Search
Search results
Lawrence in Arabia: War, Deceit, Imperial Folly, and the Making of the Modern Middle East
9.0
Rate It
Book
A thrilling and revelatory narrative of one of the most epic and consequential periods in 20th...
Management of Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Global Perspective on Diagnosis, Treatment Options, Prevention Strategies and Their Economic Impact: 2017
Book
Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is among the most serious complications in the field of...
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Nations: The Dice Game in Tabletop Games
Aug 16, 2019 (Updated Jul 17, 2021)
If you have been around board games over the past several years you will notice trends here and there. Some games came out with smaller, easier to digest, versions of themselves as card games, or roll-and-writes, or in this case: dice games. The goal is to get the same kind of feeling and experience as playing the older sibling in a much smaller and time-friendly spin-off. I have played Nations (the original big game) before, but does Nations: The Dice Game give a similar feel?
Nations: The Dice Game (can I please just call it Nations for this review as we know I am not talking about the original? Thanks.) is a civilization building, upgrade tile drafting, dice game for one to four players. Players will be upgrading their civilizations over four game rounds to compete for Books and VPs. The player with the most VP at the end of the game is the winner.
Disclaimer: The photos shown here is for a solo game, as I took them during my learning game using the solo rules. Normally the purple d4 is not used in multiplayer games. -T
To setup, each player will choose a starter civilization mat, receive five white dice, a gold chit, and a re-roll chit. Player order will be determined by cards and each player will receive their player order card which doubles as a reference card (great idea). The Progress Board will be set on the table and populated with randomized Age I Progress tiles according to the rule book. The Score Board will also be placed on the table to track Books, Events, and final VPs. The game begins with each player rolling their five dice.
Nations (TDG) is played over four ages with multiple rounds per age. At the beginning of each age old tiles will be removed from the Progress Board and new ones for the current age added. Also an Event tile will be drawn and placed on the Score Board to signify goals for Famine and War at the end of the age. On a player’s turn they will take one action from the following: Re-Roll (any or all unused dice by spending a re-roll chit), Buy tile (from the Progress Board to upgrade player mat spaces and dice), or Build Wonder (tile using Stone dice or chits for VP). When a player has taken as many turns/actions they wish for the age, they turn their player order card to the side to indicate they have passed for the remainder of the age.
Once all players have passed, they will tally their unused dice and any chits showing Books to be recorded on the Book track. Players will score points for Books based on how many opponents they have outscored for Books. Then players will consult the face-up Event tile that was revealed at the beginning of the round. The top portion displays VP earned when players discard unused dice and chits showing Famine leaf icons matching or exceeding what is on the Event tile. Similarly, for War players will consult the Event tile and use the sword icons on unused dice and chits to score any VPs for War. Play continues in this way across all four ages and once the fourth age has been scored the game ends and winner named victorious!
Components. I have mostly good news here. The dice in this dice game are wonderful. They are all easy to read and understand, and feel great when rolling nine or ten of them at once. The chits are fine, the Progress and Event tiles are nice and thick. The player mats, Score Board, and Progress Board are very thin though. I was going to give that a negative remark, but you know, players don’t really handle them during the game so there is no real need for them to be any thicker. The art is similar as in Nations, and while it does not resonate with me, it is fine. I won’t be playing Nations for the art.
All in all the game is fine. It didn’t blow me away or completely replace Nations (the big game) for me. It IS a pretty quick game to play, so there is one definite improvement over the big brother game; 10-15 minutes per player is pretty spot on. I usually do not prefer dice games to the originals (BANG! The Dice Game being the obvious improvement), and this one is really just on par with the big game. While it takes up less space on the shelf, I wouldn’t necessarily recommend it over its sibling. I feel the same way about each game, so my recommendation is get the version you feel would be played more often. Purple Phoenix Games gives Nations: The Dice Game a Montezuma-should-be-in-Age-IV 6 / 12. Give it a shot if you are into dice games, but grab the original if you want something meatier.
Nations: The Dice Game (can I please just call it Nations for this review as we know I am not talking about the original? Thanks.) is a civilization building, upgrade tile drafting, dice game for one to four players. Players will be upgrading their civilizations over four game rounds to compete for Books and VPs. The player with the most VP at the end of the game is the winner.
Disclaimer: The photos shown here is for a solo game, as I took them during my learning game using the solo rules. Normally the purple d4 is not used in multiplayer games. -T
To setup, each player will choose a starter civilization mat, receive five white dice, a gold chit, and a re-roll chit. Player order will be determined by cards and each player will receive their player order card which doubles as a reference card (great idea). The Progress Board will be set on the table and populated with randomized Age I Progress tiles according to the rule book. The Score Board will also be placed on the table to track Books, Events, and final VPs. The game begins with each player rolling their five dice.
Nations (TDG) is played over four ages with multiple rounds per age. At the beginning of each age old tiles will be removed from the Progress Board and new ones for the current age added. Also an Event tile will be drawn and placed on the Score Board to signify goals for Famine and War at the end of the age. On a player’s turn they will take one action from the following: Re-Roll (any or all unused dice by spending a re-roll chit), Buy tile (from the Progress Board to upgrade player mat spaces and dice), or Build Wonder (tile using Stone dice or chits for VP). When a player has taken as many turns/actions they wish for the age, they turn their player order card to the side to indicate they have passed for the remainder of the age.
Once all players have passed, they will tally their unused dice and any chits showing Books to be recorded on the Book track. Players will score points for Books based on how many opponents they have outscored for Books. Then players will consult the face-up Event tile that was revealed at the beginning of the round. The top portion displays VP earned when players discard unused dice and chits showing Famine leaf icons matching or exceeding what is on the Event tile. Similarly, for War players will consult the Event tile and use the sword icons on unused dice and chits to score any VPs for War. Play continues in this way across all four ages and once the fourth age has been scored the game ends and winner named victorious!
Components. I have mostly good news here. The dice in this dice game are wonderful. They are all easy to read and understand, and feel great when rolling nine or ten of them at once. The chits are fine, the Progress and Event tiles are nice and thick. The player mats, Score Board, and Progress Board are very thin though. I was going to give that a negative remark, but you know, players don’t really handle them during the game so there is no real need for them to be any thicker. The art is similar as in Nations, and while it does not resonate with me, it is fine. I won’t be playing Nations for the art.
All in all the game is fine. It didn’t blow me away or completely replace Nations (the big game) for me. It IS a pretty quick game to play, so there is one definite improvement over the big brother game; 10-15 minutes per player is pretty spot on. I usually do not prefer dice games to the originals (BANG! The Dice Game being the obvious improvement), and this one is really just on par with the big game. While it takes up less space on the shelf, I wouldn’t necessarily recommend it over its sibling. I feel the same way about each game, so my recommendation is get the version you feel would be played more often. Purple Phoenix Games gives Nations: The Dice Game a Montezuma-should-be-in-Age-IV 6 / 12. Give it a shot if you are into dice games, but grab the original if you want something meatier.
Steven Sklansky (231 KP) rated Live By Night (2017) in Movies
Sep 10, 2017
Cast (2 more)
Gun play
Costumes and Sets
Gangsters, Guns and Money. What more is there?
To me Ben Affleck has always been a good actor. It doesn't matter if it is a good movie or a bad one, he seems to make his acting ability known. Live by Night was no different, he played gangster very well. It might be because he was also directing himself. Some movies you can tell that the movie is being directed by the actor in the movie, but in this one you could not see that line. The senses he was in you could tell they were done with the same quality as a director sitting in a chair.
Ben Affleck really does love Boston, because once again that where this whole thing begins. I didn't live in the 20's but the Boston accent must not have been established yet. It was quite refreshing not to hear it in a movie. I really didn't know Boston's backstory but I guess like everywhere on the East Coast there was a mob presence. They did a really good job showing the life of someone in the mob. It wasn't just the killing and booze. It really went deep with the love story of both women and what he had to go though to keep the love and them alive. Even though one of them turned out to be a backstabbing bitch.
When the story progressed to Tampa it was interesting to see something that I don't think has been portrayed in movies. Or I have never seen it. The mob in Florida. The interactions between the Irish and Italian mob in a world of Mexicans and Cubans was done very well. There was a lot going on and it never got boring. The only part of the story that got a little off was rivalry of the mob in Tampa and Miami. You never saw the fights between them until the end. I just thought it was over and done with after the Italians were run out of town. Or maybe I just missed it.
I won't tell you what happened to anyone at the end but the gun fight was amazing. So may parts put in and the chirography was done very well. I think the very end could have been done differently. To me it was very off putting and didn't understand why they choose to go that direction. Granted it was based off a book that I never read and maybe that's the way it had to be. But it could have been written better in the book too. Books seem to get the point across better anyway.
If you like gangster movies, see it. If you like Ben Affleck, see it. If you just want to watch a movie not to be bored, see it.
Ben Affleck really does love Boston, because once again that where this whole thing begins. I didn't live in the 20's but the Boston accent must not have been established yet. It was quite refreshing not to hear it in a movie. I really didn't know Boston's backstory but I guess like everywhere on the East Coast there was a mob presence. They did a really good job showing the life of someone in the mob. It wasn't just the killing and booze. It really went deep with the love story of both women and what he had to go though to keep the love and them alive. Even though one of them turned out to be a backstabbing bitch.
When the story progressed to Tampa it was interesting to see something that I don't think has been portrayed in movies. Or I have never seen it. The mob in Florida. The interactions between the Irish and Italian mob in a world of Mexicans and Cubans was done very well. There was a lot going on and it never got boring. The only part of the story that got a little off was rivalry of the mob in Tampa and Miami. You never saw the fights between them until the end. I just thought it was over and done with after the Italians were run out of town. Or maybe I just missed it.
I won't tell you what happened to anyone at the end but the gun fight was amazing. So may parts put in and the chirography was done very well. I think the very end could have been done differently. To me it was very off putting and didn't understand why they choose to go that direction. Granted it was based off a book that I never read and maybe that's the way it had to be. But it could have been written better in the book too. Books seem to get the point across better anyway.
If you like gangster movies, see it. If you like Ben Affleck, see it. If you just want to watch a movie not to be bored, see it.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Firefly Adventures: Brigands and Browncoats in Tabletop Games
Sep 1, 2021
Okay! Yes. Firefly, a great IP. Check! Gale Force Nine, a publisher that brought a previous Firefly game to life and was pretty darn good. Check! Solo, Cooperative, or Competitive? Check! So far so good, so how does it stack up and have I finally found my gorram Firefly love?
Firefly Adventures: Brigands and Browncoats (from here just Firefly) is a miniatures skirmish game that can be played as a one-off game experience or as a campaign style story game. In it players will either control one or more Crew (the heroes of the show) or all of the Goons (the bad guys). For the solo experience I will be detailing here the solo player will control all characters on both sides. The Crew will be attempting to pull off The Rescue Job by rescuing an injured comrade hostage stashed in one of the 10 buildings on the board. After the hostage has been rescued all Crew and hostage must make it to the landing pad area before time for the Job runs out.
To setup, follow the instructions on the included Job pamphlet (there are four included in the box). The beginning of the Job will look similar to the photo below, though other components outside the board setup may be in whatever location fits the player best. After Equipment cards have been revealed and shopping completed, the game may begin in earnest, and best be quick – you only have 50 Moments to complete the Job!
Firefly is a turn-based minis game, but turns will probably never be in the same order. Each action taken by a character costs Moments in time, tracked by the brown Moments tracker around the board. Each character, be they Crew or Goons, will have their own Time Marker to show where in the 50 Moments the character currently resides. The character whose Time Marker is furthest in the rear of the pack will take their turn next. On a turn characters will have several choices of actions to take: Move, Complete a Test, Heal, Assist, or even Brawl and Shoot!
This Job focuses on gathering Intel from a terminal in one of the buildings or by chatting up nearby Cowboys. These Intel chips may be turned in for information to help narrow down exactly in which building the hostage is being held. Along the way, however, certain events may cause the Crew to have to “act heroic,” which means swapping out their gray “casual” mini for their green “heroic” mini in order to complete the event. Funny thing though, once a Crew member acts heroic, if ending their turn within line of sight of a Goon, that Goon becomes Alerted and joins the Timeline with their own mini and Time Marker. The Goons will now be trying to take out the beloved Crew member! As in the photo below, poor Mal is being surrounded by Goons with Zoe and Jayne nearby to help.
When all is said and done, Crew and Goons will be taking actions and spending Moments to do so. Should the Crew get to the landing pad with the hostage in tow the Crew wins! However, if time runs out on the Job (as it did with me twice) then the Job has failed. In either case the Crew may receive Rewards in various amounts of credits or Intel or other rewards that they may carry with to the next Job if playing a Story (several Jobs in succession).
Components. I am a HUGE fan of the components in this box. Not only are the minis great, the tokens chunky, and the artwork very good, but each 3D building is pre-assembled right out of the box. They nest very tightly and neatly within the box (whose bottom is also a very large building), but you will need to provide a bunch of baggies or other storage means because all the small components will be dumped into these buildings otherwise. I love all the components in this game, and they are all wonderful to handle… except one – the Time Markers. These are the tokens that represent the characters on the Moments tracker. As characters move along the tracker their Time Markers will be placed on a blank spot, or more often than not, on top of a stack of other Markers. No problem usually, unless your big man-hands tend not to be dextrous enough to grab the top Marker cleanly off the stack and it causes a giant mess of Time Markers on the board. I mean, not that it happened to me several times, of course…
In any case, Firefly is a marvelous scenario-based minis game that I have had nothing but great times playing – even solo! I honestly cannot imagine having more fun by adding more players, so this may be another “solo only” game for me. I will probably try it with my wife, maybe, or someone else once the COVID is gone. I love being able to figure out how best to maneuver each character in order to achieve the goals of the Job, but then something always causing me to have to act heroic and end my turn in LOS of a Goon, so now they are coming after me. I would not necessarily compare it to an action-programming game where you make plans only to have randomness obliterate them, but it certainly adds a giant amount of tactics to the game. In fact, during one play Mal alerted four Cowboys at once, and then the game was no longer a strategic stealthy experience but an all-out melee just to survive. I lost the Job, but only by a few Moments.
Ahh, this one is fabulous, and I am so happy that I have finally found that perfect-for-me Firefly game. If you are a fan of the Firefly mythos and are looking for a game that does it justice while having a ton of replayability, then please check out Firefly Adventures: Brigands and Browncoats. I am seriously also considering purchasing the expansions to add Book, Inara, Simon, and River. I mean, how could you NOT want to add River to your game?? I’ll be in my bunk.
Firefly Adventures: Brigands and Browncoats (from here just Firefly) is a miniatures skirmish game that can be played as a one-off game experience or as a campaign style story game. In it players will either control one or more Crew (the heroes of the show) or all of the Goons (the bad guys). For the solo experience I will be detailing here the solo player will control all characters on both sides. The Crew will be attempting to pull off The Rescue Job by rescuing an injured comrade hostage stashed in one of the 10 buildings on the board. After the hostage has been rescued all Crew and hostage must make it to the landing pad area before time for the Job runs out.
To setup, follow the instructions on the included Job pamphlet (there are four included in the box). The beginning of the Job will look similar to the photo below, though other components outside the board setup may be in whatever location fits the player best. After Equipment cards have been revealed and shopping completed, the game may begin in earnest, and best be quick – you only have 50 Moments to complete the Job!
Firefly is a turn-based minis game, but turns will probably never be in the same order. Each action taken by a character costs Moments in time, tracked by the brown Moments tracker around the board. Each character, be they Crew or Goons, will have their own Time Marker to show where in the 50 Moments the character currently resides. The character whose Time Marker is furthest in the rear of the pack will take their turn next. On a turn characters will have several choices of actions to take: Move, Complete a Test, Heal, Assist, or even Brawl and Shoot!
This Job focuses on gathering Intel from a terminal in one of the buildings or by chatting up nearby Cowboys. These Intel chips may be turned in for information to help narrow down exactly in which building the hostage is being held. Along the way, however, certain events may cause the Crew to have to “act heroic,” which means swapping out their gray “casual” mini for their green “heroic” mini in order to complete the event. Funny thing though, once a Crew member acts heroic, if ending their turn within line of sight of a Goon, that Goon becomes Alerted and joins the Timeline with their own mini and Time Marker. The Goons will now be trying to take out the beloved Crew member! As in the photo below, poor Mal is being surrounded by Goons with Zoe and Jayne nearby to help.
When all is said and done, Crew and Goons will be taking actions and spending Moments to do so. Should the Crew get to the landing pad with the hostage in tow the Crew wins! However, if time runs out on the Job (as it did with me twice) then the Job has failed. In either case the Crew may receive Rewards in various amounts of credits or Intel or other rewards that they may carry with to the next Job if playing a Story (several Jobs in succession).
Components. I am a HUGE fan of the components in this box. Not only are the minis great, the tokens chunky, and the artwork very good, but each 3D building is pre-assembled right out of the box. They nest very tightly and neatly within the box (whose bottom is also a very large building), but you will need to provide a bunch of baggies or other storage means because all the small components will be dumped into these buildings otherwise. I love all the components in this game, and they are all wonderful to handle… except one – the Time Markers. These are the tokens that represent the characters on the Moments tracker. As characters move along the tracker their Time Markers will be placed on a blank spot, or more often than not, on top of a stack of other Markers. No problem usually, unless your big man-hands tend not to be dextrous enough to grab the top Marker cleanly off the stack and it causes a giant mess of Time Markers on the board. I mean, not that it happened to me several times, of course…
In any case, Firefly is a marvelous scenario-based minis game that I have had nothing but great times playing – even solo! I honestly cannot imagine having more fun by adding more players, so this may be another “solo only” game for me. I will probably try it with my wife, maybe, or someone else once the COVID is gone. I love being able to figure out how best to maneuver each character in order to achieve the goals of the Job, but then something always causing me to have to act heroic and end my turn in LOS of a Goon, so now they are coming after me. I would not necessarily compare it to an action-programming game where you make plans only to have randomness obliterate them, but it certainly adds a giant amount of tactics to the game. In fact, during one play Mal alerted four Cowboys at once, and then the game was no longer a strategic stealthy experience but an all-out melee just to survive. I lost the Job, but only by a few Moments.
Ahh, this one is fabulous, and I am so happy that I have finally found that perfect-for-me Firefly game. If you are a fan of the Firefly mythos and are looking for a game that does it justice while having a ton of replayability, then please check out Firefly Adventures: Brigands and Browncoats. I am seriously also considering purchasing the expansions to add Book, Inara, Simon, and River. I mean, how could you NOT want to add River to your game?? I’ll be in my bunk.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Enola Holmes (2020) in Movies
Oct 18, 2020
A Winning (enough) combination
I'm a sucker for Sherlock Holmes. I grew up watching the fantastic black and white Holmes films from the 1940's starring Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce. I checked out '70's Holmes flicks like MURDER BY DECREE and the 7 PERCENT SOLUTION and then re-fell-in-love with Holmes with the Jeremy Brett BBC SHERLOCK HOLMES TV series of the 1980's and, of course, Benedict Cumberbatch's modern take on the master sleuth in the 2000's was "must see TV" for me. I was even on-board with Robert Downey Jr's. "take" on this iconic sleuth and was thrilled when Sir Ian McKellen portrayed an elderly Sherlock Holmes in MR. HOLMES.
So...I eagerly awaited the Netflix treatment of the "younger" sister of Sherlock Holmes in ENOLA HOLMES -and, I gotta say, I wasn't disappointed.
Based on the Young Adult series of novels by Nancy Springer, ENOLA HOLMES introduces us to the (heretofore unknown) younger sister of Sherlock and Mycroft Holmes. Raised by a fiercely independent mother in the late 1880's, Enola goes searching for her when she goes missing and gets mixed up in the "The Case of the Missing Marquess" along the way.
Millie Bobbie Brown (STRANGER THINGS) is a winning, charismatic (enough) performer as Enola. She is a steady and sure hand at the helm of this ship throughout the course of this 2 hour and 3 minute adventure. While I would have liked her to command the screen more with her presence, she does enough to make it a good, solid, effort.
The supporting cast is just as good. Helena Bonham Carter (FIGHT CLUB) is perfectly cast as Enola's (and Sherlock's and Mycroft's) mother - she has that fierce streak of independence and "don't mess with me" energy while carving her own path. She is the type of character that one would go looking for if she went missing. Sam Claflin (HUNGER GAMES: CATCHING FIRE) is finely unrecognizable (at least to me) as Mycroft - written in this piece as the more "traditional" of the Holmes family and Henry Cavill (MAN OF STEEL) brings a strong arrogance to his portrayal of Sherlock. He also brings something else - heart - to this character, a character trait that has "traditional" fans of this character up in arms. For me, it works well in the context of this film.
As for the film itself - it is good (enough). I found myself enjoying the mystery and the characters and enjoyed my time in this world. It's not anything new, but it's like putting on a pair of old shoes - comforting to wear.
This is an adaptation of the first book of the series, and I, for one, hope that there are more. It's a winning combination that was pleasant to watch.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
So...I eagerly awaited the Netflix treatment of the "younger" sister of Sherlock Holmes in ENOLA HOLMES -and, I gotta say, I wasn't disappointed.
Based on the Young Adult series of novels by Nancy Springer, ENOLA HOLMES introduces us to the (heretofore unknown) younger sister of Sherlock and Mycroft Holmes. Raised by a fiercely independent mother in the late 1880's, Enola goes searching for her when she goes missing and gets mixed up in the "The Case of the Missing Marquess" along the way.
Millie Bobbie Brown (STRANGER THINGS) is a winning, charismatic (enough) performer as Enola. She is a steady and sure hand at the helm of this ship throughout the course of this 2 hour and 3 minute adventure. While I would have liked her to command the screen more with her presence, she does enough to make it a good, solid, effort.
The supporting cast is just as good. Helena Bonham Carter (FIGHT CLUB) is perfectly cast as Enola's (and Sherlock's and Mycroft's) mother - she has that fierce streak of independence and "don't mess with me" energy while carving her own path. She is the type of character that one would go looking for if she went missing. Sam Claflin (HUNGER GAMES: CATCHING FIRE) is finely unrecognizable (at least to me) as Mycroft - written in this piece as the more "traditional" of the Holmes family and Henry Cavill (MAN OF STEEL) brings a strong arrogance to his portrayal of Sherlock. He also brings something else - heart - to this character, a character trait that has "traditional" fans of this character up in arms. For me, it works well in the context of this film.
As for the film itself - it is good (enough). I found myself enjoying the mystery and the characters and enjoyed my time in this world. It's not anything new, but it's like putting on a pair of old shoes - comforting to wear.
This is an adaptation of the first book of the series, and I, for one, hope that there are more. It's a winning combination that was pleasant to watch.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Darren (1599 KP) rated 6 Below: Miracle on the Mountain (2017) in Movies
Oct 2, 2019
Characters – Eric LeMarque had a future as one of the top ice hockey players, he threw this away with hiss reckless behaviour which has seen his career all but gone. With his addiction taking over his life, he finds himself hitting rock bottom and needing to find some hope. Heading for a snowboard away from the world he ends up lost in the harsh wilderness doing everything he can to survive in the conditions which will test his desire to get over his addictions and rebuild his life. Susan is his mother, she has always supported her son and will do anything to help him put his life back on track and is the first to notice he hasn’t been heard from for days. Sarah is one of the rescue team on the mountain, she leads the search once they learn that Eric is missing.
Performances – Josh Hartnett in the leading role does a good job, even if it feels slightly mis-cast because you get the feeling Eric was a lot younger than Hartnett. Mira Sorvino and Sarah Dumont are both solid in the supporting roles as we see them both needing to make difficult decisions.
Story – The story here follows the incredible survival story of Eric LeMarque as he faces days lost in the snow-covered mountain range without anyone searching for him for days, while also battling his own demons of addiction. The story itself is based on the real events that happened to the man who needed to rebuild his life. This does show us just how hard the survival was, though it just doesn’t become the truly engrossing story it could have been, because anything that happens is something we have seen before, be it wolves or injuries. Eric isn’t the most likely guy either because anyone that throws away a sporting career for drugs frustrates the audience. The rescue side of the film either needed to be a bigger involvement or not involved at all, we simply don’t get enough focus on what is happening on this side of the film.
Adventure/Biopic – The adventure side of the film shows us just what could go wrong for an ambitious rush can turn into a battle to survive. The biopic side of the film shows us the days which Eric is lost in the harsh snowy mountain conditions as he battles to survive and his own demons.
Settings – The film puts us in the mountain range covered in snow, showing us how easy it could be to become lost and how hard it would be to survive.
Scene of the Movie – The climb.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Hartnett feels too old for this role.
Final Thoughts – This is a by the book survival story, it does show an incredible fight to survive and does give us a form of redemption for a young man who was throwing his life away.
Overall: By the books survival film.
Rating
Performances – Josh Hartnett in the leading role does a good job, even if it feels slightly mis-cast because you get the feeling Eric was a lot younger than Hartnett. Mira Sorvino and Sarah Dumont are both solid in the supporting roles as we see them both needing to make difficult decisions.
Story – The story here follows the incredible survival story of Eric LeMarque as he faces days lost in the snow-covered mountain range without anyone searching for him for days, while also battling his own demons of addiction. The story itself is based on the real events that happened to the man who needed to rebuild his life. This does show us just how hard the survival was, though it just doesn’t become the truly engrossing story it could have been, because anything that happens is something we have seen before, be it wolves or injuries. Eric isn’t the most likely guy either because anyone that throws away a sporting career for drugs frustrates the audience. The rescue side of the film either needed to be a bigger involvement or not involved at all, we simply don’t get enough focus on what is happening on this side of the film.
Adventure/Biopic – The adventure side of the film shows us just what could go wrong for an ambitious rush can turn into a battle to survive. The biopic side of the film shows us the days which Eric is lost in the harsh snowy mountain conditions as he battles to survive and his own demons.
Settings – The film puts us in the mountain range covered in snow, showing us how easy it could be to become lost and how hard it would be to survive.
Scene of the Movie – The climb.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Hartnett feels too old for this role.
Final Thoughts – This is a by the book survival story, it does show an incredible fight to survive and does give us a form of redemption for a young man who was throwing his life away.
Overall: By the books survival film.
Rating
My Budget Book
Finance and Business
App
A housekeeping book cannot be easier. The surface is kept simple on purpose and provides all...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Moneyball (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Baseball economics has long a source of serious debate amongst fans, players, and teams. The contentious issues of how to divide the revenue in an equitable manner led to the cancellation of the playoffs and World Series in 1994 and is still largely unresolved today. While smaller market teams are given funds from a luxury tax imposed on larger payroll teams, it still fails to provide an even competitive playing field when large market teams, such as the New York Yankees, can field teams with a $225 million-plus payroll while the smaller market teams have to make do with budgets often under $40 million.
Naturally, this has put many teams at a competitive disadvantage and most feel that they have no chance to win long-term, even as they develop cheap homegrown talent in their minor-league systems. They lose said talent to the larger market clubs once players become eligible for free agency. It is against this backdrop that the new film “Moneyball” starring Brad Pitt is set.
The film was based on the book of the same name which tells the story and philosophy of Oakland A’s general manager Billy Beane. Beane was a highly recruited baseball player at a high school who turned down a scholarship to Stanford for his shot at the major leagues. Unfortunately for Beane, his career was a major disappointment punctuated with numerous stops between the pros and the minor leagues which resulted in a very mediocre and forgettable career.
Beane got himself a job as a scout and in time worked his way to being the general manager of the Oakland A’s. As the film opens, Oakland has just lost a deciding Game 5 the New York Yankees, whose payroll at the time was almost $120 million greater than Oaklands. Adding further insult to injury, Oakland is unable to re-sign its three biggest stars as they accept large contracts with the Yankees, Red Sox, and other large market teams.
Unable to get any additional funds from his owner, Beane travels to Cleveland in an attempt to find affordable talent via trades. Beane is categorically rebuffed and told that he couldn’t afford many of the players that he’s asking about and that the ones he can afford are not be available to him.
Beane notices a young man, Peter Brand (Jonah Hill) during the negotiations, whose quiet input was heeded by the Indians, even though this is Peter’s first job since graduating from Yale with an economics degree. Beane gets Peter to confide in him about his beliefs that the traditional baseball method for evaluating talent is all wrong and that there is a better way to do it.
Intrigued, Beane hires Brand to be his assistant general manager and the two set out to rebuild the Oakland A’s on a budget. Needless to say this does not sit well with many of the talent scouts or manager Art Howe (a very believable Phillip Seymour Hoffman), who sees the recruiting of washed-up has-beens and never-weres by Beane as misguided and ridiculous.
But Beane and Brand are determined, and using statistical formula that looks at such things as on-base percentages and runs scored as opposed to batting average, home runs, and RBIs, the A’s quickly put together an unlikely team. It doesn’t immediately play out well for the hopeful general manager because Howe is unwilling to play many of the new players that have been brought on. Oakland quickly sinks to the bottom of the league, and many begin to question the sanity of Bean’s approach, to the point that even his young daughter worries that his days as a general manager are numbered.
The film does a good job at showing the inner workings of baseball and Pitt does an amazing job showing the complex nature of Beane. He is a single father dealing with the failure of his playing career, and his inability to get Oakland to be a consistant winner. He puts everything he has into this so-called outrageous scheme and is willing to see it through no matter the cost. Chris Pratt does great supporting work as Scott Hatteberg, one of Beane’s reclamation projects as does Stephen Bisop as aging major-league slugger David Justice.
The film stays very true to historical events and shows the characters as they are, flaws and all. While a true story, Peter Brand, is a fictional charcter based on Paul DePodesta who introduced Beane to the analytical principles of sabermetrics. The movie remains a very interesting character study as well as an examination of the delicate relationships between players, front offices, and ownership where wins and dollars are paramount even when many teams are struggling to make do with less.
That being said the film was a very enjoyable and realistic look at the inner workings of baseball that should not be missed.
Naturally, this has put many teams at a competitive disadvantage and most feel that they have no chance to win long-term, even as they develop cheap homegrown talent in their minor-league systems. They lose said talent to the larger market clubs once players become eligible for free agency. It is against this backdrop that the new film “Moneyball” starring Brad Pitt is set.
The film was based on the book of the same name which tells the story and philosophy of Oakland A’s general manager Billy Beane. Beane was a highly recruited baseball player at a high school who turned down a scholarship to Stanford for his shot at the major leagues. Unfortunately for Beane, his career was a major disappointment punctuated with numerous stops between the pros and the minor leagues which resulted in a very mediocre and forgettable career.
Beane got himself a job as a scout and in time worked his way to being the general manager of the Oakland A’s. As the film opens, Oakland has just lost a deciding Game 5 the New York Yankees, whose payroll at the time was almost $120 million greater than Oaklands. Adding further insult to injury, Oakland is unable to re-sign its three biggest stars as they accept large contracts with the Yankees, Red Sox, and other large market teams.
Unable to get any additional funds from his owner, Beane travels to Cleveland in an attempt to find affordable talent via trades. Beane is categorically rebuffed and told that he couldn’t afford many of the players that he’s asking about and that the ones he can afford are not be available to him.
Beane notices a young man, Peter Brand (Jonah Hill) during the negotiations, whose quiet input was heeded by the Indians, even though this is Peter’s first job since graduating from Yale with an economics degree. Beane gets Peter to confide in him about his beliefs that the traditional baseball method for evaluating talent is all wrong and that there is a better way to do it.
Intrigued, Beane hires Brand to be his assistant general manager and the two set out to rebuild the Oakland A’s on a budget. Needless to say this does not sit well with many of the talent scouts or manager Art Howe (a very believable Phillip Seymour Hoffman), who sees the recruiting of washed-up has-beens and never-weres by Beane as misguided and ridiculous.
But Beane and Brand are determined, and using statistical formula that looks at such things as on-base percentages and runs scored as opposed to batting average, home runs, and RBIs, the A’s quickly put together an unlikely team. It doesn’t immediately play out well for the hopeful general manager because Howe is unwilling to play many of the new players that have been brought on. Oakland quickly sinks to the bottom of the league, and many begin to question the sanity of Bean’s approach, to the point that even his young daughter worries that his days as a general manager are numbered.
The film does a good job at showing the inner workings of baseball and Pitt does an amazing job showing the complex nature of Beane. He is a single father dealing with the failure of his playing career, and his inability to get Oakland to be a consistant winner. He puts everything he has into this so-called outrageous scheme and is willing to see it through no matter the cost. Chris Pratt does great supporting work as Scott Hatteberg, one of Beane’s reclamation projects as does Stephen Bisop as aging major-league slugger David Justice.
The film stays very true to historical events and shows the characters as they are, flaws and all. While a true story, Peter Brand, is a fictional charcter based on Paul DePodesta who introduced Beane to the analytical principles of sabermetrics. The movie remains a very interesting character study as well as an examination of the delicate relationships between players, front offices, and ownership where wins and dollars are paramount even when many teams are struggling to make do with less.
That being said the film was a very enjoyable and realistic look at the inner workings of baseball that should not be missed.
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated The Other Boleyn Girl in Books
Feb 15, 2019
Going into <b>The Other Boleyn Girl</b> I already knew that the historical details weren't very factual, but I had this laying around and needed something both light and set in the past, so I figured this would do nicely. The writing itself is perfectly fine, and mostly, I did enjoy the book. Although, for the first half, it seemed as if everyone only wore red and by the end I got so sick of hearing about Anne's "B" for Boleyn necklace I could scream.
Mary Boleyn, the narrator, is a strange character: sympathetic and of reasonable intelligence one minute, a moronic irritant the next. Personality-wise she went up and down and back and forth. First she was fine not being the King's favorite anymore and seeming to want to leave the court life for the country to be with her children, then she was jealous of a title Anne received, years after the affair between Mary and Henry was over. Possibly this was put in as part of the rivalry between the sisters, but it didn't contextually fit. Her development could have used more work and she didn't mature or change much throughout the whole book, especially between the years 1522 to 1533. I seriously got tired of everybody's patronizing and calling her a fool all the time. They should have just named the book, <b>The Foolish Boleyn Girl</b>. I find it hard to believe Mary was so ignorant the king would have continued to have her as mistress for four years, give or take. She had to offer something other than good looks and being great in the bedroom. Anne herself sure was a piece of work, and even though she was pretty much evil throughout the book, I did still feel sorry for her at the end. Jane Parker was a one-dimensional malicious harpy who wasn't given a reason why she was that way; she was just the resident baddy to the Boleyns. To me, it felt like defamation of character.
Politics and the separation of the Church of England from the Catholic Church were merely mentioned in passing as court life and its primary players took center stage. The whole incest plot, I could have done without. Now if it were the absolute truth then it'd be okay, but since it's highly debatable and based on hearsay, I found it unnecessary and gratuitous. Around the two-thirds mark, the pace let up and it became more sluggish and boring, and it wasn't until the last sixty pages that it recaptured my attention again.
As long as readers know going into this book that the history has been twisted around and invented for pure sensation, then it's fine as a fictional read, but take any "facts" with a grain of salt. While it was an okay read, I didn't love it, but it managed to divert my attention for a few days.
One last note dealing with the fourth question in the Q&A with Philippa Gregory in the back of the book:
<blockquote>How about Mary and Anne's brother, George? Did he really sleep with his sister so that she could give Henry a son?
<i>Nobody can know the answer to this one. Anne was accused of adultery with George at their trials and his wife gave evidence against them both. Most people think the trial was a show trial, but it is an interesting accusation. Anne had three miscarriages by the time of her trial, and she was not a woman to let something like sin or crime stand in her way--she was clearly guilty of one murder. I think if she had thought that Henry could not bear a son she was quite capable of finding someone to father a child on her. If she thought that, then George would have been the obvious choice.</i></blockquote>
Obvious? How in the world is that obvious? You cannot be serious, Ms. Gregory. Now I'm far from an expert in Tudor England, but I cannot imagine that being a common practice. Maybe someone more knowledgeable about this time could tell me if that ever happened, because it just boggles my mind that George would be the "<i>obvious choice</i>." Not to mention, who the hell did Anne supposedly kill? I hadn't heard that anywhere. Even my searches are coming up blank.
Mary Boleyn, the narrator, is a strange character: sympathetic and of reasonable intelligence one minute, a moronic irritant the next. Personality-wise she went up and down and back and forth. First she was fine not being the King's favorite anymore and seeming to want to leave the court life for the country to be with her children, then she was jealous of a title Anne received, years after the affair between Mary and Henry was over. Possibly this was put in as part of the rivalry between the sisters, but it didn't contextually fit. Her development could have used more work and she didn't mature or change much throughout the whole book, especially between the years 1522 to 1533. I seriously got tired of everybody's patronizing and calling her a fool all the time. They should have just named the book, <b>The Foolish Boleyn Girl</b>. I find it hard to believe Mary was so ignorant the king would have continued to have her as mistress for four years, give or take. She had to offer something other than good looks and being great in the bedroom. Anne herself sure was a piece of work, and even though she was pretty much evil throughout the book, I did still feel sorry for her at the end. Jane Parker was a one-dimensional malicious harpy who wasn't given a reason why she was that way; she was just the resident baddy to the Boleyns. To me, it felt like defamation of character.
Politics and the separation of the Church of England from the Catholic Church were merely mentioned in passing as court life and its primary players took center stage. The whole incest plot, I could have done without. Now if it were the absolute truth then it'd be okay, but since it's highly debatable and based on hearsay, I found it unnecessary and gratuitous. Around the two-thirds mark, the pace let up and it became more sluggish and boring, and it wasn't until the last sixty pages that it recaptured my attention again.
As long as readers know going into this book that the history has been twisted around and invented for pure sensation, then it's fine as a fictional read, but take any "facts" with a grain of salt. While it was an okay read, I didn't love it, but it managed to divert my attention for a few days.
One last note dealing with the fourth question in the Q&A with Philippa Gregory in the back of the book:
<blockquote>How about Mary and Anne's brother, George? Did he really sleep with his sister so that she could give Henry a son?
<i>Nobody can know the answer to this one. Anne was accused of adultery with George at their trials and his wife gave evidence against them both. Most people think the trial was a show trial, but it is an interesting accusation. Anne had three miscarriages by the time of her trial, and she was not a woman to let something like sin or crime stand in her way--she was clearly guilty of one murder. I think if she had thought that Henry could not bear a son she was quite capable of finding someone to father a child on her. If she thought that, then George would have been the obvious choice.</i></blockquote>
Obvious? How in the world is that obvious? You cannot be serious, Ms. Gregory. Now I'm far from an expert in Tudor England, but I cannot imagine that being a common practice. Maybe someone more knowledgeable about this time could tell me if that ever happened, because it just boggles my mind that George would be the "<i>obvious choice</i>." Not to mention, who the hell did Anne supposedly kill? I hadn't heard that anywhere. Even my searches are coming up blank.