Search
Search results
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Abstract Academy in Tabletop Games
Feb 25, 2022
There’s just something about a well-thought out and appealing box cover to really get you into it, am I right? Look at that graphic. The negative space used for the A and Y in AcademY is just sublime! Wait, I recognize those names on the box. Didn’t they also design some other games I enjoy? (1 minute later after consulting BGG) IT’S THE TEAM BEHIND TRUFFLE SHUFFLE, POINT SALAD, AND DOLLARS TO DONUTS?? I love those games! Oh, this is going to be good! AND it’s from Crafty Games? Boom. Gotta be a hit, I just know it. But where is all the food?
Abstract Academy is a card laying, hand management, pattern building game for two to four players. In it, players become art school students trying to impress their teachers. The only problem is that they must share a canvas, as the costs of school allow them very few luxuries. The player who can most effectively build masterpieces and satisfy all tested requirements over three rounds will ace the class and claim victory over the other starving artists.
DISCLAIMER 1: 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
DISCLAIMER 2: My current temporary housing did not want me to have great lighting for photos in this review. Please try to ignore the yellow tint; I do not enjoy over-editing game photos.
To setup, shuffle each deck type and place the decks on the table. The rulebook does not specify where, so just throw them wherever. This is a game about art, so be creative. Each player draws a hand of three Canvas cards (with the whitish back and colors on the faces). The starting Teacher’s Pet player will then reveal cards according to the round from the respective decks, per the rules and provided reference cards. Each round will reveal different sets of Assignment and Professor cards. Players also draw one Inspiration card and the game is ready to begin! Paintbrushes at the ready!
Turns could not be simpler: Play a Canvas card, and then Draw a Canvas card. Both of these actions are self-explanatory, but let me expound on this a bit. Once the first Canvas card has been played by the current Teacher’s Pet, each subsequent card must be played orthogonally adjacent to another card on the table. To define the size of the entire project’s canvas, players will be confined to a 4 x 4 grid of cards. Once a column (the cards that would lead a path to the opponent) has been completed with four cards, the rows gain special rules. Firstly, the row closest to each player becomes the “Home Row.” Players may only play cards into their own Home Row, unless the only legal place to play a card is in the opponent’s Home Row. Secondly, the Home Row and the row above it is now consider the Scoring Zone, and will dictate which cards are able to be used to satisfy Inspiration, Professor, and Assignment requirements for VP. Therefore, until the 4 x 4 grid has been solidified, players are unaware which cards may end up in their Home Rows or Scoring Zones!
Victory Points are earned by scoring the special requirements of Inspiration, Professor, and Assignment cards once the entire 4 x 4 grid of Canvas cards is complete. Oftentimes players will need to compare scores to determine which player earns the points. For example, the Moret Professor card states that five VP are earned when the player controls the “most color areas with four or more quadrants.” Each Canvas card is divided into four quadrants, and quadrants are colored with one of the primary colors. A “color area” is simply a connected network of the same color within the player’s Scoring Zone. So, to satisfy Professor Moret, the player who controls the most amount of color areas that are four quadrants or larger.
Assignment cards come in Red, Blue, and Yellow, and pertain to those colors. For example, the red “Get to the Point!” Assignment requires the “most red areas with only one quadrant.” So the assignment is asking players to dapple their canvas with unconnected red quadrants.
In stark contrast, the Inspiration card requirements resemble shapes of quadrants, as opposed to colors or numbers of quadrants. Most of the shapes on these cards are reminiscent of Tetris-style shapes, where players will score their Inspiration cards by building the correct shape of connected quadrants of the same color within their Scoring Zone.
Once these cards are all scored for the round, the Teacher’s Pet sets up for the next round per the rulebook/reference cards. The subsequent rounds will require alternate decks to reveal cards, or choice of decks. When the third and final round has been scored, the points are tallied and the victor is crowned! With a construction paper and macaroni crown, most likely. They ARE starving artists, after all.
Components. This game is a double-card-deck box with 90+ cards and a rulebook. The cards are great quality, but the true hero here is, and appropriately so, the artwork. Every card is very stylish, the Professors are all nods to real artists (well, except maybe not the promo), and it has just a really great look overall. While being played, it just has an amazing table presence. I like that a lot.
I struggled with assigning a score to this one for a few reasons. First, I like so much about this game, and I dislike a few things. I very much enjoy having so many ways to score points each round, as it keeps my mind busy with trying to put the puzzle together. The monkey wrench, though, is that when you start a round, you play cards that may not even end up in your Scoring Zone. As your hand is always three cards, it is difficult to really plan too far in advance to create a perfect Scoring Zone. Is that a bad thing? Maybe, but I think it is also quite necessary to add a little chaos to this specific game. I will explain what I mean in a bit. Perhaps a few points docked for that.
Playing Canvas cards effectively is absolutely the crux of this game, because if a pattern or shape is being built to your benefit, your opponent can easily (and definitely accidentally) ruin your best laid plans with an ill-placed card to wonkify the grid. I think that is both delicious and very very frustrating. You know what? I will decide to give a few points back for this.
The ability for the Teacher’s Pet, a title that can be passed to the other player throughout the game, to choose which two of the three Assignment decks to reveal during Round 3 just adds to the replayability factor of Abstract Academy. True, there are only five cards in each Assignments deck, and there are mathematical or statistical formulae that can calculate the exact number of possible different unique games, the ever-changing grid of cards is what makes this nearly infinitely replayable. Okay, more points earned here.
I guess I judged too harshly, and my true rating is a little lower than perhaps this little game deserves. I absolutely know that I will be playing this a whole lot more – with gamers of all ages and weight preferences. It is easy to teach, keeps the brain engaged throughout, and forces players to step back and truly appreciate that which they have equally built together. I can completely foresee my score for Abstract Academy increasing with more and more plays, so please do not regard a 4 / 6 from Purple Phoenix Games as an absolute and inflexible score.
If you are a gamer who enjoys just a little chaos added to their careful planning, light and quick card games that pack more punch than expected, and some truly awesome table presence, then you most certainly need to grab a copy of Abstract Academy. I am soon to be culling my collection and curating it to only include games I thoroughly enjoy. I have a feeling Abstract Academy is going to make the cut. It checks off so many boxes for me and how I game, and I cannot wait to introduce my kiddos to it when they can grasp the concepts.
Abstract Academy is a card laying, hand management, pattern building game for two to four players. In it, players become art school students trying to impress their teachers. The only problem is that they must share a canvas, as the costs of school allow them very few luxuries. The player who can most effectively build masterpieces and satisfy all tested requirements over three rounds will ace the class and claim victory over the other starving artists.
DISCLAIMER 1: 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
DISCLAIMER 2: My current temporary housing did not want me to have great lighting for photos in this review. Please try to ignore the yellow tint; I do not enjoy over-editing game photos.
To setup, shuffle each deck type and place the decks on the table. The rulebook does not specify where, so just throw them wherever. This is a game about art, so be creative. Each player draws a hand of three Canvas cards (with the whitish back and colors on the faces). The starting Teacher’s Pet player will then reveal cards according to the round from the respective decks, per the rules and provided reference cards. Each round will reveal different sets of Assignment and Professor cards. Players also draw one Inspiration card and the game is ready to begin! Paintbrushes at the ready!
Turns could not be simpler: Play a Canvas card, and then Draw a Canvas card. Both of these actions are self-explanatory, but let me expound on this a bit. Once the first Canvas card has been played by the current Teacher’s Pet, each subsequent card must be played orthogonally adjacent to another card on the table. To define the size of the entire project’s canvas, players will be confined to a 4 x 4 grid of cards. Once a column (the cards that would lead a path to the opponent) has been completed with four cards, the rows gain special rules. Firstly, the row closest to each player becomes the “Home Row.” Players may only play cards into their own Home Row, unless the only legal place to play a card is in the opponent’s Home Row. Secondly, the Home Row and the row above it is now consider the Scoring Zone, and will dictate which cards are able to be used to satisfy Inspiration, Professor, and Assignment requirements for VP. Therefore, until the 4 x 4 grid has been solidified, players are unaware which cards may end up in their Home Rows or Scoring Zones!
Victory Points are earned by scoring the special requirements of Inspiration, Professor, and Assignment cards once the entire 4 x 4 grid of Canvas cards is complete. Oftentimes players will need to compare scores to determine which player earns the points. For example, the Moret Professor card states that five VP are earned when the player controls the “most color areas with four or more quadrants.” Each Canvas card is divided into four quadrants, and quadrants are colored with one of the primary colors. A “color area” is simply a connected network of the same color within the player’s Scoring Zone. So, to satisfy Professor Moret, the player who controls the most amount of color areas that are four quadrants or larger.
Assignment cards come in Red, Blue, and Yellow, and pertain to those colors. For example, the red “Get to the Point!” Assignment requires the “most red areas with only one quadrant.” So the assignment is asking players to dapple their canvas with unconnected red quadrants.
In stark contrast, the Inspiration card requirements resemble shapes of quadrants, as opposed to colors or numbers of quadrants. Most of the shapes on these cards are reminiscent of Tetris-style shapes, where players will score their Inspiration cards by building the correct shape of connected quadrants of the same color within their Scoring Zone.
Once these cards are all scored for the round, the Teacher’s Pet sets up for the next round per the rulebook/reference cards. The subsequent rounds will require alternate decks to reveal cards, or choice of decks. When the third and final round has been scored, the points are tallied and the victor is crowned! With a construction paper and macaroni crown, most likely. They ARE starving artists, after all.
Components. This game is a double-card-deck box with 90+ cards and a rulebook. The cards are great quality, but the true hero here is, and appropriately so, the artwork. Every card is very stylish, the Professors are all nods to real artists (well, except maybe not the promo), and it has just a really great look overall. While being played, it just has an amazing table presence. I like that a lot.
I struggled with assigning a score to this one for a few reasons. First, I like so much about this game, and I dislike a few things. I very much enjoy having so many ways to score points each round, as it keeps my mind busy with trying to put the puzzle together. The monkey wrench, though, is that when you start a round, you play cards that may not even end up in your Scoring Zone. As your hand is always three cards, it is difficult to really plan too far in advance to create a perfect Scoring Zone. Is that a bad thing? Maybe, but I think it is also quite necessary to add a little chaos to this specific game. I will explain what I mean in a bit. Perhaps a few points docked for that.
Playing Canvas cards effectively is absolutely the crux of this game, because if a pattern or shape is being built to your benefit, your opponent can easily (and definitely accidentally) ruin your best laid plans with an ill-placed card to wonkify the grid. I think that is both delicious and very very frustrating. You know what? I will decide to give a few points back for this.
The ability for the Teacher’s Pet, a title that can be passed to the other player throughout the game, to choose which two of the three Assignment decks to reveal during Round 3 just adds to the replayability factor of Abstract Academy. True, there are only five cards in each Assignments deck, and there are mathematical or statistical formulae that can calculate the exact number of possible different unique games, the ever-changing grid of cards is what makes this nearly infinitely replayable. Okay, more points earned here.
I guess I judged too harshly, and my true rating is a little lower than perhaps this little game deserves. I absolutely know that I will be playing this a whole lot more – with gamers of all ages and weight preferences. It is easy to teach, keeps the brain engaged throughout, and forces players to step back and truly appreciate that which they have equally built together. I can completely foresee my score for Abstract Academy increasing with more and more plays, so please do not regard a 4 / 6 from Purple Phoenix Games as an absolute and inflexible score.
If you are a gamer who enjoys just a little chaos added to their careful planning, light and quick card games that pack more punch than expected, and some truly awesome table presence, then you most certainly need to grab a copy of Abstract Academy. I am soon to be culling my collection and curating it to only include games I thoroughly enjoy. I have a feeling Abstract Academy is going to make the cut. It checks off so many boxes for me and how I game, and I cannot wait to introduce my kiddos to it when they can grasp the concepts.
Baby Monitor 3G
Lifestyle and Health & Fitness
App
The First HD quality multiplatform Baby Monitor is here! BABY MONITOR 3G is a universal video and...
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Crazy Rich Asians (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
A Rom-Com with Substance
Yes, I know what you’re thinking. This isn’t really the kind of film I’m particularly fond of. Everything about it screams ‘cheesy rom-com’, just look at that poster. But, I’m happy to say I walked away from this film feeling so glad that I had watched it. This is a classic example of not judging a film by its poster or trailer, as it has so much more to offer.
As the title of my review suggests, I mainly loved this film because of the overall narrative. There’s a lot of character development and dark secrets, meaning your interest is constantly held throughout the film. You really start to care about these characters and their lives, and I didn’t feel like anyone was just thrown in there for the sake of it. The dynamics between characters is really well done and realistic, and it’s very easy for you to quickly love or hate them. I was so impressed by the quality of the acting, and how each actor brought their characters to life on screen. I was especially blown away by Michelle Yeoh and Gemma Chan, for very different reasons. I was also happy to see an all-Asian cast in a mainstream film, as we still have a lot to do when it comes to wider representation and films like this are a huge step in the right direction.
I also feel like people could identify with some of the themes, especially this idea of a class divide and feeling unwelcome. It was so eye-opening to see how some people are shunned by families because of their social status, and how important it is for families to protect their name and heritage at all costs. Whilst Crazy Rich Asians shows an extreme version of this type of behaviour, class divides are prevalent across the world so this was a really interesting theme to explore. This theme is one of the reasons why I felt this film had so much substance, as it goes beyond simply being just another rom-com and shows us some serious, real-life issues instead. There are some scenes in Crazy Rich Asians that are far from comedic, and shows us a darker side to life within a wealthy, influential circle. The results are as dark as you’d expect. I don’t want to give any spoilers – experience it for yourself instead.
As for the comedy, it was genuinely laugh-out-loud funny. I am always apprehensive with comedy films as sometimes it can become too ridiculous and slapstick, but Crazy Rich Asians was satirical and smart, with some silly moments thrown in there too. I’m so impressed with how they blended humour with drama this effortlessly. It knows how to balance this without going too far one way, and the result is an incredibly well-rounded and three dimensional film that made me laugh and cry in equal measure. It’s a truly captivating film from start to finish.
Visually, it’s a stunning piece of cinema. You’re greeted with bright colours, gorgeous set design, and you’re transported to a world of luxury and Chinese culture, with these hostile undertones. On the big screen it’s even better, because you get to experience this gorgeous film on a large scale. It’s hard to take your eyes off it. I’m looking forward to revisiting this film in future so I can look for more details the second time around, as I’m sure I missed stuff during my initial viewing!
If this is the future of rom-com, consider me converted. I was so impressed by the overall film and would recommend it to anyone. Please don’t let the title and synopsis put you off, it’s such a smart, funny, heartbreaking film and I urge you to give it a go. You might end up as surprised as me!
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/09/16/a-rom-com-with-substance-my-thoughts-on-crazy-rich-asians/
As the title of my review suggests, I mainly loved this film because of the overall narrative. There’s a lot of character development and dark secrets, meaning your interest is constantly held throughout the film. You really start to care about these characters and their lives, and I didn’t feel like anyone was just thrown in there for the sake of it. The dynamics between characters is really well done and realistic, and it’s very easy for you to quickly love or hate them. I was so impressed by the quality of the acting, and how each actor brought their characters to life on screen. I was especially blown away by Michelle Yeoh and Gemma Chan, for very different reasons. I was also happy to see an all-Asian cast in a mainstream film, as we still have a lot to do when it comes to wider representation and films like this are a huge step in the right direction.
I also feel like people could identify with some of the themes, especially this idea of a class divide and feeling unwelcome. It was so eye-opening to see how some people are shunned by families because of their social status, and how important it is for families to protect their name and heritage at all costs. Whilst Crazy Rich Asians shows an extreme version of this type of behaviour, class divides are prevalent across the world so this was a really interesting theme to explore. This theme is one of the reasons why I felt this film had so much substance, as it goes beyond simply being just another rom-com and shows us some serious, real-life issues instead. There are some scenes in Crazy Rich Asians that are far from comedic, and shows us a darker side to life within a wealthy, influential circle. The results are as dark as you’d expect. I don’t want to give any spoilers – experience it for yourself instead.
As for the comedy, it was genuinely laugh-out-loud funny. I am always apprehensive with comedy films as sometimes it can become too ridiculous and slapstick, but Crazy Rich Asians was satirical and smart, with some silly moments thrown in there too. I’m so impressed with how they blended humour with drama this effortlessly. It knows how to balance this without going too far one way, and the result is an incredibly well-rounded and three dimensional film that made me laugh and cry in equal measure. It’s a truly captivating film from start to finish.
Visually, it’s a stunning piece of cinema. You’re greeted with bright colours, gorgeous set design, and you’re transported to a world of luxury and Chinese culture, with these hostile undertones. On the big screen it’s even better, because you get to experience this gorgeous film on a large scale. It’s hard to take your eyes off it. I’m looking forward to revisiting this film in future so I can look for more details the second time around, as I’m sure I missed stuff during my initial viewing!
If this is the future of rom-com, consider me converted. I was so impressed by the overall film and would recommend it to anyone. Please don’t let the title and synopsis put you off, it’s such a smart, funny, heartbreaking film and I urge you to give it a go. You might end up as surprised as me!
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/09/16/a-rom-com-with-substance-my-thoughts-on-crazy-rich-asians/
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Alone in Berlin (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Small Rebellions.
Once again, World War II turns up another true story of quiet valour to turn into a motion picture. At a time when Trump is pontificating about so called “fake news”, here is a timely tale from history which centres on the battle against genuinely fake news: the Nazi propaganda machine.
After losing their only son in the French campaign, Berliners Otto (Brendan Gleeson,”Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire”) and Anna (Emma Thompson, “Saving Mr Banks“) turn against the regime and in repeated acts of rebellion Otto laboriously hand writes subversive postcards to leave in office blocks around Berlin.
Resistance is futile. Otto (Brendan Gleeson) and Anna (Emma Thompson) out on a new mission.
Out to catch him is local police investigator Escherich (Daniel Brühl) but in an age before CCTV that’s no easy task and with increasing SS pressure the stakes for Escherich steadily increase. For Otto and Anna, the stress is there but both are resigned to their fate: with their son stolen from them for an unjust cause they are an island of indifference in an unholy land. Both are ‘alone in Berlin’.
Daniel Brühl as police detective Escherich getting more than he bargained for from the SS.
After 70 years it still chills the blood to see German locations decked out in Nazi regalia, but one of the joys of this film is this rendering of life in wartime Berlin: starting with jubilation at German progress prior to D-Day and turning to despair and genuine danger as the tide turns towards 1945. In a pretty bleak film there are touches of black comedy now and then: Otto’s carpentry company is being encouraged “by the Fuhrer” to double and triple their output… of coffins.
A (very clean) Berlin, decked out with Nazi regalia.
More joy comes from the star turns of Gleeson and Thompson, both of who deliver on their emotionally challenging roles. Gleeson in particular makes a very believable German with a sour demeanor and a steely determination. But the star acting turn for me goes to the wonderful Daniel Brühl (“Rush“) as the tormented police detective, bullied into an ethical corner by the SS. The finale of the film – whilst not seeming quite believable – makes for a nicely unexpected twist.
The Nazi Womens’ League out on another fund-raising sweep, providing Thompson with one of her best scenes in the film with an Oberführer’s wife.
Based on a novel by Hans Fallada, the lead writing credits for the piece are shared between Achim von Borries and the director Vincent Perez – in a rare directorial outing for the Swiss actor. The script exudes a melancholic gloom and at times expresses beautifully both the grief and love shared by this older couple. But some of the dialogue needs more work and we don’t see enough of Thompson in the early part of the film where her motivations should be being developed. This rather comes down to a lack of focus by the director. While the primary story of the card distribution is slight, it is compelling and a detour into a sub-story about an old Jewish lodger living upstairs is unnecessary and detracts from the overall story arc. I would have far preferred if the running time had been a tight 90 minutes just focused on Otto’s mission. One final comment on the script: did I mishear that Anna claimed to have a 6 year old child during an air raid scene? I know Emma Thompson looks great for her age, but….
Otto and Elise Hampel – the real life characters on which the film’s Otto and Anna Quangel were based.
I can’t finish this without commending the beautiful piano score of Alexandre Desplat. From the first note I knew it was him – he has such a characteristic style – and his clever use of the score complements the film exquisitely. “Small” films like this tend to rather disappear into the woodwork for Oscar consideration, but here’s a soundtrack that I think should be considered: (but what do I know… when “Nocturnal Animals” wasn’t even nominated in one of the Oscar crimes of the century!).
In summary, I found this a thoughtful and thought-provoking film, that – despite some of the mean reviews I’ve seen – I thought was well crafted and with excellent production design by Jean-Vincent Puzos (“Amour”). It will be particularly appreciated by older audiences looking for an untold story from the war, and by all lovers of fine acting performances by the three leads.
After losing their only son in the French campaign, Berliners Otto (Brendan Gleeson,”Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire”) and Anna (Emma Thompson, “Saving Mr Banks“) turn against the regime and in repeated acts of rebellion Otto laboriously hand writes subversive postcards to leave in office blocks around Berlin.
Resistance is futile. Otto (Brendan Gleeson) and Anna (Emma Thompson) out on a new mission.
Out to catch him is local police investigator Escherich (Daniel Brühl) but in an age before CCTV that’s no easy task and with increasing SS pressure the stakes for Escherich steadily increase. For Otto and Anna, the stress is there but both are resigned to their fate: with their son stolen from them for an unjust cause they are an island of indifference in an unholy land. Both are ‘alone in Berlin’.
Daniel Brühl as police detective Escherich getting more than he bargained for from the SS.
After 70 years it still chills the blood to see German locations decked out in Nazi regalia, but one of the joys of this film is this rendering of life in wartime Berlin: starting with jubilation at German progress prior to D-Day and turning to despair and genuine danger as the tide turns towards 1945. In a pretty bleak film there are touches of black comedy now and then: Otto’s carpentry company is being encouraged “by the Fuhrer” to double and triple their output… of coffins.
A (very clean) Berlin, decked out with Nazi regalia.
More joy comes from the star turns of Gleeson and Thompson, both of who deliver on their emotionally challenging roles. Gleeson in particular makes a very believable German with a sour demeanor and a steely determination. But the star acting turn for me goes to the wonderful Daniel Brühl (“Rush“) as the tormented police detective, bullied into an ethical corner by the SS. The finale of the film – whilst not seeming quite believable – makes for a nicely unexpected twist.
The Nazi Womens’ League out on another fund-raising sweep, providing Thompson with one of her best scenes in the film with an Oberführer’s wife.
Based on a novel by Hans Fallada, the lead writing credits for the piece are shared between Achim von Borries and the director Vincent Perez – in a rare directorial outing for the Swiss actor. The script exudes a melancholic gloom and at times expresses beautifully both the grief and love shared by this older couple. But some of the dialogue needs more work and we don’t see enough of Thompson in the early part of the film where her motivations should be being developed. This rather comes down to a lack of focus by the director. While the primary story of the card distribution is slight, it is compelling and a detour into a sub-story about an old Jewish lodger living upstairs is unnecessary and detracts from the overall story arc. I would have far preferred if the running time had been a tight 90 minutes just focused on Otto’s mission. One final comment on the script: did I mishear that Anna claimed to have a 6 year old child during an air raid scene? I know Emma Thompson looks great for her age, but….
Otto and Elise Hampel – the real life characters on which the film’s Otto and Anna Quangel were based.
I can’t finish this without commending the beautiful piano score of Alexandre Desplat. From the first note I knew it was him – he has such a characteristic style – and his clever use of the score complements the film exquisitely. “Small” films like this tend to rather disappear into the woodwork for Oscar consideration, but here’s a soundtrack that I think should be considered: (but what do I know… when “Nocturnal Animals” wasn’t even nominated in one of the Oscar crimes of the century!).
In summary, I found this a thoughtful and thought-provoking film, that – despite some of the mean reviews I’ve seen – I thought was well crafted and with excellent production design by Jean-Vincent Puzos (“Amour”). It will be particularly appreciated by older audiences looking for an untold story from the war, and by all lovers of fine acting performances by the three leads.
Connor Sheffield (293 KP) rated Bloodborne: The Card Game in Tabletop Games
Aug 20, 2018
Teamwork (3 more)
Deck building (to an extent)
Pressing your luck
Planning required
Easy to learn and really fun to play!
So I can't say that I've played this game completely right because I actually had to make some house rules so that it would work for 2 players. However, me and my friend played to the best of our ability to stick to the main rules of the game such as dying and losing blood echoes and the monsters escape if you don't kill it.
From what I learned during my playthrough, this game is super fun and I can't wait to get my other friends to play it so we can play a proper 3-5 player game with the Hunters Nightmare Expansion including penalties to trophies etc.
This game requires tactics, teamwork and also careful planning to try and make sure your fellow hunters don't win. You can do this by using certain abilities of certain weapons that allow you to deal damage to the hunter yourself, allow the monster to deal damage or double damage to the player, or ensuring that you take little to no damage from the monster and allowing the other hunters to take the hit and/or fall. The game is very sneaky and you have to make sure that with the 7 card limit you have, that in the hunters dream you choose the right upgrades and new weapons and discard any others you won't need, but make sure that the cards you choose help kill the monster as well as hinder your fellow hunters.
However, you can choose to simply play the game and be fair to see who comes out on top by playing the right cards to hurt the monster more and not harm each other...but where's the fun in that?
If you've played the video game, then you'll love the card game as it has all your favourite elements such as blood echoes, weapons, health vials, molotovs, and of course the monsters! Including mini bosses and a single Final Boss card who's effects are apparent throughout the entire game. For example, the Vicar Amelia boss card, cuts players health's down from the maximum of 8, to the new maximum of 6 during the entire game no matter what other cards are played. If you have a card that says return to Max health, your new Max health is 6 which makes the game harder but also makes you think more strategically, and you have to ask yourself that one question each turn "Am I willing to take the risk?"
The payoff as in the video game, is sweet and the fall also as in the game, is bitter, especially if you took that chance whilst holding unbanked blood echoes.
My only issue with the game is that I believe there could have easily been some form of the game that allowed for just two players, but instead Myself and others like me on the internet have to come up with hosuerules, and be careful not to take away the fun of the game, as well as being careful not to drift to far from the original rules so that it doesn't become too easy. Because again, where's the fun in that?
I highly recommend this game and it's expansion to those who have the friends willing to play and not lose their sh*t when things don't go their way :')
From what I learned during my playthrough, this game is super fun and I can't wait to get my other friends to play it so we can play a proper 3-5 player game with the Hunters Nightmare Expansion including penalties to trophies etc.
This game requires tactics, teamwork and also careful planning to try and make sure your fellow hunters don't win. You can do this by using certain abilities of certain weapons that allow you to deal damage to the hunter yourself, allow the monster to deal damage or double damage to the player, or ensuring that you take little to no damage from the monster and allowing the other hunters to take the hit and/or fall. The game is very sneaky and you have to make sure that with the 7 card limit you have, that in the hunters dream you choose the right upgrades and new weapons and discard any others you won't need, but make sure that the cards you choose help kill the monster as well as hinder your fellow hunters.
However, you can choose to simply play the game and be fair to see who comes out on top by playing the right cards to hurt the monster more and not harm each other...but where's the fun in that?
If you've played the video game, then you'll love the card game as it has all your favourite elements such as blood echoes, weapons, health vials, molotovs, and of course the monsters! Including mini bosses and a single Final Boss card who's effects are apparent throughout the entire game. For example, the Vicar Amelia boss card, cuts players health's down from the maximum of 8, to the new maximum of 6 during the entire game no matter what other cards are played. If you have a card that says return to Max health, your new Max health is 6 which makes the game harder but also makes you think more strategically, and you have to ask yourself that one question each turn "Am I willing to take the risk?"
The payoff as in the video game, is sweet and the fall also as in the game, is bitter, especially if you took that chance whilst holding unbanked blood echoes.
My only issue with the game is that I believe there could have easily been some form of the game that allowed for just two players, but instead Myself and others like me on the internet have to come up with hosuerules, and be careful not to take away the fun of the game, as well as being careful not to drift to far from the original rules so that it doesn't become too easy. Because again, where's the fun in that?
I highly recommend this game and it's expansion to those who have the friends willing to play and not lose their sh*t when things don't go their way :')
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018) in Movies
Jun 23, 2018
If you liked the first 4 films in this series, you'll like this one
Did you watch - and enjoy - the other 4 films in the JURASSIC PARK series? If so, then you'll enjoy the 5th installment, for it is more of the same - man's hubris causes giant animals to run amok and chaos, death and destruction ensues.
The plot of this film is simple enough - the island where JURASSIC WORLD was built is now in trouble as a dormant volcano is now dormant no more. The debate rages - should Man go to the island to save the Dinosaurs trapped there - or should they let nature take it's course (again). Some nefarious fellows - who's intentions don't seem to be as pure as we are led to believe - convince our heroes from the previous film, Claire and Owen to help "save" the dinosaurs.
But, of course, the plot is just an excuse to get some pretty awesome looking CGI Dinosaurs on the screen - and to put our heroes in peril. And on that score, this film succeeds wonderfully well.
I remember back in 1993 how awed I was at the spectacle on the screen. The CGI Dinosaurs were LIFE-LIKE! I was blown away by it. Today, I have come to expect the CGI will be top-notch - and I was not disappointed, to the point where I forgot that I was watching CGI.
As for the action and acting, Director J.A. Bayona (A MONSTER CALLS) keeps things moving along at a sprightly pace, not letting us catch our breath - or more importantly - stop to think of the plausibility or logic of decisions being made. His mantra seems to be "move our heroes from peril to peril" - and he does that well.
Chris Pratt is back as Owen, the "Raptor handler" and his charm and charisma on screen is in full display and really carries the weight of this film. He is able to charm his way into the audiences heart, so you end up rooting for him fully from start to finish. Bryce Dallas Howard (daughter of "Opie Cunningham" Ron Howard) comes into her own as Claire, the Dinosaur "Scientist" and quasi-love interest for Owen. She is able to avoid (mostly) the cliches of "damsel in distress" or "kick-ass chick" and gives us a rounded character that I rooted for just as strongly as Pratt's character.
The rest of the cast - save two - are pretty much throw away that are set up to be Dinosaur food. The two that stood out are the great James Cromwell as an aging Billionaire who has a connection to the originator of Jurassic Park, John Hammond. Cromwell is his usual, solid self. And...the funniest character in the film...computer expert Franklin Webb (played by Justice Smith) who, of course, is asked to do more than just "computer stuff" that he is ill-equipped to handle.
Going into this film, you know what you are going to get - and this film delivers that entertainingly enough. As I stated at the top, if you like the first 4 films of this series, you'll like this one.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The plot of this film is simple enough - the island where JURASSIC WORLD was built is now in trouble as a dormant volcano is now dormant no more. The debate rages - should Man go to the island to save the Dinosaurs trapped there - or should they let nature take it's course (again). Some nefarious fellows - who's intentions don't seem to be as pure as we are led to believe - convince our heroes from the previous film, Claire and Owen to help "save" the dinosaurs.
But, of course, the plot is just an excuse to get some pretty awesome looking CGI Dinosaurs on the screen - and to put our heroes in peril. And on that score, this film succeeds wonderfully well.
I remember back in 1993 how awed I was at the spectacle on the screen. The CGI Dinosaurs were LIFE-LIKE! I was blown away by it. Today, I have come to expect the CGI will be top-notch - and I was not disappointed, to the point where I forgot that I was watching CGI.
As for the action and acting, Director J.A. Bayona (A MONSTER CALLS) keeps things moving along at a sprightly pace, not letting us catch our breath - or more importantly - stop to think of the plausibility or logic of decisions being made. His mantra seems to be "move our heroes from peril to peril" - and he does that well.
Chris Pratt is back as Owen, the "Raptor handler" and his charm and charisma on screen is in full display and really carries the weight of this film. He is able to charm his way into the audiences heart, so you end up rooting for him fully from start to finish. Bryce Dallas Howard (daughter of "Opie Cunningham" Ron Howard) comes into her own as Claire, the Dinosaur "Scientist" and quasi-love interest for Owen. She is able to avoid (mostly) the cliches of "damsel in distress" or "kick-ass chick" and gives us a rounded character that I rooted for just as strongly as Pratt's character.
The rest of the cast - save two - are pretty much throw away that are set up to be Dinosaur food. The two that stood out are the great James Cromwell as an aging Billionaire who has a connection to the originator of Jurassic Park, John Hammond. Cromwell is his usual, solid self. And...the funniest character in the film...computer expert Franklin Webb (played by Justice Smith) who, of course, is asked to do more than just "computer stuff" that he is ill-equipped to handle.
Going into this film, you know what you are going to get - and this film delivers that entertainingly enough. As I stated at the top, if you like the first 4 films of this series, you'll like this one.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Spellhacker in Books
Jan 23, 2020
Review going live on the blog at midnight EST because UBB doesn't want to get along with block editor.
<b><i>The author/publisher provided a free copy of the book for review purposes - thank you! Receiving a review copy does not guarantee a positive review and therefore do not affect the opinion or content of the review.</i></b>
I love heists in books. We've got a group of people (each who are talented AF), something goes wrong (oop--) and then they're scrambling to fix things. Sometimes there's a character or two (or more) pining for another character and we just want to smush/protect them.
And it's definitely the case with <em>Spellhacker</em> by M.K. England, which follows Diz and her friends (Ania, Jaesin and Remi) as they take on one last job that ends up backfiring horribly in their faces. It's never happened in the two years they've been running their side business. There's magic (known as maz) and seriously cool technology involved, and that's usually a good recipe for me to enjoy the book. <s>Provided that something explodes, of course, but don't tell anyone.</s>
Which I did... for the most part. <em>Spellhacker</em> is a bit difficult for me to rate since a couple of issues throughout ruined some of my enjoyment.
<h2><strong>Two Things in <em>Spellhacker</em> I have issues with:</strong></h2>
(There were more, but they're minor.)
<h3><strong>The magic system</strong></h3>
I probably wouldn't have noticed it if Kal from Reader Voracious never mentioned it, but the moment she asked, I kept noticing... and not just the name. I keep thinking formaz is pronounced like "form ass." (Maybe that's just my sense of humor trying to get through the parts of the book I struggled with.)
But what I got really confused about were the differences between techwitch and spellweaver (kind of got an idea, still confused) and just how it worked... which I kept thinking of <a href="https://rwby.fandom.com/wiki/Dust">how dust works in RWBY</a>. It's most likely a very inaccurate depiction, though.
<h3><strong>The miscommunication</strong></h3>
I noticed this faintly at the beginning few chapters and didn't let it bother me <em>too</em> much. In fact, it pretty much slipped my mind until Kal brought it up. At times, it did get pretty damn irritating and I just wanted to shove Diz in front of a certain character like the many chances she had throughout the book. <em>And there are a lot of chances</em>.
<h2>Two <strong>Things I definitely didn't have an issue in <em>Spellhacker</em>:</strong></h2>
Or maybe just minor issues and they turned out to be good things in the end (after I thought about it).
<h3><strong>Diz's narration</strong></h3>
Diz is one of those characters I found absolutely annoying at first but slowly grew on me over the book. She's bitter and salty and full of sass; she's pretty much 95% angst teenager who wants things to go her way. She also sucks at communication big time; every time she <em>wants</em> to say something, she chooses not to. Even if she's called out by her friends, it takes a while before she actually comes out with it.
I hardcore relate.
<b><i>The author/publisher provided a free copy of the book for review purposes - thank you! Receiving a review copy does not guarantee a positive review and therefore do not affect the opinion or content of the review.</i></b>
I love heists in books. We've got a group of people (each who are talented AF), something goes wrong (oop--) and then they're scrambling to fix things. Sometimes there's a character or two (or more) pining for another character and we just want to smush/protect them.
And it's definitely the case with <em>Spellhacker</em> by M.K. England, which follows Diz and her friends (Ania, Jaesin and Remi) as they take on one last job that ends up backfiring horribly in their faces. It's never happened in the two years they've been running their side business. There's magic (known as maz) and seriously cool technology involved, and that's usually a good recipe for me to enjoy the book. <s>Provided that something explodes, of course, but don't tell anyone.</s>
Which I did... for the most part. <em>Spellhacker</em> is a bit difficult for me to rate since a couple of issues throughout ruined some of my enjoyment.
<h2><strong>Two Things in <em>Spellhacker</em> I have issues with:</strong></h2>
(There were more, but they're minor.)
<h3><strong>The magic system</strong></h3>
I probably wouldn't have noticed it if Kal from Reader Voracious never mentioned it, but the moment she asked, I kept noticing... and not just the name. I keep thinking formaz is pronounced like "form ass." (Maybe that's just my sense of humor trying to get through the parts of the book I struggled with.)
But what I got really confused about were the differences between techwitch and spellweaver (kind of got an idea, still confused) and just how it worked... which I kept thinking of <a href="https://rwby.fandom.com/wiki/Dust">how dust works in RWBY</a>. It's most likely a very inaccurate depiction, though.
<h3><strong>The miscommunication</strong></h3>
I noticed this faintly at the beginning few chapters and didn't let it bother me <em>too</em> much. In fact, it pretty much slipped my mind until Kal brought it up. At times, it did get pretty damn irritating and I just wanted to shove Diz in front of a certain character like the many chances she had throughout the book. <em>And there are a lot of chances</em>.
<h2>Two <strong>Things I definitely didn't have an issue in <em>Spellhacker</em>:</strong></h2>
Or maybe just minor issues and they turned out to be good things in the end (after I thought about it).
<h3><strong>Diz's narration</strong></h3>
Diz is one of those characters I found absolutely annoying at first but slowly grew on me over the book. She's bitter and salty and full of sass; she's pretty much 95% angst teenager who wants things to go her way. She also sucks at communication big time; every time she <em>wants</em> to say something, she chooses not to. Even if she's called out by her friends, it takes a while before she actually comes out with it.
I hardcore relate.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Deception: Murder in Hong Kong in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019
One of the funnest (yeah I know, it’s not a word) parts of board gaming is getting to introduce new people to the hobby! Whether it’s a family gathering or a party with friends, I love breaking out a fun game for any occasion! Some board gamers have an aversion to the ‘party’ games category, but I think you just need to find the right game for the group to have the best experience! One of those games, for me, is Deception: Murder in Hong Kong!
MURDER! As an Investigator, that’s just another day on the job for you. This time feels different, though. Something about this case is off… After the initial evidence is gathered, the team’s Forensic Scientist has disclosed to the team that the killer is one of the Investigators! Everyone is on edge, accusing every other Investigator of being the murderer. Everyone had potential means and motive, and it is up to you to figure it out! As the Forensic Scientist uncovers more evidence, the details of the crime will come to light, and the killer will be revealed. Put your investigative and deductive skills to the test as you try to unmask the killer, or throw the team off your scent if you are the culprit!
DISCLAIMER!! This review is for vanilla Deception: Murder in Hong Kong. We have plans to add in the expansion once one of us purchases it and learns it and teaches it to the rest of us. Should that happen and our review change, we will add that information to this review or to a new review and link to it from here. -T
Deception: Murder in Hong Kong is a game of bluffing, deduction, and hidden identity. All players (except for the Forensic Scientist) have a secret role in the game – Investigator, Witness, Murderer, or Accomplice. The Forensic Scientist knows who the killer is, and how they did it. It is their job to guide the Investigators to the killer by providing clues about the uncovered evidence. The Investigators are trying to interpret the clues and uncover the killer’s identity. The Witness knows who the killer is, but has not yet figured out how they did it. The Murderer and Accomplice are looking to pin the murder on one of the other innocent members of the team! As clues are revealed, each player gets a chance to make a case against the player whom they think is the murderer. You must convince everyone of your logic, or else the killer could get away! In a game where everyone is a suspect, who can you trust? Gather clues, present your case, and put your poker face to the test in this ultimate game of deception! (See what I did there?)
I thoroughly enjoy games of deduction. Anything where you have to think and solve puzzles/riddles/etc. is fun for me. In Deception, it’s a race to see who can find the solution first. Not only do you have to deduce the correct answer from the provided clues, but you also have to put your persuasive skills to the test! Unless you can convince everyone that a specific player is the killer, they might turn their accusations towards someone else, or even worse, towards YOU! You really have to think outside of the box to interpret the Forensic Scientist’s clues, and I like to challenge myself to find the solution in as few turns as possible. The faster I can solve the murder, the smarter I feel. Don’t lie, it makes you feel smart too when you figure it out before anyone else!
The only part of Deception that I don’t really enjoy is the bluffing aspect, which is one of the most integral parts of the game, I know. I am just a horrible liar with a questionable poker face. If we play and I am the Murderer, I am almost always found out. Whenever anyone accuses me, my mind blanks and I cannot think of a single convincing way to get everyone off my scent! That is a personal problem, though, because when I get to be just a regular ol’ Investigator, I have a blast! I can still be accused, but I always feel like I have an easier time getting people off my case if I am actually innocent. I know some people really enjoy being the Murderer because they like the challenge of deceiving the entire team. I am not one of those people though. If I was guaranteed to be just a plain Investigator (or the Forensic Scientist) every time, I would probably pull this game out more!
Deception: Murder in Hong Kong is a ‘party’ game, but with the right group, it can still be a challenging game. A higher player count, in this case, does not necessarily equate to a chaotic game either. So give Deception a try. It’ll be worth it! Purple Phoenix Games gives it a 17 / 24.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2018/12/26/deception-murder-in-hong-kong-review/
MURDER! As an Investigator, that’s just another day on the job for you. This time feels different, though. Something about this case is off… After the initial evidence is gathered, the team’s Forensic Scientist has disclosed to the team that the killer is one of the Investigators! Everyone is on edge, accusing every other Investigator of being the murderer. Everyone had potential means and motive, and it is up to you to figure it out! As the Forensic Scientist uncovers more evidence, the details of the crime will come to light, and the killer will be revealed. Put your investigative and deductive skills to the test as you try to unmask the killer, or throw the team off your scent if you are the culprit!
DISCLAIMER!! This review is for vanilla Deception: Murder in Hong Kong. We have plans to add in the expansion once one of us purchases it and learns it and teaches it to the rest of us. Should that happen and our review change, we will add that information to this review or to a new review and link to it from here. -T
Deception: Murder in Hong Kong is a game of bluffing, deduction, and hidden identity. All players (except for the Forensic Scientist) have a secret role in the game – Investigator, Witness, Murderer, or Accomplice. The Forensic Scientist knows who the killer is, and how they did it. It is their job to guide the Investigators to the killer by providing clues about the uncovered evidence. The Investigators are trying to interpret the clues and uncover the killer’s identity. The Witness knows who the killer is, but has not yet figured out how they did it. The Murderer and Accomplice are looking to pin the murder on one of the other innocent members of the team! As clues are revealed, each player gets a chance to make a case against the player whom they think is the murderer. You must convince everyone of your logic, or else the killer could get away! In a game where everyone is a suspect, who can you trust? Gather clues, present your case, and put your poker face to the test in this ultimate game of deception! (See what I did there?)
I thoroughly enjoy games of deduction. Anything where you have to think and solve puzzles/riddles/etc. is fun for me. In Deception, it’s a race to see who can find the solution first. Not only do you have to deduce the correct answer from the provided clues, but you also have to put your persuasive skills to the test! Unless you can convince everyone that a specific player is the killer, they might turn their accusations towards someone else, or even worse, towards YOU! You really have to think outside of the box to interpret the Forensic Scientist’s clues, and I like to challenge myself to find the solution in as few turns as possible. The faster I can solve the murder, the smarter I feel. Don’t lie, it makes you feel smart too when you figure it out before anyone else!
The only part of Deception that I don’t really enjoy is the bluffing aspect, which is one of the most integral parts of the game, I know. I am just a horrible liar with a questionable poker face. If we play and I am the Murderer, I am almost always found out. Whenever anyone accuses me, my mind blanks and I cannot think of a single convincing way to get everyone off my scent! That is a personal problem, though, because when I get to be just a regular ol’ Investigator, I have a blast! I can still be accused, but I always feel like I have an easier time getting people off my case if I am actually innocent. I know some people really enjoy being the Murderer because they like the challenge of deceiving the entire team. I am not one of those people though. If I was guaranteed to be just a plain Investigator (or the Forensic Scientist) every time, I would probably pull this game out more!
Deception: Murder in Hong Kong is a ‘party’ game, but with the right group, it can still be a challenging game. A higher player count, in this case, does not necessarily equate to a chaotic game either. So give Deception a try. It’ll be worth it! Purple Phoenix Games gives it a 17 / 24.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2018/12/26/deception-murder-in-hong-kong-review/
Connor Sheffield (293 KP) rated Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) in Movies
Apr 18, 2017
The Good, The Bad and The Editing
So...here's a movie that split so many fans and has caused COUNTLESS arguments online. My review may also cause arguments, but I'm willing to risk that as I have a fair bit to say about this movie, most importantly and foremost;
I enjoyed the movie!
The Good:
Let me start with what's good because I feel there's never enough positivity around this movie so here goes.
Ben Affleck and Gal Gadot were the two focuses of this movie because they had a lot of pressure on them to bring Batman and Wonder Woman to life and do the characters justice (terrible I know but I couldn't resist). All over the internet I saw hate for Ben Affleck and people saying Gal Gadot was too skinny. At first, I'll be honest, I did think Gal Gadot was really skinny and couldn't imagine her as Wonder Woman, BUT, unlike most people, I knew that before they would film her scenes, she would be 'buffing up' because I have faith in Zack Snyder because he is a fan and has made brilliant films. Man Of Steel made me like Superman, because of the way he was written as conflicted and the whole film made him more human and I loved it.
Here's where some people will disagree highly with me....I am not a big fan of the Nolan trilogy Batman. Now, before you throw a fit and verbally kick my ass, let me try and tell you why. The Voice! (it's not the only reason, but this is the reason I'm trying to make a point of) Batman a.k.a Bruce Wayne is a BILLIONAIRE, so who thought that the best way for him to disguise his voice would be to make him sound like he's fucked up his throat somehow? A billionaire with all those gadgets would surely think that what he needs is a voice modulator. Snyder brought in the voice modulator and I fell in love in that first trailer from hearing Batman talk through a voice modulator because I was sat there like "Hallelujah they finally worked out what a billionaire vigilante would do!" and I think it could be just me, but I honestly would prefer to think of Batman using one of those rather than grumbling his voice, because it just makes more sense.
So...Batfleck was incredible. My favourite portrayal so far and here's why:
- Arkham game fighting style
- Aged personality that says it all about why he's that violent
- He's definitely a great portrayal of the Dark Knight Returns version of Batman
- Ben Affleck is a great actor (in my opinion)
People's biggest complaint was 'Batman Kills' and I've had this discussion with my friends many times. Yes people died, IT'S HAPPENED BEFORE! It's rare but it's happened. You like the realism of Nolan's trilogy but there's a realism to Batfleck that you might not be seeing. He's been through all the same shit year in, year out for decades. Villains cause chaos, Batman fights villain, lets them live, puts them away, they break out, rinse repeat. Doing that for decades, losing people you love because of your choice not to kill, would surely cause a spark in your mind and Bruce Wayne says this in the movie through less words. "How many good guys are left? How many stay that way?"
If you think about it, he's essentially saying "I was a good guy but even I have had my boundaries pushed to the line and over". He's finally at the age where he has a state of mind that from his perspective...bad guys don't deserve to be shown mercy, but at the same time, he doesn't necessarily kill the bad guys directly.
Think of the warehouse scene. Bad Guy throws grenade, Batman kicks it back at him. Grenade goes BOOM. Bad guys die. BUT! If the guy hadn't have tried to throw the grenade, Batman wouldn't have kicked it back, and it wouldn't have ended in their death. Simple as that.
Let's move on though.
Superman is conflicted and the movie gets very political with a message of "Here's a God-Like figure. Should he be allowed to do what he wants or should we take away Choice by having under the Governments thumb?" and Superman personally is having internal issues of "I want this to be my home because it's the only home I've known, but these people don't want me and this stress is affecting both Clark Kent and Superman". He should have been able to see or hear the bomb in the wheelchair, but his mind was preoccupied with "Why does this government and these people hate me when I saved not only my city but the whole world?". Think about your stress with work, with college, school etc. and how it really does effect everything else around you. You might not want to go out with friends because you feel drained from the stress, now try to imagine that on the level of Superman! The poor guy just wanted to help.
My biggest enjoyment from this film was ALL OF THE DC REFERENCES! There were so many cool easter eggs, references etc. that I adored from Riddler Question Marks, to seeing Superman in a skeletal form after the Nuke explosion and then regaining his life force from the flowers through their Photosynthesis just like in the graphic novel! It was an incredible experience and I loved the film mainly for that.
The Bad:
Doomsday....I want to hope it's not the actual Doomsday and maybe just a failed experiment that Lex tried out but at the same time I know it probably is meant to be THE Doomsday.
The Editing:
The editing was jumpy and some cuts didn't make sense UNTIL the Ultimate Cut. The Ultimate Cut gives us some scenes with Clark Kent in Gotham BEFORE the big introduction to Batman in person, and hearing stories and investigating why people fear him, but also respect him. This would have worked so much better in the Theatrical Cut but sadly studios like to cut the film and people blame the Director for it which annoys me slightly.
Guaranteed this post might not change your mind, but I must say that you should try watching the film again if you've avoided it, watch the Ultimate Cut and really pay attention to how its being shown to the audience. Overall this is one of my favourite superhero movies and I will always stand up for it, BUT I'm not blind to it's faults.
I enjoyed the movie!
The Good:
Let me start with what's good because I feel there's never enough positivity around this movie so here goes.
Ben Affleck and Gal Gadot were the two focuses of this movie because they had a lot of pressure on them to bring Batman and Wonder Woman to life and do the characters justice (terrible I know but I couldn't resist). All over the internet I saw hate for Ben Affleck and people saying Gal Gadot was too skinny. At first, I'll be honest, I did think Gal Gadot was really skinny and couldn't imagine her as Wonder Woman, BUT, unlike most people, I knew that before they would film her scenes, she would be 'buffing up' because I have faith in Zack Snyder because he is a fan and has made brilliant films. Man Of Steel made me like Superman, because of the way he was written as conflicted and the whole film made him more human and I loved it.
Here's where some people will disagree highly with me....I am not a big fan of the Nolan trilogy Batman. Now, before you throw a fit and verbally kick my ass, let me try and tell you why. The Voice! (it's not the only reason, but this is the reason I'm trying to make a point of) Batman a.k.a Bruce Wayne is a BILLIONAIRE, so who thought that the best way for him to disguise his voice would be to make him sound like he's fucked up his throat somehow? A billionaire with all those gadgets would surely think that what he needs is a voice modulator. Snyder brought in the voice modulator and I fell in love in that first trailer from hearing Batman talk through a voice modulator because I was sat there like "Hallelujah they finally worked out what a billionaire vigilante would do!" and I think it could be just me, but I honestly would prefer to think of Batman using one of those rather than grumbling his voice, because it just makes more sense.
So...Batfleck was incredible. My favourite portrayal so far and here's why:
- Arkham game fighting style
- Aged personality that says it all about why he's that violent
- He's definitely a great portrayal of the Dark Knight Returns version of Batman
- Ben Affleck is a great actor (in my opinion)
People's biggest complaint was 'Batman Kills' and I've had this discussion with my friends many times. Yes people died, IT'S HAPPENED BEFORE! It's rare but it's happened. You like the realism of Nolan's trilogy but there's a realism to Batfleck that you might not be seeing. He's been through all the same shit year in, year out for decades. Villains cause chaos, Batman fights villain, lets them live, puts them away, they break out, rinse repeat. Doing that for decades, losing people you love because of your choice not to kill, would surely cause a spark in your mind and Bruce Wayne says this in the movie through less words. "How many good guys are left? How many stay that way?"
If you think about it, he's essentially saying "I was a good guy but even I have had my boundaries pushed to the line and over". He's finally at the age where he has a state of mind that from his perspective...bad guys don't deserve to be shown mercy, but at the same time, he doesn't necessarily kill the bad guys directly.
Think of the warehouse scene. Bad Guy throws grenade, Batman kicks it back at him. Grenade goes BOOM. Bad guys die. BUT! If the guy hadn't have tried to throw the grenade, Batman wouldn't have kicked it back, and it wouldn't have ended in their death. Simple as that.
Let's move on though.
Superman is conflicted and the movie gets very political with a message of "Here's a God-Like figure. Should he be allowed to do what he wants or should we take away Choice by having under the Governments thumb?" and Superman personally is having internal issues of "I want this to be my home because it's the only home I've known, but these people don't want me and this stress is affecting both Clark Kent and Superman". He should have been able to see or hear the bomb in the wheelchair, but his mind was preoccupied with "Why does this government and these people hate me when I saved not only my city but the whole world?". Think about your stress with work, with college, school etc. and how it really does effect everything else around you. You might not want to go out with friends because you feel drained from the stress, now try to imagine that on the level of Superman! The poor guy just wanted to help.
My biggest enjoyment from this film was ALL OF THE DC REFERENCES! There were so many cool easter eggs, references etc. that I adored from Riddler Question Marks, to seeing Superman in a skeletal form after the Nuke explosion and then regaining his life force from the flowers through their Photosynthesis just like in the graphic novel! It was an incredible experience and I loved the film mainly for that.
The Bad:
Doomsday....I want to hope it's not the actual Doomsday and maybe just a failed experiment that Lex tried out but at the same time I know it probably is meant to be THE Doomsday.
The Editing:
The editing was jumpy and some cuts didn't make sense UNTIL the Ultimate Cut. The Ultimate Cut gives us some scenes with Clark Kent in Gotham BEFORE the big introduction to Batman in person, and hearing stories and investigating why people fear him, but also respect him. This would have worked so much better in the Theatrical Cut but sadly studios like to cut the film and people blame the Director for it which annoys me slightly.
Guaranteed this post might not change your mind, but I must say that you should try watching the film again if you've avoided it, watch the Ultimate Cut and really pay attention to how its being shown to the audience. Overall this is one of my favourite superhero movies and I will always stand up for it, BUT I'm not blind to it's faults.
Debbiereadsbook (1653 KP) rated Shifter Protection Specialists, Inc Box Set in Books
Jun 28, 2019
different and different is GOOD!
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of these books
Kale’s brother drags him to the Shifter Protection Specialists when a deranged fan starts sending threatening male. Kale doesn’t want close protection, but when the mountain of a man walks into the room, Kale knows he would suffer anything to be with this man. Aleski’s sabre tooth tiger takes a shine to Kale, and he quickly realised they could be mates. But the fan is getting closer, and more deadly, and not even Aleski knows if he can keep Kale safe.
I have a soft spot of shifters of a different sort, and you don’t see many (not EVER!) some of the animal halves of these shifters who work together and a sabre tooth tiger is somewhat different and I really rather enjoyed this!
There isn’t that MINE moment, at least not right away, and I loved watching Aleski and Kale fall for each other. Kale calms Aleski’s tiger, stands up to the man where others would run a mile. Oh Aleski would LOVE that Kale ran away, if only for his tiger to play chase with the much smaller model! But Kale isn’t others, and he knows that Aleski is the man and the TIGER for him.
I did not see who the fan might be coming at me, not at all, so well played there!
It’s sexy and sweet, steamy and emotional and I really did enjoy it!
4 solid stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Protecting his asset
tags: debbie, 4 stars, male/male, romance, shifters, military dudes
I had read this book previously, but when I went back to read my review, I couldn’t pull it up, cos my review really did not give anything away, so I read it again. This is my original review, though.
George knew his father was bad to the bane, he just didn't think he'd go as low as he did. George needs help. The sort of help Scott and his brothers provide. But George has secrets he didn't know he had, and those secrets could kill Scott.
I liked this, a lot! I've not read book one in this series, and I think it would have helped me to. Its just for me, it doesn't affect my star rating or my reading experience. I'll probably go back at some point and read it.
This is told from both Scott and George's POV, so we get to hear from both of them/
It has drama and danger. Some twists I did not see coming. Some interesting shifter types too. Snakes, lizards, phoenix and dragons as well as the usual bears and big cats.
It was an easy read, with just enough information filtered through, all in the right places, to keep you on your toes and interested.
Its the first I've read of this author. I will, as I said, go back and read book one in this series. I should also like to read any future books too. Some hints were made to possible future story lines and I would like to see them through.
4 stars.
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Guarding his Mark,
4 stars, male/male, shifters, military dudes, romance, crime/thriller
Khan was subjected to experiments as a child, and as an adult tries to steer clear of hospitals. But when he comes across a sexy man who is testing the use of snake venom on children with cancer, Khan can’t stay away. He needs to make sure that Casey is actually doing what he says he is. He also needs to keep the man safe, cos someone is clearly out to get Casey.
This one is my favourite of the three!
Khan is a King Cobra, and his venom is helping Casey find a cure for his niece. But someone else wants Casey’s research, and not for what Casey intended it for.
Casey and Khan have instant and powerful attraction right from the start, and it burns hot and bright right through the book. It’s super hawt!
I am really enjoying reading about these guys, there are a few of them who have tales to tell, I hope. I can’t find any more than these three though, and I do hope the author hasn’t left them other things!
I almost read all three books in one sitting, but the darn day job got in the way. I would have, though, had it not. I loved these.
Definitely different, and different is ALWAYS good in my book!
4 solid stars across all three books.
Kale’s brother drags him to the Shifter Protection Specialists when a deranged fan starts sending threatening male. Kale doesn’t want close protection, but when the mountain of a man walks into the room, Kale knows he would suffer anything to be with this man. Aleski’s sabre tooth tiger takes a shine to Kale, and he quickly realised they could be mates. But the fan is getting closer, and more deadly, and not even Aleski knows if he can keep Kale safe.
I have a soft spot of shifters of a different sort, and you don’t see many (not EVER!) some of the animal halves of these shifters who work together and a sabre tooth tiger is somewhat different and I really rather enjoyed this!
There isn’t that MINE moment, at least not right away, and I loved watching Aleski and Kale fall for each other. Kale calms Aleski’s tiger, stands up to the man where others would run a mile. Oh Aleski would LOVE that Kale ran away, if only for his tiger to play chase with the much smaller model! But Kale isn’t others, and he knows that Aleski is the man and the TIGER for him.
I did not see who the fan might be coming at me, not at all, so well played there!
It’s sexy and sweet, steamy and emotional and I really did enjoy it!
4 solid stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Protecting his asset
tags: debbie, 4 stars, male/male, romance, shifters, military dudes
I had read this book previously, but when I went back to read my review, I couldn’t pull it up, cos my review really did not give anything away, so I read it again. This is my original review, though.
George knew his father was bad to the bane, he just didn't think he'd go as low as he did. George needs help. The sort of help Scott and his brothers provide. But George has secrets he didn't know he had, and those secrets could kill Scott.
I liked this, a lot! I've not read book one in this series, and I think it would have helped me to. Its just for me, it doesn't affect my star rating or my reading experience. I'll probably go back at some point and read it.
This is told from both Scott and George's POV, so we get to hear from both of them/
It has drama and danger. Some twists I did not see coming. Some interesting shifter types too. Snakes, lizards, phoenix and dragons as well as the usual bears and big cats.
It was an easy read, with just enough information filtered through, all in the right places, to keep you on your toes and interested.
Its the first I've read of this author. I will, as I said, go back and read book one in this series. I should also like to read any future books too. Some hints were made to possible future story lines and I would like to see them through.
4 stars.
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Guarding his Mark,
4 stars, male/male, shifters, military dudes, romance, crime/thriller
Khan was subjected to experiments as a child, and as an adult tries to steer clear of hospitals. But when he comes across a sexy man who is testing the use of snake venom on children with cancer, Khan can’t stay away. He needs to make sure that Casey is actually doing what he says he is. He also needs to keep the man safe, cos someone is clearly out to get Casey.
This one is my favourite of the three!
Khan is a King Cobra, and his venom is helping Casey find a cure for his niece. But someone else wants Casey’s research, and not for what Casey intended it for.
Casey and Khan have instant and powerful attraction right from the start, and it burns hot and bright right through the book. It’s super hawt!
I am really enjoying reading about these guys, there are a few of them who have tales to tell, I hope. I can’t find any more than these three though, and I do hope the author hasn’t left them other things!
I almost read all three books in one sitting, but the darn day job got in the way. I would have, though, had it not. I loved these.
Definitely different, and different is ALWAYS good in my book!
4 solid stars across all three books.