Search
Search results
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Public Enemies (2009) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
The year is 1933 and bank robberies are at an all time high. John Dillinger, Baby Face Nelson, and Pretty Boy Floyd are at the top of their game. In the public eye, robbers are looked at as heroes instead of criminals. Dillinger enjoys the fruit of his labor to the fullest until the day Melvin Purvis is put in charge of the FBI division down in Chicago. Word traveled fast of how one of FBI's top agents (Purvis) took down Pretty Boy Floyd and hopes are high that he can help in the newly announced "war on crime." Once Purvis arrived in Chicago, the crime wave of the 30's that was on a steady uprise took a drastic decline. Bank robberies were never the same as Dillinger's friends began dropping like flies. As Dillinger's motto of not thinking about tomorrow since he's too busy enjoying today comes back to haunt him, he soon realizes that he can only hide for so long and that the feds will catch up with him sooner or later.
The most noticeable thing about the film is its cinematography. Michael Mann has used the same method of shooting Public Enemies with HD digital cameras like he did with Collateral. This could be a hassle to some viewers as the picture isn't as shaky as it was in something like Cloverfield, but isn't as crystal clear and steady as you may have found in some of Mann's earlier work like Heat or most other films, for that matter. Perspective plays a huge role in this film. Certain lighting seems to come off better being shot in HD digital and it certainly shows, but the imperfections seem to give the film more character. Some people might throw the word, "edgy," around, but we'll settle on saying this style of filming feels like a more realistic approach. It makes the audience feel like they're actually amongst these gangsters during their heyday.
It almost felt like Christian Bale didn't really want to be there. Between this and Terminator: Salvation, he's really lacking the charisma and talent he's shown in films like The Prestige and The Machinist or even American Psycho. Maybe he's just hit his peak and has nothing else up his sleeve to wow audiences. Bale has hit an eye-catching slump, which is hard to say since this is coming from a long time fan. As long as he continues to be cast in big budget films though and those films wind up doing extremely well at the box office, then not many people are going to notice a difference in the actor's lackluster performance.
Johnny Depp, on the other hand, stole every scene he was in. His cockiness and confidence in his abilities in what he does just gave life to Dillinger that makes you generally like him. You want to see him escape as soon as he gets caught, pull off that next big robbery, and succeed at everything he does so he can run off with Billie Frechette (Marion Cotillard) and live happily ever after. His dialogue is also generally pretty incredible. In the scene where he's confronting Agent Purvis from behind bars, Dillinger is asking Purvis about what it was like to kill a man. How their eyes looked and how you can literally watch a man just drift away by staring into their eyes while they're dying. That that whole experience could keep a man up at night. Purvis asks Dillinger what keeps him up at night. Dillinger, who always seemed to be chewing gum, replies, "Coffee." Dillinger just felt like one of Depp's better acting roles, as of late. He showed more emotion than we're generally used to seeing from him and it was just an incredibly strong performance from the Oscar nominee.
The film has a lot of great dialogue, intriguing character interaction, and it's interesting watching the story unfold of how the crime wave of the 30s may have come to an end, but what really makes the film worth seeing is the shootouts. Any scene that begins with somebody holding a gun is worth getting excited over. There's a scene in the woods in the latter half of the film that is worth the price of admission alone. It takes place at night and everything is littered with darkness until the tommy guns make an appearance. The way the guns light up everything else around the characters firing them was a nice touch. Small explosions erupting from a chamber every time somebody pulled the trigger. This is some of the best gunfire to ever be filmed.
When it comes to Public Enemies, it is one of the best films of the year which is mentioned in at least one of the TV spots. Anyone who was a fan of Michael Mann's previous films (or gangster films, in general) will more than likely walk away from this film satisfied. Johnny Depp is still at the top of his game while Christian Bale seems to be winding down. Public Enemies is a film worthy of the summer blockbuster season which will satisfy the appetite of any fan of crime films.
The most noticeable thing about the film is its cinematography. Michael Mann has used the same method of shooting Public Enemies with HD digital cameras like he did with Collateral. This could be a hassle to some viewers as the picture isn't as shaky as it was in something like Cloverfield, but isn't as crystal clear and steady as you may have found in some of Mann's earlier work like Heat or most other films, for that matter. Perspective plays a huge role in this film. Certain lighting seems to come off better being shot in HD digital and it certainly shows, but the imperfections seem to give the film more character. Some people might throw the word, "edgy," around, but we'll settle on saying this style of filming feels like a more realistic approach. It makes the audience feel like they're actually amongst these gangsters during their heyday.
It almost felt like Christian Bale didn't really want to be there. Between this and Terminator: Salvation, he's really lacking the charisma and talent he's shown in films like The Prestige and The Machinist or even American Psycho. Maybe he's just hit his peak and has nothing else up his sleeve to wow audiences. Bale has hit an eye-catching slump, which is hard to say since this is coming from a long time fan. As long as he continues to be cast in big budget films though and those films wind up doing extremely well at the box office, then not many people are going to notice a difference in the actor's lackluster performance.
Johnny Depp, on the other hand, stole every scene he was in. His cockiness and confidence in his abilities in what he does just gave life to Dillinger that makes you generally like him. You want to see him escape as soon as he gets caught, pull off that next big robbery, and succeed at everything he does so he can run off with Billie Frechette (Marion Cotillard) and live happily ever after. His dialogue is also generally pretty incredible. In the scene where he's confronting Agent Purvis from behind bars, Dillinger is asking Purvis about what it was like to kill a man. How their eyes looked and how you can literally watch a man just drift away by staring into their eyes while they're dying. That that whole experience could keep a man up at night. Purvis asks Dillinger what keeps him up at night. Dillinger, who always seemed to be chewing gum, replies, "Coffee." Dillinger just felt like one of Depp's better acting roles, as of late. He showed more emotion than we're generally used to seeing from him and it was just an incredibly strong performance from the Oscar nominee.
The film has a lot of great dialogue, intriguing character interaction, and it's interesting watching the story unfold of how the crime wave of the 30s may have come to an end, but what really makes the film worth seeing is the shootouts. Any scene that begins with somebody holding a gun is worth getting excited over. There's a scene in the woods in the latter half of the film that is worth the price of admission alone. It takes place at night and everything is littered with darkness until the tommy guns make an appearance. The way the guns light up everything else around the characters firing them was a nice touch. Small explosions erupting from a chamber every time somebody pulled the trigger. This is some of the best gunfire to ever be filmed.
When it comes to Public Enemies, it is one of the best films of the year which is mentioned in at least one of the TV spots. Anyone who was a fan of Michael Mann's previous films (or gangster films, in general) will more than likely walk away from this film satisfied. Johnny Depp is still at the top of his game while Christian Bale seems to be winding down. Public Enemies is a film worthy of the summer blockbuster season which will satisfy the appetite of any fan of crime films.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Ticket to Ride in Tabletop Games
Jan 9, 2020
I am one of the remaining few who reviewers who haven’t put in their two cents on Ticket to Ride. Why? Is it bad? No. Am I lazy? No. It’s really because I don’t think I have anything new to say about it that hasn’t already been said a hundred times. So this review on this game will be a little different from me. Instead of going over the rules and such (however truncated they typically are from me) I will question how well this game has aged for me.
Ticket to Ride is one of those games that has really hit it big in the mass market. You can find it all over in big box stores, in FLGS, online, secondary market, just everywhere. But why? And for this long? Ticket to Ride (TTR) came out in 2004. A mere 15 years ago. While that doesn’t really sound like a long time, in contrast to today’s game industry it is an eternity. With thousands upon thousands of games being released into the market through direct publish, Kickstarter/crowd funding, and big releases at conventions it’s hard to believe that you can still find this hanging with the exciting, fresh new games.
What I truly believe is magical about this game is its simplicity. “You have two main options: take some cards or play some cards.” When you can start a teach of a game by saying that, your players are invested right away because they know you aren’t going to bog them down with rules upon rules. “If you decide to take cards you can take these colored train cards or you can take new route ticket cards.” So now players have two choices from gaining cards. “If you decide to play cards you need to play cards of a color and number matching whichever route between two connecting cities on the map you like.” Done. The game is explained. Yeah, you can fight me about the endgame scoring stuff like longest route and whatnot, but for new gamers, you have explained this classic in three sentences. It’s so beautiful when a game allows you to teach it so quickly.
But that surely means that this is an easy game, right? With so few rules and such. Well, no. It’s not really “easy” at all. While your main rules are light, the strategy and tactics during play can cause feelings of joy and delight as well as frustration and concern as you see someone claim the route you need to connect to two cities on the map. Of course, you can’t explain that to your new players right away. You want them to experience these feelings organically and fully. It’s what makes TTR a really great game: having your well-laid plans just shot to smithereens by the guy who can’t tell the difference between the white train cars and the wild rainbow train cars.
DISCLAIMER: I play with the 1910 expansion, which is a MUST. The larger cards are way easier to play with. See photo below with comparisons from base game on bottom with the larger 1910 cards above. YMMV, but I will always play using this expansion. -T
Components. Let’s compare components to some current or newer games. The game board is laid out really well, and the artwork is sparse and not over-busy on the board. This is a HUGE plus for me. I like nothing more than for the board to offer thematic elements and feeling without pelting my eyes with too much distraction. The cards were a bad choice. Not because the art or the quality on them is bad – because that’s not what I am saying. The size of the cards was a poor choice. I did purchase the 1910 expansion and simply will not play my copy without it. I recently played TTR for GenCan’t 2019 at my FLGS with OG base cards and found myself dreaming of the 1910 cards. The score tracker discs are of industry-standard quality for scoring discs. The plastic train car pieces are still just as wonderful to handle and play with as are many other more modern components. Seriously just as good. TTR components (and really, most of the time Days of Wonder components in general) are really great.
So do I still enjoy playing it? You betcha, don’tcha know. I still love seeing the board in front of me, agonizing over the route tickets I am dealt, and trying to decide if I should go for the New York to Los Angeles, or keep it simple with multiple routes along the Mississippi River. I still love the panic that ensues when I see people hoarding train cards, just knowing that they will soon be on the attack and their train car collection will dwindle to almost endgame levels in too few rounds for me to complete my masterpiece. I guess I still really love it.
Is Ticket to Ride my favorite game? No. But I’ll tell you what. I hadn’t played it in a couple years, and after this weekend’s play, it has moved up on my list by several spaces. It still holds a special place in my heart, and also the hearts of my team. That’s why Purple Phoenix Games gives Ticket to Ride a retrospective 20 / 24. It’s still great!
Ticket to Ride is one of those games that has really hit it big in the mass market. You can find it all over in big box stores, in FLGS, online, secondary market, just everywhere. But why? And for this long? Ticket to Ride (TTR) came out in 2004. A mere 15 years ago. While that doesn’t really sound like a long time, in contrast to today’s game industry it is an eternity. With thousands upon thousands of games being released into the market through direct publish, Kickstarter/crowd funding, and big releases at conventions it’s hard to believe that you can still find this hanging with the exciting, fresh new games.
What I truly believe is magical about this game is its simplicity. “You have two main options: take some cards or play some cards.” When you can start a teach of a game by saying that, your players are invested right away because they know you aren’t going to bog them down with rules upon rules. “If you decide to take cards you can take these colored train cards or you can take new route ticket cards.” So now players have two choices from gaining cards. “If you decide to play cards you need to play cards of a color and number matching whichever route between two connecting cities on the map you like.” Done. The game is explained. Yeah, you can fight me about the endgame scoring stuff like longest route and whatnot, but for new gamers, you have explained this classic in three sentences. It’s so beautiful when a game allows you to teach it so quickly.
But that surely means that this is an easy game, right? With so few rules and such. Well, no. It’s not really “easy” at all. While your main rules are light, the strategy and tactics during play can cause feelings of joy and delight as well as frustration and concern as you see someone claim the route you need to connect to two cities on the map. Of course, you can’t explain that to your new players right away. You want them to experience these feelings organically and fully. It’s what makes TTR a really great game: having your well-laid plans just shot to smithereens by the guy who can’t tell the difference between the white train cars and the wild rainbow train cars.
DISCLAIMER: I play with the 1910 expansion, which is a MUST. The larger cards are way easier to play with. See photo below with comparisons from base game on bottom with the larger 1910 cards above. YMMV, but I will always play using this expansion. -T
Components. Let’s compare components to some current or newer games. The game board is laid out really well, and the artwork is sparse and not over-busy on the board. This is a HUGE plus for me. I like nothing more than for the board to offer thematic elements and feeling without pelting my eyes with too much distraction. The cards were a bad choice. Not because the art or the quality on them is bad – because that’s not what I am saying. The size of the cards was a poor choice. I did purchase the 1910 expansion and simply will not play my copy without it. I recently played TTR for GenCan’t 2019 at my FLGS with OG base cards and found myself dreaming of the 1910 cards. The score tracker discs are of industry-standard quality for scoring discs. The plastic train car pieces are still just as wonderful to handle and play with as are many other more modern components. Seriously just as good. TTR components (and really, most of the time Days of Wonder components in general) are really great.
So do I still enjoy playing it? You betcha, don’tcha know. I still love seeing the board in front of me, agonizing over the route tickets I am dealt, and trying to decide if I should go for the New York to Los Angeles, or keep it simple with multiple routes along the Mississippi River. I still love the panic that ensues when I see people hoarding train cards, just knowing that they will soon be on the attack and their train car collection will dwindle to almost endgame levels in too few rounds for me to complete my masterpiece. I guess I still really love it.
Is Ticket to Ride my favorite game? No. But I’ll tell you what. I hadn’t played it in a couple years, and after this weekend’s play, it has moved up on my list by several spaces. It still holds a special place in my heart, and also the hearts of my team. That’s why Purple Phoenix Games gives Ticket to Ride a retrospective 20 / 24. It’s still great!
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Virtual Reef Diver in Tabletop Games
Nov 19, 2020
Ahh, ze Great Barrier Reef. How I would love to see you! To swim with ze fishies and see ze beautiful colors! But alas, I am no great diver, and have only snorkled once – in ze Caribbean. I am very interested in ze marine life on ze reefs surrounding Australia, and so when I heard of a game from one of our favorite publishers (who happen to be Australian) featuring photos of ze Great Barrier Reef I knew I had to take a look.
Virtual Reef Diver is an educational card game that helps to bring awareness to happenings of the Great Barrier Reef and even implements ways for players to participate in the studies of this natural wonder. The winner(s) of the game is (are) the team who scores the most points at the end of three rounds, and also hopefully learns several new things along the way.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. It is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, but to give a general idea of the feel of the game flow. You are invited to download the rulebook, purchase the game through the publisher directly, or through any retailers stocking it. -T
To setup, shuffle the Action card deck, the Reef Disturbance deck, and the Reef decks separately, placing them on the table. Each team, or player, may be given a Classification Card (reference card) as well. From the Reef deck deal 12 cards face-up on the table in a 3×4 (or 4×3 whatever) grid. Each round a new set of 12 cards will be dealt to the table. Determine the starting player/team and the game may begin!
Players will decide at the beginning of the game which mode they wish to play: Standard or Advanced. I will be previewing the Standard mode. On a turn a player will choose a card from the grid and attempt to identify its type: Hard Coral, Soft Coral, Algae, Invertebrates, Fish, Marine Mammals, or Technology. If correct, the player will collect the card as a trophy and it will be worth VPs at the end of the game. The next player may then take a turn identifying the type of card and collecting if correct, or leaving on the table if incorrect.
All cards are worth VPs except the Technology cards. These, once correctly identified, will allow the player to exchange it for an Action card to be used in the future. Action cards can be very powerful at different times during the game.
Once all 12 cards have been taken for the round the players will reveal a Reef Disturbance card. These typically will have players discarding cards of a certain type, or several cards at once. Some Action cards will negate these effects, so having them ready is great strategy. The grid may now be replenished and the second round started. The game ends at the end of the third round and players count up points to determine the winner!
Components. Again, while this game is in production, I treated it as a preview, and these are final components. That said, this game exists to benefit the Australian Government-funded citizen science website ACEMS. Further, this game is a bunch of cards in a box. The photos on the main Reef cards are mostly quite nice, with a couple looking perhaps a little outdated. The other graphics on the game are fine. They don’t get in the way, and are functional. The cards themselves are also fine quality. Nothing in the box is exquisite nor subpar at all.
The gameplay is something that I am struggling with as a reviewer. You see, this is a VERY different game depending on the mode you play. I will probably always play it on Standard mode because I can guess what type a card may be, but the Advanced mode also awards extra points for identifying the common name, taxonomic family (scientific name), and habitat of each card’s subject. That is for eggheads, man! I’m just a normal American-educated gamer. I don’t know that stuff! So the Standard mode is relatively easy to play and be good, where the Advanced mode is for those times when you have, let’s say, a Scrabble or Chess snob who revels in being the most intellectual person in the room. That’s not at all a bad thing, and I hope any real eggheads know I am kidding around. I am merely jealous at how smart many people are.
That being the case, this game would work well for a group of younger gamers eager to learn about the marine life on the Great Barrier Reef, or those looking for a relaxing quasi-trivia style card game. Need to amp it up and play on Advanced mode? Go for it. I’ll still be flailing about like a clownfish out of water trying to understand the difference between hard and soft coral and how to distinguish them. Seriously. Take a look for yourself and help out a VERY worthy cause in the process.
Virtual Reef Diver is an educational card game that helps to bring awareness to happenings of the Great Barrier Reef and even implements ways for players to participate in the studies of this natural wonder. The winner(s) of the game is (are) the team who scores the most points at the end of three rounds, and also hopefully learns several new things along the way.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. It is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, but to give a general idea of the feel of the game flow. You are invited to download the rulebook, purchase the game through the publisher directly, or through any retailers stocking it. -T
To setup, shuffle the Action card deck, the Reef Disturbance deck, and the Reef decks separately, placing them on the table. Each team, or player, may be given a Classification Card (reference card) as well. From the Reef deck deal 12 cards face-up on the table in a 3×4 (or 4×3 whatever) grid. Each round a new set of 12 cards will be dealt to the table. Determine the starting player/team and the game may begin!
Players will decide at the beginning of the game which mode they wish to play: Standard or Advanced. I will be previewing the Standard mode. On a turn a player will choose a card from the grid and attempt to identify its type: Hard Coral, Soft Coral, Algae, Invertebrates, Fish, Marine Mammals, or Technology. If correct, the player will collect the card as a trophy and it will be worth VPs at the end of the game. The next player may then take a turn identifying the type of card and collecting if correct, or leaving on the table if incorrect.
All cards are worth VPs except the Technology cards. These, once correctly identified, will allow the player to exchange it for an Action card to be used in the future. Action cards can be very powerful at different times during the game.
Once all 12 cards have been taken for the round the players will reveal a Reef Disturbance card. These typically will have players discarding cards of a certain type, or several cards at once. Some Action cards will negate these effects, so having them ready is great strategy. The grid may now be replenished and the second round started. The game ends at the end of the third round and players count up points to determine the winner!
Components. Again, while this game is in production, I treated it as a preview, and these are final components. That said, this game exists to benefit the Australian Government-funded citizen science website ACEMS. Further, this game is a bunch of cards in a box. The photos on the main Reef cards are mostly quite nice, with a couple looking perhaps a little outdated. The other graphics on the game are fine. They don’t get in the way, and are functional. The cards themselves are also fine quality. Nothing in the box is exquisite nor subpar at all.
The gameplay is something that I am struggling with as a reviewer. You see, this is a VERY different game depending on the mode you play. I will probably always play it on Standard mode because I can guess what type a card may be, but the Advanced mode also awards extra points for identifying the common name, taxonomic family (scientific name), and habitat of each card’s subject. That is for eggheads, man! I’m just a normal American-educated gamer. I don’t know that stuff! So the Standard mode is relatively easy to play and be good, where the Advanced mode is for those times when you have, let’s say, a Scrabble or Chess snob who revels in being the most intellectual person in the room. That’s not at all a bad thing, and I hope any real eggheads know I am kidding around. I am merely jealous at how smart many people are.
That being the case, this game would work well for a group of younger gamers eager to learn about the marine life on the Great Barrier Reef, or those looking for a relaxing quasi-trivia style card game. Need to amp it up and play on Advanced mode? Go for it. I’ll still be flailing about like a clownfish out of water trying to understand the difference between hard and soft coral and how to distinguish them. Seriously. Take a look for yourself and help out a VERY worthy cause in the process.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Relic Runners in Tabletop Games
Jun 24, 2021
YES! More adventuring games! I do love adventure games. Relic Runners has players, well, running all over the board searching for, well, relics to add to their collections to bring back to their homelands and become renowned elite adventuristas! One of my wife’s favorite games, a Days of Wonder title, and one for which I have lukewarm feelings. But why?
Relic Runners is a route-building, pick-up-and-deliver, set collection game that puts players in a central camp and has them exploring outward and around the jungle building familiar pathways and exploiting riches from temples and ruins searching for those sweet sweet relics. The winner is the player who collects the most amount of VP from coins, temple pieces, and relics. So let’s get exploring!
To setup, populate the board with toolboxes, shrines, and ruins per the rulebook. Give each player a playmat and all components of matching color. The explorer bust will begin the game in the camp in the middle of the board along with two rations per player. On each playmat place the pathways and rations in their spots, and the toolbox tokens in their spot with one (or more depending on player special power) at the bottom of the Progression Table. The game can now begin!
The game ends when, depending on player count, a specific number of relics have been claimed by the players. Relics are claimed by completing Relic Expeditions, though we always call them Relic Runs, because that’s kinda the title of the game. In order to make a Relic Run players will need to have explored ruins and removed layers of shrines in order to reveal the relics. Movement is unique in Relic Runners because players may move from one location to the next for free if it is a “familiar” path marked with a pathway token in their color plus one space either before or after the familiar pathways. So a player can effectively run through five or six spots on the board if they had previously been able to place pathway tokens on the paths between the spots. This is how effective Relic Runs are accomplished.
When players pass along water trails they may encounter toolboxes. When these toolboxes are flipped to their inactive side the player will be able to move one of their toolbox tokens up the Progression Table to add effectiveness to their player. These tech tree increments could include increased ability to explore and find additional supplies, improve movement, or even give players more actions and bonuses.
Players will be running all around the board trying to uncover shrine tiles for points and abilities, upgrading their characters for efficiency, and attempting multiple Relic Runs as often as possible to bring the game’s end. The player with the most coin, combinations of relics, and temple layers is the winner!
Components. I mentioned in my opener that this is a Days of Wonder game. So? Well, Days of Wonder only produce ONE new title every year, and they seem to put all their eggs into that one big game (not including expansions for other titles throughout the year). Relic Runners is no different. The components are truly wonderful. The board and cardboard bits are great. The temples are unique and interesting. The plastic bits that begin on playmats and the base camp are quite fine. The relics, however, are simply spectacular. There are four types of relics in the game and 20 relics are included in the box. It’s all very impressive and I have had no issues with the components here nor with any Days of Wonder game. They really know what they’re doing.
The gameplay, to me, is just not my thing. Like I mentioned earlier, my wife absolutely adores this game. I can see why she does, but I feel there are other adventure style games that I would prefer to play. Now, Relic Runners is a good game. Josh rated it a six, so he loves it too. For me some of the movement mechanics are weird in that you have to move every turn so that you can’t just travel to a shrine and dismantle it over three turns. I get it. I do, but I just don’t like it. It doesn’t make thematic sense that an explorer would run to a shrine, begin work, then leave it unattended for other explorers to finish the job. So there’s a disconnect for me.
Also, I would have loved to have seen more variation in the player Progression Table. Make each character truly unique to appeal to replayability and different players’ play styles. Obviously I’m no designer, but that would have made a difference for me.
I love the components, am just okay with the art style, and am okay or less with the gameplay. But, Josh and Kristin both love it, and it will certainly appeal to many gamers. I won’t be getting rid of it, but I also won’t be suggesting we play it very often at all. However, if your collection needs a unique adventure style game featuring some interesting movement mechanics and superb components, pick up a copy of Relic Runners. Purple Phoenix Games gives it a 14 / 18. I was hoping for more Indiana Jones but I got cross-country Dora the Explorer.
Relic Runners is a route-building, pick-up-and-deliver, set collection game that puts players in a central camp and has them exploring outward and around the jungle building familiar pathways and exploiting riches from temples and ruins searching for those sweet sweet relics. The winner is the player who collects the most amount of VP from coins, temple pieces, and relics. So let’s get exploring!
To setup, populate the board with toolboxes, shrines, and ruins per the rulebook. Give each player a playmat and all components of matching color. The explorer bust will begin the game in the camp in the middle of the board along with two rations per player. On each playmat place the pathways and rations in their spots, and the toolbox tokens in their spot with one (or more depending on player special power) at the bottom of the Progression Table. The game can now begin!
The game ends when, depending on player count, a specific number of relics have been claimed by the players. Relics are claimed by completing Relic Expeditions, though we always call them Relic Runs, because that’s kinda the title of the game. In order to make a Relic Run players will need to have explored ruins and removed layers of shrines in order to reveal the relics. Movement is unique in Relic Runners because players may move from one location to the next for free if it is a “familiar” path marked with a pathway token in their color plus one space either before or after the familiar pathways. So a player can effectively run through five or six spots on the board if they had previously been able to place pathway tokens on the paths between the spots. This is how effective Relic Runs are accomplished.
When players pass along water trails they may encounter toolboxes. When these toolboxes are flipped to their inactive side the player will be able to move one of their toolbox tokens up the Progression Table to add effectiveness to their player. These tech tree increments could include increased ability to explore and find additional supplies, improve movement, or even give players more actions and bonuses.
Players will be running all around the board trying to uncover shrine tiles for points and abilities, upgrading their characters for efficiency, and attempting multiple Relic Runs as often as possible to bring the game’s end. The player with the most coin, combinations of relics, and temple layers is the winner!
Components. I mentioned in my opener that this is a Days of Wonder game. So? Well, Days of Wonder only produce ONE new title every year, and they seem to put all their eggs into that one big game (not including expansions for other titles throughout the year). Relic Runners is no different. The components are truly wonderful. The board and cardboard bits are great. The temples are unique and interesting. The plastic bits that begin on playmats and the base camp are quite fine. The relics, however, are simply spectacular. There are four types of relics in the game and 20 relics are included in the box. It’s all very impressive and I have had no issues with the components here nor with any Days of Wonder game. They really know what they’re doing.
The gameplay, to me, is just not my thing. Like I mentioned earlier, my wife absolutely adores this game. I can see why she does, but I feel there are other adventure style games that I would prefer to play. Now, Relic Runners is a good game. Josh rated it a six, so he loves it too. For me some of the movement mechanics are weird in that you have to move every turn so that you can’t just travel to a shrine and dismantle it over three turns. I get it. I do, but I just don’t like it. It doesn’t make thematic sense that an explorer would run to a shrine, begin work, then leave it unattended for other explorers to finish the job. So there’s a disconnect for me.
Also, I would have loved to have seen more variation in the player Progression Table. Make each character truly unique to appeal to replayability and different players’ play styles. Obviously I’m no designer, but that would have made a difference for me.
I love the components, am just okay with the art style, and am okay or less with the gameplay. But, Josh and Kristin both love it, and it will certainly appeal to many gamers. I won’t be getting rid of it, but I also won’t be suggesting we play it very often at all. However, if your collection needs a unique adventure style game featuring some interesting movement mechanics and superb components, pick up a copy of Relic Runners. Purple Phoenix Games gives it a 14 / 18. I was hoping for more Indiana Jones but I got cross-country Dora the Explorer.
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated The Nothing Man in Books
Oct 5, 2020
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Book-Review-Banner-75.png"/>;
I am so excited to be part of the Ambassador Book Buzz for The Nothing Man by Catherine Ryan Howard. Thank you to the amazing team at LoveReading and Corvus for this opportunity.
Needless to say, this book made me stay up all night, just to find out how it ends.
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/The-Nothing-Man.jpg"/>;
<b><i>I was the girl who survived the Nothing Man.
Now I am the woman who is going to catch him...</i></b>
You've just read the opening pages of The Nothing Man, the true crime memoir Eve Black has written about her obsessive search for the man who killed her family nearly two decades ago.
The Nothing Man starts when Jim is at work, walking through the supermarket, and he notices that a girl has a book with the name "The Nothing Man" with her. His heart starts racing - because he knows what it means. The Nothing Man is a mysterious man that has assaulted and killed many people in the area, and even after twenty years, no one has found him yet. But Jim knows the truth - because he is the man who did all these crimes.
Eve Black is one of the survivors, that managed to escape his attack by hiding in her bathroom. She writes a book about her experiences and the experiences of the other victims. With her whole family dead and nothing to lose, she is set to find out, once and for all, who the mysterious man is.
I loved the writing style - the book within the book - it was unusual and very interesting for me to engage with. I was so intrigued and invested, and that did not change at all. There are many twists and turns in this book, and you will enjoy them all, especially the very ending, where everything just comes to a big climax. It kept me glued to my seat, and I want more.
I loved the difference between Jim and Eve - their different recollections to how things happened, and why they did. In her book, Eve is explaining how the attacks and murders took place, and right after that, we also witness Jim's reaction to Eve's writing, and whether he agrees or not with how correct her facts are. It was very scary at times, to read from the killer's perspective, and the reasons of why he made some choices.
The more Jim reads, the more he realizes how dangerously close Eve is getting to the truth. He knows she won't give up until she finds him. He has no choice but to stop her first...
Usually, in our standard crime books, we have a crime scene, then suspects, and then we figure our way to finding the murderer. But here - we already know who the murderer is at the beginning of the story. But the rest of the world doesn't. And this is a concept that I haven't encountered yet, but really enjoyed it. Because this is something we don't think about often - when we have a crime, and we don't know who did it, the person that is guilty is out there somewhere, and knows he's deceived us.
The other important message from this book is to remember the victims.
Everyone remembers the name of a serial killer - but only few remember the victim's names.
<b><i>"It's fine to be fascinated by serial killers," she tells me in her office after the lecture. "I am myself, obviously. They are fascinating because even though they look just like the rest of us, they do things the rest of us would never, ever do. But they are not especially intelligent. They don't outsmart authorities. You know David Berkowitz? Son of Sam? They caught him because he got himself a parking ticket at the scene of one of his crimes.
They are boring, ordinary, failures of men - not always men, of course, but predominately - who can't even manage to live, love and process their feelings in a world where the rest of us have all managed to master it by the time we're in our teens. These are no dark magicians. They have no special skills. People seem to forget that we know their names because they got caught. In fact, the only remarkable thing about them is what they took from the world: their victims. It's their names we should know."</i></b>
Eve's book and her investigation behind the book had some powerful psychological lessons, and I enjoyed learning everything. If you already love true crime, and psychological thrillers, you have to absolutely read this and soon. This book is too good to be skipped.
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Book-Review-Banner-75.png"/>;
I am so excited to be part of the Ambassador Book Buzz for The Nothing Man by Catherine Ryan Howard. Thank you to the amazing team at LoveReading and Corvus for this opportunity.
Needless to say, this book made me stay up all night, just to find out how it ends.
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/The-Nothing-Man.jpg"/>;
<b><i>I was the girl who survived the Nothing Man.
Now I am the woman who is going to catch him...</i></b>
You've just read the opening pages of The Nothing Man, the true crime memoir Eve Black has written about her obsessive search for the man who killed her family nearly two decades ago.
The Nothing Man starts when Jim is at work, walking through the supermarket, and he notices that a girl has a book with the name "The Nothing Man" with her. His heart starts racing - because he knows what it means. The Nothing Man is a mysterious man that has assaulted and killed many people in the area, and even after twenty years, no one has found him yet. But Jim knows the truth - because he is the man who did all these crimes.
Eve Black is one of the survivors, that managed to escape his attack by hiding in her bathroom. She writes a book about her experiences and the experiences of the other victims. With her whole family dead and nothing to lose, she is set to find out, once and for all, who the mysterious man is.
I loved the writing style - the book within the book - it was unusual and very interesting for me to engage with. I was so intrigued and invested, and that did not change at all. There are many twists and turns in this book, and you will enjoy them all, especially the very ending, where everything just comes to a big climax. It kept me glued to my seat, and I want more.
I loved the difference between Jim and Eve - their different recollections to how things happened, and why they did. In her book, Eve is explaining how the attacks and murders took place, and right after that, we also witness Jim's reaction to Eve's writing, and whether he agrees or not with how correct her facts are. It was very scary at times, to read from the killer's perspective, and the reasons of why he made some choices.
The more Jim reads, the more he realizes how dangerously close Eve is getting to the truth. He knows she won't give up until she finds him. He has no choice but to stop her first...
Usually, in our standard crime books, we have a crime scene, then suspects, and then we figure our way to finding the murderer. But here - we already know who the murderer is at the beginning of the story. But the rest of the world doesn't. And this is a concept that I haven't encountered yet, but really enjoyed it. Because this is something we don't think about often - when we have a crime, and we don't know who did it, the person that is guilty is out there somewhere, and knows he's deceived us.
The other important message from this book is to remember the victims.
Everyone remembers the name of a serial killer - but only few remember the victim's names.
<b><i>"It's fine to be fascinated by serial killers," she tells me in her office after the lecture. "I am myself, obviously. They are fascinating because even though they look just like the rest of us, they do things the rest of us would never, ever do. But they are not especially intelligent. They don't outsmart authorities. You know David Berkowitz? Son of Sam? They caught him because he got himself a parking ticket at the scene of one of his crimes.
They are boring, ordinary, failures of men - not always men, of course, but predominately - who can't even manage to live, love and process their feelings in a world where the rest of us have all managed to master it by the time we're in our teens. These are no dark magicians. They have no special skills. People seem to forget that we know their names because they got caught. In fact, the only remarkable thing about them is what they took from the world: their victims. It's their names we should know."</i></b>
Eve's book and her investigation behind the book had some powerful psychological lessons, and I enjoyed learning everything. If you already love true crime, and psychological thrillers, you have to absolutely read this and soon. This book is too good to be skipped.
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated First Man (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
I have put off writing this review because I honestly didn't know what, or more precisely how to sum up my feelings about this movie. That's not a typo at the top. I'm giving this one star, and honestly I nearly didn't even give it that.
Previously I've mentioned that I will happily sit through a movie bawling my eyes out. I hadn't quite realised how important it was to have good characters behind the emotional pieces. Twice this movie brought a tear to my eye, and neither were when I particularly expected. I'll circle back round to one of those in a moment.
It is entirely possible that how these people were portrayed is accurate to real life, I honestly don't know much about the people apart from what most around the world know. I could make no emotional connection with them. So much so that at the beginning of the film when we have our first opportunity to sympathise with them I was left frowning at the screen wondering how this devastating story line left me not caring.
The redeeming feature in this film was the Armstrong's oldest son. For the most part they're just around in the periphery of the story, after all most people are there for the space film not the biopic, but he earned this star. Janet makes Neil talk to their sons about the mission he's about to leave for, the boy is just old enough to know what it might mean, how dangerous it is, and in that moment he gave a brilliant performance and I could feel his sadness and anger.
Until I saw Blade Runner 2049 I had not seen Ryan Gosling in a film in 15 years. (I have seen Murder By Numbers but didn't realise he was in it until about five minutes ago.) From that one film I was sold on him as an actor, he played that part really well and I could almost forgive him for doing La La Land. (I have not seen La La Land. However, thanks to the film's sponsorship of drama on ITV2 at a peak moment in time for series I was watching, I have seen the trailer hundreds of times and vowed never to watch it.) Gosling's role in this pained me. As I said, I don't know the people this film is based on, his portrayal of Armstrong could be entirely accurate but I didn't find anything about it believable. His devastation at the beginning of the movie appeared like it should have been a genuine heartbreak for him, and yet his performance didn't reflect that at all apart from some unconvincing wailing.
Claire Foy's Janet Armstrong, again, could be accurate I honestly don't know. Listening to her spend a lot of her time getting angry left me frustrated. Anger is a strong emotion, yet it was another performance that didn't leave me identifying with her pain. I knew where it should have been, but I couldn't find it in any of the scenes.
I feel like I could go on about this for ages. Originally I was going to give First Man two stars, which on my score card is for films that I didn't like but I can see that they're well done and could appeal to other people. Usually that would mean the subject matter isn't too my liking but the performances were good... well. Yeah.
While I can understand the chaotic nature of shuttle's in flight, starting a film with camera shots that are so violently shaky that you can't tell what's going on didn't sit well with me. From the very start you're left confused and not knowing exactly who or what you're watching. Unfortunately that was not the only time that shot was used. The film didn't seem glossy, if that makes sense. It's a film in 2018, we want to see the past in glorious high definition, but everything felt a little retro in an old kind of way. Shaky camera was a constant feature and when we see the exterior shots of the module in space I honestly though I was watching a less technicolour version of Red Dwarf. With one main difference, I like Red Dwarf.
Lots of production choices make sense to some degree. When we go from the landing to getting down on to the moon there is silence. I can see that silence would be a good tool in what is essentially nothingness. But would it have been silent? Wouldn't they have heard console beeping, com channels, and the sound of their own breathing? The silence was deafening, and dull.
When I came out of the film I really couldn't reconcile what I'd seen with what people had been raving about. There was no redeeming feature for me. So much potential telling a story that everyone knows, but doesn't really, and I was left with a bad taste in my mouth and the desire to watch Apollo 13 to reassure myself that there were better films out there.
What you should do
You're going to go and see it because everyone thinks it's amazing. You shouldn't bother. Don't watch it on DVD, don't watch it streaming... buy yourself a copy of Apollo 13 instead.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I want nothing from this film. Anything I could have would be a horrible reminder of me wasting my time at the cinema.
Previously I've mentioned that I will happily sit through a movie bawling my eyes out. I hadn't quite realised how important it was to have good characters behind the emotional pieces. Twice this movie brought a tear to my eye, and neither were when I particularly expected. I'll circle back round to one of those in a moment.
It is entirely possible that how these people were portrayed is accurate to real life, I honestly don't know much about the people apart from what most around the world know. I could make no emotional connection with them. So much so that at the beginning of the film when we have our first opportunity to sympathise with them I was left frowning at the screen wondering how this devastating story line left me not caring.
The redeeming feature in this film was the Armstrong's oldest son. For the most part they're just around in the periphery of the story, after all most people are there for the space film not the biopic, but he earned this star. Janet makes Neil talk to their sons about the mission he's about to leave for, the boy is just old enough to know what it might mean, how dangerous it is, and in that moment he gave a brilliant performance and I could feel his sadness and anger.
Until I saw Blade Runner 2049 I had not seen Ryan Gosling in a film in 15 years. (I have seen Murder By Numbers but didn't realise he was in it until about five minutes ago.) From that one film I was sold on him as an actor, he played that part really well and I could almost forgive him for doing La La Land. (I have not seen La La Land. However, thanks to the film's sponsorship of drama on ITV2 at a peak moment in time for series I was watching, I have seen the trailer hundreds of times and vowed never to watch it.) Gosling's role in this pained me. As I said, I don't know the people this film is based on, his portrayal of Armstrong could be entirely accurate but I didn't find anything about it believable. His devastation at the beginning of the movie appeared like it should have been a genuine heartbreak for him, and yet his performance didn't reflect that at all apart from some unconvincing wailing.
Claire Foy's Janet Armstrong, again, could be accurate I honestly don't know. Listening to her spend a lot of her time getting angry left me frustrated. Anger is a strong emotion, yet it was another performance that didn't leave me identifying with her pain. I knew where it should have been, but I couldn't find it in any of the scenes.
I feel like I could go on about this for ages. Originally I was going to give First Man two stars, which on my score card is for films that I didn't like but I can see that they're well done and could appeal to other people. Usually that would mean the subject matter isn't too my liking but the performances were good... well. Yeah.
While I can understand the chaotic nature of shuttle's in flight, starting a film with camera shots that are so violently shaky that you can't tell what's going on didn't sit well with me. From the very start you're left confused and not knowing exactly who or what you're watching. Unfortunately that was not the only time that shot was used. The film didn't seem glossy, if that makes sense. It's a film in 2018, we want to see the past in glorious high definition, but everything felt a little retro in an old kind of way. Shaky camera was a constant feature and when we see the exterior shots of the module in space I honestly though I was watching a less technicolour version of Red Dwarf. With one main difference, I like Red Dwarf.
Lots of production choices make sense to some degree. When we go from the landing to getting down on to the moon there is silence. I can see that silence would be a good tool in what is essentially nothingness. But would it have been silent? Wouldn't they have heard console beeping, com channels, and the sound of their own breathing? The silence was deafening, and dull.
When I came out of the film I really couldn't reconcile what I'd seen with what people had been raving about. There was no redeeming feature for me. So much potential telling a story that everyone knows, but doesn't really, and I was left with a bad taste in my mouth and the desire to watch Apollo 13 to reassure myself that there were better films out there.
What you should do
You're going to go and see it because everyone thinks it's amazing. You shouldn't bother. Don't watch it on DVD, don't watch it streaming... buy yourself a copy of Apollo 13 instead.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I want nothing from this film. Anything I could have would be a horrible reminder of me wasting my time at the cinema.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Fantastic Beasts: Crimes of Grindelwald (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
Well where do I start? I love the fact that there is no substantial synopsis for this film, a lot have just gone with "the ongoing adventures of Newt Scamander" or similarly vague offerings.
It's difficult to separate them from their Harry Potter ancestry. They are of course the same universe. If you can sever the links then the films aren't too bad, but they're not amazing either. The other issue is that with the links you're obviously given lots of issues with continuity and timelines.
After only given a brief sighting of Grindelwald in the first film we're sold a creepy and scary version in this one very early on. His suspension during the transfer to the coach gives him the sinister grace of a dementor. This leads to the first of two problems for me. Abernathy in this whole introductory section is odd and you can tell something is up, so when we're eventually presented with that was happening it wasn't a surprise.
Here's problem two. Once Grindelwald is secured in the coach the rest of the sequence takes place outside, in the dark, in a storm. Very atmospheric with striking shots... most of which you can't see because of the lightning and rain. Everything is so fast that it's just a blur. It seems to be a popular occurrence recently and I will never understand why you would spend so much money on them when you can't see what's happening. One of the bits that you can see properly is the ghostly face of Grindelwald appearing in the coach window... which is a shame because it felt like it was awfully done and could have used some covering up.
As a quick note while I remember, I would like to acknowledge the impressive advances in wizarding technology. Early roombas and Fitbits. Great job!
Looking back over the notes most of them were about characters. Barely any about storyline. Just one thing that seemed completely out of place/inaccurate, and that was Minerva McGonagall. I'm not well enough versed in Harry Potter history but looking at the chatter I don't think her timeline matches with that of the film... but I'll leave that to the super nerds. If it is inaccurate it would have been very easy to avoid so it seems ridiculous to have had in at all.
The fluffy, feathered and scaly friends also need an honourable mention. *gets out soap box and steps up* Nifflers rule. I will fight anyone who thinks otherwise. Although, bad film! Getting my hopes up and then dashing them. You give them leeway with the animation considering they're fantastic beasts, but the only creatures that don't really have a decent presence on screen are the matagots that protect the Ministry of Magic. Even as hairless catlike creatures you'd expect something a little more impressive than what feels like CGI with a layer of detail missing.
I'm also intrigued by the phoenix. Is it Fawkes? How did Albus get his? Of course I could have missed things that answer all of the questions I have about it.
After reviewing all my notes I can (un)happily say that almost all of the women come off quite badly in this film. Bunty, Newt's assistant (I hope that was her name, she was fairly forgetable other than this point), came over as a little creepy with her comments that clearly show her affections for him. Queenie has a bit of a transformation in this one. She's still got her optimistic outlook but she's devolving a bit. Tina is taken by jealousy, which seems a little off for her. The newest addition of Nagini came out relatively unscathed and I'm hoping for an intriguing ongoing story for her.
The male characters came off slightly better. Jacob and Flamel were some welcome relief from this bleak installment of the franchise. Hats off to Callum Turner and Joshua Shea though. They both managed to pick up the Newt mannerisms really well. I can appreciate it even though it's one of the things I dislike about Fantastic Beasts, the constant head tilting.
Jude Law as Albus Dumbledore still doesn't sit quite right, but he made a reasonable job of it. He doesn't quite hold the same presence in the scenes as you'd expect him to for the man he becomes though. Everyone also got into a tizzy about his sexuality. Who cares? Whether he is or isn't gay makes no difference to the movie whatsoever. Just enjoy a film a don't worry about it until it's relevant.
It really is difficult to sum the story line up for this one. There's a reason that everyone has generalised the synopsis. It's just a lot of nothing in particular. It's part two of five. There didn't really seem to be a lot apart from filler. What I can tell you is that the first time I saw this (I went to the midnight screening at Vue originally) I fell asleep through a significant chunk in the middle and yet I still came out with the same understanding and enjoyment as I did after the second time.
What you should do
You're going to have to see it at some point if you're into the HP universe. Just a statement of fact there!
Movie thing you wish you could take home
That magic spell for collapsing all my belongings into a couple of trunks, I'm assuming it would come in handy for cleaning as well.
It's difficult to separate them from their Harry Potter ancestry. They are of course the same universe. If you can sever the links then the films aren't too bad, but they're not amazing either. The other issue is that with the links you're obviously given lots of issues with continuity and timelines.
After only given a brief sighting of Grindelwald in the first film we're sold a creepy and scary version in this one very early on. His suspension during the transfer to the coach gives him the sinister grace of a dementor. This leads to the first of two problems for me. Abernathy in this whole introductory section is odd and you can tell something is up, so when we're eventually presented with that was happening it wasn't a surprise.
Here's problem two. Once Grindelwald is secured in the coach the rest of the sequence takes place outside, in the dark, in a storm. Very atmospheric with striking shots... most of which you can't see because of the lightning and rain. Everything is so fast that it's just a blur. It seems to be a popular occurrence recently and I will never understand why you would spend so much money on them when you can't see what's happening. One of the bits that you can see properly is the ghostly face of Grindelwald appearing in the coach window... which is a shame because it felt like it was awfully done and could have used some covering up.
As a quick note while I remember, I would like to acknowledge the impressive advances in wizarding technology. Early roombas and Fitbits. Great job!
Looking back over the notes most of them were about characters. Barely any about storyline. Just one thing that seemed completely out of place/inaccurate, and that was Minerva McGonagall. I'm not well enough versed in Harry Potter history but looking at the chatter I don't think her timeline matches with that of the film... but I'll leave that to the super nerds. If it is inaccurate it would have been very easy to avoid so it seems ridiculous to have had in at all.
The fluffy, feathered and scaly friends also need an honourable mention. *gets out soap box and steps up* Nifflers rule. I will fight anyone who thinks otherwise. Although, bad film! Getting my hopes up and then dashing them. You give them leeway with the animation considering they're fantastic beasts, but the only creatures that don't really have a decent presence on screen are the matagots that protect the Ministry of Magic. Even as hairless catlike creatures you'd expect something a little more impressive than what feels like CGI with a layer of detail missing.
I'm also intrigued by the phoenix. Is it Fawkes? How did Albus get his? Of course I could have missed things that answer all of the questions I have about it.
After reviewing all my notes I can (un)happily say that almost all of the women come off quite badly in this film. Bunty, Newt's assistant (I hope that was her name, she was fairly forgetable other than this point), came over as a little creepy with her comments that clearly show her affections for him. Queenie has a bit of a transformation in this one. She's still got her optimistic outlook but she's devolving a bit. Tina is taken by jealousy, which seems a little off for her. The newest addition of Nagini came out relatively unscathed and I'm hoping for an intriguing ongoing story for her.
The male characters came off slightly better. Jacob and Flamel were some welcome relief from this bleak installment of the franchise. Hats off to Callum Turner and Joshua Shea though. They both managed to pick up the Newt mannerisms really well. I can appreciate it even though it's one of the things I dislike about Fantastic Beasts, the constant head tilting.
Jude Law as Albus Dumbledore still doesn't sit quite right, but he made a reasonable job of it. He doesn't quite hold the same presence in the scenes as you'd expect him to for the man he becomes though. Everyone also got into a tizzy about his sexuality. Who cares? Whether he is or isn't gay makes no difference to the movie whatsoever. Just enjoy a film a don't worry about it until it's relevant.
It really is difficult to sum the story line up for this one. There's a reason that everyone has generalised the synopsis. It's just a lot of nothing in particular. It's part two of five. There didn't really seem to be a lot apart from filler. What I can tell you is that the first time I saw this (I went to the midnight screening at Vue originally) I fell asleep through a significant chunk in the middle and yet I still came out with the same understanding and enjoyment as I did after the second time.
What you should do
You're going to have to see it at some point if you're into the HP universe. Just a statement of fact there!
Movie thing you wish you could take home
That magic spell for collapsing all my belongings into a couple of trunks, I'm assuming it would come in handy for cleaning as well.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Hamsters vs. Hippos in Tabletop Games
Oct 1, 2021
Deeply consider this question: what is your natural predator? We are the top of the food chain, right? Right? And what we all learned in school is that some animals are herbivores, some are carnivores, and some are omnivores. At least in the Midwest, that’s what we were taught. Now, I don’t remember ever being taught that hippopotamuses (hippopotami?) eat anything other than grass. However, I have been wrong so many times in my life that I am interested to find out why they would snack on fleeing hamsters. Perhaps a board game can help me!
Hamsters vs. Hippos is a press-your-luck tile flipping game where players are cute little hamsterinos escaping the zoo and nearing freedom. However, along the way they must traverse the hippo enclosure. Typically hippos only eat grass, but in this game universe they are attracted to the delectable little rodents and are as hangry as my kids after a day at the playground. The hamster who can collect the most lotus flowers from the hippo lily pads at the end of the game will be the winner and be able to escape the zoo in peace. All other players will be snacked.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, determine the appropriate grid size for the number of players per the rulebook. Shuffle all the lily pad tiles face-down, place them in the grid, then place upon them nine lotus flower tokens. Each player will select their hamsteeple and mat and the game may now begin!
Hamsters vs. Hippos is played over four rounds and each turn players will have two actions they must complete. For the first action, each hamster must move onto the grid to explore a face-down tile, or explore another face-down tile if already on the grid. For the second action the hamster may continue exploring new tiles or be taken off the grid to score their collected lotus flowers. Movement can be orthogonally or diagonally, but every time they move, the hamsters must move to an unexplored tile. Flipping these tiles will reveal empty lily pads, some special actions to be taken, lotus flowers to be collected, or hippos that end the hamster’s round and makes the hamster forfeit their collected lotus flowers this round.
The game continues in this fashion over four rounds where hamsters are moving onto and off the grid, moving around the grid, collecting flowers, and possibly being eaten. At the end of the fourth round players total their lotus flowers they were able to keep and the hamster with the most lotus flowers wins!
Components. This one is easy. This game is a bunch of lily pad tiles, some cardstock player mats, wooden lotus flower tokens, and cute little hamsteeples. The tiles are good quality, the player mats are big and nice, and the hamsteeples are precious. I enjoy the lighthearted art style quite a bit – even the angry-looking hippo tiles. My only issue lies with the lotus flower tokens. They are very thin painted wooden tokens in two colors – pastel pink (worth 1 VP)and slightly darker pastel purple (worth 3 VP). I am not colorblind, but I like to make mention of items I would think are not colorblind friendly. The difference in color is not great enough, even for me of acceptable color differentiation. Another thing about these is they are very thin and delicate. Normally this isn’t an issue for me, but this is clearly a game my children want to play. When they play this with me I am always holding my breath just waiting for them to break a lotus flower. It hasn’t happened yet, but I might see about adding sturdier components to my copy when I play with little ones.
Game play is very very light. This is purely a press-your-luck game of deciding to move to a tile, flipping it over, and hoping for the best. There are a few special action tiles that can help mitigate the luck factor a little, but most of the time it’s a leap before you look scenario. That may turn off a large faction of gamers, but I will be playing this primarily with my children (who are nowhere near the suggested age of 8+). I could have reviewed this under our Kids Table series, but it doesn’t seem to be marketed specifically to children. As a game for adults, this is novelty at best, but for children it’s a decent press-your-luck style game. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a 4 / 6, but only because it works so well with kids. If I didn’t have children I couldn’t see myself playing it a whole lot at all. Consider this when you look at the amazing cover art and intriguing theme. It’s good for what it is, but will not be for all collections and play groups.
Hamsters vs. Hippos is a press-your-luck tile flipping game where players are cute little hamsterinos escaping the zoo and nearing freedom. However, along the way they must traverse the hippo enclosure. Typically hippos only eat grass, but in this game universe they are attracted to the delectable little rodents and are as hangry as my kids after a day at the playground. The hamster who can collect the most lotus flowers from the hippo lily pads at the end of the game will be the winner and be able to escape the zoo in peace. All other players will be snacked.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, determine the appropriate grid size for the number of players per the rulebook. Shuffle all the lily pad tiles face-down, place them in the grid, then place upon them nine lotus flower tokens. Each player will select their hamsteeple and mat and the game may now begin!
Hamsters vs. Hippos is played over four rounds and each turn players will have two actions they must complete. For the first action, each hamster must move onto the grid to explore a face-down tile, or explore another face-down tile if already on the grid. For the second action the hamster may continue exploring new tiles or be taken off the grid to score their collected lotus flowers. Movement can be orthogonally or diagonally, but every time they move, the hamsters must move to an unexplored tile. Flipping these tiles will reveal empty lily pads, some special actions to be taken, lotus flowers to be collected, or hippos that end the hamster’s round and makes the hamster forfeit their collected lotus flowers this round.
The game continues in this fashion over four rounds where hamsters are moving onto and off the grid, moving around the grid, collecting flowers, and possibly being eaten. At the end of the fourth round players total their lotus flowers they were able to keep and the hamster with the most lotus flowers wins!
Components. This one is easy. This game is a bunch of lily pad tiles, some cardstock player mats, wooden lotus flower tokens, and cute little hamsteeples. The tiles are good quality, the player mats are big and nice, and the hamsteeples are precious. I enjoy the lighthearted art style quite a bit – even the angry-looking hippo tiles. My only issue lies with the lotus flower tokens. They are very thin painted wooden tokens in two colors – pastel pink (worth 1 VP)and slightly darker pastel purple (worth 3 VP). I am not colorblind, but I like to make mention of items I would think are not colorblind friendly. The difference in color is not great enough, even for me of acceptable color differentiation. Another thing about these is they are very thin and delicate. Normally this isn’t an issue for me, but this is clearly a game my children want to play. When they play this with me I am always holding my breath just waiting for them to break a lotus flower. It hasn’t happened yet, but I might see about adding sturdier components to my copy when I play with little ones.
Game play is very very light. This is purely a press-your-luck game of deciding to move to a tile, flipping it over, and hoping for the best. There are a few special action tiles that can help mitigate the luck factor a little, but most of the time it’s a leap before you look scenario. That may turn off a large faction of gamers, but I will be playing this primarily with my children (who are nowhere near the suggested age of 8+). I could have reviewed this under our Kids Table series, but it doesn’t seem to be marketed specifically to children. As a game for adults, this is novelty at best, but for children it’s a decent press-your-luck style game. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a 4 / 6, but only because it works so well with kids. If I didn’t have children I couldn’t see myself playing it a whole lot at all. Consider this when you look at the amazing cover art and intriguing theme. It’s good for what it is, but will not be for all collections and play groups.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Black Mirror - Season 3 in TV
Mar 3, 2020
Nosedive - 8
We had to wait almost another 2 years for the Netflix investment to show a product, and in time for Halloween 2016 we got the super-glossy re-boot of Nosedive, with a big name up front and lots of anticipation. The tone was instantly more playful; less British, more inclusive to a world audience. It tackled with a wry humour the universal phenomenon of popularity and everything being rated, most notably, people themselves. In a future world of sunshine and pastel shades it has become the norm to rate every interaction, from buying coffee to buying a house, in the hope of becoming one of the beautiful people rated above a 4.5. It cleverly questions the motivations for that desire, and the pitfalls of false behaviour and the manipulation from an elite standpoint. It isn’t necessary to imagine this future, as we are virtually there already, and all this episode does is heighten the idea to hyperbolic proportions. Rated down by many viewers because it is “annoying”, but that is entirely the point: the whole thing makes you want to scream!
Playtest - 6.5
Also available for Halloween (as was the whole season, in standard Netflix style) came a chance to explore what really scares us! And… they blew it. Sure, the idea that gaming and VR becomes so photo realistic it seems entirely real isn’t far away. But, making it personal to a very annoying character dissolves all tension quite early on. Some mild jump scares aside, this has to go down as a missed opportunity. Notable only for the re-occurance of the White Bear symbol.
Shut Up and Dance - 7
This is the one most likely to make you think, hmm, that is too far! An uncomfortable episode, not only because of the subject matter and ultimate revelation, but because of the intense nastiness that pervades it. No doubt that tension is intentional, and therefore effective to a degree, but for me it crosses the line of entertainment and becomes simply nasty. Being unafraid to tackle controversial subjects is to be applauded, but the execution has to be note perfect, or the risk is the backlash this episode received. A cautionary tale about surveillance, data theft, blackmail and our personal online responsibility. Not a bad piece, just a slight misjudgment on tone and delivery.
San Junipero - 9.5
Just when critics were sharpening their pens that Netflix had ruined the potential of Black Mirror in its first phase, comes an almost perfect piece of TV that is literally heavenly! Everything about San Junipero is a work of art! Another “blind” episode that takes a while to unravel; the pacing and realisation of which is so beautifully judged that, from a writing point of view, this has to be seen as the pinnacle of the show to date. Mackenzie Davis is extraordinary as the vulnerable, shy and naive Yorkie, looking for a connection in an 80s nightclub, filled with nostalgia and cultural memes galore. The music alone is not only sing aloud perfect, but chosen for storytelling reasons so clever it raises goosebumps! The relationship between Yorkie and Kelly, an equally great Gugu Mbatha-Raw, is filled with chemistry and nuance, drawing us in to a place so deep that when the penny drops on what is really going on it draws a gasp and then possibly tears – I know it did for me! The mechanics of the technology that would make this story possible does raise a lot of questions, but in the end it is better to accept it as an allegory for love, life and our ideas of “eternity”. Don’t look too deeply at the how, but marvel at the why, and this could be the best hour of TV you will ever see! So rewatchable, rich and rewarding; the only reason not to make this a feature length big budget film is that how could it possibly be improved?
Men Against Fire - 7
Revisiting yet again the technology of a brain implant that affects our vision of the world, literally and figuratively, this episode explores indoctrination and brainwashing, with the underlying themes of racism and basic human compassion. It is a fine analogy of how the media and governments would have us think of immigrants and the “dangers” of anything “not us”. A tad obvious, and doesn’t really go anywhere new once the twist is revealed. Visually quite stunning, but not as strong as other episodes that cover similar ground.
Hated in the Nation - 8.5
With a running time of 89 minutes, this is essentially what happens when Black Mirror pushes an idea to feature length. Allowing more time for character development does make a difference, and the tension build in this fine concept for a thriller also benefits from a few extra minutes. The ever reliable Kelly MacDonald is the cornerstone of a strong cast, on the hunt for the mind behind a series of killings by killer bee drones, targeted at a democratically elected “most hated” person every day, based on a public vote. An exploration of media vilification and how easy it can be to manipulate our idea of someone’s identity and judge their actions and even personalities based on one wrong thing they may have said or done. The episode is a who-dunnit? A why-doit? And, framed, with the backdrop of the inquest surrounding events, both a good cop movie and a courtroom drama. Charlie Brooker has hinted that some of these characters may return at some point. I’m all for it.
We had to wait almost another 2 years for the Netflix investment to show a product, and in time for Halloween 2016 we got the super-glossy re-boot of Nosedive, with a big name up front and lots of anticipation. The tone was instantly more playful; less British, more inclusive to a world audience. It tackled with a wry humour the universal phenomenon of popularity and everything being rated, most notably, people themselves. In a future world of sunshine and pastel shades it has become the norm to rate every interaction, from buying coffee to buying a house, in the hope of becoming one of the beautiful people rated above a 4.5. It cleverly questions the motivations for that desire, and the pitfalls of false behaviour and the manipulation from an elite standpoint. It isn’t necessary to imagine this future, as we are virtually there already, and all this episode does is heighten the idea to hyperbolic proportions. Rated down by many viewers because it is “annoying”, but that is entirely the point: the whole thing makes you want to scream!
Playtest - 6.5
Also available for Halloween (as was the whole season, in standard Netflix style) came a chance to explore what really scares us! And… they blew it. Sure, the idea that gaming and VR becomes so photo realistic it seems entirely real isn’t far away. But, making it personal to a very annoying character dissolves all tension quite early on. Some mild jump scares aside, this has to go down as a missed opportunity. Notable only for the re-occurance of the White Bear symbol.
Shut Up and Dance - 7
This is the one most likely to make you think, hmm, that is too far! An uncomfortable episode, not only because of the subject matter and ultimate revelation, but because of the intense nastiness that pervades it. No doubt that tension is intentional, and therefore effective to a degree, but for me it crosses the line of entertainment and becomes simply nasty. Being unafraid to tackle controversial subjects is to be applauded, but the execution has to be note perfect, or the risk is the backlash this episode received. A cautionary tale about surveillance, data theft, blackmail and our personal online responsibility. Not a bad piece, just a slight misjudgment on tone and delivery.
San Junipero - 9.5
Just when critics were sharpening their pens that Netflix had ruined the potential of Black Mirror in its first phase, comes an almost perfect piece of TV that is literally heavenly! Everything about San Junipero is a work of art! Another “blind” episode that takes a while to unravel; the pacing and realisation of which is so beautifully judged that, from a writing point of view, this has to be seen as the pinnacle of the show to date. Mackenzie Davis is extraordinary as the vulnerable, shy and naive Yorkie, looking for a connection in an 80s nightclub, filled with nostalgia and cultural memes galore. The music alone is not only sing aloud perfect, but chosen for storytelling reasons so clever it raises goosebumps! The relationship between Yorkie and Kelly, an equally great Gugu Mbatha-Raw, is filled with chemistry and nuance, drawing us in to a place so deep that when the penny drops on what is really going on it draws a gasp and then possibly tears – I know it did for me! The mechanics of the technology that would make this story possible does raise a lot of questions, but in the end it is better to accept it as an allegory for love, life and our ideas of “eternity”. Don’t look too deeply at the how, but marvel at the why, and this could be the best hour of TV you will ever see! So rewatchable, rich and rewarding; the only reason not to make this a feature length big budget film is that how could it possibly be improved?
Men Against Fire - 7
Revisiting yet again the technology of a brain implant that affects our vision of the world, literally and figuratively, this episode explores indoctrination and brainwashing, with the underlying themes of racism and basic human compassion. It is a fine analogy of how the media and governments would have us think of immigrants and the “dangers” of anything “not us”. A tad obvious, and doesn’t really go anywhere new once the twist is revealed. Visually quite stunning, but not as strong as other episodes that cover similar ground.
Hated in the Nation - 8.5
With a running time of 89 minutes, this is essentially what happens when Black Mirror pushes an idea to feature length. Allowing more time for character development does make a difference, and the tension build in this fine concept for a thriller also benefits from a few extra minutes. The ever reliable Kelly MacDonald is the cornerstone of a strong cast, on the hunt for the mind behind a series of killings by killer bee drones, targeted at a democratically elected “most hated” person every day, based on a public vote. An exploration of media vilification and how easy it can be to manipulate our idea of someone’s identity and judge their actions and even personalities based on one wrong thing they may have said or done. The episode is a who-dunnit? A why-doit? And, framed, with the backdrop of the inquest surrounding events, both a good cop movie and a courtroom drama. Charlie Brooker has hinted that some of these characters may return at some point. I’m all for it.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Tomorrowland (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
I have to be honest. I was confused when I first heard that a movie was being made called Tomorrowland, and even more so when I heard it that actually is based on the themed area of Disney parks. How could they do it? What would it be about? It was strange. The teaser trailer didn’t give a whole lot away either (as teasers are designed to do). When I saw the full trailer, I had a little more understanding, and it definitely piqued my interest, but I was still totally in the dark. And I wanted to see the movie! I guess Disney really did their job right.
In this film, Tomorrowland is a place of unlimited possibilities. Another dimension, where the inhabitants of that dimension actively seek out intelligent people, inventors, who can do something that can change the world for the better. We begin at the 1964 World Fair in New York where we see a young Frank Walker (Thomas Robinson) entering into the inventor’s competition with a jetpack that doesn’t quite work. However, a mysterious young woman named Athena (Raffey Cassidy) takes an interest in him, offers him a pin and instructs him to follow her. Thus begins Frank’s adventure and we move forward in time to the present day, where we meet Casey Newton (Britt Robertson).
Casey is the teenage daughter of a NASA engineer, who is no slough in the intelligence department herself. We are introduced to her as she is sabotaging equipment at a NASA launch pad that is scheduled to be taken down, which will leave her father without a job. We see Athena again, who has mysteriously not aged, leaving a pin for Casey to discover Tomorrowland on her own. Only, this pin is a simple advertisement. We soon learn that something has gone terribly wrong, and our world is in danger. Athena leads Casey to an aged Frank Walker (George Clooney), who has since been banished from Tomorrowland, but still feeds off of their signal and sits and waits for the end of the world, which he knows when it will happen. But he and Athena see something in Casey that will help save both Tomorrowland, and our world.
Given the conversations, the imagery, and the theme of this movie, it is clearly targeted towards children more than adults. Though, there is plenty for an adult to enjoy about the movie, it is important to understand that the movie is clearly targeted to a younger audience. I say this because I feel, as did my guests who attended the press screening, that the main plot device, the main conflict of the movie, is far too complex a concept for this younger audience to understand. So before you read any further, spoiler alert. You have been forewarned. If you do not want to know, skip the next two paragraphs.
The idea here is that Frank Walker built a machine that could see any point in time. Past, future or present. With this machine, he saw the end of our world. The proposed resolution to stop the destruction of earth is this: turn off the machine. The argument being that the world ends because we see it ending. It becomes a fixation of our mind, and so it will happen. Apparently, the people of Tomorrowland have been streaming this information to Earth for years, but instead of taking steps to prevent it, Earth has embraced it. One of my favorite lines, delivered by one of my favorite actors (Hugh Laurie) indicated that we had simultaneous epidemics of obesity and starvation on Earth. It’s mind boggling. But the Casey comes up with the brilliant idea of turning it off, which will prevent the destruction of Earth because people will no longer be so focused on it. It’s a little more complicated than that, but this is the gist of it. Way too complex for your average child to comprehend.
Another part of the resolution and the end of the movie was brilliant, but I think it was poorly illustrated. As I mentioned earlier, the residents of Tomorrowland were searching for intelligent people, often high IQ inventors, who could make the world a better place. At the end of the film, Casey idea is to bring not only intelligent people, but anyone who will make a difference. Dancers, musicians, doctors, pilots, farmers, etc. I think I even saw a waitress in there. These are people who may not normally be recognized as highly intelligent, but can make huge differences in the world. The idea was to not be so limited in thinking, and understand how everything can contribute to a better world. However, they did not really do a great job of pointing this out, so some movie-goers may miss this point completely and simply see it as a rebuilding of Tomorrowland to its former glory.
Other than those two issues, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. It had a great amount of humor, action and endearing moments. It was visually stunning, and took a concept that I never thought could be made into a movie and did just that. The movie was brilliantly cast, even down to the minor characters like Hugo (Keegan-Michael Key) and Ursula (Kathryn Hahn). Of course the score was fantastic, it is a Disney film after all. And despite my issues with the complexity of the plot, I still think that everyone, young and old, will enjoy this film.
Is it perfect? Absolutely not. But it is entertaining, and definitely worth seeing on the big screen. So go check it out. In theaters everywhere, today.
In this film, Tomorrowland is a place of unlimited possibilities. Another dimension, where the inhabitants of that dimension actively seek out intelligent people, inventors, who can do something that can change the world for the better. We begin at the 1964 World Fair in New York where we see a young Frank Walker (Thomas Robinson) entering into the inventor’s competition with a jetpack that doesn’t quite work. However, a mysterious young woman named Athena (Raffey Cassidy) takes an interest in him, offers him a pin and instructs him to follow her. Thus begins Frank’s adventure and we move forward in time to the present day, where we meet Casey Newton (Britt Robertson).
Casey is the teenage daughter of a NASA engineer, who is no slough in the intelligence department herself. We are introduced to her as she is sabotaging equipment at a NASA launch pad that is scheduled to be taken down, which will leave her father without a job. We see Athena again, who has mysteriously not aged, leaving a pin for Casey to discover Tomorrowland on her own. Only, this pin is a simple advertisement. We soon learn that something has gone terribly wrong, and our world is in danger. Athena leads Casey to an aged Frank Walker (George Clooney), who has since been banished from Tomorrowland, but still feeds off of their signal and sits and waits for the end of the world, which he knows when it will happen. But he and Athena see something in Casey that will help save both Tomorrowland, and our world.
Given the conversations, the imagery, and the theme of this movie, it is clearly targeted towards children more than adults. Though, there is plenty for an adult to enjoy about the movie, it is important to understand that the movie is clearly targeted to a younger audience. I say this because I feel, as did my guests who attended the press screening, that the main plot device, the main conflict of the movie, is far too complex a concept for this younger audience to understand. So before you read any further, spoiler alert. You have been forewarned. If you do not want to know, skip the next two paragraphs.
The idea here is that Frank Walker built a machine that could see any point in time. Past, future or present. With this machine, he saw the end of our world. The proposed resolution to stop the destruction of earth is this: turn off the machine. The argument being that the world ends because we see it ending. It becomes a fixation of our mind, and so it will happen. Apparently, the people of Tomorrowland have been streaming this information to Earth for years, but instead of taking steps to prevent it, Earth has embraced it. One of my favorite lines, delivered by one of my favorite actors (Hugh Laurie) indicated that we had simultaneous epidemics of obesity and starvation on Earth. It’s mind boggling. But the Casey comes up with the brilliant idea of turning it off, which will prevent the destruction of Earth because people will no longer be so focused on it. It’s a little more complicated than that, but this is the gist of it. Way too complex for your average child to comprehend.
Another part of the resolution and the end of the movie was brilliant, but I think it was poorly illustrated. As I mentioned earlier, the residents of Tomorrowland were searching for intelligent people, often high IQ inventors, who could make the world a better place. At the end of the film, Casey idea is to bring not only intelligent people, but anyone who will make a difference. Dancers, musicians, doctors, pilots, farmers, etc. I think I even saw a waitress in there. These are people who may not normally be recognized as highly intelligent, but can make huge differences in the world. The idea was to not be so limited in thinking, and understand how everything can contribute to a better world. However, they did not really do a great job of pointing this out, so some movie-goers may miss this point completely and simply see it as a rebuilding of Tomorrowland to its former glory.
Other than those two issues, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. It had a great amount of humor, action and endearing moments. It was visually stunning, and took a concept that I never thought could be made into a movie and did just that. The movie was brilliantly cast, even down to the minor characters like Hugo (Keegan-Michael Key) and Ursula (Kathryn Hahn). Of course the score was fantastic, it is a Disney film after all. And despite my issues with the complexity of the plot, I still think that everyone, young and old, will enjoy this film.
Is it perfect? Absolutely not. But it is entertaining, and definitely worth seeing on the big screen. So go check it out. In theaters everywhere, today.