Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Creed 3 (2023) in Movies
Mar 5, 2023
Life for Adonis Creed (Michael B. Jordan), is going well. He has a loving
wife (Tessa Thompson), and daughter (Mile Davis-Kent), and has retired
from boxing after defeating an old rival and ensuring his legacy.
Creed spends his time with his family and developing young fighters at his
gym and is prepping the current champion for his next big match against
Viktor Drago.
An unexpected figure from Creed’s past arrives in the form of Damian
Anderson (Jonathan Majors), a friend of Creed’s troubled youth has
just completed eighteen years in prison.
Damian was the current Golden Gloves champion when he was arrested and
believes he is due his title shot and Creed is the one who can make it
happen.
Creed tries to teach his friend that a person without a single professional fight does not get a magical title shot and with his large
the gap from the ring he would need to grind it out to get a shot.
When an incident occurs just before a scheduled fight and without any
established fighters available to make the date of the fight, Creed gives
his friend a shot and sees that his brutal style of boxing is not what he
would endorse.
Upon winning the title Damian lets it go to his head and gloats at how Creed
had the life he should have had and blames Creed for his past issues and
for not visiting him or staying in contact.
Naturally, this puts the two former friends on a path of no return with a
climatic boxing match being the solution.
“Creed III” does not have the benefit of Sylvester Stallone but you can
still get whips of his character’s influence on Creed and Jordan does a
very solid job Directing the film. He produces strong character moments
which help define the struggles and motivations that each of them faces and
the boxing sequences are very engaging and will have you cheering along.
Majors does a great job in what could have been a routine bad guy
performance. He gives Damian a drive and purpose but also shows the path
that Creed could easily have followed had fate not gone as it did and how
watching someone get everything you dreamed of while you are in prison can
turn even the best of a man cold and bitter.
The film satisfies from start to finish and the character moments and
boxing blend to make not only a very enjoyable film but one that shows
that there is plenty of life in the franchise.
4 stars out of 5
wife (Tessa Thompson), and daughter (Mile Davis-Kent), and has retired
from boxing after defeating an old rival and ensuring his legacy.
Creed spends his time with his family and developing young fighters at his
gym and is prepping the current champion for his next big match against
Viktor Drago.
An unexpected figure from Creed’s past arrives in the form of Damian
Anderson (Jonathan Majors), a friend of Creed’s troubled youth has
just completed eighteen years in prison.
Damian was the current Golden Gloves champion when he was arrested and
believes he is due his title shot and Creed is the one who can make it
happen.
Creed tries to teach his friend that a person without a single professional fight does not get a magical title shot and with his large
the gap from the ring he would need to grind it out to get a shot.
When an incident occurs just before a scheduled fight and without any
established fighters available to make the date of the fight, Creed gives
his friend a shot and sees that his brutal style of boxing is not what he
would endorse.
Upon winning the title Damian lets it go to his head and gloats at how Creed
had the life he should have had and blames Creed for his past issues and
for not visiting him or staying in contact.
Naturally, this puts the two former friends on a path of no return with a
climatic boxing match being the solution.
“Creed III” does not have the benefit of Sylvester Stallone but you can
still get whips of his character’s influence on Creed and Jordan does a
very solid job Directing the film. He produces strong character moments
which help define the struggles and motivations that each of them faces and
the boxing sequences are very engaging and will have you cheering along.
Majors does a great job in what could have been a routine bad guy
performance. He gives Damian a drive and purpose but also shows the path
that Creed could easily have followed had fate not gone as it did and how
watching someone get everything you dreamed of while you are in prison can
turn even the best of a man cold and bitter.
The film satisfies from start to finish and the character moments and
boxing blend to make not only a very enjoyable film but one that shows
that there is plenty of life in the franchise.
4 stars out of 5
Debbiereadsbook (1727 KP) rated Scoring Position (Hockey Ever After #2) in Books
Oct 20, 2022
loved this much more than book 1!
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is book 2 in the Hockey Ever After series. I don't think its fully necessary to read book one, Winging It, before this but it might give you a better picture of the world these players live in. And I really enjoyed that book. Dante and Gabe do pop up, but knowing their story isn't essential, just helpful, especially with Tom and Kitty (side characters) playing a large part here.
Ryan is traded out and his new team is a mess. Their star player, Nico, even more so. But Ryan can see that Nico is hurting, in more ways than one. Finding his sense of humour was a great start. The Ryan messed it all up. And just what is going on with the coach?
I really enjoyed book one, gave it 4 stars, but I found this a much more engaging read, a deeper emotion read. I loved it.
Neither man is in the closet, so there was none of the coming out issue. What there was, though, was a lot of anger on Nico's part and much was misplaced. Ryan needed him to focus that anger, on the ice, rather than punishing himself. Falling for the other gay teamn member was in neither man's plans but fate has a way, huh?
I loved that it really did creep up on them both. Yes there was attraction from the start but the feelings came later and they both fought it hard. Ryan messing up, though? THAT came out of nowhere and I did NOT see that coming! I was reading, and then I was "OH MY GOD, RYAN, WHAT ARE YOU DOING?!?!?!?!" out loud and my partner was somewhat shocked at me! Oh he does redeem himself, but I loved that Nico makes him work hard for that redemption. There is not a quick fix, either, and it does take time for them to be really together.
I loved that we caught up with Dante and Gabe from book one. And Tom and Kitty. I think this is a couple of years after Winging It, since Tom is captain of Ryan's new team, and has a couple of kids. Kitty surprised me though!
Are there any more planned?? I'm loving this series, but these authors are growing on me, as a duo.
5 full and shiny stars
*same worded review will appear elsewhere
This is book 2 in the Hockey Ever After series. I don't think its fully necessary to read book one, Winging It, before this but it might give you a better picture of the world these players live in. And I really enjoyed that book. Dante and Gabe do pop up, but knowing their story isn't essential, just helpful, especially with Tom and Kitty (side characters) playing a large part here.
Ryan is traded out and his new team is a mess. Their star player, Nico, even more so. But Ryan can see that Nico is hurting, in more ways than one. Finding his sense of humour was a great start. The Ryan messed it all up. And just what is going on with the coach?
I really enjoyed book one, gave it 4 stars, but I found this a much more engaging read, a deeper emotion read. I loved it.
Neither man is in the closet, so there was none of the coming out issue. What there was, though, was a lot of anger on Nico's part and much was misplaced. Ryan needed him to focus that anger, on the ice, rather than punishing himself. Falling for the other gay teamn member was in neither man's plans but fate has a way, huh?
I loved that it really did creep up on them both. Yes there was attraction from the start but the feelings came later and they both fought it hard. Ryan messing up, though? THAT came out of nowhere and I did NOT see that coming! I was reading, and then I was "OH MY GOD, RYAN, WHAT ARE YOU DOING?!?!?!?!" out loud and my partner was somewhat shocked at me! Oh he does redeem himself, but I loved that Nico makes him work hard for that redemption. There is not a quick fix, either, and it does take time for them to be really together.
I loved that we caught up with Dante and Gabe from book one. And Tom and Kitty. I think this is a couple of years after Winging It, since Tom is captain of Ryan's new team, and has a couple of kids. Kitty surprised me though!
Are there any more planned?? I'm loving this series, but these authors are growing on me, as a duo.
5 full and shiny stars
*same worded review will appear elsewhere
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Star Wars goes western
Star Wars has had somewhat of a chequered history since turning over to the dark side, sorry, I mean Disney. You see, since LucasFilm was acquired by the House of Mouse there has been one Star Wars movie each year. The Force Awakens was good, if a little safe and The Last Jedi was brilliant, but incredibly divisive.
What’s been more exciting to see evolve however, is the Star Wars Story movies. Rogue One became my 2nd favourite film in the series after Empire with Godzilla director, Gareth Edwards proving to be a force to be reckoned with. Then, LEGO Movie directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller were hired to direct a Han Solo origins story and that got people very excited indeed.Fast forward a few months and they were unceremoniously dumped from the project during filming with veteran director Ron Howard brought in as their replacements. Howard’s name is a concerning one. He’s become something of a director-for-hire over the last decade: competent but not exemplary. Phew! Keeping up? Good.
The resulting film has been plagued by ballooning costs, expensive reshoots and rumours of on-set acting classes for some of the stars. It’s finally here, but are we looking at the first new generation Star Wars failure?
Young Han Solo (Alden Ehrenreich) finds adventure when he joins a gang of galactic smugglers, including a 196-year-old Wookie named Chewbacca. Indebted to the gangster Dryden Vos (Paul Bettany), the crew devises a daring plan to travel to the mining planet Kessel to steal a batch of valuable coaxium. In need of a fast ship, Solo meets Lando Calrissian (Donald Glover), the suave owner of the perfect vessel for the dangerous mission — the Millennium Falcon.
Thankfully, and by nothing short of a miracle, Solo: A Star Wars Story is engaging, packed full of nostalgia and features an incredible ensemble cast. It’s not perfect by any means, but we’ll get on to that later.
Billed as a heist meets western kinda movie, Solo hits all the right beats to carefully straddle the line between those two genres. The writing is snappy, genuinely funny and engaging with all the cast members doing their fair share of the heavy lifting. Emilia Clarke is great as Solo’s love interest Qi’Ra and Woody Harrelson is as charming as ever in a role that could’ve been serviced by many 50-something actors who could do fancy stuff with a blaster.
It is in Donald Glover however that the film truly belongs. His Lando Calrissian is absolutely, unequivocally sublime. He channels his counterpart from Empire beautifully and you do feel like you’re watching a young Billy Dee Williams in action.
There is some striking imagery throughout the film with the western-style finale being absolutely superb
In fact, there are only two of the main cast members that fail to register in the way that they had clearly intended to do. One is Paul Bettany’s Dryden Vos; the Star Wars universe’s first real villain failure. Alas, it’s not the fault of Bettany. The part was originally written for a CGI motion capture performance but was changed at the last minute with reshoots being added for Bettany’s scenes.
The other, unfortunately, is Han Solo himself. Alden Ehrenreich definitely makes all the right noises. He’s cocky, arrogant, self-assured, just like Harrison Ford, but, for all of his effort, he just isn’t doing a Harrison Ford in this film. Now, that doesn’t ruin the movie as much as you might think it does, as it’s easy to just go along for the ride, but at no point in Solo’s run time did I think we were watching a young Harrison Ford in action. Ehrenreich is good, he’s just not that good.
Thankfully, what is that good is the cinematography. The action is staged beautifully, though I’m unsure as to whether this is Howard’s influence or the previous directors. There is some striking imagery throughout the film with the western-style finale being absolutely superb. The CGI is nicely integrated with animatronics and props, just like a Star Wars movie should be, and each of the set pieces is brimming with excitement.
One sequence in particular, involving the liberation of some slaves is really nicely filmed with a great colour palate and the much-marketed monorail heist is edge-of-your-seat stuff with cracking CGI.
Pacing is generally good, and at 135 minutes that is no easy win though things do drag a little about half way through. What is pleasing however, is how the bromance between Chewbacca and Han takes a backseat up until about 40 minutes before the end in which a familiar theme plays over the action: it’s spine-tingling in its simplicity. In fact, John Powell’s score is rousing when it needs to be and beautifully put together. A real match for John Williams’ classic orchestral soundtrack.
Overall, Solo: A Star Wars Story is better than it had any right to be. Whenever a film goes through such a turbulent production process, it’s always concerning that the final product will be somehow lesser in quality, but this isn’t the case here. It’s not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but as a continuation of the new Star Wars mantra under Disney, it’s a fitting entry and a great addition to the series.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/05/24/solo-a-star-wars-story-review-stars-wars-goes-western/
What’s been more exciting to see evolve however, is the Star Wars Story movies. Rogue One became my 2nd favourite film in the series after Empire with Godzilla director, Gareth Edwards proving to be a force to be reckoned with. Then, LEGO Movie directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller were hired to direct a Han Solo origins story and that got people very excited indeed.Fast forward a few months and they were unceremoniously dumped from the project during filming with veteran director Ron Howard brought in as their replacements. Howard’s name is a concerning one. He’s become something of a director-for-hire over the last decade: competent but not exemplary. Phew! Keeping up? Good.
The resulting film has been plagued by ballooning costs, expensive reshoots and rumours of on-set acting classes for some of the stars. It’s finally here, but are we looking at the first new generation Star Wars failure?
Young Han Solo (Alden Ehrenreich) finds adventure when he joins a gang of galactic smugglers, including a 196-year-old Wookie named Chewbacca. Indebted to the gangster Dryden Vos (Paul Bettany), the crew devises a daring plan to travel to the mining planet Kessel to steal a batch of valuable coaxium. In need of a fast ship, Solo meets Lando Calrissian (Donald Glover), the suave owner of the perfect vessel for the dangerous mission — the Millennium Falcon.
Thankfully, and by nothing short of a miracle, Solo: A Star Wars Story is engaging, packed full of nostalgia and features an incredible ensemble cast. It’s not perfect by any means, but we’ll get on to that later.
Billed as a heist meets western kinda movie, Solo hits all the right beats to carefully straddle the line between those two genres. The writing is snappy, genuinely funny and engaging with all the cast members doing their fair share of the heavy lifting. Emilia Clarke is great as Solo’s love interest Qi’Ra and Woody Harrelson is as charming as ever in a role that could’ve been serviced by many 50-something actors who could do fancy stuff with a blaster.
It is in Donald Glover however that the film truly belongs. His Lando Calrissian is absolutely, unequivocally sublime. He channels his counterpart from Empire beautifully and you do feel like you’re watching a young Billy Dee Williams in action.
There is some striking imagery throughout the film with the western-style finale being absolutely superb
In fact, there are only two of the main cast members that fail to register in the way that they had clearly intended to do. One is Paul Bettany’s Dryden Vos; the Star Wars universe’s first real villain failure. Alas, it’s not the fault of Bettany. The part was originally written for a CGI motion capture performance but was changed at the last minute with reshoots being added for Bettany’s scenes.
The other, unfortunately, is Han Solo himself. Alden Ehrenreich definitely makes all the right noises. He’s cocky, arrogant, self-assured, just like Harrison Ford, but, for all of his effort, he just isn’t doing a Harrison Ford in this film. Now, that doesn’t ruin the movie as much as you might think it does, as it’s easy to just go along for the ride, but at no point in Solo’s run time did I think we were watching a young Harrison Ford in action. Ehrenreich is good, he’s just not that good.
Thankfully, what is that good is the cinematography. The action is staged beautifully, though I’m unsure as to whether this is Howard’s influence or the previous directors. There is some striking imagery throughout the film with the western-style finale being absolutely superb. The CGI is nicely integrated with animatronics and props, just like a Star Wars movie should be, and each of the set pieces is brimming with excitement.
One sequence in particular, involving the liberation of some slaves is really nicely filmed with a great colour palate and the much-marketed monorail heist is edge-of-your-seat stuff with cracking CGI.
Pacing is generally good, and at 135 minutes that is no easy win though things do drag a little about half way through. What is pleasing however, is how the bromance between Chewbacca and Han takes a backseat up until about 40 minutes before the end in which a familiar theme plays over the action: it’s spine-tingling in its simplicity. In fact, John Powell’s score is rousing when it needs to be and beautifully put together. A real match for John Williams’ classic orchestral soundtrack.
Overall, Solo: A Star Wars Story is better than it had any right to be. Whenever a film goes through such a turbulent production process, it’s always concerning that the final product will be somehow lesser in quality, but this isn’t the case here. It’s not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but as a continuation of the new Star Wars mantra under Disney, it’s a fitting entry and a great addition to the series.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/05/24/solo-a-star-wars-story-review-stars-wars-goes-western/
Mayhawke (97 KP) rated I am No One in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Intriguing but ultimately disappointing
Written in the first person I Am No One is the account of recent events in the life of the fictional NY academic, Jeremy O'Keefe. O'Keefe, ironically an expert in surveillance, finds himself the subject of apparent scrutiny by unknown observers, a discovery that propels him into paranoia and pushes him to the boundaries of sanity. As the story is unpacked, page by page, it becomes clear that O'Keefe's paranoia is not unfounded, and that his initial confusion as to why anyone would want to bother observing the behaviour of a mundane and only moderately successful Professor actually belies a deeper understanding of the cause and his actions that precipitated it.
O'Keefe is a difficult character to really sympathise with. Whilst his ideology is admirably egalitarian he falls into that bracket of slightly stuffy, middle-class liberals who take themselves too seriously and fail to practise what they preach. In fairness to O'Keefe he largely has the grace and self-awareness to question the rationality of his fears and accidental moments of prejudice (though he is of the very typical male Liberal variety that doesn't seem to recognise the contradiction of professing himself feminist whilst watching porn): slightly pompous, slightly too much self-regard slightly too much sense of victimhood, he is not unlikeable just a bit of a non-entity. Whilst this is clearly intentional it makes his narrative stodgy. Not unreadable, but at the same time easy to put down for a week whilst a more engaging book is read. This is either a spectacularly adept piece of characterisation or an unfortunate reflection of the author, Patrick Flanery. I do hope it is the writing because if not then all the peculiar, inaccurate and unlikely observations made by O'Keefe onbehalf of his character regarding differences between the British and Americans are likely also Flanery's:. For example the breath-taking assertion that socio-economic failure is treated more harshly in the UK than in the US, when any basic knowledge of sociology in the two countries shows that the criteria for failure is a) much broader in the US and b) responded to far more harshly, e.g.: "if you don't earn enough from your three jobs to afford medical insurance to pay for your cancer treatment, you clearly haven't worked hard enough. The fault is yours , you are a failure and the punishment is premature death.". It is also difficult to accept that Flanery is regularly treated with distrust and dislike by bank cashiers for his Irish name. Quite aside from anything else most bank cashiers in this country now aren't old enough to remember the Irish troubles, and the bigots-for-bigotry's-sake have long since transferred their angst from the Irish to the Poles and the Muslims.
Flanery is also an academic, something that is abundantly obvious from the highly structured writing method he employs in this book. The reader is left with the impression that where other novelists write books to be read as stories Flanery has written a text with an eye to future deconstruction by English Lit students. That is not necessarily a bad thing, of course, but occasionally one wishes he could have been a little less concerned with construction in the minutiae and more concerned with crafting a story with a complete beginning, middle and end. And therein lies one of the greatest failings of this book: it has no real conclusion. Questions are raised that go unanswered. In particular, there are issues with characters, whose true identity may never be elaborated upon or, in the case of his girlfriend who makes a sudden, poorly explained behavioural volte-face that is entirely out of character but provides Flanery with a device to enable his protagonist take the critical closing step to the tale.
It seems that Flanery has written this book as a parable on the dangers of unfettered digital surveillance: how easy it is for those who wish to to access all our personal data and how very quickly and efficiently lives can be subverted. Whilst this may be a revelation to a few it has to be said that there is nothing revealed in this book about the scope and methods of data collection that anyone who has even a small amount of technical savvy won't already know, which rather undermines it as an expose. The book also attempts to portray how easy it is to suddenly and unintentionally find oneself on the wrong side of the law. Unfortunately in this story the actions which purport to have landed O'Keefe in possible criminality are so ridiculous and far-fetched that only the most paranoid would ever see an offence in them. Contrary to highlighting the ease with which the well intentioned can unwittingly find themselves in need of lawyers it suggests that all the peripheral characters are actually far more paranoid and delusional than O'Keefe will ever be.
All that aside this was an intriguing and mildly engaging story. Largely well-written but let down by a an unsatisfactory conclusion and a failure to induce the kind of fear that was intended.
O'Keefe is a difficult character to really sympathise with. Whilst his ideology is admirably egalitarian he falls into that bracket of slightly stuffy, middle-class liberals who take themselves too seriously and fail to practise what they preach. In fairness to O'Keefe he largely has the grace and self-awareness to question the rationality of his fears and accidental moments of prejudice (though he is of the very typical male Liberal variety that doesn't seem to recognise the contradiction of professing himself feminist whilst watching porn): slightly pompous, slightly too much self-regard slightly too much sense of victimhood, he is not unlikeable just a bit of a non-entity. Whilst this is clearly intentional it makes his narrative stodgy. Not unreadable, but at the same time easy to put down for a week whilst a more engaging book is read. This is either a spectacularly adept piece of characterisation or an unfortunate reflection of the author, Patrick Flanery. I do hope it is the writing because if not then all the peculiar, inaccurate and unlikely observations made by O'Keefe onbehalf of his character regarding differences between the British and Americans are likely also Flanery's:. For example the breath-taking assertion that socio-economic failure is treated more harshly in the UK than in the US, when any basic knowledge of sociology in the two countries shows that the criteria for failure is a) much broader in the US and b) responded to far more harshly, e.g.: "if you don't earn enough from your three jobs to afford medical insurance to pay for your cancer treatment, you clearly haven't worked hard enough. The fault is yours , you are a failure and the punishment is premature death.". It is also difficult to accept that Flanery is regularly treated with distrust and dislike by bank cashiers for his Irish name. Quite aside from anything else most bank cashiers in this country now aren't old enough to remember the Irish troubles, and the bigots-for-bigotry's-sake have long since transferred their angst from the Irish to the Poles and the Muslims.
Flanery is also an academic, something that is abundantly obvious from the highly structured writing method he employs in this book. The reader is left with the impression that where other novelists write books to be read as stories Flanery has written a text with an eye to future deconstruction by English Lit students. That is not necessarily a bad thing, of course, but occasionally one wishes he could have been a little less concerned with construction in the minutiae and more concerned with crafting a story with a complete beginning, middle and end. And therein lies one of the greatest failings of this book: it has no real conclusion. Questions are raised that go unanswered. In particular, there are issues with characters, whose true identity may never be elaborated upon or, in the case of his girlfriend who makes a sudden, poorly explained behavioural volte-face that is entirely out of character but provides Flanery with a device to enable his protagonist take the critical closing step to the tale.
It seems that Flanery has written this book as a parable on the dangers of unfettered digital surveillance: how easy it is for those who wish to to access all our personal data and how very quickly and efficiently lives can be subverted. Whilst this may be a revelation to a few it has to be said that there is nothing revealed in this book about the scope and methods of data collection that anyone who has even a small amount of technical savvy won't already know, which rather undermines it as an expose. The book also attempts to portray how easy it is to suddenly and unintentionally find oneself on the wrong side of the law. Unfortunately in this story the actions which purport to have landed O'Keefe in possible criminality are so ridiculous and far-fetched that only the most paranoid would ever see an offence in them. Contrary to highlighting the ease with which the well intentioned can unwittingly find themselves in need of lawyers it suggests that all the peripheral characters are actually far more paranoid and delusional than O'Keefe will ever be.
All that aside this was an intriguing and mildly engaging story. Largely well-written but let down by a an unsatisfactory conclusion and a failure to induce the kind of fear that was intended.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Mountain Goats in Tabletop Games
Mar 14, 2021
Fun fact about me: I thoroughly enjoy watching nature documentaries. I just think they’re so fascinating and I love getting to see all different kinds of animals from across the world. Some of my favorites have definitely been mountain goats. You know, those goats that somehow end up way up high on mountainsides that are basically sheer cliffs? How do they get up there? How do they not fall?? Maybe it’s just me, but those goats are extra intriguing to me. Along comes a game called Mountain Goats, so obviously, I had to try it.
Mountain Goats is a game in which players are racing to the top of 6 different mountains with their goats, in a bid to be the ‘king of the hill,’ if you will. To setup the game, lay out the Mountain cards into a grid, as described in the rules. Place the point tokens at the top of their corresponding Mountain cards, set the Bonus point tokens to the side, and all players place one Goat meeple at the bottom of each set of Mountain cards. The game is now ready to start.
On your turn, you will roll the 4 dice of the game. Using those results, you will create groups of dice, in which the dice total dictates which of your Goats is moved. Once you have created your groups, you will move your Goat up one space on the corresponding Mountain. (For example, if one of my dice groups is a 3 and a 2, then I will move my Goat on Mountain 5 up one space). After moving all of your affected Goats, pass the dice to the next player. Simple, right? Yep! Now here’s where it gets interesting. If you get a Goat to the top of a Mountain, you will collect a Point token from the corresponding pile. If an opponent is already at the top of a Mountain and you are able to move there, then you kick your opponent back to the bottom of that mountain, and claim the top spot for yourself, collecting a Point token as normal! AND if you create a dice set for a Mountain on which you are already at the top, you get to collect an additional Point token and keep your Goat at the top. How long can you hang onto that top spot? I guess you’ll find out. If/when you collect at least 1 Point token from each of the 6 Mountains, you get to claim the highest-value Bonus point token still available.
Play continues in this manner until either all of the Bonus point tokens have been claimed, or when 3 Mountains have no more Point tokens remaining. Players count up all of their collected points, and the player with the highest score is the winner.
The thing I like about Mountain Goats the most is that it is so fast and easy to play/teach. The concept is easy to grasp, the mechanics are simple, and the gameplay is engaging. So right off the bat, this is a solid game for me. The next thing I like is that even though it is such a small, light game, you’ve still got to have a strategy to succeed. With the Mountains numbered 5-10, you really have to think about how you want to group your dice. If your total falls below 5 or over 10, it won’t move any Goats! So if you’ve got a 6, 6, 5, and 2, how can you best maximize your movement? Are you willing to sacrifice a die because it doesn’t necessarily work with your strategy this turn? Or do you want to move as many Goats as possible every turn? It’s really up to you, and that strategic flexibility heightens the gameplay for me.
The other thing I really like about Mountain Goats is the amount of player interaction, in a sort of take-that way. When you reach the top of a Mountain, if an opponent is already there, they get kicked back to the bottom! So not only do they have to start the climb over again, but they can’t just sit pretty collecting Point tokens when possible. For me, the slight take-that element in this game is more friendly than cutthroat, and that really makes the overall gameplay experience more positive. Starting over from the bottom is, at most, only 4 cards from the top, so getting kicked down isn’t totally detrimental to the game atmosphere.
Components. They’re great! The cards are nice and sturdy, the artwork colorful and numbering clear. The Point tokens are nice thick cardboard, the dice are big and clear, and the Goat meeples are chunky and fun to manipulate. I have yet to see a game from BoardGameTables.com that has poor production quality, and Mountain Goats is no exception.
All in all, I think this is a great and fun little game. The concept is cute, the gameplay itself is fun and engaging, and the small footprint and short playtime make it an enjoyable little game. And since the gist of the game is just counting/numbers, it can be played with relatively young gamers, which makes it a good family-friendly filler game. Purple Phoenix Games gives Mountain Goats an ascending 9 / 12. Give it a shot and see if you’ve got what it takes to come out on top!
Mountain Goats is a game in which players are racing to the top of 6 different mountains with their goats, in a bid to be the ‘king of the hill,’ if you will. To setup the game, lay out the Mountain cards into a grid, as described in the rules. Place the point tokens at the top of their corresponding Mountain cards, set the Bonus point tokens to the side, and all players place one Goat meeple at the bottom of each set of Mountain cards. The game is now ready to start.
On your turn, you will roll the 4 dice of the game. Using those results, you will create groups of dice, in which the dice total dictates which of your Goats is moved. Once you have created your groups, you will move your Goat up one space on the corresponding Mountain. (For example, if one of my dice groups is a 3 and a 2, then I will move my Goat on Mountain 5 up one space). After moving all of your affected Goats, pass the dice to the next player. Simple, right? Yep! Now here’s where it gets interesting. If you get a Goat to the top of a Mountain, you will collect a Point token from the corresponding pile. If an opponent is already at the top of a Mountain and you are able to move there, then you kick your opponent back to the bottom of that mountain, and claim the top spot for yourself, collecting a Point token as normal! AND if you create a dice set for a Mountain on which you are already at the top, you get to collect an additional Point token and keep your Goat at the top. How long can you hang onto that top spot? I guess you’ll find out. If/when you collect at least 1 Point token from each of the 6 Mountains, you get to claim the highest-value Bonus point token still available.
Play continues in this manner until either all of the Bonus point tokens have been claimed, or when 3 Mountains have no more Point tokens remaining. Players count up all of their collected points, and the player with the highest score is the winner.
The thing I like about Mountain Goats the most is that it is so fast and easy to play/teach. The concept is easy to grasp, the mechanics are simple, and the gameplay is engaging. So right off the bat, this is a solid game for me. The next thing I like is that even though it is such a small, light game, you’ve still got to have a strategy to succeed. With the Mountains numbered 5-10, you really have to think about how you want to group your dice. If your total falls below 5 or over 10, it won’t move any Goats! So if you’ve got a 6, 6, 5, and 2, how can you best maximize your movement? Are you willing to sacrifice a die because it doesn’t necessarily work with your strategy this turn? Or do you want to move as many Goats as possible every turn? It’s really up to you, and that strategic flexibility heightens the gameplay for me.
The other thing I really like about Mountain Goats is the amount of player interaction, in a sort of take-that way. When you reach the top of a Mountain, if an opponent is already there, they get kicked back to the bottom! So not only do they have to start the climb over again, but they can’t just sit pretty collecting Point tokens when possible. For me, the slight take-that element in this game is more friendly than cutthroat, and that really makes the overall gameplay experience more positive. Starting over from the bottom is, at most, only 4 cards from the top, so getting kicked down isn’t totally detrimental to the game atmosphere.
Components. They’re great! The cards are nice and sturdy, the artwork colorful and numbering clear. The Point tokens are nice thick cardboard, the dice are big and clear, and the Goat meeples are chunky and fun to manipulate. I have yet to see a game from BoardGameTables.com that has poor production quality, and Mountain Goats is no exception.
All in all, I think this is a great and fun little game. The concept is cute, the gameplay itself is fun and engaging, and the small footprint and short playtime make it an enjoyable little game. And since the gist of the game is just counting/numbers, it can be played with relatively young gamers, which makes it a good family-friendly filler game. Purple Phoenix Games gives Mountain Goats an ascending 9 / 12. Give it a shot and see if you’ve got what it takes to come out on top!
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Love, Simon (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Time to Exhale.
I saw this as a Cineworld “Secret Unlimited Screening” event (for non-UK readers, Cineworld is one of the main movie-theater chains), so went in – like the majority of the audience I suspect – predicting early sight of Lara Croft in skin tight shorts! This was a bit different! A secret screening is an interesting concept, and really tests the metal of a film in engaging its audience early. This one failed to some degree, with seven people (I was counting) walking out in the first 10 minutes. (To be fair on those seven, the film’s first 20 minutes are rather laborious; and to be fair on the film, this was a pretty full auditorium so as a percentage drop out it was low).
Teen heartthrob Nick Robinson (the older brother from “Jurassic World“) plays the eponymous hero who has a well-buried secret: he’s gay. Growing up in Pleasantville (I almost expected someone to yell “Cat!” and the fire brigade turn up) he feels unable to come out to either his high-school friends or his loving family (“Apple pie cooling on the window-sill anyone?”). But striking up an email relationship with another closeted male from the same high school – nicknamed “Blue” – allows him to explore his feelings about his sexuality and fall in love all at the same time. But neither coming out or love run terribly smoothly for Simon…
Happy families. From left, Nick Robinson, Talitha Bateman, Jennifer Garner and Josh Duhamel.
I am forty years adrift from being able to directly relate to the stresses and strains of modern high-school life (though I AM still 17 on the inside people!) But even to me, this film doesn’t feel like it should be set in the present day. While it needs to be for its tweeting and blogging story-line, surely there are few backwaters in either America or Western Europe where gay people have to stay so silent? An 80’s or early 90’s setting would, I think, have worked so much better. (Ironically, its not his gay-ness or otherwise that his friends get upset by, but something far more fundamental in the human condition).
Definitely set in the present day.
That aside, this is a sweet and ultimately quite engaging film that I’m sure will be a big hit with a teenage audience. While for me it didn’t come close to ticking all of the coming-of-age boxes that the inestimable “Lady Bird” did, it does cover old ground in a new and refreshing way, and I’m sure it WILL be very helpful for many gay people in getting the courage to come out. Times are different today, but I still can imagine few things requiring more bravery than declaring you are gay to your parents and closest friends (even though, deep down, they surely already suspect).
So, it’s sweet, but also for me (although far from its target audience) rather flat. As a comedy drama, the moments of comedy are few and far between, with only one or two of the lines making me chuckle rather than smile. A quiet auditorium is not a good sign for a film with “Comedy” in its imdb description. It does however occasionally break through with something memorable: a full on college “La La Land” scene (“Not that gay” – LoL) is a case in point. And all of the scenes featuring comedy actress Natasha Rothwell as drama teacher Ms Allbright add much needed energy and humour to the film.
Someone should tell him… regardless of gender preference, sex is never going to work like this.
Of the teen actors, Robinson is fine but it is Katherine Langford as Simon’s friend Leah who stood out for me. Talitha Eliana Bateman (“The 5th Wave“; looking a whole lot younger than her 16 years!) is also impressive as Simon’s culinary sister Nora. Simon’s parents are played by Jennifer Garner (“Dallas Buyers Club“) and Josh Duhamel (a new one on me… he’s been in the “Transformers” films apparently).
Simon says walk this way. From left, Jorge Lendeborg Jr., Nich Robinson, Alexandra Shipp and Katherine Langford.
The screenplay is by movie virgins Elizabeth Berger and Isaac Aptaker, and is a slightly patchy affair. There are scenes that worked well (a cringe inducing sports stadium scene for example) but other times where it seems to be trying too hard for T-shirt captions…. a line from Ethan (Clark Moore) about hate crime was a “Ye-what?” moment.
Some of the characters really don’t quite work either: Tony Hale (so memorable as the useless PA in “Veep”) plays almost a school-ified version of Stephen Stucker’s Johnny from “Airplane”. Perhaps that would work as some sort of whacky hall monitor guy… but it transpires that he is the headmaster. No, I don’t think so.
A bit OTT. Veep’s Tony Hale as the principal with a surfeit of bonhomie.
So, in summary, after a bit of a bumpy start, its a pleasant watch that culminates in a feel-good ending. Feel good, that is, providing you have liberal views: I can’t see it pleasing many Trump supporters. I also can’t see it getting a cinema release in Gambia or Nigeria, though God only knows they could use one. If I could give half stars I would give this one an extra half as I applaud both the theme its trying to promote and for bringing something fresh to the screen…
Teen heartthrob Nick Robinson (the older brother from “Jurassic World“) plays the eponymous hero who has a well-buried secret: he’s gay. Growing up in Pleasantville (I almost expected someone to yell “Cat!” and the fire brigade turn up) he feels unable to come out to either his high-school friends or his loving family (“Apple pie cooling on the window-sill anyone?”). But striking up an email relationship with another closeted male from the same high school – nicknamed “Blue” – allows him to explore his feelings about his sexuality and fall in love all at the same time. But neither coming out or love run terribly smoothly for Simon…
Happy families. From left, Nick Robinson, Talitha Bateman, Jennifer Garner and Josh Duhamel.
I am forty years adrift from being able to directly relate to the stresses and strains of modern high-school life (though I AM still 17 on the inside people!) But even to me, this film doesn’t feel like it should be set in the present day. While it needs to be for its tweeting and blogging story-line, surely there are few backwaters in either America or Western Europe where gay people have to stay so silent? An 80’s or early 90’s setting would, I think, have worked so much better. (Ironically, its not his gay-ness or otherwise that his friends get upset by, but something far more fundamental in the human condition).
Definitely set in the present day.
That aside, this is a sweet and ultimately quite engaging film that I’m sure will be a big hit with a teenage audience. While for me it didn’t come close to ticking all of the coming-of-age boxes that the inestimable “Lady Bird” did, it does cover old ground in a new and refreshing way, and I’m sure it WILL be very helpful for many gay people in getting the courage to come out. Times are different today, but I still can imagine few things requiring more bravery than declaring you are gay to your parents and closest friends (even though, deep down, they surely already suspect).
So, it’s sweet, but also for me (although far from its target audience) rather flat. As a comedy drama, the moments of comedy are few and far between, with only one or two of the lines making me chuckle rather than smile. A quiet auditorium is not a good sign for a film with “Comedy” in its imdb description. It does however occasionally break through with something memorable: a full on college “La La Land” scene (“Not that gay” – LoL) is a case in point. And all of the scenes featuring comedy actress Natasha Rothwell as drama teacher Ms Allbright add much needed energy and humour to the film.
Someone should tell him… regardless of gender preference, sex is never going to work like this.
Of the teen actors, Robinson is fine but it is Katherine Langford as Simon’s friend Leah who stood out for me. Talitha Eliana Bateman (“The 5th Wave“; looking a whole lot younger than her 16 years!) is also impressive as Simon’s culinary sister Nora. Simon’s parents are played by Jennifer Garner (“Dallas Buyers Club“) and Josh Duhamel (a new one on me… he’s been in the “Transformers” films apparently).
Simon says walk this way. From left, Jorge Lendeborg Jr., Nich Robinson, Alexandra Shipp and Katherine Langford.
The screenplay is by movie virgins Elizabeth Berger and Isaac Aptaker, and is a slightly patchy affair. There are scenes that worked well (a cringe inducing sports stadium scene for example) but other times where it seems to be trying too hard for T-shirt captions…. a line from Ethan (Clark Moore) about hate crime was a “Ye-what?” moment.
Some of the characters really don’t quite work either: Tony Hale (so memorable as the useless PA in “Veep”) plays almost a school-ified version of Stephen Stucker’s Johnny from “Airplane”. Perhaps that would work as some sort of whacky hall monitor guy… but it transpires that he is the headmaster. No, I don’t think so.
A bit OTT. Veep’s Tony Hale as the principal with a surfeit of bonhomie.
So, in summary, after a bit of a bumpy start, its a pleasant watch that culminates in a feel-good ending. Feel good, that is, providing you have liberal views: I can’t see it pleasing many Trump supporters. I also can’t see it getting a cinema release in Gambia or Nigeria, though God only knows they could use one. If I could give half stars I would give this one an extra half as I applaud both the theme its trying to promote and for bringing something fresh to the screen…
Bookapotamus (289 KP) rated Artemis in Books
May 25, 2018
Huge Martian fan here! And this one, while totally different, did not disappoint! There is plenty of space drama, including the fear of what could happen when crisis occurs, but also some charm, witty characters and some pretty crazy daredevil situations.
I didn't particularly like Jazz, the main character. Shes got man drama, friend drama, family drama, work drama.... BUT she is one pretty bad-ass chick who does whatever she wants and for the most part, takes no blame. She's extremely immature for her age (late 20s?) and incredibly irresponsible, and I couldn't believe she got away with some of the antics that went on in this book. Especially on the Moon!
Artemis is just that - a city - but on the moon! Very cool concept, totally different idea than The Martian. It's a pretty common practice to travel back and forth from Earth to the Moon occurs, but only if you are a zillionaire and can afford to do so. It is a hot vacation destination for rich and famous travelers, but like a lot of vacation hot spots - there are those who live and work there, like Jazz, and are natives, born there, work there, and are neither rich nor famous.
Jazz works in transportation, unloading the ships that bring stuff from Earth - which covers for her side job as a smuggler - bringing in contraband to those who request it- like cigars, etc. (um hellooo? we all know fire does not bode well in space!) One request for a pretty shady request, sends the entire city into complete chaos. Why on Moon (see what I did there?) would Jazz stoop so low and put the entire city in danger? Money - and lots of it. Jazz is saving up for something, and money is her answer to everything. And we slowly unfold the story that makes up Jazz and start to understand why she is the way she is. We also see how ridiculously smart and courageous she is and you may even start to like her a little!
There is a LOT of science in this book. I now know exactly how to weld on the moon. I mean, exactly. My husband is a welder and I read some parts to him and he said it all sounded pretty legit, so I can imagine the research that went into crafting some parts of the story.
Overall it was a lot of fun - Jazz is quite the character and I'd totally read a sequel if Jazz had another story to tell. Andy Weir knows his space, and I'm quite glad he loves it so much to write such entertaining and engaging stories for us.
I didn't particularly like Jazz, the main character. Shes got man drama, friend drama, family drama, work drama.... BUT she is one pretty bad-ass chick who does whatever she wants and for the most part, takes no blame. She's extremely immature for her age (late 20s?) and incredibly irresponsible, and I couldn't believe she got away with some of the antics that went on in this book. Especially on the Moon!
Artemis is just that - a city - but on the moon! Very cool concept, totally different idea than The Martian. It's a pretty common practice to travel back and forth from Earth to the Moon occurs, but only if you are a zillionaire and can afford to do so. It is a hot vacation destination for rich and famous travelers, but like a lot of vacation hot spots - there are those who live and work there, like Jazz, and are natives, born there, work there, and are neither rich nor famous.
Jazz works in transportation, unloading the ships that bring stuff from Earth - which covers for her side job as a smuggler - bringing in contraband to those who request it- like cigars, etc. (um hellooo? we all know fire does not bode well in space!) One request for a pretty shady request, sends the entire city into complete chaos. Why on Moon (see what I did there?) would Jazz stoop so low and put the entire city in danger? Money - and lots of it. Jazz is saving up for something, and money is her answer to everything. And we slowly unfold the story that makes up Jazz and start to understand why she is the way she is. We also see how ridiculously smart and courageous she is and you may even start to like her a little!
There is a LOT of science in this book. I now know exactly how to weld on the moon. I mean, exactly. My husband is a welder and I read some parts to him and he said it all sounded pretty legit, so I can imagine the research that went into crafting some parts of the story.
Overall it was a lot of fun - Jazz is quite the character and I'd totally read a sequel if Jazz had another story to tell. Andy Weir knows his space, and I'm quite glad he loves it so much to write such entertaining and engaging stories for us.
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated The Wicker Man (1973) in Movies
Feb 18, 2019
Come. It is time to keep your appointment with the Wicker Man.
Though we never even lay eyes on it until the final few moments of the film, the Wicker Man, both as pagan image and classic horror flick, has become an icon of the genre.
But if you are expecting some dimly lit, slow burn slasher movie, then you will be sorely disappointed. The Wicker Man spends most of its runtime, which varies from its various versions, Theatrical, Director’s and Final Cuts, providing us with a pretty decent, if not disturbing insight into paganism.
Or more over, Paganism verses Christianity. Both spiritual, both magical, yet one is fun and the other is boring. The virgin sacrifice by the sexually liberated heathens is played out brilliantly.
The beauty here is that the final twist is so well conceived and executed throughout the entire film that even though most of us know the ending whether we have seen the film or not, it is not spoiled by that foreknowledge.
It is a kin to the previously released Planet Of The Apes (1968) or the much later Sixth Sense (1999). Both spin out complex genre tales which culminate in “that ending”. But in this case, Edward Woodward delivers a chilling performance in the finale, as he is taken to his death, locked inside the burning Wicker Man to be sacrificed in order to restore the poor harvest of the previous year.
“Don’t you see that killing me is not going to bring back your apples?”
But Woodward’s character is a devout Christian and he has only his faith and a dogged view of the world to aide him. Unable to accept the seemingly free spirited community in which his finds himself, one where sex is commonplace as he himself is still a virgin.
On the other hand there is Lord Summerisle, Christopher Lee, who steals the show as per usual as the charismatic leader of the this pagan community and the descendant of a lord who routed Christianity from the Highland Island a century before.
But whilst on the surface it may seem like a rather academic subject, the film is a trippy 1970’s sexploitation movie in many ways. Some of the sex and violence fits in well with plot but other moments, such as the nude dance by Britt Ekland, though actually doubled by Lorraine Peters is a prime example of a needless, if not memorable sequence.
Overall, The Wicker Man is low budget British movie of the 1970’s and one which has endured to earn it’s classic status, by meeting the main criteria of being smart, engaging and visually compelling, along with several standout performances throughout.
But if you are expecting some dimly lit, slow burn slasher movie, then you will be sorely disappointed. The Wicker Man spends most of its runtime, which varies from its various versions, Theatrical, Director’s and Final Cuts, providing us with a pretty decent, if not disturbing insight into paganism.
Or more over, Paganism verses Christianity. Both spiritual, both magical, yet one is fun and the other is boring. The virgin sacrifice by the sexually liberated heathens is played out brilliantly.
The beauty here is that the final twist is so well conceived and executed throughout the entire film that even though most of us know the ending whether we have seen the film or not, it is not spoiled by that foreknowledge.
It is a kin to the previously released Planet Of The Apes (1968) or the much later Sixth Sense (1999). Both spin out complex genre tales which culminate in “that ending”. But in this case, Edward Woodward delivers a chilling performance in the finale, as he is taken to his death, locked inside the burning Wicker Man to be sacrificed in order to restore the poor harvest of the previous year.
“Don’t you see that killing me is not going to bring back your apples?”
But Woodward’s character is a devout Christian and he has only his faith and a dogged view of the world to aide him. Unable to accept the seemingly free spirited community in which his finds himself, one where sex is commonplace as he himself is still a virgin.
On the other hand there is Lord Summerisle, Christopher Lee, who steals the show as per usual as the charismatic leader of the this pagan community and the descendant of a lord who routed Christianity from the Highland Island a century before.
But whilst on the surface it may seem like a rather academic subject, the film is a trippy 1970’s sexploitation movie in many ways. Some of the sex and violence fits in well with plot but other moments, such as the nude dance by Britt Ekland, though actually doubled by Lorraine Peters is a prime example of a needless, if not memorable sequence.
Overall, The Wicker Man is low budget British movie of the 1970’s and one which has endured to earn it’s classic status, by meeting the main criteria of being smart, engaging and visually compelling, along with several standout performances throughout.
Midge (525 KP) rated Schoolgirl Missing in Books
Feb 23, 2019
Having read some of Sue Fortin’s books before, I was very keen to get my hands on a copy of SCHOOLGIRL MISSING as it was a must-read for me. I liked this book very much, The level of suspense she manages to create in her writing is awesome and she is one of my favourite authors in this genre.
SCHOOLGIRL MISSING is an engrossing, psychological thriller set in Ambleton, a lovely quiet village with a river running through it.
What’s really likeable about it straight-away are the opening chapters that draw you into the main characters, Neve and Kit Masters and their daughter, Poppy. Neve is impulsive and unreliable. She was someone who I could empathise with, but she also had me losing patience with her. Kit had a deep-rooted fear of loss as a result of previous life experiences which I could fully understand.
Because Poppy is Kit's daughter and not Neve's, she cannot hide her all-consuming need to have a child of her own. Kit, however, doesn't share her desires which have put a strain on their relationship, and when Poppy vanishes, the cracks begin to deepen. Would either Neve or Kit harm Poppy to achieve their own aims? Are those around them completely as they seem?
One of the highlights of the book was following the many twists and turns of the plot and I absolutely loved the way in which this story developed. Both the plot and character development are excellent, and the story is captivating and engaging. I found that I was regularly pondering where the story was going to next.
This was an interesting novel particularly for the interplay of the different secondary characters as well as the primary ones- a handsome suitor, a supportive best friend, an unpleasant ex-husband, and a dodgy past acquaintance, to name but a few. I thought that all of the characters were very cleverly written - resulting in my constant changes of opinion about whether or not I trusted them.
I loved Sue Fortin’s writing style which I found to be so vivid and very easy to read. She portrayed the characters’ feelings incredibly well as the story unfolded and Neve's past was particularly well told.
SCHOOLGIRL MISSING is a story full of secrets, suspicion and lies that held my interest from start to finish and the way in which Sue Fortin brought everything to a conclusion was just fabulous. I loved it and it has left me eager to read more from this author.
{Thank you to NetGalley, HarperCollins and Sue Fortin for a free ARC of this book in exchange for a voluntary, honest review.}
SCHOOLGIRL MISSING is an engrossing, psychological thriller set in Ambleton, a lovely quiet village with a river running through it.
What’s really likeable about it straight-away are the opening chapters that draw you into the main characters, Neve and Kit Masters and their daughter, Poppy. Neve is impulsive and unreliable. She was someone who I could empathise with, but she also had me losing patience with her. Kit had a deep-rooted fear of loss as a result of previous life experiences which I could fully understand.
Because Poppy is Kit's daughter and not Neve's, she cannot hide her all-consuming need to have a child of her own. Kit, however, doesn't share her desires which have put a strain on their relationship, and when Poppy vanishes, the cracks begin to deepen. Would either Neve or Kit harm Poppy to achieve their own aims? Are those around them completely as they seem?
One of the highlights of the book was following the many twists and turns of the plot and I absolutely loved the way in which this story developed. Both the plot and character development are excellent, and the story is captivating and engaging. I found that I was regularly pondering where the story was going to next.
This was an interesting novel particularly for the interplay of the different secondary characters as well as the primary ones- a handsome suitor, a supportive best friend, an unpleasant ex-husband, and a dodgy past acquaintance, to name but a few. I thought that all of the characters were very cleverly written - resulting in my constant changes of opinion about whether or not I trusted them.
I loved Sue Fortin’s writing style which I found to be so vivid and very easy to read. She portrayed the characters’ feelings incredibly well as the story unfolded and Neve's past was particularly well told.
SCHOOLGIRL MISSING is a story full of secrets, suspicion and lies that held my interest from start to finish and the way in which Sue Fortin brought everything to a conclusion was just fabulous. I loved it and it has left me eager to read more from this author.
{Thank you to NetGalley, HarperCollins and Sue Fortin for a free ARC of this book in exchange for a voluntary, honest review.}
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated On the Come Up in Books
Apr 4, 2019
This was an excellent follow-up to THE HATE YOU GIVE. Man, Angie Thomas can just flat out write, and the characters and worlds she creates are second to none. This book occurs in the same neighborhood as THUG, picking up a year after the riots. The neighborhood is still reeling, and nothing is quite the same.
"I'm a hoodlum from a bunch of nothing."
Bri is a wonderful character--a realistic teenager struggling with her love life and school, as well as the systematic issues of poverty, racism, drug dealing, and more facing her neighborhood, peers, and family. She's severely affected by what happened to her parents: the death of her father, who is famous in the Garden, and her mom's past drug use. The book does a great job of showing the pressures on everyone in Bri's family--her older brother went to college, but is back, living at home and working in a pizza shop, trying to help his mom out. Her mom is still paying for her past sins: trying to get a job isn't easy, nor is it easy to keep the faith of your teenage daughter, who calls her mom by her first name. And Bri--well she wants to become a rapper and earn money to get her family out of poverty. As such, she doesn't always make the best choices. And, to her, it almost seems like rapper is the only choice for freedom.
"That's how it goes though. The drug dealers in my neighborhood aren't struggling. Everybody else is."
Don't get me wrong, though. While this book is beautiful and does such a great job at showing so many of the challenges facing Bri and the Garden's community, it's also an engaging and funny read. As I said, Thomas is such an amazing writer. The church scenes in this novel are priceless: I was laughing at loud at some points. And Bri is just so vivid in her characteristics. She's a self-proclaimed "nerd" who loves things like Star Wars and some of her references and jokes in the books are just hilarious.
The supporting cast in this one is great--Bri's brother, her friends (including a gay BFF!), Aunt Pooh, the church biddies, and more. They all jump off the pages just like Bri. Much like THUG, this is a story of family at its core and even if you'll want to shake Bri for some of her bad decisions, it's pretty much impossible not to love her, her family, and her friends.
Overall, I really liked this book. It's well-written, tackles some serious topics in a great way, and yet is funny and poignant as well. I highly recommend it. 4+ stars.
"I'm a hoodlum from a bunch of nothing."
Bri is a wonderful character--a realistic teenager struggling with her love life and school, as well as the systematic issues of poverty, racism, drug dealing, and more facing her neighborhood, peers, and family. She's severely affected by what happened to her parents: the death of her father, who is famous in the Garden, and her mom's past drug use. The book does a great job of showing the pressures on everyone in Bri's family--her older brother went to college, but is back, living at home and working in a pizza shop, trying to help his mom out. Her mom is still paying for her past sins: trying to get a job isn't easy, nor is it easy to keep the faith of your teenage daughter, who calls her mom by her first name. And Bri--well she wants to become a rapper and earn money to get her family out of poverty. As such, she doesn't always make the best choices. And, to her, it almost seems like rapper is the only choice for freedom.
"That's how it goes though. The drug dealers in my neighborhood aren't struggling. Everybody else is."
Don't get me wrong, though. While this book is beautiful and does such a great job at showing so many of the challenges facing Bri and the Garden's community, it's also an engaging and funny read. As I said, Thomas is such an amazing writer. The church scenes in this novel are priceless: I was laughing at loud at some points. And Bri is just so vivid in her characteristics. She's a self-proclaimed "nerd" who loves things like Star Wars and some of her references and jokes in the books are just hilarious.
The supporting cast in this one is great--Bri's brother, her friends (including a gay BFF!), Aunt Pooh, the church biddies, and more. They all jump off the pages just like Bri. Much like THUG, this is a story of family at its core and even if you'll want to shake Bri for some of her bad decisions, it's pretty much impossible not to love her, her family, and her friends.
Overall, I really liked this book. It's well-written, tackles some serious topics in a great way, and yet is funny and poignant as well. I highly recommend it. 4+ stars.