Search
Search results
My Food Bag
Food & Drink
App
Welcome to the My Food Bag app! Every week, Nadia and our Development Kitchen dream up inspiring...
Taryn K (441 KP) rated Otherworldly Izakaya Nobu Volume 2 (manga) in Books
May 15, 2022 (Updated May 15, 2022)
The characters are well written (1 more)
The world is beginning to expand.
Another quiet slice-of-life night at Izakaya Nobu
Much like volume 1, volume 2 of Otherworldly Izakaya Nobu takes us to the pub that sits between modern Japan and the rather medieval city of Aitheria. Again, we have Japanese, German, and English food terms going on, which keeps life interesting, but the explanations are handy, so there is minimal chance of confusion.
The book starts off with one of the soldiers from volume 1, Hans, stopping by the pub after training only to find out it's 'Kisu Day'. Hans is surprised to see Chef Nobu deep frying the tempura-battered fish and putting it on paper, which is a very expensive commodity in Aitheria. The little details really make this series special, I think.
In chapter 2, "Thief", we meet a new helper, a young girl trying to help out her family, named Effa. There is a bit of confusion, but we get to meet the new deacon in town, who has already become a regular.
Chapter 3, "An Uninvited Guest", Chef Nobu learns a 'new' recipe, and we are reminded that Shinobu can cook as well. A pompous little man and his gourmet aristocrat boss stop by in search of the Ankake Yudofu that pleased the bride-to-be in volume 1, as she praised it at her wedding. Each chapter builds ties to other people or builds ties between Shinobu/Chef and the regulars, which Is another thing I love. Ankake Yudofu is out of season, as it is no longer winter, so schnitzel is apparently just the ticket, if Chef just knew what it is.
Chapter 4, "Quarreling Craftsmen", sees two new characters introduced. Holga, a glassmaker who heard about Izakaya Nobu from the tax collector Gehrnot, who enjoyed the 'Spaghetti Napolitan' in volume 1, and Han's father, a woodworker named Laurenz. They spend most of the chapter arguing and trying each other's dishes, but it is a friendly rivalry that gets settled down by a surprising person.
Chapter 5, "The Commander's Weakness", is hilarious due to more puns on squid than I ever thought could be made, but Commander Bertholdt has to conquer his fear of squid before his arranged marriage to the daughter of a fisherman. Such a good chapter. One of my favorites. "He squidn't!"
Chapter 6, "Effa in Wonderland", sees Effa going through the back door of the pub into modern Japan. Not much cooking in this chapter, but we find out a little more about how the pub ended up being in two places at once. Thankfully, she gets back to Aitheria safe and sound.
I'm not completely sure about this being a review as much as a rundown of what happens. It's just a feel-good series, with just a hair of drama, but nothing that can't be resolved in a chapter or perhaps two. The characters are likeable, for the most part, and those who aren't are meant to be unlikeable. The interpersonal relationships are fun to see revealed. Definitely a good pre-bed book. 😊
The book starts off with one of the soldiers from volume 1, Hans, stopping by the pub after training only to find out it's 'Kisu Day'. Hans is surprised to see Chef Nobu deep frying the tempura-battered fish and putting it on paper, which is a very expensive commodity in Aitheria. The little details really make this series special, I think.
In chapter 2, "Thief", we meet a new helper, a young girl trying to help out her family, named Effa. There is a bit of confusion, but we get to meet the new deacon in town, who has already become a regular.
Chapter 3, "An Uninvited Guest", Chef Nobu learns a 'new' recipe, and we are reminded that Shinobu can cook as well. A pompous little man and his gourmet aristocrat boss stop by in search of the Ankake Yudofu that pleased the bride-to-be in volume 1, as she praised it at her wedding. Each chapter builds ties to other people or builds ties between Shinobu/Chef and the regulars, which Is another thing I love. Ankake Yudofu is out of season, as it is no longer winter, so schnitzel is apparently just the ticket, if Chef just knew what it is.
Chapter 4, "Quarreling Craftsmen", sees two new characters introduced. Holga, a glassmaker who heard about Izakaya Nobu from the tax collector Gehrnot, who enjoyed the 'Spaghetti Napolitan' in volume 1, and Han's father, a woodworker named Laurenz. They spend most of the chapter arguing and trying each other's dishes, but it is a friendly rivalry that gets settled down by a surprising person.
Chapter 5, "The Commander's Weakness", is hilarious due to more puns on squid than I ever thought could be made, but Commander Bertholdt has to conquer his fear of squid before his arranged marriage to the daughter of a fisherman. Such a good chapter. One of my favorites. "He squidn't!"
Chapter 6, "Effa in Wonderland", sees Effa going through the back door of the pub into modern Japan. Not much cooking in this chapter, but we find out a little more about how the pub ended up being in two places at once. Thankfully, she gets back to Aitheria safe and sound.
I'm not completely sure about this being a review as much as a rundown of what happens. It's just a feel-good series, with just a hair of drama, but nothing that can't be resolved in a chapter or perhaps two. The characters are likeable, for the most part, and those who aren't are meant to be unlikeable. The interpersonal relationships are fun to see revealed. Definitely a good pre-bed book. 😊
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Hex Marks the Spot (A Bewitching Mystery, #3) in Books
Feb 15, 2019
Here we are into the third entry into the Bewitching Mystery series. So what's Maggie into this time? The murder of an Amish ladies' man, one who's married and has young kids, at that. She also has struggles with her love life and is overcoming her fear of the "unknown" and becoming more adept at using her gift.
<u><b>May contain minor spoilers of previous books.</b></u>
A few times throughout this short book (246 pages), I felt like throwing in the towel. After reading the first book, I really felt this was a series for me. One that I connected with and would be able to read book after book. Sadly it has not panned out this way. Mostly because of the main character, Maggie O'Neill, who I really liked in the first book. While there's nothing inherently wrong with her, I cannot relate to her and I don't like her too much either. She's rather a dull fish. Also, some of her thoughts feel forced, especially the "humorous" kind, which might be a big part of why I'm not liking her anymore. Well, whatever it is exactly, she's just not quite working for me. Though now that she's using her gift more, this may liven her up in the future, I don't know. The other thing is her presumptions, or rather the one presumption about the "relationship" between Marcus and Liss she's had since the first book. Where she ever got that idea in her head, I haven't a clue, but at least it was resolved by the end of this book. On the up side, she wasn't as dumb as in the previous book, [b:A Charmed Death|512386|A Charmed Death (A Bewitching Mystery, #2)|Madelyn Alt|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1175403627s/512386.jpg|1182867]. All the other characters in the series I like and feel really add to the series, with maybe the exception of Tom, who is very closed-minded and basically just irritates me as a modern woman. I suppose a character who is that way is needed, and he is making some strides in opening his mind to new and frightening (to him) things, but I don't get Maggie's attraction to him; it just has not come across in the three books I've read. As for Maggie's other love interest, Marcus, while he's definitely way (way, way, way, way, <u>way</u>) more interesting than Tom, and I'm going to flip this, but I totally don't understand Marcus's interest in Maggie. I cannot think of anything that would intrigue him about her. I honestly can't, other than she's nice. A nice, boring, girl-next-door-type. Well, I guess that's something. So, the mystery.... Surprisingly, it seemed very minimal in this installment and the baddie very easy to figure out since there wasn't many, or any, other suspects. Still, it was tied up pretty neatly and made some sort of sense.
At the beginning of every book there is enough of a recap of characters and what's been going on so each book in the series can easily be read by itself, and not necessarily in order. While that is nice for a new reader or one who has gone a long time inbetween books, it makes for a repetitive nature if read too closely together, so I think it'll be a while before I pick up the next entry.
<u><b>May contain minor spoilers of previous books.</b></u>
A few times throughout this short book (246 pages), I felt like throwing in the towel. After reading the first book, I really felt this was a series for me. One that I connected with and would be able to read book after book. Sadly it has not panned out this way. Mostly because of the main character, Maggie O'Neill, who I really liked in the first book. While there's nothing inherently wrong with her, I cannot relate to her and I don't like her too much either. She's rather a dull fish. Also, some of her thoughts feel forced, especially the "humorous" kind, which might be a big part of why I'm not liking her anymore. Well, whatever it is exactly, she's just not quite working for me. Though now that she's using her gift more, this may liven her up in the future, I don't know. The other thing is her presumptions, or rather the one presumption about the "relationship" between Marcus and Liss she's had since the first book. Where she ever got that idea in her head, I haven't a clue, but at least it was resolved by the end of this book. On the up side, she wasn't as dumb as in the previous book, [b:A Charmed Death|512386|A Charmed Death (A Bewitching Mystery, #2)|Madelyn Alt|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1175403627s/512386.jpg|1182867]. All the other characters in the series I like and feel really add to the series, with maybe the exception of Tom, who is very closed-minded and basically just irritates me as a modern woman. I suppose a character who is that way is needed, and he is making some strides in opening his mind to new and frightening (to him) things, but I don't get Maggie's attraction to him; it just has not come across in the three books I've read. As for Maggie's other love interest, Marcus, while he's definitely way (way, way, way, way, <u>way</u>) more interesting than Tom, and I'm going to flip this, but I totally don't understand Marcus's interest in Maggie. I cannot think of anything that would intrigue him about her. I honestly can't, other than she's nice. A nice, boring, girl-next-door-type. Well, I guess that's something. So, the mystery.... Surprisingly, it seemed very minimal in this installment and the baddie very easy to figure out since there wasn't many, or any, other suspects. Still, it was tied up pretty neatly and made some sort of sense.
At the beginning of every book there is enough of a recap of characters and what's been going on so each book in the series can easily be read by itself, and not necessarily in order. While that is nice for a new reader or one who has gone a long time inbetween books, it makes for a repetitive nature if read too closely together, so I think it'll be a while before I pick up the next entry.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Dumbo (2019) in Movies
Apr 5, 2019
In a word...bland
There are many words that you can use to describe films by Tim Burton: Gothic, Bizarre, Dark, Interesting, SteamPunk, Unique, Visual.
With the live action DUMBO, you can add another word to describe a Tim Burton film: Bland.
Based on the 1941 animated classic character of Walt Disney, DUMBO tells the tale of an animal, shamed for having a deformity...over-large ears...but when the young elephant discovers that these ears can save the circus he is in - and will help reunite him with his mother - a journey to redemption begins.
Sounds like a pretty good premise for a film, right? Unfortunately, this isn't really the theme of this film. Unlike other Disney "live action" versions of classic animated films (BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, the upcoming ALADDIN and THE LION KING), DUMBO is a live action remake only in the fact that Director Burton uses the baby elephant, separated from his mother, with over large ears who can fly. This film shows no signs of the earlier, beloved, children's film. It eliminates the songs (except as background music) and it tacks on a family drama of a returning army veteran (who's wife died while he was away) and his 2 children and a rival circus trying to steal the famed flying elephant.
Is it a children's movie? Is it a Tim Burton eerie, scary, visual delight? Well...yes...and no...on both parts and that's the problem of this film. Burton straddles a line between the two, never committing to a fun, stylistic children's film (like PADDINGTON 2) or an eerie, bizarre Tim Burton film (many, many to name but the closest I can come is BIG FISH). He restrains himself to the bland middle and it shows.
He has assembled a strong ensemble of actors to populate this world - Colin Farrell, Danny DeVito, Eva Green, Michael Keaton and Alan Arkin are all in this film - and are all bland. While, at times, this film felt every minute of it's 1 hour and 52 minute run time, I was longing for more from each of these characters, fleshing out what was the BEGINNING of interesting characters, but never getting past that. Each one of these characters are bland, bland, bland and you can see each actor trying harder and harder to push some sort of character to the screen, but never succeeding.
The only interesting characters, ironically enough, is that of Dumbo and his mother, Mrs. Jumbo. These are 2 CGI, non-speaking characters but they say more in facial expressions and movements than all of the human characters combined.
And that's the other problem with this film. Much like another Disney Live Action film, TOMORROWLAND, a large part of this film is given to showing the world that is lavishly made by the Director, Production Designer, Art Director and Cinematographer - and it is impressive indeed - but the action and characters inhabiting this world are...well...bland and that makes for a lackluster film.
One thing to note - this film is not scary, nor is it overly sad (things that I heard that this film was), so I'd be interested to hear if you have younger children (ages 7-10, say) and they saw the film - did they enjoy it? I think they just might.
I didn't, I thought this film was bland.
Letter Grade: B- (for the interesting visuals put up on the screen)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
With the live action DUMBO, you can add another word to describe a Tim Burton film: Bland.
Based on the 1941 animated classic character of Walt Disney, DUMBO tells the tale of an animal, shamed for having a deformity...over-large ears...but when the young elephant discovers that these ears can save the circus he is in - and will help reunite him with his mother - a journey to redemption begins.
Sounds like a pretty good premise for a film, right? Unfortunately, this isn't really the theme of this film. Unlike other Disney "live action" versions of classic animated films (BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, the upcoming ALADDIN and THE LION KING), DUMBO is a live action remake only in the fact that Director Burton uses the baby elephant, separated from his mother, with over large ears who can fly. This film shows no signs of the earlier, beloved, children's film. It eliminates the songs (except as background music) and it tacks on a family drama of a returning army veteran (who's wife died while he was away) and his 2 children and a rival circus trying to steal the famed flying elephant.
Is it a children's movie? Is it a Tim Burton eerie, scary, visual delight? Well...yes...and no...on both parts and that's the problem of this film. Burton straddles a line between the two, never committing to a fun, stylistic children's film (like PADDINGTON 2) or an eerie, bizarre Tim Burton film (many, many to name but the closest I can come is BIG FISH). He restrains himself to the bland middle and it shows.
He has assembled a strong ensemble of actors to populate this world - Colin Farrell, Danny DeVito, Eva Green, Michael Keaton and Alan Arkin are all in this film - and are all bland. While, at times, this film felt every minute of it's 1 hour and 52 minute run time, I was longing for more from each of these characters, fleshing out what was the BEGINNING of interesting characters, but never getting past that. Each one of these characters are bland, bland, bland and you can see each actor trying harder and harder to push some sort of character to the screen, but never succeeding.
The only interesting characters, ironically enough, is that of Dumbo and his mother, Mrs. Jumbo. These are 2 CGI, non-speaking characters but they say more in facial expressions and movements than all of the human characters combined.
And that's the other problem with this film. Much like another Disney Live Action film, TOMORROWLAND, a large part of this film is given to showing the world that is lavishly made by the Director, Production Designer, Art Director and Cinematographer - and it is impressive indeed - but the action and characters inhabiting this world are...well...bland and that makes for a lackluster film.
One thing to note - this film is not scary, nor is it overly sad (things that I heard that this film was), so I'd be interested to hear if you have younger children (ages 7-10, say) and they saw the film - did they enjoy it? I think they just might.
I didn't, I thought this film was bland.
Letter Grade: B- (for the interesting visuals put up on the screen)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Avatar (2009) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
James Cameron has had his work cut out trying to eclipse the success of his previous film Titanic, way back in 1997 and to this day it remains the highest grossing film of all time. It’s hard to believe that it’s been 12 years since his name was plastered on the big screen but he’s back with Avatar, a science fiction epic to rival Titanic’s crown.
Avatar has been marketed to death with 10-minute trailers littering cinemas across the globe and it hasn’t stopped there, James Cameron has been parading himself and the films stars around like toy soldiers to ensure it receives as much attention as he thinks it deserves, but is it actually any good?
Let’s start with the premise, an ex marine (Sam Worthington) who has been paralysed from the waist down in battle has been sent to an alien planet called Pandora to help mine for a very valuable metal and would you believe it, it’s name is ‘Unobtainium’, no jokes. Whilst there, he meets the Na’vi, an alien race that resemble giant smurfs. He becomes intrigued by their way of life, not to mention falling in love with one of them (Zoe Saldana). No, I’m not kidding and yes it does sound ridiculous.
The film starts pretty slowly, but then again at just under three hours long it has plenty of time to build momentum and after those first 10-minutes you get sucked into the whole environment of Pandora in the most dazzling 3D I have ever seen in the cinema. The special effects are complimented perfectly with the 3D experience and the alien environment is stunning, so stunning in fact that you have to see it, to believe it.
Considering the story is about blue smurf like aliens and is to say the least, a little thin on the ground; I was surprised to be sat there with all different kinds of emotion splattered across my face. One minute I would be wanting to shout out at the screen in sheer rage at what was going on, other times I would be sobbing my heart out in some of the most upsetting scenes I have seen in a modern Sci-fi. It just doesn’t happen, Sci-fi and tears just don’t go together; it’s like eating chocolate with fish. The transition between action, thriller, comedy and drama is exceptionally watertight and Avatar blends these genres all perfectly to form what is a complete package of a film.
Unfortunately, whilst the acting is sublime from most corners, with Zoe Saldana being the stand out performance as one of the female Na’vi, some of the human actors don’t really get enough screen time; annoying considering the films length. Sigourney Weaver is viciously underused and even though she plays her character with brilliance, she needed more screen time to fully develop the role.
Thankfully though, Cameron’s film limits the faults to those few and Avatar remains a magical ride, which whilst not being utterly original, reeks of box office championship and may just take over Titanic as the biggest film of all time.
Avatar is then, what everyone had ever wanted it to be, it combines unparalleled special effects in superb 3D with fabulous performances from the actors who really looked like they wanted to be in their roles. Trust the hype and you will witness history in the making.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2010/10/17/avatar-2009/
Avatar has been marketed to death with 10-minute trailers littering cinemas across the globe and it hasn’t stopped there, James Cameron has been parading himself and the films stars around like toy soldiers to ensure it receives as much attention as he thinks it deserves, but is it actually any good?
Let’s start with the premise, an ex marine (Sam Worthington) who has been paralysed from the waist down in battle has been sent to an alien planet called Pandora to help mine for a very valuable metal and would you believe it, it’s name is ‘Unobtainium’, no jokes. Whilst there, he meets the Na’vi, an alien race that resemble giant smurfs. He becomes intrigued by their way of life, not to mention falling in love with one of them (Zoe Saldana). No, I’m not kidding and yes it does sound ridiculous.
The film starts pretty slowly, but then again at just under three hours long it has plenty of time to build momentum and after those first 10-minutes you get sucked into the whole environment of Pandora in the most dazzling 3D I have ever seen in the cinema. The special effects are complimented perfectly with the 3D experience and the alien environment is stunning, so stunning in fact that you have to see it, to believe it.
Considering the story is about blue smurf like aliens and is to say the least, a little thin on the ground; I was surprised to be sat there with all different kinds of emotion splattered across my face. One minute I would be wanting to shout out at the screen in sheer rage at what was going on, other times I would be sobbing my heart out in some of the most upsetting scenes I have seen in a modern Sci-fi. It just doesn’t happen, Sci-fi and tears just don’t go together; it’s like eating chocolate with fish. The transition between action, thriller, comedy and drama is exceptionally watertight and Avatar blends these genres all perfectly to form what is a complete package of a film.
Unfortunately, whilst the acting is sublime from most corners, with Zoe Saldana being the stand out performance as one of the female Na’vi, some of the human actors don’t really get enough screen time; annoying considering the films length. Sigourney Weaver is viciously underused and even though she plays her character with brilliance, she needed more screen time to fully develop the role.
Thankfully though, Cameron’s film limits the faults to those few and Avatar remains a magical ride, which whilst not being utterly original, reeks of box office championship and may just take over Titanic as the biggest film of all time.
Avatar is then, what everyone had ever wanted it to be, it combines unparalleled special effects in superb 3D with fabulous performances from the actors who really looked like they wanted to be in their roles. Trust the hype and you will witness history in the making.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2010/10/17/avatar-2009/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Dark Tower (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
10 years in the making
A film adaptation of Stephen King’s wildly successful Dark Tower novels has been rumoured for over a decade. In 2007, J.J. Abrams was attached to direct the film but dropped out in December 2009.
Then, in 2010, veteran director Ron Howard was to head the project, but that fell through in 2015. Finally, by June 2015 the film entered full-steam ahead production with Danish filmmaker Nikolaj Arcel at the helm.
So, 10 years on from the first murmurings of a Dark Tower film were discovered, what is the finished product like? And does it capture the wonder of that eight-novel behemoth by King?Roland Deschain (Idris Elba), the last Gunslinger, is locked in an eternal battle with Walter O’Dim (Matthew McConaughey), also known as the Man in Black. The Gunslinger must prevent the Man in Black from toppling the Dark Tower, the key that holds the universe together. With the fate of worlds at stake, two men collide in the ultimate battle between good and evil.
Unfortunately, this troubled production has resulted in a film that’s biggest sin is its averageness. There’s not a single thing about The Dark Tower that stands out as unique, even with charismatic stars like Matthew McCounaughey and Idris Elba at the helm.
The two of them perform well with the overtly expositional dialogue and Elba just reeks of charisma, despite the dross he unfortunately has to spout from time to time. Newcomer Tom Taylor is fine, but it pains me to say it, just a little bit bland.
The plot is nigh on impossible to understand for those who haven’t read King’s books with a story that never fully explains what the titular tower even does. How on earth can a film enter production without a script that fully describes such a vital plot point? It’d be like Mad Max: Fury Road never actually featuring Max, just referencing him occasionally.
Elsewhere, Tom Holkenborg’s score is bland, the special effects just about as average as you can get and the cinematography uninspiring. This is such a shame, because moments of excellence shine through.
The action is choreographed to a good standard and the sequences in which Elba and Taylor visit Earth are an enjoyable fish-out-of-water style distraction from an otherwise disappointing script. Think Thor on Earth but in NYC rather than New Mexico.
Ultimately though, films like this get me a little angry and I feel frustrated just writing this review. With eight books in which to take nuggets of story from, the film just kind of plods along for 95 minutes. I’m not normally one for suggesting a movie be longer, but The Dark Tower really did need an extra 30 minutes at least to flesh out the characters and plot.
Overall, despite two commanding performances from its lead stars, The Dark Tower is a royal mess. In a year that has featured numerous disappointing sequels, Sony could’ve kicked things up a gear with something completely new. In the end, we’re left with a film as bland and average as you can possibly get. What a shame.
Let’s just hope that It is the King adaptation we’ve been waiting for.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/08/19/the-dark-tower-review-10-years-in-the-making/
Then, in 2010, veteran director Ron Howard was to head the project, but that fell through in 2015. Finally, by June 2015 the film entered full-steam ahead production with Danish filmmaker Nikolaj Arcel at the helm.
So, 10 years on from the first murmurings of a Dark Tower film were discovered, what is the finished product like? And does it capture the wonder of that eight-novel behemoth by King?Roland Deschain (Idris Elba), the last Gunslinger, is locked in an eternal battle with Walter O’Dim (Matthew McConaughey), also known as the Man in Black. The Gunslinger must prevent the Man in Black from toppling the Dark Tower, the key that holds the universe together. With the fate of worlds at stake, two men collide in the ultimate battle between good and evil.
Unfortunately, this troubled production has resulted in a film that’s biggest sin is its averageness. There’s not a single thing about The Dark Tower that stands out as unique, even with charismatic stars like Matthew McCounaughey and Idris Elba at the helm.
The two of them perform well with the overtly expositional dialogue and Elba just reeks of charisma, despite the dross he unfortunately has to spout from time to time. Newcomer Tom Taylor is fine, but it pains me to say it, just a little bit bland.
The plot is nigh on impossible to understand for those who haven’t read King’s books with a story that never fully explains what the titular tower even does. How on earth can a film enter production without a script that fully describes such a vital plot point? It’d be like Mad Max: Fury Road never actually featuring Max, just referencing him occasionally.
Elsewhere, Tom Holkenborg’s score is bland, the special effects just about as average as you can get and the cinematography uninspiring. This is such a shame, because moments of excellence shine through.
The action is choreographed to a good standard and the sequences in which Elba and Taylor visit Earth are an enjoyable fish-out-of-water style distraction from an otherwise disappointing script. Think Thor on Earth but in NYC rather than New Mexico.
Ultimately though, films like this get me a little angry and I feel frustrated just writing this review. With eight books in which to take nuggets of story from, the film just kind of plods along for 95 minutes. I’m not normally one for suggesting a movie be longer, but The Dark Tower really did need an extra 30 minutes at least to flesh out the characters and plot.
Overall, despite two commanding performances from its lead stars, The Dark Tower is a royal mess. In a year that has featured numerous disappointing sequels, Sony could’ve kicked things up a gear with something completely new. In the end, we’re left with a film as bland and average as you can possibly get. What a shame.
Let’s just hope that It is the King adaptation we’ve been waiting for.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/08/19/the-dark-tower-review-10-years-in-the-making/
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Nanuk in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019
Oh, Nanuk. Why are you so disliked? Is it because some gamers can’t separate Steve Jackson Games from Munchkin? Are you then destined to just be “okay” because your cousin is so polarizing? No. I will stand up for you AND your other cousin Revolution! (review coming)! You are a good game. Repeat after me, “I am a good game.” Good. ?
Nanuk, technically, is a polar bear. The same found on the cover of the game box. He is attempting to nom on an Inuit hunter. But worry not, in this game Nanuk does not eat people. Just the animals that have been hunted by the people to be brought back to the village as a result of your pig-headed boasting. Oh, you say you can bring back 17 fish in three days? I say you’re doomed.
I do not want to get in a habit of explaining games in my reviews, but I feel like Nanuk could benefit from it, so I will be quickly paraphrasing.
In Nanuk play goes around the table where each player must increase either the number of animals (and you can change the animal type) or the number of days of “the Hunt.” Example, I increase the current boast from three deer in one day to four birds in one day. Once a player no longer thinks the combination of animals and days will a successful hunt make, they must flip over their voting token to the doomed side. The last player to have upped the ante is the Hunt Leader and the naysayer is the, idk, Doom Leader I think. Then everyone evaluates the animal and Inuksuk (the awesome humanoid stone statue) cards to determine if they should join the Hunt or Doom team, flipping their voting token thusly. Every player then must contribute at least one card from their hand that will be shuffled together as the results of the Hunt. Should the boast parameters be met between the cards contributed and cards drawn from the deck (equal to the number of days boasted) the Hunt team wins and spoils are split among the team members. If not, the Doom team wins the spoils. At the end of the game you are hoping to have amassed sets and pairs of animals to score the most VP. There are a couple other rules that I will leave you to discover, but that is the… meat… of them.
I received my copy of Nanuk cheaply from a BGG auction many years ago. I was not sure exactly what to expect of it, but I was diggin the cover art. Once we played it, and played it again, and more, I began to love it more and more. It’s not a long game, the rules are relatively simple, and it is very much a social game. I wouldn’t necessarily call it a “party game” because that term just has different connotations to me, but it will play 5-8 players quite comfortably. Many times I have a group of 6 or more and this always delivers. Please give this one a try and I know you will enjoy it.
Someday we will start making lists and such, and this will go on my list of favorite games that support a larger play count. That said, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a 12 / 18 (because Laura has not yet played it).
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/01/16/nanuk-review/
Nanuk, technically, is a polar bear. The same found on the cover of the game box. He is attempting to nom on an Inuit hunter. But worry not, in this game Nanuk does not eat people. Just the animals that have been hunted by the people to be brought back to the village as a result of your pig-headed boasting. Oh, you say you can bring back 17 fish in three days? I say you’re doomed.
I do not want to get in a habit of explaining games in my reviews, but I feel like Nanuk could benefit from it, so I will be quickly paraphrasing.
In Nanuk play goes around the table where each player must increase either the number of animals (and you can change the animal type) or the number of days of “the Hunt.” Example, I increase the current boast from three deer in one day to four birds in one day. Once a player no longer thinks the combination of animals and days will a successful hunt make, they must flip over their voting token to the doomed side. The last player to have upped the ante is the Hunt Leader and the naysayer is the, idk, Doom Leader I think. Then everyone evaluates the animal and Inuksuk (the awesome humanoid stone statue) cards to determine if they should join the Hunt or Doom team, flipping their voting token thusly. Every player then must contribute at least one card from their hand that will be shuffled together as the results of the Hunt. Should the boast parameters be met between the cards contributed and cards drawn from the deck (equal to the number of days boasted) the Hunt team wins and spoils are split among the team members. If not, the Doom team wins the spoils. At the end of the game you are hoping to have amassed sets and pairs of animals to score the most VP. There are a couple other rules that I will leave you to discover, but that is the… meat… of them.
I received my copy of Nanuk cheaply from a BGG auction many years ago. I was not sure exactly what to expect of it, but I was diggin the cover art. Once we played it, and played it again, and more, I began to love it more and more. It’s not a long game, the rules are relatively simple, and it is very much a social game. I wouldn’t necessarily call it a “party game” because that term just has different connotations to me, but it will play 5-8 players quite comfortably. Many times I have a group of 6 or more and this always delivers. Please give this one a try and I know you will enjoy it.
Someday we will start making lists and such, and this will go on my list of favorite games that support a larger play count. That said, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a 12 / 18 (because Laura has not yet played it).
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/01/16/nanuk-review/
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Pitch Green (Dimensions in Death, #1) in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can also be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>).
Those who know me know that YA horror is my favourite genre. I was lucky enough to be asked by Jolly Fish Press to review a book that fit that genre. The book was Pitch Green (Dimensions in Death #1) by The Brothers Washburn. I definitely wasn't disappointed with this book.
Camm and Cal have been best friends forever. They've pretty much gone through everything together including the disappearance of Camm's little brother seven years ago. As Camm and Cal dig deeper to solve Cal's little brother's disappearance, they discover that more children have gone missing in their little hometown starting back in 1941. They also discover that some sinister force is behind the disappearance. Will Camm and Cal lose their life in the process of uncovering this mystery or will they lose their sanity?
Okay, I don't really get the title of this book. I understand the whole "green" part of the title which I won't explain due to small spoilers, but I don't understand the "pitch" bit. It's definitely an unusual title, that's for sure. However, I don't like or dislike the title. It just leaves me perplexed.
I'm definitely a fan of this spooky looking cover! I love the spooky green font and the creepy looking grandfather clock with the hanging man pendulum which features quite frequently in the book. I do believe that the cover of this book gives its readers a glimpse into what to expect.
I enjoyed the world building. I could definitely picture the creepy mansion in my mind, and because I live by lots of plants (not the green kind), I could totally relate to the Trona plant mentioned throughout the book.
I enjoyed the pacing of this book although I must admit that there was a chapter or two when I thought that the pacing was going to be slow. However, it quickly picked up, and I was hooked. I finished Pitch Green sooner then I had anticipated...that's how great the pacing was!
The only problem I had with this book was the fact that Camm and Cal seemed a bit younger than 18. They came across, to me, as being about 12 or 13 years old due to their actions, dialogue, and thoughts. Other than that, they were quite enjoyable characters. I loved how much of a wise cracker Camm was.
As I said before, the dialogue didn't match that of two 18 year olds. Don't get me wrong, the dialogue did make me laugh quite a bit, but it was off. The dialogue wasn't that bothersome after I got farther into the book and just imagined Camm and Cal to be two 14 year olds talking to each other. As for language, there is only one swear word.
I will definitely be buying the next book in the series. The ending of this book definitely left me wanting more despite the characters acting younger than their age.
I'd definitely recommend this book to everyone aged 13+ especially those who are fans of the horror genre.
(I was given a copy of this book from the publishers in exchange for a fair and honest review).
Those who know me know that YA horror is my favourite genre. I was lucky enough to be asked by Jolly Fish Press to review a book that fit that genre. The book was Pitch Green (Dimensions in Death #1) by The Brothers Washburn. I definitely wasn't disappointed with this book.
Camm and Cal have been best friends forever. They've pretty much gone through everything together including the disappearance of Camm's little brother seven years ago. As Camm and Cal dig deeper to solve Cal's little brother's disappearance, they discover that more children have gone missing in their little hometown starting back in 1941. They also discover that some sinister force is behind the disappearance. Will Camm and Cal lose their life in the process of uncovering this mystery or will they lose their sanity?
Okay, I don't really get the title of this book. I understand the whole "green" part of the title which I won't explain due to small spoilers, but I don't understand the "pitch" bit. It's definitely an unusual title, that's for sure. However, I don't like or dislike the title. It just leaves me perplexed.
I'm definitely a fan of this spooky looking cover! I love the spooky green font and the creepy looking grandfather clock with the hanging man pendulum which features quite frequently in the book. I do believe that the cover of this book gives its readers a glimpse into what to expect.
I enjoyed the world building. I could definitely picture the creepy mansion in my mind, and because I live by lots of plants (not the green kind), I could totally relate to the Trona plant mentioned throughout the book.
I enjoyed the pacing of this book although I must admit that there was a chapter or two when I thought that the pacing was going to be slow. However, it quickly picked up, and I was hooked. I finished Pitch Green sooner then I had anticipated...that's how great the pacing was!
The only problem I had with this book was the fact that Camm and Cal seemed a bit younger than 18. They came across, to me, as being about 12 or 13 years old due to their actions, dialogue, and thoughts. Other than that, they were quite enjoyable characters. I loved how much of a wise cracker Camm was.
As I said before, the dialogue didn't match that of two 18 year olds. Don't get me wrong, the dialogue did make me laugh quite a bit, but it was off. The dialogue wasn't that bothersome after I got farther into the book and just imagined Camm and Cal to be two 14 year olds talking to each other. As for language, there is only one swear word.
I will definitely be buying the next book in the series. The ending of this book definitely left me wanting more despite the characters acting younger than their age.
I'd definitely recommend this book to everyone aged 13+ especially those who are fans of the horror genre.
(I was given a copy of this book from the publishers in exchange for a fair and honest review).
Connor Sheffield (293 KP) rated Gotham - Season 1 in TV
Jun 20, 2018
Cast (5 more)
Character development
Characters
Setting
Great Drama
Gripping storyline
Some of the more extreme comic book costumes (2 more)
Some of the characters
Certain plot elements that take away the drama (mostly if you've read or seen what happens next)
Imagine a Gotham without Batman....
Contains spoilers, click to show
When I first watched it when it first aired, I was sceptical and yet excited and then I felt let down. Gotham at first was a great cop show but what annoyed me was the fact that all these things that we knew to happen when Batman was around, were happening when Bruce Wayne was still a child and my brain couldn't wrap around the idea let alone get behind it, but at the same time I didn't know what I was expecting. Still I watched the first two seasons because I wanted to see some of my favourite villains and characters brought to life and I love Ben McKenzie as James Gordon!
However upon recently returning to watching Gotham I have come to see it in a new light and adore the show to pieces as I should have from the start. Gotham isn't about Batman, it's not about Bruce Wayne (not fully anyways). I see now that Gotham is a concept of a question:
"What if these villains we're here before Batman? Leaving only the police to deal with the extremity of Gotham most famous rogues!"
What makes this show so good is that we see a young, reckless and a little out of character Jim Gordon, who is even willing to bend the law to the point of breaking to get Justice. The drama is intense and you never can tell when Jim goes off on one, if he'll restrain himself to the law and doing things by the book. In a way there's a lot of Batman within Jim Gordon himself which makes the show even better.
Some of the characters annoy me at times. I liked Fish Mooney at first because she was dangerous and twisted, but when you bring a character back so many times you just lose interest and they're no longer a threat to the drama of their character development because you leave yourself with the only two viable questions: "will she ever stay dead?" And "when will she die for good?" I just don't seem to be concerned for her anymore like I did in the first season when she was double crossing Falcone. When everything was fresh and you didn't know if a stray bullet might hit her finally or if an Assassin was in her midst at all times waiting to strike. The drama for me didn't vanish but certainly lessened in later seasons.
The character development of characters like Bruce Wayne, Jim Gordon, Edward Nigma and Oswald Cobblepot are brilliantly written. With Bruce becoming a stronger minded young man in season two and Oswald's rise to power. I particularly loved Nigmas transformation into a killer because of the way it was set out, with the first murder being slightly on purpose, the second a complete accident, the third being to protect himself against discovery and the rest being a complete turn around into someone who discovers he enjoys the task of killing someone. The writers are excellent when it comes to development of characters and plot.
Can't wait for the new season and I hope they go out with a bang!
However upon recently returning to watching Gotham I have come to see it in a new light and adore the show to pieces as I should have from the start. Gotham isn't about Batman, it's not about Bruce Wayne (not fully anyways). I see now that Gotham is a concept of a question:
"What if these villains we're here before Batman? Leaving only the police to deal with the extremity of Gotham most famous rogues!"
What makes this show so good is that we see a young, reckless and a little out of character Jim Gordon, who is even willing to bend the law to the point of breaking to get Justice. The drama is intense and you never can tell when Jim goes off on one, if he'll restrain himself to the law and doing things by the book. In a way there's a lot of Batman within Jim Gordon himself which makes the show even better.
Some of the characters annoy me at times. I liked Fish Mooney at first because she was dangerous and twisted, but when you bring a character back so many times you just lose interest and they're no longer a threat to the drama of their character development because you leave yourself with the only two viable questions: "will she ever stay dead?" And "when will she die for good?" I just don't seem to be concerned for her anymore like I did in the first season when she was double crossing Falcone. When everything was fresh and you didn't know if a stray bullet might hit her finally or if an Assassin was in her midst at all times waiting to strike. The drama for me didn't vanish but certainly lessened in later seasons.
The character development of characters like Bruce Wayne, Jim Gordon, Edward Nigma and Oswald Cobblepot are brilliantly written. With Bruce becoming a stronger minded young man in season two and Oswald's rise to power. I particularly loved Nigmas transformation into a killer because of the way it was set out, with the first murder being slightly on purpose, the second a complete accident, the third being to protect himself against discovery and the rest being a complete turn around into someone who discovers he enjoys the task of killing someone. The writers are excellent when it comes to development of characters and plot.
Can't wait for the new season and I hope they go out with a bang!
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Meg (2018) in Movies
Dec 4, 2018
Not "So Awful It's Good", just Awful
One of the surprise hits of the summer of 2018 was the "so bad it's good" mega-shark movie THE MEG, starring the impediment of modern-day machismo, Jason Statham. So, when I saw that it was streaming on DirecTV, I thought I'd melt into the couch with a blanket and a beverage of my choice and relish in the over-the-top awfulness that is THE MEG.
Well...I am here to report that THE MEG is awful, just not over-the-top "so bad it's good" awful. It's just awful - and that is an awful disappointment.
I can see the pitch now - THE MEG is "Jaws, but bigger, it's Mega-Jaws! What were the best parts of Jaws? Well, we're gonna do that again, just more!" But what these filmmakers failed to realize is that the best part of Jaws isn't the shark attacking, it's the interaction of the 3 men who go off in search of the shark.
And...the folks that are "fish-fodder" for this big shark just aren't interesting enough. The filmmakers give Jason Statham a PTSD backstory that is forgotten about 2 minutes into the film. His nemesis/former crewmate (a forgettable Robert Taylor) hates Statham's character for about 5 minutes...the stalwart captain is...well stalwart and he is played by "I always melt into the background" Cliff Curtis. Rubie Rose is on-board as the "young genius" who's good looks and youth makes everyone underestimate her - even after she proves over and over again that she is young and a GENIUS. And then, there's good ol' Rain Wilson (Dwight from THE OFFICE) who's the megalomaniacal mega-billionaire who wants to capture (not kill) The Meg for profit.
The problem with all these characters (and others like Masi Oka's homesick scientist) is that they are one-note but not SO one note that they are over-the-top caricatures. They're just boring and forgettable.
As for the shark killings (the real reason that The Meg is intriguing), they are just as boring and forgettable as the characters. Most of them are homages to kills ni the Jaws series of films, so there is some fun in that, but none of them are truly unique and original or over-the-top enough.
The blame, I think, probably goes to "the suits" at Warner Brothers or perhaps Gravity Pictures. There are 3 writers on this, so clearly the script kept getting sent back to the drawing board - and 19(!) producers attached. I heard that Eli Roth was attached at one point and he wanted to make it EXTREMELY graphic and bloody - but "the suits" wanted something they could market to a broader audience, so let him go and hired the always mediocre Jon Turtletaub (LAST VEGAS, THE SORCERER'S APPRENTICE) to Direct and mediocrity reigns all over.
If you want a "so bad it's good" mega-shark film and check out DEEP BLUE SEA (the Samuel L. Jackson speech in this film is worth the price of admission). And when you see THE MEG on whatever streaming platform you prefer and are prepared to watch it "for a laugh", save yourself the bother (and the boredom) and stream something else.
Letter Grade: C (it is competently made)
4 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Well...I am here to report that THE MEG is awful, just not over-the-top "so bad it's good" awful. It's just awful - and that is an awful disappointment.
I can see the pitch now - THE MEG is "Jaws, but bigger, it's Mega-Jaws! What were the best parts of Jaws? Well, we're gonna do that again, just more!" But what these filmmakers failed to realize is that the best part of Jaws isn't the shark attacking, it's the interaction of the 3 men who go off in search of the shark.
And...the folks that are "fish-fodder" for this big shark just aren't interesting enough. The filmmakers give Jason Statham a PTSD backstory that is forgotten about 2 minutes into the film. His nemesis/former crewmate (a forgettable Robert Taylor) hates Statham's character for about 5 minutes...the stalwart captain is...well stalwart and he is played by "I always melt into the background" Cliff Curtis. Rubie Rose is on-board as the "young genius" who's good looks and youth makes everyone underestimate her - even after she proves over and over again that she is young and a GENIUS. And then, there's good ol' Rain Wilson (Dwight from THE OFFICE) who's the megalomaniacal mega-billionaire who wants to capture (not kill) The Meg for profit.
The problem with all these characters (and others like Masi Oka's homesick scientist) is that they are one-note but not SO one note that they are over-the-top caricatures. They're just boring and forgettable.
As for the shark killings (the real reason that The Meg is intriguing), they are just as boring and forgettable as the characters. Most of them are homages to kills ni the Jaws series of films, so there is some fun in that, but none of them are truly unique and original or over-the-top enough.
The blame, I think, probably goes to "the suits" at Warner Brothers or perhaps Gravity Pictures. There are 3 writers on this, so clearly the script kept getting sent back to the drawing board - and 19(!) producers attached. I heard that Eli Roth was attached at one point and he wanted to make it EXTREMELY graphic and bloody - but "the suits" wanted something they could market to a broader audience, so let him go and hired the always mediocre Jon Turtletaub (LAST VEGAS, THE SORCERER'S APPRENTICE) to Direct and mediocrity reigns all over.
If you want a "so bad it's good" mega-shark film and check out DEEP BLUE SEA (the Samuel L. Jackson speech in this film is worth the price of admission). And when you see THE MEG on whatever streaming platform you prefer and are prepared to watch it "for a laugh", save yourself the bother (and the boredom) and stream something else.
Letter Grade: C (it is competently made)
4 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
