Search
Search results
Hadley (567 KP) rated Frankenstein in Books
Apr 30, 2019
Great main character (1 more)
Beautiful writing
Over usage of some words (1 more)
Secondary characters have hardly a back story
In the horror genre, I have very few favorite female writers, but Mary Shelley is one of them. The way she weaves environments with character defining scenes is beautifully done in 'Frankenstein.' At the tender age of 18, Shelley was able to convey grief and loss through a single story. She created a relatable 'creature' that many readers will have pity for, but also an obsessive young man that can hardly be hated. Some people may be intimidated by the more diverse English language from the early 1800's, but, in my opinion, the story would not have had the same impact if it had been written today.
Not just horror readers will enjoy 'Frankenstein,' but also those who like to read philosophy. Shelley brings up life discerning questions that even society meddles with today. It's amazing to think that a two century old book discusses problems we still deal with.
The book begins with a sea captain that picks up a stranger that was stranded on a raft of ice, and this man has a fascinating story to tell. The entire book is a letter written by the sea captain to his sister, which he details every bit of Victor Frankenstein's several year tale. Readers get to follow Frankenstein's life from the moment his 'creature' is made to the end of his days, which traverses the globe. When Shelley begins to lull over her love of environments, she quickly picks up with character or story development that keeps our attention from wandering.
'Frankenstein' focuses on the need to be loved and accepted to live a happy existence,as well as reaching our dreams, but Shelley shows how achieving such things can cause a crushing defeat in the latter pursuit: "Night was far advanced when I came to the halfway resting-place, and seated myself beside the fountain. The stars shone at intervals, as the clouds passed from over them; the dark pines rose before me, and every here and there a broken tree lay on the ground: it was a scene of wonderful solemnity, and stirred strange thoughts within me. I wept bitterly; and clasping my hands in agony, I exclaimed, 'Oh! stars, and clouds, and winds, ye are all about to mock me: if ye really pity me, crush sensation and memory; let me become as nought; but if not, depart, depart, and leave me in darkness.' "
There are other characters we read of, including Frankenstein's best friend, Henry, and his long time love interest, Elizabeth (both of who grew up with Frankenstein). Henry comes from a well-to-do merchant family, while Elizabeth was orphaned from a wealthy family, then adopted by the Frankensteins as a future wife for Victor. Unfortunately, we learn little about them or Victor's family, that when any of them do die, it's not felt personally by the reader. There are other characters that had major events in the story, but as with the friends, they weren't developed enough to bring up any emotion at their passing.
After Frankenstein sets out after his creation,we meet the 'creature' at the top of a mountain. He is devastated that his creator hates him, and that the other humans he has met also hated him. "I expected this reception,' said the demon. 'All men hate the wretched; how, then, must I be hated, who am miserable beyond all living things! Yet you, my creator, detest and spurn me, thy creature, to whom thou art bound by ties only dissoluble by the annihilation of one of us. You purpose to kill me. How dare you sport thus with life? Do your duty towards me, and I will do mine towards you and the rest of mankind. If you will comply with my conditions, I will leave them and you at peace; but if you refuse, I will glut the maw of death, until it be satiated with the blood of your remaining friends.' "
The 'creature' gives Frankenstein an ultimatum: he either makes him a female companion or he will kill everyone Frankenstein loves and adores." 'What I ask of you is reasonable and moderate; I demand a creature of another sex, but as hideous as myself; the gratification is small, but it is all that I can receive,and it shall content me.' " Although, by this time, the 'creature' has already murdered Frankenstein's youngest brother, Victor agrees to make him a companion, but with serious regret soon after.
The majority of the story concerns Frankenstein trying fool-hardly to protect all those he loves while the 'creature' murders them one by one. The most surprising of the murders is Henry's. After Frankenstein changes his mind on making another creation, the 'creature' quickly finds Henry and kills him, but Frankenstein is accused of the murder and spends quite some time in prison for it. "But I was doomed to live; and, in two months, found myself as awaking from a dream, in a prison, stretched on a wretched bed, surrounded by gaolers, turnkeys, bolts, and all the miserable apparatus of a dungeon. "
Frankenstein is eventually released from prison when the evidence doesn't add up, and witnesses come forward, claiming to have seen Victor elsewhere at the time of the murder. Frankenstein is, at this time, in a drowning melancholy and madness, but this doesn't stop him from marrying Elizabeth. The 'creature' foretold Frankenstein that he would be with him on his wedding night, and Victor uses this to his advantage - arming himself with pistols and knives on the honeymoon. Yet, to no avail, Frankenstein is unable to outlive or outsmart the 'creature' at any turn.
'Frankenstein' is a must-read for all readers. Although many horror stories today pertain to a creature killing it's master, none of them can reach the grief stricken peaks as Shelley has. Every passage in this book reads like poetry. Every interaction between Frankenstein and his 'creature' is fascinating to the reader. And, before Frankenstein dies, he leaves the sea captain with words of wisdom that even readers could benefit from: "Seek happiness in tranquillity and avoid ambition, even if it be only the apparently innocent one of distinguishing yourself in science and discoveries."
Highly recommend!
Not just horror readers will enjoy 'Frankenstein,' but also those who like to read philosophy. Shelley brings up life discerning questions that even society meddles with today. It's amazing to think that a two century old book discusses problems we still deal with.
The book begins with a sea captain that picks up a stranger that was stranded on a raft of ice, and this man has a fascinating story to tell. The entire book is a letter written by the sea captain to his sister, which he details every bit of Victor Frankenstein's several year tale. Readers get to follow Frankenstein's life from the moment his 'creature' is made to the end of his days, which traverses the globe. When Shelley begins to lull over her love of environments, she quickly picks up with character or story development that keeps our attention from wandering.
'Frankenstein' focuses on the need to be loved and accepted to live a happy existence,as well as reaching our dreams, but Shelley shows how achieving such things can cause a crushing defeat in the latter pursuit: "Night was far advanced when I came to the halfway resting-place, and seated myself beside the fountain. The stars shone at intervals, as the clouds passed from over them; the dark pines rose before me, and every here and there a broken tree lay on the ground: it was a scene of wonderful solemnity, and stirred strange thoughts within me. I wept bitterly; and clasping my hands in agony, I exclaimed, 'Oh! stars, and clouds, and winds, ye are all about to mock me: if ye really pity me, crush sensation and memory; let me become as nought; but if not, depart, depart, and leave me in darkness.' "
There are other characters we read of, including Frankenstein's best friend, Henry, and his long time love interest, Elizabeth (both of who grew up with Frankenstein). Henry comes from a well-to-do merchant family, while Elizabeth was orphaned from a wealthy family, then adopted by the Frankensteins as a future wife for Victor. Unfortunately, we learn little about them or Victor's family, that when any of them do die, it's not felt personally by the reader. There are other characters that had major events in the story, but as with the friends, they weren't developed enough to bring up any emotion at their passing.
After Frankenstein sets out after his creation,we meet the 'creature' at the top of a mountain. He is devastated that his creator hates him, and that the other humans he has met also hated him. "I expected this reception,' said the demon. 'All men hate the wretched; how, then, must I be hated, who am miserable beyond all living things! Yet you, my creator, detest and spurn me, thy creature, to whom thou art bound by ties only dissoluble by the annihilation of one of us. You purpose to kill me. How dare you sport thus with life? Do your duty towards me, and I will do mine towards you and the rest of mankind. If you will comply with my conditions, I will leave them and you at peace; but if you refuse, I will glut the maw of death, until it be satiated with the blood of your remaining friends.' "
The 'creature' gives Frankenstein an ultimatum: he either makes him a female companion or he will kill everyone Frankenstein loves and adores." 'What I ask of you is reasonable and moderate; I demand a creature of another sex, but as hideous as myself; the gratification is small, but it is all that I can receive,and it shall content me.' " Although, by this time, the 'creature' has already murdered Frankenstein's youngest brother, Victor agrees to make him a companion, but with serious regret soon after.
The majority of the story concerns Frankenstein trying fool-hardly to protect all those he loves while the 'creature' murders them one by one. The most surprising of the murders is Henry's. After Frankenstein changes his mind on making another creation, the 'creature' quickly finds Henry and kills him, but Frankenstein is accused of the murder and spends quite some time in prison for it. "But I was doomed to live; and, in two months, found myself as awaking from a dream, in a prison, stretched on a wretched bed, surrounded by gaolers, turnkeys, bolts, and all the miserable apparatus of a dungeon. "
Frankenstein is eventually released from prison when the evidence doesn't add up, and witnesses come forward, claiming to have seen Victor elsewhere at the time of the murder. Frankenstein is, at this time, in a drowning melancholy and madness, but this doesn't stop him from marrying Elizabeth. The 'creature' foretold Frankenstein that he would be with him on his wedding night, and Victor uses this to his advantage - arming himself with pistols and knives on the honeymoon. Yet, to no avail, Frankenstein is unable to outlive or outsmart the 'creature' at any turn.
'Frankenstein' is a must-read for all readers. Although many horror stories today pertain to a creature killing it's master, none of them can reach the grief stricken peaks as Shelley has. Every passage in this book reads like poetry. Every interaction between Frankenstein and his 'creature' is fascinating to the reader. And, before Frankenstein dies, he leaves the sea captain with words of wisdom that even readers could benefit from: "Seek happiness in tranquillity and avoid ambition, even if it be only the apparently innocent one of distinguishing yourself in science and discoveries."
Highly recommend!
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Cosmic Run: Regeneration in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019
One of the best parts of the board gaming experience is finding a fun group of people with whom to play! Sometimes, though, coordinating a game night is easier said than done. We all must occasionally forego the group experience and face the world as the Lonely Only. But fear not! The world of solo-play is a vast and exciting realm! What follows is a chronicle of my journey into the solo-playing world – notes on gameplay, mechanics, rules, difficulty, and overall experience with solo variations of commonly multiplayer games! I hope this will provide some insight as you continue to grow your collection, or explore your already owned games!
Space – the Final Frontier. Well, not anymore. You’re living in the year 2123, and space travel is not a novel idea. In fact, Earth has become uninhabitable, and the human race must find a new planet to call home! You and your team of explorers have taken to the galaxies to find a suitable replacement for the future of mankind. By befriending aliens and outmaneuvering rival explorers, your team will be credited with the discovery of new colonies on these distant planets. It’s a literal Space Race, so kick on that hyper-drive and take to the stars!
Cosmic Run: Regeneration is a competitive or cooperative dice-rolling game in which players are racing to earn the most victory points by being the first to discover new planets. It’s a Yahtzee-style push-your-luck game where you must roll certain sets of identical dice to advance your ships on the individual planet tracks. Dice can also be used to ‘hire’ aliens or find crystals, which can give you special abilities once per game. The planets must be discovered in a timely manner, though, because passing meteors could cause damage to, or even completely destroy, these planets – this is space, after all. Players earn victory points in three ways – by being the first to discover a planet, based on their position on a planet’s track if they are not the first to discover it, or by retiring sets of aliens. The player with the most victory points once all 6 planets are discovered is the winner! When playing solo, the game is played essentially the same way, with some minor differences. If the solo player discovers all 6 planets before any one is destroyed or before the meteor deck runs out, they win! However, if even a single planet is destroyed or they are not all discovered before the meteor deck runs out, the solo player loses.
I enjoy playing Cosmic Run: Regeneration as a solo game because it’s simple, but not easy. You’re just rolling dice, but you need a strategy. Do you try to advance quickly on the easiest tracks, or do you commit dice to more difficult tracks and hope that the dice rolls will be on your side? Be careful – once you commit a die to a certain track, it cannot be moved. I’ve played so many games where I commit dice to Planet 2 (2-of-a-kind) and end up rolling 3 more of the same number that could’ve been used on Planet 5 (5-of-a-kind) if I’d just committed them there in the first place! A lot of the game is dependent on the luck of the roll, but I feel like you still need a solid strategy to be successful. There’s a good balance between the two – I still feel like I’m in control of the game even though I can’t control how the dice will roll.
The one main difference between solo and group play is that the solo player is allowed to spend VPs to create ‘forcefields’ around planets. This is because in group play if a planet is destroyed, players score points for their track progress, and the game continues. For the solo player, however, if a planet is destroyed, the game is over. When playing solo, I can choose to spend either 5 or 10 VPs to create a forcefield around either 1 or all planets to protect them from meteors for one turn. Without this option in solo play, it would be impossible to win. The first 4 cards of the meteor deck are guaranteed to hit 4 different planets, so right off the bat you are starting at kind of a disadvantage. Each planet only takes 3 hits to be destroyed, so depending on how well the meteor deck is shuffled, the game would be over quickly if I weren’t able to create forcefields. It all comes back to strategy – you have to decide when to spend those VPs and what planets need protecting at any given point in the game.
That being said, scoring VPs is not really easy in solo play. To score points for a planet, you have to physically reach the planet surface – and that can take a while depending on how well you are rolling. You can hire/retire aliens for VPs, but alien cards have a die cost, so if you are hiring aliens all the time, those are dice you are not using to advance on planet tracks. And each turn, planets get closer to destruction if you don’t advance on their tracks fast enough. You can earn VPs when you land on a VP token space – you do not pick up the token if you pass it, you must land exactly on it. So all in all, you can’t afford to protect every planet every turn. You have to strategize carefully about how to risk your hard-earned VPs. The most frustrating thing is when I pay VPs to protect a planet that isn’t even the one that gets hit! 5 VPs gone that I usually can’t get back in a single turn. But that’s all part of the push-your-luck isn’t it? There’s no reward without risk, and sometimes it’s better to be safe than sorry. I’m usually not a very risky game player, but in this game I have to be. Playing it safe is not an option when I’m racing against the meteor deck.
Cosmic Run: Regeneration is a game of strategy with some healthy helpings of luck and risk-taking. You need a solid strategy, but one that is flexible enough to adapt to your dice rolls on any given turn. No game is a guaranteed win – if I win it’s usually at the last possible second. This game is easy to play, but not necessarily easy to win and that’s what keeps me coming back to play. Even as a solo game, it’s engaging and I think it’s pretty fun too!
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/01/25/solo-chronicles-cosmic-run-regeneration/
Space – the Final Frontier. Well, not anymore. You’re living in the year 2123, and space travel is not a novel idea. In fact, Earth has become uninhabitable, and the human race must find a new planet to call home! You and your team of explorers have taken to the galaxies to find a suitable replacement for the future of mankind. By befriending aliens and outmaneuvering rival explorers, your team will be credited with the discovery of new colonies on these distant planets. It’s a literal Space Race, so kick on that hyper-drive and take to the stars!
Cosmic Run: Regeneration is a competitive or cooperative dice-rolling game in which players are racing to earn the most victory points by being the first to discover new planets. It’s a Yahtzee-style push-your-luck game where you must roll certain sets of identical dice to advance your ships on the individual planet tracks. Dice can also be used to ‘hire’ aliens or find crystals, which can give you special abilities once per game. The planets must be discovered in a timely manner, though, because passing meteors could cause damage to, or even completely destroy, these planets – this is space, after all. Players earn victory points in three ways – by being the first to discover a planet, based on their position on a planet’s track if they are not the first to discover it, or by retiring sets of aliens. The player with the most victory points once all 6 planets are discovered is the winner! When playing solo, the game is played essentially the same way, with some minor differences. If the solo player discovers all 6 planets before any one is destroyed or before the meteor deck runs out, they win! However, if even a single planet is destroyed or they are not all discovered before the meteor deck runs out, the solo player loses.
I enjoy playing Cosmic Run: Regeneration as a solo game because it’s simple, but not easy. You’re just rolling dice, but you need a strategy. Do you try to advance quickly on the easiest tracks, or do you commit dice to more difficult tracks and hope that the dice rolls will be on your side? Be careful – once you commit a die to a certain track, it cannot be moved. I’ve played so many games where I commit dice to Planet 2 (2-of-a-kind) and end up rolling 3 more of the same number that could’ve been used on Planet 5 (5-of-a-kind) if I’d just committed them there in the first place! A lot of the game is dependent on the luck of the roll, but I feel like you still need a solid strategy to be successful. There’s a good balance between the two – I still feel like I’m in control of the game even though I can’t control how the dice will roll.
The one main difference between solo and group play is that the solo player is allowed to spend VPs to create ‘forcefields’ around planets. This is because in group play if a planet is destroyed, players score points for their track progress, and the game continues. For the solo player, however, if a planet is destroyed, the game is over. When playing solo, I can choose to spend either 5 or 10 VPs to create a forcefield around either 1 or all planets to protect them from meteors for one turn. Without this option in solo play, it would be impossible to win. The first 4 cards of the meteor deck are guaranteed to hit 4 different planets, so right off the bat you are starting at kind of a disadvantage. Each planet only takes 3 hits to be destroyed, so depending on how well the meteor deck is shuffled, the game would be over quickly if I weren’t able to create forcefields. It all comes back to strategy – you have to decide when to spend those VPs and what planets need protecting at any given point in the game.
That being said, scoring VPs is not really easy in solo play. To score points for a planet, you have to physically reach the planet surface – and that can take a while depending on how well you are rolling. You can hire/retire aliens for VPs, but alien cards have a die cost, so if you are hiring aliens all the time, those are dice you are not using to advance on planet tracks. And each turn, planets get closer to destruction if you don’t advance on their tracks fast enough. You can earn VPs when you land on a VP token space – you do not pick up the token if you pass it, you must land exactly on it. So all in all, you can’t afford to protect every planet every turn. You have to strategize carefully about how to risk your hard-earned VPs. The most frustrating thing is when I pay VPs to protect a planet that isn’t even the one that gets hit! 5 VPs gone that I usually can’t get back in a single turn. But that’s all part of the push-your-luck isn’t it? There’s no reward without risk, and sometimes it’s better to be safe than sorry. I’m usually not a very risky game player, but in this game I have to be. Playing it safe is not an option when I’m racing against the meteor deck.
Cosmic Run: Regeneration is a game of strategy with some healthy helpings of luck and risk-taking. You need a solid strategy, but one that is flexible enough to adapt to your dice rolls on any given turn. No game is a guaranteed win – if I win it’s usually at the last possible second. This game is easy to play, but not necessarily easy to win and that’s what keeps me coming back to play. Even as a solo game, it’s engaging and I think it’s pretty fun too!
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/01/25/solo-chronicles-cosmic-run-regeneration/
Jamie Towell Cook (13 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of Kingdom Hearts III in Video Games
Apr 6, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
Kingdom Hearts 3 is the long anticipated third part officially in the series. It started back in 2002 and now in 2019 we finally have the 3rd (and allegedly) final part of what is Sora and his friends story. In this time we have travelled to many beloved Disney classics from Mount Olympus to Neverland and for some bizarre reason we even went to Tarzan's world. During all of this Sora is learning how to be the Keyblade wielder and defend all the worlds from the threat of the darkness. On his journey he meets many familiar faces ranging from final fantasy characters such as Cloud, Tidus and Vivi to famous disney heroes such as Ariel, Beast, Jack Skellington.
Unfortunalty since it began in 2002 Kingdom Hearts became a jumbled mess jumping on different consoles along the way. It may have begun as a PlayStation game but soon after there was a spin off for the game boy advance and another for the psp and another for the nintendo ds. Releasing titles that actually continue the plot from the original game on various different consoles and expecting fans to just role with that and keep up, well thats not exactly the best of ideas! Luckily the story so far has been released and rereleased and rererereleased so that fans can figure out just what the hell is actually going on in this either brilliantly masterminded tale or a way for the game producers to milk the franchise for all its worth. I'll let you decide that one.
So any ways, with a whopping 14 years between KH2 and KH3 a lot has changed within the Disney world and with their new corporate purchases a lot of people had questions about what would we see in a new Kingdom Hearts. Would the new game feature any worlds from Marvel? Would we see something from the Muppet Show? Maybe Star Wars? The answer to this was a big fat no. They were going to keep it old school Disney......although by old school Disney that didn't have the same meaning as what I thought it would. Instead of the familiar faces we have grown accustomed to there is no Halloween Town, no Neverland, no Atlantica (Thank god, good call on that one) instead we visit new realms, draining whatever is left from the Frozen franchise and travelling to worlds such as Arendale, San Frantokyo and some other Disney Pixar worlds. Now i'm not saying there is anything wrong with these worlds because they are beautiful and stunning and fun to play through. Couldn't they have at least tried to feature some golden oldies as well. Something else that i noticed that as well that made me feel disappointed in this release was the lack of final fantasy characters, minus a very brief glimpse of 2 characters as statues thats pretty much it.
The story itself is appealing as it continues the tales of Sora, Ventus and Roxas and ultimately brings the trios story to a (almost) conclusion. The voice acting for the kingdom hearts series will never win any awards and in some areas is just hands down terrible but, as it plays out you notice it a lot less and just want to see where its all headed.
The gameplay is as it has always been, if its not broke don't fix it. There are a few additions though. Kingdom Hearts 1 had abilities, in kingdom hearts 2 we seen this become built upon by fusion. This was a way of fusing Sora's abilities with either Donald or Goofy and eventually both. Leading to Wisdom mode, which was magic based. Valour mode, which was strength and defence based. Master, which, yes you guessed it, is a mix of all the above. Limit mode, which brings Sora's abilities to the spotlight. Then you had Final form which was basically a combination of Limit and Master and finally there was anti form, this turned Sora into a heartless version of himself with attacks and abilities to match. These were all scrapped in Kingdom Hearts 3 to make way for attractions, which is an attack based on Disneyworld theme park attractions. There are also attacks based on whose in your team as well. As fun as these are in the beginning, they get old and repetitive fast. The summons have never really played a main part in the Kingdom Hearts series since its first release and KH3 makes that very apparent again, with what i thought was a very lackluster 5 summons in the form of Ariel, Ralph, Stitch, Simba and a dream eater from Kingdom Hearts own series. I mean come on, wheres Mushu? Genie? Bambi? Dumbo? Tinkerbell? Why aren't there any new ones? They could have played up new Pixar entries such as Bolt or Up, even The Incredibles.
The other feature that is new and unique to KH3 is the ability to transform the Keyblade. Now picking up a new keyblade isn't just about the stat boosts, they each feature something different and unique. Without giving too much away, all i can really say about this is the additions to turn your weapon in to such things as shields, blasters and other random creations based on the worlds they are related to is actually a brilliant concept and makes up for the drive form that was taken from KH2 and not featured again.
I really hope that Square Enix are planning on releasing some decent DLC for KH3. Hopefully in the form of some old Disney worlds, a coliseum and some extra story with old familiar faces. Because it is definitely needed.
The Gummi ship does manage to make a come back (yet again). I would like to say something positive about this because it does seem like a lot of work went into making this feel like a more relevant part of the game but, the controls take a bit of figuring out and there is no real need for it other than it being a mini game really.
If Square Enix does add some DLC that adds worlds, characters, keyblades and modes. Then i honestly believe they could boost the game from being a good game to an amazing game. Just listen to the fans, hear what they want and deliver.
I wish i had better news for Kingdom Hearts fans. Especially those who have waited those 14 years but i am judging this game harshly because of my love for the series and the length of time it has been under development.
Unfortunalty since it began in 2002 Kingdom Hearts became a jumbled mess jumping on different consoles along the way. It may have begun as a PlayStation game but soon after there was a spin off for the game boy advance and another for the psp and another for the nintendo ds. Releasing titles that actually continue the plot from the original game on various different consoles and expecting fans to just role with that and keep up, well thats not exactly the best of ideas! Luckily the story so far has been released and rereleased and rererereleased so that fans can figure out just what the hell is actually going on in this either brilliantly masterminded tale or a way for the game producers to milk the franchise for all its worth. I'll let you decide that one.
So any ways, with a whopping 14 years between KH2 and KH3 a lot has changed within the Disney world and with their new corporate purchases a lot of people had questions about what would we see in a new Kingdom Hearts. Would the new game feature any worlds from Marvel? Would we see something from the Muppet Show? Maybe Star Wars? The answer to this was a big fat no. They were going to keep it old school Disney......although by old school Disney that didn't have the same meaning as what I thought it would. Instead of the familiar faces we have grown accustomed to there is no Halloween Town, no Neverland, no Atlantica (Thank god, good call on that one) instead we visit new realms, draining whatever is left from the Frozen franchise and travelling to worlds such as Arendale, San Frantokyo and some other Disney Pixar worlds. Now i'm not saying there is anything wrong with these worlds because they are beautiful and stunning and fun to play through. Couldn't they have at least tried to feature some golden oldies as well. Something else that i noticed that as well that made me feel disappointed in this release was the lack of final fantasy characters, minus a very brief glimpse of 2 characters as statues thats pretty much it.
The story itself is appealing as it continues the tales of Sora, Ventus and Roxas and ultimately brings the trios story to a (almost) conclusion. The voice acting for the kingdom hearts series will never win any awards and in some areas is just hands down terrible but, as it plays out you notice it a lot less and just want to see where its all headed.
The gameplay is as it has always been, if its not broke don't fix it. There are a few additions though. Kingdom Hearts 1 had abilities, in kingdom hearts 2 we seen this become built upon by fusion. This was a way of fusing Sora's abilities with either Donald or Goofy and eventually both. Leading to Wisdom mode, which was magic based. Valour mode, which was strength and defence based. Master, which, yes you guessed it, is a mix of all the above. Limit mode, which brings Sora's abilities to the spotlight. Then you had Final form which was basically a combination of Limit and Master and finally there was anti form, this turned Sora into a heartless version of himself with attacks and abilities to match. These were all scrapped in Kingdom Hearts 3 to make way for attractions, which is an attack based on Disneyworld theme park attractions. There are also attacks based on whose in your team as well. As fun as these are in the beginning, they get old and repetitive fast. The summons have never really played a main part in the Kingdom Hearts series since its first release and KH3 makes that very apparent again, with what i thought was a very lackluster 5 summons in the form of Ariel, Ralph, Stitch, Simba and a dream eater from Kingdom Hearts own series. I mean come on, wheres Mushu? Genie? Bambi? Dumbo? Tinkerbell? Why aren't there any new ones? They could have played up new Pixar entries such as Bolt or Up, even The Incredibles.
The other feature that is new and unique to KH3 is the ability to transform the Keyblade. Now picking up a new keyblade isn't just about the stat boosts, they each feature something different and unique. Without giving too much away, all i can really say about this is the additions to turn your weapon in to such things as shields, blasters and other random creations based on the worlds they are related to is actually a brilliant concept and makes up for the drive form that was taken from KH2 and not featured again.
I really hope that Square Enix are planning on releasing some decent DLC for KH3. Hopefully in the form of some old Disney worlds, a coliseum and some extra story with old familiar faces. Because it is definitely needed.
The Gummi ship does manage to make a come back (yet again). I would like to say something positive about this because it does seem like a lot of work went into making this feel like a more relevant part of the game but, the controls take a bit of figuring out and there is no real need for it other than it being a mini game really.
If Square Enix does add some DLC that adds worlds, characters, keyblades and modes. Then i honestly believe they could boost the game from being a good game to an amazing game. Just listen to the fans, hear what they want and deliver.
I wish i had better news for Kingdom Hearts fans. Especially those who have waited those 14 years but i am judging this game harshly because of my love for the series and the length of time it has been under development.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Block Ness in Tabletop Games
May 10, 2021
The Loch Ness monster has been a thorn in the side of believers for so long now. We recently published a preview for a Sasquatch game, and a game featuring a werewolf. Today it’s Nessie’s turn. But this game isn’t necessarily about Nessie, but of giant water serpents vying for control over the too-small lake in which they find themselves. How did they get there? What do they eat? Will they truly come to get me if I don’t brush my teeth? I don’t know the answer to some of those questions, but here’s another: is a game about these creatures good?
Block Ness is a connections game with big chunky bits where players are taking on the mantles of ever-expanding water serpents attempting to stretch themselves out as long as possible. The winning serpent is they who either is able to stretch out furthest (by using all of their body pieces), or who is able to reach for the sun the furthest (by having the tallest head piece at game end).
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, place the peg board on top of the insert in the box. This signifies the lake and where the game will take place. Each player chooses a color of serpent and takes all the corresponding pieces in front of them. Each serpent has a starting body piece that is shorter than all the other pieces, and must be placed first. The youngest player places their first piece on the board, within the darkest inner colors of the lake (UNlike the setup pictured below. Sometimes you just HAVE to let little ones place wherever they like to avoid ACTUAL monster spawns). The other players follow in turn order and attach the head and tail pieces to either end of the starting segments. The game is now setup and ready to begin!
On a turn, the active player will choose a body piece to add to their serpent at either the head or tail location. Players are limited to the three spaces adjacently surrounding the head and tail segments (akin to the compass markings of North, East, South, West). The new body segment then receives either the head or tail piece on its end to signify the new growth of the serpent. No body segments may be placed in a diagonal fashion, and there will come a time when serpents will need to get creative in order to place.
Should a serpent wish to expand through an existing player’s body segment, they may only do so if they are able to place said piece ABOVE the existing segment. For example, the photo below shows the orange serpent slithering above a portion of the black serpent (whose placement now looks somewhat illegal anyway). No matter where the segment is placed the head or tail piece will need to be moved to the newly-placed segment to allow for further expansion on future turns.
Play continues in this fashion until one player has the least leftover body segments without a legal placement, or controls the serpent with the tallest head among the tied players. The winner then must gloat and challenge the others to another game.
Components. This game has great 3D serpent pieces and a nice little peg board to play on. I truly love when games include the box as part of gameplay, and this uses it well. The art and colors used throughout are simply perfect (thank you for not using boring blue, red, yellow, green). The only tiny gripe I have is more of a hope than anything. I hope that upon many many plays the peg board stays nice and doesn’t deteriorate. I realize it’s a game and it’s made out of cardboard. I know many people love seeing their games age because it shows a well-loved item, but I’m not like that. I like my games to always look new. Perhaps if the peg board ever does warp or get damaged in any way I may look into having a plexi replacement made. But that aside, this is a beautiful game with excellent components, and exactly what I would expect from Blue Orange Games.
So do I like this one? Oh yes, quite a bit! Though it is not exactly the same, I believe this may kill off an old family favorite of mine – Blokus. Again, this is not a re-theme of Blokus at all, but it certainly gives me the same vibes, but in three dimensions and with much greater flair. In both games players are actively trying to block each others’ expansion progress, but Block Ness offers a smaller board and way less pieces with which to play. This creates a more tense game in a shorter time frame, and you play with serpent monsters!!
The serpents are all so much fun to handle, and while I initially though moving the head and tail pieces would get annoying after a while, I quite enjoy seeing my new serpent monster after their endpoints are reattached. Like I mentioned earlier, I very much appreciate being able to play orange, purple, black, and a yellowy-green very similar in color to our highlight color we use for our brand. Super happy about those color choices.
All in all, to say this slays Blokus is a huge thing for me. My wife and I absolutely adore Blokus, but I think I would much rather play Block Ness. I also can play this with my kids much easier and not have to worry about one of them losing the 1×1 pieces. I am certainly not alone in recommending this one. Purple Phoenix Games gives this a legendary 10 / 12. I would be surprised if this doesn’t intrigue most gamers of almost any skill and preference. There is much strategy to be employed, and an equal amount of frustration as the serpents block in other opponents. While I have no desire to try to see the actual Loch Ness monster, I will ALWAYS be up for a game of Block Ness.
Block Ness is a connections game with big chunky bits where players are taking on the mantles of ever-expanding water serpents attempting to stretch themselves out as long as possible. The winning serpent is they who either is able to stretch out furthest (by using all of their body pieces), or who is able to reach for the sun the furthest (by having the tallest head piece at game end).
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, place the peg board on top of the insert in the box. This signifies the lake and where the game will take place. Each player chooses a color of serpent and takes all the corresponding pieces in front of them. Each serpent has a starting body piece that is shorter than all the other pieces, and must be placed first. The youngest player places their first piece on the board, within the darkest inner colors of the lake (UNlike the setup pictured below. Sometimes you just HAVE to let little ones place wherever they like to avoid ACTUAL monster spawns). The other players follow in turn order and attach the head and tail pieces to either end of the starting segments. The game is now setup and ready to begin!
On a turn, the active player will choose a body piece to add to their serpent at either the head or tail location. Players are limited to the three spaces adjacently surrounding the head and tail segments (akin to the compass markings of North, East, South, West). The new body segment then receives either the head or tail piece on its end to signify the new growth of the serpent. No body segments may be placed in a diagonal fashion, and there will come a time when serpents will need to get creative in order to place.
Should a serpent wish to expand through an existing player’s body segment, they may only do so if they are able to place said piece ABOVE the existing segment. For example, the photo below shows the orange serpent slithering above a portion of the black serpent (whose placement now looks somewhat illegal anyway). No matter where the segment is placed the head or tail piece will need to be moved to the newly-placed segment to allow for further expansion on future turns.
Play continues in this fashion until one player has the least leftover body segments without a legal placement, or controls the serpent with the tallest head among the tied players. The winner then must gloat and challenge the others to another game.
Components. This game has great 3D serpent pieces and a nice little peg board to play on. I truly love when games include the box as part of gameplay, and this uses it well. The art and colors used throughout are simply perfect (thank you for not using boring blue, red, yellow, green). The only tiny gripe I have is more of a hope than anything. I hope that upon many many plays the peg board stays nice and doesn’t deteriorate. I realize it’s a game and it’s made out of cardboard. I know many people love seeing their games age because it shows a well-loved item, but I’m not like that. I like my games to always look new. Perhaps if the peg board ever does warp or get damaged in any way I may look into having a plexi replacement made. But that aside, this is a beautiful game with excellent components, and exactly what I would expect from Blue Orange Games.
So do I like this one? Oh yes, quite a bit! Though it is not exactly the same, I believe this may kill off an old family favorite of mine – Blokus. Again, this is not a re-theme of Blokus at all, but it certainly gives me the same vibes, but in three dimensions and with much greater flair. In both games players are actively trying to block each others’ expansion progress, but Block Ness offers a smaller board and way less pieces with which to play. This creates a more tense game in a shorter time frame, and you play with serpent monsters!!
The serpents are all so much fun to handle, and while I initially though moving the head and tail pieces would get annoying after a while, I quite enjoy seeing my new serpent monster after their endpoints are reattached. Like I mentioned earlier, I very much appreciate being able to play orange, purple, black, and a yellowy-green very similar in color to our highlight color we use for our brand. Super happy about those color choices.
All in all, to say this slays Blokus is a huge thing for me. My wife and I absolutely adore Blokus, but I think I would much rather play Block Ness. I also can play this with my kids much easier and not have to worry about one of them losing the 1×1 pieces. I am certainly not alone in recommending this one. Purple Phoenix Games gives this a legendary 10 / 12. I would be surprised if this doesn’t intrigue most gamers of almost any skill and preference. There is much strategy to be employed, and an equal amount of frustration as the serpents block in other opponents. While I have no desire to try to see the actual Loch Ness monster, I will ALWAYS be up for a game of Block Ness.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Beauty and the Beast (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Tail as old as Kline.
With the Disney marketing machine in full swing, its hard to separate the hype from the movie reality in this latest live-action remake of one of their classic animated features from 1991. If you are lucky enough to have children you will know that each child tends to have “their” Disney feature: for my second daughter (then 4) that film would be “Beauty and the Beast”. With a VHS video tape worn down to the substrate, this is a film I know every line of dialogue to (“I’m especially good at expectorating”). So seeing this movie was always going to be a wander down Nostalgia Avenue and a left turn into Emotion Crescent, regardless of how good a film it was. And so it proved.
Taking no chances with a beloved formula, most of the film is an almost exact frame-for-frame recreation of the original, with the odd diversion which, in the main, is to slot in new songs by original composer Alan Menken with Tim Rice lyrics. For, unlike “La La Land” this is a proper musical lover’s musical with songs dropping in regularly throughout the running time.
Which brings us to Emma Watson’s Belle. I’ve seen review comments that she ‘dials it in’ with a humourless and souless portrayal of the iconic bookworm. I can’t fathom what film those people were watching! I found Watson to be utterly mesmerising, confident and delightful with a fine (though possibly auto-tuned) singing voice. Her ‘Sound of Music’ moment (you’ll know the one) brought tears to my eyes. There are moments when her acting is highly reminiscent of Hermione Grainger, but this is about as crass a criticism as saying that Harrison Ford has done his “Knock it Off” snarl again.
I even felt that the somewhat dodgy bestiality/Stockholm-syndrome thing, inherent in the plot, was deftly handled by her. Curiously (and I feel guilty for even thinking this) the only part I felt slightly icky about was the age difference evident in the final kiss between Watson (now 27) and the transformed beast (sorry if this is a TERRIBLE spoiler for you!) played by Dan Stevens (“Downton Abbey”): even though with Stevens being only 35 this is only 8 years! I think the problem here is that it is still difficult for me to decouple the modern feminist woman that is Watson from the picture of the young Hermione as a schoolgirl in her first term at Hogwarts. (I know this is terrible typecasting, and definitely my bad, but that’s the way it is).
Stevens himself is fine as the cursed prince, albeit that most of his scenes are behind the CGI-created wet-rug that is the beast. Similarly, most of the supporting stars (Ewan McGregor as Lumière, Ian McKellen as Cogsworth, Emma Thompson as Mrs Potts and an almost unrecognisable Stanley Tucci as the maestro Cadenza) are similarly confined to voice parts for the majority of the film. Kevin Kline is great as the supremely huggable Maurice. But the performances that really shine though are those of Luke Evans (“The Girl on the Train“) as the odiously boorish Gaston and Josh Gad (Olaf in “Frozen”) as his hilariously adoring sidekick LeFou. Much has been made of the gay Disney angle to this element of the story, most of which is arrant homophobic nonsense since the scenes are pretty innocuous. In fact the most adventurous ‘non-heterosexual’ aspect of the film, and a scene that raises by far the biggest laugh, relates to a completely different character.
Most of the songs delivered in the film are OK without, in my view, surpassing the versions in the original. Only Dan Steven’s dramatic new song “Evermore”- as one of the few really new ‘full-length’ songs in the film – has ‘Oscar nomination’ written all over it. However, the film eschews the ‘live-filming’ approach to song production featured in recent musicals like “La La Land” and “Les Miserables”, with some degree of lip-sync evident. Whilst I understand that ‘imperfection’ is not a “Disney thing”, I found that lack of risk-taking a bit of a disappointment.
The makers of the original “Beauty and the Beast” would I’m sure have been bowled over by the quality of the special effects on show here. However, that was in 1991 and it is now 2017, when “The Jungle Book” has set the bar for CGI effects. By today’s standards, the special effects here are mediocre at best. I wondered at first if some of the dodgy green-screen work was delivered that way to make it seem more “cartoony”, but I doubt that – – why bother? More irritatingly, the animated chattels in the castle, especially the candlestick Lumière, are seriously unconvincing. Mrs Potts, the teapot, and her son Chip, the cup, are rendered as flat and two-dimensional. There should have been no shortage of money to thrown at the effects with a reported budget of $160 million. Where has the Disney magic gone?
The film also seems to be rendered primarily for a 3D showing (I saw it in 2D). I say this because some of the panning shots (notably one around the library) to me just ended up as an unimpressive blur of mediocrity. Most odd.
The director is Bill Condon responsible for the modestly well-respected but low-key “Dreamgirls” and “Mr Holmes” but also the much derided “Breaking Dawn” end to the “Twilight” series. As such this seems to have been quite a risk that Disney took with such a high profile property, and I would have been intrigued to see what a more innovative director like Chazelle or Iñárritu would have done with it.
However, despite my reservations it is bound to be a MONSTER hit in every sense of the word, and kids aged 5 to 10 will, I predict, absolutely adore it (be warned that kids under 5 may be seriously scared by some of the darker scenes, especially the two wolf-attacks). For a younger age group, I would rate it as an easy FFFFF. As an adult viewer, given that I have viewed it through the rosy tint of my nostalgia-glasses (unfortunately you cannot hire these at the cinema if you haven’t brought your own!), this was an enjoyable watch. Despite my (more than expected!) slew of criticisms above my rating is still….
Taking no chances with a beloved formula, most of the film is an almost exact frame-for-frame recreation of the original, with the odd diversion which, in the main, is to slot in new songs by original composer Alan Menken with Tim Rice lyrics. For, unlike “La La Land” this is a proper musical lover’s musical with songs dropping in regularly throughout the running time.
Which brings us to Emma Watson’s Belle. I’ve seen review comments that she ‘dials it in’ with a humourless and souless portrayal of the iconic bookworm. I can’t fathom what film those people were watching! I found Watson to be utterly mesmerising, confident and delightful with a fine (though possibly auto-tuned) singing voice. Her ‘Sound of Music’ moment (you’ll know the one) brought tears to my eyes. There are moments when her acting is highly reminiscent of Hermione Grainger, but this is about as crass a criticism as saying that Harrison Ford has done his “Knock it Off” snarl again.
I even felt that the somewhat dodgy bestiality/Stockholm-syndrome thing, inherent in the plot, was deftly handled by her. Curiously (and I feel guilty for even thinking this) the only part I felt slightly icky about was the age difference evident in the final kiss between Watson (now 27) and the transformed beast (sorry if this is a TERRIBLE spoiler for you!) played by Dan Stevens (“Downton Abbey”): even though with Stevens being only 35 this is only 8 years! I think the problem here is that it is still difficult for me to decouple the modern feminist woman that is Watson from the picture of the young Hermione as a schoolgirl in her first term at Hogwarts. (I know this is terrible typecasting, and definitely my bad, but that’s the way it is).
Stevens himself is fine as the cursed prince, albeit that most of his scenes are behind the CGI-created wet-rug that is the beast. Similarly, most of the supporting stars (Ewan McGregor as Lumière, Ian McKellen as Cogsworth, Emma Thompson as Mrs Potts and an almost unrecognisable Stanley Tucci as the maestro Cadenza) are similarly confined to voice parts for the majority of the film. Kevin Kline is great as the supremely huggable Maurice. But the performances that really shine though are those of Luke Evans (“The Girl on the Train“) as the odiously boorish Gaston and Josh Gad (Olaf in “Frozen”) as his hilariously adoring sidekick LeFou. Much has been made of the gay Disney angle to this element of the story, most of which is arrant homophobic nonsense since the scenes are pretty innocuous. In fact the most adventurous ‘non-heterosexual’ aspect of the film, and a scene that raises by far the biggest laugh, relates to a completely different character.
Most of the songs delivered in the film are OK without, in my view, surpassing the versions in the original. Only Dan Steven’s dramatic new song “Evermore”- as one of the few really new ‘full-length’ songs in the film – has ‘Oscar nomination’ written all over it. However, the film eschews the ‘live-filming’ approach to song production featured in recent musicals like “La La Land” and “Les Miserables”, with some degree of lip-sync evident. Whilst I understand that ‘imperfection’ is not a “Disney thing”, I found that lack of risk-taking a bit of a disappointment.
The makers of the original “Beauty and the Beast” would I’m sure have been bowled over by the quality of the special effects on show here. However, that was in 1991 and it is now 2017, when “The Jungle Book” has set the bar for CGI effects. By today’s standards, the special effects here are mediocre at best. I wondered at first if some of the dodgy green-screen work was delivered that way to make it seem more “cartoony”, but I doubt that – – why bother? More irritatingly, the animated chattels in the castle, especially the candlestick Lumière, are seriously unconvincing. Mrs Potts, the teapot, and her son Chip, the cup, are rendered as flat and two-dimensional. There should have been no shortage of money to thrown at the effects with a reported budget of $160 million. Where has the Disney magic gone?
The film also seems to be rendered primarily for a 3D showing (I saw it in 2D). I say this because some of the panning shots (notably one around the library) to me just ended up as an unimpressive blur of mediocrity. Most odd.
The director is Bill Condon responsible for the modestly well-respected but low-key “Dreamgirls” and “Mr Holmes” but also the much derided “Breaking Dawn” end to the “Twilight” series. As such this seems to have been quite a risk that Disney took with such a high profile property, and I would have been intrigued to see what a more innovative director like Chazelle or Iñárritu would have done with it.
However, despite my reservations it is bound to be a MONSTER hit in every sense of the word, and kids aged 5 to 10 will, I predict, absolutely adore it (be warned that kids under 5 may be seriously scared by some of the darker scenes, especially the two wolf-attacks). For a younger age group, I would rate it as an easy FFFFF. As an adult viewer, given that I have viewed it through the rosy tint of my nostalgia-glasses (unfortunately you cannot hire these at the cinema if you haven’t brought your own!), this was an enjoyable watch. Despite my (more than expected!) slew of criticisms above my rating is still….
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Kingdoms of the Deep in Tabletop Games
Dec 26, 2020
Underwater-themed games are fast becoming some of my favorite to play. I have always enjoyed visiting aquariums (the Ripley’s Aquarium of the Smokies is by far the best I’ve seen) and I have owned many of my own tanks. So I have a soft spot. Couple a great theme with a great publisher and what do we get? A great game? Yep!
Kingdoms of the Deep is an abstracted area-control game set in the ocean for one to six players. In it players lead a faction of creatures intent on ruling the underwater kingdom. The player who scores the most VP at the end of the game is the winner, and as their king the player must rule with a strong pectoral fin. Okay, that last part isn’t in the rules, but it should be.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this preview. These are preview copy components, and the final components may be different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, but to give our readers an idea of how the game plays. You are invited to back the game on Kickstarter launching January 12, 2021, order from your FLGS, or purchase through any retailers stocking it after it is fulfilled. -T
To setup players will choose a color and take all components of that color. Obviously, the best choice is purple. Next the central board will be built of large hex tiles surrounding an Atlantis tile. Upon Atlantis one Shark token will be placed. The Score Board is placed near the central hex board and upon it is placed the Round Marker, the End Game Scoring tile, and the three Goal cards. Players then populate the board with their Influence Cubes on their specific preferred terrain types. Upgrade Cubes (discs in the final version) are then placed on each player’s individual play mats on the furthest value to the left, save for the Reset upgrades: players will choose one to place a cube. Give the starting player the Start Player token (a manta ray in this prototype) and the game may begin!
On a turn each player will choose a card from their hand of Action cards to be flipped simultaneously. The starting player will resolve their card first and play will continue around the table thenceforth. Each player will take their action and prepare for the next round. Should a player choose a card that no other player had chosen for the round they will also be able to activate the Solo Ability printed on the card. Typically these Solo Abilities are a furtherance of the action chosen. For example, should a player choose the Deploy Action card and be the only one to do so, they will be able to deploy one additional Influence Cube on the board than normal. The actions are Bolster, Deploy, Move, Upgrade, Shark, and Reset. Each action is limited to a number of cubes added, spaces moved, or upgrades allowed according to where the player board discs (large cubes in the prototype) lie on the player’s mat.
The Bolster action allows the player to add a number of Influence Cubes to the board on the player’s current preferred terrain type. To Deploy units is to add Influence Cubes to the board on hexes already containing their Influence or hexes directly adjacent to those already containing their Influence cubes. When a player chooses the Move action they are able to move creatures (Influence Cubes of any player and Shark tokens) a number of spaces that can be used for once creature or split between several. Players will certainly wish to Upgrade their actions throughout the game by increasing their player board discs’ spaces on their mat. For example, upgrading the Move action could allow the player to move creatures three spaces instead of two. The Shark action allows the player to move the Shark token(s) and chomp creatures on the same hex. Once a Shark feeds, the controlling player will increase their standing on their own Bait Pile track on their play mat. Certain increments on this track will provide the player with one instance of an action (Move, Deploy, etc), and the creature’s Influence Cube is returned to the matching player. Reset actions allow the player to recall their played Action cards to their hands, but also provide whichever action the player originally chose at setup. Should a player wish to Upgrade their Reset action more actions will become available to them each time they utilize the Reset action. Additionally, at the end of the player’s turn having used the Reset action card the Round Marker token is moved one space closer to the end of the game on its track. More on this later.
During play, some creatures may be moved onto the Atlantis tile in the middle of the board via the Deploy or Move actions. When this happens the player who moved the cube onto the Atlantis tile will score a point immediately, and the creature cube is placed in the Atlantis castle (cloth bag in the prototype, but a castle component in the final version). At the end of the game points are awarded to the player with the most creatures in Atlantis.
Every three movements of the Round Marker token signifies a scoring round takes place. Players will consult the current Goal card for any scoring round bonuses and points are earned. The Goal card is then discarded to reveal the next Goal card in sequence on which players can concentrate during the next rounds of play. Also during the first two of these scoring rounds another Shark token is added to the board on the Atlantis tile to be moved around seeking lunch. Once the Round Marker reaches the final scoring round the game ends and points are tallied to arrive at the winner.
Components. Again, this is a prototype version of the game, and while I know certain things will be different in the final version, I do not know what else may be upgraded as a result of any stretch goals reached. Therefore I do not want to comment on the quality of the components, but rather the art style and direction this game is heading toward actual production.
The art on this one is simply gorgeous. The style is the same as that of Animal Kingdoms, which is also a release from Galactic Raptor. All the art I have seen in this game is sublime and permeates the theme into every portion of the game. It is so beautifully colorful and the creatures are all unique and interesting that it may be difficult to concentrate on the actual game for some people, I imagine.
All that aside, I really do think this is a good game. It certainly gives me the Witch’s Brew/Broom Service vibe with benefits for the player who chooses something the others have not. Combine that feeling with that of the chaos of Survive!: Escape from Atlantis area control of constantly-shifting cube placement and I think Galactic Raptor has a hit here. Again, I am excited to see the final product with the more premium components and tweaked rules, but what I have here is still a good implementation of the mechanics with a hard-to-beat theme.
I do quite like the Shark ability to chomp not only everyone else’s creatures, but also your own to take those cubes back into your supply to be Bolstered or Deployed elsewhere. I also really like being able to Upgrade any action I wish to truly personalize my style and tactics during play. I like being able to Move other players’ creatures into Atlantis for that immediate point, but also to remove that cube from play altogether. It creates quite an interesting dynamic and strategy to facilitate other players’ majority status in Atlantis in order to gain quick points and board control right away. There are so many thing to like about this game, and I am so glad I was able to give it a chance on the table.
If you enjoy games similar to those I mentioned previously, then check out Kingdoms of the Deep. It is beautiful, offers quite a bit of strategy and tactics, and stands to become an excellent mid-weight simultaneous action, area control game WITH SHARKS. While I probably won’t be playing this one every game night, I can certainly see myself introducing it to many of my fellow gamers. I urge you to check out the Kickstarter campaign for Kingdoms of the Deep once it launches in January. Tell ’em Old Travis sent ya.
Kingdoms of the Deep is an abstracted area-control game set in the ocean for one to six players. In it players lead a faction of creatures intent on ruling the underwater kingdom. The player who scores the most VP at the end of the game is the winner, and as their king the player must rule with a strong pectoral fin. Okay, that last part isn’t in the rules, but it should be.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this preview. These are preview copy components, and the final components may be different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, but to give our readers an idea of how the game plays. You are invited to back the game on Kickstarter launching January 12, 2021, order from your FLGS, or purchase through any retailers stocking it after it is fulfilled. -T
To setup players will choose a color and take all components of that color. Obviously, the best choice is purple. Next the central board will be built of large hex tiles surrounding an Atlantis tile. Upon Atlantis one Shark token will be placed. The Score Board is placed near the central hex board and upon it is placed the Round Marker, the End Game Scoring tile, and the three Goal cards. Players then populate the board with their Influence Cubes on their specific preferred terrain types. Upgrade Cubes (discs in the final version) are then placed on each player’s individual play mats on the furthest value to the left, save for the Reset upgrades: players will choose one to place a cube. Give the starting player the Start Player token (a manta ray in this prototype) and the game may begin!
On a turn each player will choose a card from their hand of Action cards to be flipped simultaneously. The starting player will resolve their card first and play will continue around the table thenceforth. Each player will take their action and prepare for the next round. Should a player choose a card that no other player had chosen for the round they will also be able to activate the Solo Ability printed on the card. Typically these Solo Abilities are a furtherance of the action chosen. For example, should a player choose the Deploy Action card and be the only one to do so, they will be able to deploy one additional Influence Cube on the board than normal. The actions are Bolster, Deploy, Move, Upgrade, Shark, and Reset. Each action is limited to a number of cubes added, spaces moved, or upgrades allowed according to where the player board discs (large cubes in the prototype) lie on the player’s mat.
The Bolster action allows the player to add a number of Influence Cubes to the board on the player’s current preferred terrain type. To Deploy units is to add Influence Cubes to the board on hexes already containing their Influence or hexes directly adjacent to those already containing their Influence cubes. When a player chooses the Move action they are able to move creatures (Influence Cubes of any player and Shark tokens) a number of spaces that can be used for once creature or split between several. Players will certainly wish to Upgrade their actions throughout the game by increasing their player board discs’ spaces on their mat. For example, upgrading the Move action could allow the player to move creatures three spaces instead of two. The Shark action allows the player to move the Shark token(s) and chomp creatures on the same hex. Once a Shark feeds, the controlling player will increase their standing on their own Bait Pile track on their play mat. Certain increments on this track will provide the player with one instance of an action (Move, Deploy, etc), and the creature’s Influence Cube is returned to the matching player. Reset actions allow the player to recall their played Action cards to their hands, but also provide whichever action the player originally chose at setup. Should a player wish to Upgrade their Reset action more actions will become available to them each time they utilize the Reset action. Additionally, at the end of the player’s turn having used the Reset action card the Round Marker token is moved one space closer to the end of the game on its track. More on this later.
During play, some creatures may be moved onto the Atlantis tile in the middle of the board via the Deploy or Move actions. When this happens the player who moved the cube onto the Atlantis tile will score a point immediately, and the creature cube is placed in the Atlantis castle (cloth bag in the prototype, but a castle component in the final version). At the end of the game points are awarded to the player with the most creatures in Atlantis.
Every three movements of the Round Marker token signifies a scoring round takes place. Players will consult the current Goal card for any scoring round bonuses and points are earned. The Goal card is then discarded to reveal the next Goal card in sequence on which players can concentrate during the next rounds of play. Also during the first two of these scoring rounds another Shark token is added to the board on the Atlantis tile to be moved around seeking lunch. Once the Round Marker reaches the final scoring round the game ends and points are tallied to arrive at the winner.
Components. Again, this is a prototype version of the game, and while I know certain things will be different in the final version, I do not know what else may be upgraded as a result of any stretch goals reached. Therefore I do not want to comment on the quality of the components, but rather the art style and direction this game is heading toward actual production.
The art on this one is simply gorgeous. The style is the same as that of Animal Kingdoms, which is also a release from Galactic Raptor. All the art I have seen in this game is sublime and permeates the theme into every portion of the game. It is so beautifully colorful and the creatures are all unique and interesting that it may be difficult to concentrate on the actual game for some people, I imagine.
All that aside, I really do think this is a good game. It certainly gives me the Witch’s Brew/Broom Service vibe with benefits for the player who chooses something the others have not. Combine that feeling with that of the chaos of Survive!: Escape from Atlantis area control of constantly-shifting cube placement and I think Galactic Raptor has a hit here. Again, I am excited to see the final product with the more premium components and tweaked rules, but what I have here is still a good implementation of the mechanics with a hard-to-beat theme.
I do quite like the Shark ability to chomp not only everyone else’s creatures, but also your own to take those cubes back into your supply to be Bolstered or Deployed elsewhere. I also really like being able to Upgrade any action I wish to truly personalize my style and tactics during play. I like being able to Move other players’ creatures into Atlantis for that immediate point, but also to remove that cube from play altogether. It creates quite an interesting dynamic and strategy to facilitate other players’ majority status in Atlantis in order to gain quick points and board control right away. There are so many thing to like about this game, and I am so glad I was able to give it a chance on the table.
If you enjoy games similar to those I mentioned previously, then check out Kingdoms of the Deep. It is beautiful, offers quite a bit of strategy and tactics, and stands to become an excellent mid-weight simultaneous action, area control game WITH SHARKS. While I probably won’t be playing this one every game night, I can certainly see myself introducing it to many of my fellow gamers. I urge you to check out the Kickstarter campaign for Kingdoms of the Deep once it launches in January. Tell ’em Old Travis sent ya.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Gerald's Game (2017) in Movies
Oct 13, 2017 (Updated Oct 13, 2017)
Top Notch Performances. (1 more)
Effective Scares.
Hard To Watch, Yet Impossible To Turn Away
Contains spoilers, click to show
After being underwhelmed by the major blockbuster release of IT, I didn’t have much hope for this small Netflix movie with a limited cast, a low budget and being an adaption of what is regarded as one of Stephen King’s lesser works. I am happy to report that I was pleasantly surprised when I sat down to watch this one, in fact I’d go as far as to say it blew me away.
This is a movie that lives and dies on the performances of the actors involved. For those of you not familiar with the story’s premise, it involves a married couple driving out to a holiday cottage in the woods for a dirty weekend. The couple is played by Carla Gugino, (Jessie,) and Bruce Greenwood, (Gerald,) who both totally nail their respective roles in the movie. Once they get to the cottage and the door is conveniently left ajar, Gerald handcuffs Jessie to the bed and goes to the bathroom to pop a Viagra. Once he comes back and explains how he has made sure the gardeners and the cleaners won’t disturb them for a few days, he takes a heart attack and collapses onto the floor and dies.
From this point on, Carla Gugino spends the vast majority of the movie handcuffed to the bed and she gives an absolutely stellar performance, possibly the best of her career. She goes though a vast array of emotions in convincing, believable form and shows everything, from despair, to sadness, to anger, to fear, to resilience. I don’t think anyone has ever been Oscar nominated for a straight-to-Netflix movie, but if there is one performance that deserves to be, it is this one.
If you haven’t seen the movie yet, please don’t read on past this point as I am going to have to delve into spoilers in order to discuss the other aspects of the movie that I enjoyed. I thought the way that Gerald appeared to Jessie as a sort of devil on her shoulder was really effective and Greenwood delivered the required level of intense cruelty perfectly. Then the fact that Jessie appeared to herself as a sort of angel on the shoulder to oppose Gerald’s negative thoughts, meant that Gugino was required to deliver a dual character performance, on top of the already challenging role of being chained to the bed.
Flashback sequences in movies can go either way for me. They usually either tend to detract from the story at hand and become an unnecessary tangent, or they compliment what is going on and add to the movie overall. Thankfully in this movie, it is the latter. The flashback scenes are uncomfortable and hard to watch, but they do add context to what is going on in the character’s mind and make for a more interesting dissection of the effect that child abuse can have on a person in later life and how psychologically, even as adults people are still affected by the dreadful things that occurred in their past.
I also thought that this film was extremely effective in terms of its fear factor. As opposed to IT, which was scary at the start, but became repetitive and managed to desensitise its audience for what to expect by the halfway mark, Gerald’s game retains an unpredictable level of uneasiness throughout.
As far as the viewer knows during the first half of the movie, the main conflict facing the protagonist is starvation and the dog that is gnawing on Gerald’s dead body, but then things take a much more sinister turn. In what is possibly the creepiest scene I have seen in a movie this year, Jessie wakes up during the night after passing out for a few hours and she looks into the corner of the room, squinting her eyes. The camera follows where she is looking and the general shape of something can be made out. Then the shape begins to move forwards into the moonlight and is revealed to be a huge, deformed man holding a trinket box. This was so unexpected and freaky, and I loved it. I thought it was so effective in the context of the movie and was executed perfectly to be as disturbing as possible. It is also a relatable scare, as we have all experienced that moment; glancing at the corner of the room, something catches our eye and looks off in the darkness, but you just brush it off and fall back asleep. Jessie’s worst fears are confirmed here though, as she really did see something in the corner of the room and she is helpless to get away from it.
It also throws a twist into a story that has so far been based in what could be a real situation. You start to wonder, is Jessie experiencing something supernatural, or is she just hallucinating due to lack of food and water? Then the Gerald hallucination asks her if ‘The Moonlight Man,’ that she saw isn’t real, then why did the dog run away when he was in the room? Just like Jessie, the audience starts to wonder if he could be real, perhaps he is death and he has come to take Jessie to hell. All of these questions add to the already intense and disturbing tone of the movie and I thought it worked perfectly.
Eventually the movie wraps up with Jessie having an epiphany that if she smashes the glass of water and cuts her wrist, the blood can help her slip her hand out of the cuffs. What follows is a gory, brutal, difficult to watch de-gloving scene that will have you wincing and watching through your fingers. Then in true Stephen King fashion, the movie goes on to reveal another twist. It is revealed that ‘The Moonlight Man,’ really was in the room with Jessie. He was a serial killer that collected various body parts form dead people and he was taking parts from Gerald’s body while Jessie was chained to the bed. I can see why this ending could be polarizing for some, but I loved it and I thought it added an extra layer of craziness to the already insane sequence of events that we just witnessed.
Overall, Gerald’s Game is fantastic. A truly unsettling, chilling Stephen King adaption that showcases fantastic performances from its cast, makes the most of its minimal setting and managed to creep me out way more than any other horror movie I have seen this year.
This is a movie that lives and dies on the performances of the actors involved. For those of you not familiar with the story’s premise, it involves a married couple driving out to a holiday cottage in the woods for a dirty weekend. The couple is played by Carla Gugino, (Jessie,) and Bruce Greenwood, (Gerald,) who both totally nail their respective roles in the movie. Once they get to the cottage and the door is conveniently left ajar, Gerald handcuffs Jessie to the bed and goes to the bathroom to pop a Viagra. Once he comes back and explains how he has made sure the gardeners and the cleaners won’t disturb them for a few days, he takes a heart attack and collapses onto the floor and dies.
From this point on, Carla Gugino spends the vast majority of the movie handcuffed to the bed and she gives an absolutely stellar performance, possibly the best of her career. She goes though a vast array of emotions in convincing, believable form and shows everything, from despair, to sadness, to anger, to fear, to resilience. I don’t think anyone has ever been Oscar nominated for a straight-to-Netflix movie, but if there is one performance that deserves to be, it is this one.
If you haven’t seen the movie yet, please don’t read on past this point as I am going to have to delve into spoilers in order to discuss the other aspects of the movie that I enjoyed. I thought the way that Gerald appeared to Jessie as a sort of devil on her shoulder was really effective and Greenwood delivered the required level of intense cruelty perfectly. Then the fact that Jessie appeared to herself as a sort of angel on the shoulder to oppose Gerald’s negative thoughts, meant that Gugino was required to deliver a dual character performance, on top of the already challenging role of being chained to the bed.
Flashback sequences in movies can go either way for me. They usually either tend to detract from the story at hand and become an unnecessary tangent, or they compliment what is going on and add to the movie overall. Thankfully in this movie, it is the latter. The flashback scenes are uncomfortable and hard to watch, but they do add context to what is going on in the character’s mind and make for a more interesting dissection of the effect that child abuse can have on a person in later life and how psychologically, even as adults people are still affected by the dreadful things that occurred in their past.
I also thought that this film was extremely effective in terms of its fear factor. As opposed to IT, which was scary at the start, but became repetitive and managed to desensitise its audience for what to expect by the halfway mark, Gerald’s game retains an unpredictable level of uneasiness throughout.
As far as the viewer knows during the first half of the movie, the main conflict facing the protagonist is starvation and the dog that is gnawing on Gerald’s dead body, but then things take a much more sinister turn. In what is possibly the creepiest scene I have seen in a movie this year, Jessie wakes up during the night after passing out for a few hours and she looks into the corner of the room, squinting her eyes. The camera follows where she is looking and the general shape of something can be made out. Then the shape begins to move forwards into the moonlight and is revealed to be a huge, deformed man holding a trinket box. This was so unexpected and freaky, and I loved it. I thought it was so effective in the context of the movie and was executed perfectly to be as disturbing as possible. It is also a relatable scare, as we have all experienced that moment; glancing at the corner of the room, something catches our eye and looks off in the darkness, but you just brush it off and fall back asleep. Jessie’s worst fears are confirmed here though, as she really did see something in the corner of the room and she is helpless to get away from it.
It also throws a twist into a story that has so far been based in what could be a real situation. You start to wonder, is Jessie experiencing something supernatural, or is she just hallucinating due to lack of food and water? Then the Gerald hallucination asks her if ‘The Moonlight Man,’ that she saw isn’t real, then why did the dog run away when he was in the room? Just like Jessie, the audience starts to wonder if he could be real, perhaps he is death and he has come to take Jessie to hell. All of these questions add to the already intense and disturbing tone of the movie and I thought it worked perfectly.
Eventually the movie wraps up with Jessie having an epiphany that if she smashes the glass of water and cuts her wrist, the blood can help her slip her hand out of the cuffs. What follows is a gory, brutal, difficult to watch de-gloving scene that will have you wincing and watching through your fingers. Then in true Stephen King fashion, the movie goes on to reveal another twist. It is revealed that ‘The Moonlight Man,’ really was in the room with Jessie. He was a serial killer that collected various body parts form dead people and he was taking parts from Gerald’s body while Jessie was chained to the bed. I can see why this ending could be polarizing for some, but I loved it and I thought it added an extra layer of craziness to the already insane sequence of events that we just witnessed.
Overall, Gerald’s Game is fantastic. A truly unsettling, chilling Stephen King adaption that showcases fantastic performances from its cast, makes the most of its minimal setting and managed to creep me out way more than any other horror movie I have seen this year.
I first learned about you, Joe, when I sat one Sunday morning on Netflix and I could not keep my eyes off of the promo for this show about you fixating on a blonde woman. Naturally, I was intrigued and I had to learn about you, Joe, and how exactly you could see stalking as a way of getting close to someone and love them. I do wish you hadn't been a manager at a bookstore, Joe. I'm a booknerd, it was difficult to not like you, most of the time.
I watched your story and then I listened to your story. Joe, there are quite a few differences between the BookJoe and the NetflixJoe. Either way, Joe, I judge you harshly at each passing moment when you follow this girl, Guinevere Beck (can we just laugh at the irony that her name is Guinevere? If you haven't read King Author, you should) or stalk her using her old phone that she believed lost.
Just a little nit pick on my part, Netflix, Android and Apple DO NOT use the same cloud! They are ENTIRELY different companies with entirely different hardware. There was no way, NetflixJoe, that you could have seen the woman's emails or texts from an Android phone when she got a new phone that is an Apple. Rant over, now back to you, Joe.
BookJoe is more wordy and more story telling. Perhaps your warped mind may have believed Guinevere (Beck in both stories) might have flirted with you. This begs the question, what made her stand out from any other WOMAN who doesn't wear a bra (and don't state that you can't tell because you point that out about Beck every chance you got)? It couldn't have been the books she purchased as how you mentally made fun of the fact that she bought a certain book because the author was a relative of a celebrity.
I'll give you credit, NetflixJoe, while NetflixBeck was still a bit off with her procrastination and her obsessiveness with a crack head and drinking, she still grew some character and made for someone with potential. BookBeck, on the other hand, BookJoe, you really could have picked a much better person to stalk.
BookBeck is highly ditzy, a pushover, loves to drink (a lot!), and prefers casual encounters (which you found that out by going through her email) with other men, except you! She claims she wants to write, yet spends little if any time doing it, and while you do somewhat encourage her, it doesn't work. She just wants to say she wants to write, but not do it. And when she does write, and BookJoe you have stated this a little annoyance before, it's pure pornography.
BookJoe, I often pitied you because you are highly intelligent yet so stupid. BookBeck was all wrong for you and you spent all this time trying to make her right and doing it all the wrong way. Oh, Joe, you just couldn't take it. And you couldn't see it. So stupid, Joe.
Okay, as fun as that was, here's the remainder of the review without me talking to Joe. The show on Netflix was so hard to turn off because it was that intense. No, I DO NOT ship Beck and Joe. HE IS STILL A STALKER!! The show really showed that even the people who seem all nice and laid back CAN BE THE PERSON THAT IS DANGEROUS! The book does the same thing as well.
In the book, it's all told in Joe's point of view, and he could very well be not a very reliable narrator. All of it is told from what he sees and sometimes what he wishes he could see. At least on Netflix, though Joe narrates mostly, you're able to see the evidence instead of going off by his word. He also gives off of how delusional he really is when it comes to Beck. He makes himself BELIEVE that Beck is just suffering from daddy issues with all these men and he can help her and make her only want him.
The story itself was really well put together. The book will definitely not give you the shipping feels like Netflix seems to do for some people. Most of the time, I do just say out loud how stupid Joe really is and how he maybe he should move on. I wasn't lying when I said BookBeck was all those things. She really was. I actually did not like her character at all. To me, there wasn't much growth except for small things here and there, but for the most part, she just remained this person who had daddy issues and tried to do everything she could to NOT write. I'll give her credit for finding out about Joe and trying to figure out how to get away, but that's about it.
The show is a great watch cause the story is pretty good. If you want to see everything and not go by Joe, watch the show first. If you are curious as to how BookJoe started and became NetflixJoe, read this book first. Do you think he's a reliable narrator?
I have to point out the similarities with these characters that of King Arthur, however. I mentioned that earlier because Beck's first name is Guinevere. Think about it (if you've read King Arthur when you were in school).
Joe is Arthur - he manages a bookstore and reads. He fixates himself on a woman who apparently is so enchanting that he must have her no matter what.
Benji in retrospect is Merlin - He may be hooked on drugs and a total douche, but he WARNS Joe about Beck and that she is indeed crazy and not faithful. Joe does NOT listen.
Dr. Nicky is Lancelot - he is a therapist to both Joe and Beck (separately and without the other knowing) and he tries to guide Joe through his therapy, but in the end, he falls for Beck and they have an affair.
Beck IS GUINEVERE - Not at all the person she appears to be for Joe and winds up being entirely unfaithful and suffers for it.
**I haven't figured out Peach, but she's just crazy**
It is a two part series - I need a break from Joe before I think about reading the second book.
I watched your story and then I listened to your story. Joe, there are quite a few differences between the BookJoe and the NetflixJoe. Either way, Joe, I judge you harshly at each passing moment when you follow this girl, Guinevere Beck (can we just laugh at the irony that her name is Guinevere? If you haven't read King Author, you should) or stalk her using her old phone that she believed lost.
Just a little nit pick on my part, Netflix, Android and Apple DO NOT use the same cloud! They are ENTIRELY different companies with entirely different hardware. There was no way, NetflixJoe, that you could have seen the woman's emails or texts from an Android phone when she got a new phone that is an Apple. Rant over, now back to you, Joe.
BookJoe is more wordy and more story telling. Perhaps your warped mind may have believed Guinevere (Beck in both stories) might have flirted with you. This begs the question, what made her stand out from any other WOMAN who doesn't wear a bra (and don't state that you can't tell because you point that out about Beck every chance you got)? It couldn't have been the books she purchased as how you mentally made fun of the fact that she bought a certain book because the author was a relative of a celebrity.
I'll give you credit, NetflixJoe, while NetflixBeck was still a bit off with her procrastination and her obsessiveness with a crack head and drinking, she still grew some character and made for someone with potential. BookBeck, on the other hand, BookJoe, you really could have picked a much better person to stalk.
BookBeck is highly ditzy, a pushover, loves to drink (a lot!), and prefers casual encounters (which you found that out by going through her email) with other men, except you! She claims she wants to write, yet spends little if any time doing it, and while you do somewhat encourage her, it doesn't work. She just wants to say she wants to write, but not do it. And when she does write, and BookJoe you have stated this a little annoyance before, it's pure pornography.
BookJoe, I often pitied you because you are highly intelligent yet so stupid. BookBeck was all wrong for you and you spent all this time trying to make her right and doing it all the wrong way. Oh, Joe, you just couldn't take it. And you couldn't see it. So stupid, Joe.
Okay, as fun as that was, here's the remainder of the review without me talking to Joe. The show on Netflix was so hard to turn off because it was that intense. No, I DO NOT ship Beck and Joe. HE IS STILL A STALKER!! The show really showed that even the people who seem all nice and laid back CAN BE THE PERSON THAT IS DANGEROUS! The book does the same thing as well.
In the book, it's all told in Joe's point of view, and he could very well be not a very reliable narrator. All of it is told from what he sees and sometimes what he wishes he could see. At least on Netflix, though Joe narrates mostly, you're able to see the evidence instead of going off by his word. He also gives off of how delusional he really is when it comes to Beck. He makes himself BELIEVE that Beck is just suffering from daddy issues with all these men and he can help her and make her only want him.
The story itself was really well put together. The book will definitely not give you the shipping feels like Netflix seems to do for some people. Most of the time, I do just say out loud how stupid Joe really is and how he maybe he should move on. I wasn't lying when I said BookBeck was all those things. She really was. I actually did not like her character at all. To me, there wasn't much growth except for small things here and there, but for the most part, she just remained this person who had daddy issues and tried to do everything she could to NOT write. I'll give her credit for finding out about Joe and trying to figure out how to get away, but that's about it.
The show is a great watch cause the story is pretty good. If you want to see everything and not go by Joe, watch the show first. If you are curious as to how BookJoe started and became NetflixJoe, read this book first. Do you think he's a reliable narrator?
I have to point out the similarities with these characters that of King Arthur, however. I mentioned that earlier because Beck's first name is Guinevere. Think about it (if you've read King Arthur when you were in school).
Joe is Arthur - he manages a bookstore and reads. He fixates himself on a woman who apparently is so enchanting that he must have her no matter what.
Benji in retrospect is Merlin - He may be hooked on drugs and a total douche, but he WARNS Joe about Beck and that she is indeed crazy and not faithful. Joe does NOT listen.
Dr. Nicky is Lancelot - he is a therapist to both Joe and Beck (separately and without the other knowing) and he tries to guide Joe through his therapy, but in the end, he falls for Beck and they have an affair.
Beck IS GUINEVERE - Not at all the person she appears to be for Joe and winds up being entirely unfaithful and suffers for it.
**I haven't figured out Peach, but she's just crazy**
It is a two part series - I need a break from Joe before I think about reading the second book.
KittyMiku (138 KP) rated Her Last Goodbye in Books
May 23, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
As with any mystery, it is amazing to have that suspense with a tad bit of danger. After all, the excitement is in the wondering who did what and what may have caused an event to happen. However, Her Last Goodbye is more than just that. It allows the reader to see into some of the worries and dangers it is to be a parent, how romance can lead to vulnerable states of mind (which we all know can lead to some acts of intimacy), as well as how some people have some complicated views on how a relationship should work. It was even more shocking and terrifyingly real than the first book in the Morgan Dane series. I found myself ridden with anxiety, fear, and concern through out the book. Having so many difficult situations to have to sort through and ideas, I found this book hard to put down, even when it got too intense to keep reading at the moment.
First of all, Morgan having three children is always nice to see. With her concern about her children's livelihood always about her, it wasn't hard for her to connect with the missing woman, Chelsea, who was a mother of 2 small children, and how she wasn't likely to leave her children that she adored so much. It was, however, rough for her to try to come up with clues and facts to prove that the woman just didn't run away from her family. To see Morgan struggle through that idea and then to end up having her own children threatened on multiple occasions by a variety of men, only made things worse. I found those parts exceptionally hard to read. Having a child myself, I don't think I would have been as rational or as brave as she was. Just the thought of the things she went through and the ideas of a mother just abandoning her children, has me shaken. Even though, as stated in the book, mothers sometimes do strange things like that, it still isn't easy to process or understand. Then to watch a mother go into Mama Bear mode to protect her own, kept my own mind whirling. I like to think I would do anything to protect my daughter, but my own problem with conflict would have been enough to make sure I got out of whatever situation that would put me in that rough spot. It had fuel Morgan even more though. She pushed harder to find and get rid of the person behind her own children's danger. This only makes her even more loveable. It is actually inspiring to have such a strong woman character, who would do anything to protect her loved ones. I can't help but feel more drawn to her in this book, and I feel that my admiration and love for her will grow in the future. Even so, I still found a lot of other disturbing things within the story.
We all know that there are people out there who believe women should be completely submissive to men, but it was still really hard to read and stomach a character who had this belief. To kidnap, condition, and even train another person seems extremely harsh, yet a they existed. I found it harder to read how they would torture another human being to break their mind and their spirit, just to train a woman to think and be something they weren't. Especially when said person was supposedly in love with their prey. I did find it inspiring on how, even being tortured, a woman can overcome it and try to escape and get back to her family. In fact, the thought of her family propelled her and kept her trying to get back home. It really made me happy to see that family was her motivation. Though, it was rough to get through, it made me wonder how many women could go through what she had and still find the courage and strength to keep trying to figure out a way to escape and get home. Even though, it was clear she was traumatized, it was clear she was more concerned with getting home to her children than how she could be caught and tortured and punished for trying. I found this to be a pleasant idea to have about someone who was captured. After all, wouldn't you end up within just a few days of being hurt over and over, give up and just conform to whoever was trying to condition you was ways? I probably would have. But this woman character definitely shed some light how nothing else mattered where your family is concern.
I found how strong feelings for someone and their family can really change how you view things to be a nice delight. I hadn't expected Lance to end up falling for Morgan's children the way he did to happen. It had been hinted that he loved and wanted a relationship with Morgan, but to see him fall in love with her girls and want to protect them as much as Morgan did, was really a pleasant sight. I know there are men out there like that, but its still rare and to see how his love for Morgan ends up extending to her children was just the right about of sentiment and love the book need to keeps things from going overboard. I enjoyed how he tried his best to make sure her girls were safe and even let them into his house to keep them protected, to be exhilarating and touching. It is always nice to have some wholesome love and concern to help break up some of the tension in a storyline and Leigh's way of adding this to Lance's character was a nice call. It helped keep the danger presented while showing a parental side to Lance and offering up how your friends and potential lover's can easily adore your children as much as you do.
Overall, I would rate Melinda Leigh's Her Last Goodbye 5 stars out of 5 stars for how well written and emotional filled the book was. It could stand alone as it gives refreshers on what happened in the last book, as well as had its own storyline. Though, the character developments increased and they continued to grow through out the story, the reader wouldn't feel like they missed a whole lot by reading this book first. I have to say that has to be something that is delightful. After all, wouldn't is just bite if you had to read the first book to even think about picking up the second. Sometimes you don't always realize what you are grabbing and having a series that has books that could stand alone if they needed to, makes it so much easier to start by whatever book you happen to pick up first. I definitely recommend this book to all our thrill seekers. Its not for the faint of heart, but is still extremely excellent to read.
First of all, Morgan having three children is always nice to see. With her concern about her children's livelihood always about her, it wasn't hard for her to connect with the missing woman, Chelsea, who was a mother of 2 small children, and how she wasn't likely to leave her children that she adored so much. It was, however, rough for her to try to come up with clues and facts to prove that the woman just didn't run away from her family. To see Morgan struggle through that idea and then to end up having her own children threatened on multiple occasions by a variety of men, only made things worse. I found those parts exceptionally hard to read. Having a child myself, I don't think I would have been as rational or as brave as she was. Just the thought of the things she went through and the ideas of a mother just abandoning her children, has me shaken. Even though, as stated in the book, mothers sometimes do strange things like that, it still isn't easy to process or understand. Then to watch a mother go into Mama Bear mode to protect her own, kept my own mind whirling. I like to think I would do anything to protect my daughter, but my own problem with conflict would have been enough to make sure I got out of whatever situation that would put me in that rough spot. It had fuel Morgan even more though. She pushed harder to find and get rid of the person behind her own children's danger. This only makes her even more loveable. It is actually inspiring to have such a strong woman character, who would do anything to protect her loved ones. I can't help but feel more drawn to her in this book, and I feel that my admiration and love for her will grow in the future. Even so, I still found a lot of other disturbing things within the story.
We all know that there are people out there who believe women should be completely submissive to men, but it was still really hard to read and stomach a character who had this belief. To kidnap, condition, and even train another person seems extremely harsh, yet a they existed. I found it harder to read how they would torture another human being to break their mind and their spirit, just to train a woman to think and be something they weren't. Especially when said person was supposedly in love with their prey. I did find it inspiring on how, even being tortured, a woman can overcome it and try to escape and get back to her family. In fact, the thought of her family propelled her and kept her trying to get back home. It really made me happy to see that family was her motivation. Though, it was rough to get through, it made me wonder how many women could go through what she had and still find the courage and strength to keep trying to figure out a way to escape and get home. Even though, it was clear she was traumatized, it was clear she was more concerned with getting home to her children than how she could be caught and tortured and punished for trying. I found this to be a pleasant idea to have about someone who was captured. After all, wouldn't you end up within just a few days of being hurt over and over, give up and just conform to whoever was trying to condition you was ways? I probably would have. But this woman character definitely shed some light how nothing else mattered where your family is concern.
I found how strong feelings for someone and their family can really change how you view things to be a nice delight. I hadn't expected Lance to end up falling for Morgan's children the way he did to happen. It had been hinted that he loved and wanted a relationship with Morgan, but to see him fall in love with her girls and want to protect them as much as Morgan did, was really a pleasant sight. I know there are men out there like that, but its still rare and to see how his love for Morgan ends up extending to her children was just the right about of sentiment and love the book need to keeps things from going overboard. I enjoyed how he tried his best to make sure her girls were safe and even let them into his house to keep them protected, to be exhilarating and touching. It is always nice to have some wholesome love and concern to help break up some of the tension in a storyline and Leigh's way of adding this to Lance's character was a nice call. It helped keep the danger presented while showing a parental side to Lance and offering up how your friends and potential lover's can easily adore your children as much as you do.
Overall, I would rate Melinda Leigh's Her Last Goodbye 5 stars out of 5 stars for how well written and emotional filled the book was. It could stand alone as it gives refreshers on what happened in the last book, as well as had its own storyline. Though, the character developments increased and they continued to grow through out the story, the reader wouldn't feel like they missed a whole lot by reading this book first. I have to say that has to be something that is delightful. After all, wouldn't is just bite if you had to read the first book to even think about picking up the second. Sometimes you don't always realize what you are grabbing and having a series that has books that could stand alone if they needed to, makes it so much easier to start by whatever book you happen to pick up first. I definitely recommend this book to all our thrill seekers. Its not for the faint of heart, but is still extremely excellent to read.
Ande Thomas (69 KP) rated The Time Traveler's Wife in Books
May 30, 2019
I've been thinking a lot about what I would write about <i>The Time Traveler's Wife,</i> partly because it seems one usually falls into one of two camps: Love it, hate it. It turns out, I belong to the latter. I won't bother with the sci-fi elements, the could he/couldn't he, the exploration of time travel as a plot device - I'm always willing to engage with a story as long as it follows it's own rules. My problems run deeper.
Spoilers abound.
<spoiler>
First, I'd be remiss not to at least acknowledge the creepy factor of a 40 year old naked man befriending a 6 year old girl. It's been discussed ad nauseum, but I've got to put my two cents in.
The whole experience reeks of grooming. Henry shows up, naked, in a young girl's life and (although true) casually explains that he's a <i>time traveler</i>. Her imagination is hooked. Her very own secret Magic Man. Over the following years, their friendship blossoms, and Henry refuses to tell her anything about the future. He is friendly, charming even, and always respectful. But he remains an enigma. Clare is pulled in by the mystery of the Magic Man. All she knows are the dates of his future arrivals. Until one day he begins to break his rule and tell her that they will be together. They'll get married and be in love and have a life. What changed? Why is he suddenly willing to tell her snippets of her future life? Puberty. She admits her desire to be with him and he basically says "keep waiting, it'll happen."
From that moment, her life has been decided - by Henry, and for Henry. Clare spends the entirety of her teenage existence (and beyond) waiting on Henry. The whole of her character arc is basically one big middle finger to the Bechdel test. Henry leads her by a leash with clues and vague promises of the future. We'll be together when you're older (we're destined). We'll have sex on your 18th birthday (wait for me). We'll meet in Chicago (move to Chicago). Even after his dying breath, he subtly slides direction her way. "I hope you move on, but by the way, I'll drop by when you're EIGHTY. But by all means...move on." Is it coincidence that Henry's time traveling mimics an emotionally abusive relationship? Clare tells us, "Henry is an artist of another sort, a disappearing artist. Our life together in this too-small apartment is punctuated by Henry’s small absences. Sometimes he disappears unobtrusively . . . Sometimes it’s frightening." Sure, you say, but he can't help it. He wants to be there for her. <i>It's just the way he is.</i> It's not even hinted at. Multiple people tell Clare <b>to her face</b> that Henry is bad news. But she won't hear it, because he spent her entire childhood molding her into his wife.
The author doesn't hide the allusion to Homer. Rather, she beats us over the head with it. And sure, it makes sense; Clare is the patiently waiting wife, Henry the distant traveler. Even Alba takes up her role as Telemachus, going on her own journeys in search of her father. But do we need both main characters referring to Henry by name, as Odysseus? We get it, girl. You want to write your own romantic Odyssey. Ease up.
Oh, and by the way - Clare's quote above? That's one of her first comments on married life. Her first thoughts after the wedding are "Why is my husband always gone? Why am I always afraid for him?" Henry's first thoughts? "How can Clare listen to Cheap Trick?" Let me remind you that this is the guy who's willing to rattle off a comprehensive list of early punk before jumping up to join in singing a Prince song, but he's upset that his wife listens to The Eagles instead of some obscure as hell French punk band. Also, this man who is thrilled to share musical tastes with a young teen with a mohawk then laments that the kid can't find his own music and has to take his? He preaches the meaning of punk before privately questioning why those kids want to be punk? Here's a guy who's entire life was shaped by music - both of his parents made livings playing music written before they were even born, yet he can't comprehend why two preteens could (or should) like The Clash, or why Clare would like The Beatles. <i>Stay in your own time,</i> he is essentially saying, <i>leave the time traveling to me.</i>
The guy doesn't even realize the pain he causes. Ingrid asks him "Why were you so mean to me?" "Was I," he says, "I didn't want to be." I know, I know. Everyone around her didn't want him to see her or speak to her. But need I remind you - dude time travels and frequently gives himself tips from the future. "Hey pal, take it easy on Ingrid," or "Bro, Ingrid is really shaken up, don't listen to her family or doctor, she needs some closure." But of course, nothing can really change, everything is the way it is.
This is all before I even begin to mention how much Niffenegger LOVES to name-drop. Of course there's the aforementioned punk band name-vomit, mentions of Henry's parents' work can't go by without naming a specific piece, despite adding nothing to the story or our understanding of the characters, there are two separate references to Claude Levi-Strauss (why?), and various other casual mentions of figures that seem to serve no purpose other than to prove that Henry is smart, and knows smart people things.
</spoiler>
I wanted to like this book more, I thought it had a fascinating premise and an interesting perspective. Obviously, I'm not a regular consumer of romance, and I realize that the problems I have with this book are problems shared by a large portion of the genre. But I am positive that we can have a love story that isn't mired by (at best) morally ambiguous relationships. I understand it was a different world when it was published, and that's not directly anyone's fault. Questions of consent and power and respect have been thrust into the spotlight in the short years since this book was published, but that's the lens with which I have to peer through. Stop glorifying these vapid, and frankly, abusive relationships as the paragon of romance. We're better than this. We need to be.
Spoilers abound.
<spoiler>
First, I'd be remiss not to at least acknowledge the creepy factor of a 40 year old naked man befriending a 6 year old girl. It's been discussed ad nauseum, but I've got to put my two cents in.
The whole experience reeks of grooming. Henry shows up, naked, in a young girl's life and (although true) casually explains that he's a <i>time traveler</i>. Her imagination is hooked. Her very own secret Magic Man. Over the following years, their friendship blossoms, and Henry refuses to tell her anything about the future. He is friendly, charming even, and always respectful. But he remains an enigma. Clare is pulled in by the mystery of the Magic Man. All she knows are the dates of his future arrivals. Until one day he begins to break his rule and tell her that they will be together. They'll get married and be in love and have a life. What changed? Why is he suddenly willing to tell her snippets of her future life? Puberty. She admits her desire to be with him and he basically says "keep waiting, it'll happen."
From that moment, her life has been decided - by Henry, and for Henry. Clare spends the entirety of her teenage existence (and beyond) waiting on Henry. The whole of her character arc is basically one big middle finger to the Bechdel test. Henry leads her by a leash with clues and vague promises of the future. We'll be together when you're older (we're destined). We'll have sex on your 18th birthday (wait for me). We'll meet in Chicago (move to Chicago). Even after his dying breath, he subtly slides direction her way. "I hope you move on, but by the way, I'll drop by when you're EIGHTY. But by all means...move on." Is it coincidence that Henry's time traveling mimics an emotionally abusive relationship? Clare tells us, "Henry is an artist of another sort, a disappearing artist. Our life together in this too-small apartment is punctuated by Henry’s small absences. Sometimes he disappears unobtrusively . . . Sometimes it’s frightening." Sure, you say, but he can't help it. He wants to be there for her. <i>It's just the way he is.</i> It's not even hinted at. Multiple people tell Clare <b>to her face</b> that Henry is bad news. But she won't hear it, because he spent her entire childhood molding her into his wife.
The author doesn't hide the allusion to Homer. Rather, she beats us over the head with it. And sure, it makes sense; Clare is the patiently waiting wife, Henry the distant traveler. Even Alba takes up her role as Telemachus, going on her own journeys in search of her father. But do we need both main characters referring to Henry by name, as Odysseus? We get it, girl. You want to write your own romantic Odyssey. Ease up.
Oh, and by the way - Clare's quote above? That's one of her first comments on married life. Her first thoughts after the wedding are "Why is my husband always gone? Why am I always afraid for him?" Henry's first thoughts? "How can Clare listen to Cheap Trick?" Let me remind you that this is the guy who's willing to rattle off a comprehensive list of early punk before jumping up to join in singing a Prince song, but he's upset that his wife listens to The Eagles instead of some obscure as hell French punk band. Also, this man who is thrilled to share musical tastes with a young teen with a mohawk then laments that the kid can't find his own music and has to take his? He preaches the meaning of punk before privately questioning why those kids want to be punk? Here's a guy who's entire life was shaped by music - both of his parents made livings playing music written before they were even born, yet he can't comprehend why two preteens could (or should) like The Clash, or why Clare would like The Beatles. <i>Stay in your own time,</i> he is essentially saying, <i>leave the time traveling to me.</i>
The guy doesn't even realize the pain he causes. Ingrid asks him "Why were you so mean to me?" "Was I," he says, "I didn't want to be." I know, I know. Everyone around her didn't want him to see her or speak to her. But need I remind you - dude time travels and frequently gives himself tips from the future. "Hey pal, take it easy on Ingrid," or "Bro, Ingrid is really shaken up, don't listen to her family or doctor, she needs some closure." But of course, nothing can really change, everything is the way it is.
This is all before I even begin to mention how much Niffenegger LOVES to name-drop. Of course there's the aforementioned punk band name-vomit, mentions of Henry's parents' work can't go by without naming a specific piece, despite adding nothing to the story or our understanding of the characters, there are two separate references to Claude Levi-Strauss (why?), and various other casual mentions of figures that seem to serve no purpose other than to prove that Henry is smart, and knows smart people things.
</spoiler>
I wanted to like this book more, I thought it had a fascinating premise and an interesting perspective. Obviously, I'm not a regular consumer of romance, and I realize that the problems I have with this book are problems shared by a large portion of the genre. But I am positive that we can have a love story that isn't mired by (at best) morally ambiguous relationships. I understand it was a different world when it was published, and that's not directly anyone's fault. Questions of consent and power and respect have been thrust into the spotlight in the short years since this book was published, but that's the lens with which I have to peer through. Stop glorifying these vapid, and frankly, abusive relationships as the paragon of romance. We're better than this. We need to be.