Search
Search results
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Millennial Manatees in Tabletop Games
Mar 11, 2021
I am totes Gen X. Tail end, mind you, but still not a Millennial. That said, I can still appreciate things I have missed out on due to age gaps and generational differences. I want to make so many jokes right now but I genuinely do not want to offend anyone, let alone an entire generation of people. So I won’t. Enjoy the review.
Millennial Manatees is a worker-placement(ish) card(ish) game for one to four players. In it players are assuming roles of manatees tasked with paying off their identical student loan debt: 20 coins. The first player to make wise venture investments and create the best ROI will be crowned the winner! Please keep reading. This game is not at all a powerhouse economic simulation. It’s a fun game with manatees, avocado toast, and IT COMES IN A FANNY PACK.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box fanny pack. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online directly from the publisher (or Amazon if you wish) or from your FLGS. -T
To setup carefully empty the contents of the fanny pack game box(?) and unfold the game board. Upon it will be placed separated (but shuffled) face-up decks for Basic, Salty, and Big Mood venture cards. Next to these shuffle the Volunteer cards and place the deck face-down. Shuffle the remaining Manatee cards and place somewhere around the game board. Each player chooses a color of manatee and takes all the components matching its shirt color. Unlike the photo below place all “fanatee pack” tokens with the 7 coins side face-up and each player will start the game with three coins. The players will set their debt trackers at the starting position of the debt track, and the first player receives the avocado toast token. Yes, the big one you see below.
Each round begins with the avocado toast holder and continues around the table. The first player will place their manateeple (ooh I like that one) on any card or printed space on the game board. Options include: Basic, Salty, or Big Mood venture cards, Volunteer cards, Boomer Handout board space, Take the Toast board space, and Pay Back Student Debt board space. Once the current toast holder has placed their manateeple the next player may place on any other non-occupied space or card available. Note: the Pay Back Student Debt space is always available for any number of manateeples.
For the cost in coins printed on the cards, the Basic, Salty, and Big Mood venture cards can be purchased and placed in the player’s tableau of cards. This represents the player investing in certain business ventures in the hopes of earning more coins in the long run. Once a player has a venture card in front of them the card will specify how it will be activated and the benefit therein. Many cards allow the player to collect coins, but sometimes cards allow for stealing of other players’ coins or other nefarious doings.
The volunteer cards are drawn face-down and once read by the drawing player are kept face-down in their tableau until the proper game phase activates it or the player plays it to the discard pile.
Once a player decides they want to pay down their debt they will visit the Pay Back Student Debt space on the board. When they do this they will immediately use ALL coins they have earned and apply it directly to their debt by moving their tracker down the line by the amount paid.
By placing the manateeple on the Take the Toast space, that player simply takes the toast token and becomes the first player of the next round. By placing the manateeple on the Boomer Handout space the player will gain one coin during the Manatee phase.
The Manatee phase consists of the first player flipping the top card of the Manatee deck. Most of the cards in this deck are art depictions of manatees in different attire and hairstyles. When a Manatee card is flipped during this phase, all players reference any venture cards in their tableau to see if the manatee will trigger their card. For example, a manatee may be dressed in an orange shirt, wearing sunglasses, and holding a yoga mat. For those players whose venture cards are triggered by any of these items, their cards will bestow their benefits. There are two other types of cards in this deck as well, but I will let you experience these when you play.
Turns continue in this fashion of placing manateeples in unique spaces or cards, resolving any immediate effects, playing volunteer cards, flipping and resolving Manatee cards, and paying down student debt until one player has paid off the entire sum and wins the game! Then the hardest part of the game will commence: attempting to put all the components back in the fanny pack so that they are not damaged. Good luck.
Components. This game has some pretty spectacular components coupled with some really great art. Obviously, having a game packaged in a fanny pack is just delightful, even though I typically despise non-boxed games. Secondly, all the wooden manateeples and avocado toast tokens are just amazing to behold and handle. The cards are good quality and the game features incredible art throughout. I am a big fan of this art style – it is very cartoony and very cool. This theme is just perfection and the game that lies beneath the theme is very surprising.
I say the game beneath the great art and theme is surprising because I was completely not expecting to like this one as much as I do. At its heart it is a very light worker-placement game with hints of take that and based on using currency as victory points. I like all of those mechanics quite a bit, so combining these with aforementioned art and theme works for me on another level.
I feel this game is something I can bring out with almost any crowd of adults and have a smashing great time. There are so many little jokes packed into this little game that make me giggle every time I see them. And come on, a first player token that is avocado toast? It’s too good! I love all the colors assaulting my eyes, and I love all the hate-placement that happens, and I didn’t know that I love manatees as much as I now do.
Look, I am usually pretty positive about the games I play. But I also play a lot of stinkers. This one, thankfully, delivers a super fun game experience in an hour or less, even though the theme is absolutely ridiculous. But I also find that so charming. If you are looking for that special WOW game that is relatively light but incredibly satisfying to play, I strongly recommend checking out Millennial Manatees. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one 10 / 12 soy super americanos (is that a thing?). Display the pink fanny pack with pride next to all your super-serious games and watch as your visitors flock to it and ask what it is. Then play it with them and watch them fall in love as we did. I am very happy to now have this one in my collection.
Millennial Manatees is a worker-placement(ish) card(ish) game for one to four players. In it players are assuming roles of manatees tasked with paying off their identical student loan debt: 20 coins. The first player to make wise venture investments and create the best ROI will be crowned the winner! Please keep reading. This game is not at all a powerhouse economic simulation. It’s a fun game with manatees, avocado toast, and IT COMES IN A FANNY PACK.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box fanny pack. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online directly from the publisher (or Amazon if you wish) or from your FLGS. -T
To setup carefully empty the contents of the fanny pack game box(?) and unfold the game board. Upon it will be placed separated (but shuffled) face-up decks for Basic, Salty, and Big Mood venture cards. Next to these shuffle the Volunteer cards and place the deck face-down. Shuffle the remaining Manatee cards and place somewhere around the game board. Each player chooses a color of manatee and takes all the components matching its shirt color. Unlike the photo below place all “fanatee pack” tokens with the 7 coins side face-up and each player will start the game with three coins. The players will set their debt trackers at the starting position of the debt track, and the first player receives the avocado toast token. Yes, the big one you see below.
Each round begins with the avocado toast holder and continues around the table. The first player will place their manateeple (ooh I like that one) on any card or printed space on the game board. Options include: Basic, Salty, or Big Mood venture cards, Volunteer cards, Boomer Handout board space, Take the Toast board space, and Pay Back Student Debt board space. Once the current toast holder has placed their manateeple the next player may place on any other non-occupied space or card available. Note: the Pay Back Student Debt space is always available for any number of manateeples.
For the cost in coins printed on the cards, the Basic, Salty, and Big Mood venture cards can be purchased and placed in the player’s tableau of cards. This represents the player investing in certain business ventures in the hopes of earning more coins in the long run. Once a player has a venture card in front of them the card will specify how it will be activated and the benefit therein. Many cards allow the player to collect coins, but sometimes cards allow for stealing of other players’ coins or other nefarious doings.
The volunteer cards are drawn face-down and once read by the drawing player are kept face-down in their tableau until the proper game phase activates it or the player plays it to the discard pile.
Once a player decides they want to pay down their debt they will visit the Pay Back Student Debt space on the board. When they do this they will immediately use ALL coins they have earned and apply it directly to their debt by moving their tracker down the line by the amount paid.
By placing the manateeple on the Take the Toast space, that player simply takes the toast token and becomes the first player of the next round. By placing the manateeple on the Boomer Handout space the player will gain one coin during the Manatee phase.
The Manatee phase consists of the first player flipping the top card of the Manatee deck. Most of the cards in this deck are art depictions of manatees in different attire and hairstyles. When a Manatee card is flipped during this phase, all players reference any venture cards in their tableau to see if the manatee will trigger their card. For example, a manatee may be dressed in an orange shirt, wearing sunglasses, and holding a yoga mat. For those players whose venture cards are triggered by any of these items, their cards will bestow their benefits. There are two other types of cards in this deck as well, but I will let you experience these when you play.
Turns continue in this fashion of placing manateeples in unique spaces or cards, resolving any immediate effects, playing volunteer cards, flipping and resolving Manatee cards, and paying down student debt until one player has paid off the entire sum and wins the game! Then the hardest part of the game will commence: attempting to put all the components back in the fanny pack so that they are not damaged. Good luck.
Components. This game has some pretty spectacular components coupled with some really great art. Obviously, having a game packaged in a fanny pack is just delightful, even though I typically despise non-boxed games. Secondly, all the wooden manateeples and avocado toast tokens are just amazing to behold and handle. The cards are good quality and the game features incredible art throughout. I am a big fan of this art style – it is very cartoony and very cool. This theme is just perfection and the game that lies beneath the theme is very surprising.
I say the game beneath the great art and theme is surprising because I was completely not expecting to like this one as much as I do. At its heart it is a very light worker-placement game with hints of take that and based on using currency as victory points. I like all of those mechanics quite a bit, so combining these with aforementioned art and theme works for me on another level.
I feel this game is something I can bring out with almost any crowd of adults and have a smashing great time. There are so many little jokes packed into this little game that make me giggle every time I see them. And come on, a first player token that is avocado toast? It’s too good! I love all the colors assaulting my eyes, and I love all the hate-placement that happens, and I didn’t know that I love manatees as much as I now do.
Look, I am usually pretty positive about the games I play. But I also play a lot of stinkers. This one, thankfully, delivers a super fun game experience in an hour or less, even though the theme is absolutely ridiculous. But I also find that so charming. If you are looking for that special WOW game that is relatively light but incredibly satisfying to play, I strongly recommend checking out Millennial Manatees. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one 10 / 12 soy super americanos (is that a thing?). Display the pink fanny pack with pride next to all your super-serious games and watch as your visitors flock to it and ask what it is. Then play it with them and watch them fall in love as we did. I am very happy to now have this one in my collection.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Faza in Tabletop Games
Oct 28, 2020
You know those fantasy dreams you have where an alien race comes to Earth and tries to take over the world and terraform it to match their homeland? Just me? Well, this is awkward. Okay, how about the ones where you are a freedom fighter trying to save the world from those aliens and you only have three friends to help you in your impossible mission? That one is better? Okay! Then you are in for a treat with Faza, no matter which dream is yours.
Faza is a sci-fi, grid movement, modular board, purely cooperative board game for one to four players. In this review I will be addressing it from a solo player’s viewpoint. In my plays I have used the full complement of four characters and controlled them all simultaneously.
In Faza, players take on the roles of four Faction Zeta members tasked with saving Earth from the Faza alien race. They will accomplish this by using each character’s skills effectively and efficiently, killing alien drones invading the town tiles, and attacking motherships using the help of turncoat rebel Faza. Only one path to victory lies ahead with several ways to lose. Do you got the GUTS? DO YA??
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup a game of Faza, each player will choose a character to control throughout the game. These characters are medical, political, tactical, or technological in nature, and there are two of each from which players may choose. The map of the town is comprised of 16 tiles, and once randomly setup in a 4×4 grid players will place their color-matched meeples on the appropriate Outpost tiles along with two rebels (purple fazeeples). Each of the three mothership standees will be placed on tiles corresponding to rulebook placement along with three drones and two drones per orthogonally adjacent tiles. The Faza deck is to be shuffled and placed aside, along with the remaining drones and rebels. Each player places out their character action cards in numerical order and the game may now begin in earnest!
On a player’s turn… well, there aren’t any turns in this game. In fact, the game is played over several phases: the Team Phase and the Faza Phase. During the Team Phase players may use several free actions and one action pertaining to each of their four player action cards. Each of these cards offer the player a choice of two actions. Perhaps one side is movement and the other a bazooka. Or one is an airplane while the other is a raygun, for example. As actions are spent cards are twisted 90 degrees to keep track.
During the Team Phase players may play their actions in any order that would benefit the team best. This also includes fighting drones and sending rebels to damage the motherships. However, with every damage to the mothership taken a Faza card is drawn and put into play. These could be real bad news for the heroes, or even reward cards. They can be devastating or not so bad at all. Once players have finished the Team Phase, the action now turns to the Faza.
During the Faza Phase the Mothership Activation Tracker will move to the next mothership in sequence and activate their abilities. The motherships will typically move, do something bad to the terrain or drop more drones or destroy something, and then pass play onto the players again.
Each mothership starts the game with 4 HP and once players send enough rebels and encounter the same number of Faza cards the mothership is downed and less powerful when their ability card is activated. However, players will win once all three motherships have been defeated! On the other hand, players will lose when any one player dies of injuries from unsuccessful battles, the players run out of drones to be placed on the board when needed, all of the Outpost tiles have been terraformed by the Faza motherships, or all rebels have been removed from the board in Hard Mode.
Components. When contacted about reviewing the game I first turned to the website and watched a how to play video by Jon Gets Games. He did a great job explaining the rules clearly and succinctly. Then I happened to get a notification on BGG that Marco Arnaudo posted a video on Faza, so I watched it as well. In his video he complains that though the components are all very nice (which they are for sure) the color palette is not great. I can certainly see why he would say such a thing, but orange is my favorite color, so to see so much of it on a game is a big plus for me. Yes, having the orange drones sitting atop an orange town tile can maybe make for unpleasant color contrast, I happen to find it tolerable and enjoyable. The quality of the components is wonderful and the box has a nice heft to it. No complaints from ME about the components. Did I mention the rebels are an amazing purple color as well? No secret here that we love the color purple! Maybe even more than Oprah!
The gameplay is where it’s at for me. Marco too. We both love this little gem! The ability to sandbox your entire turn and just have one character do one action, then switch over to another character to do one or more actions, then back to the original is just so much fun. Each character has a special ability and four action cards. Even when an injury must be sustained, actions are still available, but at a much lesser potency. That’s a great way to negatively affect the players without having to completely debilitate them. To sustain an injury the player will flip their lowest-numbered action card to the back side, and once all four of their action cards are injured they are dead. D-E-D dead.
As a solo game Faza really delivers the goods. Being able to control two to four characters by oneself and determine the best order to activate abilities and move meeples around is delicious. Having certain tiles offer combat bonuses to matching characters is excellent and a great way to thin the herd of pesky drones. I really cannot say enough great things about the game. If you have never heard of this one, please don’t worry. I really hadn’t either until the designer contacted me about reviewing it. And I am certainly glad he did because this is a marvel of a game. I am looking forward to my next play against the Faza and increasing the difficulty to really bash my confidence on this one.
If you are looking for a game that is relatively quick to play and offers so many great choices, while using a wonderful art style and color palette, I urge you to check out Faza by visiting the website and ordering your copy right away. The Earth needs you to ward off the invaders and you need to play this game of mostly orange with a dash of purple.
Faza is a sci-fi, grid movement, modular board, purely cooperative board game for one to four players. In this review I will be addressing it from a solo player’s viewpoint. In my plays I have used the full complement of four characters and controlled them all simultaneously.
In Faza, players take on the roles of four Faction Zeta members tasked with saving Earth from the Faza alien race. They will accomplish this by using each character’s skills effectively and efficiently, killing alien drones invading the town tiles, and attacking motherships using the help of turncoat rebel Faza. Only one path to victory lies ahead with several ways to lose. Do you got the GUTS? DO YA??
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup a game of Faza, each player will choose a character to control throughout the game. These characters are medical, political, tactical, or technological in nature, and there are two of each from which players may choose. The map of the town is comprised of 16 tiles, and once randomly setup in a 4×4 grid players will place their color-matched meeples on the appropriate Outpost tiles along with two rebels (purple fazeeples). Each of the three mothership standees will be placed on tiles corresponding to rulebook placement along with three drones and two drones per orthogonally adjacent tiles. The Faza deck is to be shuffled and placed aside, along with the remaining drones and rebels. Each player places out their character action cards in numerical order and the game may now begin in earnest!
On a player’s turn… well, there aren’t any turns in this game. In fact, the game is played over several phases: the Team Phase and the Faza Phase. During the Team Phase players may use several free actions and one action pertaining to each of their four player action cards. Each of these cards offer the player a choice of two actions. Perhaps one side is movement and the other a bazooka. Or one is an airplane while the other is a raygun, for example. As actions are spent cards are twisted 90 degrees to keep track.
During the Team Phase players may play their actions in any order that would benefit the team best. This also includes fighting drones and sending rebels to damage the motherships. However, with every damage to the mothership taken a Faza card is drawn and put into play. These could be real bad news for the heroes, or even reward cards. They can be devastating or not so bad at all. Once players have finished the Team Phase, the action now turns to the Faza.
During the Faza Phase the Mothership Activation Tracker will move to the next mothership in sequence and activate their abilities. The motherships will typically move, do something bad to the terrain or drop more drones or destroy something, and then pass play onto the players again.
Each mothership starts the game with 4 HP and once players send enough rebels and encounter the same number of Faza cards the mothership is downed and less powerful when their ability card is activated. However, players will win once all three motherships have been defeated! On the other hand, players will lose when any one player dies of injuries from unsuccessful battles, the players run out of drones to be placed on the board when needed, all of the Outpost tiles have been terraformed by the Faza motherships, or all rebels have been removed from the board in Hard Mode.
Components. When contacted about reviewing the game I first turned to the website and watched a how to play video by Jon Gets Games. He did a great job explaining the rules clearly and succinctly. Then I happened to get a notification on BGG that Marco Arnaudo posted a video on Faza, so I watched it as well. In his video he complains that though the components are all very nice (which they are for sure) the color palette is not great. I can certainly see why he would say such a thing, but orange is my favorite color, so to see so much of it on a game is a big plus for me. Yes, having the orange drones sitting atop an orange town tile can maybe make for unpleasant color contrast, I happen to find it tolerable and enjoyable. The quality of the components is wonderful and the box has a nice heft to it. No complaints from ME about the components. Did I mention the rebels are an amazing purple color as well? No secret here that we love the color purple! Maybe even more than Oprah!
The gameplay is where it’s at for me. Marco too. We both love this little gem! The ability to sandbox your entire turn and just have one character do one action, then switch over to another character to do one or more actions, then back to the original is just so much fun. Each character has a special ability and four action cards. Even when an injury must be sustained, actions are still available, but at a much lesser potency. That’s a great way to negatively affect the players without having to completely debilitate them. To sustain an injury the player will flip their lowest-numbered action card to the back side, and once all four of their action cards are injured they are dead. D-E-D dead.
As a solo game Faza really delivers the goods. Being able to control two to four characters by oneself and determine the best order to activate abilities and move meeples around is delicious. Having certain tiles offer combat bonuses to matching characters is excellent and a great way to thin the herd of pesky drones. I really cannot say enough great things about the game. If you have never heard of this one, please don’t worry. I really hadn’t either until the designer contacted me about reviewing it. And I am certainly glad he did because this is a marvel of a game. I am looking forward to my next play against the Faza and increasing the difficulty to really bash my confidence on this one.
If you are looking for a game that is relatively quick to play and offers so many great choices, while using a wonderful art style and color palette, I urge you to check out Faza by visiting the website and ordering your copy right away. The Earth needs you to ward off the invaders and you need to play this game of mostly orange with a dash of purple.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Aladdin (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
Oh. My. This was always going to be a tough one for me, and I've been thinking long and hard about how on earth I was going to review this. I love the original, anyone who even remotely enjoys it would be able to sing you at least one of the songs, and therein lies one of the problems. Would I have had a different opinion about some of the elements had I not seen the original so many times? After a lot of contemplating I think the answer in most cases is no.
Note: I went to see this for a second time so I'm going to edit what I previously wrote up as I go because on second viewing it was better. Once the initial shock and annoyance had passed after seeing it the first time it was much easier to watch for the second time.
Remaking something that's peak Disney has so many issues, recasting roles, changing social views and cultural sensitivities, are probably the biggest ones.
Let's talk about the (blue) elephant in the room... although I guess that phrase isn't really accurate as we all want to talk about it. Oh Genie, my Genie. I don't think anyone would have been able to fill that lamp the way Robin Williams did, he was larger than life and brought such a sense of fun whenever he did roles like this. The man is a comedic legend. Recasting this was always going to be difficult, and honestly, I don't know if there's anyone I would have been happy with taking over the mantle.
When I found out that Will Smith was on board I wasn't completely put off. On paper he's got everything you'd need for this role. He had one of two choices, stick to the original faithfully or take it your own way. I just don't think Smith actually had a choice though, he was going to have to do a reinterpretation of the role, but how could you ever follow Williams?
The thing I'm most surprised about with Genie is just how bad the CGI is. It's not like this is something Disney are unfamiliar with. Why did some of it even need to be CGId? I obviously don't know the ins and outs of these techniques or options, but if people can make Robbie Coltrane look larger than life in Harry Potter without mucking it up then why aren't they smurfing Will Smith up and doing the same?
Casting across the rest of the film wasn't such an epic task, Mena Massoud as Aladdin and Navid Negahban as the Sultan hit exactly the right spot. I had issues with Jafar, that's nothing to do with Marwan Kenzari's acting which was very good, but it was the fact that in my head Jafar should have been older. (Dream casting: Ben Kingsley.) I'm sure I won't be popular saying this but I didn't really like Naomi Scott as Jasmine, I don't think she brought enough sass to the role, I also felt that some of the new inclusions into the film around Jasmine negatively affected my view of her.
By far and away my favourite from the live action cast was Nasim Pedrad as Dalia, Jasmine's lady in waiting. I don't know why they felt the need to bring this character in, but I'm really glad they did. She's funny and a welcome break in some scenes. She completely outshines Jasmine as almost every point in the film... actually, I retract the word "almost". While I might not be happy about part of her character's story (ask me for the spoilers) she was definitely the best added extra in the film.
Our group of sidekicks, Abu, Iago, Rajah and Carpet all come out with varying degrees of success. Abu wasn't entirely lucky with the CGI and didn't get such a fun part as before. Iago was much more bird-like than previously which meant less actual talking so I have to wonder why they hired Alan Tudyk if they weren't going to use him properly. Rajah while less quizzical than in the original was entertaining and luckily wasn't mutilated by the CGI. Carpet though, I loved Carpet. He was super cute and absolutely adorable with Abu.
I'm not going to go over every change they made to the original, but one tweak particularly bugged me. They change the way that Aladdin gets out of the cave of wonders. The verbal trickery that Aladdin uses in the original is gone and they switch it out for a much more deceitful moment. The idea isn't as clever as its predecessor and also means that later in the film when Aladdin tricks Jafar you don't get that same connection, watching Genie working out what was going on was painful viewing.
I can't really put off talking about the songs anymore.
As trailers and sneak peeks appeared online I became increasingly nervous about the songs. Prince Ali seemed to be less upbeat than before, and while the sequence looked like it had potential all of it together didn't feel as vibrant. I appreciate that they tried to keep all those little Genie added extra in but it felt like they went with a "safe" option.
I enjoy Will Smith's singing, but I'm not a fan of it in this. I don't think the change in style is suited to these songs. I've seen people saying about how he's rapping in it... but I wouldn't have identified it as rapping. If anything it felt like they went "you should get some rapping in there, but we're Disney so tone it down... a lot."
We get a new offering on the soundtrack in the shape of Speechless, Jasmine's empowering song. I like the song, it certainly has the Disney vibe, and Scott sings it beautifully... but it didn't give me those goosebumps that I expect from power songs. I probably would have given the song a pass had it not been for the way it was included in the film. The frozen scenes with Jasmine dramatically moving in and out of the cast and set... ugh... that just didn't work for me.
Massoud had originally given me so much hope for the music when I heard One Jump Ahead at the beginning. It was excellent, and throughout the film I loved his singing.
Here's where my opinion changed a bit after my second visit... the songs weren't all as bad as I'd felt after the first viewing. I still didn't enjoy Genie's offering, but Aladdin and Jasmine both felt like an excellent choice. The main thing that didn't change was the fact that I didn't feel the songs fit well into the scenes. Part of the draw of Disney is the toe-tapping singalong vibe you get from the music, and there was a lack of pizzaz in most of the sequences that left my toes untapped.
I could probably go on for a very long time about this film. (I already have.) Ultimately, I don't think it's an improvement on the original, I don't think these modern rehashes really add a lot when you have to adjust for the modern culture. I'm not saying that you shouldn't take the changing times into consideration, I just think you should do it in a way that doesn't just come across as trying to score points with the audience to prove how "with it" you are. I also don't think that coming up with 30 minutes of extra footage is ever a sensible idea. If that's what you want to do then perhaps you need to really mix things up and come up with a whole new concept for the story.
What you should do
You're either a Disney nut or you're not. Personally, I would recommend staying at home and having a binge of old Disney classics, starting with the one true Genie.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Could I get Genie powers without the itty-bitty living space?
Note: I went to see this for a second time so I'm going to edit what I previously wrote up as I go because on second viewing it was better. Once the initial shock and annoyance had passed after seeing it the first time it was much easier to watch for the second time.
Remaking something that's peak Disney has so many issues, recasting roles, changing social views and cultural sensitivities, are probably the biggest ones.
Let's talk about the (blue) elephant in the room... although I guess that phrase isn't really accurate as we all want to talk about it. Oh Genie, my Genie. I don't think anyone would have been able to fill that lamp the way Robin Williams did, he was larger than life and brought such a sense of fun whenever he did roles like this. The man is a comedic legend. Recasting this was always going to be difficult, and honestly, I don't know if there's anyone I would have been happy with taking over the mantle.
When I found out that Will Smith was on board I wasn't completely put off. On paper he's got everything you'd need for this role. He had one of two choices, stick to the original faithfully or take it your own way. I just don't think Smith actually had a choice though, he was going to have to do a reinterpretation of the role, but how could you ever follow Williams?
The thing I'm most surprised about with Genie is just how bad the CGI is. It's not like this is something Disney are unfamiliar with. Why did some of it even need to be CGId? I obviously don't know the ins and outs of these techniques or options, but if people can make Robbie Coltrane look larger than life in Harry Potter without mucking it up then why aren't they smurfing Will Smith up and doing the same?
Casting across the rest of the film wasn't such an epic task, Mena Massoud as Aladdin and Navid Negahban as the Sultan hit exactly the right spot. I had issues with Jafar, that's nothing to do with Marwan Kenzari's acting which was very good, but it was the fact that in my head Jafar should have been older. (Dream casting: Ben Kingsley.) I'm sure I won't be popular saying this but I didn't really like Naomi Scott as Jasmine, I don't think she brought enough sass to the role, I also felt that some of the new inclusions into the film around Jasmine negatively affected my view of her.
By far and away my favourite from the live action cast was Nasim Pedrad as Dalia, Jasmine's lady in waiting. I don't know why they felt the need to bring this character in, but I'm really glad they did. She's funny and a welcome break in some scenes. She completely outshines Jasmine as almost every point in the film... actually, I retract the word "almost". While I might not be happy about part of her character's story (ask me for the spoilers) she was definitely the best added extra in the film.
Our group of sidekicks, Abu, Iago, Rajah and Carpet all come out with varying degrees of success. Abu wasn't entirely lucky with the CGI and didn't get such a fun part as before. Iago was much more bird-like than previously which meant less actual talking so I have to wonder why they hired Alan Tudyk if they weren't going to use him properly. Rajah while less quizzical than in the original was entertaining and luckily wasn't mutilated by the CGI. Carpet though, I loved Carpet. He was super cute and absolutely adorable with Abu.
I'm not going to go over every change they made to the original, but one tweak particularly bugged me. They change the way that Aladdin gets out of the cave of wonders. The verbal trickery that Aladdin uses in the original is gone and they switch it out for a much more deceitful moment. The idea isn't as clever as its predecessor and also means that later in the film when Aladdin tricks Jafar you don't get that same connection, watching Genie working out what was going on was painful viewing.
I can't really put off talking about the songs anymore.
As trailers and sneak peeks appeared online I became increasingly nervous about the songs. Prince Ali seemed to be less upbeat than before, and while the sequence looked like it had potential all of it together didn't feel as vibrant. I appreciate that they tried to keep all those little Genie added extra in but it felt like they went with a "safe" option.
I enjoy Will Smith's singing, but I'm not a fan of it in this. I don't think the change in style is suited to these songs. I've seen people saying about how he's rapping in it... but I wouldn't have identified it as rapping. If anything it felt like they went "you should get some rapping in there, but we're Disney so tone it down... a lot."
We get a new offering on the soundtrack in the shape of Speechless, Jasmine's empowering song. I like the song, it certainly has the Disney vibe, and Scott sings it beautifully... but it didn't give me those goosebumps that I expect from power songs. I probably would have given the song a pass had it not been for the way it was included in the film. The frozen scenes with Jasmine dramatically moving in and out of the cast and set... ugh... that just didn't work for me.
Massoud had originally given me so much hope for the music when I heard One Jump Ahead at the beginning. It was excellent, and throughout the film I loved his singing.
Here's where my opinion changed a bit after my second visit... the songs weren't all as bad as I'd felt after the first viewing. I still didn't enjoy Genie's offering, but Aladdin and Jasmine both felt like an excellent choice. The main thing that didn't change was the fact that I didn't feel the songs fit well into the scenes. Part of the draw of Disney is the toe-tapping singalong vibe you get from the music, and there was a lack of pizzaz in most of the sequences that left my toes untapped.
I could probably go on for a very long time about this film. (I already have.) Ultimately, I don't think it's an improvement on the original, I don't think these modern rehashes really add a lot when you have to adjust for the modern culture. I'm not saying that you shouldn't take the changing times into consideration, I just think you should do it in a way that doesn't just come across as trying to score points with the audience to prove how "with it" you are. I also don't think that coming up with 30 minutes of extra footage is ever a sensible idea. If that's what you want to do then perhaps you need to really mix things up and come up with a whole new concept for the story.
What you should do
You're either a Disney nut or you're not. Personally, I would recommend staying at home and having a binge of old Disney classics, starting with the one true Genie.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Could I get Genie powers without the itty-bitty living space?
Hadley (567 KP) rated The Devil in the White City: Murder, Magic, and Madness in Books
Jan 18, 2021
History (1 more)
Well-written
H.H. Holmes had many aliases and lives.
He's been a doctor and a licensed pharmacist, who then conned an old couple into selling their drug store to him where he preyed on young girls and ignorant customers that would buy whatever Holmes would tell them to buy, whether it were real or fake tonics.
He was a building owner who had a murder hotel secretly built with " a wooden chute that would descend from a secret location on the second floor all the way to the basement... ", "a room next to his office fitted with a large walk-in vault, with airtight seams and asbestos-coated iron walls. A gas jet embedded in one wall would be controlled from his closet...", "a large basement with hidden chambers and a sub-basement for the permanent storage of sensitive material. "
He owned and ran an alcohol-treatment company known as the Silver Ash Institute that claimed to have the cure for alcoholism.
He was a traveling business man, who had two wives and two children. He established the Campbell-Yates Manufacturing Company, which made nothing and sold nothing.
He was also labeled as America's first serial killer. His body count is unknown even today; his victims were frequently young women, which included stenographers and house wives. He was best known for convincing people who trusted him to sign him as the beneficiary of their life insurance policies, only to kill them and make it seem an accident so he could collect the money.
Holmes grew up in a small farming village in New Hampshire, where he briefly spoke about an early fear of a human skeleton that hung in a doctor's office: " 'I had daily to pass the office of one village doctor, the door of which was seldom if ever barred,' he wrote in a later memoir. 'Partly from its being associated in my mind as the source of all the nauseous mixtures that had been my childish terror (for this was before the day of children's medicines), and partly because of vague rumors I had heard regarding its contents, this place was one of peculiar abhorrence to me.' "... "Two children discovered Mudgett's [Holmes' real last name] fear and one day captured him and dragged him 'struggling and shrieking' into the doctor's office. 'Nor did they desist,' Mudgett wrote, 'until I had been brought face to face with one of its grinning skeletons, which, with arms outstretched, seemed ready in its turn to seize me. It was a wicked and dangerous thing to do to a child of tender years and health,' he wrote, ' but it proved an heroic method of treatment, destined ultimately to cure me of my fears, and to inculcate in me, first, a strong feeling of curiosity, and, later, a desire to learn, which resulted years afterwards in my adopting medicine as a profession.' "
Erik Larson's fourth book, the Devil in the White City, is only partly about Holmes and his dark trail of murder and lies. The story told is mostly centered around the planning and building of the 1893 World's Fair. The prologue opens with one of the architects aboard a ship long after the fair has ended - - - 1912 to be exact- - - where he begins to write of the fair in his diary. The next chapter continues on with Chicago competing against other major cities to win the rights to host the World's Fair. Chicago was not the ideal place for the fair because it was known for it's crime and slaughter houses - - - this was exactly why the politicians wanted it so badly there, so it would help to lighten the image of Chicago for the rest of the world. Even the local Whitechapel Club that had sprouted up after the infamous murders by Jack the Ripper, were excited to win the rights to host the fair in their city, and celebrated in a macabre way:
"Upon learning that Chicago had won the fair, the men of the Whitechapel Club composed a telegram to Chauncey Depew, who more than any other man symbolized New York and its campaign to win the fair. Previously Depew had promised the members of the Whitechapel Club that if Chicago prevailed he would present himself at the club's next meeting, to be hacked apart by the Ripper himself - - - metaphorically, he presumed, although at the Whitechapel Club could one ever be certain? The club's coffin, for example, had once been used to transport the body of a member who had committed suicide. After claiming his body, the club hauled it to the Indiana Dunes on Lake Michigan, where members erected an immense pyre. They placed the body on top, then set it alight. Carrying torches and wearing black hooded robes, they circled the fire singing hymns to the dead between sips of whiskey. The club also had a custom of sending robed members to kidnap visiting celebrities and steal them away in a black coach with covered windows, all without saying a word.
The club's telegram reached Depew in Washington twenty minutes after the final ballot, just as Chicago's congressional delegation began celebrating at the Willard Hotel near the White House. The telegram asked, 'When may we see you at our dissecting table?' "
There are chapters in-between, technically reading like a side story, that tell us about Holmes and his misdeeds in Chicago, but there just wasn't enough about Holmes that I could consider this a True Crime book, nor an informative book about Holmes. Unfortunately, when the reader begins to really dwell into the story of Holmes, it's quickly ended by having two or more chapters about the building of the World's Fair. One interesting point about the story is that the reader does get to see how many inventions were brought to light because of the Fair, such as the invention of the Ferris Wheel. Larson's writing is very coherent and the descriptions are so well done that the reader is practically transported back to the late 1800s, yet, before I finished the book, I felt misled by the title... then coming across everything that happened to not only the Fair, but the people who were involved with it, it's hard not to wonder if the whole thing was cursed, thus the Devil being in the White City.
One of the side stories I did really enjoy was the slow unfolding of a man named Prendergast. A delusional young man who ran one of the groups of paperboys in Chicago, who was also obsessed with politics, became a determined supporter of Mayor Harrison; after Harrison was voted into office again, Prendergast believed it was because of him and the letters he sent out to numerous politicians and potential voters. Prendergast also believed he deserved a chair on the council for Harrison's re-election, for which he even showed up at City Hall to take over. This incident was the straw that broke the camel's back for Prendergast - - - he was humiliated when the people there laughed in his face. Prendergast then decided to take matters into his own hands, and bought a revolver. The day before the Fair would end, Prendergast showed up at Harrison's home and shot him. Harrison died minutes later. Prendergast turned himself in for the murder as soon as he left Harrison's residence. When asked why he had done it, Prendergast responded: " ' Because he betrayed my confidence. I supported him through his campaign and he promised to appoint me corporation counsel. He didn't live up to his word.' "
This book has been voted as a top True Crime must-read novel. I don't agree with this. As I said before: Holmes' chapters are few; eighty percent of this book is about the building of the World's Fair. As a True Crime junkie, I didn't enjoy this one, but also as a history junkie, I enjoyed learning about the Fair and everything that happened. I can't recommend this book to TC fans or horror fans. It's mostly history and architecture.
He's been a doctor and a licensed pharmacist, who then conned an old couple into selling their drug store to him where he preyed on young girls and ignorant customers that would buy whatever Holmes would tell them to buy, whether it were real or fake tonics.
He was a building owner who had a murder hotel secretly built with " a wooden chute that would descend from a secret location on the second floor all the way to the basement... ", "a room next to his office fitted with a large walk-in vault, with airtight seams and asbestos-coated iron walls. A gas jet embedded in one wall would be controlled from his closet...", "a large basement with hidden chambers and a sub-basement for the permanent storage of sensitive material. "
He owned and ran an alcohol-treatment company known as the Silver Ash Institute that claimed to have the cure for alcoholism.
He was a traveling business man, who had two wives and two children. He established the Campbell-Yates Manufacturing Company, which made nothing and sold nothing.
He was also labeled as America's first serial killer. His body count is unknown even today; his victims were frequently young women, which included stenographers and house wives. He was best known for convincing people who trusted him to sign him as the beneficiary of their life insurance policies, only to kill them and make it seem an accident so he could collect the money.
Holmes grew up in a small farming village in New Hampshire, where he briefly spoke about an early fear of a human skeleton that hung in a doctor's office: " 'I had daily to pass the office of one village doctor, the door of which was seldom if ever barred,' he wrote in a later memoir. 'Partly from its being associated in my mind as the source of all the nauseous mixtures that had been my childish terror (for this was before the day of children's medicines), and partly because of vague rumors I had heard regarding its contents, this place was one of peculiar abhorrence to me.' "... "Two children discovered Mudgett's [Holmes' real last name] fear and one day captured him and dragged him 'struggling and shrieking' into the doctor's office. 'Nor did they desist,' Mudgett wrote, 'until I had been brought face to face with one of its grinning skeletons, which, with arms outstretched, seemed ready in its turn to seize me. It was a wicked and dangerous thing to do to a child of tender years and health,' he wrote, ' but it proved an heroic method of treatment, destined ultimately to cure me of my fears, and to inculcate in me, first, a strong feeling of curiosity, and, later, a desire to learn, which resulted years afterwards in my adopting medicine as a profession.' "
Erik Larson's fourth book, the Devil in the White City, is only partly about Holmes and his dark trail of murder and lies. The story told is mostly centered around the planning and building of the 1893 World's Fair. The prologue opens with one of the architects aboard a ship long after the fair has ended - - - 1912 to be exact- - - where he begins to write of the fair in his diary. The next chapter continues on with Chicago competing against other major cities to win the rights to host the World's Fair. Chicago was not the ideal place for the fair because it was known for it's crime and slaughter houses - - - this was exactly why the politicians wanted it so badly there, so it would help to lighten the image of Chicago for the rest of the world. Even the local Whitechapel Club that had sprouted up after the infamous murders by Jack the Ripper, were excited to win the rights to host the fair in their city, and celebrated in a macabre way:
"Upon learning that Chicago had won the fair, the men of the Whitechapel Club composed a telegram to Chauncey Depew, who more than any other man symbolized New York and its campaign to win the fair. Previously Depew had promised the members of the Whitechapel Club that if Chicago prevailed he would present himself at the club's next meeting, to be hacked apart by the Ripper himself - - - metaphorically, he presumed, although at the Whitechapel Club could one ever be certain? The club's coffin, for example, had once been used to transport the body of a member who had committed suicide. After claiming his body, the club hauled it to the Indiana Dunes on Lake Michigan, where members erected an immense pyre. They placed the body on top, then set it alight. Carrying torches and wearing black hooded robes, they circled the fire singing hymns to the dead between sips of whiskey. The club also had a custom of sending robed members to kidnap visiting celebrities and steal them away in a black coach with covered windows, all without saying a word.
The club's telegram reached Depew in Washington twenty minutes after the final ballot, just as Chicago's congressional delegation began celebrating at the Willard Hotel near the White House. The telegram asked, 'When may we see you at our dissecting table?' "
There are chapters in-between, technically reading like a side story, that tell us about Holmes and his misdeeds in Chicago, but there just wasn't enough about Holmes that I could consider this a True Crime book, nor an informative book about Holmes. Unfortunately, when the reader begins to really dwell into the story of Holmes, it's quickly ended by having two or more chapters about the building of the World's Fair. One interesting point about the story is that the reader does get to see how many inventions were brought to light because of the Fair, such as the invention of the Ferris Wheel. Larson's writing is very coherent and the descriptions are so well done that the reader is practically transported back to the late 1800s, yet, before I finished the book, I felt misled by the title... then coming across everything that happened to not only the Fair, but the people who were involved with it, it's hard not to wonder if the whole thing was cursed, thus the Devil being in the White City.
One of the side stories I did really enjoy was the slow unfolding of a man named Prendergast. A delusional young man who ran one of the groups of paperboys in Chicago, who was also obsessed with politics, became a determined supporter of Mayor Harrison; after Harrison was voted into office again, Prendergast believed it was because of him and the letters he sent out to numerous politicians and potential voters. Prendergast also believed he deserved a chair on the council for Harrison's re-election, for which he even showed up at City Hall to take over. This incident was the straw that broke the camel's back for Prendergast - - - he was humiliated when the people there laughed in his face. Prendergast then decided to take matters into his own hands, and bought a revolver. The day before the Fair would end, Prendergast showed up at Harrison's home and shot him. Harrison died minutes later. Prendergast turned himself in for the murder as soon as he left Harrison's residence. When asked why he had done it, Prendergast responded: " ' Because he betrayed my confidence. I supported him through his campaign and he promised to appoint me corporation counsel. He didn't live up to his word.' "
This book has been voted as a top True Crime must-read novel. I don't agree with this. As I said before: Holmes' chapters are few; eighty percent of this book is about the building of the World's Fair. As a True Crime junkie, I didn't enjoy this one, but also as a history junkie, I enjoyed learning about the Fair and everything that happened. I can't recommend this book to TC fans or horror fans. It's mostly history and architecture.
Jordan Binkerd (567 KP) rated Gideon's Angel in Books
Aug 15, 2019
Note: this review is transposted from my personal review blog, and so was originally written several years ago. I figured if I reposted it here, someone might actually read it….
I received my copy of Gideon’s Angel through the Goodreads FirstReads program. This in no way influences my review, except to ensure that I was able to get ahold of this book and thus review it. I have to say, I really enjoyed this one. I want to describe it as “steampunk,” but my understanding is that steampunk is usually set in the 1800s (or at least that level of tech and society) whereas this work is firmly set in 1653. If there’s already a term for pseudo-historical fiction with a fantasy touch set in that timeframe, I apologize for not knowing what it is and using it accordingly.
Things are not going well for Richard Treadwell. The English Civil War is over, the King’s Cavaliers lost to the forces of Parliament and Oliver Cromwell, and Charles I has been executed. Treadwell has managed to escape the destruction of his cause, and has spent the past eight years in exile in France, performing a delicate balancing act between loyalty to his exiled king* and his employer, Cardinal Mazarin. When Mazarin informs him that someone is using the forces of Hell to tip the balance in their favor and asks him to spy on the exile court to find out if it is one of the king’s supporters, Treadwell decides that it’s time to get out of Paris. He accepts a mission for one of the king’s more militant supporters that will take him back to his beloved England–to lead a Royalist uprising, one last try to oust Cromwell and his Puritan cronies. Treadwell has other business to tend to as well, including a wife who by now probably considers herself a widow. Unfortunately for Treadwell’s simple worldview, it soon becomes clear that Cromwell’s power is the only thing preventing the more radical Puritan elements from running roughshod over the whole country. Worse still, a demon from the pits of Hell has appeared to a radical Puritan sect masquerading as an angel of light and ordering the death of Cromwell so that the Kingdom of God may be fulfilled. Now instead of assassinating Cromwell Treadwell will be forced to save him–if he can find a way to fight the forces of Hell, gain some allies in his quest, and avoid d’Artagnan, a young Musketeer dispatched by the Cardinal to bear him back to Paris….
I really enjoyed this book. It’s not exactly “high literature,” but I think I’ve very well established that I care far more about a work’s entertainment value than whatever it is critics look for. The world Beal creates here feels very real, slipping in background historical information without making you feel like you’ve been lectured. Some readers will probably wish for more background on the English Civil War, and that’s fine. If they care that much, there are numerous good books on the subject. If they don’t, there’s a Wikipedia article that should give you a good rundown on what happened. Beal manages to evoke seventeenth-century London in all its grimy glory, much as it would have actually been aside from the fact that all the magic we dismiss as superstition is actually going on behind the scenes. Moreover, this magic very much resembles what you would find depicted in the folklore of the era without obvious modern embellishment. I’m not really all that well versed in the history of the Freemasons, so I can’t accurately speak to how they were portrayed here except to say that I very much doubt their claim to date back to the builders of the pyramids. Then again, I doubt they have the tools to summon demons too, so maybe I shouldn’t be too critical. Secondary characters generally proved to be interestingly complex, especially Billy Chard, but I am seeing criticism of how the female characters in the book act. They aren’t weak characters by any means, but they are constrained by their roles in society. Treadwell’s wife has pragmatically joined her fate to that of the officer who took over Treadwell’s land when he was banished and is pregnant with his child. Is she weak for this? Or is she a strong female doing what she has to in order to protect what is left of her family? Treadwell’s Parisian mistress follows him to England rather than stay in Paris and face the scandal of their liasion alone. Weak, for needing Treadwell by her side? Or strong, for following him into whatever dangers he may be facing? Finally, Isabelle decides to follow her father and the rest of Treadwell’s band into battle against the forces of Darkness, deciding that it would be better to fall by his side than live on without him. Possibly a sign of weakness, but look at her situation realistically. She and her father were driven from Spain for their Jewish heritage, her mother dying along the way. Jews do not fare well in the Christian world of the seventeenth century, not even in England. The lot of a young woman alone in the world is already hard enough in this time without adding the burden of religious and ethnic persecution. She would have no respectable means of supporting herself, and could conceivably find herself forced into prostitution–on her own if she was lucky, as no more than a slave if she was not. Is preferring death in battle to such a fate a sign of weakness or of strength? She certainly has no trouble speaking her mind, and in fact berates Treadwell severely for endangering her father when they first meet. I suppose I can understand where some people would find these characters and their portrayal to be weak and sexist, but I respectfully disagree. I submit that instead they are strong characters reacting realistically to a world where women are not treated equally–in fact, I would have more of a problem with them if they demonstrated anachronistic modern sensibilities.** The ending was a little deus ex machina, but on the whole I didn’t mind. I would say that I want to read a sequel, but I don’t think the author could come up with anything to top this in terms of personal impact on the characters–Treadwell’s internal conflict between hating Cromwell and having to save him is very well done, and I fear Beal would prove unable to find something equally interesting as a follow up. We never really got to find out what happened to Treadwell back during the Thirty Years War that introduced him to the world of angels and demons, so I could see maybe writing that up….I’d buy it, anyway.
CONTENT: R-rated language, occasionally harsh but I would argue not gratuitous. Moderately explicit sexual content, as you would expect from a work in this vein.*** A fair amount of violence, from both man and demon. Not usually too gory in its description. There is also a good deal of occult content, as the villains are summoning a demon they believe to be an angel. This demon’s lesser minions dog Treadwell and his friends, and there are multiple encounters with them. One is implied to be a golem, others appear as strange amalgamations of beast(s) and man. For me, this is adequately balanced by the recognition that, as powerful as the forces of Darkness are, God is far more powerful than they. Bottom line: if you’re mature enough to handle the other content, I don’t believe the occult elements should prove to be an issue.
*Charles I was executed, while his son Charles II went into exile. Just in case you were concerned with the historical accuracy of the book. So far as I can tell, this is pretty accurate. You know, aside from the demons and fictional characters roaming London…..
**Please understand, I’m neither defending nor endorsing the inequality of the seventeenth century. Neither is Clifford Beal, for that matter. I’m simply pointing out that it was how it was, and this was the world the characters would have come from. I’m all for equality, but to whitewash history and pretend it was different from it was….that way lies dangerous waters.
***This evokes more than anything a supernatural-tinged Alexandre Dumas novel for me….and you know how bawdry his musketeers could be when they wanted to be.
Original post: https://jordanbinkerd.wordpress.com/2013/10/24/review-gideons-angel-by-clifford-beal/
I received my copy of Gideon’s Angel through the Goodreads FirstReads program. This in no way influences my review, except to ensure that I was able to get ahold of this book and thus review it. I have to say, I really enjoyed this one. I want to describe it as “steampunk,” but my understanding is that steampunk is usually set in the 1800s (or at least that level of tech and society) whereas this work is firmly set in 1653. If there’s already a term for pseudo-historical fiction with a fantasy touch set in that timeframe, I apologize for not knowing what it is and using it accordingly.
Things are not going well for Richard Treadwell. The English Civil War is over, the King’s Cavaliers lost to the forces of Parliament and Oliver Cromwell, and Charles I has been executed. Treadwell has managed to escape the destruction of his cause, and has spent the past eight years in exile in France, performing a delicate balancing act between loyalty to his exiled king* and his employer, Cardinal Mazarin. When Mazarin informs him that someone is using the forces of Hell to tip the balance in their favor and asks him to spy on the exile court to find out if it is one of the king’s supporters, Treadwell decides that it’s time to get out of Paris. He accepts a mission for one of the king’s more militant supporters that will take him back to his beloved England–to lead a Royalist uprising, one last try to oust Cromwell and his Puritan cronies. Treadwell has other business to tend to as well, including a wife who by now probably considers herself a widow. Unfortunately for Treadwell’s simple worldview, it soon becomes clear that Cromwell’s power is the only thing preventing the more radical Puritan elements from running roughshod over the whole country. Worse still, a demon from the pits of Hell has appeared to a radical Puritan sect masquerading as an angel of light and ordering the death of Cromwell so that the Kingdom of God may be fulfilled. Now instead of assassinating Cromwell Treadwell will be forced to save him–if he can find a way to fight the forces of Hell, gain some allies in his quest, and avoid d’Artagnan, a young Musketeer dispatched by the Cardinal to bear him back to Paris….
I really enjoyed this book. It’s not exactly “high literature,” but I think I’ve very well established that I care far more about a work’s entertainment value than whatever it is critics look for. The world Beal creates here feels very real, slipping in background historical information without making you feel like you’ve been lectured. Some readers will probably wish for more background on the English Civil War, and that’s fine. If they care that much, there are numerous good books on the subject. If they don’t, there’s a Wikipedia article that should give you a good rundown on what happened. Beal manages to evoke seventeenth-century London in all its grimy glory, much as it would have actually been aside from the fact that all the magic we dismiss as superstition is actually going on behind the scenes. Moreover, this magic very much resembles what you would find depicted in the folklore of the era without obvious modern embellishment. I’m not really all that well versed in the history of the Freemasons, so I can’t accurately speak to how they were portrayed here except to say that I very much doubt their claim to date back to the builders of the pyramids. Then again, I doubt they have the tools to summon demons too, so maybe I shouldn’t be too critical. Secondary characters generally proved to be interestingly complex, especially Billy Chard, but I am seeing criticism of how the female characters in the book act. They aren’t weak characters by any means, but they are constrained by their roles in society. Treadwell’s wife has pragmatically joined her fate to that of the officer who took over Treadwell’s land when he was banished and is pregnant with his child. Is she weak for this? Or is she a strong female doing what she has to in order to protect what is left of her family? Treadwell’s Parisian mistress follows him to England rather than stay in Paris and face the scandal of their liasion alone. Weak, for needing Treadwell by her side? Or strong, for following him into whatever dangers he may be facing? Finally, Isabelle decides to follow her father and the rest of Treadwell’s band into battle against the forces of Darkness, deciding that it would be better to fall by his side than live on without him. Possibly a sign of weakness, but look at her situation realistically. She and her father were driven from Spain for their Jewish heritage, her mother dying along the way. Jews do not fare well in the Christian world of the seventeenth century, not even in England. The lot of a young woman alone in the world is already hard enough in this time without adding the burden of religious and ethnic persecution. She would have no respectable means of supporting herself, and could conceivably find herself forced into prostitution–on her own if she was lucky, as no more than a slave if she was not. Is preferring death in battle to such a fate a sign of weakness or of strength? She certainly has no trouble speaking her mind, and in fact berates Treadwell severely for endangering her father when they first meet. I suppose I can understand where some people would find these characters and their portrayal to be weak and sexist, but I respectfully disagree. I submit that instead they are strong characters reacting realistically to a world where women are not treated equally–in fact, I would have more of a problem with them if they demonstrated anachronistic modern sensibilities.** The ending was a little deus ex machina, but on the whole I didn’t mind. I would say that I want to read a sequel, but I don’t think the author could come up with anything to top this in terms of personal impact on the characters–Treadwell’s internal conflict between hating Cromwell and having to save him is very well done, and I fear Beal would prove unable to find something equally interesting as a follow up. We never really got to find out what happened to Treadwell back during the Thirty Years War that introduced him to the world of angels and demons, so I could see maybe writing that up….I’d buy it, anyway.
CONTENT: R-rated language, occasionally harsh but I would argue not gratuitous. Moderately explicit sexual content, as you would expect from a work in this vein.*** A fair amount of violence, from both man and demon. Not usually too gory in its description. There is also a good deal of occult content, as the villains are summoning a demon they believe to be an angel. This demon’s lesser minions dog Treadwell and his friends, and there are multiple encounters with them. One is implied to be a golem, others appear as strange amalgamations of beast(s) and man. For me, this is adequately balanced by the recognition that, as powerful as the forces of Darkness are, God is far more powerful than they. Bottom line: if you’re mature enough to handle the other content, I don’t believe the occult elements should prove to be an issue.
*Charles I was executed, while his son Charles II went into exile. Just in case you were concerned with the historical accuracy of the book. So far as I can tell, this is pretty accurate. You know, aside from the demons and fictional characters roaming London…..
**Please understand, I’m neither defending nor endorsing the inequality of the seventeenth century. Neither is Clifford Beal, for that matter. I’m simply pointing out that it was how it was, and this was the world the characters would have come from. I’m all for equality, but to whitewash history and pretend it was different from it was….that way lies dangerous waters.
***This evokes more than anything a supernatural-tinged Alexandre Dumas novel for me….and you know how bawdry his musketeers could be when they wanted to be.
Original post: https://jordanbinkerd.wordpress.com/2013/10/24/review-gideons-angel-by-clifford-beal/
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated The Bloody Inn in Tabletop Games
Feb 12, 2022
It’s cliche to post a game review like this so near to Halloween, so I will probably hold off on that. However, what a perfect game to go along with the macabre tone of the Halloween season! Get this: you and your family own a motel in a small town where many travelers stop to rest. You are strapped for cash, so what is a logical step in achieving wealth? Of course! Murdering and robbing your customers upon their stays! No? Not a typical business model? Unsustainable? Pfft. You just aren’t robbing the right customers…
The Bloody Inn is a card-drafting, hand management, horror game of recruiting accomplices and having them carry out dastardly deeds to secure the most money at the end of the game. In it, players take on the roles of one of the inn’s staff members and control pawns in their evil schemes in order to swindle and kill for mountains of francs (it’s set in France, pre-Euro).
To setup, place the main board on the table, give each player the components of their color choice, two Peasant cards, a 10 franc (f) check, and a player aid card. The “traveler deck” is assembled and shuffled per the rules, and placed on the Entrance side of the board. Players choose one room to place a key token in their color, and several gray neutral key tokens are placed in other rooms. Unsuspecting travelers will be staying in these rooms each night. Per the rules, the greediest player is given the first player card and the mischief may begin!
The Bloody Inn is played over several rounds, and each round has players completing three phases: Welcome Travelers, Player Actions, and End of Round. Players will Welcome Travelers to signify the start of the round by the first player drawing one card from the deck at a time and choosing in which room they will be placed.
After Travelers have been welcomed and turn in for the evening, the second phase may begin: Player Actions. In turn order players will be able to perform two actions each round. Players may choose from five different actions, and actions can be repeated for the second action of the round. Players may Bribe a Guest by discarding cards from hand equal to the printed value on the target card’s front. Initially all players simply employ the two starter Peasants, so Bribing is only performed on cards that show a value of 0-2. When a player Bribes a guest, they essentially spend cards from hand to recruit the new guest to their employ. These new employees (accomplices) are then available to be used on future actions. One or two Peasants may also be Bribed from the bistro, adding to a player’s hand of usable human resources.
A player may instead choose to Kill a Guest by similarly discarding the appropriate number of accomplices and adding the freshly-slain guest to their tableau, face-down. The card backs feature a coffin with their “rank” (action number) printed on it. Corpses normally cause no issues, but they will need to be buried under an Annex in order to collect the money in their pockets. Players may use an action to Build an Annex by discarding the appropriate number of accomplices and using a card from hand to build and staff the Annex. Annexes can be used for the action printed on the card bottom, and/or as a housing for corpses, with the Corpses being sent to any player’s Annex via the Bury a Corpse action. Discard the requisite number of accomplices to bury a corpse, and avoid suspicion from the Law.
If none of these actions are attractive to the player, or if they simply wish, they may instead Pass and launder money from the village notary. To do this, either reduce the number of francs from the Wealth Track on the main board in order to gain a 10f check, or turn in a check for 10f on the Wealth Track.
Once all players have taken their two actions, the End of Round is performed. Firstly, if any Travelers remain belonging to the Police type (signified by pistol icons on the top of the card), they will conduct an investigation, finding any unburied corpses. Should a corpse be found in this way, the owning player will need to pay 10f for the local undertaker to dispose of the body respectfully. This not only costs the player 10f, but also the amount of money that could have been gained if they had only buried them or dealt with the Police traveler prior. Next, the Travelers who remain all wake up feeling refreshed and leave the inn by being placed in the discard pile. Once the board has been cleared of all Travelers, accomplices must be paid their wages for their help. For each accomplice in hand, the players must pay 1f from the Wealth Track.
Play continues in this fashion until the main Traveler deck has been depleted twice. Then, players add up their francs and the player with the most in francs and checks is the winner, and just the greatest little murderer/robber/briber in all the land!
Components. This game really has a modest amount of components, but they are all similarly great quality. The main board acts as the inn’s room display, the Wealth Track, AND the bistro (where Peasants are discarded, as opposed to being placed in the normal discard pile). I love when components pull double or triple duty. That said, the player aids not only remind the players of the phases and actions from which they may choose, but it also provides the player with a starter Annex that can be used to bury their first corpse! HOW COOL IS THAT?! However, the greatest thing that stands out in regards to the components is the overall look and feel of the game. The character artist for this one is Weberson Santiago, and he has also illustrated games such as the new Quest (the new version of The Resistance: Avalon), Coup, and the new Whirling Witchcraft. I adore his art style, even though I shouldn’t. My typical preference of character art is semi-realism (like that of Kwanchai Moriya), but this style is really unique and perfectly applied to the theme. Great matchup of artist and game here. I do have one silly wish for this game: PLEASE change the player colors. I mean, I am so tired of having the choice between red, blue, green, and yellow. Take a Cue from my good friend Scott Brady and use one of the more interesting color choices. I mean, even to fit in with the theme here a more appropriate palette could include a brown, black, orange, and yellow or something. Be bold!!
I knew right away that this was a great game for me. Yes, the theme is super dark and macabre, which is rare for me to enjoy, but I would only play this with adults anyway so I am unbothered by it. However, the puzzle that lies within this box is one that I thoroughly enjoy solving every round. What I neglected to mention up top is the fact that when actions are taken (Bribing, Killing, Building Annexes, and Burying Corpses) if you happen to have certain card types in hand, then the cost of discards is reduced by the number of cards present. For example, if I were to Bribe a Police card from the rooms in my first action, they have an affinity for killing (messed up, I know) and will thus help me to perform a Kill action on the next turn by reducing the number of accomplices I would need to discard for that action. Side benefit: by taking the Police Travelers off the board, they then will not perform their investigations in the morning.
Another aspect I truly enjoy about The Bloody Inn is that many cards have that dual-purpose mechanic I appreciate. The player aid is also an Annex. Brilliant! Many of the Annex cards can also offer one-time or recurring powers. It’s just so satisfying to grab cards that can combo well with each other in order to fulfill your evil plans. Every card is important, and when they can offer more than one benefit, I am a happy gamer.
I cannot express how happy I am to have decided to purchase this one. I have seen the BGG ratings and rankings, but always thought I wouldn’t like it due to its very adult theme, but boy was I wrong! This is one of the best games I have played recently and I hope to even bling it out a bit, maybe even with new player colors like I suggested earlier. Laura and my wife were able to join me for this one and they agree with me – this one is excellent and definitely worth consideration into anyone’s collection. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a dastardly 15 / 18. Yeah, it’s perfect for Halloweentime, but also for ANY time. If you are looking for something a little grim and grisly with lighter rules and lots of interesting choices, you need to check out The Bloody Inn. Grab lots of Police cards and go on a killing spree for me!
The Bloody Inn is a card-drafting, hand management, horror game of recruiting accomplices and having them carry out dastardly deeds to secure the most money at the end of the game. In it, players take on the roles of one of the inn’s staff members and control pawns in their evil schemes in order to swindle and kill for mountains of francs (it’s set in France, pre-Euro).
To setup, place the main board on the table, give each player the components of their color choice, two Peasant cards, a 10 franc (f) check, and a player aid card. The “traveler deck” is assembled and shuffled per the rules, and placed on the Entrance side of the board. Players choose one room to place a key token in their color, and several gray neutral key tokens are placed in other rooms. Unsuspecting travelers will be staying in these rooms each night. Per the rules, the greediest player is given the first player card and the mischief may begin!
The Bloody Inn is played over several rounds, and each round has players completing three phases: Welcome Travelers, Player Actions, and End of Round. Players will Welcome Travelers to signify the start of the round by the first player drawing one card from the deck at a time and choosing in which room they will be placed.
After Travelers have been welcomed and turn in for the evening, the second phase may begin: Player Actions. In turn order players will be able to perform two actions each round. Players may choose from five different actions, and actions can be repeated for the second action of the round. Players may Bribe a Guest by discarding cards from hand equal to the printed value on the target card’s front. Initially all players simply employ the two starter Peasants, so Bribing is only performed on cards that show a value of 0-2. When a player Bribes a guest, they essentially spend cards from hand to recruit the new guest to their employ. These new employees (accomplices) are then available to be used on future actions. One or two Peasants may also be Bribed from the bistro, adding to a player’s hand of usable human resources.
A player may instead choose to Kill a Guest by similarly discarding the appropriate number of accomplices and adding the freshly-slain guest to their tableau, face-down. The card backs feature a coffin with their “rank” (action number) printed on it. Corpses normally cause no issues, but they will need to be buried under an Annex in order to collect the money in their pockets. Players may use an action to Build an Annex by discarding the appropriate number of accomplices and using a card from hand to build and staff the Annex. Annexes can be used for the action printed on the card bottom, and/or as a housing for corpses, with the Corpses being sent to any player’s Annex via the Bury a Corpse action. Discard the requisite number of accomplices to bury a corpse, and avoid suspicion from the Law.
If none of these actions are attractive to the player, or if they simply wish, they may instead Pass and launder money from the village notary. To do this, either reduce the number of francs from the Wealth Track on the main board in order to gain a 10f check, or turn in a check for 10f on the Wealth Track.
Once all players have taken their two actions, the End of Round is performed. Firstly, if any Travelers remain belonging to the Police type (signified by pistol icons on the top of the card), they will conduct an investigation, finding any unburied corpses. Should a corpse be found in this way, the owning player will need to pay 10f for the local undertaker to dispose of the body respectfully. This not only costs the player 10f, but also the amount of money that could have been gained if they had only buried them or dealt with the Police traveler prior. Next, the Travelers who remain all wake up feeling refreshed and leave the inn by being placed in the discard pile. Once the board has been cleared of all Travelers, accomplices must be paid their wages for their help. For each accomplice in hand, the players must pay 1f from the Wealth Track.
Play continues in this fashion until the main Traveler deck has been depleted twice. Then, players add up their francs and the player with the most in francs and checks is the winner, and just the greatest little murderer/robber/briber in all the land!
Components. This game really has a modest amount of components, but they are all similarly great quality. The main board acts as the inn’s room display, the Wealth Track, AND the bistro (where Peasants are discarded, as opposed to being placed in the normal discard pile). I love when components pull double or triple duty. That said, the player aids not only remind the players of the phases and actions from which they may choose, but it also provides the player with a starter Annex that can be used to bury their first corpse! HOW COOL IS THAT?! However, the greatest thing that stands out in regards to the components is the overall look and feel of the game. The character artist for this one is Weberson Santiago, and he has also illustrated games such as the new Quest (the new version of The Resistance: Avalon), Coup, and the new Whirling Witchcraft. I adore his art style, even though I shouldn’t. My typical preference of character art is semi-realism (like that of Kwanchai Moriya), but this style is really unique and perfectly applied to the theme. Great matchup of artist and game here. I do have one silly wish for this game: PLEASE change the player colors. I mean, I am so tired of having the choice between red, blue, green, and yellow. Take a Cue from my good friend Scott Brady and use one of the more interesting color choices. I mean, even to fit in with the theme here a more appropriate palette could include a brown, black, orange, and yellow or something. Be bold!!
I knew right away that this was a great game for me. Yes, the theme is super dark and macabre, which is rare for me to enjoy, but I would only play this with adults anyway so I am unbothered by it. However, the puzzle that lies within this box is one that I thoroughly enjoy solving every round. What I neglected to mention up top is the fact that when actions are taken (Bribing, Killing, Building Annexes, and Burying Corpses) if you happen to have certain card types in hand, then the cost of discards is reduced by the number of cards present. For example, if I were to Bribe a Police card from the rooms in my first action, they have an affinity for killing (messed up, I know) and will thus help me to perform a Kill action on the next turn by reducing the number of accomplices I would need to discard for that action. Side benefit: by taking the Police Travelers off the board, they then will not perform their investigations in the morning.
Another aspect I truly enjoy about The Bloody Inn is that many cards have that dual-purpose mechanic I appreciate. The player aid is also an Annex. Brilliant! Many of the Annex cards can also offer one-time or recurring powers. It’s just so satisfying to grab cards that can combo well with each other in order to fulfill your evil plans. Every card is important, and when they can offer more than one benefit, I am a happy gamer.
I cannot express how happy I am to have decided to purchase this one. I have seen the BGG ratings and rankings, but always thought I wouldn’t like it due to its very adult theme, but boy was I wrong! This is one of the best games I have played recently and I hope to even bling it out a bit, maybe even with new player colors like I suggested earlier. Laura and my wife were able to join me for this one and they agree with me – this one is excellent and definitely worth consideration into anyone’s collection. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a dastardly 15 / 18. Yeah, it’s perfect for Halloweentime, but also for ANY time. If you are looking for something a little grim and grisly with lighter rules and lots of interesting choices, you need to check out The Bloody Inn. Grab lots of Police cards and go on a killing spree for me!
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Savages (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Over the past 15 years, Oliver Stone’s films have been kind of hit or miss to me. It’s as if Stone is still trying to make the same controversial films he became popular for in the 80’s and early 90’s. Only, as an audience, we have become keen to his filmmaking style and therefore his more recent work suffers from the apathy of a “show me something new” culture. Still, despite his failures, Stone does not makes apologies for his work while he continues in his quest to make films about controversial subjects. This time around Stone strives to take us into the violent world of the Mexican drug cartels though a film adaptation of the novel Savages by Don Winslow.
As the film opens we are introduced to “O” (Blake Lively) who, as our narrator, acquaints us with the open yet loving relationship she shares with our two protagonists, Chon and Ben. Chon (Taylor Kitsch), an ex-Navy SEAL, is unquestionably the muscle of the trio’s operation. Chon was the original financier for his high school friend Ben, (Aaron Johnson) the peaceful, charitable, botany genius who has created the most potent marijuana in the world. Together these two embody the perfect man for O, while the three of them enjoy the spoils of the small marijuana empire they created in southern California.
That is until they gain the attention from a Mexican cartel intent on creating a stronger foothold in the southern California area. The cartel offers them a partnership and explains that by teaming up their business will triple in three years. But when the trio refuse the offer, the ruthless head of the cartel, Elena (Selma Hayek), instructs her enforcer, Lado (Benicio Del Toro), to kidnap O and hold her hostage so the boys will cooperate. Soon our heroes use their network of connections, like crooked DEA agent Dennis (John Travolta) and financial broker Spin (Emile Hirsch), to battle the cartel in a series of savage maneuvers to get back their one “shared” love.
Stone has been known to inspire his actors to give Oscar worthy performances. Sadly, you will not find any such performances here. That is not to say that the acting was terrible. It just seemed that the characters themselves are uninspired which is a shame because I would have liked to have seen some growth in this young cast, especially from Taylor Kitsch.
I feel that many critics will be hard on Taylor Kitsch because of his previous epic fails of 2012 (John Carter and Battleship) however I am surprised to admit that, for this movie at least, he gets a pass in my book. Not because he delivers a fantastic performance that makes me believe he’s truly an up and coming talent, but rather because he is convincing in his portrayal of Chon. When O describes our protagonists as each being one half of the perfect man, she refers to Chon as “Hard Steel,” which is exactly what Kitsch plays him as, a one-dimensional, emotionally devoid character with no growth or any real redeeming qualities other than the ability to go to war. Regardless of whether or not Kitsch has any additional acting range not showcased in this film, I cannot penalize him for his performance in this movie. He fit the part that he was cast in fine.
Blake Lively (Gossip Girl, Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants) plays O, short for Ophelia. And yes she channels the mad, love-struck, melancholic character from Hamlet after whom she is named. And while it is easy to make those comparisons to the character of this film, they only appear to be on the surface, if anything. And herein lies the problem. Regardless of how you feel about her open relationship with Ben and Chon, the more I learned about her, the less I cared. Like Kitsch’s character, O is boring and one dimensional. She is the product of being a pretty little rich girl whose mother is off somewhere with husband number twelve. She has been getting stoned every day since she was young and the only place she finds herself loved is in with the company of Chon and Ben. Tragic, I know. While watching the film I honestly thought to myself, if I was Ben or Chon, I would say, “Fuck it. Cut her loose and let’s go to Asia.” She has no redeeming qualities other than being good looking and a good lay. So why would they go through so much trouble for her? The trio’s relationship is weakly tied together by her telling us through narration but never really materializes on screen. At times you get some of a feeling that Ben actually loves her but that love is never really reciprocated from O. It is safe to say that that I did not derive any loving connection from Lively’s performance, though her deliver as a narrator was tolerable.
Aaron Johnson (Kick-Ass) is the one redeeming performance from this young cast. In contrast to Chon, O describes Ben as “Soft Wood” which makes him the better half. Ben is the one character who actually goes through some kind of character arc and growth. Using the wood analogy, we watch him bend from the peaceful Buddhist businessman to the man who will sacrifice everything, to get back this woman he loves. Nowhere is this better embodied than when Ben is faced with the tough choice of sticking to his peaceful beliefs or incinerating a man in cold blood during one of their moves against the cartel. I found myself actually curious about what Ben would do next. Unlike Chon and O, Ben has some depth and struggles with his personal beliefs, his love for O and what needs to be done. Needless to say, Johnson delivers a believable performance that actually helps move along the action and was the only protagonist that kept me interested in their battle.
In addition to Johnson, the film is littered with several strong supporting cast members who all deliver solid performances. Selma Hayek is strong as Elena, the leader of the cartel that challenges Ben and Chon. She is a ruthless and shrewd businesswoman and yet has a better “sense of morality” as she explains during her interactions with O and her own daughter. Her enforcer Lado is played by Benicio Del Toro who, with the help of an uncomfortable rapist mustache, comes off as an extremely menacing character. Del Toro solidifies himself on screen by being down right creepy and yet intelligent in his own savage way. During every moment of screen time you expect him to kill someone just because it is good for business.
A needed bit of change of pace is provided by an unexpected performance by Emile Hirsch (Into the Wild) as Ben and Chon’s witty financial broker, Spin. As well as by John Travolta who plays Dennis, the dirty DEA agent who’s in Ben and Chon’s pocket. In fact, even though Travolta’s screen time is maybe a total of 12 minutes, his performance steals the show with his sole bit of comic relief, for lack of a better explanation. Perhaps the strongest acted moment of this film is during a standoff scene between Del Toro and Travolta that in many ways makes me want to know more about those characters. And what that movie would be about.
In typical Stone fashion the movie is shot in a variety of film angles and stylistic devices used to foreshadow and at times create a foreboding presence. Visually the movie provides a strong and believable feeling for the world these characters live in and the way that they operate their business. In addition, narration is used at points to move along the action and provide the audience with insight that otherwise would not have been possible on performances alone. I personally have no problem with narration as long as it is set up from the beginning and used to advance the story, which it is. However in the final act, the movie introduces a film device from left field that completely kills the already weak pacing of the movie. I cannot get into it without giving away the story, but I can see how this device could completely ruin the movie for those patrons who are already disinterested by the time the final act rolls around. Especially for those who do not find any connection to any of the characters. In which case, the pacing of this film will seem slow and drawn out.
I am torn about my review of this film. Savages is something that I wanted to like more than I did. Two of the three protagonists are one dimensional and if it was not for Johnson and the strong supporting cast I might have found the movie boring. It was also completely different from the expectations set by the commercials. Those looking for an action movie will feel misled and will more than likely be disappointed with the film. Not that there is not any action, only it comes between very long periods of dialogue and slow pacing. By the end of the movie, you are either invested in these characters or just waiting for the lights to come up in the theater. And in typical Oliver Stone fashion the movie tries to make us question our own perception of just what it means to be a savage.
As the film opens we are introduced to “O” (Blake Lively) who, as our narrator, acquaints us with the open yet loving relationship she shares with our two protagonists, Chon and Ben. Chon (Taylor Kitsch), an ex-Navy SEAL, is unquestionably the muscle of the trio’s operation. Chon was the original financier for his high school friend Ben, (Aaron Johnson) the peaceful, charitable, botany genius who has created the most potent marijuana in the world. Together these two embody the perfect man for O, while the three of them enjoy the spoils of the small marijuana empire they created in southern California.
That is until they gain the attention from a Mexican cartel intent on creating a stronger foothold in the southern California area. The cartel offers them a partnership and explains that by teaming up their business will triple in three years. But when the trio refuse the offer, the ruthless head of the cartel, Elena (Selma Hayek), instructs her enforcer, Lado (Benicio Del Toro), to kidnap O and hold her hostage so the boys will cooperate. Soon our heroes use their network of connections, like crooked DEA agent Dennis (John Travolta) and financial broker Spin (Emile Hirsch), to battle the cartel in a series of savage maneuvers to get back their one “shared” love.
Stone has been known to inspire his actors to give Oscar worthy performances. Sadly, you will not find any such performances here. That is not to say that the acting was terrible. It just seemed that the characters themselves are uninspired which is a shame because I would have liked to have seen some growth in this young cast, especially from Taylor Kitsch.
I feel that many critics will be hard on Taylor Kitsch because of his previous epic fails of 2012 (John Carter and Battleship) however I am surprised to admit that, for this movie at least, he gets a pass in my book. Not because he delivers a fantastic performance that makes me believe he’s truly an up and coming talent, but rather because he is convincing in his portrayal of Chon. When O describes our protagonists as each being one half of the perfect man, she refers to Chon as “Hard Steel,” which is exactly what Kitsch plays him as, a one-dimensional, emotionally devoid character with no growth or any real redeeming qualities other than the ability to go to war. Regardless of whether or not Kitsch has any additional acting range not showcased in this film, I cannot penalize him for his performance in this movie. He fit the part that he was cast in fine.
Blake Lively (Gossip Girl, Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants) plays O, short for Ophelia. And yes she channels the mad, love-struck, melancholic character from Hamlet after whom she is named. And while it is easy to make those comparisons to the character of this film, they only appear to be on the surface, if anything. And herein lies the problem. Regardless of how you feel about her open relationship with Ben and Chon, the more I learned about her, the less I cared. Like Kitsch’s character, O is boring and one dimensional. She is the product of being a pretty little rich girl whose mother is off somewhere with husband number twelve. She has been getting stoned every day since she was young and the only place she finds herself loved is in with the company of Chon and Ben. Tragic, I know. While watching the film I honestly thought to myself, if I was Ben or Chon, I would say, “Fuck it. Cut her loose and let’s go to Asia.” She has no redeeming qualities other than being good looking and a good lay. So why would they go through so much trouble for her? The trio’s relationship is weakly tied together by her telling us through narration but never really materializes on screen. At times you get some of a feeling that Ben actually loves her but that love is never really reciprocated from O. It is safe to say that that I did not derive any loving connection from Lively’s performance, though her deliver as a narrator was tolerable.
Aaron Johnson (Kick-Ass) is the one redeeming performance from this young cast. In contrast to Chon, O describes Ben as “Soft Wood” which makes him the better half. Ben is the one character who actually goes through some kind of character arc and growth. Using the wood analogy, we watch him bend from the peaceful Buddhist businessman to the man who will sacrifice everything, to get back this woman he loves. Nowhere is this better embodied than when Ben is faced with the tough choice of sticking to his peaceful beliefs or incinerating a man in cold blood during one of their moves against the cartel. I found myself actually curious about what Ben would do next. Unlike Chon and O, Ben has some depth and struggles with his personal beliefs, his love for O and what needs to be done. Needless to say, Johnson delivers a believable performance that actually helps move along the action and was the only protagonist that kept me interested in their battle.
In addition to Johnson, the film is littered with several strong supporting cast members who all deliver solid performances. Selma Hayek is strong as Elena, the leader of the cartel that challenges Ben and Chon. She is a ruthless and shrewd businesswoman and yet has a better “sense of morality” as she explains during her interactions with O and her own daughter. Her enforcer Lado is played by Benicio Del Toro who, with the help of an uncomfortable rapist mustache, comes off as an extremely menacing character. Del Toro solidifies himself on screen by being down right creepy and yet intelligent in his own savage way. During every moment of screen time you expect him to kill someone just because it is good for business.
A needed bit of change of pace is provided by an unexpected performance by Emile Hirsch (Into the Wild) as Ben and Chon’s witty financial broker, Spin. As well as by John Travolta who plays Dennis, the dirty DEA agent who’s in Ben and Chon’s pocket. In fact, even though Travolta’s screen time is maybe a total of 12 minutes, his performance steals the show with his sole bit of comic relief, for lack of a better explanation. Perhaps the strongest acted moment of this film is during a standoff scene between Del Toro and Travolta that in many ways makes me want to know more about those characters. And what that movie would be about.
In typical Stone fashion the movie is shot in a variety of film angles and stylistic devices used to foreshadow and at times create a foreboding presence. Visually the movie provides a strong and believable feeling for the world these characters live in and the way that they operate their business. In addition, narration is used at points to move along the action and provide the audience with insight that otherwise would not have been possible on performances alone. I personally have no problem with narration as long as it is set up from the beginning and used to advance the story, which it is. However in the final act, the movie introduces a film device from left field that completely kills the already weak pacing of the movie. I cannot get into it without giving away the story, but I can see how this device could completely ruin the movie for those patrons who are already disinterested by the time the final act rolls around. Especially for those who do not find any connection to any of the characters. In which case, the pacing of this film will seem slow and drawn out.
I am torn about my review of this film. Savages is something that I wanted to like more than I did. Two of the three protagonists are one dimensional and if it was not for Johnson and the strong supporting cast I might have found the movie boring. It was also completely different from the expectations set by the commercials. Those looking for an action movie will feel misled and will more than likely be disappointed with the film. Not that there is not any action, only it comes between very long periods of dialogue and slow pacing. By the end of the movie, you are either invested in these characters or just waiting for the lights to come up in the theater. And in typical Oliver Stone fashion the movie tries to make us question our own perception of just what it means to be a savage.