Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Bohemian Rhapsody (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
“Fame and fortune and everything that goes with it”.
Sometimes a trailer generates a bit of a buzz of excitement with a cinema audience and the first showings of the trailer for “Bohemian Rhapsody” was a case in point. But would the film live up to the potential?
The Plot
Farrokh Bulsara (Rami Malek), born in Zanzibar to Indian parents, is a shy boy with a dramatic singing voice. At a concert he meets Mary (Lucy Boynton) who becomes the “love of his life”. When a space for a lead singer becomes available in a college band, Farrokh leaps at the chance and onstage becomes an exuberant extrovert. The band, of course, changes its name to Queen and with Farrokh assuming the name of Freddie Mercury they are set for global success. But Freddie is a complex character, and the demands and temptations of global super-stardom take a terrible toll.
The Review
Wow! What a great film on so many different levels. As a biopic of Mercury and a history of one of the greatest ever rock bands, the film is highly entertaining. But I wasn’t prepared for how emotional I would find it. Mercury’s life is befitting of a Shakespearian tragedy: an estrangement from his ‘conservative’ father (Ace Bhatti); a public extravert, but privately an insecure and needy bi-sexual, constantly searching for his perch in life; a meteoric rise and an equally spectacular and historic fall.
Do you remember where you were (if anywhere!) during the historic Live Aid concert at Wembley in July 1985? My eagle-minded wife had to remind me that we were travelling to Hampshire to house hunt because of my graduate job offer from IBM Hursley Park. My 3 month old daughter was rolling around, unstrapped, in a carry cot on the back seat: different times; different rules! Why this is relevant is that the film culminates in a recreation of the band’s spectacular 20 minute set for 1985’s Live Aid concert at Wembley. It’s a spectacular piece of cinema and one that – for me – puts the much hyped concert scenes from “A Star is Born” back in its box. Aside from a few niggles (the sound engineers in the booth were, if I’m not mistaken, all the size of Hagrid!) it’s a spectacular piece of CGI work.
It’s also worth remembering that whilst today’s massive stadium concerts from the likes of Adele and Coldplay are commonplace, back in the UK of 1985 most of the bands played in more traditional theatre venues: this really was an historic event on so many levels.
If I’m being critical, there are a few bits of the movie that are a tad tacky and twee. A whizz around the world of tour locations is composed of some pretty ropy animations that didn’t work for me. And a few of the ‘creations’ of classic songs – particularly “Another One Bites the Dust” – are a bit forced. Countering that though, the “Bohemian Rhapsody” is mesmerising.
The Turns
I’ll just put it right out there, Rami Malek is just sensational as Mercury! I first called out Malek as someone to watch in “Need For Speed“, but since then he’s gone on to major fame in the TV series “Mr Robot”. Here he is a force of nature on the screen and you literally can’t take your eyes off him. Every nuance of Mercury’s tortured soul is up there. I would love to see the performance recognized in the Awards season, with the showreel clip being a brilliant standoff in the rain with Paul Prenter (“Downton’s” Allen Leech).
The rest of the band – Ben Hardy as drummer Roger Taylor; Gwilym Lee as lead guitar Brian May; and Joseph Mazzello (yes, young Tim from “Jurassic Park”!) as bass guitarist John Deacon – all work well together, with Lee looking more like Brian May than Brian May!
Lucy Boynton, so great in “Sing Street“, gets a meaty dramatic role to sink her teeth into, and the ever-reliable Tom Hollander is great as the band’s legal rep/manager Jim “Miami” Beech: his ‘knowing looks’ near the end of the film are brilliantly done.
The surprise piece of casting though was the very welcome return of Mike Myers as the exec Ray Foster: only seen spasmodically on screen since 2009’s “Inglorious Basterds”. It’s a role that reminded me of Tom Cruise‘s turn in “Tropic Thunder”! But it’s well done. After making “Bohemian Rhapsody” famous again in “Wayne’s World”, how could he have refused? I say “Welcome back Mr Myers”: you’ve been missed.
And a final shout out to Paul Jones, my son-in-law’s brother, who gets a full screen appearance in the crowd, arms outstretched, during the “Fat Bottomed Girls” set! (I must admit, I missed it, so will have to go and see it again!)
Final Thoughts
This is a film that grabs you and propels you through the story at a fast lick. It’s a surprisingly moving story, with a well-known and tragic finale. It’s not a perfect film, but it is up there wih the year’s best as a high-energy cinema experience.
The Plot
Farrokh Bulsara (Rami Malek), born in Zanzibar to Indian parents, is a shy boy with a dramatic singing voice. At a concert he meets Mary (Lucy Boynton) who becomes the “love of his life”. When a space for a lead singer becomes available in a college band, Farrokh leaps at the chance and onstage becomes an exuberant extrovert. The band, of course, changes its name to Queen and with Farrokh assuming the name of Freddie Mercury they are set for global success. But Freddie is a complex character, and the demands and temptations of global super-stardom take a terrible toll.
The Review
Wow! What a great film on so many different levels. As a biopic of Mercury and a history of one of the greatest ever rock bands, the film is highly entertaining. But I wasn’t prepared for how emotional I would find it. Mercury’s life is befitting of a Shakespearian tragedy: an estrangement from his ‘conservative’ father (Ace Bhatti); a public extravert, but privately an insecure and needy bi-sexual, constantly searching for his perch in life; a meteoric rise and an equally spectacular and historic fall.
Do you remember where you were (if anywhere!) during the historic Live Aid concert at Wembley in July 1985? My eagle-minded wife had to remind me that we were travelling to Hampshire to house hunt because of my graduate job offer from IBM Hursley Park. My 3 month old daughter was rolling around, unstrapped, in a carry cot on the back seat: different times; different rules! Why this is relevant is that the film culminates in a recreation of the band’s spectacular 20 minute set for 1985’s Live Aid concert at Wembley. It’s a spectacular piece of cinema and one that – for me – puts the much hyped concert scenes from “A Star is Born” back in its box. Aside from a few niggles (the sound engineers in the booth were, if I’m not mistaken, all the size of Hagrid!) it’s a spectacular piece of CGI work.
It’s also worth remembering that whilst today’s massive stadium concerts from the likes of Adele and Coldplay are commonplace, back in the UK of 1985 most of the bands played in more traditional theatre venues: this really was an historic event on so many levels.
If I’m being critical, there are a few bits of the movie that are a tad tacky and twee. A whizz around the world of tour locations is composed of some pretty ropy animations that didn’t work for me. And a few of the ‘creations’ of classic songs – particularly “Another One Bites the Dust” – are a bit forced. Countering that though, the “Bohemian Rhapsody” is mesmerising.
The Turns
I’ll just put it right out there, Rami Malek is just sensational as Mercury! I first called out Malek as someone to watch in “Need For Speed“, but since then he’s gone on to major fame in the TV series “Mr Robot”. Here he is a force of nature on the screen and you literally can’t take your eyes off him. Every nuance of Mercury’s tortured soul is up there. I would love to see the performance recognized in the Awards season, with the showreel clip being a brilliant standoff in the rain with Paul Prenter (“Downton’s” Allen Leech).
The rest of the band – Ben Hardy as drummer Roger Taylor; Gwilym Lee as lead guitar Brian May; and Joseph Mazzello (yes, young Tim from “Jurassic Park”!) as bass guitarist John Deacon – all work well together, with Lee looking more like Brian May than Brian May!
Lucy Boynton, so great in “Sing Street“, gets a meaty dramatic role to sink her teeth into, and the ever-reliable Tom Hollander is great as the band’s legal rep/manager Jim “Miami” Beech: his ‘knowing looks’ near the end of the film are brilliantly done.
The surprise piece of casting though was the very welcome return of Mike Myers as the exec Ray Foster: only seen spasmodically on screen since 2009’s “Inglorious Basterds”. It’s a role that reminded me of Tom Cruise‘s turn in “Tropic Thunder”! But it’s well done. After making “Bohemian Rhapsody” famous again in “Wayne’s World”, how could he have refused? I say “Welcome back Mr Myers”: you’ve been missed.
And a final shout out to Paul Jones, my son-in-law’s brother, who gets a full screen appearance in the crowd, arms outstretched, during the “Fat Bottomed Girls” set! (I must admit, I missed it, so will have to go and see it again!)
Final Thoughts
This is a film that grabs you and propels you through the story at a fast lick. It’s a surprisingly moving story, with a well-known and tragic finale. It’s not a perfect film, but it is up there wih the year’s best as a high-energy cinema experience.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Dumplin' (2018) in Movies
Jan 16, 2019
Good On So Many Levels
High school student Willowdean (Danielle MacDonald) decides to enter a beauty pageant to spite her mom Rosie (Jennifer Aniston), a former pageant queen.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
The characters in this story are not just unique and enjoyable. They also represent the melting pot of what this world should be. Willowdean feels out of place because she is heavyset so she tries to attack herself before others do. Her Aunt Lucy (Hilliary Begley) tried to teach her to do the opposite before she passed away, but Willowdean didn’t grasp her aunt’s confidence unfortunately. Through her journey of pageant life, she makes two good friends: Hannah (Bex Taylor-Klaus) who is anti-establishment (or anti-everything, rather) and Millie (Maddie Baillio) a ball of happiness with an overprotective mom. They are at the core of a slew of good characters that brighten the story. And did I mention the drag queens? Phe-no-men-al.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
The conflict here is less about outward confrontation and more about inner discovery. Willowdean’s greatest enemy is herself, something most of us can probably relate to. It is refreshing to watching her battle old demons while coming to terms with who she is and who she can be. Destroying yourself is toxic and Dumplin’ shows how a negative view of one’s self can damage and destroy the relationships around us.
Genre: 10
Memorability: 8
The story as a whole has a magical feeling to it that’s centered in realism, almost like a trailer park Cinderella. I thought of all the 201 movies I watched in 2018. Few touched me quite like this one. A really memorable movie can make you laugh, maybe cry a little, and reflect. Dumplin’ gets the job done. It teaches you never to underestimate yourself and to go all out even when you don’t think you have a shot.
Pace: 10
I love when storytelling is consistent and blends seamlessly from one scene to the next. You get that here. There’s not a whole lot of pointless dialogue that takes you nowhere or random scenes that forces relationship-building. It moves consistently like a batch of waves. Before you know it, it’s over and you’ve had a great ride.
Plot: 10
The story isn’t just original but heartfelt. Something we can all get behind. I can honestly say that I’ve never seen anything like it. You can see the ending coming a mile away, but you’re having so much of a good time you don’t care!
Resolution: 10
Just as with the plot, you definitely see the ending coming a mile away. Doesn’t make it any less awesome or touching. Mum’s the word, but it ties on a nice little bow on the movie as a whole.
Overall: 98
I’m always wary of Netflix originals. Not because they can’t be good, I’ve seen plenty of amazing things on Netflix. Rather I understand that there’s a pressure for them to keep putting out original content at a fast pace because the market is catching up. This could mean more swings-and-misses. Dumplin’ is not a casualty of that in the least. Quality movie.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
The characters in this story are not just unique and enjoyable. They also represent the melting pot of what this world should be. Willowdean feels out of place because she is heavyset so she tries to attack herself before others do. Her Aunt Lucy (Hilliary Begley) tried to teach her to do the opposite before she passed away, but Willowdean didn’t grasp her aunt’s confidence unfortunately. Through her journey of pageant life, she makes two good friends: Hannah (Bex Taylor-Klaus) who is anti-establishment (or anti-everything, rather) and Millie (Maddie Baillio) a ball of happiness with an overprotective mom. They are at the core of a slew of good characters that brighten the story. And did I mention the drag queens? Phe-no-men-al.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
The conflict here is less about outward confrontation and more about inner discovery. Willowdean’s greatest enemy is herself, something most of us can probably relate to. It is refreshing to watching her battle old demons while coming to terms with who she is and who she can be. Destroying yourself is toxic and Dumplin’ shows how a negative view of one’s self can damage and destroy the relationships around us.
Genre: 10
Memorability: 8
The story as a whole has a magical feeling to it that’s centered in realism, almost like a trailer park Cinderella. I thought of all the 201 movies I watched in 2018. Few touched me quite like this one. A really memorable movie can make you laugh, maybe cry a little, and reflect. Dumplin’ gets the job done. It teaches you never to underestimate yourself and to go all out even when you don’t think you have a shot.
Pace: 10
I love when storytelling is consistent and blends seamlessly from one scene to the next. You get that here. There’s not a whole lot of pointless dialogue that takes you nowhere or random scenes that forces relationship-building. It moves consistently like a batch of waves. Before you know it, it’s over and you’ve had a great ride.
Plot: 10
The story isn’t just original but heartfelt. Something we can all get behind. I can honestly say that I’ve never seen anything like it. You can see the ending coming a mile away, but you’re having so much of a good time you don’t care!
Resolution: 10
Just as with the plot, you definitely see the ending coming a mile away. Doesn’t make it any less awesome or touching. Mum’s the word, but it ties on a nice little bow on the movie as a whole.
Overall: 98
I’m always wary of Netflix originals. Not because they can’t be good, I’ve seen plenty of amazing things on Netflix. Rather I understand that there’s a pressure for them to keep putting out original content at a fast pace because the market is catching up. This could mean more swings-and-misses. Dumplin’ is not a casualty of that in the least. Quality movie.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Girl in the Spider's Web (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Would the last straight woman in Stockholm turn off the lights?
You’ve gotta love a Scandi-thriller. Well, that was until last year’s hopeless Michael Fassbender vehicle “The Snowman” which devalued the currency better than Brexit has done to the pound! The mother of them all though was the original “Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” trilogy (in Swedish) in 2009. Although subject to a wholly unnecessary English remake two year’s later by David Fincher (with Mara Rooney and Daniel Craig) it was Noomi Rapace who struck the perfect note as the original anarchic and damaged Lisbeth Salander: a punk wielding a baseball bat like an alien-thing possessed (pun well and truly intended!).
Now though we have “A New Dragon Tattoo Story” (as the film’s subtitle clumsily declares) based on the book by David Lagercrantz, who took over the literary franchise after the untimely death of Stieg Larsson. Picking up the reins as Salander is that most British of actresses Claire Foy…. which seems an odd choice, but one which – after you get past the rather odd accent – she just about pulls off.
The Plot
Lizbeth Salendar (Claire Foy) has an interesting hobby. She is a vigilante, like a lesbian Batman, stalking the streets of Stockholm putting wrongs right where abusive boyfriends/husbands are concerned.
She is also a hacking machine for rent. And Frans Balder (Stephen Merchant) has a problem. He has invented a software program that allows its user to control every nuclear warhead in the world from a single laptop (cue every other Bond/24/Austin Powers script ever written). But he has had second thoughts and wants it back from its resting place on the server of the NSA’s chief hacker, Ed Needham (Lakeith Stanfield). Balder recruits Salander to recover it, but when things go pear-shaped Salander finds herself on the wrong side of both the law and the encircling terrorist “spiders”.
The Review
Scandi-dramas work best when they exploit the snow; maintain a sexual tension; and go dark, gritty and violent. On the plus side, “The Girl in the Spider’s Web” ticks most of those boxes adequately. Foy’s Salandar is smart, sassy and sexy, outwitting the best of the best, and only once finding her intellectual match. (If you’re a lesbian, Stockholm is most definitely the place to be: there only seemed to be one hetero-female there, and she was an adulteress).
But Salander also has a Bond-like invincibility that unfortunately tests your incredulity at multiple points. Contributing to the excitement is the stunt team, who keep themselves busy with some great car and bike chases.
So, the movie has its moments and is great to look at. But the film ends up a sandwich or two short of a smorgasbord, thanks largely to some totally bonkers plot points and more than a few ridiculous coincidences. There are without doubt an array of well-constructed set pieces here, but they fail to fully connect with any great conviction. An example of a scene that infuriates is a dramatic bathroom fight in a red-lit gloom with identical protagonists that is cut together so furiously you would need a Blu-ray slo-mo to work out what the hell is going on… and then I fear you might fail.
So it’s an A- for the Production Design (Eve Stewart, “The Danish Girl“) and the Cinematography (Pedro Luque, “Don’t Breathe“), but a C- for the director Fede Alvarez (also “Don’t Breathe“).
Avoid the Trailer
I will save my biggest source of wrath though for that major bug-bear of mine: trailers that spoil the plot.
I’ve asked before, but for a film like this, WHO EXACTLY PUTS TOGETHER THE TRAILER? I’d like to think it’s some mindless committee of marketing execs somewhere. Because I HONESTLY CAN’T BELIEVE it would be the director! (If I’m wrong though, I would point my finger at Mr Alvarez and chant “shame, shame, shame”!)
For the trailer that I saw playing in UK cinemas does it’s level best to not only drop in the key spoilers of the plot (including the climactic scene), but also spoils just about every action money-shot in the movie. It’s all so pointless. If you’ve by any chance managed to get to this point without seeing the trailer, then SAVE YOURSELVES and AVOID IT!
(The one attached below by the way is slightly – slightly! – better, including some over-dubbing of a line that I don’t think was in the film. Perhaps they realised their huge mistake and reissued it?)
The Turns
As I mentioned earlier, Claire Foy again extends her range by playing Salander really well. She is the reason to go and see the film.
The Daniel Craig part of Blomkvist is played here by Sverrir Gudnason, who was in “The Circle” (which I saw) and was Borg in “Borg McEnroe” (which I didn’t). Blomkvist really is a lazy ****, since he works for the publication “Millenium” but writes absolutely nothing for years. It must be only because the boss (Vicky Krieps) fancies him that he keeps his job. Gudnason is good enough, but has very little to do in the movie: its the Salander/Foy show. Slightly, but only slightly, more involved is Lakeith Standfield as the US intelligence man.
Given little to do in the plot. Sverrir Gudnason as the incredibly unproductive ‘journalist’ Mikael Blomkvist. (Source: Sony Pictures Entertainment)
Stephen Merchant is an odd casting choice for Balder. Not withstanding that he was brilliant when almost unrecognisable in “Logan“, here he looks far too much like his “Ricky Gervais sidekick” persona to be taken seriously: and it’s not even remotely a comedy (there is only one humorous moment in the film, a nice “clicker” gag in a car park).
Final Thoughts
I had high hopes for this film from the trailer, but I was left disappointed. It’s not classic Scandi-noir like the original “Tattoo”; and it’s not going for the black comedy angle of “Headhunters” (which I saw again last week and loved… again!). It falls into a rather “meh” category. It’s not a bad evening’s watch, but perhaps worth leaving for a DVD/cable showing.
Now though we have “A New Dragon Tattoo Story” (as the film’s subtitle clumsily declares) based on the book by David Lagercrantz, who took over the literary franchise after the untimely death of Stieg Larsson. Picking up the reins as Salander is that most British of actresses Claire Foy…. which seems an odd choice, but one which – after you get past the rather odd accent – she just about pulls off.
The Plot
Lizbeth Salendar (Claire Foy) has an interesting hobby. She is a vigilante, like a lesbian Batman, stalking the streets of Stockholm putting wrongs right where abusive boyfriends/husbands are concerned.
She is also a hacking machine for rent. And Frans Balder (Stephen Merchant) has a problem. He has invented a software program that allows its user to control every nuclear warhead in the world from a single laptop (cue every other Bond/24/Austin Powers script ever written). But he has had second thoughts and wants it back from its resting place on the server of the NSA’s chief hacker, Ed Needham (Lakeith Stanfield). Balder recruits Salander to recover it, but when things go pear-shaped Salander finds herself on the wrong side of both the law and the encircling terrorist “spiders”.
The Review
Scandi-dramas work best when they exploit the snow; maintain a sexual tension; and go dark, gritty and violent. On the plus side, “The Girl in the Spider’s Web” ticks most of those boxes adequately. Foy’s Salandar is smart, sassy and sexy, outwitting the best of the best, and only once finding her intellectual match. (If you’re a lesbian, Stockholm is most definitely the place to be: there only seemed to be one hetero-female there, and she was an adulteress).
But Salander also has a Bond-like invincibility that unfortunately tests your incredulity at multiple points. Contributing to the excitement is the stunt team, who keep themselves busy with some great car and bike chases.
So, the movie has its moments and is great to look at. But the film ends up a sandwich or two short of a smorgasbord, thanks largely to some totally bonkers plot points and more than a few ridiculous coincidences. There are without doubt an array of well-constructed set pieces here, but they fail to fully connect with any great conviction. An example of a scene that infuriates is a dramatic bathroom fight in a red-lit gloom with identical protagonists that is cut together so furiously you would need a Blu-ray slo-mo to work out what the hell is going on… and then I fear you might fail.
So it’s an A- for the Production Design (Eve Stewart, “The Danish Girl“) and the Cinematography (Pedro Luque, “Don’t Breathe“), but a C- for the director Fede Alvarez (also “Don’t Breathe“).
Avoid the Trailer
I will save my biggest source of wrath though for that major bug-bear of mine: trailers that spoil the plot.
I’ve asked before, but for a film like this, WHO EXACTLY PUTS TOGETHER THE TRAILER? I’d like to think it’s some mindless committee of marketing execs somewhere. Because I HONESTLY CAN’T BELIEVE it would be the director! (If I’m wrong though, I would point my finger at Mr Alvarez and chant “shame, shame, shame”!)
For the trailer that I saw playing in UK cinemas does it’s level best to not only drop in the key spoilers of the plot (including the climactic scene), but also spoils just about every action money-shot in the movie. It’s all so pointless. If you’ve by any chance managed to get to this point without seeing the trailer, then SAVE YOURSELVES and AVOID IT!
(The one attached below by the way is slightly – slightly! – better, including some over-dubbing of a line that I don’t think was in the film. Perhaps they realised their huge mistake and reissued it?)
The Turns
As I mentioned earlier, Claire Foy again extends her range by playing Salander really well. She is the reason to go and see the film.
The Daniel Craig part of Blomkvist is played here by Sverrir Gudnason, who was in “The Circle” (which I saw) and was Borg in “Borg McEnroe” (which I didn’t). Blomkvist really is a lazy ****, since he works for the publication “Millenium” but writes absolutely nothing for years. It must be only because the boss (Vicky Krieps) fancies him that he keeps his job. Gudnason is good enough, but has very little to do in the movie: its the Salander/Foy show. Slightly, but only slightly, more involved is Lakeith Standfield as the US intelligence man.
Given little to do in the plot. Sverrir Gudnason as the incredibly unproductive ‘journalist’ Mikael Blomkvist. (Source: Sony Pictures Entertainment)
Stephen Merchant is an odd casting choice for Balder. Not withstanding that he was brilliant when almost unrecognisable in “Logan“, here he looks far too much like his “Ricky Gervais sidekick” persona to be taken seriously: and it’s not even remotely a comedy (there is only one humorous moment in the film, a nice “clicker” gag in a car park).
Final Thoughts
I had high hopes for this film from the trailer, but I was left disappointed. It’s not classic Scandi-noir like the original “Tattoo”; and it’s not going for the black comedy angle of “Headhunters” (which I saw again last week and loved… again!). It falls into a rather “meh” category. It’s not a bad evening’s watch, but perhaps worth leaving for a DVD/cable showing.
Andy Meakin (5 KP) rated Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi (2017) in Movies
Jan 8, 2018
Great visuals let down by meandering story
For those who are unaware, The Jast Jedi is the latest instalment in the core Star Wars series, and picks up from where Force Awakens left off. Rey (played by the decidedly average Daisy Ridley) is on an island with Mark Hamill (playing himself it seems as the mannerisms of the character bore no similarity to the one we saw in Episodes 4, 5 and 6). Chewbacca is also there, but you wouldn’t really tell aside from a few “comedy” moments with the creatures of the island shoehorned in to seemingly ignore the trauma of losing his blood-oath life companion in the last film (Han Solo….keep up people) and instead have him there to just growl at “The Most Annoying and Unnecessary Additions To Film Since Jar Jar”™ from time to time. Whilst there she seeks to recruit Mark to aid Carrie Fisher’s rebellion (again…something not quite right about the character, and another who seems to have gotten over a traumatic murder of a loved one….by a loved one…quite rapidly) and also train her up in the way of the Super-Jedi (seriously, the powers are far beyond anything we have come to know from Jedi before).
Meanwhile Finn wakes up so he can perform comedy pratfalls a lot, Poe has become a one-man-army who could possibly defeat the whole Empire if Carrie would just stop demoting him, and BB8 seems to have more internal mechanical abilities than Cyborg in the DC comics. Remember how much the paring of Rey and Finn worked in the previous film? Yeah, that’s not here. How about Poe and Finn…that bromance? Nope. Okay…what about….ah forget it.
So, on the flip-side Kylo Ren (Adam Driver who I genuinely don’t get the obsession some folk have with) is acting all emo at how Supreme Leader Snoke is seemingly in love with General Hux (Domhall Gleeson, who acts like he’s in a Carry On film). Snoke is no longer a huge hologram, but is now a physical entity in the film, played (rather excellently I must add) by CGI mo-cap legend Andy Serkis. Strange that a CGI character feels more real than any of the rest of the cast, but hey-ho. With his mighty fleet, Snoke leads the battle to wipe the last remnants of the Rebellion….
The film opens with a spectacular space battle, and certainly doesn’t skimp on set-pieces throughout, with land and space being covered in glory. But story wise there isn’t much going on, even though Rian Johnson clearly thinks there is. Not really a spoiler, but when the Rebel fleet are on the run, trying to stay out of reach of the First Order craft, you do wonder why a few of the first order fleet didn’t just jump to a short hyperdrive to pen the Rebels in, rather than just following behind like sheep. That minor niggle is the smallest of the film’s story problems.
The issue seems to be that many moments have been engineered purely to pull the rug out from under the fan-theorists, rather than being included to actually serve the story on offer. None of the reveals are particularly clever, and one moment in particular resonated in the same manner the “Martha!” moment did in Batman v Superman, so poorly presented that it was almost hilarious in the reveal. Shoehorn in a few cameos, and contrived scene set ups and the whole thing feels like it is trying to pack two films into one, and in order to do so decided to cut out all the bits that make sense to make room for ‘action…fights….explosions…and…..’
…PORGS! Damn those things to Hades! Absolutely unnecessary, irritating, and jarring enough when on screen to make you stop actually caring about the action going on. They are used at the most inopportune moments in a poor attempt to generate laughs! I’ve seen people argue that, “Star Wars is for kids, so of course some things would be childish!” A poor excuse, and it’s the same one George Lucas used for Jar Jar Binks. Still feel it’s a good excuse? They are a marketing ploy to sell cuddly merchandise, and they are awful!
It’s not entirely bad, though. As mentioned the action and effects work is stunning, and there are some marvellous visual feasts on offer. The score is, as expected from music maestro John Williams, enchanting, thrilling, and with plenty of echoes of previous themes morphed into the mix. It’s just that, overall, this feels less like part of the Star Wars series, and more like a fan-fiction. It’s a shame as Rian Johnson has a strong pedigree with Brick and Looper, and hearing he has been granted a new trilogy of films of his own design was exciting news. After this, however, all I can say is that I’m glad JJ Abrams is coming back for the final part – maybe the magic will return with him.
Better than the prequels, including Rogue One, but the weaker of the rest, The Last Jedi is overlong for no real reason, and not as sharp as it wants to be. All gloss and style, but with very little substance.
Meanwhile Finn wakes up so he can perform comedy pratfalls a lot, Poe has become a one-man-army who could possibly defeat the whole Empire if Carrie would just stop demoting him, and BB8 seems to have more internal mechanical abilities than Cyborg in the DC comics. Remember how much the paring of Rey and Finn worked in the previous film? Yeah, that’s not here. How about Poe and Finn…that bromance? Nope. Okay…what about….ah forget it.
So, on the flip-side Kylo Ren (Adam Driver who I genuinely don’t get the obsession some folk have with) is acting all emo at how Supreme Leader Snoke is seemingly in love with General Hux (Domhall Gleeson, who acts like he’s in a Carry On film). Snoke is no longer a huge hologram, but is now a physical entity in the film, played (rather excellently I must add) by CGI mo-cap legend Andy Serkis. Strange that a CGI character feels more real than any of the rest of the cast, but hey-ho. With his mighty fleet, Snoke leads the battle to wipe the last remnants of the Rebellion….
The film opens with a spectacular space battle, and certainly doesn’t skimp on set-pieces throughout, with land and space being covered in glory. But story wise there isn’t much going on, even though Rian Johnson clearly thinks there is. Not really a spoiler, but when the Rebel fleet are on the run, trying to stay out of reach of the First Order craft, you do wonder why a few of the first order fleet didn’t just jump to a short hyperdrive to pen the Rebels in, rather than just following behind like sheep. That minor niggle is the smallest of the film’s story problems.
The issue seems to be that many moments have been engineered purely to pull the rug out from under the fan-theorists, rather than being included to actually serve the story on offer. None of the reveals are particularly clever, and one moment in particular resonated in the same manner the “Martha!” moment did in Batman v Superman, so poorly presented that it was almost hilarious in the reveal. Shoehorn in a few cameos, and contrived scene set ups and the whole thing feels like it is trying to pack two films into one, and in order to do so decided to cut out all the bits that make sense to make room for ‘action…fights….explosions…and…..’
…PORGS! Damn those things to Hades! Absolutely unnecessary, irritating, and jarring enough when on screen to make you stop actually caring about the action going on. They are used at the most inopportune moments in a poor attempt to generate laughs! I’ve seen people argue that, “Star Wars is for kids, so of course some things would be childish!” A poor excuse, and it’s the same one George Lucas used for Jar Jar Binks. Still feel it’s a good excuse? They are a marketing ploy to sell cuddly merchandise, and they are awful!
It’s not entirely bad, though. As mentioned the action and effects work is stunning, and there are some marvellous visual feasts on offer. The score is, as expected from music maestro John Williams, enchanting, thrilling, and with plenty of echoes of previous themes morphed into the mix. It’s just that, overall, this feels less like part of the Star Wars series, and more like a fan-fiction. It’s a shame as Rian Johnson has a strong pedigree with Brick and Looper, and hearing he has been granted a new trilogy of films of his own design was exciting news. After this, however, all I can say is that I’m glad JJ Abrams is coming back for the final part – maybe the magic will return with him.
Better than the prequels, including Rogue One, but the weaker of the rest, The Last Jedi is overlong for no real reason, and not as sharp as it wants to be. All gloss and style, but with very little substance.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Custom Heroes in Tabletop Games
Feb 7, 2022
You know that feeling when you play a game that FEELS familiar, but has really improved on certain aspects? Take, for example, the famed “Yahtzee mechanic” that has been extended and improved upon by so many games. Or the “I Cut, You Choose mechanic” that has shown up in several titles with slight variations to improve it? Well such was my feeling when cracking open Custom Heroes. I thought to myself, “Man, this feels natural in my hands, but it’s better.” I know I left myself open for tons of jokes here, but this is a PG(ish) forum, so keep it classy, everyone.
Custom Heroes is a fantasy/sci-fi-themed, customization, ladder-climbing, trick-taking card game for two to six players. In it players are using their hand of cards to win tricks (a la Tichu). The twist is that each card is able to be upgraded by using various Advancements that are added directly into the same sleeve as the base card. The winner of the game is they who amass 10 or more points and win a subsequent hand.
Before the first game after unboxing, all Character Cards will need to be sleeved. These Character Cards are numbered from 1-10 and come in six sets (one set of 10 cards for each player, at max player count). To setup the game, each player chooses a Player Screen to hide their resources and provide the scoring table. Shuffle the Character cards and deal each player a hand of 10 cards. For this review, I will be using the two-player rules. Players also begin with 1VP Token and 2 Power Tokens, along with an Ascended Form Advancement Card and Kodora Advancement Card. In a two-player game, players begin with three total Advancement Cards, as shown in the photo below. The rest of the VP Tokens and Power Tokens are placed (or thrown, in my case) on the table, and the remainder of the Advancement Cards are shuffled and placed in the bag to be drawn randomly throughout the game. The battle for tricks may now begin!
As with all (most?) trick-taking games, Custom Heroes is played over a series of rounds. However, Custom Heroes is played across three phases: Upkeep, Main, Scoring. During the Upkeep phase, the deck of Character Cards is shuffled and 10 cards are dealt to each player. On each player’s turn during the Main phase, they will decide if they would like to upgrade any card by sleeving Advancement Cards along with the Character Cards. These Advancement Cards are clear plastic and will alter the value of the card, provide special abilities, or provide modifiers to the card’s value. Sleeving new Advancements may be done at any time during the turn, before playing it, but the caveat is that ALL cards are shuffled and dealt to players after every round, so the chances of receiving that same card in future hands diminishes with each additional player at the table!
Once Advancements have been applied, or whilst applying, the players will determine the lead play. A lead could be a single card or several matching cards in a set. The following player will need to play a card, or cards, of the same number, but of higher value. For example, if a single 7 was led, only a single 8, 9, or 10 will beat it. However, if a pair of 5s was led, a pair of 6-10 will beat that lead. Players may pass if they cannot, or choose not to, beat the current trick, and can engage in play on a future trick. Once a player has run out of cards for the hand, or all players have passed. The first player to run out of cards, or the last player to play a card, wins the hand and receives the benefits listed on the scoring table shown below. Again, when a player earns 10 VP and wins a hand, they win!
A few notes about Advancement Cards. The Ascended Form card given to all players at setup will allow the player to win the trick for that round once played. It is essentially a wild insta-win card. That is, unless another player plays an Ascended Form on top of it and wins with the most recent Ascended Form. The Kodora card, however, can be played to the player’s tableau instead of as a card in a trick. When played this way, the player “bets” two VP Tokens that they will win the hand. If they do, they gain an additional two VP Tokens, but lose their bet if they do not finish in 1st Place. All other Advancement Cards may be added to the Character Card sleeve as long as the associated gem icon at the bottom is not already present in the sleeve. As there are four gem slots on Character Cards, each Character may be upgraded four total times.
Components. This one comes with a number of components of different types. The tokens are all small, but not too small, the bag is cool, but obviously the main attractions are the clear plastic cards and sleeves common to the Card Crafting System that AEG produced. I think I first saw this idea of layering plastic cards on top of one another in the Gloom series, though it may have existed even before that. I adore this idea and really fell in love with it when I was big into Mystic Vale, also from John D. Clair and AEG. So components for me get a big ol’ seal of approval. I love ’em.
Similarly, I think the gameplay gets a big seal of approval from me. Like I said, I was big into Mystic Vale for a while, but I think that Cusom Heroes, to me, trumps it in many ways. Though both boxes mention games approximately taking around 45 minutes, I found Mystic Vale to be much longer, mostly due to having to explain and re-explain rules and oddities to players at the table. It feels like Custom Heroes has cut down the complexity of gameplay, especially for newer gamers. I can bring out Custom Heroes and have it taught and played in under an hour – a feat I still haven’t mastered with Mystic Vale.
I think that I also prefer the trick-taking style of Custom Heroes a bit more. My family really enjoys playing Euchre at family reunions and other events, and while Custom Heroes isn’t a Euchre clone at all, the feel is very similar. There is still a led card, and cards that are more valuable to be played atop them in order to win tricks. While there isn’t necessarily any suits in Custom Heroes, the ability to trump an entire hand with an Ascended Form Advancement or other Advancements adds a layer (see what I did there) of strategy and tactics that is just so satisfying. I am a big fan of games that allow players to upgrade their starting resources, or level up their characters, and this one fits right inside a little 60 minute pocket and is relatively easy to teach and play.
All in all, I am so glad I found this one at my FLGS (well, not super local), and there was a big sale going on. I picked it up solely for the Card Crafting System logo and it was a big hit for me. This will completely replace Mystic Vale for me in my collection, and I couldn’t be happier with that. If you are looking for something quick, easy, but full of choices and modifications, this is certainly the game for you. It’s the game for me, and that’s why Purple Phoenix Games gives Custom Heroes a mostly-upgraded 5 / 6. Could this reach into my Top 10 someday, or earn a Golden Feather Award? It is entirely possible. We shall see with more and more plays. I am excited to give it many more plays and find out! Are you in?
Custom Heroes is a fantasy/sci-fi-themed, customization, ladder-climbing, trick-taking card game for two to six players. In it players are using their hand of cards to win tricks (a la Tichu). The twist is that each card is able to be upgraded by using various Advancements that are added directly into the same sleeve as the base card. The winner of the game is they who amass 10 or more points and win a subsequent hand.
Before the first game after unboxing, all Character Cards will need to be sleeved. These Character Cards are numbered from 1-10 and come in six sets (one set of 10 cards for each player, at max player count). To setup the game, each player chooses a Player Screen to hide their resources and provide the scoring table. Shuffle the Character cards and deal each player a hand of 10 cards. For this review, I will be using the two-player rules. Players also begin with 1VP Token and 2 Power Tokens, along with an Ascended Form Advancement Card and Kodora Advancement Card. In a two-player game, players begin with three total Advancement Cards, as shown in the photo below. The rest of the VP Tokens and Power Tokens are placed (or thrown, in my case) on the table, and the remainder of the Advancement Cards are shuffled and placed in the bag to be drawn randomly throughout the game. The battle for tricks may now begin!
As with all (most?) trick-taking games, Custom Heroes is played over a series of rounds. However, Custom Heroes is played across three phases: Upkeep, Main, Scoring. During the Upkeep phase, the deck of Character Cards is shuffled and 10 cards are dealt to each player. On each player’s turn during the Main phase, they will decide if they would like to upgrade any card by sleeving Advancement Cards along with the Character Cards. These Advancement Cards are clear plastic and will alter the value of the card, provide special abilities, or provide modifiers to the card’s value. Sleeving new Advancements may be done at any time during the turn, before playing it, but the caveat is that ALL cards are shuffled and dealt to players after every round, so the chances of receiving that same card in future hands diminishes with each additional player at the table!
Once Advancements have been applied, or whilst applying, the players will determine the lead play. A lead could be a single card or several matching cards in a set. The following player will need to play a card, or cards, of the same number, but of higher value. For example, if a single 7 was led, only a single 8, 9, or 10 will beat it. However, if a pair of 5s was led, a pair of 6-10 will beat that lead. Players may pass if they cannot, or choose not to, beat the current trick, and can engage in play on a future trick. Once a player has run out of cards for the hand, or all players have passed. The first player to run out of cards, or the last player to play a card, wins the hand and receives the benefits listed on the scoring table shown below. Again, when a player earns 10 VP and wins a hand, they win!
A few notes about Advancement Cards. The Ascended Form card given to all players at setup will allow the player to win the trick for that round once played. It is essentially a wild insta-win card. That is, unless another player plays an Ascended Form on top of it and wins with the most recent Ascended Form. The Kodora card, however, can be played to the player’s tableau instead of as a card in a trick. When played this way, the player “bets” two VP Tokens that they will win the hand. If they do, they gain an additional two VP Tokens, but lose their bet if they do not finish in 1st Place. All other Advancement Cards may be added to the Character Card sleeve as long as the associated gem icon at the bottom is not already present in the sleeve. As there are four gem slots on Character Cards, each Character may be upgraded four total times.
Components. This one comes with a number of components of different types. The tokens are all small, but not too small, the bag is cool, but obviously the main attractions are the clear plastic cards and sleeves common to the Card Crafting System that AEG produced. I think I first saw this idea of layering plastic cards on top of one another in the Gloom series, though it may have existed even before that. I adore this idea and really fell in love with it when I was big into Mystic Vale, also from John D. Clair and AEG. So components for me get a big ol’ seal of approval. I love ’em.
Similarly, I think the gameplay gets a big seal of approval from me. Like I said, I was big into Mystic Vale for a while, but I think that Cusom Heroes, to me, trumps it in many ways. Though both boxes mention games approximately taking around 45 minutes, I found Mystic Vale to be much longer, mostly due to having to explain and re-explain rules and oddities to players at the table. It feels like Custom Heroes has cut down the complexity of gameplay, especially for newer gamers. I can bring out Custom Heroes and have it taught and played in under an hour – a feat I still haven’t mastered with Mystic Vale.
I think that I also prefer the trick-taking style of Custom Heroes a bit more. My family really enjoys playing Euchre at family reunions and other events, and while Custom Heroes isn’t a Euchre clone at all, the feel is very similar. There is still a led card, and cards that are more valuable to be played atop them in order to win tricks. While there isn’t necessarily any suits in Custom Heroes, the ability to trump an entire hand with an Ascended Form Advancement or other Advancements adds a layer (see what I did there) of strategy and tactics that is just so satisfying. I am a big fan of games that allow players to upgrade their starting resources, or level up their characters, and this one fits right inside a little 60 minute pocket and is relatively easy to teach and play.
All in all, I am so glad I found this one at my FLGS (well, not super local), and there was a big sale going on. I picked it up solely for the Card Crafting System logo and it was a big hit for me. This will completely replace Mystic Vale for me in my collection, and I couldn’t be happier with that. If you are looking for something quick, easy, but full of choices and modifications, this is certainly the game for you. It’s the game for me, and that’s why Purple Phoenix Games gives Custom Heroes a mostly-upgraded 5 / 6. Could this reach into my Top 10 someday, or earn a Golden Feather Award? It is entirely possible. We shall see with more and more plays. I am excited to give it many more plays and find out! Are you in?
Cyn Armistead (14 KP) rated American Gods in Books
Mar 1, 2018
I'm trying to remember whether or not I've read any of Gaiman's other novels before, and I'm fairly certain that I haven't. I read [b:Good Omens|12067|Good Omens|Terry Pratchett|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1266659394s/12067.jpg|4110990], but that was co-written with [a:Terry Pratchett|1654|Terry Pratchett|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1235562205p2/1654.jpg], and the collaboration was genius. I know that the entire world seems to love Sandman, of course, but I'm just not a fan of graphic novels. In fact, it took me a while to realize that the Good Omens co-author and the Sandman author were one and the same.
I've certainly read some short stories, too. The most memorable, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow,_Glass,_Apples">"Snow, Glass, Apples"</a> was reprinted in an anthology I read recently. I find it disturbing, so I won't re-read it. Well-written, of course—it wouldn't be so very memorably distressing if it weren't so masterfully done! (I found the <a href="http://www.holycow.com/dreaming/stories/snow-glass-apples">text online</a> if you care to read it, but please understand that the story deals with pedophilia, necrophilia, and incest here. It is the polar opposite of all things Disney.) Snow White was never one of of my favorite fairy tales, and Gaiman definitely pushed it much farther down the list.
In any case, I don't know what I was expecting from Gaiman, but <i>American Gods</i> wasn't it. I like stories with happy endings, and within the first few chapters I was fairly sure that there wouldn't be one. Is Gaiman fundamentally opposed to joy, or is it just happiness that he doesn't allow?
The novel is epic. It is masterful. All that stuff from the big critics is dead on. The book could be used as the backbone of a mythological scavenger hunt if a teacher were willing to run a very unstructured but engaging course that way. I certainly enjoyed that aspect of it, and it made me glad that I was reading it on my iTouch so that I could look up anything I liked online at any time, no matter where I happened to be (which was almost always at home or somewhere else that had wifi access, happily).
I seldom want to see illustrations in any book, but yes, I think I would like to see good pictures of some of the characters Gaiman described in this one. On the other hand, without artwork I spent time imagining what the characters looked like based on the descriptions. I don't normally stop to do that, as such matters as seldom relevant to a plot, but these beings caught my fancy. Not enough that I would sit through an entire graphic novel, I'm afraid, but if I saw one now I might flip through it to see how the artist's renderings compare with my versions.
I'm seldom able to identify an overall Theme to the books I read. Most of them, honestly, are fluff. I'm fine with that. I read them because they entertain me. <i>American Gods</i> is different. It is entertaining, but it isn't light or fluffy in the least. It definitely has an easily identifiably Theme and Tropes and all those elements that I recall from long-ago classes, the sorts of things that put me off from my original English major because I hated tearing other author's works apart instead of writing anything original. (Now, I begin to understand that we were being taught to recognize what makes for good writing so we might have some hope of possibly creating some of it one day.)
I somewhat timidly conclude that <i>American Gods</i> is the first piece of Literature I've read in a very long time, and well worth the time spent reading it. (I find it rather amusing that it would be British Literature, despite its title, due to the author's nationality.) I'm not going to state the theme, because that would be a spoiler, and I hate putting those in reviews—but it's something that I see as a Truth, and one that needs to be stated far more often, especiallly today. It's even more interesting that it took a Brit to say it.
The book is dark, although it does have some very bright spots in it. I will acknowledge that I was going through a particularly bad time with regards to my health when I was reading it, but I still think it might be best for some people to read this one when in a fairly positive state of mind.
I've certainly read some short stories, too. The most memorable, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow,_Glass,_Apples">"Snow, Glass, Apples"</a> was reprinted in an anthology I read recently. I find it disturbing, so I won't re-read it. Well-written, of course—it wouldn't be so very memorably distressing if it weren't so masterfully done! (I found the <a href="http://www.holycow.com/dreaming/stories/snow-glass-apples">text online</a> if you care to read it, but please understand that the story deals with pedophilia, necrophilia, and incest here. It is the polar opposite of all things Disney.) Snow White was never one of of my favorite fairy tales, and Gaiman definitely pushed it much farther down the list.
In any case, I don't know what I was expecting from Gaiman, but <i>American Gods</i> wasn't it. I like stories with happy endings, and within the first few chapters I was fairly sure that there wouldn't be one. Is Gaiman fundamentally opposed to joy, or is it just happiness that he doesn't allow?
The novel is epic. It is masterful. All that stuff from the big critics is dead on. The book could be used as the backbone of a mythological scavenger hunt if a teacher were willing to run a very unstructured but engaging course that way. I certainly enjoyed that aspect of it, and it made me glad that I was reading it on my iTouch so that I could look up anything I liked online at any time, no matter where I happened to be (which was almost always at home or somewhere else that had wifi access, happily).
I seldom want to see illustrations in any book, but yes, I think I would like to see good pictures of some of the characters Gaiman described in this one. On the other hand, without artwork I spent time imagining what the characters looked like based on the descriptions. I don't normally stop to do that, as such matters as seldom relevant to a plot, but these beings caught my fancy. Not enough that I would sit through an entire graphic novel, I'm afraid, but if I saw one now I might flip through it to see how the artist's renderings compare with my versions.
I'm seldom able to identify an overall Theme to the books I read. Most of them, honestly, are fluff. I'm fine with that. I read them because they entertain me. <i>American Gods</i> is different. It is entertaining, but it isn't light or fluffy in the least. It definitely has an easily identifiably Theme and Tropes and all those elements that I recall from long-ago classes, the sorts of things that put me off from my original English major because I hated tearing other author's works apart instead of writing anything original. (Now, I begin to understand that we were being taught to recognize what makes for good writing so we might have some hope of possibly creating some of it one day.)
I somewhat timidly conclude that <i>American Gods</i> is the first piece of Literature I've read in a very long time, and well worth the time spent reading it. (I find it rather amusing that it would be British Literature, despite its title, due to the author's nationality.) I'm not going to state the theme, because that would be a spoiler, and I hate putting those in reviews—but it's something that I see as a Truth, and one that needs to be stated far more often, especiallly today. It's even more interesting that it took a Brit to say it.
The book is dark, although it does have some very bright spots in it. I will acknowledge that I was going through a particularly bad time with regards to my health when I was reading it, but I still think it might be best for some people to read this one when in a fairly positive state of mind.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Harsh Shadows in Tabletop Games
Apr 20, 2021
I am definitely a social gamer, but if there is one positive thing to come from the year 2020, it was rediscovering my love of playing solo games. So when Wonderspell reached out about previewing their newest casual solo card game, I was hooked! Taking on the role of a secret agent trying to track down an enemy spy? Yes please! Keep reading to find out more.
Disclaimer: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this preview. The pictured components might not be finalized, and could differ after a successful Kickstarter campaign. -L
Harsh Shadows is a solo card game of hand management, grid movement, and deduction where you are an agent working to collect evidence necessary to apprehend an enemy spy. To setup for a game, randomly place the 9 Location cards in a 3×3 grid. Prepare the Discovery deck as described in the rules, place 1 face-down Discovery card to the right of each Location, and place the rest of the deck off to the side of the grid. Shuffle the Confiscated Item cards and deal the appropriate number to each of the Case File cards – 3 to Evidence, 1 to Red Herring, and 4 to False Leads. The Spy card is placed on the upper-left-most Location, and your Agent card on the lower-right-most Location. Shuffle the Spy Movement cards, and the game is ready to begin! It should look similar to the picture below.
The game is played over a series of rounds in which you will be moving your Agent, performing additional actions, and then moving the Spy. The goal is to track down the Spy, with the correct evidence in hand, before the Spy is able to flee the scene. The first thing that you will do each round is to move your Agent. You may only move to a Location that is adjacent or diagonal to your current Location. Once you move to a new Location, you will draw the top Discovery card from that Location. Discovery cards will either be Items, Clues, or Bombs. Items are collected as potential Evidence, Clues are used to reveal Confiscated Items from Case Files, and Bombs force you to discard a card from your tableau. After you have moved and collected a new Discovery card, you may perform any/all of these additional actions: Use Clue Cards, Place the Tracking Bug, Track the Spy, or Use your current Location’s ability. To Use Clue cards, you will discard a number of clues in order to reveal a Confiscated Item card from a Case File. The Confiscated Items under the Evidence Case File show the 3 items you are required to have in hand to apprehend the Spy by the end of the game. The item under the Red Herring, if you have it in hand at game’s end, will cause you to automatically lose. The 4 items under the False Leads will neither help you win, nor cause you to lose – they simply offer fodder for you to discard when necessary.
Another element required to win the game is to place the Tracking Bug on the Spy. On your turn, you may place the Tracking Bug at your current Location card – if the Spy moves to the Location on a future turn, they are considered to be ‘bugged’ and the Tracking Bug is live! Twice per game, you are allowed to Track the Spy. To do so, you will look at the top card of the Spy Movement deck, and return it to the top. This just lets you see to which Location the Spy is about to move. And finally, you can use your Location’s ability. Once you have taken as many of the additional actions as you want, it is time to move the Spy. Reveal the top card of the Spy Movement deck, and move the Spy in the appropriate direction to a new Location. At the Spy’s new Location, add a Discovery card to its pile. Play continues in this manner until either you make an accusation, or the Spy escapes. In order to make an accusation, you must have Evidence cards in hand, the Spy must be bugged, and you must be at the same Location as the Spy. When you make an accusation, you will reveal any remaining cards under the Evidence and Red Herring Case Files. If you have the 3 matching Evidence cards, you win and apprehend the Spy! BUT if you have the Red Herring card, or you are missing any of the required Evidence cards, you lose. If you haven’t made an accusation in time, the Spy could escape, causing you to lose the game as well – I’ll leave those details for you to discover on your own!
In theory, Harsh Shadows seems like a neat and strategic card game, but how does it hold up in reality? Pretty well, actually! The first thing I want to talk about is how strategic it is, even with its elements of deduction. You need to collect Evidence fast in order to catch the Spy, so what’s the best plan of movement? Also, each Location has a special ability, so is there an ability you need to use now or do you want to wait a bit longer? After using a Location’s ability, it is no longer available for the rest of the game, so you have to time those uses carefully. Along those lines comes the deduction. Sure, you can try to reveal all the Confiscated Items so that you’re 100% sure that you’ve got the right Evidence. But if you don’t work fast enough, the Spy could escape. Are you willing to risk only knowing for sure what 1 piece of Evidence in order to confront the Spy before it’s too late? Or do you want to save up Clues to purchase that coveted Red Herring, to know for sure what not to keep in order to win. There’s a balance of risk with deduction, as well as a real-time element in the sense that the game has a finite amount of rounds. You’re not racing a physical clock, but once the Discovery deck runs out, the Spy is considered to be on the run, on the verge of escaping. Overall, this is a casual card game, but it has a decent amount of strategy to keep you engaged and entertained.
Let’s touch on components for a second. Obviously, this is just a card game, and this is a preview copy. As I said earlier, the final production could differ from this version, but I have to say that this preview copy is good quality. The cards are nice and thick, the artwork thematic and clean. I imagine the rules would get some final edits for slight clarifications, but for the most part the production quality is already pretty decent.
I have to say that Harsh Shadows surprised me. I’d never played a solo game with deduction elements, and it was actually quite exciting. Usually the deduction games I’ve played are based around sussing out a traitor amongst a group of people, so there is that human interaction element that can really help guide your thoughts and decisions. In Harsh Shadows, there’s nobody but yourself – you can’t look for tells in other players because the cards won’t speak to you. It feels riskier in this way because it’s more a game of odds then, instead of your ability to pick out social cues. Other people may feel differently, but I thought this was a neat twist on the deduction mechanic. If you’re looking for a strategic solo game, that plays relatively quickly and casually, I would definitely recommend checking out Harsh Shadows. It goes live on Kickstarter here in April, and I look forward to following its progress!
Disclaimer: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this preview. The pictured components might not be finalized, and could differ after a successful Kickstarter campaign. -L
Harsh Shadows is a solo card game of hand management, grid movement, and deduction where you are an agent working to collect evidence necessary to apprehend an enemy spy. To setup for a game, randomly place the 9 Location cards in a 3×3 grid. Prepare the Discovery deck as described in the rules, place 1 face-down Discovery card to the right of each Location, and place the rest of the deck off to the side of the grid. Shuffle the Confiscated Item cards and deal the appropriate number to each of the Case File cards – 3 to Evidence, 1 to Red Herring, and 4 to False Leads. The Spy card is placed on the upper-left-most Location, and your Agent card on the lower-right-most Location. Shuffle the Spy Movement cards, and the game is ready to begin! It should look similar to the picture below.
The game is played over a series of rounds in which you will be moving your Agent, performing additional actions, and then moving the Spy. The goal is to track down the Spy, with the correct evidence in hand, before the Spy is able to flee the scene. The first thing that you will do each round is to move your Agent. You may only move to a Location that is adjacent or diagonal to your current Location. Once you move to a new Location, you will draw the top Discovery card from that Location. Discovery cards will either be Items, Clues, or Bombs. Items are collected as potential Evidence, Clues are used to reveal Confiscated Items from Case Files, and Bombs force you to discard a card from your tableau. After you have moved and collected a new Discovery card, you may perform any/all of these additional actions: Use Clue Cards, Place the Tracking Bug, Track the Spy, or Use your current Location’s ability. To Use Clue cards, you will discard a number of clues in order to reveal a Confiscated Item card from a Case File. The Confiscated Items under the Evidence Case File show the 3 items you are required to have in hand to apprehend the Spy by the end of the game. The item under the Red Herring, if you have it in hand at game’s end, will cause you to automatically lose. The 4 items under the False Leads will neither help you win, nor cause you to lose – they simply offer fodder for you to discard when necessary.
Another element required to win the game is to place the Tracking Bug on the Spy. On your turn, you may place the Tracking Bug at your current Location card – if the Spy moves to the Location on a future turn, they are considered to be ‘bugged’ and the Tracking Bug is live! Twice per game, you are allowed to Track the Spy. To do so, you will look at the top card of the Spy Movement deck, and return it to the top. This just lets you see to which Location the Spy is about to move. And finally, you can use your Location’s ability. Once you have taken as many of the additional actions as you want, it is time to move the Spy. Reveal the top card of the Spy Movement deck, and move the Spy in the appropriate direction to a new Location. At the Spy’s new Location, add a Discovery card to its pile. Play continues in this manner until either you make an accusation, or the Spy escapes. In order to make an accusation, you must have Evidence cards in hand, the Spy must be bugged, and you must be at the same Location as the Spy. When you make an accusation, you will reveal any remaining cards under the Evidence and Red Herring Case Files. If you have the 3 matching Evidence cards, you win and apprehend the Spy! BUT if you have the Red Herring card, or you are missing any of the required Evidence cards, you lose. If you haven’t made an accusation in time, the Spy could escape, causing you to lose the game as well – I’ll leave those details for you to discover on your own!
In theory, Harsh Shadows seems like a neat and strategic card game, but how does it hold up in reality? Pretty well, actually! The first thing I want to talk about is how strategic it is, even with its elements of deduction. You need to collect Evidence fast in order to catch the Spy, so what’s the best plan of movement? Also, each Location has a special ability, so is there an ability you need to use now or do you want to wait a bit longer? After using a Location’s ability, it is no longer available for the rest of the game, so you have to time those uses carefully. Along those lines comes the deduction. Sure, you can try to reveal all the Confiscated Items so that you’re 100% sure that you’ve got the right Evidence. But if you don’t work fast enough, the Spy could escape. Are you willing to risk only knowing for sure what 1 piece of Evidence in order to confront the Spy before it’s too late? Or do you want to save up Clues to purchase that coveted Red Herring, to know for sure what not to keep in order to win. There’s a balance of risk with deduction, as well as a real-time element in the sense that the game has a finite amount of rounds. You’re not racing a physical clock, but once the Discovery deck runs out, the Spy is considered to be on the run, on the verge of escaping. Overall, this is a casual card game, but it has a decent amount of strategy to keep you engaged and entertained.
Let’s touch on components for a second. Obviously, this is just a card game, and this is a preview copy. As I said earlier, the final production could differ from this version, but I have to say that this preview copy is good quality. The cards are nice and thick, the artwork thematic and clean. I imagine the rules would get some final edits for slight clarifications, but for the most part the production quality is already pretty decent.
I have to say that Harsh Shadows surprised me. I’d never played a solo game with deduction elements, and it was actually quite exciting. Usually the deduction games I’ve played are based around sussing out a traitor amongst a group of people, so there is that human interaction element that can really help guide your thoughts and decisions. In Harsh Shadows, there’s nobody but yourself – you can’t look for tells in other players because the cards won’t speak to you. It feels riskier in this way because it’s more a game of odds then, instead of your ability to pick out social cues. Other people may feel differently, but I thought this was a neat twist on the deduction mechanic. If you’re looking for a strategic solo game, that plays relatively quickly and casually, I would definitely recommend checking out Harsh Shadows. It goes live on Kickstarter here in April, and I look forward to following its progress!
Cyn Armistead (14 KP) rated Carniepunk in Books
Mar 1, 2018
As soon as I read about this collection on Kevin Hearne's Facebook, I knew I would be buying it. I don't care for carnivals at all, and every story will be related to one in some way - but there was just no way I was going to miss an Atticus and Oberon story! I even pre-ordered the book on Amazon, the first time I've ever done that. It was SO hard not to skip right ahead and read Hearne's contribution the moment the book was in my hot little hands, but I managed some discipline.
Rob Thurman's "Painted Love" opens the book. It is dark, but to be fair it isn't quite as dark as the only Thurman novel I've read, from the Cal Leandros series. I rather liked the twist. I adored the fiercely protective older sister, especially the way she is described. I'll rate this one at three.
I don't believe I've ever read anything by Delilah S. Dawson before, certainly not anything in the Blud universe, so I had no idea what to expect from "The Three Lives of Lydia." It was a far darker story than I would generally choose to read. I found the male love interest highly appealing. The portrayal of mental illness was horrific. I found it interesting that Dawson is an Atlantan as well as a fellow geeky mom, but I'm sure that I've never heard of her before. She does have a book coming out next year that looks promising, so I may give it a read. This one's a two.
Then there is the Iron Druid story! "The Demon Barker of Wheat Street" is set a few books back in the series' chronology (two weeks after "Two Ravens and One Crow"), so Granuaille isn't yet a full Druid. To make things even more interesting, Atticus accidentally offended the local elemental many years ago, so his magic doesn't work as well as usual in the area. The story isn't vital to the series, and knowledge of the series isn't necessary for enjoying it. Hearne's fans definitely won't want to miss it, though, and it could be used as a nice little taste of his style for new readers. Definitely a five.
I couldn't make it through "The Sweeter the Juice" by Mark Henry. Zombies are disgusting, but I was way squicked before the first walking dead even appeared on the scene. A one, just because there are no zeroes.
Jaye Wells is another new-to-me author, as far as I can remember at the moment. I didn't really like "The Werewife," to be honest. There was no joy anywhere in this story. There wasn't even a hint that perhaps the couple in the story had been happy together at one time. Both of them seemed pretty miserable, and I didn't like the way it ended. It didn't seem like there was any way to give them a happy ending, but that ending didn't feel "true." It gets a two, and that's only to set it apart from the previous story.
"The Cold Girl" by Rachel Caine is about an abusive teen relationship. Oh, and vampires. I'm not a Caine fan, but this story was better than some of her other work. Again, too dark for my tastes. If half stars were possible, it would have one. I'll be nice and round up to three.
The name Allison Pang sounds familiar, so maybe I've read something by her in the past. If I did, I'm certain that it wasn't set in the same world as "A Duet With Darkness," which says it is an Abby Sinclair story. I found the main character to be an annoying, immature twit, but I'm a sucker for fiction with musical influences. The music is well-done here. I don't know if I will read anything more by Ms. Pang or not - I suppose that depends on whether or not her other work has better characters and is also musical. This one gets a four.
I found "Recession of the Divine" by Hillary Jacques fascinating. The Greek inspiration was unusual. I didn't really buy the customers being quite so unquestioning of Ophelia's state, but it wasn't a major complaint overall. I was highly disappointed to find nothing but a credit in another anthology for her. But! Reading the author profiles at the end of the book pays off, because that's how I learned that she also writes as Regan Summers. Now her works published under that name are on my to-read shelf. Another five.
Jennifer Estep's "Parlor Tricks" was actually released free on Amazon a little while back to promote Carniepunk, so it was the first story I read. I enjoy the Elemental Assassin series in general, and this story is no exception. Again, knowledge of the series is not required to understand the story, and the story is not vital to the series. It is a nice little sample, though, and I enjoyed seeing Gin and Bria having a sisterly outing. I'm probably biased, but it gets a five.
I liked Kelly Meding's "Freak House" a lot, and her name sounded familiar, but the story was set in the "Strays" universe, which I was certain I had never heard of before. I actually stirred myself to look her up, and learned that I've had one of her books on my to-read list for ages, and Strays is a new series she's just starting. Djinn, werewolves, vampires, pixies, harpies, leprechauns, skinwalkers, and more, some "out" to humans, some living hidden - what's not to love? This one gets a four.
Nicole Peeler us yet another author who sounded vaguely familiar to me, and yep, there is one of her books on my to-read list (yes, it is massive, why do you ask?). It is, in fact, the first of the Jane True books, and "The Inside Man" is set in that world. Peeler's writing style dies not flow for me, but I liked Capitola Jones and her friends Shar and Moo. As clowns are indisputably evil, I had little to complain about in the story. It gets a three.
Succubus (former?) Jezzie is the main character in Jackie Kessler's story "A Chance in Hell." Obviously, the story is set her Hell on Earth series. I had to look that up, though, because while I know you're shocked, her name did not ring any bells for me. I don't actually have ALL the urban fantasy books on my to-read or read lists! The piece opens with a confusing remark about a demon eating Jezebel's face, when that definitely is not the anatomy in question. If that's a common euphemism, it is wholly new to me. Within the next couple of pages there are multiple references to the fact that she has fallen in love with a human since becoming mortal, but absolutely no explanation of how she would reconcile sex with an incubus with her human love. As much as I would prefer that it were not the case, the default assumption in our society is that people are monogamous. Therefore, when there is a deviation from that norm, the reader expects - something. Is it supposed to demonstrate that the fictional society is different? Is the character in an explicitly non-monogamous relationship? Is her love unrequited? Is the guy dead? Do demons not count? Is she just a skanky ho? Then this great love isn't mentioned again for the rest of the story, so none of the questions raised are answered. Oh. There is, in fact, a plot here, but I was so annoyed by that stuff that I almost failed to notice it. Demonic circus, yo. The whole demon thing reminds me too much of another series I've read in the past. I can't even remember the author's name, much less the title, right now, but Kessler's work feels derivative. She gets a two.
Next up is Kelly Gay - Hey look! Another author whose name I don't recognize! - with "Hell's Menagerie," a Charlie Madigan short story. Okay, this series is set in an alternate Atlanta. As an Atlanta girl, that certainly gets my attention. And Charlie is a single mother. I don't recall any other single mothers in the UF world right off. (Kate Daniels doesn't quite count, because she adopted her daughter as a teen. Although it is interesting to note that Kate is also Atlanta-based.) I was ready to like this one, based solely on what I knew of the series. Then there was a grammatical error on the second page of the story that set my teeth on edge, one which could not be chalked up to a character's voice. Add in the fact that we get a fast, "and also, Jim" style introduction to Charlie (who isn't even present in the story!), Rex, and Emma in less than two pages, and I am officially annoyed. It isn't an old matinee movie, so surely that information could have been worked in a little more naturally? Emma won me over. Mostly. There's some, "Not another super-gifted kid," reaction, but I guess if the mother is supposed to be all that it's to be expected that the daughter might be special, too. Hmm. A three.
The last piece is Seaman McGuire's "Daughter of the Midway, the Mermaid, and the Open, Lonely, Sea." Is that title a mouthful, or what? It has the feel of a Toby Daye story, although it isn't subtitled as such, and there are no fae so maybe it isn't in that universe at all. As there are other stories in the book that are set in the same world as their author's series, yet not marked in any way, lack of a subtitle can't be taken as a negative indicator, though. In any case, the story is poignant, which I've come to expect from McGuire. I didn't really like it, but I didn't dislike it, either. I couldn't "feel" Ada in any true sense. I have the same problem with Toby. A three at best.
Overall, the book was decent. The ratings only average out to 3.21, but I'm very glad to have read the stories by Hearne and Estep. Discovering Jacques/Summers was absolutely worthwhile. I really hate that I read as much of Henry's story as I did. If I could delete that from my memory, it would probably raise the rating for everything else.
Rob Thurman's "Painted Love" opens the book. It is dark, but to be fair it isn't quite as dark as the only Thurman novel I've read, from the Cal Leandros series. I rather liked the twist. I adored the fiercely protective older sister, especially the way she is described. I'll rate this one at three.
I don't believe I've ever read anything by Delilah S. Dawson before, certainly not anything in the Blud universe, so I had no idea what to expect from "The Three Lives of Lydia." It was a far darker story than I would generally choose to read. I found the male love interest highly appealing. The portrayal of mental illness was horrific. I found it interesting that Dawson is an Atlantan as well as a fellow geeky mom, but I'm sure that I've never heard of her before. She does have a book coming out next year that looks promising, so I may give it a read. This one's a two.
Then there is the Iron Druid story! "The Demon Barker of Wheat Street" is set a few books back in the series' chronology (two weeks after "Two Ravens and One Crow"), so Granuaille isn't yet a full Druid. To make things even more interesting, Atticus accidentally offended the local elemental many years ago, so his magic doesn't work as well as usual in the area. The story isn't vital to the series, and knowledge of the series isn't necessary for enjoying it. Hearne's fans definitely won't want to miss it, though, and it could be used as a nice little taste of his style for new readers. Definitely a five.
I couldn't make it through "The Sweeter the Juice" by Mark Henry. Zombies are disgusting, but I was way squicked before the first walking dead even appeared on the scene. A one, just because there are no zeroes.
Jaye Wells is another new-to-me author, as far as I can remember at the moment. I didn't really like "The Werewife," to be honest. There was no joy anywhere in this story. There wasn't even a hint that perhaps the couple in the story had been happy together at one time. Both of them seemed pretty miserable, and I didn't like the way it ended. It didn't seem like there was any way to give them a happy ending, but that ending didn't feel "true." It gets a two, and that's only to set it apart from the previous story.
"The Cold Girl" by Rachel Caine is about an abusive teen relationship. Oh, and vampires. I'm not a Caine fan, but this story was better than some of her other work. Again, too dark for my tastes. If half stars were possible, it would have one. I'll be nice and round up to three.
The name Allison Pang sounds familiar, so maybe I've read something by her in the past. If I did, I'm certain that it wasn't set in the same world as "A Duet With Darkness," which says it is an Abby Sinclair story. I found the main character to be an annoying, immature twit, but I'm a sucker for fiction with musical influences. The music is well-done here. I don't know if I will read anything more by Ms. Pang or not - I suppose that depends on whether or not her other work has better characters and is also musical. This one gets a four.
I found "Recession of the Divine" by Hillary Jacques fascinating. The Greek inspiration was unusual. I didn't really buy the customers being quite so unquestioning of Ophelia's state, but it wasn't a major complaint overall. I was highly disappointed to find nothing but a credit in another anthology for her. But! Reading the author profiles at the end of the book pays off, because that's how I learned that she also writes as Regan Summers. Now her works published under that name are on my to-read shelf. Another five.
Jennifer Estep's "Parlor Tricks" was actually released free on Amazon a little while back to promote Carniepunk, so it was the first story I read. I enjoy the Elemental Assassin series in general, and this story is no exception. Again, knowledge of the series is not required to understand the story, and the story is not vital to the series. It is a nice little sample, though, and I enjoyed seeing Gin and Bria having a sisterly outing. I'm probably biased, but it gets a five.
I liked Kelly Meding's "Freak House" a lot, and her name sounded familiar, but the story was set in the "Strays" universe, which I was certain I had never heard of before. I actually stirred myself to look her up, and learned that I've had one of her books on my to-read list for ages, and Strays is a new series she's just starting. Djinn, werewolves, vampires, pixies, harpies, leprechauns, skinwalkers, and more, some "out" to humans, some living hidden - what's not to love? This one gets a four.
Nicole Peeler us yet another author who sounded vaguely familiar to me, and yep, there is one of her books on my to-read list (yes, it is massive, why do you ask?). It is, in fact, the first of the Jane True books, and "The Inside Man" is set in that world. Peeler's writing style dies not flow for me, but I liked Capitola Jones and her friends Shar and Moo. As clowns are indisputably evil, I had little to complain about in the story. It gets a three.
Succubus (former?) Jezzie is the main character in Jackie Kessler's story "A Chance in Hell." Obviously, the story is set her Hell on Earth series. I had to look that up, though, because while I know you're shocked, her name did not ring any bells for me. I don't actually have ALL the urban fantasy books on my to-read or read lists! The piece opens with a confusing remark about a demon eating Jezebel's face, when that definitely is not the anatomy in question. If that's a common euphemism, it is wholly new to me. Within the next couple of pages there are multiple references to the fact that she has fallen in love with a human since becoming mortal, but absolutely no explanation of how she would reconcile sex with an incubus with her human love. As much as I would prefer that it were not the case, the default assumption in our society is that people are monogamous. Therefore, when there is a deviation from that norm, the reader expects - something. Is it supposed to demonstrate that the fictional society is different? Is the character in an explicitly non-monogamous relationship? Is her love unrequited? Is the guy dead? Do demons not count? Is she just a skanky ho? Then this great love isn't mentioned again for the rest of the story, so none of the questions raised are answered. Oh. There is, in fact, a plot here, but I was so annoyed by that stuff that I almost failed to notice it. Demonic circus, yo. The whole demon thing reminds me too much of another series I've read in the past. I can't even remember the author's name, much less the title, right now, but Kessler's work feels derivative. She gets a two.
Next up is Kelly Gay - Hey look! Another author whose name I don't recognize! - with "Hell's Menagerie," a Charlie Madigan short story. Okay, this series is set in an alternate Atlanta. As an Atlanta girl, that certainly gets my attention. And Charlie is a single mother. I don't recall any other single mothers in the UF world right off. (Kate Daniels doesn't quite count, because she adopted her daughter as a teen. Although it is interesting to note that Kate is also Atlanta-based.) I was ready to like this one, based solely on what I knew of the series. Then there was a grammatical error on the second page of the story that set my teeth on edge, one which could not be chalked up to a character's voice. Add in the fact that we get a fast, "and also, Jim" style introduction to Charlie (who isn't even present in the story!), Rex, and Emma in less than two pages, and I am officially annoyed. It isn't an old matinee movie, so surely that information could have been worked in a little more naturally? Emma won me over. Mostly. There's some, "Not another super-gifted kid," reaction, but I guess if the mother is supposed to be all that it's to be expected that the daughter might be special, too. Hmm. A three.
The last piece is Seaman McGuire's "Daughter of the Midway, the Mermaid, and the Open, Lonely, Sea." Is that title a mouthful, or what? It has the feel of a Toby Daye story, although it isn't subtitled as such, and there are no fae so maybe it isn't in that universe at all. As there are other stories in the book that are set in the same world as their author's series, yet not marked in any way, lack of a subtitle can't be taken as a negative indicator, though. In any case, the story is poignant, which I've come to expect from McGuire. I didn't really like it, but I didn't dislike it, either. I couldn't "feel" Ada in any true sense. I have the same problem with Toby. A three at best.
Overall, the book was decent. The ratings only average out to 3.21, but I'm very glad to have read the stories by Hearne and Estep. Discovering Jacques/Summers was absolutely worthwhile. I really hate that I read as much of Henry's story as I did. If I could delete that from my memory, it would probably raise the rating for everything else.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Shadow Kingdoms of Valeria in Tabletop Games
Jan 5, 2022
As you’ve read in our previous reviews, we are BIG fans of the Valeria-verse games. Whether we have to recruit adventurers for quests, build a thriving village, or traverse the lands to protect its people from various Monsters, we are all about this realm. For this newest installation in the series, the tables have been flipped on us – because doesn’t it get tiring always being the ‘good guys’? Shadow Kingdoms of Valeria allows players to embrace their inner dark side and fight back against these ‘heroes’ to reclaim dominance over the lands. Sometimes, it just feels good to be bad!
Shadow Kingdoms of Valeria is a game of worker placement and dice drafting/pool building in which players are trying to amass the most VP by the end of the game. Played over a series of rounds, players will take turns moving their Warden, drafting dice, and performing various actions. To setup, place the main board in the center of the play area. Shuffle and place the Battle Plan deck, Award cards, and Champion decks in their corresponding locations. Fill the dice bag with the requisite number of dice for your player count, and draw/roll/place the listed number of dice in each of the 5 Shrines (areas) of the main game board. A specified number of Gems are placed in the appropriate Shrine, and each player places their score marker on the 0 space of the score track. Each player receives a player board, random Campaign Map, Warden and Conquest Markers in their chosen color, as well as markers for Gold, Influence, and Magic. Choose a starting player, and the game is ready to begin! The setup for a 2-player game is pictured below.
On your turn, you will move your Warden from its current location to one of the other 5 locations on the board. Whichever location you choose dictates what actions you may take this turn, and are as follows: Gem Shrine, Magic Shrine, Champions Shrine, Gold Shrine, Tactics Shrine, or your own Camp. When placing your Warden at any location (with the exception of your own Camp), you will first select one of the dice found at that Shrine and place it on an open space of your player board. You may not move to a Shrine if it has no dice! After taking a die, you may perform the action associated with your chosen location. The Gem Shrine allows you to take 1 Gem, which can be used to manipulate dice in future turns. At the Magic Shrine, you may gain 2 Magic or claim 1 Award card. Magic can be spent in the game to manipulate dice or partially refresh the Champion/Battle Plan decks, and Award cards give you VP and can be claimed once you have met their requisite conditions. The Champions Shrine grants you the opportunity to buy a Champion card. Champions can provide either Immediate, Ongoing, or End-Game effects. The Gold Shrine allows you to gain Gold (used to purchase Champions and Battle Plans), and the Tactics Shrine allows you to buy a Battle Plan to be placed in your reserve on your player board.
The final location, your own Camp, is on your player board. When you place your Warden here, you are committing to perform a Battle. To do so, select which Battle Plan you wish to complete (either from your reserve, or pay Gold to buy directly from the Battle Plan line), and place it on your player board. All Battle Plans have certain dice requirements that need to be met in order to be completed. Select and manipulate which dice you want to use for your chosen Battle Plan, and add up your total Strength. Compare your Strength to your Influence marker – the lower of the two will be your total strength for this battle. Check the chart on your player board to find the number of VP you earn for the total Strength level achieved in the Battle, and immediately move your score marker the appropriate number of spaces. After performing a Battle, you get to level up your player board. During the game setup, each player receives 10 Conquest Markers that are housed on their player board, blocking/locking certain bonuses, abilities, and dice slots. After a Battle, you may remove 1 Conquest Marker from your player board (granting you a new bonus/ability for future turns), and place it on your Campaign Map. Campaign Maps have nine different slots that will grant you differing rewards. Once you have moved your Conquest Marker, return all dice used in this Battle to the dice bag, and move your completed Battle Plan card to the side of your player board. Your turn then ends and the game moves to the next player.
The game continues in this fashion, with players moving their Wardens, collecting dice, and performing actions, until one player has completed their 7th Battle Plan. The round continues until all players have had an equal number of turns, and then players add up any remaining VP. The player who has accumulated the most VP is then declared the winner!
It really should come as no surprise to you that I love this game. Beyond just the Valeria-verse theme, though, the gameplay is more strategic than I originally thought. Yes, it’s a worker placement and dice drafting game, but the underlying strategy is really what makes it great. You see, the dice in the game have 3 different elements that affect your strategy. First is the color: each color matches a Faction, and different Factions are required to complete specific Battle Plans. Next, is the actual die value: you want higher numbers to get a higher Strength, which equates to more VP when completing Battle Plans. And lastly is the discount: depending on the face value of the die, you will receive a discount towards purchasing Champions, Battle Plans, or collecting gold. The lower the face value of the die, the higher the discount, and vice versa. So yeah, maybe taking a 1 value die won’t really help in the Battle Plan, but the amount of gold it allows you to collect might be worth it. You have those 3 things to consider for dice alone! And that doesn’t even take into account which Champions you might want to buy, or what Battle Plans would be beneficial to you.
Another neat strategic element are the Conquest Markers on your player board. Everyone starts with the same number/placement of Conquest Markers, but as the game progresses, players may resolve them in various ways. There is no ‘correct’ order in which to move Conquest Markers – it all comes down to your strategy. Maybe you want more dice right off the bat, so you remove those first. Or maybe you want to be able to reserve more than 1 Battle Plan at a time, so you go for that one. It’s going to be different for every player, and it’ll be different every game. It all depends on the layout of the main board, and which dice and actions are available to you at any given time. There are so many strategic considerations throughout the entire game, and it keeps all players actively engaged.
Components. No surprise here, but the component quality is great, which is to be expected of Daily Magic Games. The cardboard is all thick and chunky, the wooden tokens nice and sturdy, and the cards are easy to manipulate and clear to read. The artwork is, in my opinion, one of the greatest things about the Valeria games, and Shadow Kingdoms is no exception. When getting the game set up, sometimes I find myself just looking through the cards and really appreciating the artwork. So all in all, great production quality here.
Does Shadow Kingdoms of Valeria climb the ranks to my favorite Valeria game? Not quite, but I have to say honestly that it’s getting there. The gameplay is solid and straightforward, the strategic implications are vast, and the components make the game feel awesome. And to get the Monster perspective in this universe is a neat twist that I otherwise would not really have thought of. If you’re a fan of the Valeria games, definitely check this one out. Or if you’re just a fan of worker placement, with some unique elements of drafting, then I highly recommend this one as well. Purple Phoenix Games gives it a mighty 5 / 6. Check it out. I don’t think you’ll be disappointed.
Shadow Kingdoms of Valeria is a game of worker placement and dice drafting/pool building in which players are trying to amass the most VP by the end of the game. Played over a series of rounds, players will take turns moving their Warden, drafting dice, and performing various actions. To setup, place the main board in the center of the play area. Shuffle and place the Battle Plan deck, Award cards, and Champion decks in their corresponding locations. Fill the dice bag with the requisite number of dice for your player count, and draw/roll/place the listed number of dice in each of the 5 Shrines (areas) of the main game board. A specified number of Gems are placed in the appropriate Shrine, and each player places their score marker on the 0 space of the score track. Each player receives a player board, random Campaign Map, Warden and Conquest Markers in their chosen color, as well as markers for Gold, Influence, and Magic. Choose a starting player, and the game is ready to begin! The setup for a 2-player game is pictured below.
On your turn, you will move your Warden from its current location to one of the other 5 locations on the board. Whichever location you choose dictates what actions you may take this turn, and are as follows: Gem Shrine, Magic Shrine, Champions Shrine, Gold Shrine, Tactics Shrine, or your own Camp. When placing your Warden at any location (with the exception of your own Camp), you will first select one of the dice found at that Shrine and place it on an open space of your player board. You may not move to a Shrine if it has no dice! After taking a die, you may perform the action associated with your chosen location. The Gem Shrine allows you to take 1 Gem, which can be used to manipulate dice in future turns. At the Magic Shrine, you may gain 2 Magic or claim 1 Award card. Magic can be spent in the game to manipulate dice or partially refresh the Champion/Battle Plan decks, and Award cards give you VP and can be claimed once you have met their requisite conditions. The Champions Shrine grants you the opportunity to buy a Champion card. Champions can provide either Immediate, Ongoing, or End-Game effects. The Gold Shrine allows you to gain Gold (used to purchase Champions and Battle Plans), and the Tactics Shrine allows you to buy a Battle Plan to be placed in your reserve on your player board.
The final location, your own Camp, is on your player board. When you place your Warden here, you are committing to perform a Battle. To do so, select which Battle Plan you wish to complete (either from your reserve, or pay Gold to buy directly from the Battle Plan line), and place it on your player board. All Battle Plans have certain dice requirements that need to be met in order to be completed. Select and manipulate which dice you want to use for your chosen Battle Plan, and add up your total Strength. Compare your Strength to your Influence marker – the lower of the two will be your total strength for this battle. Check the chart on your player board to find the number of VP you earn for the total Strength level achieved in the Battle, and immediately move your score marker the appropriate number of spaces. After performing a Battle, you get to level up your player board. During the game setup, each player receives 10 Conquest Markers that are housed on their player board, blocking/locking certain bonuses, abilities, and dice slots. After a Battle, you may remove 1 Conquest Marker from your player board (granting you a new bonus/ability for future turns), and place it on your Campaign Map. Campaign Maps have nine different slots that will grant you differing rewards. Once you have moved your Conquest Marker, return all dice used in this Battle to the dice bag, and move your completed Battle Plan card to the side of your player board. Your turn then ends and the game moves to the next player.
The game continues in this fashion, with players moving their Wardens, collecting dice, and performing actions, until one player has completed their 7th Battle Plan. The round continues until all players have had an equal number of turns, and then players add up any remaining VP. The player who has accumulated the most VP is then declared the winner!
It really should come as no surprise to you that I love this game. Beyond just the Valeria-verse theme, though, the gameplay is more strategic than I originally thought. Yes, it’s a worker placement and dice drafting game, but the underlying strategy is really what makes it great. You see, the dice in the game have 3 different elements that affect your strategy. First is the color: each color matches a Faction, and different Factions are required to complete specific Battle Plans. Next, is the actual die value: you want higher numbers to get a higher Strength, which equates to more VP when completing Battle Plans. And lastly is the discount: depending on the face value of the die, you will receive a discount towards purchasing Champions, Battle Plans, or collecting gold. The lower the face value of the die, the higher the discount, and vice versa. So yeah, maybe taking a 1 value die won’t really help in the Battle Plan, but the amount of gold it allows you to collect might be worth it. You have those 3 things to consider for dice alone! And that doesn’t even take into account which Champions you might want to buy, or what Battle Plans would be beneficial to you.
Another neat strategic element are the Conquest Markers on your player board. Everyone starts with the same number/placement of Conquest Markers, but as the game progresses, players may resolve them in various ways. There is no ‘correct’ order in which to move Conquest Markers – it all comes down to your strategy. Maybe you want more dice right off the bat, so you remove those first. Or maybe you want to be able to reserve more than 1 Battle Plan at a time, so you go for that one. It’s going to be different for every player, and it’ll be different every game. It all depends on the layout of the main board, and which dice and actions are available to you at any given time. There are so many strategic considerations throughout the entire game, and it keeps all players actively engaged.
Components. No surprise here, but the component quality is great, which is to be expected of Daily Magic Games. The cardboard is all thick and chunky, the wooden tokens nice and sturdy, and the cards are easy to manipulate and clear to read. The artwork is, in my opinion, one of the greatest things about the Valeria games, and Shadow Kingdoms is no exception. When getting the game set up, sometimes I find myself just looking through the cards and really appreciating the artwork. So all in all, great production quality here.
Does Shadow Kingdoms of Valeria climb the ranks to my favorite Valeria game? Not quite, but I have to say honestly that it’s getting there. The gameplay is solid and straightforward, the strategic implications are vast, and the components make the game feel awesome. And to get the Monster perspective in this universe is a neat twist that I otherwise would not really have thought of. If you’re a fan of the Valeria games, definitely check this one out. Or if you’re just a fan of worker placement, with some unique elements of drafting, then I highly recommend this one as well. Purple Phoenix Games gives it a mighty 5 / 6. Check it out. I don’t think you’ll be disappointed.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Asator in Tabletop Games
Oct 20, 2020
Vikings. Raiding and pillaging and dragon riding. That’s about the extent of my knowledge of the ancient(?) civilization that so many people go bonkers romanticizing. Okay, so they didn’t REALLY ride dragons, but How To Train Your Dragon is great and the game I am previewing today also includes dragons, so I’m rolling with it. But how does this Viking game play and compare to its inspirations?
Asator is a head to head (or teams) game of troop maneuvering and attacking using 30 identical miniatures on each side. Each mini acts as a platoon of three different kinds of armies, plus a Chieftan, Master, Wizard, and Dragon that all have different special abilities. The winner of Asator is the player who can eliminate their opponent’s leadership (Chieftan, Master, and Wizard).
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I know that the final components will be slightly different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, as there are just too many. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup, place the battle mat on the table, and then players will place groups of minis on the field within the closest three rows of hexes in alternating turn fashion. Players will also take the two large Battle Sheets and a dry-erase marker to keep track of every one of their minis’ stats throughout the game. Each player will also choose five of the given 10 Wizard spell cards to use for the game, and each spell may only be used once during the game. Once all army minis are placed, the first player will move up to 20 units on the battlefield and attack opponent armies if possible. The game is now on and decimation is the goal.
Each mini type corresponds to a different group of armies, plus the dragon and three leader pieces. All armies of the same type have the same stats for movement, hit points (HP), armor rating (AR), and attack weapons. Also each mini is labeled on the bottom so keeping track of each unit is made a little easier. Obviously the leader pieces are more powerful and each has a special style of combat. The Master wields an axe and shield (which is broken after one hit) to increase AR and dole out the damage. The Chieftan wields a spear, twin axes, a bow, and a shield. Similar to the Master, the Chieftan’s shield is broken after an attack against him, and his spear is broken after a missed attack. The Wizard is not at all strong in melee, but has powerful spells at his disposal to be used for the disposal of enemy units.
Besides the leadership trio each side also brings a Dragon to the battle. Dragons can move slowly by land, but quite quickly by air. Once in the air he or she may deliver a Fire Blast that causes huge damage, but then the Dragon must ground themselves to regain stamina for flight. In addition, each player will have access to Cavalry, Infantry, and Bowmen, each with their own stat blocks and abilities.
This is all well and good, and is somewhat similar to the strategy one would use in Chess. Combat, however, is much more involved than that of simply moving into an enemy’s space and automatically overtaking it. In Asator combat victory is decided via a VERY pared down version of D&D combat. It uses a simplified d20-based attack versus the enemy Armor Rating (AR). Rolls over the AR of the enemy is a success and damage is dealt. Done. Some attacks require a roll of 2d6 for damage amount, like spells and Dragon attacks. That said, combat is decided using 1d20 and 2d6. That’s it.
The game continues in turns where the first player will move their pieces and attack, and then the next player will do the same until one player has defeated all three enemy leaders and earned the title of Asator – Master of War.
Components. Again, we were provided a prototype copy of the game, but most of the components are what will be received when the game is backed or purchased. That said, the game utilizes a cloth battle mat that folds into the box, four dry-erase Battle Sheets, two dry-erase markers, dice for both players, Wizard spell cards for both players, and 60 miniatures. The battle mat is great fabric quality with minimal art that doesn’t get in the way of play (much appreciated). The dry-erase components are good. The card quality is fine. The dice are black and white dice to correspond with players using the black or white minis, and are of normal quality. The minis are great and I enjoyed playing with them.
Now for the negatives of what is included in the box. First, the art. Now, there is very minimal art used throughout the game. It’s just not a focal point, and it shows in the game’s production. I found the sketch on the cover of the rule book (which is the same as the watermark on the Battle Mat) to be very cool, but the box cover art leaves some to be desired. Similarly, the Wizard spell cards use very generic-looking art icons with text for explanation. I am most certainly being hyper-critical here because flashy art on these components are certainly not needed to play or highly enjoy the game. For my tastes, though, I would like to see more polished art on these pieces as the art is so sparse throughout.
But how does the game feel? It’s truly quite good. I don’t play many wargames or 1v1 skirmish style games, so to present me with something like this and for me to enjoy it as much as I have has to be a sign of something good. Again, I am no strategic war general, but being able to employ different strategies every game is exciting. Testing out the different combinations of Wizard spell cards is fun for a tinkerer. And, of course, playing with a bunch of minis is always good fun.
There is a good game here, and I absolutely love the combination of Chess maneuverability with the simplified RPG d20 battle system. It works well in a game like this where each piece owns a stat block of which players will need to be mindful. I didn’t quite mention my favorite part of the rules yet either: natural 20 on a combat roll equals insta-death. Yes, even to the Dragon, which happened in my very first game. THAT is a cool rule that tripped up tactics quite often in my plays.
All in all this game is a great example of combining a couple sets of mechanics that wouldn’t be expected and creating a great gaming experience from them. I invite you to back the game on Kickstarter when it goes live if you are looking for that special game that is unlike many others you currently own. If the art were spruced up a bit I would be fawning all over it, but even without impressive art I still find I have the twitch in my brain to play it again and again. I wonder how many natural 20s I can roll in a game. Great, now I want to set it up and see…
Asator is a head to head (or teams) game of troop maneuvering and attacking using 30 identical miniatures on each side. Each mini acts as a platoon of three different kinds of armies, plus a Chieftan, Master, Wizard, and Dragon that all have different special abilities. The winner of Asator is the player who can eliminate their opponent’s leadership (Chieftan, Master, and Wizard).
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I know that the final components will be slightly different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, as there are just too many. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup, place the battle mat on the table, and then players will place groups of minis on the field within the closest three rows of hexes in alternating turn fashion. Players will also take the two large Battle Sheets and a dry-erase marker to keep track of every one of their minis’ stats throughout the game. Each player will also choose five of the given 10 Wizard spell cards to use for the game, and each spell may only be used once during the game. Once all army minis are placed, the first player will move up to 20 units on the battlefield and attack opponent armies if possible. The game is now on and decimation is the goal.
Each mini type corresponds to a different group of armies, plus the dragon and three leader pieces. All armies of the same type have the same stats for movement, hit points (HP), armor rating (AR), and attack weapons. Also each mini is labeled on the bottom so keeping track of each unit is made a little easier. Obviously the leader pieces are more powerful and each has a special style of combat. The Master wields an axe and shield (which is broken after one hit) to increase AR and dole out the damage. The Chieftan wields a spear, twin axes, a bow, and a shield. Similar to the Master, the Chieftan’s shield is broken after an attack against him, and his spear is broken after a missed attack. The Wizard is not at all strong in melee, but has powerful spells at his disposal to be used for the disposal of enemy units.
Besides the leadership trio each side also brings a Dragon to the battle. Dragons can move slowly by land, but quite quickly by air. Once in the air he or she may deliver a Fire Blast that causes huge damage, but then the Dragon must ground themselves to regain stamina for flight. In addition, each player will have access to Cavalry, Infantry, and Bowmen, each with their own stat blocks and abilities.
This is all well and good, and is somewhat similar to the strategy one would use in Chess. Combat, however, is much more involved than that of simply moving into an enemy’s space and automatically overtaking it. In Asator combat victory is decided via a VERY pared down version of D&D combat. It uses a simplified d20-based attack versus the enemy Armor Rating (AR). Rolls over the AR of the enemy is a success and damage is dealt. Done. Some attacks require a roll of 2d6 for damage amount, like spells and Dragon attacks. That said, combat is decided using 1d20 and 2d6. That’s it.
The game continues in turns where the first player will move their pieces and attack, and then the next player will do the same until one player has defeated all three enemy leaders and earned the title of Asator – Master of War.
Components. Again, we were provided a prototype copy of the game, but most of the components are what will be received when the game is backed or purchased. That said, the game utilizes a cloth battle mat that folds into the box, four dry-erase Battle Sheets, two dry-erase markers, dice for both players, Wizard spell cards for both players, and 60 miniatures. The battle mat is great fabric quality with minimal art that doesn’t get in the way of play (much appreciated). The dry-erase components are good. The card quality is fine. The dice are black and white dice to correspond with players using the black or white minis, and are of normal quality. The minis are great and I enjoyed playing with them.
Now for the negatives of what is included in the box. First, the art. Now, there is very minimal art used throughout the game. It’s just not a focal point, and it shows in the game’s production. I found the sketch on the cover of the rule book (which is the same as the watermark on the Battle Mat) to be very cool, but the box cover art leaves some to be desired. Similarly, the Wizard spell cards use very generic-looking art icons with text for explanation. I am most certainly being hyper-critical here because flashy art on these components are certainly not needed to play or highly enjoy the game. For my tastes, though, I would like to see more polished art on these pieces as the art is so sparse throughout.
But how does the game feel? It’s truly quite good. I don’t play many wargames or 1v1 skirmish style games, so to present me with something like this and for me to enjoy it as much as I have has to be a sign of something good. Again, I am no strategic war general, but being able to employ different strategies every game is exciting. Testing out the different combinations of Wizard spell cards is fun for a tinkerer. And, of course, playing with a bunch of minis is always good fun.
There is a good game here, and I absolutely love the combination of Chess maneuverability with the simplified RPG d20 battle system. It works well in a game like this where each piece owns a stat block of which players will need to be mindful. I didn’t quite mention my favorite part of the rules yet either: natural 20 on a combat roll equals insta-death. Yes, even to the Dragon, which happened in my very first game. THAT is a cool rule that tripped up tactics quite often in my plays.
All in all this game is a great example of combining a couple sets of mechanics that wouldn’t be expected and creating a great gaming experience from them. I invite you to back the game on Kickstarter when it goes live if you are looking for that special game that is unlike many others you currently own. If the art were spruced up a bit I would be fawning all over it, but even without impressive art I still find I have the twitch in my brain to play it again and again. I wonder how many natural 20s I can roll in a game. Great, now I want to set it up and see…
