Search
The Platinum Raven and Other Novellas
Book
"The Platinum Raven and other novellas" by Rohan Quine is a paperback comprising a collection of...
Lenard (726 KP) rated One Night in Miami (2020) in Movies
Jan 9, 2021
One Night in Miami is from start to finish a frank examination on responsibility and acceptance. On February 25, 1964, four friends who happened to highly visible black men, Malcolm X, Cassius Clay, Sam Cooke, and Jim Brown, met in a hotel room after Cassius surprised the world in winning the heavyweight championship. But, before we get to that night, we are introduced to each man at a crossroads. Malcolm X is breaking away from the Nation of Islam after witnessing the corruption of its leadership. His actions would lead some members to view him as a direct threat. Cassius Clay is a great boxer, but his focus is waning. His brash style is alienating the audience and he has opinions about the way his brothers are being treated in the country. Sam Cooke is recognized as a great voice, but still not respected in the "white" world where success is gauged. He is looking for a way to crossover without betraying his roots. Jim Brown is the greatest football player, but even in his hometown he is still seen as inferior socially. In this dramatized version of the events of that night, each man must come to terms with the path he has chosen and the path forward.
Like another recent film, the path is a choice between making changes within the system, like Sam Cooke and Jim Brown have attempted, or to change the system from the outside, like Malcolm and Clay. Both paths have their advantages, and both are also deadly. Within a year, both Malcolm and Cooke would be dead. The movie based on a play finds ways from each character to learn from the others by pairing them off in various combinations (Malcolm-Cooke, Brown-Clay, Cooke-Clay, Malcolm-Brown, Malcolm-Clay, Cooke-Brown). The main antagonism takes place between Cooke and Malcolm. Cooke sees Malcolm as a militant who is creating sowing seeds of fear in the eyes of "America" and Malcolm sees Cooke as a Stepin Fetchit with a huge amount of talent wasted playing by the rules. Cooke shows Malcolm that he is quietly taking control while Malcolm gives Cooke the spark to sing for civil rights for the less fortunate members of black society. Malcolm also begins to see how his actions have hurt his brothers by grouping all members of one race together similar to the way whites do not distinguish between black individuals. The movie never shies away from shading each hero with flaws.
Malcolm may be paranoid as evidenced by a couple scenes where he sees people on his trail who may or may not be real. Under a lot of pressure to break from his organization, Malcolm sees his staff betraying him to the feds who have been investigating him since he first started speaking. The whole subplot humanizes a man who many view as dangerous to the world. Jim Brown is also seen as a hero to most. He broke records and is about to conquer the film industry. Maybe they are using him, but he is using them to shine a light on the inequality of the races.
Lastly, one scene in the movie is a highlight. It is not in Miami, but in Boston. It shows how one man can turn a riot into a celebration of joy. With the main road blocked, a man of great talent can turn adversity into victory using his wits and his voice.
Like another recent film, the path is a choice between making changes within the system, like Sam Cooke and Jim Brown have attempted, or to change the system from the outside, like Malcolm and Clay. Both paths have their advantages, and both are also deadly. Within a year, both Malcolm and Cooke would be dead. The movie based on a play finds ways from each character to learn from the others by pairing them off in various combinations (Malcolm-Cooke, Brown-Clay, Cooke-Clay, Malcolm-Brown, Malcolm-Clay, Cooke-Brown). The main antagonism takes place between Cooke and Malcolm. Cooke sees Malcolm as a militant who is creating sowing seeds of fear in the eyes of "America" and Malcolm sees Cooke as a Stepin Fetchit with a huge amount of talent wasted playing by the rules. Cooke shows Malcolm that he is quietly taking control while Malcolm gives Cooke the spark to sing for civil rights for the less fortunate members of black society. Malcolm also begins to see how his actions have hurt his brothers by grouping all members of one race together similar to the way whites do not distinguish between black individuals. The movie never shies away from shading each hero with flaws.
Malcolm may be paranoid as evidenced by a couple scenes where he sees people on his trail who may or may not be real. Under a lot of pressure to break from his organization, Malcolm sees his staff betraying him to the feds who have been investigating him since he first started speaking. The whole subplot humanizes a man who many view as dangerous to the world. Jim Brown is also seen as a hero to most. He broke records and is about to conquer the film industry. Maybe they are using him, but he is using them to shine a light on the inequality of the races.
Lastly, one scene in the movie is a highlight. It is not in Miami, but in Boston. It shows how one man can turn a riot into a celebration of joy. With the main road blocked, a man of great talent can turn adversity into victory using his wits and his voice.
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated So This is Love in Books
May 16, 2020
Never has a title of a book made me sing one verse over and over (and over) again. Seriously, I have been wandering around the house humming “So this is love” so much my husband probably thinks I have got myself a new fella!
‘So This is Love’ is the latest in the Disney Twisted Tale series and has been eagerly awaited by yours truly. The latest novel, by Elizabeth Lim (who also wrote the Mulan inspired tale ‘Reflection’) explores what would happen to the classic Cinderella tale if Cinders did not try on the glass slipper for the Grand Duke and scamper off towards her happily ever after. How would Cinderella fare if a dramatic stand off resulted in the remaining slipper shattering into a million pieces?
However, it is not, as you may suspect, Lady Tremaine who smashes the second glass slipper but Cinders herself. Lim’s Cinderella has her head firmly on her shoulders and is all too aware what the power of possessing this shoe may mean to herself, the Prince and the kingdom if it fell into the greedy hands of her relatives. Thus, in an act of bravery, she destroys her ticket to a happily ever after and faces the wrath of her stepmother in the process.
This is the first point in the twisted tale where we see a completely different Cinderella than we have ever seen before. After a dramatic turn of events Cinderella leaves her family home for good and finds herself at risk of a life living on the streets. However, Elizabeth Lim has not abandoned all aspects of a fairy tale: a chance encounter and a new friend present Cinders with the opportunity to find work within the palace where she once danced the night away.
In my opinion, the traditional Cinderella would go running straight to the Prince, explain her story, rely on her beautiful face and live happily ever after. Thankfully for the realists amongst us, our twisted tale Cinderella agonises over the possibility that the Prince is more in love with the idea of the “runaway princess”: she decides that their relationship would never work and that she should focus on her career and creating an independent life for herself.
This was such a refreshing character trait: I loved the fact that, although Elizabeth Lim did not change the time period of the novel, she modernised the main character into a young woman who does not need rescuing. Quite the opposite, as Cinderella soon finds herself witnessing corruption within the palace: can this Disney Princess become a hero and save the kingdom?
Lim’s Cinderella is truly a modern role model: she is resilient, sometimes stubborn but altogether kind and most importantly, she faces her fears despite overwhelming periods of anxiety in some of the most emotive and beautifully written pieces I have read in a long time.
In an Instagram post to Elizabeth Lim (@elimpix) I told her that this Cinderella is the version I would prefer my boys to chase after. However, on reflection that isn’t true. This Cinderella doesn’t deserve to be chased and hunted down in order to fit into a pretty shoe. This Cinderella is a partner in every aspect: working for the good of the kingdom and a ruler in her own right. This is the Cinderella I would want my boys to be worthy of.
‘So This is Love’ is the latest in the Disney Twisted Tale series and has been eagerly awaited by yours truly. The latest novel, by Elizabeth Lim (who also wrote the Mulan inspired tale ‘Reflection’) explores what would happen to the classic Cinderella tale if Cinders did not try on the glass slipper for the Grand Duke and scamper off towards her happily ever after. How would Cinderella fare if a dramatic stand off resulted in the remaining slipper shattering into a million pieces?
However, it is not, as you may suspect, Lady Tremaine who smashes the second glass slipper but Cinders herself. Lim’s Cinderella has her head firmly on her shoulders and is all too aware what the power of possessing this shoe may mean to herself, the Prince and the kingdom if it fell into the greedy hands of her relatives. Thus, in an act of bravery, she destroys her ticket to a happily ever after and faces the wrath of her stepmother in the process.
This is the first point in the twisted tale where we see a completely different Cinderella than we have ever seen before. After a dramatic turn of events Cinderella leaves her family home for good and finds herself at risk of a life living on the streets. However, Elizabeth Lim has not abandoned all aspects of a fairy tale: a chance encounter and a new friend present Cinders with the opportunity to find work within the palace where she once danced the night away.
In my opinion, the traditional Cinderella would go running straight to the Prince, explain her story, rely on her beautiful face and live happily ever after. Thankfully for the realists amongst us, our twisted tale Cinderella agonises over the possibility that the Prince is more in love with the idea of the “runaway princess”: she decides that their relationship would never work and that she should focus on her career and creating an independent life for herself.
This was such a refreshing character trait: I loved the fact that, although Elizabeth Lim did not change the time period of the novel, she modernised the main character into a young woman who does not need rescuing. Quite the opposite, as Cinderella soon finds herself witnessing corruption within the palace: can this Disney Princess become a hero and save the kingdom?
Lim’s Cinderella is truly a modern role model: she is resilient, sometimes stubborn but altogether kind and most importantly, she faces her fears despite overwhelming periods of anxiety in some of the most emotive and beautifully written pieces I have read in a long time.
In an Instagram post to Elizabeth Lim (@elimpix) I told her that this Cinderella is the version I would prefer my boys to chase after. However, on reflection that isn’t true. This Cinderella doesn’t deserve to be chased and hunted down in order to fit into a pretty shoe. This Cinderella is a partner in every aspect: working for the good of the kingdom and a ruler in her own right. This is the Cinderella I would want my boys to be worthy of.
Gotham is the kind of show where I wonder whether they tried to save money by just having the interns write the script. It's got that stilted, on-the-nose kind of dialogue that makes me just feel bad for the actors. For a while I thought the quality of the writing varied from scene to scene, but it was really just that a certain few actors (those that play Fish Mooney, Ed Nygma, and Harvey Bullock spring to mind) that were able to transcend the material they were working with, while others struggled and some just seemed to give up.
Season one starts off promisingly enough for a superhero themed crime show. The premise is solid - we get to watch how these superheroes and supervillians come to be. And that is really the draw that keeps me watching - the character driven moments where we see Nygma descend into madness, the Penguin rise through the ranks of the underworld, Mooney wrestle to keep control of her little patch of Gotham. The conflict James Gordon faces in the first season - a Lawful Good character up against rampant, insidious, and impossible to root up corruption throughout every level of Gotham's government is genuinely interesting and feels like a relevant emotional thread that keeps you going through all of the schlocky and improbable events. All three seasons seem to have a firm grasp of their season plot arc and tentpole moments, setting up the next season nicely for whatever main villain and evil will be explored, but I feel like the tone of the show has shifted wildly. The show can't decide if it's gritty or campy, whether it's a comic book or a crime procedural. It handwaves technology and superpowers in a way that fails to establish in-world rules or limitations. So every super power is all-powerful until plot convenient. I also just personally hate the third season "blood virus" arc and the non-canonical Mad Hatter who speaks in rhyming couplets.
Speaking of which, I'd love to tell the writers that a mass of contradictory, plot-convenient impulses does not a strong female character make. Barbara Kean's story arc makes absolutely no sense. Lee Thompkins seems only to exist to push Gordon to do things he wouldn't otherwise, and Selina Kyle is easily swapped out with every spunky street urchin ever.
I almost want to be offended that every single queer character is, or ends up being, a baddie, but honestly I think that's probably just because the antagonists are more interesting and fleshed out characters to begin with. Still, there's some serious issues with representation (shocker). The third season introduces a really icky variant of the Born Sexy Yesterday trope (watch the video by the Pop Culture Detective, it's worth it.)
Still, I think the casting is pretty great, acting ability aside. The costuming is good, although everything is hampered by the show's refusal to nail down any sort of time period. The dream sequences in the first two seasons are beautiful. I love Oswald Cobblepot and Ed Nygma, and I'd love to see the actor who plays Bruce Wayne master more than just his admittedly very good "holding back tears" expression.
If you're looking for something campy, if you like your villians and your superheroes, and if you need something to watch while you fold laundry or go to sleep, I would recommend this show. It's a show that thrives on tired old tropes, but it lifts those tropes from its source material, so fans of comics might enjoy it, or might be aggrieved at the retconning of beloved old character's backstories.
Whatever you do, don't call Nymga insane. He's better now. He has a certificate.
Season one starts off promisingly enough for a superhero themed crime show. The premise is solid - we get to watch how these superheroes and supervillians come to be. And that is really the draw that keeps me watching - the character driven moments where we see Nygma descend into madness, the Penguin rise through the ranks of the underworld, Mooney wrestle to keep control of her little patch of Gotham. The conflict James Gordon faces in the first season - a Lawful Good character up against rampant, insidious, and impossible to root up corruption throughout every level of Gotham's government is genuinely interesting and feels like a relevant emotional thread that keeps you going through all of the schlocky and improbable events. All three seasons seem to have a firm grasp of their season plot arc and tentpole moments, setting up the next season nicely for whatever main villain and evil will be explored, but I feel like the tone of the show has shifted wildly. The show can't decide if it's gritty or campy, whether it's a comic book or a crime procedural. It handwaves technology and superpowers in a way that fails to establish in-world rules or limitations. So every super power is all-powerful until plot convenient. I also just personally hate the third season "blood virus" arc and the non-canonical Mad Hatter who speaks in rhyming couplets.
Speaking of which, I'd love to tell the writers that a mass of contradictory, plot-convenient impulses does not a strong female character make. Barbara Kean's story arc makes absolutely no sense. Lee Thompkins seems only to exist to push Gordon to do things he wouldn't otherwise, and Selina Kyle is easily swapped out with every spunky street urchin ever.
I almost want to be offended that every single queer character is, or ends up being, a baddie, but honestly I think that's probably just because the antagonists are more interesting and fleshed out characters to begin with. Still, there's some serious issues with representation (shocker). The third season introduces a really icky variant of the Born Sexy Yesterday trope (watch the video by the Pop Culture Detective, it's worth it.)
Still, I think the casting is pretty great, acting ability aside. The costuming is good, although everything is hampered by the show's refusal to nail down any sort of time period. The dream sequences in the first two seasons are beautiful. I love Oswald Cobblepot and Ed Nygma, and I'd love to see the actor who plays Bruce Wayne master more than just his admittedly very good "holding back tears" expression.
If you're looking for something campy, if you like your villians and your superheroes, and if you need something to watch while you fold laundry or go to sleep, I would recommend this show. It's a show that thrives on tired old tropes, but it lifts those tropes from its source material, so fans of comics might enjoy it, or might be aggrieved at the retconning of beloved old character's backstories.
Whatever you do, don't call Nymga insane. He's better now. He has a certificate.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Apartment (1960) in Movies
May 11, 2018
A true classic in every sense of the word
My local cinema does "Secret Movie Night" once a month, you just show up and watch a "classic" of their choosing, you just don't know what it is until it starts.
One of the reasons that I enjoy this is that I end up viewing films that I might not, otherwise, choose to watch. Case in point is the selection for May - the 1960 Oscar winner for Best Picture, THE APARTMENT - a "love story" with some comedy and some dark dramatic moments and themes. A very tricky combination of items that are bundled together, brilliantly, by a master of the craft.
THE APARTMENT tells the story of nebbish office worker C.C. Baxter (Jack Lemmon in an Oscar nominated performance, more on that later) who is talked into lending his apartment to higher-ups in his company so they can carry out extra-marital affairs. When one of the affairs goes wrong, Baxter is forced to "clean up the mess".
Written and Directed by the GREAT Billy WIlder (SOME LIKE IT HOT, SUNSET BOULEVARD), The Apartment is more than a love story, more than a look into the vacuous lives of those anonymous office workers, it is a look into the lives of those who are victims of abuse of power. Wilder, rightfully so, won the Oscar for Best Director and Best Screenplay for this film. The Apartment is strongly written and directed not flinching at the deep subject matter while also balancing things out with moments of comedy and joy, turning what could have been a dour, dark subject into a more joyous exploration of true humanity and love rising through the corruption and abuse of power heaped upon them.
In the lead role of CC Baxter, Lemmon is perfectly cast. Starting as a pure comedic character who is set upon by a world too strong for him, his character slowly turns sharper, deeper, more serious and more real as the film progresses. Lemmon was nominated for the Oscar for his performance - and rightfully so. I had to look up who beat him out for the statue and found out it was Burt Lancaster's powerhouse performance in ELMER GANTRY, so I can't really argue about this (but I digress).
Matching Lemmon beat for beat is Shirley MacLaine, the wronged girl who's "issues" (I'm not going to spoil what happens, if you haven't seen this) are at the heart of this film - and at the heart of Lemmon's character. MacLaine is charming and tragic in this role and she, too, was nominated for an Oscar (for Best Actress losing to Elizabeth Taylor for Butterfield 8). Rounding out the cast was a pre-MY 3 SONS Fred MacMurray (as the Exec who abuses both Lemmon's and MacLaine's characters). He was terrific as this cad, and thought for sure that he would have been nominated for Best Supporting Actor, but that honor went to Jack Kruschen as Lemmon's neighbor in the apartment building where they both lived. I am fine with that but preferred MacMurray's performance. Also showing up are such great character actors as Ray Walston (MY FAVORITE MARTIAN), David Lewis (GENERAL HOSPITAL), Willard Waterman (THE GREAT GILDERSLEEVE) and David White (Larry Tate in BEWITCHED) as other Execs using The Apartment for their purposes.
This is a terrific motion picture and if you haven't seen it (or if you haven't seen it in quite sometime), I highly recommend you check it out (it is shown on the Turner Classic Movie channel on a fairly regular basis). It certainly shows a slice of life during the MAD MEN days that just doesn't exist anymore - and also presents a type of film, and a type of filmmaker, that just doesn't exist today.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
One of the reasons that I enjoy this is that I end up viewing films that I might not, otherwise, choose to watch. Case in point is the selection for May - the 1960 Oscar winner for Best Picture, THE APARTMENT - a "love story" with some comedy and some dark dramatic moments and themes. A very tricky combination of items that are bundled together, brilliantly, by a master of the craft.
THE APARTMENT tells the story of nebbish office worker C.C. Baxter (Jack Lemmon in an Oscar nominated performance, more on that later) who is talked into lending his apartment to higher-ups in his company so they can carry out extra-marital affairs. When one of the affairs goes wrong, Baxter is forced to "clean up the mess".
Written and Directed by the GREAT Billy WIlder (SOME LIKE IT HOT, SUNSET BOULEVARD), The Apartment is more than a love story, more than a look into the vacuous lives of those anonymous office workers, it is a look into the lives of those who are victims of abuse of power. Wilder, rightfully so, won the Oscar for Best Director and Best Screenplay for this film. The Apartment is strongly written and directed not flinching at the deep subject matter while also balancing things out with moments of comedy and joy, turning what could have been a dour, dark subject into a more joyous exploration of true humanity and love rising through the corruption and abuse of power heaped upon them.
In the lead role of CC Baxter, Lemmon is perfectly cast. Starting as a pure comedic character who is set upon by a world too strong for him, his character slowly turns sharper, deeper, more serious and more real as the film progresses. Lemmon was nominated for the Oscar for his performance - and rightfully so. I had to look up who beat him out for the statue and found out it was Burt Lancaster's powerhouse performance in ELMER GANTRY, so I can't really argue about this (but I digress).
Matching Lemmon beat for beat is Shirley MacLaine, the wronged girl who's "issues" (I'm not going to spoil what happens, if you haven't seen this) are at the heart of this film - and at the heart of Lemmon's character. MacLaine is charming and tragic in this role and she, too, was nominated for an Oscar (for Best Actress losing to Elizabeth Taylor for Butterfield 8). Rounding out the cast was a pre-MY 3 SONS Fred MacMurray (as the Exec who abuses both Lemmon's and MacLaine's characters). He was terrific as this cad, and thought for sure that he would have been nominated for Best Supporting Actor, but that honor went to Jack Kruschen as Lemmon's neighbor in the apartment building where they both lived. I am fine with that but preferred MacMurray's performance. Also showing up are such great character actors as Ray Walston (MY FAVORITE MARTIAN), David Lewis (GENERAL HOSPITAL), Willard Waterman (THE GREAT GILDERSLEEVE) and David White (Larry Tate in BEWITCHED) as other Execs using The Apartment for their purposes.
This is a terrific motion picture and if you haven't seen it (or if you haven't seen it in quite sometime), I highly recommend you check it out (it is shown on the Turner Classic Movie channel on a fairly regular basis). It certainly shows a slice of life during the MAD MEN days that just doesn't exist anymore - and also presents a type of film, and a type of filmmaker, that just doesn't exist today.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Prey: MoonCrash in Video Games
Jun 19, 2019
During their E3 Showcase, Bethesda announced that PREY would be getting a free update with new features as well as a paid DLC called MoonCrash. The DLC was released shortly after the showcase and while covering E3, I got to play a level of the new content which was very engaging.
I have been playing the full DLC for a while now and have to say it is engaging and streamlines the PREY experience into smaller runs without compromising the experience and challenge.
Playing as an operator who must remotely control five different characters, players will be tasked with escaping the base through a variety of means and surviving the Mimics who infest the base. Players will gain points for various tasks and defeating enemies, and they can use those points to buy gear to start each level. While there are opportunities to get new weapons, ammunition, and other gear on the levels, the smaller gameplay area makes planning ahead key as you do not have a massive space station to run through this time around.
The goal is to get all five players out without dying but this is not as easy as it sounds as the maps change over time. I managed to get two players out and while getting a third to a goal, I discovered that a staircase I needed to get to my objective was now destroyed and high level creatures were now guarding the area.
Adding to the challenge is a corruption feature which can cause your weapons and gear to malfunction. Imagine having a pistol with plenty of ammunition and the gun becomes corrupted. Instead of being able to quickly unload a clip into an enemy, you are forced to fire a single shot and then do a clear and load action before you can fire another shot. In the time you used to fire multiple shots, you can now fire two shots which does not help when faced with some of the baddies in the game.
Although set in a Lunar Base, players will recognize items from the prior game such as Mods, food, crafting items, and such which will greatly help increase the chances of survival.
The escape options are varied as you can do things like take an Escape Pod, pilot a shuttle, or other creative ways like using a portal or uploading your conscious. However this is not always as easy as it sounds as changing conditions may cause you to rethink your plans. Rushing to a computer terminal may find the stairs gone, trying to use a portal requires a repair that your character is not able to do with their current skill set. One mission required me to locate a Neuromod and program in piloting skills to my character so I could operate the shuttle.
After using the Escape Pod to get one player to safety, I decided to use another pod to help another character escape after my planned option was no longer viable. I made my way to the pod and as I prepared to launch, learned the unit needed a Navigation Chip which was in another part of the lab and of course; surrounded by all sorts of undesirable enemies.
MoonCrash does not have the story depth of the original game or the multitude of side quests that players had with the first game. It does give players a challenging and fun experience that does still allow for creative and diverse ways to accomplish their goals.
The graphics of the game are in keeping with the first game and the sounds of the game do a fantastic job of adding to the immersion.
MoonCrash is a very enjoyable addition to the game and is a must for fans of the original game.
http://sknr.net/2018/06/25/mooncrash-prey-dlc-review/
I have been playing the full DLC for a while now and have to say it is engaging and streamlines the PREY experience into smaller runs without compromising the experience and challenge.
Playing as an operator who must remotely control five different characters, players will be tasked with escaping the base through a variety of means and surviving the Mimics who infest the base. Players will gain points for various tasks and defeating enemies, and they can use those points to buy gear to start each level. While there are opportunities to get new weapons, ammunition, and other gear on the levels, the smaller gameplay area makes planning ahead key as you do not have a massive space station to run through this time around.
The goal is to get all five players out without dying but this is not as easy as it sounds as the maps change over time. I managed to get two players out and while getting a third to a goal, I discovered that a staircase I needed to get to my objective was now destroyed and high level creatures were now guarding the area.
Adding to the challenge is a corruption feature which can cause your weapons and gear to malfunction. Imagine having a pistol with plenty of ammunition and the gun becomes corrupted. Instead of being able to quickly unload a clip into an enemy, you are forced to fire a single shot and then do a clear and load action before you can fire another shot. In the time you used to fire multiple shots, you can now fire two shots which does not help when faced with some of the baddies in the game.
Although set in a Lunar Base, players will recognize items from the prior game such as Mods, food, crafting items, and such which will greatly help increase the chances of survival.
The escape options are varied as you can do things like take an Escape Pod, pilot a shuttle, or other creative ways like using a portal or uploading your conscious. However this is not always as easy as it sounds as changing conditions may cause you to rethink your plans. Rushing to a computer terminal may find the stairs gone, trying to use a portal requires a repair that your character is not able to do with their current skill set. One mission required me to locate a Neuromod and program in piloting skills to my character so I could operate the shuttle.
After using the Escape Pod to get one player to safety, I decided to use another pod to help another character escape after my planned option was no longer viable. I made my way to the pod and as I prepared to launch, learned the unit needed a Navigation Chip which was in another part of the lab and of course; surrounded by all sorts of undesirable enemies.
MoonCrash does not have the story depth of the original game or the multitude of side quests that players had with the first game. It does give players a challenging and fun experience that does still allow for creative and diverse ways to accomplish their goals.
The graphics of the game are in keeping with the first game and the sounds of the game do a fantastic job of adding to the immersion.
MoonCrash is a very enjoyable addition to the game and is a must for fans of the original game.
http://sknr.net/2018/06/25/mooncrash-prey-dlc-review/
Natacha (374 KP) rated Red Rising in Books
Jan 23, 2020
More reviews on my blog: https://natachainreviewland.wordpress.com/
Red Rising is another book that I struggle to rate. I did enjoy the book but it didn't blow my mind. I think it's just an "It's not you, it's me" kind of situation. For the best part of the story, I felt like I was reading a retelling of the Hunger Games (and it was a movie I felt it was just ok, haven't read the books) and mixed with The Punisher (guys loses his wife and needs to get his revenge). I had fun but that's all.
Things I liked:
-The writing was very good. Simple, clear, just the right amount of information and exposition to make us understand the world and characters.
-We have a cast of charters with different and distinct personalities and well fleshed out.
-I really enjoyed the fourth part of the book. At this point, I felt like it lost the Hunger Game vibe. We don't have just one person that needs to take down the system but a whole army that marches against corruption.
-Towards the end, we had two nice twists. One of them had been foreshadowed for a while and the second one I personally saw it coming. Although to be honest when you have 20 pages left you can guess that things will go in a different direction what the author is making you believe. Despite that, I really liked those twists.
-I really like Darrow and Mustang dynamic and relationship. I thought it was well done and it felt natural.
-Now that the Huger Game part of the story is done I'm curious to see what Darrow will do outside in the world and how his plan will unfold.
Things I didn't like
I don't have many negatives. There was nothing wrong with the story but I'll try to point some aspect that bothered me.
-As I mention I didn't care about Hunger Game and throughout a large part of the story I couldn't help but thinking of the similarities.
-I'm a little tired of the "They kill my wife and I need to get revenge and keep her dream alive" trope.
-The story is written in first-person POV and present tense and this is really my least favourite way to tell a story.
-I feel like Darrow is a little bit of a Gary Stu. On so many occasion we have Darrow say things like "I'm stronger, I'm taller, I'm faster than he/she, I know better than them" etc. This is why I don't like first-person POV. When it's the author or another person telling us that the main character is stronger or taller or whatever it feels like an observation. When we have the main character telling us about the fact that they are better than everyone else, for me, they become across as obnoxious and annoying. And because of that, I struggle to really connect with Darrow.
-Rape is used a couple of times to move the plot forward. I don't mind when it's used once but when it's used again and again it feels like the author didn't know what else to do to get the plot going.
So here you have it. It wasn't a bad book there was nothing wrong with it and I understand why so many people rave about it. But personally, I couldn't get into the "this is a great book" place. I'm curious about the rest of the series, I don't feel the need to start right away like with other series, but I will get to the second book eventually.
Red Rising is another book that I struggle to rate. I did enjoy the book but it didn't blow my mind. I think it's just an "It's not you, it's me" kind of situation. For the best part of the story, I felt like I was reading a retelling of the Hunger Games (and it was a movie I felt it was just ok, haven't read the books) and mixed with The Punisher (guys loses his wife and needs to get his revenge). I had fun but that's all.
Things I liked:
-The writing was very good. Simple, clear, just the right amount of information and exposition to make us understand the world and characters.
-We have a cast of charters with different and distinct personalities and well fleshed out.
-I really enjoyed the fourth part of the book. At this point, I felt like it lost the Hunger Game vibe. We don't have just one person that needs to take down the system but a whole army that marches against corruption.
-Towards the end, we had two nice twists. One of them had been foreshadowed for a while and the second one I personally saw it coming. Although to be honest when you have 20 pages left you can guess that things will go in a different direction what the author is making you believe. Despite that, I really liked those twists.
-I really like Darrow and Mustang dynamic and relationship. I thought it was well done and it felt natural.
-Now that the Huger Game part of the story is done I'm curious to see what Darrow will do outside in the world and how his plan will unfold.
Things I didn't like
I don't have many negatives. There was nothing wrong with the story but I'll try to point some aspect that bothered me.
-As I mention I didn't care about Hunger Game and throughout a large part of the story I couldn't help but thinking of the similarities.
-I'm a little tired of the "They kill my wife and I need to get revenge and keep her dream alive" trope.
-The story is written in first-person POV and present tense and this is really my least favourite way to tell a story.
-I feel like Darrow is a little bit of a Gary Stu. On so many occasion we have Darrow say things like "I'm stronger, I'm taller, I'm faster than he/she, I know better than them" etc. This is why I don't like first-person POV. When it's the author or another person telling us that the main character is stronger or taller or whatever it feels like an observation. When we have the main character telling us about the fact that they are better than everyone else, for me, they become across as obnoxious and annoying. And because of that, I struggle to really connect with Darrow.
-Rape is used a couple of times to move the plot forward. I don't mind when it's used once but when it's used again and again it feels like the author didn't know what else to do to get the plot going.
So here you have it. It wasn't a bad book there was nothing wrong with it and I understand why so many people rave about it. But personally, I couldn't get into the "this is a great book" place. I'm curious about the rest of the series, I don't feel the need to start right away like with other series, but I will get to the second book eventually.
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Bromley Boys (2018) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Story: The Bromley Boys starts in 1969 three years after England won the World Cup, David Roberts (O’Connor) had wanted to support the popular teams of either West Ham or Tottenham, but his father Donald (Davies) has banned football in the house, leading to his mother Gertrude (McCutcheon) sneaking him a scarf of his local team Bromley.
This season is going to be David’s biggest as he learns about the corruption from the chairman Charlie McQueen (Foreman) and the potential sale of the club’s best player. David also meets Ruby (Baker) the daughter of the chairman that is the only girl that talks to him as he experiences love for the first time.
Thoughts on The Bromley Boys
Characters – David Roberts is a teenage boy that got dreams of being a footballer after seeing England win the World Cup in 1966, he is forced to support his local team, a small team with a tiny fanbase, he becomes a loyal fan and during the 1969 season he must figure out prove the chairman is out to ruin the club as they constantly struggle on the pitch. Ruby McQueen is the daughter of the chairman that starts dating David, she wants a normal relationship but often has to play second fiddle to his love of football. Charlie McQueen is the greedy chairman of Bromley, the fans and manager believe he is trying to put them out of business, which reflects on how David tries to expose his truth. Gertrude and Donald are David’s parents that are trying to give him the best future even if they don’t like him enjoy football.
Performances – Brenock O’Connor is delightful in the leading role showing us just how obsessed teenager can become when it comes to sports. Savannah Baker is great as the love interest who is looking for a future. Jamie Foreman looks all the part of a corrupt chairman through the film, with Alan Davies and Martine McCutcheon showing they have the star power from the English side.
Story – The story here follows a teenage football fan of his local team that starts to see things putting his beloved club in trouble after overhearing a conversation, he tries to fix things during the season just to make sure his team will be their next season. As a football fan this is one of the easiest films to relate to, seeing the ups, well downs more than often in this film, we can see how footballs can see their lives taken over by the season, it is even worse in modern day too, we do also have the important message about trying to support your local team instead of one of the more established teams that friends support. This is based on a trouble story which apart from the romantic angle does feel like it could have been real, but also the tales told from the tiny crowds to get buzz around their club. This is a story that is going to be one that the English market will enjoy the most.
Comedy – You will get plenty of laughs in this film, a lot comes from the love of football and seeing just how much it can change a life.
Settings – The film is set in and around the small town of Bromley, we spend plenty of time at the club, which helps us understand what this meant to David.
Scene of the Movie – The last game of the season.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The teachers seem very harsh.
Final Thoughts – This is an enjoyable British comedy, one that the English will enjoy most and one we can understand the passion behind supporting the team.
Overall: Truly fun and feel good film.
This season is going to be David’s biggest as he learns about the corruption from the chairman Charlie McQueen (Foreman) and the potential sale of the club’s best player. David also meets Ruby (Baker) the daughter of the chairman that is the only girl that talks to him as he experiences love for the first time.
Thoughts on The Bromley Boys
Characters – David Roberts is a teenage boy that got dreams of being a footballer after seeing England win the World Cup in 1966, he is forced to support his local team, a small team with a tiny fanbase, he becomes a loyal fan and during the 1969 season he must figure out prove the chairman is out to ruin the club as they constantly struggle on the pitch. Ruby McQueen is the daughter of the chairman that starts dating David, she wants a normal relationship but often has to play second fiddle to his love of football. Charlie McQueen is the greedy chairman of Bromley, the fans and manager believe he is trying to put them out of business, which reflects on how David tries to expose his truth. Gertrude and Donald are David’s parents that are trying to give him the best future even if they don’t like him enjoy football.
Performances – Brenock O’Connor is delightful in the leading role showing us just how obsessed teenager can become when it comes to sports. Savannah Baker is great as the love interest who is looking for a future. Jamie Foreman looks all the part of a corrupt chairman through the film, with Alan Davies and Martine McCutcheon showing they have the star power from the English side.
Story – The story here follows a teenage football fan of his local team that starts to see things putting his beloved club in trouble after overhearing a conversation, he tries to fix things during the season just to make sure his team will be their next season. As a football fan this is one of the easiest films to relate to, seeing the ups, well downs more than often in this film, we can see how footballs can see their lives taken over by the season, it is even worse in modern day too, we do also have the important message about trying to support your local team instead of one of the more established teams that friends support. This is based on a trouble story which apart from the romantic angle does feel like it could have been real, but also the tales told from the tiny crowds to get buzz around their club. This is a story that is going to be one that the English market will enjoy the most.
Comedy – You will get plenty of laughs in this film, a lot comes from the love of football and seeing just how much it can change a life.
Settings – The film is set in and around the small town of Bromley, we spend plenty of time at the club, which helps us understand what this meant to David.
Scene of the Movie – The last game of the season.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The teachers seem very harsh.
Final Thoughts – This is an enjoyable British comedy, one that the English will enjoy most and one we can understand the passion behind supporting the team.
Overall: Truly fun and feel good film.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Motherless Brooklyn (2019) in Movies
Jan 15, 2021
A little too slow and self-indulgent for my tastes
There is no denying that Edward Norton is a talented performer. Ever since he burst onto the scene with his Oscar nominated performance in PRIMAL FEAR, he has been a presence both on and off the screen as an Actor, Writer, Producer and Director.
With his latest effort, MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN (based on the base selling novel by Jonathan Lethem), Norton puts ALL of his skills to work as he Produced, Directed, Wrote and Starred in this Private Eye thriller from 2019.
If only Norton had handed at least 1 of those jobs over to someone else.
Norton stars as Lionel Essrog, a Private Eye with Tourette’s Syndrome, who’s investigation into the murder of a mentor of his exposes corruption, racism, greed and abuse of power in City Hall in New York City in the 1950’s.
As the star, Norton brings a nice edge to Lionel, who’s Tourette’s causes him to twitch and belt out words randomly, as well as gives him a photographic memory. While the twitching and random swearing are a bit over the top at times, the photographic memory helps Lionel solve the case (of course it does).
And that’s where I have issue with writer Norton - as he cannot resist the urge to showcase Actor Norton’s propensity to go over the top and puts in many, many “Tourette’s moments” as well as putting in long dialogue scenes that tries to show the audience how smart Lionel is.
Unfortunately, Director Norton indulges Writer Norton and Actor Norton so the film has a languid pace that just sits on Lionel’s actions and words. This is a 2 hour movie packed into a 2 1/2 hour run time. Now, to be fair to Director Norton, there are some absolutely gorgeous and interesting pictures put on the screen and the atmosphere (and characters) that are created are interesting (enough) to ALMOST forgive the self-indulgent ways of Writer/Actor/Director Norton.
As for the rest of the cast, Bruce Willis is…Bruce Willis as a Private Eye that works with Lionel and Willem DaFoe is at his “Willem DeFoe-iest” in portraying a critic of New York City Hall with a secret past. It’s as if Director Norton said to both of these 2 fine actors to just “do your thing” while he focused on the myriad of other jobs he had on this film.
Special notice needs to be made of the work of Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Femme Fatale Laura Rose (a part that Norton specifically added to the film - her character was not in the book - and wrote just for her). She is quite good in this role and her scenes with Norton crackle somewhat louder than the rest of the film.
And then there is Alec Baldwin as a corrupt, racist, politician who is looking out for only 1 person - himself. While Baldwin is very good in this 100% serious role, I couldn’t be help but be reminded of a certain comedic character he has played for the past few years on Saturday Night Live.
The music by Daniel Pemberton and the Cinematography by Dick Pope add greatly to the atmosphere of this film - and that is good - for when the story bogs down (and it bogs down A LOT), there usually is something interesting to look at or listen to.
Not a bad film, but it could have been a much better film if someone would have taken at least ONE of the jobs off of Norton (I would vote for Director) and tightened things up and tone down Norton’s tendency to “ham it up” on screen.
Letter Grade: B-
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
With his latest effort, MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN (based on the base selling novel by Jonathan Lethem), Norton puts ALL of his skills to work as he Produced, Directed, Wrote and Starred in this Private Eye thriller from 2019.
If only Norton had handed at least 1 of those jobs over to someone else.
Norton stars as Lionel Essrog, a Private Eye with Tourette’s Syndrome, who’s investigation into the murder of a mentor of his exposes corruption, racism, greed and abuse of power in City Hall in New York City in the 1950’s.
As the star, Norton brings a nice edge to Lionel, who’s Tourette’s causes him to twitch and belt out words randomly, as well as gives him a photographic memory. While the twitching and random swearing are a bit over the top at times, the photographic memory helps Lionel solve the case (of course it does).
And that’s where I have issue with writer Norton - as he cannot resist the urge to showcase Actor Norton’s propensity to go over the top and puts in many, many “Tourette’s moments” as well as putting in long dialogue scenes that tries to show the audience how smart Lionel is.
Unfortunately, Director Norton indulges Writer Norton and Actor Norton so the film has a languid pace that just sits on Lionel’s actions and words. This is a 2 hour movie packed into a 2 1/2 hour run time. Now, to be fair to Director Norton, there are some absolutely gorgeous and interesting pictures put on the screen and the atmosphere (and characters) that are created are interesting (enough) to ALMOST forgive the self-indulgent ways of Writer/Actor/Director Norton.
As for the rest of the cast, Bruce Willis is…Bruce Willis as a Private Eye that works with Lionel and Willem DaFoe is at his “Willem DeFoe-iest” in portraying a critic of New York City Hall with a secret past. It’s as if Director Norton said to both of these 2 fine actors to just “do your thing” while he focused on the myriad of other jobs he had on this film.
Special notice needs to be made of the work of Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Femme Fatale Laura Rose (a part that Norton specifically added to the film - her character was not in the book - and wrote just for her). She is quite good in this role and her scenes with Norton crackle somewhat louder than the rest of the film.
And then there is Alec Baldwin as a corrupt, racist, politician who is looking out for only 1 person - himself. While Baldwin is very good in this 100% serious role, I couldn’t be help but be reminded of a certain comedic character he has played for the past few years on Saturday Night Live.
The music by Daniel Pemberton and the Cinematography by Dick Pope add greatly to the atmosphere of this film - and that is good - for when the story bogs down (and it bogs down A LOT), there usually is something interesting to look at or listen to.
Not a bad film, but it could have been a much better film if someone would have taken at least ONE of the jobs off of Norton (I would vote for Director) and tightened things up and tone down Norton’s tendency to “ham it up” on screen.
Letter Grade: B-
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
D&D Lords of Waterdeep
Games
9.0
Rate It
App
*Cross platform online play! Join your friends on other platforms!* *New In-game chat feature. Stay...