in this film is how detail and hard work and maths and safety precautions and thousands of team members made this happen. Every nut and bolt, and every drop of sweat and fuel is counted, recounted and considered. At times it seems mundane and without drama, boring even, and then the sheer scale of acheivement and wonder overtakes you as you catch yourself realising how incredible it was that any of this was done at all.
There is no political overtone or background here, no conspiracy theory, no other voice questioning the economic impact or wisdom of the entire endeavour, just a childlike but serious minded wonder at doing something because we could if we set our minds to it. And for that it has a beauty and transcendent elegance that rarely accompanies the subject. By the end, there is really only one word to describe the fact that over 50 years ago three men looked down on the Earthrise and beheld every other living thing in existence in one glance. And that word is: wow!
It is slow, for sure, but only because we have become used to pace and forced drama, from our fictions and our documentaries. Apollo 11 won’t be for everyone in that case, and may even be fairly called dull by some who can’t relate to it in any way. For me it was a trance like epiphany I can’t forget. Highly recommended if you are looking for something fascinating, educational and thought provoking out of your comfort zone and out of this world!