Search
Search results
Hazel (1853 KP) rated This Secret We're Keeping in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
A pupil and a teacher. Is it ever right to break the rules?</i> This is the dilemma which debut author Rebecca Done basis her novel on. <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> is set seventeen years after a maths teacher began an inappropriate relationship with a schoolgirl; but did he really deserve what happened to him, after all he loved her and she loved him?
Jess has never got over her love for the teacher she ran away with when she was fifteen. Although she has got her life together: living in Norfolk, freelance catering business, a rich boyfriend; she cannot help but think back to way Mr. Landley, Matthew, made her feel. Suddenly, after a chance encounter, Matthew is back in her life with a new name, Will, and a girlfriend and daughter. Delighted to see each other again, it is not long before they fall back into their illicit affair, however the potential consequences are almost as bad as the previous time.
<i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> causes the reader to question strong personal beliefs, primarily whether a teacher-student relationship is as wrong as it sounds. If certain events in this novel were to be made public through the media, the majority would instantly hate Matthew, deem him a paedophile, and be satisfied with his punishment. However on reading the situation from his point of view, initial opinions begin to crumble. It appears he genuinely loved Jess, and she him; there were no abusive occurrences, and it was Jess that instigated the relationship in the first place. Did Matthew truly deserve to go to prison for something that would have been legal in a year’s time?
Matthew/Will’s narrative helps to show that it is virtually impossible to pinpoint a single moment that changes a life forever. At which point did he know that he had stepped over the line from right to wrong? In hindsight it is fairly obvious, but at the time the warning signs are not so clear.
Due to the challenging of preset judgments, <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> can often be difficult to read. Whilst on the one hand logic will be screaming, “This is wrong!” Done plays with her readers’ sentimentalities to consider the other side of the argument. As the novel progresses it becomes easier to fall in line with Jess and Matthew/Will’s viewpoints, however a brief interaction towards the end forces readers to temporarily reconsider their forgone conclusion. After all, how much can a first person narrative really be trusted?
Having read the blurb I admit I was a bit wary about reading this book. For one, it falls under the genre of Chick Lit, which I am not all that fond of, but secondly the book’s theme appeared rather controversial. On the whole, <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> was much better than I was anticipating, however I began to lose interest towards the end as nothing much had changed throughout the present day chapters, and it was already obvious how the past narrative would pan out. The ending is also frustratingly ambiguous, as we never find out whether either of the key characters gets a “happy ever after.”
If you are someone who enjoys Chick Lit, do not let the themes of the book put you off. <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> is essentially a romance story, one that is written remarkably well for a first time author. Rebecca Done will be a name to look out for in the world of contemporary literature.
A pupil and a teacher. Is it ever right to break the rules?</i> This is the dilemma which debut author Rebecca Done basis her novel on. <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> is set seventeen years after a maths teacher began an inappropriate relationship with a schoolgirl; but did he really deserve what happened to him, after all he loved her and she loved him?
Jess has never got over her love for the teacher she ran away with when she was fifteen. Although she has got her life together: living in Norfolk, freelance catering business, a rich boyfriend; she cannot help but think back to way Mr. Landley, Matthew, made her feel. Suddenly, after a chance encounter, Matthew is back in her life with a new name, Will, and a girlfriend and daughter. Delighted to see each other again, it is not long before they fall back into their illicit affair, however the potential consequences are almost as bad as the previous time.
<i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> causes the reader to question strong personal beliefs, primarily whether a teacher-student relationship is as wrong as it sounds. If certain events in this novel were to be made public through the media, the majority would instantly hate Matthew, deem him a paedophile, and be satisfied with his punishment. However on reading the situation from his point of view, initial opinions begin to crumble. It appears he genuinely loved Jess, and she him; there were no abusive occurrences, and it was Jess that instigated the relationship in the first place. Did Matthew truly deserve to go to prison for something that would have been legal in a year’s time?
Matthew/Will’s narrative helps to show that it is virtually impossible to pinpoint a single moment that changes a life forever. At which point did he know that he had stepped over the line from right to wrong? In hindsight it is fairly obvious, but at the time the warning signs are not so clear.
Due to the challenging of preset judgments, <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> can often be difficult to read. Whilst on the one hand logic will be screaming, “This is wrong!” Done plays with her readers’ sentimentalities to consider the other side of the argument. As the novel progresses it becomes easier to fall in line with Jess and Matthew/Will’s viewpoints, however a brief interaction towards the end forces readers to temporarily reconsider their forgone conclusion. After all, how much can a first person narrative really be trusted?
Having read the blurb I admit I was a bit wary about reading this book. For one, it falls under the genre of Chick Lit, which I am not all that fond of, but secondly the book’s theme appeared rather controversial. On the whole, <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> was much better than I was anticipating, however I began to lose interest towards the end as nothing much had changed throughout the present day chapters, and it was already obvious how the past narrative would pan out. The ending is also frustratingly ambiguous, as we never find out whether either of the key characters gets a “happy ever after.”
If you are someone who enjoys Chick Lit, do not let the themes of the book put you off. <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> is essentially a romance story, one that is written remarkably well for a first time author. Rebecca Done will be a name to look out for in the world of contemporary literature.
A Bibliophagist (113 KP) rated The Toll (Arc of a Scythe, #3) in Books
Feb 5, 2020
Characters (3 more)
Worldbuilding
Plot
Pacing
A fantasic finale
After the amazing cliffhanger of Thunderhead, I rushed to pick up this because I just HAD TO KNOW. This cover is even prettier, they really nailed this series (sans the transformers font) and I hope it inspires more YA books to hire illustrators and not photo manip garbage. I'm an Illustrator though, so I'm biased. This review will have spoilers for Thunderhead, so don't read if you haven't read that!
The Toll picks up immediately after Thunderhead. Goddard has returned the MidMerica, no one knows that he was demoted to apprentice and with the death of Scythe Curie he stands uncontested for replacing Xenocrates. Anastasia and Rowan rest at the bottom of the ocean, and Goddard has made the site a site of remembrance to avoid any evidence being drudged up. The sinking of Endura is also squarely blamed on Rowan, and the world suffers as the Thunderhead punishes everyone, marking them unsavory. Cutting off communication with all but one, our former unsavory, Greyson.
With the rise of Goddard, the Schism amongst the Scythedom widens. He seizes more power, overturns rules and makes new ones and slowly starts taking control of other nations. Dubbing himself the Overblade. The story arches over 3 years post Thunderhead, and we jump around a little bit. During the three years Goddard continues to take a chokehold on the world, Greyson suddenly finds himself a living god amongst the tonists and humanity, as the only one able to speak to the thunderhead, he takes on the role of the Tonist's mythological figure, The Toll. Acting as a go-between, and manipulating those around him to fulfill the Thunderhead's goals.
Meanwhile, Faraday continues his search for the land of nod, making serious headway and discovering something that makes the Thunderhead uncertain. So the Thunderhead starts making plans. Faraday finds himself stranded with his helper, far away from the Scythedom, the Thunderhead and the horrible things that have been happening far away. He knows nothing of the fate of Marie, Goddard, Citra, Rowan, or the world. Finally, in the third year since the sinking of Endura, Rowan and Citra are raised from the depths, squirreled away by the Amazonian Scythes before Goddard knows they aren't dead. Being raised from the dead did wonders for Goddard's cause, so can Anastaisa's return do wonders for the plight of the old guard? But first Anastasia must plan and play her cards right, digging deep in the Thunderheads back brain to piece together mysteries long since written off and uncover the secrets of the Scythedom.
This book was really good, and a very satisfying finale to the series. The already rich worldbuilding is made richer by his choice to cut the world off from the Thunderhead, showing us what happens when people lose their connection to the world. He believably shows the influence one charismatic politician can have, and how easy it is for things to fall into disarray. You can tell he had a gameplan when he wrote these books, because everything comes together just right, not loose ends, everything had a purpose. Characters are tested, grow and develop. New parts of the world are further explored, completing the picture he begun in the other two books. I thoroughly enjoyed his take on the age-old sci-fi trope of "How does the benevolent computer protect humans from themselves". Well written, and elevated, especially in terms of other YA fiction. Shusterman really wrote a fantastic series. Once again, the romance is understated, but the emotions run deep enough at this point to pull at your heartstrings and make you believe in their love, even if it came from somewhat unbelievable beginnings.
This series is well worth the read, and a breath of fresh air in an otherwise stale and formulaic YA world.
The Toll picks up immediately after Thunderhead. Goddard has returned the MidMerica, no one knows that he was demoted to apprentice and with the death of Scythe Curie he stands uncontested for replacing Xenocrates. Anastasia and Rowan rest at the bottom of the ocean, and Goddard has made the site a site of remembrance to avoid any evidence being drudged up. The sinking of Endura is also squarely blamed on Rowan, and the world suffers as the Thunderhead punishes everyone, marking them unsavory. Cutting off communication with all but one, our former unsavory, Greyson.
With the rise of Goddard, the Schism amongst the Scythedom widens. He seizes more power, overturns rules and makes new ones and slowly starts taking control of other nations. Dubbing himself the Overblade. The story arches over 3 years post Thunderhead, and we jump around a little bit. During the three years Goddard continues to take a chokehold on the world, Greyson suddenly finds himself a living god amongst the tonists and humanity, as the only one able to speak to the thunderhead, he takes on the role of the Tonist's mythological figure, The Toll. Acting as a go-between, and manipulating those around him to fulfill the Thunderhead's goals.
Meanwhile, Faraday continues his search for the land of nod, making serious headway and discovering something that makes the Thunderhead uncertain. So the Thunderhead starts making plans. Faraday finds himself stranded with his helper, far away from the Scythedom, the Thunderhead and the horrible things that have been happening far away. He knows nothing of the fate of Marie, Goddard, Citra, Rowan, or the world. Finally, in the third year since the sinking of Endura, Rowan and Citra are raised from the depths, squirreled away by the Amazonian Scythes before Goddard knows they aren't dead. Being raised from the dead did wonders for Goddard's cause, so can Anastaisa's return do wonders for the plight of the old guard? But first Anastasia must plan and play her cards right, digging deep in the Thunderheads back brain to piece together mysteries long since written off and uncover the secrets of the Scythedom.
This book was really good, and a very satisfying finale to the series. The already rich worldbuilding is made richer by his choice to cut the world off from the Thunderhead, showing us what happens when people lose their connection to the world. He believably shows the influence one charismatic politician can have, and how easy it is for things to fall into disarray. You can tell he had a gameplan when he wrote these books, because everything comes together just right, not loose ends, everything had a purpose. Characters are tested, grow and develop. New parts of the world are further explored, completing the picture he begun in the other two books. I thoroughly enjoyed his take on the age-old sci-fi trope of "How does the benevolent computer protect humans from themselves". Well written, and elevated, especially in terms of other YA fiction. Shusterman really wrote a fantastic series. Once again, the romance is understated, but the emotions run deep enough at this point to pull at your heartstrings and make you believe in their love, even if it came from somewhat unbelievable beginnings.
This series is well worth the read, and a breath of fresh air in an otherwise stale and formulaic YA world.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Paragon: Trials of the Chosen in Tabletop Games
Sep 18, 2021
I am going to start off with complete honesty. I have been dreading writing this review. Not because I am afraid to give anything negative criticism or because a game has been too daunting for me, but rather, because I still do not feel that after all my plays of this game that I have an absolute understanding of each of its components. I hope you will continue reading as I explain what I mean.
Paragon: Trials of the Chosen (which I will lovingly refer to as Paragon from here on out) is a fantasy deck construction fighting card game where players will be outfitting their chosen avatars with awesome gear and abilities and sending them to battle against other players’ avatars. All players will know EXACTLY what is in their draw deck AND in what order because they have constructed it card by card and the deck will never be shuffled. Intrigued?
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, each player chooses two avatars with whom they will play. Avatars belong to one or two different Disciplines, which allows players to construct their deck with Discipline-specific cards to be used during the game. As part of setup, each player will choose 20 cards from the gigantic deck of Equipment and Ability cards with which they will form their deck for play. Per the rules, each player will then place their chosen avatars and ordered decks in front of themselves along with a blue 1d10, the green 1d10 (all set to 1 to begin), and pile of Hearts tokens. Players draw their starting hand of five cards and the battle can begin!
The green 1d10 notates the round number, and the blue 1d10 per player represents their current Energy. To bring cards into play a player will spend the printed amount of Energy and track this on their 1d10.
Each round is played over several phases. The game is designed to play to 10 rounds, but players may play past 10 while keeping the round tracker and Energy static for all rounds after 10. The first phase is the Start Phase, and acts as a maintenance phase where players will activate any “Start Phase” effects from played cards, ready all exhausted cards, increase all the d10s, and draw the top card from their deck. Should a player be unable to draw a card during this phase due to the draw deck being empty, they immediately lose the game.
The second phase is the beefy Main Phase. This is where all the action happens. During this phase, players will take turns playing cards until both players have passed. On a turn a player will have the choice of five actions: Play a Card, Trigger an Activated Effect, Declare an Attack, Channel Energy, and Pass. To Play a Card the active player will pay the cost (in Energy) printed on the card and bring it into play exhausted. Cards brought into play this way will be attached to one of the avatars and act as an equipment or new ability, as long as the card played matches the Discipline of the avatar to which it is attached.
To Trigger an Activated Effect, the player will need to satisfy any qualifying conditions of the activation, which are printed on the card. These abilities can vary wildly and add immense strategy to play.
Once a player believes they have enough firepower attached to their avatars they may instead Declare an Attack by announcing their target and exhausting the card that is attacking. It is here that Paragon strays from the norm. Instead of damage simply being dealt to the opponent, the player may engage in a volley of playing Instant cards from hand (and paying their Energy costs) to add to the card stack. This is important, as the stack is then resolved in reverse order of play. So the last card to be played on the stack will be resolved first. This can result in attacks being nullified or shielded before they even proc. Sneaky and wily players will certainly use this phase wisely to draw out cards from their opponents’ hands. Once the stack is built, it is resolved and damage is calculated.
Players may instead elect to Channel Energy by exhausting one of their avatars to add 1 Energy to their pool. This may be repeated as long as the other avatar is available to be exhausted.
Lastly, and most easily, when players have no other actions they can or wish to complete, they may Pass in order to close out the round of phases.
When both players have Passed, the End Phase begins, and acts as another maintenance cleanup phase to ready players for the next round. This includes resolving any “End Phase” effects and increasing the round d10 by 1. The game ends once a player’s two avatars have been defeated or a player is unable to draw a card from their draw deck. The winner then boasts mightily in the face of their competitor and spews taunts and rematch challenges.
Components. This one is simple. Paragon has a giant stack of cards, a few d10s, and some wooden Heart tokens. The tokens are double-sided with a 1 printed on one side and a 3 on the other. These are obviously to track HP loss, and are fine. The 3d10 in this version are entry-level, and I will probably bling it out with some d10s that are more themed. The cards. Okay, I will certainly be sleeving this game. I want to keep my copy in excellent condition for as long as I can. In the last photo here, I splayed out the avatars that are currently included, and all the other cards stacked are the equipment and abilities to be attached to the avatars. I have no problems with the components in Paragon (I just want to get more exciting d10s to use).
There really is an insane amount of choice and customization that can be had in constructing a deck for the chosen avatars, and that is precisely why I mention in the opening that I have yet to understand all the components: how will I ever be able to perfect a combination that speaks to me and works with my style when I have about a zillion options available? I know many gamers will salivate over the amount of deliberation and possibilities contained in the box, and after several plays, I find myself weighing options in my head throughout the day. When you think about a game throughout the day and how you will attempt to play it next time, I feel that is a sign of a truly great game for you.
This is certainly not for everyone, but it definitely is for me. I truly cannot wait to try out different combinations, strategies, and deck configurations each time I play. I can also see Paragon being ripe for multiple expansions, with new avatars representing new Disciplines, or adding in expansion material that is themed for different IPs or historical eras. Well, I guess it is time to pick up a part-time job to fund my Paragon expansions.
If you are like me and enjoy games that offer near-infinite possibilities and the true feeling of never playing the same game twice, then Paragon needs to be on your shelf. The rules are easily-digestible, games take 30 minutes once you are familiar with it, and there are a ton of unique cards included in this box. Purple Phoenix Games gives Paragon an excited 5 / 6. I really think that with more plays and tweaks to my copy (maybe an expansion or two thrown in) this could eek up to a 6 and earn a Golden Feather Award from me. It is smooth, exciting, and just oozing with customization that many gamers are going to absolutely love. Go find yourself a copy and get it to the table right away!
Paragon: Trials of the Chosen (which I will lovingly refer to as Paragon from here on out) is a fantasy deck construction fighting card game where players will be outfitting their chosen avatars with awesome gear and abilities and sending them to battle against other players’ avatars. All players will know EXACTLY what is in their draw deck AND in what order because they have constructed it card by card and the deck will never be shuffled. Intrigued?
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, each player chooses two avatars with whom they will play. Avatars belong to one or two different Disciplines, which allows players to construct their deck with Discipline-specific cards to be used during the game. As part of setup, each player will choose 20 cards from the gigantic deck of Equipment and Ability cards with which they will form their deck for play. Per the rules, each player will then place their chosen avatars and ordered decks in front of themselves along with a blue 1d10, the green 1d10 (all set to 1 to begin), and pile of Hearts tokens. Players draw their starting hand of five cards and the battle can begin!
The green 1d10 notates the round number, and the blue 1d10 per player represents their current Energy. To bring cards into play a player will spend the printed amount of Energy and track this on their 1d10.
Each round is played over several phases. The game is designed to play to 10 rounds, but players may play past 10 while keeping the round tracker and Energy static for all rounds after 10. The first phase is the Start Phase, and acts as a maintenance phase where players will activate any “Start Phase” effects from played cards, ready all exhausted cards, increase all the d10s, and draw the top card from their deck. Should a player be unable to draw a card during this phase due to the draw deck being empty, they immediately lose the game.
The second phase is the beefy Main Phase. This is where all the action happens. During this phase, players will take turns playing cards until both players have passed. On a turn a player will have the choice of five actions: Play a Card, Trigger an Activated Effect, Declare an Attack, Channel Energy, and Pass. To Play a Card the active player will pay the cost (in Energy) printed on the card and bring it into play exhausted. Cards brought into play this way will be attached to one of the avatars and act as an equipment or new ability, as long as the card played matches the Discipline of the avatar to which it is attached.
To Trigger an Activated Effect, the player will need to satisfy any qualifying conditions of the activation, which are printed on the card. These abilities can vary wildly and add immense strategy to play.
Once a player believes they have enough firepower attached to their avatars they may instead Declare an Attack by announcing their target and exhausting the card that is attacking. It is here that Paragon strays from the norm. Instead of damage simply being dealt to the opponent, the player may engage in a volley of playing Instant cards from hand (and paying their Energy costs) to add to the card stack. This is important, as the stack is then resolved in reverse order of play. So the last card to be played on the stack will be resolved first. This can result in attacks being nullified or shielded before they even proc. Sneaky and wily players will certainly use this phase wisely to draw out cards from their opponents’ hands. Once the stack is built, it is resolved and damage is calculated.
Players may instead elect to Channel Energy by exhausting one of their avatars to add 1 Energy to their pool. This may be repeated as long as the other avatar is available to be exhausted.
Lastly, and most easily, when players have no other actions they can or wish to complete, they may Pass in order to close out the round of phases.
When both players have Passed, the End Phase begins, and acts as another maintenance cleanup phase to ready players for the next round. This includes resolving any “End Phase” effects and increasing the round d10 by 1. The game ends once a player’s two avatars have been defeated or a player is unable to draw a card from their draw deck. The winner then boasts mightily in the face of their competitor and spews taunts and rematch challenges.
Components. This one is simple. Paragon has a giant stack of cards, a few d10s, and some wooden Heart tokens. The tokens are double-sided with a 1 printed on one side and a 3 on the other. These are obviously to track HP loss, and are fine. The 3d10 in this version are entry-level, and I will probably bling it out with some d10s that are more themed. The cards. Okay, I will certainly be sleeving this game. I want to keep my copy in excellent condition for as long as I can. In the last photo here, I splayed out the avatars that are currently included, and all the other cards stacked are the equipment and abilities to be attached to the avatars. I have no problems with the components in Paragon (I just want to get more exciting d10s to use).
There really is an insane amount of choice and customization that can be had in constructing a deck for the chosen avatars, and that is precisely why I mention in the opening that I have yet to understand all the components: how will I ever be able to perfect a combination that speaks to me and works with my style when I have about a zillion options available? I know many gamers will salivate over the amount of deliberation and possibilities contained in the box, and after several plays, I find myself weighing options in my head throughout the day. When you think about a game throughout the day and how you will attempt to play it next time, I feel that is a sign of a truly great game for you.
This is certainly not for everyone, but it definitely is for me. I truly cannot wait to try out different combinations, strategies, and deck configurations each time I play. I can also see Paragon being ripe for multiple expansions, with new avatars representing new Disciplines, or adding in expansion material that is themed for different IPs or historical eras. Well, I guess it is time to pick up a part-time job to fund my Paragon expansions.
If you are like me and enjoy games that offer near-infinite possibilities and the true feeling of never playing the same game twice, then Paragon needs to be on your shelf. The rules are easily-digestible, games take 30 minutes once you are familiar with it, and there are a ton of unique cards included in this box. Purple Phoenix Games gives Paragon an excited 5 / 6. I really think that with more plays and tweaks to my copy (maybe an expansion or two thrown in) this could eek up to a 6 and earn a Golden Feather Award from me. It is smooth, exciting, and just oozing with customization that many gamers are going to absolutely love. Go find yourself a copy and get it to the table right away!
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Saving Private Ryan (1998) in Movies
Feb 25, 2019 (Updated Feb 25, 2019)
Groundbreaker mired in slop
Contains spoilers, click to show
Regarded as one of the best war films ever made, it certainly qualifies. The opening twenty minutes are still as breathtaking, shocking and disturbing realistic as they were back in 1998. It is hard to imagine that it has now been over twelve years since Saving Private Ryan broke the mold of World War II film making.
Winner of five Academy Awards, including Best Director for Spielberg, Best Cinematography, and Sound, which was astonishing, even by today's standards, it failed to win Best Picture, losing out to Shakespeare In Love. Shakespeare In Love! Don't get me wrong, it's a good film, but easily forgettable compared to Ryan, only proving yet again that if you touch upon the British monarchy you get Oscars.
The film is a fictional account of four brothers, all serving in the U.S. Army, three of which were killed in action on or around the D-Day landings. The fourth, James Ryan played by Matt Damon is somewhere in Europe, and Tom Hanks with his platoon are sent to bring him home, to spare his mother anymore heartache.
Tom Hanks, who was also snubbed at the 1998 Oscars for his perfect performance as Captain Miller, the everyman who was losing himself in the horrors of war, underplayed his role perfectly. He is believable on every level, emotionally, physically and has a sense of subtly with makes him of Hollywood's greats.
The action is visceral, gritty and horrifying. But never played for crass effect. Scenes of soldiers intestines spilling out, limbs flying a sunder and brutal killing left, right and centre are recreated for one purpose. To truly demonstrate the horrors of war, and to change our perceptions of the global conflict which had almost become a joke, a setting for gung- ho action films, where the Yanks reign supreme and single-handedly win the war.
This shows troops crying, hurting and making decisions which should not be made under any moral circumstances, but you understand why, whether you agree or not. There is no doubt that Spielberg is not innocent of making an American film, but it is about as even-handed as you might expect, with the exception of Tora! Tora! Tora! or The Longest Day.
So, the action is first-rate, graphic and perfectly toned to recreate to horror of the last century's greatest and most of destructive conflicts. But that's only half the story.
The other half is the talking, reminiscing and the almost sepia tone is more than a little cloying. The U.S. General's monologues, which seem to consist almost entirely of Lincoln quotations are overly sentimental, erring on the side of sloppy patriotism rather than Jingoism, which is hardly a bad thing but it isn't good either.
The civilian scenes, such as Mrs Ryan, washing a plate as she sees the car drive down to road to inform her of her sons deaths are so sentimental that they jar against the realism of the war scenes. It's not so much contrast as it is as extreme as black and white.
The action is obviously interspersed, as all war films are, with rest stops and moments of talking, pondering etc., but the scenes drag on too long and disrupt the tone of the film. On the other hand, the direction is brilliant when explaining the situations during and around the action, but Spielberg seemed to think that we needed these sloppy and often boring moments, such as The Church, and the outside the cafe in Ramelle, to express the emotional torment of the characters, but I think that these scenes are so boring and pointless that I' can hardly remember them, as my attention drifts off during them! But I do have an understanding of the soldiers, and this was achieved, quite adorably without these scenes.
Overall, this is a film of two halves if ever there was one. The battle scenes and the journey through war-torn France are brilliant, gritty and educational, but the scenes of American sentimentality are in danger of derailing the whole film. Many feel that is the best war film of all time. I do not agree, favouring Black Hawk Down over this, but I would be remiss if I didn't acknowledge that Blank Hawk Down owes a debt to Saving Private Ryan, by opening the door to the gritty war dramas of the naughties and to the style itself.
This film is on of the most important contributions to cinema ever, and has done so much to finally show to true nature of WWII and war in general. But even though I would rate this 10/10 if it was just for the war scenes, the slop just gets in the way and devalues what should have been perfection.
Winner of five Academy Awards, including Best Director for Spielberg, Best Cinematography, and Sound, which was astonishing, even by today's standards, it failed to win Best Picture, losing out to Shakespeare In Love. Shakespeare In Love! Don't get me wrong, it's a good film, but easily forgettable compared to Ryan, only proving yet again that if you touch upon the British monarchy you get Oscars.
The film is a fictional account of four brothers, all serving in the U.S. Army, three of which were killed in action on or around the D-Day landings. The fourth, James Ryan played by Matt Damon is somewhere in Europe, and Tom Hanks with his platoon are sent to bring him home, to spare his mother anymore heartache.
Tom Hanks, who was also snubbed at the 1998 Oscars for his perfect performance as Captain Miller, the everyman who was losing himself in the horrors of war, underplayed his role perfectly. He is believable on every level, emotionally, physically and has a sense of subtly with makes him of Hollywood's greats.
The action is visceral, gritty and horrifying. But never played for crass effect. Scenes of soldiers intestines spilling out, limbs flying a sunder and brutal killing left, right and centre are recreated for one purpose. To truly demonstrate the horrors of war, and to change our perceptions of the global conflict which had almost become a joke, a setting for gung- ho action films, where the Yanks reign supreme and single-handedly win the war.
This shows troops crying, hurting and making decisions which should not be made under any moral circumstances, but you understand why, whether you agree or not. There is no doubt that Spielberg is not innocent of making an American film, but it is about as even-handed as you might expect, with the exception of Tora! Tora! Tora! or The Longest Day.
So, the action is first-rate, graphic and perfectly toned to recreate to horror of the last century's greatest and most of destructive conflicts. But that's only half the story.
The other half is the talking, reminiscing and the almost sepia tone is more than a little cloying. The U.S. General's monologues, which seem to consist almost entirely of Lincoln quotations are overly sentimental, erring on the side of sloppy patriotism rather than Jingoism, which is hardly a bad thing but it isn't good either.
The civilian scenes, such as Mrs Ryan, washing a plate as she sees the car drive down to road to inform her of her sons deaths are so sentimental that they jar against the realism of the war scenes. It's not so much contrast as it is as extreme as black and white.
The action is obviously interspersed, as all war films are, with rest stops and moments of talking, pondering etc., but the scenes drag on too long and disrupt the tone of the film. On the other hand, the direction is brilliant when explaining the situations during and around the action, but Spielberg seemed to think that we needed these sloppy and often boring moments, such as The Church, and the outside the cafe in Ramelle, to express the emotional torment of the characters, but I think that these scenes are so boring and pointless that I' can hardly remember them, as my attention drifts off during them! But I do have an understanding of the soldiers, and this was achieved, quite adorably without these scenes.
Overall, this is a film of two halves if ever there was one. The battle scenes and the journey through war-torn France are brilliant, gritty and educational, but the scenes of American sentimentality are in danger of derailing the whole film. Many feel that is the best war film of all time. I do not agree, favouring Black Hawk Down over this, but I would be remiss if I didn't acknowledge that Blank Hawk Down owes a debt to Saving Private Ryan, by opening the door to the gritty war dramas of the naughties and to the style itself.
This film is on of the most important contributions to cinema ever, and has done so much to finally show to true nature of WWII and war in general. But even though I would rate this 10/10 if it was just for the war scenes, the slop just gets in the way and devalues what should have been perfection.
Ande Thomas (69 KP) rated The Time Traveler's Wife in Books
May 30, 2019
I've been thinking a lot about what I would write about <i>The Time Traveler's Wife,</i> partly because it seems one usually falls into one of two camps: Love it, hate it. It turns out, I belong to the latter. I won't bother with the sci-fi elements, the could he/couldn't he, the exploration of time travel as a plot device - I'm always willing to engage with a story as long as it follows it's own rules. My problems run deeper.
Spoilers abound.
<spoiler>
First, I'd be remiss not to at least acknowledge the creepy factor of a 40 year old naked man befriending a 6 year old girl. It's been discussed ad nauseum, but I've got to put my two cents in.
The whole experience reeks of grooming. Henry shows up, naked, in a young girl's life and (although true) casually explains that he's a <i>time traveler</i>. Her imagination is hooked. Her very own secret Magic Man. Over the following years, their friendship blossoms, and Henry refuses to tell her anything about the future. He is friendly, charming even, and always respectful. But he remains an enigma. Clare is pulled in by the mystery of the Magic Man. All she knows are the dates of his future arrivals. Until one day he begins to break his rule and tell her that they will be together. They'll get married and be in love and have a life. What changed? Why is he suddenly willing to tell her snippets of her future life? Puberty. She admits her desire to be with him and he basically says "keep waiting, it'll happen."
From that moment, her life has been decided - by Henry, and for Henry. Clare spends the entirety of her teenage existence (and beyond) waiting on Henry. The whole of her character arc is basically one big middle finger to the Bechdel test. Henry leads her by a leash with clues and vague promises of the future. We'll be together when you're older (we're destined). We'll have sex on your 18th birthday (wait for me). We'll meet in Chicago (move to Chicago). Even after his dying breath, he subtly slides direction her way. "I hope you move on, but by the way, I'll drop by when you're EIGHTY. But by all means...move on." Is it coincidence that Henry's time traveling mimics an emotionally abusive relationship? Clare tells us, "Henry is an artist of another sort, a disappearing artist. Our life together in this too-small apartment is punctuated by Henry’s small absences. Sometimes he disappears unobtrusively . . . Sometimes it’s frightening." Sure, you say, but he can't help it. He wants to be there for her. <i>It's just the way he is.</i> It's not even hinted at. Multiple people tell Clare <b>to her face</b> that Henry is bad news. But she won't hear it, because he spent her entire childhood molding her into his wife.
The author doesn't hide the allusion to Homer. Rather, she beats us over the head with it. And sure, it makes sense; Clare is the patiently waiting wife, Henry the distant traveler. Even Alba takes up her role as Telemachus, going on her own journeys in search of her father. But do we need both main characters referring to Henry by name, as Odysseus? We get it, girl. You want to write your own romantic Odyssey. Ease up.
Oh, and by the way - Clare's quote above? That's one of her first comments on married life. Her first thoughts after the wedding are "Why is my husband always gone? Why am I always afraid for him?" Henry's first thoughts? "How can Clare listen to Cheap Trick?" Let me remind you that this is the guy who's willing to rattle off a comprehensive list of early punk before jumping up to join in singing a Prince song, but he's upset that his wife listens to The Eagles instead of some obscure as hell French punk band. Also, this man who is thrilled to share musical tastes with a young teen with a mohawk then laments that the kid can't find his own music and has to take his? He preaches the meaning of punk before privately questioning why those kids want to be punk? Here's a guy who's entire life was shaped by music - both of his parents made livings playing music written before they were even born, yet he can't comprehend why two preteens could (or should) like The Clash, or why Clare would like The Beatles. <i>Stay in your own time,</i> he is essentially saying, <i>leave the time traveling to me.</i>
The guy doesn't even realize the pain he causes. Ingrid asks him "Why were you so mean to me?" "Was I," he says, "I didn't want to be." I know, I know. Everyone around her didn't want him to see her or speak to her. But need I remind you - dude time travels and frequently gives himself tips from the future. "Hey pal, take it easy on Ingrid," or "Bro, Ingrid is really shaken up, don't listen to her family or doctor, she needs some closure." But of course, nothing can really change, everything is the way it is.
This is all before I even begin to mention how much Niffenegger LOVES to name-drop. Of course there's the aforementioned punk band name-vomit, mentions of Henry's parents' work can't go by without naming a specific piece, despite adding nothing to the story or our understanding of the characters, there are two separate references to Claude Levi-Strauss (why?), and various other casual mentions of figures that seem to serve no purpose other than to prove that Henry is smart, and knows smart people things.
</spoiler>
I wanted to like this book more, I thought it had a fascinating premise and an interesting perspective. Obviously, I'm not a regular consumer of romance, and I realize that the problems I have with this book are problems shared by a large portion of the genre. But I am positive that we can have a love story that isn't mired by (at best) morally ambiguous relationships. I understand it was a different world when it was published, and that's not directly anyone's fault. Questions of consent and power and respect have been thrust into the spotlight in the short years since this book was published, but that's the lens with which I have to peer through. Stop glorifying these vapid, and frankly, abusive relationships as the paragon of romance. We're better than this. We need to be.
Spoilers abound.
<spoiler>
First, I'd be remiss not to at least acknowledge the creepy factor of a 40 year old naked man befriending a 6 year old girl. It's been discussed ad nauseum, but I've got to put my two cents in.
The whole experience reeks of grooming. Henry shows up, naked, in a young girl's life and (although true) casually explains that he's a <i>time traveler</i>. Her imagination is hooked. Her very own secret Magic Man. Over the following years, their friendship blossoms, and Henry refuses to tell her anything about the future. He is friendly, charming even, and always respectful. But he remains an enigma. Clare is pulled in by the mystery of the Magic Man. All she knows are the dates of his future arrivals. Until one day he begins to break his rule and tell her that they will be together. They'll get married and be in love and have a life. What changed? Why is he suddenly willing to tell her snippets of her future life? Puberty. She admits her desire to be with him and he basically says "keep waiting, it'll happen."
From that moment, her life has been decided - by Henry, and for Henry. Clare spends the entirety of her teenage existence (and beyond) waiting on Henry. The whole of her character arc is basically one big middle finger to the Bechdel test. Henry leads her by a leash with clues and vague promises of the future. We'll be together when you're older (we're destined). We'll have sex on your 18th birthday (wait for me). We'll meet in Chicago (move to Chicago). Even after his dying breath, he subtly slides direction her way. "I hope you move on, but by the way, I'll drop by when you're EIGHTY. But by all means...move on." Is it coincidence that Henry's time traveling mimics an emotionally abusive relationship? Clare tells us, "Henry is an artist of another sort, a disappearing artist. Our life together in this too-small apartment is punctuated by Henry’s small absences. Sometimes he disappears unobtrusively . . . Sometimes it’s frightening." Sure, you say, but he can't help it. He wants to be there for her. <i>It's just the way he is.</i> It's not even hinted at. Multiple people tell Clare <b>to her face</b> that Henry is bad news. But she won't hear it, because he spent her entire childhood molding her into his wife.
The author doesn't hide the allusion to Homer. Rather, she beats us over the head with it. And sure, it makes sense; Clare is the patiently waiting wife, Henry the distant traveler. Even Alba takes up her role as Telemachus, going on her own journeys in search of her father. But do we need both main characters referring to Henry by name, as Odysseus? We get it, girl. You want to write your own romantic Odyssey. Ease up.
Oh, and by the way - Clare's quote above? That's one of her first comments on married life. Her first thoughts after the wedding are "Why is my husband always gone? Why am I always afraid for him?" Henry's first thoughts? "How can Clare listen to Cheap Trick?" Let me remind you that this is the guy who's willing to rattle off a comprehensive list of early punk before jumping up to join in singing a Prince song, but he's upset that his wife listens to The Eagles instead of some obscure as hell French punk band. Also, this man who is thrilled to share musical tastes with a young teen with a mohawk then laments that the kid can't find his own music and has to take his? He preaches the meaning of punk before privately questioning why those kids want to be punk? Here's a guy who's entire life was shaped by music - both of his parents made livings playing music written before they were even born, yet he can't comprehend why two preteens could (or should) like The Clash, or why Clare would like The Beatles. <i>Stay in your own time,</i> he is essentially saying, <i>leave the time traveling to me.</i>
The guy doesn't even realize the pain he causes. Ingrid asks him "Why were you so mean to me?" "Was I," he says, "I didn't want to be." I know, I know. Everyone around her didn't want him to see her or speak to her. But need I remind you - dude time travels and frequently gives himself tips from the future. "Hey pal, take it easy on Ingrid," or "Bro, Ingrid is really shaken up, don't listen to her family or doctor, she needs some closure." But of course, nothing can really change, everything is the way it is.
This is all before I even begin to mention how much Niffenegger LOVES to name-drop. Of course there's the aforementioned punk band name-vomit, mentions of Henry's parents' work can't go by without naming a specific piece, despite adding nothing to the story or our understanding of the characters, there are two separate references to Claude Levi-Strauss (why?), and various other casual mentions of figures that seem to serve no purpose other than to prove that Henry is smart, and knows smart people things.
</spoiler>
I wanted to like this book more, I thought it had a fascinating premise and an interesting perspective. Obviously, I'm not a regular consumer of romance, and I realize that the problems I have with this book are problems shared by a large portion of the genre. But I am positive that we can have a love story that isn't mired by (at best) morally ambiguous relationships. I understand it was a different world when it was published, and that's not directly anyone's fault. Questions of consent and power and respect have been thrust into the spotlight in the short years since this book was published, but that's the lens with which I have to peer through. Stop glorifying these vapid, and frankly, abusive relationships as the paragon of romance. We're better than this. We need to be.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Sea of Clouds in Tabletop Games
Sep 5, 2019 (Updated Jul 1, 2020)
When it comes to game themes, I think that we at Purple Phoenix Games are pretty good at trying just about anything. That being said, for some reason we keep finding ourselves back at pirates! So how does Sea of Clouds compare to our other pirate-themed games? Is it a good First Mate, or does it need to walk the plank? Keep reading to find out!
In Sea of Clouds, players are Captains of mighty air pirate ships. That’s right – flying pirate ships! Just like the pirate days of yore, your goal is to recruit the best crew, plunder for treasure and relics, and find the best rum along the way. But be careful because your rival pirate Captains have their eyes on the same prize – so make sure you’ve got a way to outsmart them and sail your way to victory!
Sea of Clouds is a game of card drafting, set collection, and push your luck in which players are trying to amass the most end-game victory points. Played over a series of rounds, players take turns drafting cards, performing bonus actions, and engaging in combat with their neighboring Captains. To setup, each player takes their chosen Captain board, the central board is placed in the middle of all players, and 1 loot card is placed face-down on each of the 3 loot spaces on the central board. The remaining cards are shuffled and create a draw pile. Now you are ready to play!
Each round consists of divvying up shares of loot between all players. On your turn, you will take the face-down card(s) in the #1 loot spot and look at them secretly. Decide whether you want to take the share, or leave it and look at the next one. If you decide to keep the card(s), add them directly around your Captain board in their corresponding spaces. If you decided to leave the share, add 1 card from the top of the draw pile to that share, and then look secretly at the cards in the #2 loot spot. Proceed in the same manner as before with the cards in the #2 and #3 loot spots, if necessary. If none of the shares catch your fancy, draw 1 card from the top of the draw deck to add to your ship. Play continues to the left, and once everyone has had their turn, move the round marker ahead on the central board, and continue on to the next round in the same fashion. At the end of certain rounds of the game, following the divvying of shares, there will be a boarding/combat turn – players will compare the combat strength of their crew (recruited during the divvying of shares) to that of their neighboring Captains. If your crew’s strength is greater than your neighbor, resolve any rewards/effects on your pirate cards. If your strength is less than your neighbor, you lose the combat and do not collect any rewards. Once all combats have been resolved, everyone discards all their crew cards, and the next round begins. At the end of the game, players count up their victory points, and the player who has amassed the most is the winner!
I’m going to get right to the spoilers and say that I love Sea of Clouds. It has some of my favorite mechanics (set collection and card drafting) and it is easy to teach, learn, and play. Do not let the simplicity of play fool you, however, because strategy is definitely a key to victory. One thing that takes this strategy to the next level for me is that there will be times when all players know what cards are in each share of loot. You’ve got to pay attention to which shares your opponents are taking, and figure out a way to stop them from collecting complete sets, or try to force them to collect a share they may not necessarily want. Also, as shares go unclaimed, they get more cards (and eventually money) added to them, so you have to weigh the risks of collecting a share because of one specific card, even though there may be a ‘bad’ card in that share for you. You always have to be adjusting your strategy based on what cards show up in each share, so there is no idle time for any player in this game.
Another neat thing I like about the strategy of this game is that all the cards have backs based on their card type. So all Relic cards have the same back, all Crew cards have the same back, etc. Even though you may not know what is on the other side of the card, you might just take a chance on a share of loot because it has the card types you are trying to get. That’s where the push your luck comes in, because until you look at a share of loot, you aren’t sure if that card is the one you need. Maybe share #1 has a couple cards you could use, but share #2 has a relic card that could be the final one in your set! Are you willing to risk passing up a decent share of loot to see if the next share has what you need? Or maybe the top of the draw deck has the card type you want – would you pass up all 3 shares of loot for one blindly draw card in hopes that it is to your benefit? There is no single ‘right’ way to play, and that is what makes this fun.
The only drawbacks of this game for me are the boarding/combat turns. I like the idea of this player interaction, but it doesn’t always work fairly in my opinion. At the end of each boarding/combat turn, all players discard all of their Crew cards, and you have until the next boarding phase to recruit a new crew. And sometimes, just based on the luck of the draw, you just never get the opportunity to hire anybody. Maybe your opponent takes the share with a Crew member before you get a chance to, or maybe the deck just isn’t evenly shuffled enough to get enough Crew cards out into the playing field. So if you have no Crew, you automatically lose the combat, and that can be detrimental to your strategy – opponents could steal or discard some of your cards, and cause you to lose end-game points. Maybe if there was a draw pile where you could pay a certain amount of gold to hire a Crew member, that would make the game feel a little more fair in the combat department. But ultimately, you’re at the mercy of the luck of the shuffle/draw, and sometimes it just doesn’t balance out.
All in all, I think Sea of Clouds is a great game. It’s a relatively simple game, but one that still requires strategic thought. The push your luck element feels unique in this game because you don’t really lose anything if your luck runs out, you just don’t necessarily get as far as you wanted. The game itself is pretty to look at – the artwork is very well-done and the colors really pop and draw the eye to the cards. This may not be in my Top 10 of favorite games, but it’s one that I will definitely be keeping in my collection. Take a chance on this one if you haven’t so far – it might surprise you. Purple Phoenix Games gives Sea of Clouds a high-flying 12 / 18.
In Sea of Clouds, players are Captains of mighty air pirate ships. That’s right – flying pirate ships! Just like the pirate days of yore, your goal is to recruit the best crew, plunder for treasure and relics, and find the best rum along the way. But be careful because your rival pirate Captains have their eyes on the same prize – so make sure you’ve got a way to outsmart them and sail your way to victory!
Sea of Clouds is a game of card drafting, set collection, and push your luck in which players are trying to amass the most end-game victory points. Played over a series of rounds, players take turns drafting cards, performing bonus actions, and engaging in combat with their neighboring Captains. To setup, each player takes their chosen Captain board, the central board is placed in the middle of all players, and 1 loot card is placed face-down on each of the 3 loot spaces on the central board. The remaining cards are shuffled and create a draw pile. Now you are ready to play!
Each round consists of divvying up shares of loot between all players. On your turn, you will take the face-down card(s) in the #1 loot spot and look at them secretly. Decide whether you want to take the share, or leave it and look at the next one. If you decide to keep the card(s), add them directly around your Captain board in their corresponding spaces. If you decided to leave the share, add 1 card from the top of the draw pile to that share, and then look secretly at the cards in the #2 loot spot. Proceed in the same manner as before with the cards in the #2 and #3 loot spots, if necessary. If none of the shares catch your fancy, draw 1 card from the top of the draw deck to add to your ship. Play continues to the left, and once everyone has had their turn, move the round marker ahead on the central board, and continue on to the next round in the same fashion. At the end of certain rounds of the game, following the divvying of shares, there will be a boarding/combat turn – players will compare the combat strength of their crew (recruited during the divvying of shares) to that of their neighboring Captains. If your crew’s strength is greater than your neighbor, resolve any rewards/effects on your pirate cards. If your strength is less than your neighbor, you lose the combat and do not collect any rewards. Once all combats have been resolved, everyone discards all their crew cards, and the next round begins. At the end of the game, players count up their victory points, and the player who has amassed the most is the winner!
I’m going to get right to the spoilers and say that I love Sea of Clouds. It has some of my favorite mechanics (set collection and card drafting) and it is easy to teach, learn, and play. Do not let the simplicity of play fool you, however, because strategy is definitely a key to victory. One thing that takes this strategy to the next level for me is that there will be times when all players know what cards are in each share of loot. You’ve got to pay attention to which shares your opponents are taking, and figure out a way to stop them from collecting complete sets, or try to force them to collect a share they may not necessarily want. Also, as shares go unclaimed, they get more cards (and eventually money) added to them, so you have to weigh the risks of collecting a share because of one specific card, even though there may be a ‘bad’ card in that share for you. You always have to be adjusting your strategy based on what cards show up in each share, so there is no idle time for any player in this game.
Another neat thing I like about the strategy of this game is that all the cards have backs based on their card type. So all Relic cards have the same back, all Crew cards have the same back, etc. Even though you may not know what is on the other side of the card, you might just take a chance on a share of loot because it has the card types you are trying to get. That’s where the push your luck comes in, because until you look at a share of loot, you aren’t sure if that card is the one you need. Maybe share #1 has a couple cards you could use, but share #2 has a relic card that could be the final one in your set! Are you willing to risk passing up a decent share of loot to see if the next share has what you need? Or maybe the top of the draw deck has the card type you want – would you pass up all 3 shares of loot for one blindly draw card in hopes that it is to your benefit? There is no single ‘right’ way to play, and that is what makes this fun.
The only drawbacks of this game for me are the boarding/combat turns. I like the idea of this player interaction, but it doesn’t always work fairly in my opinion. At the end of each boarding/combat turn, all players discard all of their Crew cards, and you have until the next boarding phase to recruit a new crew. And sometimes, just based on the luck of the draw, you just never get the opportunity to hire anybody. Maybe your opponent takes the share with a Crew member before you get a chance to, or maybe the deck just isn’t evenly shuffled enough to get enough Crew cards out into the playing field. So if you have no Crew, you automatically lose the combat, and that can be detrimental to your strategy – opponents could steal or discard some of your cards, and cause you to lose end-game points. Maybe if there was a draw pile where you could pay a certain amount of gold to hire a Crew member, that would make the game feel a little more fair in the combat department. But ultimately, you’re at the mercy of the luck of the shuffle/draw, and sometimes it just doesn’t balance out.
All in all, I think Sea of Clouds is a great game. It’s a relatively simple game, but one that still requires strategic thought. The push your luck element feels unique in this game because you don’t really lose anything if your luck runs out, you just don’t necessarily get as far as you wanted. The game itself is pretty to look at – the artwork is very well-done and the colors really pop and draw the eye to the cards. This may not be in my Top 10 of favorite games, but it’s one that I will definitely be keeping in my collection. Take a chance on this one if you haven’t so far – it might surprise you. Purple Phoenix Games gives Sea of Clouds a high-flying 12 / 18.
I am most familiar with the tale of the Phantom of the Opera from the musical of that name. It is likely different from the book by Gaston Leroux. I havent read the original novel that inspired the opera and RoseBlood itself in years. As a result, I am sure that I miss some nods to the original or nuances that people more familiar with the story will understand.
Our main character, Rune has a unique relationship with music. Certain works, usually arias written for women, speak to her and make their home in her soul. Upon hearing the soaring notes, she is immediately overtaken by the need to sing and expel the music. When she was younger and her father accompanied her on the violin, those moments were glorious but they did not last. Her father became ill and then died, leaving her with no accompaniment and the music began to cage her. No longer could she just release the notes inside her, but they took something with them and left her feeling ill. If the piece spoke to her she had no choice but let it overwhelm her vocal cords and release.
The Phantom lives in his classic dark dwelling beneath the school, which was once an opera house. He travels the underground river via a boat, has various neglected instruments strewn about and is friendly with a red swan. Just your normal phantom behavior. Pretty early on, we learn that who we first believe to be this iteration of the phantom is not the one from the book and are introduced to the Phantom himself. The Phantom is Thorns guardian and teacher, although he has been sickly lately and Thorn has been taking care of him.
There is an interesting addition in this version of auras and chakras. Rune, Thorn and the Phantom are able to see the music as it fills the air with colour. The Phantom even taught Thorn how to harness that auric energy from emotions, and the even more powerful music, to do things like manipulating feelings and thoughts. Together, Thorn and the Phantom plan to alienate Rune from her teachers and classmates until she discovers the lair surrenders to the darkness and they hope she gives up her music to them.
Runes first day at RoseBlood does not go exactly as she hoped, but her new friend and peer advisor, Sunny introduces her to Jackson Reynolds. My immediate feelings about the two were that they were playing this retelling's version of Meg and Raoul, whether that is, in fact, true you shall have to discover by reading the book. Her relationship with her Phantom parallels that of the original, as he helps her to calm the music inside her.
Although the author provides reasoning later on for their immediate connection and trust, it still feels like insta-love. To know someone for only a short while and frequently consider abandoning or betraying everything youve ever known and believed in for the past decade. That is intense and not something people could just easily give up on whether it is the right way or not.
While I did enjoy this book, I probably would not go out and purchase a copy for myself. In order to make this the next chapter of the Phantom of the Opera, rather than a re-telling the author added some different aspects to the story that were not in the original. I am not entirely sure how I feel about this change it was interesting but as I was reading I didnt feel or believe that it was as well thought out as it should have been. I think that the idea of the story was a lot more intriguing than the actual execution of it ended up being.
After the conclusion of the book, there is a note from the author that describes what inspired her to write this version of the story. It shows where she got each of her ideas and the amount of thought that went into them. As I stated before, I see the merit of each addition (and admire the research that went into them) but it just seemed to be a little too much added and it became unwieldy.
Our main character, Rune has a unique relationship with music. Certain works, usually arias written for women, speak to her and make their home in her soul. Upon hearing the soaring notes, she is immediately overtaken by the need to sing and expel the music. When she was younger and her father accompanied her on the violin, those moments were glorious but they did not last. Her father became ill and then died, leaving her with no accompaniment and the music began to cage her. No longer could she just release the notes inside her, but they took something with them and left her feeling ill. If the piece spoke to her she had no choice but let it overwhelm her vocal cords and release.
The Phantom lives in his classic dark dwelling beneath the school, which was once an opera house. He travels the underground river via a boat, has various neglected instruments strewn about and is friendly with a red swan. Just your normal phantom behavior. Pretty early on, we learn that who we first believe to be this iteration of the phantom is not the one from the book and are introduced to the Phantom himself. The Phantom is Thorns guardian and teacher, although he has been sickly lately and Thorn has been taking care of him.
There is an interesting addition in this version of auras and chakras. Rune, Thorn and the Phantom are able to see the music as it fills the air with colour. The Phantom even taught Thorn how to harness that auric energy from emotions, and the even more powerful music, to do things like manipulating feelings and thoughts. Together, Thorn and the Phantom plan to alienate Rune from her teachers and classmates until she discovers the lair surrenders to the darkness and they hope she gives up her music to them.
Runes first day at RoseBlood does not go exactly as she hoped, but her new friend and peer advisor, Sunny introduces her to Jackson Reynolds. My immediate feelings about the two were that they were playing this retelling's version of Meg and Raoul, whether that is, in fact, true you shall have to discover by reading the book. Her relationship with her Phantom parallels that of the original, as he helps her to calm the music inside her.
Although the author provides reasoning later on for their immediate connection and trust, it still feels like insta-love. To know someone for only a short while and frequently consider abandoning or betraying everything youve ever known and believed in for the past decade. That is intense and not something people could just easily give up on whether it is the right way or not.
While I did enjoy this book, I probably would not go out and purchase a copy for myself. In order to make this the next chapter of the Phantom of the Opera, rather than a re-telling the author added some different aspects to the story that were not in the original. I am not entirely sure how I feel about this change it was interesting but as I was reading I didnt feel or believe that it was as well thought out as it should have been. I think that the idea of the story was a lot more intriguing than the actual execution of it ended up being.
After the conclusion of the book, there is a note from the author that describes what inspired her to write this version of the story. It shows where she got each of her ideas and the amount of thought that went into them. As I stated before, I see the merit of each addition (and admire the research that went into them) but it just seemed to be a little too much added and it became unwieldy.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Nocturnal Animals (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Putting the crisis into mid-life crisis.
“Do you think your life has turned into something you never intended?” So asks Susan Morrow (Amy Adams) to her young assistant, who obviously looks baffled. “Of course, not – you’re still young”. Susan is in a mid-life crisis. While successful within the opulent Los Angeles art scene her personal life is crashing to the ground around her: her marriage (to Hutton (Armie Hammer, “The Man From Uncle”) ) appears to be cooling fast amid financial worries.
In the midst of this rudderless time a manuscript from her ex-husband, struggling writer Edward Sheffield (Jake Gyllenhaal), turns up out of the blue. As we see in flashback, Edward is a man let down on multiple levels by Susan in the past. His novel – “Nocturnal Animals”, dedicated to Susan – is a primal scream of twenty years worth of hurt, pain, regret and vengeance; a railing against a loss of love; a railing against a loss of life.
As Susan painfully turns the pages we live the book as a ‘film within a film’ – with characters casually modelled on Edward, Susan and Susan’s daughter, actually played by Gyllenhaal, Amy-Adams-lookalike Isla Fisher (“Grimsby”) and Ellie Bamber (“Pride and Prejudice and Zombies”) respectively. The insomniac Susan is seriously moved. She feels likes someone who’s fallen asleep on the train of life and doesn’t recognise any of the stations when she wakes up. How will Susan’s regrets translate into action? Should she take up Edwards offer to meet up for dinner?
This Tom Ford film – only his second after the wildly successful “A Single Man” in 2009 – is a challenging film to watch. The opening titles of naked overweight woman ‘twerkers’ is challenging enough (#wobble). After this shocking opening (that morphs into an art gallery installation) the LA scenes have a gloriously Hitchcockian/noir feel to them, being gorgeously filmed by cinematographer Seamus McGarvey (“The Accountant”, “The Avengers”) – an Oscar nomination I would suggest should be in the offing.
And then comes the start of the “book” segment: one of the most uncomfortably tense scenes I’ve seen this year. A Texan family horror film featuring a lonely highway and a trio of “deplorables” (to quote an unfortunate put-down by Hilary Clinton). As stark contrast to the sharp lines and glamour of LA, these scenes are reminiscent of “No Country for Old Men” with a searingly unpleasant performance from Aaron Taylor-Johnson (“Kick-Ass”) and an equally queasy turn by local law enforcer Bobby Andes (Michael Shannon, Zod in “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice”). Either or both of these gentlemen could be contenders for a Supporting Actor nomination. The tension is superbly notched up by a mesmerising cello/violin score by Polish composer Abel Korzeniowski.
Amy Adams is fantastic in the leading role (what with “Arrival” this month, this is quite a month for the actress) as is Jake Gyllenhaal, channelling so much emotion, angst and guilt at his own impotence. After “Nightcrawler” Gyllenhaal is building up a formidable reputation that must translate into an Oscar some time soon: possibly this is it. Some excellent cameos from Laura Linney (as Susan’s sad-eyed mother) and Michael Sheen (in a superb purple jacket) rounds off an excellent ensemble cast.
The concept of a “film within a film” is not new. The most memorable example (I realise with a shock – #midlifecrisis) was “The French Lieutenant’s Woman” with a young but striking Meryl Streep 35 years ago. Here the LA sequence, the book and the flashback scenes are beautifully merged into a seamless whole where you never seem to get lost or disorientated.
If there is a criticism to be made, the second half of the ‘book’ is not as satisfying as the first with some rather clunky plot points that fall a little too easily.
However, this is a nuanced film where every step and every scene feels sculpted and filled with meaning. It is a film that deserves repeat viewings, since it raises questions and thoughts that survive long after the lights have come up. Tom Ford’s output may be of a sparsity of Kubrick proportions, but like Kubrick his output is certainly worth waiting for.
Recommended, but go mentally prepared: this was a UK 15 certificate, but it felt like it should be more of a UK 18.
In the midst of this rudderless time a manuscript from her ex-husband, struggling writer Edward Sheffield (Jake Gyllenhaal), turns up out of the blue. As we see in flashback, Edward is a man let down on multiple levels by Susan in the past. His novel – “Nocturnal Animals”, dedicated to Susan – is a primal scream of twenty years worth of hurt, pain, regret and vengeance; a railing against a loss of love; a railing against a loss of life.
As Susan painfully turns the pages we live the book as a ‘film within a film’ – with characters casually modelled on Edward, Susan and Susan’s daughter, actually played by Gyllenhaal, Amy-Adams-lookalike Isla Fisher (“Grimsby”) and Ellie Bamber (“Pride and Prejudice and Zombies”) respectively. The insomniac Susan is seriously moved. She feels likes someone who’s fallen asleep on the train of life and doesn’t recognise any of the stations when she wakes up. How will Susan’s regrets translate into action? Should she take up Edwards offer to meet up for dinner?
This Tom Ford film – only his second after the wildly successful “A Single Man” in 2009 – is a challenging film to watch. The opening titles of naked overweight woman ‘twerkers’ is challenging enough (#wobble). After this shocking opening (that morphs into an art gallery installation) the LA scenes have a gloriously Hitchcockian/noir feel to them, being gorgeously filmed by cinematographer Seamus McGarvey (“The Accountant”, “The Avengers”) – an Oscar nomination I would suggest should be in the offing.
And then comes the start of the “book” segment: one of the most uncomfortably tense scenes I’ve seen this year. A Texan family horror film featuring a lonely highway and a trio of “deplorables” (to quote an unfortunate put-down by Hilary Clinton). As stark contrast to the sharp lines and glamour of LA, these scenes are reminiscent of “No Country for Old Men” with a searingly unpleasant performance from Aaron Taylor-Johnson (“Kick-Ass”) and an equally queasy turn by local law enforcer Bobby Andes (Michael Shannon, Zod in “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice”). Either or both of these gentlemen could be contenders for a Supporting Actor nomination. The tension is superbly notched up by a mesmerising cello/violin score by Polish composer Abel Korzeniowski.
Amy Adams is fantastic in the leading role (what with “Arrival” this month, this is quite a month for the actress) as is Jake Gyllenhaal, channelling so much emotion, angst and guilt at his own impotence. After “Nightcrawler” Gyllenhaal is building up a formidable reputation that must translate into an Oscar some time soon: possibly this is it. Some excellent cameos from Laura Linney (as Susan’s sad-eyed mother) and Michael Sheen (in a superb purple jacket) rounds off an excellent ensemble cast.
The concept of a “film within a film” is not new. The most memorable example (I realise with a shock – #midlifecrisis) was “The French Lieutenant’s Woman” with a young but striking Meryl Streep 35 years ago. Here the LA sequence, the book and the flashback scenes are beautifully merged into a seamless whole where you never seem to get lost or disorientated.
If there is a criticism to be made, the second half of the ‘book’ is not as satisfying as the first with some rather clunky plot points that fall a little too easily.
However, this is a nuanced film where every step and every scene feels sculpted and filled with meaning. It is a film that deserves repeat viewings, since it raises questions and thoughts that survive long after the lights have come up. Tom Ford’s output may be of a sparsity of Kubrick proportions, but like Kubrick his output is certainly worth waiting for.
Recommended, but go mentally prepared: this was a UK 15 certificate, but it felt like it should be more of a UK 18.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (2015) in Movies
Jul 20, 2017
There has been an awakening...
Contains spoilers, click to show
There was a point where I honestly thought that this day was never going to come. Ladies and gentlemen, for the first time in 30 years we have an exciting, entertaining Star Wars movie. Now this review will contain a non spoilers section and a spoilers section, so if you haven’t seen the movie yet, maybe don’t read past the spoiler warning. So, strap in because if this franchise is starting as it means to go on, then I’ve got a good feeling about this…
First off, let’s talk about the new cast. All three of them are fantastic in their performances, with Daisy Ridley as Rey, John Boyega as Finn and Oscar Isaac as Poe Dameron respectively. Poe has the smallest role, which is my biggest and only complaint about the character, because he is awesome. He is funny, he’s an amazing pilot, he reeks of cool and he is the one character in this movie that I’d love to get a pint with. Finn is another new character, dealing with an inner conflict, (which I won’t ruin,) but is still likeable and relatable. Rey is arguably the most central of the three new main cast members and she delivers also, she sold the fairly bland character dealing with an exciting new adventure calling her name pretty well, but possibly could have done more in a few scenes, as it sort of feels like they could have cast anyone of the same age in this role and they would have delivered, but she did well enough. Of course, the old cast are also back, Anthony Daniels as C3PO is just as irritating as he was 30 years ago and while it’s nice to see Peter Mahew back as Chewie, they really could have put any tall, thin guy into the furry costume and it wouldn’t have made any difference. Carrie Fisher is back as Leia and the while lines she had were entertaining and at times touching, she simply wasn’t in the movie enough. I won’t talk about Luke until the spoilers section, so let’s move on to Han. It’s nice to see grumpy old gramps Harrison Ford actually look enthusiastic and as if he is actually enjoying himself for a change. His performance surprisingly isn’t phoned in and he genuinely commits to the role just as much as he did 30 years ago. Also, out of the original returning cast, he is definitely in the movie most.
Now that we have discussed the light side, now let’s move onto the dark side. Personally I don’t think these characters are as strong as the protagonists. It’s not the fault of the actors, Domnall Gleason as Hux is great, super evil and almost Nazi-like, Andy Serkis as Snoke is intimidating in his performance also and Adam Driver as Kylo Ren is one of the best performances in the movie, showing sadness and anger, all while being an unhinged threatening presence. The problem here is that the villains in this movie just don’t have the same impact as the villains in the original , Hux and Ren are made out to be young and naïve and while Snoke is pulling the strings, but we only ever see him as a hologram and even then, we don’t see him all that much. It’s as if this is these villain’s origin story, but in A New Hope, the villains and the Empire already felt like an established, villainous organisation, whereas in this movie it is as if a bunch of amateurs have happened across a new death star (let’s not lie, that’s all that the Starkiller base is,) and they don’t really know what they are doing. And Captain Phasma? Hardly worth talking about, she is in two scenes and does nothing in either of them besides let herself get taken advantage of. So that’s a summary on how I felt about the characters in general, onto the movie as a whole.
I feel that Abrams has gotten the tone of this movie just right. It’s funny enough that it’s constantly entertaining and never boring and it’s serious enough that you feel a genuine, palpable threat throughout. The score is also fantastic, as is expected from John Williams and overall the effects are spot on also. I did have a slight problem with some of the CGI characters, namely Snoke, the tentacle monsters that show up briefly and the market owner that was in possession of the Falcon at the start of the movie played by Simon Pegg, but there were also a lot of puppets and practical effects were used and it really pays off in the overall look of the movie, no more crammed scenes of cartoon garbage like the prequels, just what matters. The pacing of this movie is very fast, some might say too fast, with Abrams not really giving the viewers time to breathe and digest what they just saw before throwing another dogfight or lightsaber battle at them, but hey, at least you can’t say it’s boring and I’m happy to say that there isn’t a senate discussion in sight. I really do feel like I have to see the movie again however before making an overall verdict and that is due to the extremely fast pacing and because of all of the significant events that happen nothing really stands out, which leaves a lack of meat on the bone. The story is well written however, the world is built well and the characters are all introduced well, but the story does follow a lot of the same beats as the original trilogy. Without giving anything away, the story is divided up into three distinct acts, with each taking place on a different planet followed by an epilogue at the end. There is a cantina scene, a robot carrying an important message to be delivered, Tie Fighter vs. X Wing dogfights and a death star-like weapon of mass destruction, there is even a trench run.
Okay, so I saw the movie again on Tuesday this week and while most of what I felt the first time I felt again, making a lot of the feelings I had after my first viewing more concrete, I did notice a few new things. Also, from this point on there will be spoilers.
Knowing what was coming before it did really helped the pacing of this movie, it was much easier to digest a second time, but at no point was it a chore to watch the film again. I also noticed a lot more lens flares this time, upon first viewing I thought that the only lens flare in the movie was when the Starkiller base fires it’s weapon, but there are in fact quite a few throughout the film. Also the end scene with Luke was a lot better the second time, it didn’t feel as awkward or drawn out and felt more like a fitting end to the movie, although if you ask me, Luke should have at least had a line. Also the revelation that Kylo Ren was actually Ben Solo, Han’s son and Han’s death scene at the hands of Ren were also better on second viewing. While Han’s death was somewhat predictable and probably could have been executed better, it was nice to have him in this movie for the time we got him and I’m sure Harrison Ford is more than happy to never have to play the character again. Also BB-8 is possibly even more likable the second time. Seeing the movie again I also gained a greater appreciation for the cinematography in it, with some awesome long shots showing off the dogfights and the First Order vs. Resistance action. I’m glad I got to see the movie a second time as it has upped my opinion of the movie and if you are a Star Wars fan, it’s something that I would strongly recommend you do.
First off, let’s talk about the new cast. All three of them are fantastic in their performances, with Daisy Ridley as Rey, John Boyega as Finn and Oscar Isaac as Poe Dameron respectively. Poe has the smallest role, which is my biggest and only complaint about the character, because he is awesome. He is funny, he’s an amazing pilot, he reeks of cool and he is the one character in this movie that I’d love to get a pint with. Finn is another new character, dealing with an inner conflict, (which I won’t ruin,) but is still likeable and relatable. Rey is arguably the most central of the three new main cast members and she delivers also, she sold the fairly bland character dealing with an exciting new adventure calling her name pretty well, but possibly could have done more in a few scenes, as it sort of feels like they could have cast anyone of the same age in this role and they would have delivered, but she did well enough. Of course, the old cast are also back, Anthony Daniels as C3PO is just as irritating as he was 30 years ago and while it’s nice to see Peter Mahew back as Chewie, they really could have put any tall, thin guy into the furry costume and it wouldn’t have made any difference. Carrie Fisher is back as Leia and the while lines she had were entertaining and at times touching, she simply wasn’t in the movie enough. I won’t talk about Luke until the spoilers section, so let’s move on to Han. It’s nice to see grumpy old gramps Harrison Ford actually look enthusiastic and as if he is actually enjoying himself for a change. His performance surprisingly isn’t phoned in and he genuinely commits to the role just as much as he did 30 years ago. Also, out of the original returning cast, he is definitely in the movie most.
Now that we have discussed the light side, now let’s move onto the dark side. Personally I don’t think these characters are as strong as the protagonists. It’s not the fault of the actors, Domnall Gleason as Hux is great, super evil and almost Nazi-like, Andy Serkis as Snoke is intimidating in his performance also and Adam Driver as Kylo Ren is one of the best performances in the movie, showing sadness and anger, all while being an unhinged threatening presence. The problem here is that the villains in this movie just don’t have the same impact as the villains in the original , Hux and Ren are made out to be young and naïve and while Snoke is pulling the strings, but we only ever see him as a hologram and even then, we don’t see him all that much. It’s as if this is these villain’s origin story, but in A New Hope, the villains and the Empire already felt like an established, villainous organisation, whereas in this movie it is as if a bunch of amateurs have happened across a new death star (let’s not lie, that’s all that the Starkiller base is,) and they don’t really know what they are doing. And Captain Phasma? Hardly worth talking about, she is in two scenes and does nothing in either of them besides let herself get taken advantage of. So that’s a summary on how I felt about the characters in general, onto the movie as a whole.
I feel that Abrams has gotten the tone of this movie just right. It’s funny enough that it’s constantly entertaining and never boring and it’s serious enough that you feel a genuine, palpable threat throughout. The score is also fantastic, as is expected from John Williams and overall the effects are spot on also. I did have a slight problem with some of the CGI characters, namely Snoke, the tentacle monsters that show up briefly and the market owner that was in possession of the Falcon at the start of the movie played by Simon Pegg, but there were also a lot of puppets and practical effects were used and it really pays off in the overall look of the movie, no more crammed scenes of cartoon garbage like the prequels, just what matters. The pacing of this movie is very fast, some might say too fast, with Abrams not really giving the viewers time to breathe and digest what they just saw before throwing another dogfight or lightsaber battle at them, but hey, at least you can’t say it’s boring and I’m happy to say that there isn’t a senate discussion in sight. I really do feel like I have to see the movie again however before making an overall verdict and that is due to the extremely fast pacing and because of all of the significant events that happen nothing really stands out, which leaves a lack of meat on the bone. The story is well written however, the world is built well and the characters are all introduced well, but the story does follow a lot of the same beats as the original trilogy. Without giving anything away, the story is divided up into three distinct acts, with each taking place on a different planet followed by an epilogue at the end. There is a cantina scene, a robot carrying an important message to be delivered, Tie Fighter vs. X Wing dogfights and a death star-like weapon of mass destruction, there is even a trench run.
Okay, so I saw the movie again on Tuesday this week and while most of what I felt the first time I felt again, making a lot of the feelings I had after my first viewing more concrete, I did notice a few new things. Also, from this point on there will be spoilers.
Knowing what was coming before it did really helped the pacing of this movie, it was much easier to digest a second time, but at no point was it a chore to watch the film again. I also noticed a lot more lens flares this time, upon first viewing I thought that the only lens flare in the movie was when the Starkiller base fires it’s weapon, but there are in fact quite a few throughout the film. Also the end scene with Luke was a lot better the second time, it didn’t feel as awkward or drawn out and felt more like a fitting end to the movie, although if you ask me, Luke should have at least had a line. Also the revelation that Kylo Ren was actually Ben Solo, Han’s son and Han’s death scene at the hands of Ren were also better on second viewing. While Han’s death was somewhat predictable and probably could have been executed better, it was nice to have him in this movie for the time we got him and I’m sure Harrison Ford is more than happy to never have to play the character again. Also BB-8 is possibly even more likable the second time. Seeing the movie again I also gained a greater appreciation for the cinematography in it, with some awesome long shots showing off the dogfights and the First Order vs. Resistance action. I’m glad I got to see the movie a second time as it has upped my opinion of the movie and if you are a Star Wars fan, it’s something that I would strongly recommend you do.