Search
Search results
Eilidh G Clark (177 KP) rated Nasty Women in Books
May 13, 2017
Nasty women is hard-hitting, eye-opening, and unashamedly honest.
‘Sometimes the role model you need is not an example to aspire to, but someone who reflects back the parts of yourself that society deems fit.’ -
Becca Inglis
Nasty Women, published by 404 ink, is a collection of essays about what it is, and how it feels to be a woman in the 21st century. When I first picked up the book, I assumed, like I think most readers would, that it would be an easy book to just pick up and put down whenever I had a spare ten minutes. Wrong, I was sucked into this book right from the beginning, and read it all in a day. That doesn’t mean it was an easy read, or perhaps easy is the wrong word – it isn’t a comfortable read - and it isn’t meant to be. Nasty women is hard-hitting, eye-opening, and unashamedly honest.
The book opens with ‘Independence Day’ by Katie Muriel. A story of mixed race and identity in Trump’s America, Muriel discusses her experience of inter-family racism, heightened by political differences, ‘This is not the first, nor is it the last family divide Trump will leave in his wake, but I refuse to think of him as some deity who stands around shifting pieces on a board in his golden war room.’ The anger in this piece is clear, but it is the rationalism and clarity of the writer that speaks volumes. Race, racism and xenophobia, is a prominent feature in these stories. Claire L. Heuchan, for example, talks about ‘Othering’ a term that readers will see repeatedly in this book, ‘Scotland,’ she writes, ‘is a fairly isolating place to be a black woman.’
Survival is a key trope in Nasty Women. Mel Reeve, in ‘The Nastiness of Survival,’ talks about being a survivor of rape and emotional abuse, ‘I do not fit the ‘right’ definition of someone who has been raped.’ This statement alone is filled with irony.
I was particularly drawn to Laura Waddell’s essay, ‘Against Stereotypes: Working Class Girls and Working Class Art.’ Laura talks about the difficulty of both gender and class inequality, and, in particular, the lack of working class writers and working class fiction being published, ‘I have read a lot of fiction’ she says, ‘I have read almost none from housing estates such as the one I grew up on. These stories are missing, from shelves, and from the record.’ As a Scottish fiction writer from a working-class background myself, these words resonate deeply.
Alice Tarbuck’s ‘Foraging and Feminism: Hedge-Witchcraft in the 21st Century’, is almost fun to read in a deeply devastating way. There is a desperate tone in this piece, and a desperate need to escape society. ‘There is beauty and bounty around us if we look for it, and perhaps that is all the magic we need. Or perhaps, what we need is real magic, whether that comes in the form of resistance and community or the form of blackthorn charms and skullcap tinctures, and howling to the moon.
I loved this book. This book gives women a voice. And it is loud! Well done 404 Ink, and all the contributors, for bravely breaking the silence.
Becca Inglis
Nasty Women, published by 404 ink, is a collection of essays about what it is, and how it feels to be a woman in the 21st century. When I first picked up the book, I assumed, like I think most readers would, that it would be an easy book to just pick up and put down whenever I had a spare ten minutes. Wrong, I was sucked into this book right from the beginning, and read it all in a day. That doesn’t mean it was an easy read, or perhaps easy is the wrong word – it isn’t a comfortable read - and it isn’t meant to be. Nasty women is hard-hitting, eye-opening, and unashamedly honest.
The book opens with ‘Independence Day’ by Katie Muriel. A story of mixed race and identity in Trump’s America, Muriel discusses her experience of inter-family racism, heightened by political differences, ‘This is not the first, nor is it the last family divide Trump will leave in his wake, but I refuse to think of him as some deity who stands around shifting pieces on a board in his golden war room.’ The anger in this piece is clear, but it is the rationalism and clarity of the writer that speaks volumes. Race, racism and xenophobia, is a prominent feature in these stories. Claire L. Heuchan, for example, talks about ‘Othering’ a term that readers will see repeatedly in this book, ‘Scotland,’ she writes, ‘is a fairly isolating place to be a black woman.’
Survival is a key trope in Nasty Women. Mel Reeve, in ‘The Nastiness of Survival,’ talks about being a survivor of rape and emotional abuse, ‘I do not fit the ‘right’ definition of someone who has been raped.’ This statement alone is filled with irony.
I was particularly drawn to Laura Waddell’s essay, ‘Against Stereotypes: Working Class Girls and Working Class Art.’ Laura talks about the difficulty of both gender and class inequality, and, in particular, the lack of working class writers and working class fiction being published, ‘I have read a lot of fiction’ she says, ‘I have read almost none from housing estates such as the one I grew up on. These stories are missing, from shelves, and from the record.’ As a Scottish fiction writer from a working-class background myself, these words resonate deeply.
Alice Tarbuck’s ‘Foraging and Feminism: Hedge-Witchcraft in the 21st Century’, is almost fun to read in a deeply devastating way. There is a desperate tone in this piece, and a desperate need to escape society. ‘There is beauty and bounty around us if we look for it, and perhaps that is all the magic we need. Or perhaps, what we need is real magic, whether that comes in the form of resistance and community or the form of blackthorn charms and skullcap tinctures, and howling to the moon.
I loved this book. This book gives women a voice. And it is loud! Well done 404 Ink, and all the contributors, for bravely breaking the silence.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising (2016) in Movies
Jul 19, 2017
An Unnecessarily Good Time
When the trailers for the first Bad Neighbours movie were released, I really wanted to see it as I’m a big fan of Seth Rogen comedies, but when it was released I was really underwhelmed. Then I heard they were making a sequel and while I’m sure that the first movie made money I just thought that a sequel to Neighbours was totally unneeded. I love it when I’m wrong. Bad Neighbours 2 is a million times better than the first movie and it is also a lot better than the trailers show it to be. The trailers make it out to be a silly slapstick dick joke movie, but some of the comedy is actually really original and more subtly hidden in the dialogue in the script. The slapstick humour is kept to a minimum and the comedic timing from the whole cast is spot on. To be honest going in, I thought that the sorority would annoy me and detract from the comedy in the film, but they were probably the best element in the movie. There was a heavier girl in the movie playing one of the sorority members and I initially thought she would be no more than the Melissa McCarthy or Rebel Wilson character in the movie, where she would just say I’m fat and fall over and say a dirty word and call it comedy but she actually pleasantly surprised me and she was possibly the funniest character in the movie. This film was a breath of fresh air and it totally trumped it’s predecessor. Comedy directors should take note this is how you make a good sequel to a comedy flick.
Don’t get me wrong, its not a perfect comedy by any means and some of the laughs do fall flat, but the vast majority of them do land and there were a few times where I belly laughed really loudly in the picture hall and that is something that has not happened in a while, probably not since Deadpool back in January. If you are looking to switch your brain off and enjoy a good juvenile summer comedy then I would definitely recommend this to you. Zac Effron is kind of doing a Channing Tatum impression these days in a lot of ways, but he, (like Tatum,) is so likable and charming that he pulls it off. His character, as well as Dave Franco’s character and the other guys from the first movie’s fraternity that are also in the sequel are much better written and portrayed across the board in this movie. This film is just superior in every way and it marks a rare occasion when a comedy sequel actually outshines the previous film. Don’t get me wrong though this isn’t the wittiest dialogue ever put to film either, there are plenty of dick jokes and some lazy slapstick, but for the most part the laughs are a bit deeper than what you would expect going in.
Overall I really enjoyed this movie for what it was and it really pleasantly surprised me in a big way. I’d also see it again as I’m sure there are a few jokes I missed the first time around.
Don’t get me wrong, its not a perfect comedy by any means and some of the laughs do fall flat, but the vast majority of them do land and there were a few times where I belly laughed really loudly in the picture hall and that is something that has not happened in a while, probably not since Deadpool back in January. If you are looking to switch your brain off and enjoy a good juvenile summer comedy then I would definitely recommend this to you. Zac Effron is kind of doing a Channing Tatum impression these days in a lot of ways, but he, (like Tatum,) is so likable and charming that he pulls it off. His character, as well as Dave Franco’s character and the other guys from the first movie’s fraternity that are also in the sequel are much better written and portrayed across the board in this movie. This film is just superior in every way and it marks a rare occasion when a comedy sequel actually outshines the previous film. Don’t get me wrong though this isn’t the wittiest dialogue ever put to film either, there are plenty of dick jokes and some lazy slapstick, but for the most part the laughs are a bit deeper than what you would expect going in.
Overall I really enjoyed this movie for what it was and it really pleasantly surprised me in a big way. I’d also see it again as I’m sure there are a few jokes I missed the first time around.
Connor Sheffield (293 KP) rated You Died, But a Necromancer Revived You in Video Games
Apr 19, 2019
Fast Paced Action (5 more)
Ever changing maps
Traps that make you think
Great art design
Great level design
Simple gameplay
Let Me Die!
You Died but a Necromancer Revived You......but you'll wish you had just stayed dead as you face the same levels over and over and over again. Speed and Accuracy are mandatory.
This game is so simple with no other controls to worry about other than your movement using the analog stick, or the D-Pads. The skill to get through the levels however becomes increasingly more difficult, and rapidly more frustrating as you will die.....over and over and over again, only to either respawn at the first level, or if you play on easy mode, you just have to play that same floor again where you just died, but don't bother memorising the traps placements, cos this game doesn't let you off the hook that easily....the maps change even when your playing the same floor you just died on.
Part of you might think at first, I'll wait for the trap to go before I move, but oh no, once again speed and accuracy are key here, you have to time your runs right, get through the traps, try not to get shot, stabbed, squashed, or even more so....try not to run off the edge into a floor full of spikes....it's not as easy to avoid as you might think, one small step in the wrong direction of those floors and you're gone.
This game is addictive, but so utterly frustrating and I had a good laugh on my own the first 100 times I died but I can imagine that with 3 other players on the board in 4-Player Co-Op mode, it will leave you in stitches (hopefully not literally....leave that to your character to injure themselves).
Difficulty levels I have seen this far are simply Easy, or Normal. I don't know if a hard difficulty unlocks after complete the game, because honestly at the minute....I can't complete it. The levels where you face the Necromancer himself are super frustrating and very difficult to do without messing up again and again. However, don't thin easy level makes the traps etc any easier....all it does is simply keep you on the floor you died (unless its a boss battle). The difficulty level of the traps does not change and in Normal mode, if you die, you go right back to the beginning of the level, but luckily there are checkpoints along the way so you don't start from square one again.
Oh and did I mention that as time goes on, the floor eventually starts blowing up behind you, making you rush through to the end.
There are a variety of awesome 8-bit characters to choose from, which gives this whole game a great nostalgic vibe of playing retro games, but with so much added in that it stills feels modern and definitely a game you'll keep going back to. Especially for a game night with friends.
I highly recommend this game for anyone who's a fan of action packed arcade games with a retro feel.
Just try not to throw the remote.
This game is so simple with no other controls to worry about other than your movement using the analog stick, or the D-Pads. The skill to get through the levels however becomes increasingly more difficult, and rapidly more frustrating as you will die.....over and over and over again, only to either respawn at the first level, or if you play on easy mode, you just have to play that same floor again where you just died, but don't bother memorising the traps placements, cos this game doesn't let you off the hook that easily....the maps change even when your playing the same floor you just died on.
Part of you might think at first, I'll wait for the trap to go before I move, but oh no, once again speed and accuracy are key here, you have to time your runs right, get through the traps, try not to get shot, stabbed, squashed, or even more so....try not to run off the edge into a floor full of spikes....it's not as easy to avoid as you might think, one small step in the wrong direction of those floors and you're gone.
This game is addictive, but so utterly frustrating and I had a good laugh on my own the first 100 times I died but I can imagine that with 3 other players on the board in 4-Player Co-Op mode, it will leave you in stitches (hopefully not literally....leave that to your character to injure themselves).
Difficulty levels I have seen this far are simply Easy, or Normal. I don't know if a hard difficulty unlocks after complete the game, because honestly at the minute....I can't complete it. The levels where you face the Necromancer himself are super frustrating and very difficult to do without messing up again and again. However, don't thin easy level makes the traps etc any easier....all it does is simply keep you on the floor you died (unless its a boss battle). The difficulty level of the traps does not change and in Normal mode, if you die, you go right back to the beginning of the level, but luckily there are checkpoints along the way so you don't start from square one again.
Oh and did I mention that as time goes on, the floor eventually starts blowing up behind you, making you rush through to the end.
There are a variety of awesome 8-bit characters to choose from, which gives this whole game a great nostalgic vibe of playing retro games, but with so much added in that it stills feels modern and definitely a game you'll keep going back to. Especially for a game night with friends.
I highly recommend this game for anyone who's a fan of action packed arcade games with a retro feel.
Just try not to throw the remote.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Geostorm (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
The 90's are back
I’ve got to start by telling you I wasn’t holding out much hope for Geostorm and that’s for quite a few reasons. Firstly, Gerard Butler’s career has been on a bit of a slide recently.
Last year was particularly rough for the Scotsman, with London Has Fallen and Gods of Egypt receiving less than 2 stars here at Movie Metropolis. Secondly, Geostorm has had one of the most turbulent productions of any blockbuster in recent memory.
It actually completed main shooting in 2014 but after a negative audience reaction, it’s release date was pushed back numerous times and costly reshoots were drafted in to sort out the presumed mess. Now, in Autumn 2017 it’s arrived. But what’s it like?
After an unprecedented series of natural disasters, the world’s leaders banded together to create an intricate net of satellites to control the global climate and keep people safe. But now, something is wrong: the system built to protect the planet is attacking it, and it becomes a race against the clock to uncover the real threat before a worldwide geostorm wipes out everything and everyone along with it.
Sounding like something straight from the SyFy channel, Geostorm’s premise is utterly ridiculous but disaster movies have never been particularly well-known for their deep, meaningful and accurate storylines. In fact, some of the very best films in the genre, Deep Impact, Armageddon, Volcano wrestled with significant plot holes – audiences don’t care about that when they can watch the planet getting destroyed.
Morbid, right? Most definitely, but the same applies here. The special effects are so darn good, as a tidal wave obliterates Dubai, and the action interspersed at the right intervals, that the lack of cohesive plot and at times hideous and expositional dialogue really doesn’t matter.
The cinematography by director Dean Devlin (in his first feature film) is really rather good. It’s not ground-breaking but considering 95% of the movie is CGI, he works with green screen well and the script’s twists and turns make it a damn sight more interesting than the majority of 2017’s blockbusters.
“Geostorm channels those brilliantly camp disaster movies from the 80s and 90s beautifully.”
Gerard Butler is actually very decent, but there is a lot more talent on offer here than you would first expect. Ed Harris is always dependable and Andy Garcia plays a President similar to Morgan Freeman’s turn in 1998s Deep Impact. It’s cheesier than a Dairylea triangle, but that’s exactly how disaster films are meant to be.
Geostorm channels those brilliantly camp disaster movies from the 80s and 90s beautifully. Dante’s Peak, Earthquake and Volcano can all be felt here. It takes itself a lot less seriously than 2015’s San Andreas, and has a decent sense of humour to boot.
The scenes on-board the International Space Station are a little dull and to be fair, for a film titled Geostorm, there could be a little more ‘storming’ going on, but it’s a fun, throwaway film that requires nothing but your mind to switch off.
Overall, despite a ridiculously turbulent birth, Geostorm is an honest film. Sure, it’s premise is plagued by plot inconsistencies and the characters aren’t fleshed out enough for us to care about their fates, but it’s a rollercoaster ride of special effects and disaster, which I’m not ashamed to say, I really enjoyed.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/10/21/geostorm-review/
Last year was particularly rough for the Scotsman, with London Has Fallen and Gods of Egypt receiving less than 2 stars here at Movie Metropolis. Secondly, Geostorm has had one of the most turbulent productions of any blockbuster in recent memory.
It actually completed main shooting in 2014 but after a negative audience reaction, it’s release date was pushed back numerous times and costly reshoots were drafted in to sort out the presumed mess. Now, in Autumn 2017 it’s arrived. But what’s it like?
After an unprecedented series of natural disasters, the world’s leaders banded together to create an intricate net of satellites to control the global climate and keep people safe. But now, something is wrong: the system built to protect the planet is attacking it, and it becomes a race against the clock to uncover the real threat before a worldwide geostorm wipes out everything and everyone along with it.
Sounding like something straight from the SyFy channel, Geostorm’s premise is utterly ridiculous but disaster movies have never been particularly well-known for their deep, meaningful and accurate storylines. In fact, some of the very best films in the genre, Deep Impact, Armageddon, Volcano wrestled with significant plot holes – audiences don’t care about that when they can watch the planet getting destroyed.
Morbid, right? Most definitely, but the same applies here. The special effects are so darn good, as a tidal wave obliterates Dubai, and the action interspersed at the right intervals, that the lack of cohesive plot and at times hideous and expositional dialogue really doesn’t matter.
The cinematography by director Dean Devlin (in his first feature film) is really rather good. It’s not ground-breaking but considering 95% of the movie is CGI, he works with green screen well and the script’s twists and turns make it a damn sight more interesting than the majority of 2017’s blockbusters.
“Geostorm channels those brilliantly camp disaster movies from the 80s and 90s beautifully.”
Gerard Butler is actually very decent, but there is a lot more talent on offer here than you would first expect. Ed Harris is always dependable and Andy Garcia plays a President similar to Morgan Freeman’s turn in 1998s Deep Impact. It’s cheesier than a Dairylea triangle, but that’s exactly how disaster films are meant to be.
Geostorm channels those brilliantly camp disaster movies from the 80s and 90s beautifully. Dante’s Peak, Earthquake and Volcano can all be felt here. It takes itself a lot less seriously than 2015’s San Andreas, and has a decent sense of humour to boot.
The scenes on-board the International Space Station are a little dull and to be fair, for a film titled Geostorm, there could be a little more ‘storming’ going on, but it’s a fun, throwaway film that requires nothing but your mind to switch off.
Overall, despite a ridiculously turbulent birth, Geostorm is an honest film. Sure, it’s premise is plagued by plot inconsistencies and the characters aren’t fleshed out enough for us to care about their fates, but it’s a rollercoaster ride of special effects and disaster, which I’m not ashamed to say, I really enjoyed.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/10/21/geostorm-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Non-Stop (2014) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
On the wrong side of 60 you’d be forgiven for thinking that it was time for Liam Neeson to hang up his gun and move away from the cold, steely world of action films, into the fuzzy and sentimental territory of a rom-com.
Thankfully he and director Jaume Collet-Serra, who Neeson previously worked with on the disappointing thriller Unknown, have decided to continue with the action thriller theme in Taken on a Plane, sorry… Non-Stop.
Neeson plays troubled US air marshal Bill Marks as he begins a non-stop flight from New York to London, though from the outset it is obvious this will be no ordinary journey.
Marks is a man with a chequered past. From suffering with depression after the breakdown of his marriage to his subsequent alcoholism, everything seems to be utterly gloomy.
Soon after take off, Neeson’s character is sent numerous anonymous texts stating that a person on board will be killed every 20 minutes unless $150 million is transferred into a bank account.
Cue Neeson’s trademark gruff tone as he shouts about the cabin trying to discover just hr_Non-Stop_6who is behind the messages. It’s fair to say things aren’t as simple as that and Collet-Serra’s spirited direction keeps things moving with more twists than a curly-wurly.
Julianne Moore stars as Marks’s ‘seat neighbour’ and is as usual excellent but unusually bland, portraying a character that numerous other actresses could’ve fitted into quite easily – it’s a strange departure from Moore’s more deep characterisations, but she does it well despite the lack of material she’s given to work with.
The plot is well driven by the excellent cinematography, using the confined spaces of an aircraft to great effect with sweeping shots of the cabin over the heads of passengers and the use of aeroplane windows to move in and out of the fuselage.
Technology plays a huge part in Non-Stop, the constant stream of text messages that Neeson receives could have made the film fall flat, but thankfully each one is put up on the screen allowing the audience to read them in real time, rather than stopping the story dead and allowing boredom to set in.
Whilst the story and plot are first-rate, the special effects unfortunately are not such a blast. Whilst the majority of them are passable given the film’s relatively small budget of $50 million, the shots of the aircraft towards the finale are underwhelming and look like they belong in a video game, not a Hollywood blockbuster. It’s an unfortunate lapse in an otherwise very competent film.
Thankfully Neeson’s now applauded acting technique distracts from these moments enough to steer Non-Stop to a pulse-racing and very satisfying conclusion.
Overall, Non-Stop is good fun from start to finish and barely slows within its succinct running time. However, it all feels very familiar and this is a problem for its main star too. For all of Neeson’s fans this is another good notch on their bedposts – but I doubt it will bring any newcomers to his admittedly large following, meaning he runs of the risk of being typecast.
Nevertheless, apart from a few lapses in special effects and a rather bland Julianne Moore, Non-Stop is definitely worth a watch – even if there may be a sense of deja vu.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2014/03/01/non-stop-review/
Thankfully he and director Jaume Collet-Serra, who Neeson previously worked with on the disappointing thriller Unknown, have decided to continue with the action thriller theme in Taken on a Plane, sorry… Non-Stop.
Neeson plays troubled US air marshal Bill Marks as he begins a non-stop flight from New York to London, though from the outset it is obvious this will be no ordinary journey.
Marks is a man with a chequered past. From suffering with depression after the breakdown of his marriage to his subsequent alcoholism, everything seems to be utterly gloomy.
Soon after take off, Neeson’s character is sent numerous anonymous texts stating that a person on board will be killed every 20 minutes unless $150 million is transferred into a bank account.
Cue Neeson’s trademark gruff tone as he shouts about the cabin trying to discover just hr_Non-Stop_6who is behind the messages. It’s fair to say things aren’t as simple as that and Collet-Serra’s spirited direction keeps things moving with more twists than a curly-wurly.
Julianne Moore stars as Marks’s ‘seat neighbour’ and is as usual excellent but unusually bland, portraying a character that numerous other actresses could’ve fitted into quite easily – it’s a strange departure from Moore’s more deep characterisations, but she does it well despite the lack of material she’s given to work with.
The plot is well driven by the excellent cinematography, using the confined spaces of an aircraft to great effect with sweeping shots of the cabin over the heads of passengers and the use of aeroplane windows to move in and out of the fuselage.
Technology plays a huge part in Non-Stop, the constant stream of text messages that Neeson receives could have made the film fall flat, but thankfully each one is put up on the screen allowing the audience to read them in real time, rather than stopping the story dead and allowing boredom to set in.
Whilst the story and plot are first-rate, the special effects unfortunately are not such a blast. Whilst the majority of them are passable given the film’s relatively small budget of $50 million, the shots of the aircraft towards the finale are underwhelming and look like they belong in a video game, not a Hollywood blockbuster. It’s an unfortunate lapse in an otherwise very competent film.
Thankfully Neeson’s now applauded acting technique distracts from these moments enough to steer Non-Stop to a pulse-racing and very satisfying conclusion.
Overall, Non-Stop is good fun from start to finish and barely slows within its succinct running time. However, it all feels very familiar and this is a problem for its main star too. For all of Neeson’s fans this is another good notch on their bedposts – but I doubt it will bring any newcomers to his admittedly large following, meaning he runs of the risk of being typecast.
Nevertheless, apart from a few lapses in special effects and a rather bland Julianne Moore, Non-Stop is definitely worth a watch – even if there may be a sense of deja vu.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2014/03/01/non-stop-review/
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated The Princess Bride: Storming The Castle in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019
You haven’t played this game? Inconceivable! Actually, quite conceivable. I wasn’t really into the board game hobby when this came out in 2008, so of course I did not pick it up at release. I am a big Princess Bride fan, and I probably would have picked it up at release because I’m a sucker for certain IPs. There are few copies of this still floating around for sale, so it can be had at a modest price. However, will you enjoy it? Will it bore you “to the pain”? Read on.
So this game, at its heart, is a racing game. You will be racing your pawn toward Humperdinck’s castle in the middle of the table, and you need to traverse several Path cards depicting different areas in the Princess Bride universe. Each of these Path cards will dictate whether you will need specific equipment/items to gain access, or if they are free of that requirement. If you start your turn at the gates of the castle, or have an item allowing you entry sooner, you win!
Ok, the bad. The components are just not great. The box is flimsy and boring. The insert is laughable. The cards are acceptable quality – don’t expect any better quality than normal playing cards picked up at the dollar store. The art on the cards is also very boring and the ink used on the cards seems to be flaking a bit after just a few plays. Screen grabs on cards are fine to me, but the choices made on some of these cards are very questionable. The pawns are poorly designed and they fall over all the time, which is unfortunate when you have to play on a smaller table.
The good now. Owning a Princess Bride game that I can pull out and actually play and have a decent time is a positive for me. There are other games with this same IP that are… not at all fun. This one actually has some gameplay to it that you can enjoy for a while, and even crave future plays. Yes, it feels a bit like Munchkin in that you are trying to achieve the winning goal and your opponents are trying their hardest to delay you. However, it differs due to the fact that the pile-on is slow and you have to basically forfeit your turn to debilitate your opponent. Is that strategy worth it? I’m not so sure…
Does it make you feel like you are in the story? Not really. Do you shudder when the RUSes and Shrieking Eels come into play? Nah, but they are so formidable in the story! Is the GAME worth it though? Yeah, it is. If you are a fan of the book or movie, this is the best Princess Bride game out there. Will another game come out and knock it off the top spot? I hope so. But for now, I am happy with my copy of the game. Perhaps I will look into blinging it out a bit to make it more epic. That said, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a swashbuckling 7 / 12.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/01/21/the-princess-bride-storming-the-castle-review/
So this game, at its heart, is a racing game. You will be racing your pawn toward Humperdinck’s castle in the middle of the table, and you need to traverse several Path cards depicting different areas in the Princess Bride universe. Each of these Path cards will dictate whether you will need specific equipment/items to gain access, or if they are free of that requirement. If you start your turn at the gates of the castle, or have an item allowing you entry sooner, you win!
Ok, the bad. The components are just not great. The box is flimsy and boring. The insert is laughable. The cards are acceptable quality – don’t expect any better quality than normal playing cards picked up at the dollar store. The art on the cards is also very boring and the ink used on the cards seems to be flaking a bit after just a few plays. Screen grabs on cards are fine to me, but the choices made on some of these cards are very questionable. The pawns are poorly designed and they fall over all the time, which is unfortunate when you have to play on a smaller table.
The good now. Owning a Princess Bride game that I can pull out and actually play and have a decent time is a positive for me. There are other games with this same IP that are… not at all fun. This one actually has some gameplay to it that you can enjoy for a while, and even crave future plays. Yes, it feels a bit like Munchkin in that you are trying to achieve the winning goal and your opponents are trying their hardest to delay you. However, it differs due to the fact that the pile-on is slow and you have to basically forfeit your turn to debilitate your opponent. Is that strategy worth it? I’m not so sure…
Does it make you feel like you are in the story? Not really. Do you shudder when the RUSes and Shrieking Eels come into play? Nah, but they are so formidable in the story! Is the GAME worth it though? Yeah, it is. If you are a fan of the book or movie, this is the best Princess Bride game out there. Will another game come out and knock it off the top spot? I hope so. But for now, I am happy with my copy of the game. Perhaps I will look into blinging it out a bit to make it more epic. That said, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a swashbuckling 7 / 12.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/01/21/the-princess-bride-storming-the-castle-review/
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Woman in Cabin 10 in Books
Feb 8, 2018
Laura (Lo) Blackstock is excited to finally get the opportunity of her travel journalism career: a chance to cover the launch of a luxury cruise ship, the Aurora. The ship is headed to Norway, and Lo has the ability to mingle with a set of wealthy passengers and make some connections to jump-start her writing career. But before she even sets foot on the boat, Lo is reeling from a break-in at her apartment, which leaves her anxious, exhausted, and--through a series of unfortunate events--on the outs with her boyfriend, Jonah. Still, at first the Aurora seems gorgeous and luxurious, if a bit small for Lo's claustrophobia. But her first evening on board, after an evening of dining and drinking, Lo is awoken to the sound of an argument in cabin 10 next door, and she's convinced she sees a woman tossed overboard. But no one on the ship believes her, and the woman she knows she met earlier in cabin 10, when asking to borrow mascara, is gone--nowhere on the boat. Lo knows realistically this isn't possible: it's a small boat and people can't just disappear. But she also knows who she saw and what she saw. Is she going crazy? And is someone on the boat now out to get her?
This was an interesting and suspenseful thriller. I agree with the comparisons to an Agatha Christie novel: with the setting of the novel being a ship, you have a limited cast of characters (and suspects), which heightens some of the intrigue. Ware does an excellent job of setting the scene, and you can practically feel yourself trapped in this opulent yet slightly claustrophobic, endlessly rocking luxury cruise-liner. Lo is set up rather quickly as unreliable narrator: she's clearly anxious after her break-in, prone to drinking, and reeling from a lack of sleep. Therefore, from the outset, we're not sure if we can trust what we're reading or what seems to be unfolding on this ship. One of my favorite things about this novel is that it certainly keeps you guessing -- I was constantly coming up with (and discarding) various theories as I read, placing blame on a new character every few chapters. And, of course, always harboring that seed of doubt that Lo just made the entire thing up. While we hear entirely from Lo, Ware places a few newspaper stories at the end of each chapter, which just add to your doubt and confusion.
As for Lo, she's not the most enjoyable of main characters and due to our limited set of characters, we don't have many others, so most of the tale hinges on her. She's a bit annoying and whiny and prone to overthinking and bad decisions. She can get frustrating at times, to say the least. The story itself isn't really creepy or spooky, but it's definitely interesting and, as I said, keeps you guessing until nearly the very end. A few of the plot points seem a bit haphazard, as if things were just jammed together randomly into the story, but I suppose they all work together at the end.
Overall, this is certainly an engaging and suspenseful thriller. If you enjoy a fast-paced whodunnit, this one is for you. 3.5 stars.
This was an interesting and suspenseful thriller. I agree with the comparisons to an Agatha Christie novel: with the setting of the novel being a ship, you have a limited cast of characters (and suspects), which heightens some of the intrigue. Ware does an excellent job of setting the scene, and you can practically feel yourself trapped in this opulent yet slightly claustrophobic, endlessly rocking luxury cruise-liner. Lo is set up rather quickly as unreliable narrator: she's clearly anxious after her break-in, prone to drinking, and reeling from a lack of sleep. Therefore, from the outset, we're not sure if we can trust what we're reading or what seems to be unfolding on this ship. One of my favorite things about this novel is that it certainly keeps you guessing -- I was constantly coming up with (and discarding) various theories as I read, placing blame on a new character every few chapters. And, of course, always harboring that seed of doubt that Lo just made the entire thing up. While we hear entirely from Lo, Ware places a few newspaper stories at the end of each chapter, which just add to your doubt and confusion.
As for Lo, she's not the most enjoyable of main characters and due to our limited set of characters, we don't have many others, so most of the tale hinges on her. She's a bit annoying and whiny and prone to overthinking and bad decisions. She can get frustrating at times, to say the least. The story itself isn't really creepy or spooky, but it's definitely interesting and, as I said, keeps you guessing until nearly the very end. A few of the plot points seem a bit haphazard, as if things were just jammed together randomly into the story, but I suppose they all work together at the end.
Overall, this is certainly an engaging and suspenseful thriller. If you enjoy a fast-paced whodunnit, this one is for you. 3.5 stars.
MichaelS (0 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Feb 20, 2018
"Meanwhile, at the Hall Of Justice..."
This movie is the culmination of a childhood full of Saturday mornings in front of the tv in pajamas with a bowl of cereal. "Superfriends" was superheroes at it's most basic. The bad guys wanted to take over or destroy the world and the good guys have to stop them. That was the depth of the plots for both those classic cartoons, and this movie. It's pure cartoon fun brought to life, and I loved every minute of it.
The plot only serves as a reason for these heroes to come together. So you can say that story is not a top priority. Character is the name of the game here, and on that level, the movie is gold. Each character is fully realized, with their own individual situation they need to grow from. Every hero is given his or her moment to shine as an individual. When they stand as a team, it's some of the best superhero action we've ever gotten.
The performances of the League members is spot on across the board. Every character is presented exactly the way they should be. Ben Affleck continues to prove all the doubters wrong, by giving us the best live action version of Batman we've ever seen. Right from the start you see how he demands fear from evildoers, but filled with hope for the good things in the world. Gal Gadot IS Wonder Woman. If there was any doubt left after her solo movie, it should be thoroughly erased now. She's strong in body, mind, and spirit. Jason Mamoa forever erases the idea of Aquaman being the wimpiest superhero. His "surfer dude" take on the character brings all the recklessness and abandon you'd expect from a beach bum. He's almost like a Spartan soldier that lives for the excitement of battle. Ezra Miller brings a youthful excitement of someone who is simply jazzed by what he, and others, can do with their abilities. He's almost the comic relief until you realize that the excited reactions he gives to everything is exactly what we would to if we were dropped in that situation.
SPOILER TERRITORY....skip to "END SPOILERS" if you don't want anything ruined
Although it should really come as no surprise to anyone, Superman does indeed return from the dead in this movie. Not only is that he's resurrected very cool, but the aftermath gives us the best fight scene of the film. Superman vs The Justice League. 'nuff said? I've always loved Henry Cavill as Superman, but now he owns the role. He has grown from a man filled with self doubt, trying to find his place in the world, to a man who now fully realizes who he is, and what purpose he serves to mankind. Lots of great Superman stuff in this movie, and that is the thing I'm most thankful for.
END SPOILERS
This is the most fun I've had with a superhero movie in a long time. It may not have the deepest plot, but that is fine with me, because this is truly a comic book come to life. It's full of the action and joyful spirit that the boy in me tuned into every weekend. Now, if the post credit scene in the movie delivers, it REALLY will be everything that the classic Challenges Of The Superfriends, and reduce me to that boy in pajamas again, cereal in hand, and a smile on my face.
The plot only serves as a reason for these heroes to come together. So you can say that story is not a top priority. Character is the name of the game here, and on that level, the movie is gold. Each character is fully realized, with their own individual situation they need to grow from. Every hero is given his or her moment to shine as an individual. When they stand as a team, it's some of the best superhero action we've ever gotten.
The performances of the League members is spot on across the board. Every character is presented exactly the way they should be. Ben Affleck continues to prove all the doubters wrong, by giving us the best live action version of Batman we've ever seen. Right from the start you see how he demands fear from evildoers, but filled with hope for the good things in the world. Gal Gadot IS Wonder Woman. If there was any doubt left after her solo movie, it should be thoroughly erased now. She's strong in body, mind, and spirit. Jason Mamoa forever erases the idea of Aquaman being the wimpiest superhero. His "surfer dude" take on the character brings all the recklessness and abandon you'd expect from a beach bum. He's almost like a Spartan soldier that lives for the excitement of battle. Ezra Miller brings a youthful excitement of someone who is simply jazzed by what he, and others, can do with their abilities. He's almost the comic relief until you realize that the excited reactions he gives to everything is exactly what we would to if we were dropped in that situation.
SPOILER TERRITORY....skip to "END SPOILERS" if you don't want anything ruined
Although it should really come as no surprise to anyone, Superman does indeed return from the dead in this movie. Not only is that he's resurrected very cool, but the aftermath gives us the best fight scene of the film. Superman vs The Justice League. 'nuff said? I've always loved Henry Cavill as Superman, but now he owns the role. He has grown from a man filled with self doubt, trying to find his place in the world, to a man who now fully realizes who he is, and what purpose he serves to mankind. Lots of great Superman stuff in this movie, and that is the thing I'm most thankful for.
END SPOILERS
This is the most fun I've had with a superhero movie in a long time. It may not have the deepest plot, but that is fine with me, because this is truly a comic book come to life. It's full of the action and joyful spirit that the boy in me tuned into every weekend. Now, if the post credit scene in the movie delivers, it REALLY will be everything that the classic Challenges Of The Superfriends, and reduce me to that boy in pajamas again, cereal in hand, and a smile on my face.
Justin Taylor (59 KP) rated Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (2017) in Movies
Oct 29, 2018
The action pieces were kinda on point (4 more)
Of course the Rock kills it as usual and brings his a game or at least tries his best
The trio of Kevin Hart, Karen Gillan and Jack Black are the best things about this movie
It does something original with the source material
A good movie to sit down and eat popcorn to
Although this is a sequel to Jumanji yeah in case y'all didn't know it's a sequel and outside of a couple of references including a name-drop of Robin Williams character from the original it has nothing to do with the first (2 more)
Also basic plot getting sucked into a video game which is a plot that we have seen in Many other things (Spy Kids, Tron and fairly odd parents to name a few) and while it does it in a fresh way at the end of the day it's the exact same plot from the first
The villain is pretty much meh but if u like Jumanji I think you probably have no problem with him
Jumanji was passable
Contains spoilers, click to show
Ok this movie ain't perfect but it did do it's purpose and I personally thought it wasn't bad,
Too be honest I wasn't crazy about a Jumanji sequel especially after the late great Robin Williams passed away. But they did some things good and some things not so good so I'll start with the good first
1. It does something fresh with the original so in case you haven't seen it spoiler warning the board game we all know and love turned into a video game which is something I was kinda expecting but I wasn't surprised and it was nice seeing it getting updated for a new generation
2. The characters in the Jumanji world are hilariously entertaining with props particularly to Karen Gillan and Jack Black..they bring it in this movie and they had me laughing my butt off. Not totally saying that the Rock and Kevin Hart weren't funny either but they all are great
3 the action sequences are awesomely executed and exciting as it should be. Nothing more to say.
Now for the bad
1. Elephant in the room, the plot, ok so getting stuck in a video game is something that's been done to death but they do something creative with it but at the end of the day it's the exact same plot of the first movie.
2. The villains pretty much meh, he's your standard I'm gonna take what I want and no one can stop me type villain and yes in case your wondering his last name is van pelt.
3. Speaking of homages to the first movie don't expect too much outside of a couple of references including a name drop of Williams character from the original movie it has nothing to do with the first movie so it's like a standalone sequel and a soft reboot which means the events of the original still exist but they're pretty much making some retcons.
Overall I didn't hate this movie, I laughed at anything but I think if u take ur nostalgia glasses off and watch it with a new point of view youll enjoy it also this movie did something right because its getting a sequel next year
Too be honest I wasn't crazy about a Jumanji sequel especially after the late great Robin Williams passed away. But they did some things good and some things not so good so I'll start with the good first
1. It does something fresh with the original so in case you haven't seen it spoiler warning the board game we all know and love turned into a video game which is something I was kinda expecting but I wasn't surprised and it was nice seeing it getting updated for a new generation
2. The characters in the Jumanji world are hilariously entertaining with props particularly to Karen Gillan and Jack Black..they bring it in this movie and they had me laughing my butt off. Not totally saying that the Rock and Kevin Hart weren't funny either but they all are great
3 the action sequences are awesomely executed and exciting as it should be. Nothing more to say.
Now for the bad
1. Elephant in the room, the plot, ok so getting stuck in a video game is something that's been done to death but they do something creative with it but at the end of the day it's the exact same plot of the first movie.
2. The villains pretty much meh, he's your standard I'm gonna take what I want and no one can stop me type villain and yes in case your wondering his last name is van pelt.
3. Speaking of homages to the first movie don't expect too much outside of a couple of references including a name drop of Williams character from the original movie it has nothing to do with the first movie so it's like a standalone sequel and a soft reboot which means the events of the original still exist but they're pretty much making some retcons.
Overall I didn't hate this movie, I laughed at anything but I think if u take ur nostalgia glasses off and watch it with a new point of view youll enjoy it also this movie did something right because its getting a sequel next year
Sheridan (209 KP) rated the Xbox One version of Fallout 76 in Video Games
Dec 29, 2018
Challenging Gameplay (3 more)
Huge Open World
Ability to Modify Items
CAMP Set Up
Tragic Graphics (4 more)
Online Only
No Dogmeat :(
STASH box limit
Feels Repetitive
A Game to End an Epic Series?
Let's face it - there's a lot of Fallout fans out there and these fans have a whole heap to say about this game. The big question is - is this a game for the fans? Not really, no. I don't *hate* it, but I'm not totally on board with it either. Now I've been playing the Fallout games for a very long time, I've completed both Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas serveral times and have completed the majority of Fallout 4 too. Fallout 76 is just - not a good game. There are aspects I quite like - the CAMP, the STASH boxes littered around so you don't have to fast travel all the time, the ability to modify weapons and amour, the huge open world to explore - I like all of that. What I hate is that it just doesn't feel like a Fallout game, the storyline just isn't there - I don't just start playing and realise literal hours have passed. There's no NPCs, no companions and worst of all there's no Dogmeat. I mean, sure other companions I understand, it's an online only game, I can see how running around with a crew could become combersome but - I miss my doggo! I can't stand that it's online only - sure give us the option to but I've never been a fan of being forced to play online, I game to relax, not to interact with others - plus no pause is extremely annoying. The graphics are terrible considering what other companies have come out with in 2018, it feels like FO3 graphics. The limit on the STASH box is currently 600lbs but mine is full and I keep having to get rid of stuff that I actually need. The repetitive going back and forth on missions and having to travel from one side of the map to the other while doing a mission is extremely frustrating, especially considering you're pretty much always carrying too much stuff (you literally need a ton of weapons, ammo, food & water to survive).
Overall I don't love it, but I don't hate it.
In short;
Was it worth the $120 preorder price? F**k no.
Is it something I'll play complusively until I've done everything?
No.
Does it ensare you and leave you excited to play again?
No.
Does it exceed Bethesda's big exciting lead up to release?
Certainly not.
Is it the worst game ever?
No, not really.
Is it truly a Fallout game?
Nope.
Does it feel like a dodgy, half-assed turd that the developers crapped out to make money?
Why, yes, yes it does.
Is it a game for Fallout fans?
Maybe, if you're into online play with friends then I guess? If you look past all the bugs, the sub-par graphics and the dull unimaginative storyline sure, this might be a game for you.
Would I recommend it?
No, not unless it's in the $20 bin at EB and you have literally NOTHING else to play.
I'm just saying if this game were a puddle, I could stand in it bare foot and not get my feet wet - that's how much depth it has...
It isn't the *worst* thing I've spent money on (Technomancer takes that spot with Recore as a close second), but it's definitely not something to play if you're a Fallout fan. Just stick to the old stuff, it's waaaay better...
Overall I don't love it, but I don't hate it.
In short;
Was it worth the $120 preorder price? F**k no.
Is it something I'll play complusively until I've done everything?
No.
Does it ensare you and leave you excited to play again?
No.
Does it exceed Bethesda's big exciting lead up to release?
Certainly not.
Is it the worst game ever?
No, not really.
Is it truly a Fallout game?
Nope.
Does it feel like a dodgy, half-assed turd that the developers crapped out to make money?
Why, yes, yes it does.
Is it a game for Fallout fans?
Maybe, if you're into online play with friends then I guess? If you look past all the bugs, the sub-par graphics and the dull unimaginative storyline sure, this might be a game for you.
Would I recommend it?
No, not unless it's in the $20 bin at EB and you have literally NOTHING else to play.
I'm just saying if this game were a puddle, I could stand in it bare foot and not get my feet wet - that's how much depth it has...
It isn't the *worst* thing I've spent money on (Technomancer takes that spot with Recore as a close second), but it's definitely not something to play if you're a Fallout fan. Just stick to the old stuff, it's waaaay better...