Search
Search results
Lee (2222 KP) rated Aquaman (2018) in Movies
Dec 14, 2018
A very enjoyable DCEU movie!
Before I begin, I just wanted to describe my feelings on the state of the DCEU up until now and hopefully this will be a good indication as to whether or not you're going to agree with me when it comes to Aquaman. So, as I'm sure most people will agree, so far the whole thing has been a bit of a disaster. A rush to try and bottle what Marvel have spent the last 10 years crafting and achieving, with just a handful of below average and inconsistently toned movies. I liked Man of Steel, and I didn't mind Batman V Superman, although I do understand why many people were disappointed. I really enjoyed Wonder Woman, and I found a lot to like within Justice League too. But as for Suicide Squad, well that one was just a ridiculous mess. And with all the uncertainty around the future of Henry Cavill and Ben Affleck in their roles as Superman and Batman, it seems DC still have a long way to go in terms of laying solid foundations for some decent universe building to rival Marvel.
So that brings us to Aquaman, probably the only other character of interest from Justice League who has yet to get his own origin/standalone movie. We got glimpses in Justice League, tastes of the underwater water world, and brief appearances from Amber Heards character Mera, so it's good to be able to expand on what has the potential to be a really strong, interesting character. And under the direction of James Wan, hopefully another welcome deviation from the dark, dull earlier DC movies that received so much criticism.
As far as origin stories go, things get off to a strong start. Lighthouse keeper Thomas Curry finds Atlantean queen Atlanna (Nicole Kidman) washed up on the rocks one day and takes her in to care for her. They fall in love, eventually giving birth to Arthur. A few years later and it's clear that Atlanna cannot stay. She returns to Atlantis, promising that she'll return to him one day, leaving Thomas to raise Arthur. When we join Arthur again, it's one year following the events of the Justice League and the defeat of Steppenwolf. Taking care of a bunch of hi-tech pirates who have boarded a submarine, but still finding time to return home to dad for a few beers and a laugh with the locals. He's left the world of Atlantis behind him, having been banished for being a half breed, and feeling anger at the treatment his mother received for giving birth to him. It's not long though before things all start kicking off and he had to return to life under the sea. Half brother Orm (Patrick Wilson) is looking to wage war on the surface world in retaliation for all the destruction and pollution within the seas, and begins trying to gain support from the seven kingdoms. Meanwhile, one of the pirates Aquaman encountered earlier has got his hands on some Atlantean technology, becoming Black Manta and vowing to get his revenge. During an undersea meeting with Vulko, aid to Atlanna and the man responsible for training Arthur as a child, Arthur is urged to find the lost Trident of Atlan, a magic artifact that once belonged to Atlantis’ first ruler. By wielding the trident, Arthur can reclaim his rightful place as king, hopefully uniting the worlds of land and sea.
There is a LOT going on here, and luckily for the most part, it all works relatively well. The quest for the trident is a bit like an Indiana Jones quest - Arthur and Mera have to undertake a trek across, and below, the Sahara desert, a trip to Sicily, a perilous boat trip and a journey to a hidden world deep within the ocean. The Black Manta storyline seems a bit unnecessary and annoying at times, although does provide some great action (and a setup for a sequel). The underwater scenes involving Atlantis and the other kingdoms are absolutely beautiful to look at, very detailed and imaginative, but these are the areas that unfortunately begin to let the movie down. Culminating in an epic underwater battle involving thousands of different creatures and weapons, the movie ends up as just another DCEU CGI overload.
Despite that, I actually had a lot of fun with this movie, and I particularly loved the action. Fluid, balletic fight scenes, with the viewpoint flowing above and around those involved, we follow a character as he powers through walls and roofs, pulling out to reveal and follow other characters in action, the direction of these scenes is extremely effective. Overall, this is definitely a strong step up for the DCEU and a worthy standalone movie. I just hope they can now keep this momentum going.
So that brings us to Aquaman, probably the only other character of interest from Justice League who has yet to get his own origin/standalone movie. We got glimpses in Justice League, tastes of the underwater water world, and brief appearances from Amber Heards character Mera, so it's good to be able to expand on what has the potential to be a really strong, interesting character. And under the direction of James Wan, hopefully another welcome deviation from the dark, dull earlier DC movies that received so much criticism.
As far as origin stories go, things get off to a strong start. Lighthouse keeper Thomas Curry finds Atlantean queen Atlanna (Nicole Kidman) washed up on the rocks one day and takes her in to care for her. They fall in love, eventually giving birth to Arthur. A few years later and it's clear that Atlanna cannot stay. She returns to Atlantis, promising that she'll return to him one day, leaving Thomas to raise Arthur. When we join Arthur again, it's one year following the events of the Justice League and the defeat of Steppenwolf. Taking care of a bunch of hi-tech pirates who have boarded a submarine, but still finding time to return home to dad for a few beers and a laugh with the locals. He's left the world of Atlantis behind him, having been banished for being a half breed, and feeling anger at the treatment his mother received for giving birth to him. It's not long though before things all start kicking off and he had to return to life under the sea. Half brother Orm (Patrick Wilson) is looking to wage war on the surface world in retaliation for all the destruction and pollution within the seas, and begins trying to gain support from the seven kingdoms. Meanwhile, one of the pirates Aquaman encountered earlier has got his hands on some Atlantean technology, becoming Black Manta and vowing to get his revenge. During an undersea meeting with Vulko, aid to Atlanna and the man responsible for training Arthur as a child, Arthur is urged to find the lost Trident of Atlan, a magic artifact that once belonged to Atlantis’ first ruler. By wielding the trident, Arthur can reclaim his rightful place as king, hopefully uniting the worlds of land and sea.
There is a LOT going on here, and luckily for the most part, it all works relatively well. The quest for the trident is a bit like an Indiana Jones quest - Arthur and Mera have to undertake a trek across, and below, the Sahara desert, a trip to Sicily, a perilous boat trip and a journey to a hidden world deep within the ocean. The Black Manta storyline seems a bit unnecessary and annoying at times, although does provide some great action (and a setup for a sequel). The underwater scenes involving Atlantis and the other kingdoms are absolutely beautiful to look at, very detailed and imaginative, but these are the areas that unfortunately begin to let the movie down. Culminating in an epic underwater battle involving thousands of different creatures and weapons, the movie ends up as just another DCEU CGI overload.
Despite that, I actually had a lot of fun with this movie, and I particularly loved the action. Fluid, balletic fight scenes, with the viewpoint flowing above and around those involved, we follow a character as he powers through walls and roofs, pulling out to reveal and follow other characters in action, the direction of these scenes is extremely effective. Overall, this is definitely a strong step up for the DCEU and a worthy standalone movie. I just hope they can now keep this momentum going.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Burning Blue in Books
Jan 23, 2020
Well, Kahlan and Lupe and other members of book club who think I'm negative over every book, I hope you're happy. REALLY happy!
Burning Blue has got to be one of the best book club reads of this year I might even have my vote finalized for the 2014-15 Gateway Readers Award.
Of course, I want to get my hands on Don't Turn Around by Michelle Gragnon and Croak by Gina Damico first before voting... unless I don't get to it by March.
It's not all about the acid that's a bonus being thrown at wealthy and popular beauty queen not-a-bee Nicole Castro of New Jersey or the mere fact that a hacker is the one who decides to look at the situation more closely to find out who did it, it's the other stuff that I really enjoyed.
The writing's engrossing we don't read from just Jay Nazarro's view, we read from Nicole Castro's journal, and a few of Dr. Julian Nye's (apparently he's like the shrink of the book) notes about Nicole. It's almost as though we're watching CSI, NCIS, or Law and Order with all the likeness to an investigation going on behind NJPD's backs, though CSI and Company (those other fun shows we call Law) are certainly less predictable than Burning Blue. Plus, TV shows have detectives, not an outcast hacker deciding to find out who the culprit is by hacking and whatnot.
<blockquote>What day is it? What night? I'm burning, burning, burning blue.</blockquote>
That obviously doesn't mean reading about Jay's past wasn't highly awkward though... or more accurately, a tad bit gross.
<blockquote>You don't get a lot of homework in the fourth grade, and I didn't have anything to do except make mini snowmen with my earwax.</blockquote>
Although the perpetrator was very predictable, I found it enjoyable to read the rest of the story and see how it would all play out in the end. I obviously watch too much TV (which by the way, isn't even close to true because I don't even watch TV most of the time and I pretty much live under a legit rock) to take a fantastically, pretty whopping close to accurate stab.
I did not, however, take a stab at who actually threw the acid. I merely guessed who came up with the entire plan in the first place.
To top it off for the non-romantics out there, Jay falling in love with Nicole as he investigates the situation further doesn't overshadow the plot at all. There are brief mentions from Jay and Nicole's journal, but that's about it, much to my delight. Really, I'm done with romance currently eclipses suck, okay? Euphemism intended.
Perfectly paced and with great dialogue among the characters, Burning Blue is a fantastic book. Plus there's acid. Yay, chemistry!
--------------------
Original Rating: 4.5 out of 5
Original Review at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2015/01/review-burning-blue-by-paul-griffin.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cG5gfBqJVzk/VA5BIojjZ9I/AAAAAAAAD1g/7srLUfpAGEU/s1600/banner.png"; /></a>
Burning Blue has got to be one of the best book club reads of this year I might even have my vote finalized for the 2014-15 Gateway Readers Award.
Of course, I want to get my hands on Don't Turn Around by Michelle Gragnon and Croak by Gina Damico first before voting... unless I don't get to it by March.
It's not all about the acid that's a bonus being thrown at wealthy and popular beauty queen not-a-bee Nicole Castro of New Jersey or the mere fact that a hacker is the one who decides to look at the situation more closely to find out who did it, it's the other stuff that I really enjoyed.
The writing's engrossing we don't read from just Jay Nazarro's view, we read from Nicole Castro's journal, and a few of Dr. Julian Nye's (apparently he's like the shrink of the book) notes about Nicole. It's almost as though we're watching CSI, NCIS, or Law and Order with all the likeness to an investigation going on behind NJPD's backs, though CSI and Company (those other fun shows we call Law) are certainly less predictable than Burning Blue. Plus, TV shows have detectives, not an outcast hacker deciding to find out who the culprit is by hacking and whatnot.
<blockquote>What day is it? What night? I'm burning, burning, burning blue.</blockquote>
That obviously doesn't mean reading about Jay's past wasn't highly awkward though... or more accurately, a tad bit gross.
<blockquote>You don't get a lot of homework in the fourth grade, and I didn't have anything to do except make mini snowmen with my earwax.</blockquote>
Although the perpetrator was very predictable, I found it enjoyable to read the rest of the story and see how it would all play out in the end. I obviously watch too much TV (which by the way, isn't even close to true because I don't even watch TV most of the time and I pretty much live under a legit rock) to take a fantastically, pretty whopping close to accurate stab.
I did not, however, take a stab at who actually threw the acid. I merely guessed who came up with the entire plan in the first place.
To top it off for the non-romantics out there, Jay falling in love with Nicole as he investigates the situation further doesn't overshadow the plot at all. There are brief mentions from Jay and Nicole's journal, but that's about it, much to my delight. Really, I'm done with romance currently eclipses suck, okay? Euphemism intended.
Perfectly paced and with great dialogue among the characters, Burning Blue is a fantastic book. Plus there's acid. Yay, chemistry!
--------------------
Original Rating: 4.5 out of 5
Original Review at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2015/01/review-burning-blue-by-paul-griffin.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cG5gfBqJVzk/VA5BIojjZ9I/AAAAAAAAD1g/7srLUfpAGEU/s1600/banner.png"; /></a>
TextMe Up - 2nd Phone Number
Productivity and Social Networking
App
ONE APP & MULTIPLE NUMBERS Use your phone like your email with TextMe Up’s smart numbers. Add as...
Daily Bible Inspirations – verses & devotions
Reference and Lifestyle
App
Get inspirational, uplifting Bible verses and devotions – complete with stunning photos –...
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Legendary: A Marvel Deck Building Game in Tabletop Games
Sep 19, 2019
Teamwork makes the dream work! That’s how the saying goes, right? And in Legendary: A Marvel Deck Building Game, it is certainly the truth! When I say it’s a team-building game, I mean that both literally and figuratively – you must recruit heroes and work semi-cooperatively with your fellow gamers to defeat the evil Mastermind before they take over the city!
In an era where superheroes are the norm, the days of petty crime are over. As the protectors of our world have grown in power, so too have those who would see it fall to chaos. Out of the shadows comes a nefarious Mastermind who has engineered the most wicked evil scheme the world has ever seen. With an ever-growing band of followers and henchmen to carry out the plot, the future looks dismal. But do not fear – the supers are here! This job is way too big for only one single hero to handle, but if they all band together, then maybe, juuuust maybe, they might be able to pull it off…
DISCLAIMER: There are several expansions to this game, but we are not reviewing them at this time. Should we review them in the future we will either update this review or post a link to the new material here. -T
Set in the world of Marvel comics and, recently, the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Legendary: Marvel is a cooperative deck building game. Players take turns drafting and playing cards to recruit heroes to their team and to fight off the villains trying to carry out the sinister scheme. You have to strategize how you want to build your deck to best complete the mission – do you recruit heroes that give you special abilities (like drawing additional cards), or do you recruit strong heroes that give you lots of attack points? The choice is entirely up to you! Although all players are building their own individual decks, you must also devise a team strategy because all players either win or lose together as a team. That being said, there is a small competitive aspect to this game – the player with the most Victory Points (earned by defeating villains and rescuing bystanders) is deemed the most legendary hero of the game! Exactly how competitive the game gets is up to the players. I personally prefer a more cooperative approach and usually don’t tally up VPs at the end of the game – either the team won or we lost.
The beauty of this game is that it can be played with any combination of Marvel characters – you are not limited to only using specific teams. Selecting which heroes/villains/Mastermind/etc. to use is at the discretion of the players. Want Iron Man to team up with Deadpool and Wolverine to fight off Kingpin? Go for it! You have basically the entire Marvel universe from which to choose, so the sky is the limit! With so many options, though, it can be a little overwhelming, so I usually use a randomizer app to create a setup for me. Sometimes the setup itself will determine how the entire game will play out – certain combinations of Mastermind/villains/scheme can be BRUTAL to play and difficult to win. But the cool thing about this game is that you cannot just look at a setup and tell if it will be difficult or not – that realization only will come once you start playing!
I love playing this game because of its immense variability – the base game alone has 500 cards! The ability to choose your own heroes, villains, Masterminds, and Schemes means that you will probably never play the same game twice. And on top of that, Legendary: Marvel currently has like 19 expansions! The possibilities are truly endless, and that is the Holy Grail for me when it comes to gaming. I know that I will never get bored of this game because it is a different experience every game.
On the flip side, my main grievance with Legendary: Marvel is with the physical setup and teardown. Every play uses SO MANY cards that it does take a decent amount of time to get setup or put away. Every individual hero/villain/Mastermind/etc. must be sorted and stored separately, and with 500+ cards, that time adds up. When deciding on a game to play, sometimes I skip Legendary: Marvel because of the time it takes to set up. I LOVE to play it, but sometimes I do not feel like taking that much time to set up – I just want to play! My other grievance deals with certain hero superpowers/special card text. Some hero cards have special text, and the definitions are outlined in the rule book but not on the cards themselves. Until I learned/memorized what that special text meant, I was constantly referring back to the rule book nearly every turn to make sure I was using the cards correctly. There is a bit of a learning curve with some of the hero text, but it does get better the more you play!
Don’t let the simplicity of the mechanics fool you – this game requires more strategy than meets the eye! You must not only decide on a strategy for building your individual deck, but you and your teammates must also collectively choose a group strategy to defeat the Mastermind. Cooperation is key, and it really helps the theme of the game come to life. Definitely a winner for Purple Phoenix Games with a butt-kicking 24 / 24 and a well-earned Golden Feather Award!
In an era where superheroes are the norm, the days of petty crime are over. As the protectors of our world have grown in power, so too have those who would see it fall to chaos. Out of the shadows comes a nefarious Mastermind who has engineered the most wicked evil scheme the world has ever seen. With an ever-growing band of followers and henchmen to carry out the plot, the future looks dismal. But do not fear – the supers are here! This job is way too big for only one single hero to handle, but if they all band together, then maybe, juuuust maybe, they might be able to pull it off…
DISCLAIMER: There are several expansions to this game, but we are not reviewing them at this time. Should we review them in the future we will either update this review or post a link to the new material here. -T
Set in the world of Marvel comics and, recently, the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Legendary: Marvel is a cooperative deck building game. Players take turns drafting and playing cards to recruit heroes to their team and to fight off the villains trying to carry out the sinister scheme. You have to strategize how you want to build your deck to best complete the mission – do you recruit heroes that give you special abilities (like drawing additional cards), or do you recruit strong heroes that give you lots of attack points? The choice is entirely up to you! Although all players are building their own individual decks, you must also devise a team strategy because all players either win or lose together as a team. That being said, there is a small competitive aspect to this game – the player with the most Victory Points (earned by defeating villains and rescuing bystanders) is deemed the most legendary hero of the game! Exactly how competitive the game gets is up to the players. I personally prefer a more cooperative approach and usually don’t tally up VPs at the end of the game – either the team won or we lost.
The beauty of this game is that it can be played with any combination of Marvel characters – you are not limited to only using specific teams. Selecting which heroes/villains/Mastermind/etc. to use is at the discretion of the players. Want Iron Man to team up with Deadpool and Wolverine to fight off Kingpin? Go for it! You have basically the entire Marvel universe from which to choose, so the sky is the limit! With so many options, though, it can be a little overwhelming, so I usually use a randomizer app to create a setup for me. Sometimes the setup itself will determine how the entire game will play out – certain combinations of Mastermind/villains/scheme can be BRUTAL to play and difficult to win. But the cool thing about this game is that you cannot just look at a setup and tell if it will be difficult or not – that realization only will come once you start playing!
I love playing this game because of its immense variability – the base game alone has 500 cards! The ability to choose your own heroes, villains, Masterminds, and Schemes means that you will probably never play the same game twice. And on top of that, Legendary: Marvel currently has like 19 expansions! The possibilities are truly endless, and that is the Holy Grail for me when it comes to gaming. I know that I will never get bored of this game because it is a different experience every game.
On the flip side, my main grievance with Legendary: Marvel is with the physical setup and teardown. Every play uses SO MANY cards that it does take a decent amount of time to get setup or put away. Every individual hero/villain/Mastermind/etc. must be sorted and stored separately, and with 500+ cards, that time adds up. When deciding on a game to play, sometimes I skip Legendary: Marvel because of the time it takes to set up. I LOVE to play it, but sometimes I do not feel like taking that much time to set up – I just want to play! My other grievance deals with certain hero superpowers/special card text. Some hero cards have special text, and the definitions are outlined in the rule book but not on the cards themselves. Until I learned/memorized what that special text meant, I was constantly referring back to the rule book nearly every turn to make sure I was using the cards correctly. There is a bit of a learning curve with some of the hero text, but it does get better the more you play!
Don’t let the simplicity of the mechanics fool you – this game requires more strategy than meets the eye! You must not only decide on a strategy for building your individual deck, but you and your teammates must also collectively choose a group strategy to defeat the Mastermind. Cooperation is key, and it really helps the theme of the game come to life. Definitely a winner for Purple Phoenix Games with a butt-kicking 24 / 24 and a well-earned Golden Feather Award!
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Hitman in Video Games
Oct 19, 2017 (Updated Oct 19, 2017)
Solid mechanics. (1 more)
Allows for player experimentation.
Story is garbage. (1 more)
Lack of cohesion.
Episodic Bloodshed
Before diving in, I feel like I should preface this review by pointing out that although this Hitman game was released episodically over the course of eight months, I bought the entire season digitally and played through all 6 levels consecutively. The main reason being; I am a big fan of the Hitman series, but wasn’t onboard with the stunted release schedule trend that this game was adhering to.
You can look at this game in two different ways. If you accept it as an adaption of the Hitman games that have preceded it, presented in a new format type for a new audience, then it’s great and it totally achieves what it set out to do. If like me, you were hoping for something more like the PS2 era games in the series, you will most likely be disappointed. Whether you love or loathe this new way that Hitman is being presented to us, I think it’s fair to say that it is certainly different to what we are used to.
At this point, after playing through the entire game over the last month or so, I have learned to accept it for what it is and came to the conclusion that it’s not the Hitman I remember from my preteen days and that’s okay. It is a different take on the series’ traditional underlying themes and mechanics, updated for a modern audience and even as a die hard, old school fan of the franchise, I can appreciate that.
My favourite thing about this game is that it allows you, as the player, to decide on the level of respect the game treats you with. What I mean by that is, if you have never touched a Hitman game, or even a stealth game before, this is a fantastic starting point. If you are looking for a my-first-premeditated-murder-simulator experience, this is the best recommendation I can think of. Just buy the entire season, boot up the game, play through each stage in order and on normal difficulty and follow the step by step prompts to take down each target. If you play this way, the game ends up functioning as a Wiki-how for any of the past games in the series and can even be used to train you to be better at stealth games in general. However, if you consider yourself a more of a hardcore, matter-of-fact assassin and want the most immersive and unencumbered version of the experience, you can totally have that also.
I know that it isn’t a popular opinion, but I enjoyed my time with Absolution, (the previous entry in the franchise,) however I agree with the overall belief that that game didn’t know what it wanted to be. This latest Hitman game knows exactly what it wants to be and executes what it sets out to do beautifully. Even if you aren’t a fan of the new way this game plays out, it is irrefutable to say that it doesn’t confidently accomplish its intention.
In addition, the technical elements of the game are fairly solid also. The gameplay is precise but fun, the gameplay graphics are pretty nice to look at and the cut-scene graphics are almost photorealistic. The level design functions well to compliment the tasks that you are assigned meaning, the use of lighting and strategic placement of weapons and items etc doesn’t seem too out of place. I experienced some cosmetic glitches and clipping during my time with the game, but never anything game-breaking. The only technical issue that severely hindered my experience was the online connectivity, or lack thereof. I can recall multiple times where I was in the middle of choosing my custom loadout before endeavouring on my next mission, only to be kicked out of the menu halfway through and told that connectivity to the server had been lost. This grew tedious after around the tenth time it happened and more than once caused me to put the controller down and stop playing for the night as multiple attempts to re-establish a connection were in vain.
Lastly, the story is unfortunately unremarkable; it is just a heartless, tacked on excuse for you to move from one setting to the next, but it functions as a justification for 47 to travel to the various locations where the missions take place. The only other downside to this experience was the feel of the game. This criticism is hard to put into words, but in the six missions; the process going in and out of each location as smoothly as possible, coupled with the focus on gameplay mechanics and the lack of cohesiveness to the story makes for a disjointed experience that I don’t think will stay with me over a significant amount of time other than thinking back and saying, “that stealth game had some really well implemented mechanics.” I don’t think that I will ever feel any real nostalgia for this game, nor will it stand out in my mind for anything other than its technical elements. Although the locations are vast and the opportunities the player can take advantage of are numerous, the game feels brief and somewhat unfinished once you complete it. You really get the feeling of this being part of an ongoing series, rather than a solid standalone game. The lack of any definitive beginning, middle and end sections to the game makes it feel rather unsatisfying once you reach the climax and causes the game overall to be more of a mesh of various missions clumsily thrown together, rather than a progressive chapter it 47’s career. The game I played immediately before Hitman, was Nier: Automata and that game managed to have both solid mechanics and some heart within it too. I know that 47 is supposed to be a cold, calculated, heartless killer, but that doesn’t mean that the games he stars in have to be heartless as well.
Overall, this is a solid stealth game and there is a lot of fun to be had here. Just know going in, if you are a long time Hitman fan, some things are going to be different. That doesn’t mean they will necessarily be bad, but you will certainly see a new spin being put on the tried and tested mechanics of past game in the franchise. If this is your first stealth game, then I would say that there is no better introduction into the genre, especially if you use the Opportunities menu. Unfortunately though, it does seem more like a variation of well made parts, rather than a solid, cohesive whole.
You can look at this game in two different ways. If you accept it as an adaption of the Hitman games that have preceded it, presented in a new format type for a new audience, then it’s great and it totally achieves what it set out to do. If like me, you were hoping for something more like the PS2 era games in the series, you will most likely be disappointed. Whether you love or loathe this new way that Hitman is being presented to us, I think it’s fair to say that it is certainly different to what we are used to.
At this point, after playing through the entire game over the last month or so, I have learned to accept it for what it is and came to the conclusion that it’s not the Hitman I remember from my preteen days and that’s okay. It is a different take on the series’ traditional underlying themes and mechanics, updated for a modern audience and even as a die hard, old school fan of the franchise, I can appreciate that.
My favourite thing about this game is that it allows you, as the player, to decide on the level of respect the game treats you with. What I mean by that is, if you have never touched a Hitman game, or even a stealth game before, this is a fantastic starting point. If you are looking for a my-first-premeditated-murder-simulator experience, this is the best recommendation I can think of. Just buy the entire season, boot up the game, play through each stage in order and on normal difficulty and follow the step by step prompts to take down each target. If you play this way, the game ends up functioning as a Wiki-how for any of the past games in the series and can even be used to train you to be better at stealth games in general. However, if you consider yourself a more of a hardcore, matter-of-fact assassin and want the most immersive and unencumbered version of the experience, you can totally have that also.
I know that it isn’t a popular opinion, but I enjoyed my time with Absolution, (the previous entry in the franchise,) however I agree with the overall belief that that game didn’t know what it wanted to be. This latest Hitman game knows exactly what it wants to be and executes what it sets out to do beautifully. Even if you aren’t a fan of the new way this game plays out, it is irrefutable to say that it doesn’t confidently accomplish its intention.
In addition, the technical elements of the game are fairly solid also. The gameplay is precise but fun, the gameplay graphics are pretty nice to look at and the cut-scene graphics are almost photorealistic. The level design functions well to compliment the tasks that you are assigned meaning, the use of lighting and strategic placement of weapons and items etc doesn’t seem too out of place. I experienced some cosmetic glitches and clipping during my time with the game, but never anything game-breaking. The only technical issue that severely hindered my experience was the online connectivity, or lack thereof. I can recall multiple times where I was in the middle of choosing my custom loadout before endeavouring on my next mission, only to be kicked out of the menu halfway through and told that connectivity to the server had been lost. This grew tedious after around the tenth time it happened and more than once caused me to put the controller down and stop playing for the night as multiple attempts to re-establish a connection were in vain.
Lastly, the story is unfortunately unremarkable; it is just a heartless, tacked on excuse for you to move from one setting to the next, but it functions as a justification for 47 to travel to the various locations where the missions take place. The only other downside to this experience was the feel of the game. This criticism is hard to put into words, but in the six missions; the process going in and out of each location as smoothly as possible, coupled with the focus on gameplay mechanics and the lack of cohesiveness to the story makes for a disjointed experience that I don’t think will stay with me over a significant amount of time other than thinking back and saying, “that stealth game had some really well implemented mechanics.” I don’t think that I will ever feel any real nostalgia for this game, nor will it stand out in my mind for anything other than its technical elements. Although the locations are vast and the opportunities the player can take advantage of are numerous, the game feels brief and somewhat unfinished once you complete it. You really get the feeling of this being part of an ongoing series, rather than a solid standalone game. The lack of any definitive beginning, middle and end sections to the game makes it feel rather unsatisfying once you reach the climax and causes the game overall to be more of a mesh of various missions clumsily thrown together, rather than a progressive chapter it 47’s career. The game I played immediately before Hitman, was Nier: Automata and that game managed to have both solid mechanics and some heart within it too. I know that 47 is supposed to be a cold, calculated, heartless killer, but that doesn’t mean that the games he stars in have to be heartless as well.
Overall, this is a solid stealth game and there is a lot of fun to be had here. Just know going in, if you are a long time Hitman fan, some things are going to be different. That doesn’t mean they will necessarily be bad, but you will certainly see a new spin being put on the tried and tested mechanics of past game in the franchise. If this is your first stealth game, then I would say that there is no better introduction into the genre, especially if you use the Opportunities menu. Unfortunately though, it does seem more like a variation of well made parts, rather than a solid, cohesive whole.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Thor: Ragnarok (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
Utterly preposterous
Thor is arguably one of Marvel’s strongest characters. Played by the superb Chris Hemsworth since 2011, the God of thunder is one of the MCUs most popular assets.
It’s unfortunate then that he’s been lambasted with the weakest solo films of the entire series, the son of Odin really has deserved much better.
Thor’s inception in the first of his three solo outings was a competent if unremarkable origins story and the less said about Thor: The Dark World, which remains the poorest film of the entire MCU, the better. Now, just in time for Infinity War,Thor: Ragnarok rolls into cinemas. But does it do its leading man justice?Imprisoned on the other side of the universe, the mighty Thor (Hemsworth) finds himself in a deadly gladiatorial contest that pits him against the Hulk (Bruce Banner), his former ally and fellow Avenger. Thor’s quest for survival leads him in a race against time to prevent the all-powerful goddess of death, Hela, (Cate Blanchett) from destroying his home world and the Asgardian civilisation.
This third film for our mighty Avenger is really something. A film more akin to Guardians of the Galaxy than its overly stuffy predecessors. Director Taika Waititi in his first big-budget feature has managed what many had thought was impossible, he’s given Thor a rather brilliant movie.
But how? Well, he’s realised what no-one else has. The premise surrounding our titular hero is utterly ridiculous. Rather than shy away from that and create something serious, he’s embraced it with humour, music and my goodness, a lot of colour.
If you thought Guardians of the Galaxy used every colour on the spectrum, you ain’t seen nothing yet. Thor: Ragnarok is quite something to watch. From the gold-tipped spears of Asgard that glisten like never before, to the trash-topped planet of Sakaar, everything is dripping in colour.
“Casting Goldblum in the role of an immortal game-player really is an inspired choice.”
Speaking of Sakaar, it contains one of the MCUs best new additions: Jeff Goldbum. Sorry, I mean the Grandmaster. Casting Goldblum in the role of an immortal game-player really is an inspired choice. The 65-year-old legend has made a career on playing himself and it works exceptionally well here. His improvisation is absolutely spot on.
Ragnarok throws up a few other surprises too. One being that Chris Hemsworth is absolutely hilarious. He and Tom Hiddleston bounce off each other incredibly well and we see real chemistry – the chemistry that should have been evident from the start. Cate Blanchett also turns the cheese up to 11 as the latest throwaway Marvel villain, Hela.
She fares better than the majority of Marvel villains and is certainly more interesting than Christopher Eccelston’s, Malekith, but they never quite make the impact that the scriptwriters were clearly looking for. Nevertheless, Blanchett is excellent.
Thankfully, Thor: Ragnarok doesn’t suffer from the absence of Natalie Portman’s dull Jane Foster, and though she is referenced early on, newcomer Tessa Thompson as Valkyrie provides a fitting replacement and possible future love-interest for our intrepid hero.
Unfortunately, it’s not all good news. Surprisingly the first 30 minutes feel incredibly rushed as numerous loose storylines are brought together and the improvised nature of the script lends itself to a little too much humour. Yes, we get it, Marvel films are funny, but this should not be at the expense of the more emotional sequences that the movie tries to put across.
Nevertheless, Thor: Ragnarok is a resounding success, created by a man who clearly has a passion for this corner of the MCU. He manages to make an absolutely preposterous film – and that’s exactly how Thor should be. Take a bow Mr. Waititi.
A little tip – there are two end credit sequences waiting for you. You’re welcome.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/10/26/thor-ragnarok-review/
It’s unfortunate then that he’s been lambasted with the weakest solo films of the entire series, the son of Odin really has deserved much better.
Thor’s inception in the first of his three solo outings was a competent if unremarkable origins story and the less said about Thor: The Dark World, which remains the poorest film of the entire MCU, the better. Now, just in time for Infinity War,Thor: Ragnarok rolls into cinemas. But does it do its leading man justice?Imprisoned on the other side of the universe, the mighty Thor (Hemsworth) finds himself in a deadly gladiatorial contest that pits him against the Hulk (Bruce Banner), his former ally and fellow Avenger. Thor’s quest for survival leads him in a race against time to prevent the all-powerful goddess of death, Hela, (Cate Blanchett) from destroying his home world and the Asgardian civilisation.
This third film for our mighty Avenger is really something. A film more akin to Guardians of the Galaxy than its overly stuffy predecessors. Director Taika Waititi in his first big-budget feature has managed what many had thought was impossible, he’s given Thor a rather brilliant movie.
But how? Well, he’s realised what no-one else has. The premise surrounding our titular hero is utterly ridiculous. Rather than shy away from that and create something serious, he’s embraced it with humour, music and my goodness, a lot of colour.
If you thought Guardians of the Galaxy used every colour on the spectrum, you ain’t seen nothing yet. Thor: Ragnarok is quite something to watch. From the gold-tipped spears of Asgard that glisten like never before, to the trash-topped planet of Sakaar, everything is dripping in colour.
“Casting Goldblum in the role of an immortal game-player really is an inspired choice.”
Speaking of Sakaar, it contains one of the MCUs best new additions: Jeff Goldbum. Sorry, I mean the Grandmaster. Casting Goldblum in the role of an immortal game-player really is an inspired choice. The 65-year-old legend has made a career on playing himself and it works exceptionally well here. His improvisation is absolutely spot on.
Ragnarok throws up a few other surprises too. One being that Chris Hemsworth is absolutely hilarious. He and Tom Hiddleston bounce off each other incredibly well and we see real chemistry – the chemistry that should have been evident from the start. Cate Blanchett also turns the cheese up to 11 as the latest throwaway Marvel villain, Hela.
She fares better than the majority of Marvel villains and is certainly more interesting than Christopher Eccelston’s, Malekith, but they never quite make the impact that the scriptwriters were clearly looking for. Nevertheless, Blanchett is excellent.
Thankfully, Thor: Ragnarok doesn’t suffer from the absence of Natalie Portman’s dull Jane Foster, and though she is referenced early on, newcomer Tessa Thompson as Valkyrie provides a fitting replacement and possible future love-interest for our intrepid hero.
Unfortunately, it’s not all good news. Surprisingly the first 30 minutes feel incredibly rushed as numerous loose storylines are brought together and the improvised nature of the script lends itself to a little too much humour. Yes, we get it, Marvel films are funny, but this should not be at the expense of the more emotional sequences that the movie tries to put across.
Nevertheless, Thor: Ragnarok is a resounding success, created by a man who clearly has a passion for this corner of the MCU. He manages to make an absolutely preposterous film – and that’s exactly how Thor should be. Take a bow Mr. Waititi.
A little tip – there are two end credit sequences waiting for you. You’re welcome.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/10/26/thor-ragnarok-review/
*＊✿❀ Maki ❀✿＊* (7 KP) rated Attachments in Books
May 3, 2018
I actually liked this one more than I thought I was going to. The whole "reading emails without permission" thing...well, it says something that even the characters in the book don't think it's right. The fact that Lincoln at least acknowledges that what he's doing is wrong helps - it doesn't make the creepy stalker vibes completely go away, but it helps.
The setting worked well for the story. Being set in 1999, and focusing on the Y2K scare went a long way to making the events of the story believable. The internet was still young, and people didn't understand computers as well as we do today. Well, I mean, in general. Some people still don't understand computers.
Attachments didn't quite have the humor of Fangirl. It had its amusing moments and pop culture references, but as a whole the story took itself more seriously. Unfortunately, that made Lincoln's moments of self-pity something of a drag to get through.
And Lincoln's character is the main focus of the story, rather than the relationship between Beth and Lincoln. The two don't actually meet each other (or even talk to each other) until practically the end of the book.
Don't get me wrong - Lincoln's character arc was well done. He changes for the better over the course of the book, one small step at a time. But soooo much of that time is dedicated to Lincoln moping about how he's alone, and still living in his mother's house, or Lincoln being scolded by his sister for being alone and still living in his mother's house. There's no self-depreciating humor. It's just scene after scene of Lincoln being miserable.
I really enjoyed the format of the book, though. It feels weird for me to focus so much on that, but I liked the back and forth emails between Beth and Jennifer. And for all of the stalker vibes that came from Lincoln reading their exchanges, I liked the idea behind the execution. Lincoln wasn't given the entire story between the two women, but saw enough snippets of their lives to piece together their stories. Lincoln was as much of an observer to the events of the emails as the reader.
And despite that limitation, despite the fact that they're only physically present once or twice, Beth and Jennifer were both strong characters. They were very well-written. I'd read a book of just their emails back and forth. Even if Beth *does* love Adam Sandler movies.
The setting worked well for the story. Being set in 1999, and focusing on the Y2K scare went a long way to making the events of the story believable. The internet was still young, and people didn't understand computers as well as we do today. Well, I mean, in general. Some people still don't understand computers.
Attachments didn't quite have the humor of Fangirl. It had its amusing moments and pop culture references, but as a whole the story took itself more seriously. Unfortunately, that made Lincoln's moments of self-pity something of a drag to get through.
And Lincoln's character is the main focus of the story, rather than the relationship between Beth and Lincoln. The two don't actually meet each other (or even talk to each other) until practically the end of the book.
Don't get me wrong - Lincoln's character arc was well done. He changes for the better over the course of the book, one small step at a time. But soooo much of that time is dedicated to Lincoln moping about how he's alone, and still living in his mother's house, or Lincoln being scolded by his sister for being alone and still living in his mother's house. There's no self-depreciating humor. It's just scene after scene of Lincoln being miserable.
I really enjoyed the format of the book, though. It feels weird for me to focus so much on that, but I liked the back and forth emails between Beth and Jennifer. And for all of the stalker vibes that came from Lincoln reading their exchanges, I liked the idea behind the execution. Lincoln wasn't given the entire story between the two women, but saw enough snippets of their lives to piece together their stories. Lincoln was as much of an observer to the events of the emails as the reader.
And despite that limitation, despite the fact that they're only physically present once or twice, Beth and Jennifer were both strong characters. They were very well-written. I'd read a book of just their emails back and forth. Even if Beth *does* love Adam Sandler movies.
Online Soccer Manager (OSM)
Games and Sports
App
Do you want to be the manager of your favorite football team? Online Soccer Manager (OSM) offers you...
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) in Movies
Jul 3, 2020
Introduce a horror icon (3 more)
Robert Englund
Freddy
Wes Craven
Whatever you do, don’t fall asleep!
Contains spoilers, click to show
A Nightmare on Elm Street- is one of my all time favorite horror films. Its also one of the greatest horror movies of all time. That being said, the ending sucks and i will get to that, but first lets talk more about the film.
I just love the idea of someone who appears in your dreams. Someone who stalks you, someone who messes with you, someone who kills you in your dreams. Now Wes got the idea from several newspaper articles printed in the Los Angeles Times in the 1970s about Southeast Asian refugees, who, after fleeing to the United States because of war and genocide in Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam, suffered disturbing nightmares and refused to sleep. Some of the men died in their sleep soon after and some of his own childhood nightmares.
The idea of Freddy was Craven's early life. One night, a young Craven saw an elderly man walking on the sidepath outside the window of his home. The man stopped to glance at a startled Craven and walked off. Now Initially, Fred Krueger was intended to be a child molester, but Craven eventually characterized him as a child murderer to avoid being accused of exploiting a spate of highly publicized child molestation cases that occurred in California around the time of production of the film. This idea happened in the 2010 remake.
Lets talk about the plot: In Wes Craven's classic slasher film, several Midwestern teenagers fall prey to Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund), a disfigured midnight mangler who preys on the teenagers in their dreams -- which, in turn, kills them in reality. After investigating the phenomenon, Nancy (Heather Langenkamp) begins to suspect that a dark secret kept by her and her friends' parents may be the key to unraveling the mystery, but can Nancy and her boyfriend Glen (Johnny Depp) solve the puzzle before it's too late?
The plot/story is excellent, the mystery surrounded of Krueger. Who he exactly is, why is he do this, what made him do this, how do the parnets know about Krueger? All of these questions and more your trying to figure out and the movie does a excellent job explaining them.
The deaths: the death scenes are excellent. Tina revolving around her room, Rod's bed sheets wrapping around him while he is in a prison cell and dies hanging and Glen getting pulled through his bed and then his blood gushes to the ceiling. Excellent deaths and memorable.
The Ending: Craven originally planned for the film to have a more evocative ending: Nancy kills Krueger by ceasing to believe in him, then awakens to discover that everything that happened in the film was an elongated nightmare. However, New Line leader Robert Shaye demanded a twist ending, in which Krueger disappears and all seems to have been a dream, only for the audience to discover that it was a dream-within-a-dream-within-a-dream.
According to Craven, "The original ending of the script has Nancy come out the door. It's an unusually cloudy and foggy day. A car pulls up with her dead friends in it. She's startled. She goes out and gets in the car wondering what the hell is going on, and they drive off into the fog, with the mother left standing on the doorstep and that's it. It was very brief, and suggestive that maybe life is sort of dream-like too. Shaye wanted Freddy Krueger to be driving the car, and have the kids screaming. It all became very negative. I felt a philosophical tension to my ending. Shaye said, "That's so 60s, it's stupid." I refused to have Freddy in the driver's seat, and we thought up about five different endings. The one we used, with Freddy pulling the mother through the doorway amused us all so much, we couldn't not use it."
Heather Langenkamp states that "there always was this sense that Freddy was the car", while according to Sara Risher, "it was always Wes' idea to pan to the little girls' jumping rope". Both a happy ending and a twist ending were filmed, but the final film used the twist ending. As a result, Craven who never wanted the film to be an ongoing franchise, did not work on the first sequel, Freddy's Revenge (1985).
Also Nancy's mom getting pulles through the window door was wierd and you can tell it was a blow up doll.
The Music: The lyrics for Freddy's theme song, sung by the jumprope children throughout the series and based on One, Two, Buckle My Shoe, was already written and included in the script when Bernstein started writing the soundtrack, while the melody for it was not set by Bernstein, but by Heather Langenkamp's boyfriend and soon-to-be husband at the time, Alan Pasqua, who was a musician himself. One of the three girls who recorded the vocal part of the theme was Robert Shaye's then 14-year-old daughter. Per the script, the lyrics are as follow: One two, Freddie's coming for you.Three four, better lock your door. Five six, grab your crucifix. Seven eight, gonna stay up late. Nine ten, never sleep again.
End Thoughts: A Nightmare on Elm Street is a excellent horror movie, it introduces a horror icon, has great charcters, has great death scenes and above all is perfect. Thank you Wes for giving us this movie.
I just love the idea of someone who appears in your dreams. Someone who stalks you, someone who messes with you, someone who kills you in your dreams. Now Wes got the idea from several newspaper articles printed in the Los Angeles Times in the 1970s about Southeast Asian refugees, who, after fleeing to the United States because of war and genocide in Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam, suffered disturbing nightmares and refused to sleep. Some of the men died in their sleep soon after and some of his own childhood nightmares.
The idea of Freddy was Craven's early life. One night, a young Craven saw an elderly man walking on the sidepath outside the window of his home. The man stopped to glance at a startled Craven and walked off. Now Initially, Fred Krueger was intended to be a child molester, but Craven eventually characterized him as a child murderer to avoid being accused of exploiting a spate of highly publicized child molestation cases that occurred in California around the time of production of the film. This idea happened in the 2010 remake.
Lets talk about the plot: In Wes Craven's classic slasher film, several Midwestern teenagers fall prey to Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund), a disfigured midnight mangler who preys on the teenagers in their dreams -- which, in turn, kills them in reality. After investigating the phenomenon, Nancy (Heather Langenkamp) begins to suspect that a dark secret kept by her and her friends' parents may be the key to unraveling the mystery, but can Nancy and her boyfriend Glen (Johnny Depp) solve the puzzle before it's too late?
The plot/story is excellent, the mystery surrounded of Krueger. Who he exactly is, why is he do this, what made him do this, how do the parnets know about Krueger? All of these questions and more your trying to figure out and the movie does a excellent job explaining them.
The deaths: the death scenes are excellent. Tina revolving around her room, Rod's bed sheets wrapping around him while he is in a prison cell and dies hanging and Glen getting pulled through his bed and then his blood gushes to the ceiling. Excellent deaths and memorable.
The Ending: Craven originally planned for the film to have a more evocative ending: Nancy kills Krueger by ceasing to believe in him, then awakens to discover that everything that happened in the film was an elongated nightmare. However, New Line leader Robert Shaye demanded a twist ending, in which Krueger disappears and all seems to have been a dream, only for the audience to discover that it was a dream-within-a-dream-within-a-dream.
According to Craven, "The original ending of the script has Nancy come out the door. It's an unusually cloudy and foggy day. A car pulls up with her dead friends in it. She's startled. She goes out and gets in the car wondering what the hell is going on, and they drive off into the fog, with the mother left standing on the doorstep and that's it. It was very brief, and suggestive that maybe life is sort of dream-like too. Shaye wanted Freddy Krueger to be driving the car, and have the kids screaming. It all became very negative. I felt a philosophical tension to my ending. Shaye said, "That's so 60s, it's stupid." I refused to have Freddy in the driver's seat, and we thought up about five different endings. The one we used, with Freddy pulling the mother through the doorway amused us all so much, we couldn't not use it."
Heather Langenkamp states that "there always was this sense that Freddy was the car", while according to Sara Risher, "it was always Wes' idea to pan to the little girls' jumping rope". Both a happy ending and a twist ending were filmed, but the final film used the twist ending. As a result, Craven who never wanted the film to be an ongoing franchise, did not work on the first sequel, Freddy's Revenge (1985).
Also Nancy's mom getting pulles through the window door was wierd and you can tell it was a blow up doll.
The Music: The lyrics for Freddy's theme song, sung by the jumprope children throughout the series and based on One, Two, Buckle My Shoe, was already written and included in the script when Bernstein started writing the soundtrack, while the melody for it was not set by Bernstein, but by Heather Langenkamp's boyfriend and soon-to-be husband at the time, Alan Pasqua, who was a musician himself. One of the three girls who recorded the vocal part of the theme was Robert Shaye's then 14-year-old daughter. Per the script, the lyrics are as follow: One two, Freddie's coming for you.Three four, better lock your door. Five six, grab your crucifix. Seven eight, gonna stay up late. Nine ten, never sleep again.
End Thoughts: A Nightmare on Elm Street is a excellent horror movie, it introduces a horror icon, has great charcters, has great death scenes and above all is perfect. Thank you Wes for giving us this movie.
Rache (174 KP) Dec 15, 2018
Lee (2222 KP) Dec 15, 2018