Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Earthfall in Video Games
Jun 19, 2019
Left 4 Dead and its sequel Left 4 Dead 2 became must play games for fans who loved the four player co-op gameplay as players worked with one another to accomplish tasks and survive legions of undead and supernatural enemies.
The sequel came soon after the original and despite rumors and the best hopes of the gaming community; a new chapter in the series has yet to appear.
Thankfully Holospark have stepped up to offer gamers an enjoyable and intense gaming experience for fans who have grown weary of waiting for a new installment of Left 4 Dead. Set in the Pacific Northwest, Earthfall deals with the aftermath of an Alien invasion where four characters must work with one another to accomplish tasks, defeat wave after wave of enemies and survive.
Players can play with one another or play with A.I. controlled Bots whose ability level can be adjusted by players at the start of the level.
Weapons ranging from shotguns, pistols, bladed weapons, machine guns, and heavy weapons can be found along the way or printed at 3D Printers to help the odds of survival. There are also health kits, stations, ammo boxes, and Stimulant shots which will all have their place as the gameplay unfolds.
Teamwork is the key as the enemies are abundant and fast. While they may not have the best A.I. out there and rush straight at you; the fact that they are so abundant and attack from multiple directions at once really increases the challenge.
There are several types of enemies as well as boss Aliens who show up at various points of a level to throw a wrench into your strategy. Once a player is down, they can be revived by other players which often puts players in the difficult task of trying to stay alive or rushing into danger to try to save other players.
There are also devices such as auto and manned gun emplacements which can shred enemies, but overheat if continuous fire is used.
The game does offer various levels of difficulty so players can find one that best meets their gameplay style. Some may find the gameplay a bit dated but when you factor in the game was made by an Indie developer and has a list price for $30.00; it has some great things going for it. I have played the game well-over a year in early access phase and I have really enjoyed seeing the improvements to the game as it made its way to full release. The new maps are really good and there are more coming for gamers to enjoy as well. What is also really enjoyable to see is that Holospark seems very open to suggestions of the community and will continue to tweak the game going forward.
While some will likely say the graphics are a bit out of date and the dialogue is a bit standard, it is important to note that this is a game designed for fans of Left 4 Dead and is done by an smaller developer and not one of the mega-publishers, as such, I found the quality of the graphics and gameplay more than good enough for modern systems and at no time did I ever find it as a distraction to the gameplay as I was immersed from the get go.
If you are a fan of Left 4 Dead and want an affordably priced game that incorporates several of the best elements of the prior game, then you will not want to miss Earthfall.
http://sknr.net/2018/07/16/earthfall/
The sequel came soon after the original and despite rumors and the best hopes of the gaming community; a new chapter in the series has yet to appear.
Thankfully Holospark have stepped up to offer gamers an enjoyable and intense gaming experience for fans who have grown weary of waiting for a new installment of Left 4 Dead. Set in the Pacific Northwest, Earthfall deals with the aftermath of an Alien invasion where four characters must work with one another to accomplish tasks, defeat wave after wave of enemies and survive.
Players can play with one another or play with A.I. controlled Bots whose ability level can be adjusted by players at the start of the level.
Weapons ranging from shotguns, pistols, bladed weapons, machine guns, and heavy weapons can be found along the way or printed at 3D Printers to help the odds of survival. There are also health kits, stations, ammo boxes, and Stimulant shots which will all have their place as the gameplay unfolds.
Teamwork is the key as the enemies are abundant and fast. While they may not have the best A.I. out there and rush straight at you; the fact that they are so abundant and attack from multiple directions at once really increases the challenge.
There are several types of enemies as well as boss Aliens who show up at various points of a level to throw a wrench into your strategy. Once a player is down, they can be revived by other players which often puts players in the difficult task of trying to stay alive or rushing into danger to try to save other players.
There are also devices such as auto and manned gun emplacements which can shred enemies, but overheat if continuous fire is used.
The game does offer various levels of difficulty so players can find one that best meets their gameplay style. Some may find the gameplay a bit dated but when you factor in the game was made by an Indie developer and has a list price for $30.00; it has some great things going for it. I have played the game well-over a year in early access phase and I have really enjoyed seeing the improvements to the game as it made its way to full release. The new maps are really good and there are more coming for gamers to enjoy as well. What is also really enjoyable to see is that Holospark seems very open to suggestions of the community and will continue to tweak the game going forward.
While some will likely say the graphics are a bit out of date and the dialogue is a bit standard, it is important to note that this is a game designed for fans of Left 4 Dead and is done by an smaller developer and not one of the mega-publishers, as such, I found the quality of the graphics and gameplay more than good enough for modern systems and at no time did I ever find it as a distraction to the gameplay as I was immersed from the get go.
If you are a fan of Left 4 Dead and want an affordably priced game that incorporates several of the best elements of the prior game, then you will not want to miss Earthfall.
http://sknr.net/2018/07/16/earthfall/
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Everything, Everything in Books
Jan 23, 2020
I'm part of a reading challenge on this app called Habitica where I have to read a book turning into a movie this year, so <em>Everything, Everything</em> kind of got picked because of that. (I know it's problematic. The reading challenges are the only reasons why I chose to read the book.)
Anelise and I were also throwing out random books from our library for hours and this was the first that we both had a copy of or could borrow from the library, so here we are.
<b>
</b> <b>I was hoping to learn more from <i>Everything, Everything</i> than I actually did.</b> Madeline Whittier, aka Maddy, is someone who has SCID - an immune disorder where those affected basically have to be isolated from everything. <b>I learned virtually nothing but the bare bones definition of SCID</b> for the duration of the book:
<ul>
<li>You have to be isolated from the world</li>
<li>Anything, ANYTHING can trigger a reaction</li>
<li>It is basically a very miserable life</li>
</ul>
<div>Let's be honest: it's the dictionary definition.</div>
And <b>everything is so WHIT</b>E. White walls, white rooms, white bookshelves - I like the occasional white but ALL white is associated with hospitals. <b>I suppose hospital is the atmosphere Yoon is going for? </b>Still, though. Hospitals do have a splash of color somewhere? At least I'm pretty sure they do, but I'm that one kid who rarely went to the hospital.
So if you want the really quick version:<b> the romance is the plot</b>. I'm usually not a fan of contemporary romance, but I've been on a contemporary streak lately after reading some amazing books lately in the genre. <b>The romance between Mandy and Olly is adorable</b> - seeing their limited interactions, IMs, emails, etc. and even when they saw each other outside of those. <b>If you don't mind a cute romance or have a curiosity to know more about SCID, then <i>Everything, Everything</i> might be up your alley.</b> But I like learning things. This is why I'm still Ravenclaw and not Gryffindor, so Pottermore is wrong, I tell you. WRONG.
I thought<b> the layout was interesting and different, making the book seem quicker</b>. I also loved the illustrations - they complemented the story really well and felt like a nice addition.
Despite the cute romance, interesting layout, and amazing illustrations, <b>I am still disappointed with the ending.</b> It's one of those endings that might depend on the reader’s preferences, but I thought <b>it was a screwed up ending where some of the characters have HUGE issues</b>. I know I have my own issues of life, but this one is a really messy issue and I'm surprised no one got even a tiny bit suspicious for what? 16, 17 years?
I know there are some out there who will turn around and say that <i>Everything, Everything</i> is a fantastic novel. It is! But <b>the ending ruined everything, and I cannot add this to my collection of shove worthy books.</b>
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/everything-everything-by-nicola-yoon/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Anelise and I were also throwing out random books from our library for hours and this was the first that we both had a copy of or could borrow from the library, so here we are.
<b>
</b> <b>I was hoping to learn more from <i>Everything, Everything</i> than I actually did.</b> Madeline Whittier, aka Maddy, is someone who has SCID - an immune disorder where those affected basically have to be isolated from everything. <b>I learned virtually nothing but the bare bones definition of SCID</b> for the duration of the book:
<ul>
<li>You have to be isolated from the world</li>
<li>Anything, ANYTHING can trigger a reaction</li>
<li>It is basically a very miserable life</li>
</ul>
<div>Let's be honest: it's the dictionary definition.</div>
And <b>everything is so WHIT</b>E. White walls, white rooms, white bookshelves - I like the occasional white but ALL white is associated with hospitals. <b>I suppose hospital is the atmosphere Yoon is going for? </b>Still, though. Hospitals do have a splash of color somewhere? At least I'm pretty sure they do, but I'm that one kid who rarely went to the hospital.
So if you want the really quick version:<b> the romance is the plot</b>. I'm usually not a fan of contemporary romance, but I've been on a contemporary streak lately after reading some amazing books lately in the genre. <b>The romance between Mandy and Olly is adorable</b> - seeing their limited interactions, IMs, emails, etc. and even when they saw each other outside of those. <b>If you don't mind a cute romance or have a curiosity to know more about SCID, then <i>Everything, Everything</i> might be up your alley.</b> But I like learning things. This is why I'm still Ravenclaw and not Gryffindor, so Pottermore is wrong, I tell you. WRONG.
I thought<b> the layout was interesting and different, making the book seem quicker</b>. I also loved the illustrations - they complemented the story really well and felt like a nice addition.
Despite the cute romance, interesting layout, and amazing illustrations, <b>I am still disappointed with the ending.</b> It's one of those endings that might depend on the reader’s preferences, but I thought <b>it was a screwed up ending where some of the characters have HUGE issues</b>. I know I have my own issues of life, but this one is a really messy issue and I'm surprised no one got even a tiny bit suspicious for what? 16, 17 years?
I know there are some out there who will turn around and say that <i>Everything, Everything</i> is a fantastic novel. It is! But <b>the ending ruined everything, and I cannot add this to my collection of shove worthy books.</b>
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/everything-everything-by-nicola-yoon/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Steam Park: Play Dirty in Tabletop Games
Aug 20, 2021
In the expansion review series, we take a look at a game expansion to discuss whether it is a necessary purchase/addition to one’s collection.
This breakdown is for the action dice-rolling and them park-building game Steam Park’s modular expansion, Play Dirty (as in dirt, not as in adult themes). Play Dirty is a modular expansion, so some modules may be added or left out depending on comfort level and enjoyment of each module.
One major module added to this expansion is the addition of a fifth player to Steam Park. As if Steam Park wasn’t frantic enough with four, go ahead and throw in a fifth set of hands going crazy at the table! Also included are gray “Stingy Visitors,” which act as wild visitor types for color, but provide one less Danari (currency in Steam Park) but create NO DIRT. Excellent! Play Dirty also includes a new set of five stands for robots to do business: Fountain, Hall of Mirrors, Office, Shooting Gallery, and Incinerator. Along with these new stands are a set of stand reference tiles to remind players what each stand actually does in the game. Very handy.
The biggest difference-makers in the expansion box are the Ride Extensions, Park Directors, and Espionage Dice. Ride Extensions do just that – extend existing rides in one’s park, but the two different colored extensions (golden and rusty) have their own rules that are triggered depending on colors of robots upon them. The Park Directors module adds a new twist that changes the rules for an aspect of the base game for all players throughout the entire game. These are very powerful changes, and one Park Director is chosen to be used at the beginning of each game. Espionage Dice are very special in that one is added to each player’s white dice and rolled as normal throughout the game. However, the Espionage Dice cost 4 Danari to activate after the Roll Phase. The power here is that the player using the die pays one Danari less to use it when matching the face of white dice in their opponent’s pig sitting to their right. For example, to use a Build Stand face on Espionage Die will cost four Danari normally. However, should the opponent on the right have four Build Stand symbols showing on their white dice, the Espionage Die activates for free!
Must you own the Play Dirty expansion to truly enjoy your plays of Steam Park? Not at all. I do very much enjoy several of the modules in the box though. I really enjoy the powerful Park Directors because it freshens up a rule from the base game or modifies it in interesting ways. I like the new Stands that come in the box as well for additional options during play, but you MUST use the reference tiles, especially if combining all 10 Stands. The other modules are fine, but I would have been happy with just the ones I mentioned here.
Official recommendation: I remember my first play of Steam Park and falling in love with it right away. I have never felt stagnation in my future plays, but adding Play Dirty certainly is a game-changer in every sense of the term. I say definitely pick it up if you are feeling the base game no longer gives you the excitement and frenzy it once did.
This breakdown is for the action dice-rolling and them park-building game Steam Park’s modular expansion, Play Dirty (as in dirt, not as in adult themes). Play Dirty is a modular expansion, so some modules may be added or left out depending on comfort level and enjoyment of each module.
One major module added to this expansion is the addition of a fifth player to Steam Park. As if Steam Park wasn’t frantic enough with four, go ahead and throw in a fifth set of hands going crazy at the table! Also included are gray “Stingy Visitors,” which act as wild visitor types for color, but provide one less Danari (currency in Steam Park) but create NO DIRT. Excellent! Play Dirty also includes a new set of five stands for robots to do business: Fountain, Hall of Mirrors, Office, Shooting Gallery, and Incinerator. Along with these new stands are a set of stand reference tiles to remind players what each stand actually does in the game. Very handy.
The biggest difference-makers in the expansion box are the Ride Extensions, Park Directors, and Espionage Dice. Ride Extensions do just that – extend existing rides in one’s park, but the two different colored extensions (golden and rusty) have their own rules that are triggered depending on colors of robots upon them. The Park Directors module adds a new twist that changes the rules for an aspect of the base game for all players throughout the entire game. These are very powerful changes, and one Park Director is chosen to be used at the beginning of each game. Espionage Dice are very special in that one is added to each player’s white dice and rolled as normal throughout the game. However, the Espionage Dice cost 4 Danari to activate after the Roll Phase. The power here is that the player using the die pays one Danari less to use it when matching the face of white dice in their opponent’s pig sitting to their right. For example, to use a Build Stand face on Espionage Die will cost four Danari normally. However, should the opponent on the right have four Build Stand symbols showing on their white dice, the Espionage Die activates for free!
Must you own the Play Dirty expansion to truly enjoy your plays of Steam Park? Not at all. I do very much enjoy several of the modules in the box though. I really enjoy the powerful Park Directors because it freshens up a rule from the base game or modifies it in interesting ways. I like the new Stands that come in the box as well for additional options during play, but you MUST use the reference tiles, especially if combining all 10 Stands. The other modules are fine, but I would have been happy with just the ones I mentioned here.
Official recommendation: I remember my first play of Steam Park and falling in love with it right away. I have never felt stagnation in my future plays, but adding Play Dirty certainly is a game-changer in every sense of the term. I say definitely pick it up if you are feeling the base game no longer gives you the excitement and frenzy it once did.
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated Hourglass (Hourglass, #1) in Books
Apr 27, 2018
Let me just say right now that I'm glad I didn't judge this book by its cover, because I never would have requested it. The cover doesn't particularly appeal to me; for that matter, the title didn't make me curious either. Even after I read the back cover I wasn't convinced. I like to be intrigued and the cover/summary fooled me. But I saw a good review for it somewhere, so I snatched it up. I'm very happy I did.
Time travel has been done poorly so many times, but Hourglass was fantastic. It was original and creative, and it met every requirement for a perfect book: it had tension, awesome characters, a well thought out and multi-layered plot, and good writing.
There was tension in every sentence of ever paragraph of every chapter. It was nearly impossible to put down. I completely lost track of time while I read it. (haha, lost track of…get it?…. it's a time travel book…never mind.) I was forced to put it down to do things like work and chores and food, but except for things like that, it kept me reading, and there were no empty scenes.
The characters were amazing. Can I just say that I want to marry Michael right now? omigoodness. He's going on my list. Any author who can write a character like that is going on my favorites list right now. Emerson is strong-willed, kick-ass, and has to remind herself that she's short because her personality is the opposite. She was the perfect heroine because she was real and fragile and head over heels in love with someone she wasn't supposed to love. Michael was the brave proud chivalrous attractive protagonist who has a major hero complex, and of course is trying not to be in love with Em (and failing miserably). Both of them together had humorous conversations and explosive chemistry. (like, things short circuit when they touch, and light bulbs break when they kiss.)
The plot kept me guessing all the way to the end, and the last quarter of the book threw so many twists and turns at me that I found myself thinking, "Ok wait, what? are you serious?" But it wasn't overdone, there was no overkill, and it worked perfectly in the end. (I'll keep it spoiler free, but I'll just say don't worry, it does work out. Don't get mad and throw the book against the wall like I did.)
And of course, the writing. I find that many young adult novels have mediocre writing. McEntire is a good writer in the sense that she can keep the tension real and controlling, she has good descriptions and great pacing, and there are no dead words.
Hourglass was fast-paced, exciting, unique, and completely enthralling. I anxiously await more from McEntire hope for more of Michael and Emerson's story in the future.
Content/recommendation: some mild language, no sex. Ages 16+
Time travel has been done poorly so many times, but Hourglass was fantastic. It was original and creative, and it met every requirement for a perfect book: it had tension, awesome characters, a well thought out and multi-layered plot, and good writing.
There was tension in every sentence of ever paragraph of every chapter. It was nearly impossible to put down. I completely lost track of time while I read it. (haha, lost track of…get it?…. it's a time travel book…never mind.) I was forced to put it down to do things like work and chores and food, but except for things like that, it kept me reading, and there were no empty scenes.
The characters were amazing. Can I just say that I want to marry Michael right now? omigoodness. He's going on my list. Any author who can write a character like that is going on my favorites list right now. Emerson is strong-willed, kick-ass, and has to remind herself that she's short because her personality is the opposite. She was the perfect heroine because she was real and fragile and head over heels in love with someone she wasn't supposed to love. Michael was the brave proud chivalrous attractive protagonist who has a major hero complex, and of course is trying not to be in love with Em (and failing miserably). Both of them together had humorous conversations and explosive chemistry. (like, things short circuit when they touch, and light bulbs break when they kiss.)
The plot kept me guessing all the way to the end, and the last quarter of the book threw so many twists and turns at me that I found myself thinking, "Ok wait, what? are you serious?" But it wasn't overdone, there was no overkill, and it worked perfectly in the end. (I'll keep it spoiler free, but I'll just say don't worry, it does work out. Don't get mad and throw the book against the wall like I did.)
And of course, the writing. I find that many young adult novels have mediocre writing. McEntire is a good writer in the sense that she can keep the tension real and controlling, she has good descriptions and great pacing, and there are no dead words.
Hourglass was fast-paced, exciting, unique, and completely enthralling. I anxiously await more from McEntire hope for more of Michael and Emerson's story in the future.
Content/recommendation: some mild language, no sex. Ages 16+
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Mentor, The in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Oh, Im so sad I can only give this book a 3 star review. I really wanted to love this one! The synopsis sounds so dark, intense and creepy, but it let me down in that department
almost completely!
The first 40% of this book was definitely enthralling, at times silly and over the top, but still exciting to read. The characters were interesting, the story was moving along nicely and the writing was simple, but not bad. It was about when I got to 50% that I realised I was getting a little bit bored by this novel.
Characters in this one werent so bad. They were well developed and even though there were a fair few number of them, we did get to know them individually, quite well. My problem was that they were pretty unbelievable and I didnt really like any of them. Im not sure if Kyle was meant to come across as an anti-hero, but thats kind of what he felt like although for me, it was mostly anti, less hero. I really didnt like the introduction to the character as being a semi-graphic description of the sex he had with his girlfriend.
The plot for this book sounded amazing! An English professor writes a depraved book that sounds like an unsolved murder case from years ago? Is it just a coincidence or is it something more sinister? Doesnt that sounds amazing? Well, it isnt, I hate to say! Yes, this professor does write a depraved, and terribly written, book about kidnapping a girl but it doesnt allude to the fact it might be about a cold case until around the 60% mark, which is ridiculous!
At 336 pages, this isnt a long novel, but it definitely could have been cut down! Most of this novel was a very repetitive back and forth between Kyle and his mad professor. Repetition like this in books is something I absolutely despise and with each new chapter, I could feel myself losing the will to read this book.
That was my first issue with the writing, and then my annoyance moved on to the number of spelling, grammatical and sentence structure errors. Considering this novel was about an editor, you would have thought the real editor would have caught the vast number of cock ups in this book!
I got very irritated by this novel towards the end. The story was convoluted, silly and unrealistic. I got to the point of skimming pages in the ending chapters, yes, it was that disappointing. Not to mention this wasnt creepy or tense at all. It was pretty predictable all the way through and the ending was a cheap way out.
Overall, I wouldnt recommend this novel. It gets 3 stars because I did enjoy the first 40% or so, but the story became silly and I couldnt get over the number of errors in the writing.
The first 40% of this book was definitely enthralling, at times silly and over the top, but still exciting to read. The characters were interesting, the story was moving along nicely and the writing was simple, but not bad. It was about when I got to 50% that I realised I was getting a little bit bored by this novel.
Characters in this one werent so bad. They were well developed and even though there were a fair few number of them, we did get to know them individually, quite well. My problem was that they were pretty unbelievable and I didnt really like any of them. Im not sure if Kyle was meant to come across as an anti-hero, but thats kind of what he felt like although for me, it was mostly anti, less hero. I really didnt like the introduction to the character as being a semi-graphic description of the sex he had with his girlfriend.
The plot for this book sounded amazing! An English professor writes a depraved book that sounds like an unsolved murder case from years ago? Is it just a coincidence or is it something more sinister? Doesnt that sounds amazing? Well, it isnt, I hate to say! Yes, this professor does write a depraved, and terribly written, book about kidnapping a girl but it doesnt allude to the fact it might be about a cold case until around the 60% mark, which is ridiculous!
At 336 pages, this isnt a long novel, but it definitely could have been cut down! Most of this novel was a very repetitive back and forth between Kyle and his mad professor. Repetition like this in books is something I absolutely despise and with each new chapter, I could feel myself losing the will to read this book.
That was my first issue with the writing, and then my annoyance moved on to the number of spelling, grammatical and sentence structure errors. Considering this novel was about an editor, you would have thought the real editor would have caught the vast number of cock ups in this book!
I got very irritated by this novel towards the end. The story was convoluted, silly and unrealistic. I got to the point of skimming pages in the ending chapters, yes, it was that disappointing. Not to mention this wasnt creepy or tense at all. It was pretty predictable all the way through and the ending was a cheap way out.
Overall, I wouldnt recommend this novel. It gets 3 stars because I did enjoy the first 40% or so, but the story became silly and I couldnt get over the number of errors in the writing.
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated The Addams Family (2019) in Movies
Nov 1, 2019 (Updated Nov 1, 2019)
Everyone knows pink is a gateway colour
addams family attempts to bring the classic family into modern day and while not a bad little film it doesnt do nearly enough to make them as memorable for a new generation of kids/teens as it did for people my age growing up. I must say I quite admire this film for trying to differentiate its self from the constant barrage of animated features weve had this year. Its colour pallet is mostly drab, cold and dark colours which I enjoyed and fit well with the gothic/spooky vibe of the film. Theres also a lot of cool halloween things to look at in the scenes that are set inside the familys house and humor at times can be incredibly gross or darkly adult too which really made me giggle (most of which children are thankfuly to young to understand). Animation while not overly detailed was nice to look at also be it the warts on an old hags nose, spiders crawling the walls or the way the bottom of Morticias dress squirms around the floor as she walks are just some of the neat little attentions to detail making this world a little more strange and alive. Plot and story wise its a little dull and while I found some clever ideas implemented here they really are not executed very interestingly. I did find some of the ideas fun however like the way the movie pokes fun at current trends eg all the girls at the school wednesday goes to have those hidious duck lips, all look identical to one another and obsess over instagram. Everyone in the town also has odd habbits of thier own and the seemingly nicest person also has a much darker side to her, not to mention the entire town is filled with hatred for anything diffrent, easily influenced by social media, full of fake happiness and coated in hidiously garish colour choices which makes you question who the 'ugly' and 'strange' ones really are here. Subtle themes of child abuse, belonging, acceptance, being yourself, death, honour, pressure, loneliness as well as other heavy subjects strangely fit well here making the film a little darker than I expected too. Sadly theres not much here for kids who will undoubtedly be bored quick because big spectacle set pieces are few and far between/not very exciting either and what I found enjoyable ie the subbtle violence, gross adult humour, adult themes and gothic visuals wont likely intrest them either. Oscar isaac and Charlize theron voice work for Morticia and Gomez I found very enjoyable and the score at times really stood out to me a lot at times creating a nice eerie atmosphere. Not nearly as bad as people make out Adams Family may be a tad forgettable, have an extreamly rushed third act, story arcs that go nowhere its creepy, kooky, spooky, and enjoyable enough to warrent seeing at the cinema for sure.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Blockers (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
Three childhood friends, Sam (Gideon Adlon), Kayla (Geraldine Viswanathan) and Julie (Kathryn Newton, make a pack that they will all have sex for the first time with their dates on prom night. They get together at Julie’s house the night of prom to and get sent off by all families. They head out in a limo for the most memorable night of their lives. Little do they know that Julie left her laptop on with their group chat open. Julie’s mom, Lisa (Leslie Mann), finds the laptop and with the help of Kayla’s dad, Mitchell (John Cena), and Sam’s dad, Hunter (Ike Barinholtz), they decipher the emoji messages and discover the girls’ sex pact. Lisa a single mom, who just found out that her daughter has been accepted to a college thousands of miles away, thinks her daughter is making a huge mistake and wants to confront her. Mitchell, an overprotective father, agrees and they decide to race after the girls to confront them at the dance. Hunter who has been out of his daughter’s life and just wants her to have a great night tries to first talk them out of it, then physically stop them as they get into Lisa’s car. All three in the car they speed off to what will definitely me a memorable prom night for them and their three daughters.
This comedy is the directorial debut for Kay Cannon (writer Pitch Perfect 2, screenplay Pitch Perfect, actress How to Be Single). She does a good job and this is a well-made comedy. The story does an okay job of blending comedy with a heartfelt story of the relationship between parents and children. There are definitely parts that had the audience roaring in laughter. The jokes at time were a little juvenile and for shock value alone, but other times were very witty. There is also a decent amount of cheesiness in this film that didn’t necessarily fit all of the time. With a rooster in front of the title you have to assume there are going to be some raunchy moments. Over all the performances were good. John Cena has some very funny moments but also some pretty campy lines. I did feel his character had the same moment several times though. They had him cry multiple times throughout the film and by the end the big tough guy crying grew old for me. Ira Barinholtz has some fun moments also.
Sometimes the best moments in a comedy are spoiled in the trailers and for me they did a good job of putting enough of the high points in the trailer will out ruining the punchline. I found myself enjoying the buildup to the payoff more than the big finish. I thought that seeing this film in a theater also helped as many of the laughs more contagious audience laughter than punchlines. Overall I left the theater enjoying the film and thinking it was better than expected.
This comedy is the directorial debut for Kay Cannon (writer Pitch Perfect 2, screenplay Pitch Perfect, actress How to Be Single). She does a good job and this is a well-made comedy. The story does an okay job of blending comedy with a heartfelt story of the relationship between parents and children. There are definitely parts that had the audience roaring in laughter. The jokes at time were a little juvenile and for shock value alone, but other times were very witty. There is also a decent amount of cheesiness in this film that didn’t necessarily fit all of the time. With a rooster in front of the title you have to assume there are going to be some raunchy moments. Over all the performances were good. John Cena has some very funny moments but also some pretty campy lines. I did feel his character had the same moment several times though. They had him cry multiple times throughout the film and by the end the big tough guy crying grew old for me. Ira Barinholtz has some fun moments also.
Sometimes the best moments in a comedy are spoiled in the trailers and for me they did a good job of putting enough of the high points in the trailer will out ruining the punchline. I found myself enjoying the buildup to the payoff more than the big finish. I thought that seeing this film in a theater also helped as many of the laughs more contagious audience laughter than punchlines. Overall I left the theater enjoying the film and thinking it was better than expected.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020 (Updated Jul 9, 2020)
First up, the latest Coen Brothers effort, the slightly offputtingly titled The Ballad of Buster Scruggs. I mean, it sounds like a working title at best, and doesn’t exactly draw you in. Oh, and it’s a Western, and Tim Blake Nelson sings in it – those Coen’s never did much care about box office, huh? And what’s more it is an anthology film; five or six short vignettes vaguely set in the same dusty landscape of pre industrial America.
I didn’t even know it was an anthology from the trailer, or poster. I thought the entire thing was about the crooning Blake Nelson, and as much as I love the Coen’s back catalogue, I wasn’t overly keen. Then the reviews, and a few Oscar nominations made me sit up a bit, feeling a bit silly that I had ever doubted the partnership that has offered the most consistently interesting off-kilter films of the last 40 years.
Immediately, I was struck by two things: a sense of a whimsical mood, and a breathtaking cinematography capturing a landscape. This was definitely a Coen film. I found myself enjoying the humour and inventiveness effortlessly. And then being surprised to find we were moving on to another story before even 15 minutes had passed!
A bit with James Franco and an unfortunate lynch mob / hanging situation; a wry piece about Tom Waits panning for gold and protecting his find; a more serious (and mood breakingly longer) piece about an unlikely love between a worldly wagon trainer and a naive young woman; and finally something like a Western ghost story as strangers talk inside a carriage heading to a mysterious location. And with a somewhat anti-climactic end… we were out. Did I miss something? Then it must have been forgettable.
I liked all the sections to degrees, and admired how they were all unique but dovetailed together well. There is certainly plenty to enjoy and even love in this strange experiment of a film. The Tom Waits section was my favourite, and the long wagon train section my least favourite, in simple terms.
However the overall impression is that it somehow isn’t quite fully there… something doesn’t hold it together as a complete film. It is hard to put your finger on it, but it is something to do with the story arc in terms of energy. It would maybe have been better served with a more upbeat climax. But who am I to question these guys?
Would I watch it again? Absolutely. Would I recommend it to everyone? With caution, yeah sure. Will I be adding it to any best of lists any time soon? Capagorically not. Enjoy it for what it is. Even watch each piece in isolation maybe. Look in wonder at how Joel and Ethan can still frame an image or capture a detail. And then let it fly away, as inconsequential as a dream.
I didn’t even know it was an anthology from the trailer, or poster. I thought the entire thing was about the crooning Blake Nelson, and as much as I love the Coen’s back catalogue, I wasn’t overly keen. Then the reviews, and a few Oscar nominations made me sit up a bit, feeling a bit silly that I had ever doubted the partnership that has offered the most consistently interesting off-kilter films of the last 40 years.
Immediately, I was struck by two things: a sense of a whimsical mood, and a breathtaking cinematography capturing a landscape. This was definitely a Coen film. I found myself enjoying the humour and inventiveness effortlessly. And then being surprised to find we were moving on to another story before even 15 minutes had passed!
A bit with James Franco and an unfortunate lynch mob / hanging situation; a wry piece about Tom Waits panning for gold and protecting his find; a more serious (and mood breakingly longer) piece about an unlikely love between a worldly wagon trainer and a naive young woman; and finally something like a Western ghost story as strangers talk inside a carriage heading to a mysterious location. And with a somewhat anti-climactic end… we were out. Did I miss something? Then it must have been forgettable.
I liked all the sections to degrees, and admired how they were all unique but dovetailed together well. There is certainly plenty to enjoy and even love in this strange experiment of a film. The Tom Waits section was my favourite, and the long wagon train section my least favourite, in simple terms.
However the overall impression is that it somehow isn’t quite fully there… something doesn’t hold it together as a complete film. It is hard to put your finger on it, but it is something to do with the story arc in terms of energy. It would maybe have been better served with a more upbeat climax. But who am I to question these guys?
Would I watch it again? Absolutely. Would I recommend it to everyone? With caution, yeah sure. Will I be adding it to any best of lists any time soon? Capagorically not. Enjoy it for what it is. Even watch each piece in isolation maybe. Look in wonder at how Joel and Ethan can still frame an image or capture a detail. And then let it fly away, as inconsequential as a dream.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated 47 Meters Down: Uncaged (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
Shark Movie That Struggles To Stay Afloat
47 Meters Down Uncaged is a 2019 survival/horror movie directed by Johannes Robert and written by Robert and Ernest Riera with producers James Harris, Mark Lane and Robert Jones. It was produced by They Fyzz Facility and distributed by Entertainment Studios Motion Pictures. The film stars Corinne Foxx, Sophie Nelisse, Brianne Tju and Sistaine Stallone.
Mia (Sophie Nelisse), has had trouble fitting in living in Mexico which includes trouble with girls at school and adjusting to living with her father, step-mother (Nia Long) and sister. Three teenagers, Sasha (Corinne Foxx) her step-sister and her two friends convince her to go swimming with them at a secret lagoon rather than go on a glass bottom boat tour. The lagoon happens to be near a sunken Mayan city where Mia's father Grant (John Corbett) is working. The girls grab some scuba gear and decide to seize this opportunity to see the discovery for themselves and find that it is the hunting ground for deadly great white sharks. With their air supply running out and having to navigate the labyrinth of tunnels the girls find themselves in a race against time and the deadly sharks to try and survive.
This movie was okay but I thought it was going to be better. I hadn't seen the first one so I don't know if they are connected in anyway but I believe they are not. I wanted to see a good shark movie especially since during shark week a while back I had seen a lot of shark shows this year and the movie they did called Capsized which was pretty decent. This movie started off good but failed to set the tension in a gripping way. I didn't like the fact that since they were swimming in caves the lighting was dark and didn't allow for a lot of visuals. It was good for mood setting and ambiance but I thought it was a little gimmicky when they used the flares and it changed everything red. I say that because the CGI of the sharks left me underwhelmed as well. The sharks were supposed to be blind for having evolved or lived in caves the whole time and also adjusted to be more sensitive to sounds. To me the CGI looked unbelievable and threw off the emergence from enjoying the movie. They could have been better or the way they built the tension could have been better. The movie did have a couple of frightening "jump scares", one of which surprised and got me. For some reason I really didn't like the ending, for me it was the main character acting out of character and then there being to many "jump scares" back to back at the end. If you see it you'll know what I'm talking about. Anyways I give this movie a 5/10.
Mia (Sophie Nelisse), has had trouble fitting in living in Mexico which includes trouble with girls at school and adjusting to living with her father, step-mother (Nia Long) and sister. Three teenagers, Sasha (Corinne Foxx) her step-sister and her two friends convince her to go swimming with them at a secret lagoon rather than go on a glass bottom boat tour. The lagoon happens to be near a sunken Mayan city where Mia's father Grant (John Corbett) is working. The girls grab some scuba gear and decide to seize this opportunity to see the discovery for themselves and find that it is the hunting ground for deadly great white sharks. With their air supply running out and having to navigate the labyrinth of tunnels the girls find themselves in a race against time and the deadly sharks to try and survive.
This movie was okay but I thought it was going to be better. I hadn't seen the first one so I don't know if they are connected in anyway but I believe they are not. I wanted to see a good shark movie especially since during shark week a while back I had seen a lot of shark shows this year and the movie they did called Capsized which was pretty decent. This movie started off good but failed to set the tension in a gripping way. I didn't like the fact that since they were swimming in caves the lighting was dark and didn't allow for a lot of visuals. It was good for mood setting and ambiance but I thought it was a little gimmicky when they used the flares and it changed everything red. I say that because the CGI of the sharks left me underwhelmed as well. The sharks were supposed to be blind for having evolved or lived in caves the whole time and also adjusted to be more sensitive to sounds. To me the CGI looked unbelievable and threw off the emergence from enjoying the movie. They could have been better or the way they built the tension could have been better. The movie did have a couple of frightening "jump scares", one of which surprised and got me. For some reason I really didn't like the ending, for me it was the main character acting out of character and then there being to many "jump scares" back to back at the end. If you see it you'll know what I'm talking about. Anyways I give this movie a 5/10.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Tomorrowland (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
I have to be honest. I was confused when I first heard that a movie was being made called Tomorrowland, and even more so when I heard it that actually is based on the themed area of Disney parks. How could they do it? What would it be about? It was strange. The teaser trailer didn’t give a whole lot away either (as teasers are designed to do). When I saw the full trailer, I had a little more understanding, and it definitely piqued my interest, but I was still totally in the dark. And I wanted to see the movie! I guess Disney really did their job right.
In this film, Tomorrowland is a place of unlimited possibilities. Another dimension, where the inhabitants of that dimension actively seek out intelligent people, inventors, who can do something that can change the world for the better. We begin at the 1964 World Fair in New York where we see a young Frank Walker (Thomas Robinson) entering into the inventor’s competition with a jetpack that doesn’t quite work. However, a mysterious young woman named Athena (Raffey Cassidy) takes an interest in him, offers him a pin and instructs him to follow her. Thus begins Frank’s adventure and we move forward in time to the present day, where we meet Casey Newton (Britt Robertson).
Casey is the teenage daughter of a NASA engineer, who is no slough in the intelligence department herself. We are introduced to her as she is sabotaging equipment at a NASA launch pad that is scheduled to be taken down, which will leave her father without a job. We see Athena again, who has mysteriously not aged, leaving a pin for Casey to discover Tomorrowland on her own. Only, this pin is a simple advertisement. We soon learn that something has gone terribly wrong, and our world is in danger. Athena leads Casey to an aged Frank Walker (George Clooney), who has since been banished from Tomorrowland, but still feeds off of their signal and sits and waits for the end of the world, which he knows when it will happen. But he and Athena see something in Casey that will help save both Tomorrowland, and our world.
Given the conversations, the imagery, and the theme of this movie, it is clearly targeted towards children more than adults. Though, there is plenty for an adult to enjoy about the movie, it is important to understand that the movie is clearly targeted to a younger audience. I say this because I feel, as did my guests who attended the press screening, that the main plot device, the main conflict of the movie, is far too complex a concept for this younger audience to understand. So before you read any further, spoiler alert. You have been forewarned. If you do not want to know, skip the next two paragraphs.
The idea here is that Frank Walker built a machine that could see any point in time. Past, future or present. With this machine, he saw the end of our world. The proposed resolution to stop the destruction of earth is this: turn off the machine. The argument being that the world ends because we see it ending. It becomes a fixation of our mind, and so it will happen. Apparently, the people of Tomorrowland have been streaming this information to Earth for years, but instead of taking steps to prevent it, Earth has embraced it. One of my favorite lines, delivered by one of my favorite actors (Hugh Laurie) indicated that we had simultaneous epidemics of obesity and starvation on Earth. It’s mind boggling. But the Casey comes up with the brilliant idea of turning it off, which will prevent the destruction of Earth because people will no longer be so focused on it. It’s a little more complicated than that, but this is the gist of it. Way too complex for your average child to comprehend.
Another part of the resolution and the end of the movie was brilliant, but I think it was poorly illustrated. As I mentioned earlier, the residents of Tomorrowland were searching for intelligent people, often high IQ inventors, who could make the world a better place. At the end of the film, Casey idea is to bring not only intelligent people, but anyone who will make a difference. Dancers, musicians, doctors, pilots, farmers, etc. I think I even saw a waitress in there. These are people who may not normally be recognized as highly intelligent, but can make huge differences in the world. The idea was to not be so limited in thinking, and understand how everything can contribute to a better world. However, they did not really do a great job of pointing this out, so some movie-goers may miss this point completely and simply see it as a rebuilding of Tomorrowland to its former glory.
Other than those two issues, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. It had a great amount of humor, action and endearing moments. It was visually stunning, and took a concept that I never thought could be made into a movie and did just that. The movie was brilliantly cast, even down to the minor characters like Hugo (Keegan-Michael Key) and Ursula (Kathryn Hahn). Of course the score was fantastic, it is a Disney film after all. And despite my issues with the complexity of the plot, I still think that everyone, young and old, will enjoy this film.
Is it perfect? Absolutely not. But it is entertaining, and definitely worth seeing on the big screen. So go check it out. In theaters everywhere, today.
In this film, Tomorrowland is a place of unlimited possibilities. Another dimension, where the inhabitants of that dimension actively seek out intelligent people, inventors, who can do something that can change the world for the better. We begin at the 1964 World Fair in New York where we see a young Frank Walker (Thomas Robinson) entering into the inventor’s competition with a jetpack that doesn’t quite work. However, a mysterious young woman named Athena (Raffey Cassidy) takes an interest in him, offers him a pin and instructs him to follow her. Thus begins Frank’s adventure and we move forward in time to the present day, where we meet Casey Newton (Britt Robertson).
Casey is the teenage daughter of a NASA engineer, who is no slough in the intelligence department herself. We are introduced to her as she is sabotaging equipment at a NASA launch pad that is scheduled to be taken down, which will leave her father without a job. We see Athena again, who has mysteriously not aged, leaving a pin for Casey to discover Tomorrowland on her own. Only, this pin is a simple advertisement. We soon learn that something has gone terribly wrong, and our world is in danger. Athena leads Casey to an aged Frank Walker (George Clooney), who has since been banished from Tomorrowland, but still feeds off of their signal and sits and waits for the end of the world, which he knows when it will happen. But he and Athena see something in Casey that will help save both Tomorrowland, and our world.
Given the conversations, the imagery, and the theme of this movie, it is clearly targeted towards children more than adults. Though, there is plenty for an adult to enjoy about the movie, it is important to understand that the movie is clearly targeted to a younger audience. I say this because I feel, as did my guests who attended the press screening, that the main plot device, the main conflict of the movie, is far too complex a concept for this younger audience to understand. So before you read any further, spoiler alert. You have been forewarned. If you do not want to know, skip the next two paragraphs.
The idea here is that Frank Walker built a machine that could see any point in time. Past, future or present. With this machine, he saw the end of our world. The proposed resolution to stop the destruction of earth is this: turn off the machine. The argument being that the world ends because we see it ending. It becomes a fixation of our mind, and so it will happen. Apparently, the people of Tomorrowland have been streaming this information to Earth for years, but instead of taking steps to prevent it, Earth has embraced it. One of my favorite lines, delivered by one of my favorite actors (Hugh Laurie) indicated that we had simultaneous epidemics of obesity and starvation on Earth. It’s mind boggling. But the Casey comes up with the brilliant idea of turning it off, which will prevent the destruction of Earth because people will no longer be so focused on it. It’s a little more complicated than that, but this is the gist of it. Way too complex for your average child to comprehend.
Another part of the resolution and the end of the movie was brilliant, but I think it was poorly illustrated. As I mentioned earlier, the residents of Tomorrowland were searching for intelligent people, often high IQ inventors, who could make the world a better place. At the end of the film, Casey idea is to bring not only intelligent people, but anyone who will make a difference. Dancers, musicians, doctors, pilots, farmers, etc. I think I even saw a waitress in there. These are people who may not normally be recognized as highly intelligent, but can make huge differences in the world. The idea was to not be so limited in thinking, and understand how everything can contribute to a better world. However, they did not really do a great job of pointing this out, so some movie-goers may miss this point completely and simply see it as a rebuilding of Tomorrowland to its former glory.
Other than those two issues, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. It had a great amount of humor, action and endearing moments. It was visually stunning, and took a concept that I never thought could be made into a movie and did just that. The movie was brilliantly cast, even down to the minor characters like Hugo (Keegan-Michael Key) and Ursula (Kathryn Hahn). Of course the score was fantastic, it is a Disney film after all. And despite my issues with the complexity of the plot, I still think that everyone, young and old, will enjoy this film.
Is it perfect? Absolutely not. But it is entertaining, and definitely worth seeing on the big screen. So go check it out. In theaters everywhere, today.