Search
Search results
David McK (3236 KP) rated Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016) in Movies
Dec 18, 2019 (Updated Jun 16, 2020)
"It is a period of civil war. Rebel spaceships, striking from a hidden base, have won their first victory against the evil Galactic Empire. During the battle, Rebel spies managed to steal secret plans to the Empire's ultimate weapon, the DEATH STAR, an armored space station with enough power to destroy an entire planet.
Pursued by the Enpire's sinister agents, Princess Leia races home abord her starship, custodian of the stolen plans that can save her people and restore freedom to the galaxy ..."
So reads the opening crawl to the first Star Wars film (otherwise known as "Episode IV: A New Hope"), with this opening crawl becoming a feature of all the Star Wars films to date.
That is, until this one - the first to NOT have an opening crawl, and the first to NOT focus on any of the Skywalkers. Instead, this film deals with what was originally only just described in that crawl; by the mission to steal those Death Star plans and, as such, is the first completely self-contained and stand-alone Star Wars film.
I'd heard this described as a war movie, and that's probably a pretty fair comparison - this is more serious than the other six (especially the prequel Trilogy), maybe a bit darker in places, with the Rebel Alliance not afraid of getting their hands dirty and not quite the idealists they were originally portrayed as.
As this is back in galactic Civil War territory, we also have the return of some of the original villains of the saga - it's no secret that Darth Vader casts a shadow over the film (while not being the main villain of it), with an extended sequence towards the end showing just why he was so feared, and probably destined to become - like the 3-way Qui-Gonn Jinn/Kenobi/Maul fight in 'The Phantom Menace', or Vader vs Luke in 'The Empire Strikes back' - one of the most talked about scenes in the entire saga.
(As an aside, and talking of scenes: yes, there are scenes shown in the trailers that don't make it to the final cut, but since I managed to avoid (most of) those trailers, I can't really comment on that.)
Maybe a tad slow in getting started, but the bombastic final act more than makes up for it!
Pursued by the Enpire's sinister agents, Princess Leia races home abord her starship, custodian of the stolen plans that can save her people and restore freedom to the galaxy ..."
So reads the opening crawl to the first Star Wars film (otherwise known as "Episode IV: A New Hope"), with this opening crawl becoming a feature of all the Star Wars films to date.
That is, until this one - the first to NOT have an opening crawl, and the first to NOT focus on any of the Skywalkers. Instead, this film deals with what was originally only just described in that crawl; by the mission to steal those Death Star plans and, as such, is the first completely self-contained and stand-alone Star Wars film.
I'd heard this described as a war movie, and that's probably a pretty fair comparison - this is more serious than the other six (especially the prequel Trilogy), maybe a bit darker in places, with the Rebel Alliance not afraid of getting their hands dirty and not quite the idealists they were originally portrayed as.
As this is back in galactic Civil War territory, we also have the return of some of the original villains of the saga - it's no secret that Darth Vader casts a shadow over the film (while not being the main villain of it), with an extended sequence towards the end showing just why he was so feared, and probably destined to become - like the 3-way Qui-Gonn Jinn/Kenobi/Maul fight in 'The Phantom Menace', or Vader vs Luke in 'The Empire Strikes back' - one of the most talked about scenes in the entire saga.
(As an aside, and talking of scenes: yes, there are scenes shown in the trailers that don't make it to the final cut, but since I managed to avoid (most of) those trailers, I can't really comment on that.)
Maybe a tad slow in getting started, but the bombastic final act more than makes up for it!
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Intern (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Ben is a widower who has tried to fill his time with routine and travel since his wife passed, but he is stuck in a rut. He feels unnecessary and lonely. On his way out of a grocery store Ben spies a flier for “Senior Interns”. He discovers that they actually mean Senior Citizens and not high school seniors, and he creates a video application outlining his qualifications and telling about himself.
Jules runs her company, which she started out of her home, with an attention to detail that insists on perfection, all the while it’s strangling her home life.
She neither remembers she agreed to, nor wants to utilize, an intern of any sort, let alone an out-to-pasture one as Ben appears to be.
With quiet persistence, a good dose of humor, and genuine caring, expertise and talent, Ben goes about proving to Jules just how much she needs his brand of help and how much value he can add to her operation.
I really enjoyed this film. For me, it had just the right amount of funny and sad and even a bit of action (entrenched in a totally impossible situation, and obviously for pure comic relief sake) that made it completely enjoyable to watch.
It is rated PG-13, but I think that even a youngster in the 10 or 11 year old range, provided they were mature enough to deal with the idea of infidelity inside a marriage, would be ok to see it too. The rating was given in part due to “brief strong language” but to be honest I can’t recall any very strong language, which honestly in this day & age is a refreshing change.
I love DeNiro in almost anything I see him in, and this was no exception. I have never had strong feelings either way regarding Anne Hathaway, but I liked her in this, paired against DeNiro. The rest of the cast did their job well, but for me sort of faded into the background against the 2 main characters.
I would give this film 4 out of 5 stars, and the 4 stars is only because it wasn’t a movie I came away with a feeling of “oh my gosh that was AMAZING”, and more that I came away thinking “that was really good, I really enjoyed it and I’m glad that I got to see it.”
Jules runs her company, which she started out of her home, with an attention to detail that insists on perfection, all the while it’s strangling her home life.
She neither remembers she agreed to, nor wants to utilize, an intern of any sort, let alone an out-to-pasture one as Ben appears to be.
With quiet persistence, a good dose of humor, and genuine caring, expertise and talent, Ben goes about proving to Jules just how much she needs his brand of help and how much value he can add to her operation.
I really enjoyed this film. For me, it had just the right amount of funny and sad and even a bit of action (entrenched in a totally impossible situation, and obviously for pure comic relief sake) that made it completely enjoyable to watch.
It is rated PG-13, but I think that even a youngster in the 10 or 11 year old range, provided they were mature enough to deal with the idea of infidelity inside a marriage, would be ok to see it too. The rating was given in part due to “brief strong language” but to be honest I can’t recall any very strong language, which honestly in this day & age is a refreshing change.
I love DeNiro in almost anything I see him in, and this was no exception. I have never had strong feelings either way regarding Anne Hathaway, but I liked her in this, paired against DeNiro. The rest of the cast did their job well, but for me sort of faded into the background against the 2 main characters.
I would give this film 4 out of 5 stars, and the 4 stars is only because it wasn’t a movie I came away with a feeling of “oh my gosh that was AMAZING”, and more that I came away thinking “that was really good, I really enjoyed it and I’m glad that I got to see it.”
Sensitivemuse (246 KP) rated Empire of Ruins in Books
Aug 15, 2018
Keeps Getting Better
Contains spoilers, click to show
***Possible spoilers you’ve been warned***
This series is so consistent and does not disappoint. So we covered the city, we covered the sea in the second book. Now it’s time to go into the deep jungles and go on an exciting adventure that involves natives, flying ships, an Egyptian temple placed in Australia (I know right?), which results in an Indiana Jones type of adventure but involves secret agents, spies, and horrible clockwork falcons that can kill.
You can’t get more exciting than this. It starts off at a good pace and it’s steady. I enjoyed how during the ‘down times’ there is focus on Modo and Octavia’s character development. Modo still has some childish characteristics in him but as the novel progresses he slowly gets over that and the change stands out. You really do feel for him as his appearance starts to affect him, especially with his relationship with Octavia. His encounter with the natives help him to be comfortable in his own skin and I think because of this he starts acting more headstrong and does the talk back to Mr Socrates (which was a great scene to read. Wowwweee Modo, you do that clap back because Mr Socrates sure can’t take it haha)
I felt for Modo when he reveals his true likeness to Octavia. I get where she’s coming from though. She had this mental picture of Modo and it was nothing like the real thing so of course she wouldn’t know how to react. It hurt to read though. I couldn’t even imagine how crush Modo would have felt considering how much he feels for Octavia.
The plot in itself was super good and filled with action during the last half of the novel. The bad guys run with their tail between their legs in this one (enjoyable to read no doubt) but they come back with a vengeance towards the end. I rather expected the temple to be a little more of a challenge to go through (more traps please) but then perhaps that would prolong the adventure just a little too much.
I’m wanting to know what’s going to happen between Modo and Mr Socrates considering they had a falling out in the novel. This is going to get good and I hope the fourth and final novel will close this on a good note. Greatly recommend this series so far, pick it up and enjoy! It’s a great adventure!
This series is so consistent and does not disappoint. So we covered the city, we covered the sea in the second book. Now it’s time to go into the deep jungles and go on an exciting adventure that involves natives, flying ships, an Egyptian temple placed in Australia (I know right?), which results in an Indiana Jones type of adventure but involves secret agents, spies, and horrible clockwork falcons that can kill.
You can’t get more exciting than this. It starts off at a good pace and it’s steady. I enjoyed how during the ‘down times’ there is focus on Modo and Octavia’s character development. Modo still has some childish characteristics in him but as the novel progresses he slowly gets over that and the change stands out. You really do feel for him as his appearance starts to affect him, especially with his relationship with Octavia. His encounter with the natives help him to be comfortable in his own skin and I think because of this he starts acting more headstrong and does the talk back to Mr Socrates (which was a great scene to read. Wowwweee Modo, you do that clap back because Mr Socrates sure can’t take it haha)
I felt for Modo when he reveals his true likeness to Octavia. I get where she’s coming from though. She had this mental picture of Modo and it was nothing like the real thing so of course she wouldn’t know how to react. It hurt to read though. I couldn’t even imagine how crush Modo would have felt considering how much he feels for Octavia.
The plot in itself was super good and filled with action during the last half of the novel. The bad guys run with their tail between their legs in this one (enjoyable to read no doubt) but they come back with a vengeance towards the end. I rather expected the temple to be a little more of a challenge to go through (more traps please) but then perhaps that would prolong the adventure just a little too much.
I’m wanting to know what’s going to happen between Modo and Mr Socrates considering they had a falling out in the novel. This is going to get good and I hope the fourth and final novel will close this on a good note. Greatly recommend this series so far, pick it up and enjoy! It’s a great adventure!
Darren (1599 KP) rated Allied (2016) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Allied starts as Canadian Intelligence Officer Max Vatan (Pitt) lands in Morocco to work with French Resistance Fighter Marianna Beausejour (Cotillard) as they pretend to be married as they complete their mission. The two fall in love for real and return to London to get married against the his superior Frank Heslop (Harris) opinion.
After a year of marriage Heslop comes to Max believing Marianna is indeed a spy, this leaves Max questioning, which side of the story to believe and what is the truth.
Thoughts on Allied
Characters – Max Vatan is Canadian intelligence working in Africa, highly skilled he can blend into his environment, but he does fall in love with his undercover wife. When he gets informed she could well be a spy, his life is turned upside down with doubts about what is the truth. Marianna is the French resistance fighter working with the Canadian Max as his fake wife, but she also falls in love with Max and returns to start a family with him. We don’t learn too much apart from that she is a loving wife and mother though.
Performances – Brad Pitt is good for the opening mission, you believe his every decision, but when he becomes the family man, he just doesn’t reach the levels you know he can. Marion Cotillard is good without being her breath-taking best in this role.
Story – The story here follows love and spies during World War II, we see how two people from different sides of the war fall in love and they must decide which side of the war they are supporting. This film doesn’t become as intense as it could be because seeing it from both sides could have heighted the experience and by the end it just doesn’t feel like it reaches the levels it should.
Action/Romance/War – The action during the film is tame with very little being used or looking overly real. The romance doesn’t feel whirlwind like you think it should be either, but the war side comes off strong as we see how the tension between the sides cause most of the issues in the lives.
Settings – The settings look authentic for the time, which does work well for the film.
Scene of the Movie – The truth.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Just fizzles out in the second half of the film.
Final Thoughts – This is a war romance film that just never reaches the levels it should do, it just seems to go on and becomes one of the average films that you forget by the end.
Overall: Average and disappointing.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/02/01/abc-film-challenge-oscar-nomination-a-allied-2016/
After a year of marriage Heslop comes to Max believing Marianna is indeed a spy, this leaves Max questioning, which side of the story to believe and what is the truth.
Thoughts on Allied
Characters – Max Vatan is Canadian intelligence working in Africa, highly skilled he can blend into his environment, but he does fall in love with his undercover wife. When he gets informed she could well be a spy, his life is turned upside down with doubts about what is the truth. Marianna is the French resistance fighter working with the Canadian Max as his fake wife, but she also falls in love with Max and returns to start a family with him. We don’t learn too much apart from that she is a loving wife and mother though.
Performances – Brad Pitt is good for the opening mission, you believe his every decision, but when he becomes the family man, he just doesn’t reach the levels you know he can. Marion Cotillard is good without being her breath-taking best in this role.
Story – The story here follows love and spies during World War II, we see how two people from different sides of the war fall in love and they must decide which side of the war they are supporting. This film doesn’t become as intense as it could be because seeing it from both sides could have heighted the experience and by the end it just doesn’t feel like it reaches the levels it should.
Action/Romance/War – The action during the film is tame with very little being used or looking overly real. The romance doesn’t feel whirlwind like you think it should be either, but the war side comes off strong as we see how the tension between the sides cause most of the issues in the lives.
Settings – The settings look authentic for the time, which does work well for the film.
Scene of the Movie – The truth.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Just fizzles out in the second half of the film.
Final Thoughts – This is a war romance film that just never reaches the levels it should do, it just seems to go on and becomes one of the average films that you forget by the end.
Overall: Average and disappointing.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/02/01/abc-film-challenge-oscar-nomination-a-allied-2016/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Atomic Blonde (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Say hello to Mrs. John Wick
David Leitch is one of the most exciting film-makers of the current crop of directors working today. His brilliant John Wick reignited Keanu Reeves’ career in spectacular fashion and he’s worked behind-the-scenes on films like Captain America: Civil War and Jurassic World.
Just this year he signed on to direct Deadpool 2 after Tim Miller’s sudden departure. In the meantime, he’s treating us to another adults-only thriller, Atomic Blonde. But is this Charlize Theron-led vehicle as good as his previous work?
Sensual and savage, Lorraine Broughton (Charlize Theron) is the most elite spy in MI6, an agent willing to use all her skills to stay alive during impossible missions. With the Berlin Wall ready to crumble, she travels into the middle of the city to retrieve a dossier and take down an espionage ring. Once there, she teams up with an embedded station chief (James McAvoy) to navigate her way through the deadliest game of spies.
Charlize Theron is fast-becoming one of Hollywood’s most bankable stars after decent turns in Fast & Furious 8 and Mad Max: Fury Road. In Atomic Blonde this is no exception. She commands the screen in each and every frame, oozing class and showing the world she is a first-class action superstar.
The rest of the cast are also exquisite. James McAvoy can do no wrong this year after his out-of-this-world performance in Split, and his David Percival here is fleshed out, well-written and beautifully acted. Elsewhere, John Goodman and Toby Jones add even more prowess to proceedings.
Add to this some stunning cinematography and you’ve got a recipe for success. Atomic Blonde relishes the era in which it is presented with a magnificent soundtrack and beautiful direction. Leitch makes the film feel very much alive, with brutally realistic action shot without needless shaky cam or over-the-top scoring.
Unfortunately, the story is less successful. If Theron is the living, beating heart of Atomic Blonde, the script nearly strangles her. It is nearly impossible to truly understand what is happening on screen as the plot throws more twists and turns at the audience than Spaghetti Junction. Ordinarily, this would be great, but here it’s distracting and nonsensical.
Nevertheless, this is a vastly entertaining film, very much in the same vein of John Wick. In fact, it’d be fantastic if we could see these two characters brought together in a crossover of epic proportions.
Overall, David Leitch hasn’t quite recaptured the success of his first feature film but has managed to craft a highly stylised and quick-moving thriller that feels very real and utilises its exceptional cast incredibly well, with Charlize Theron being an absolute delight. It’s just unfortunate the plot is a bit of a damp squib.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/08/10/atomic-blonde-review-say-hello-to-mrs-john-wick/
Just this year he signed on to direct Deadpool 2 after Tim Miller’s sudden departure. In the meantime, he’s treating us to another adults-only thriller, Atomic Blonde. But is this Charlize Theron-led vehicle as good as his previous work?
Sensual and savage, Lorraine Broughton (Charlize Theron) is the most elite spy in MI6, an agent willing to use all her skills to stay alive during impossible missions. With the Berlin Wall ready to crumble, she travels into the middle of the city to retrieve a dossier and take down an espionage ring. Once there, she teams up with an embedded station chief (James McAvoy) to navigate her way through the deadliest game of spies.
Charlize Theron is fast-becoming one of Hollywood’s most bankable stars after decent turns in Fast & Furious 8 and Mad Max: Fury Road. In Atomic Blonde this is no exception. She commands the screen in each and every frame, oozing class and showing the world she is a first-class action superstar.
The rest of the cast are also exquisite. James McAvoy can do no wrong this year after his out-of-this-world performance in Split, and his David Percival here is fleshed out, well-written and beautifully acted. Elsewhere, John Goodman and Toby Jones add even more prowess to proceedings.
Add to this some stunning cinematography and you’ve got a recipe for success. Atomic Blonde relishes the era in which it is presented with a magnificent soundtrack and beautiful direction. Leitch makes the film feel very much alive, with brutally realistic action shot without needless shaky cam or over-the-top scoring.
Unfortunately, the story is less successful. If Theron is the living, beating heart of Atomic Blonde, the script nearly strangles her. It is nearly impossible to truly understand what is happening on screen as the plot throws more twists and turns at the audience than Spaghetti Junction. Ordinarily, this would be great, but here it’s distracting and nonsensical.
Nevertheless, this is a vastly entertaining film, very much in the same vein of John Wick. In fact, it’d be fantastic if we could see these two characters brought together in a crossover of epic proportions.
Overall, David Leitch hasn’t quite recaptured the success of his first feature film but has managed to craft a highly stylised and quick-moving thriller that feels very real and utilises its exceptional cast incredibly well, with Charlize Theron being an absolute delight. It’s just unfortunate the plot is a bit of a damp squib.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/08/10/atomic-blonde-review-say-hello-to-mrs-john-wick/
Lee (2222 KP) rated The Spy Who Dumped Me (2018) in Movies
Aug 21, 2018
Not enough comedy (1 more)
Drags on way too long
More action spy movie than comedy
In recent years, whenever I go to watch a comedy at the cinema, I come away totally disappointed, and end up going off on a rant about the state of movie comedies these days when I review them afterwards. Mostly, these movies have a very simple plot premise, which they then just try and plaster over with a tonne of gross out scenes or poorly written 'comedy' set-pieces. Other times they feature a bit more story and plot, with the humour being more of an add-on. The Spy Who Dumped Me veers more towards the latter, ending up as more of an above average action spy movie than a comedy.
Mila Kunis is Audrey, celebrating her birthday in a bar. Only her celebrations have been ruined somewhat by the fact that her boyfriend Drew (Justin Theroux) recently dumped her. By text! She's with best friend Morgan (Kate McKinnon), and as they complain about Drew, we see that he's in a spot of bother of his own over in Europe - taking out bad guys in a market shootout, getting chased through somebody's apartment while the owners watch TV, jumping out of a window onto a truck, and casually strolling out of a building as it explodes behind him. But when Audrey sends him yet another text, this time threatening to burn all of his stuff, Drew quickly gets in touch with her. Turns out that a small trophy in among his little box of dirty undies and other possessions is the key to saving a lot of people, and the bad guys want to get their hands on it at all costs. So, Audrey and Morgan unwittingly become involved in the world of spies and villains, traveling around Europe and bumbling their way through all manner of problems to ensure that the trophy finds its way into the right hands.
As mentioned earlier, every effort has been made to make sure that this is a high action spy movie along the lines of the Bourne and Mission Impossible movies. The aforementioned escape from the bad guys, a huge restaurant shootout, a deadly villain, a high speed street chase involving cars, motorbikes and guns, not to mention almost as much double crossing/who can you trust shenanigans than MI: Fallout recently, are all present and presented really well. All the while, Audrey and Morgan bring lighthearted relief and humour to it all. Kunis and McKinnon doing exactly what we're used to from their separate movie comedies but coming together here as a really likeable team and with a good supporting cast too.
Overall, The Spy Who Dumped Me isn't too bad, but it isn't too great either. It also seemed to drag on way too much for my liking and I would have preferred a much tighter movie, with a few more laughs. Still fairly enjoyable though.
Mila Kunis is Audrey, celebrating her birthday in a bar. Only her celebrations have been ruined somewhat by the fact that her boyfriend Drew (Justin Theroux) recently dumped her. By text! She's with best friend Morgan (Kate McKinnon), and as they complain about Drew, we see that he's in a spot of bother of his own over in Europe - taking out bad guys in a market shootout, getting chased through somebody's apartment while the owners watch TV, jumping out of a window onto a truck, and casually strolling out of a building as it explodes behind him. But when Audrey sends him yet another text, this time threatening to burn all of his stuff, Drew quickly gets in touch with her. Turns out that a small trophy in among his little box of dirty undies and other possessions is the key to saving a lot of people, and the bad guys want to get their hands on it at all costs. So, Audrey and Morgan unwittingly become involved in the world of spies and villains, traveling around Europe and bumbling their way through all manner of problems to ensure that the trophy finds its way into the right hands.
As mentioned earlier, every effort has been made to make sure that this is a high action spy movie along the lines of the Bourne and Mission Impossible movies. The aforementioned escape from the bad guys, a huge restaurant shootout, a deadly villain, a high speed street chase involving cars, motorbikes and guns, not to mention almost as much double crossing/who can you trust shenanigans than MI: Fallout recently, are all present and presented really well. All the while, Audrey and Morgan bring lighthearted relief and humour to it all. Kunis and McKinnon doing exactly what we're used to from their separate movie comedies but coming together here as a really likeable team and with a good supporting cast too.
Overall, The Spy Who Dumped Me isn't too bad, but it isn't too great either. It also seemed to drag on way too much for my liking and I would have preferred a much tighter movie, with a few more laughs. Still fairly enjoyable though.
Russell Evans (179 KP) rated Tyrants of the Underdark in Tabletop Games
Feb 24, 2020 (Updated Feb 24, 2020)
Interesting deck building mechanics (3 more)
Several different viable strategic options
Quick paced, easy to learn to play
Great artwork on cards
A quick paced game of fantasy deck building strategy, skilfully mixed with area control
This game mixes up a couple of game genres, but it balances them really well. I brought this game as my teenage son is a D&D fan and we have played it many times now. We’ve enjoyed it, so we also brought the expansion decks – which, for me, is always the sign of a good game. The game is pretty easy to learn, and once you have the grasp of the game mechanics, the turns flow smoothly and quickly. A 3 player game takes us just over an hour to play.
A brief overview of the Game
Each player controls a Drow house in the Underdark, competing to take control by getting the most Victory Points at the end of the game. Victory points are gained from various sources, for example, controlling locations on the board, assassinating your rivals troops, card abilities, cards owned in your deck or promoted.
Each turn the player draws cards from their own deck that determine what they can do in their turn. There are several different strategies you can pursue to try and win – subterfuge, violence, using spies, gathering a powerful deck etc. You can use influence that you gain in the game to buy new cards from the communal market to expand your deck and buy new minions with a range of different abilities. Random card drawers in the market can be frustrating when your opponents get the card you want straight after your turn, but that’s the nature of the game. Some of the cards can seem super–powered but there are several of these, so we find it balances out overall.
The promotion mechanic is rather interesting - it gives you the dilemma of promoting a card to gain increased victory points but means that the card (and its abilities) aren’t available for you to use for rest of the game. Do you hang on to it a bit longer to use that awesome ability and risk the game ending before you can promote that card for loads more victory points?
There are 4 decks included in the base game; Drow, Dragons, Elementals and Demons and they all play very differently. You use a mix of 2 decks each game, so that adds a bit of variety and re-playability. (Add in the 2 from the expansion for a bit more – Aberrations and Undead.)
Also worth mentioning; the artwork on the cards is nice and the board is good too.
I think Tyrants of the Underdark is a very enjoyable game and it gets a solid 9/10. I just wish there were some more expansions for it.
A brief overview of the Game
Each player controls a Drow house in the Underdark, competing to take control by getting the most Victory Points at the end of the game. Victory points are gained from various sources, for example, controlling locations on the board, assassinating your rivals troops, card abilities, cards owned in your deck or promoted.
Each turn the player draws cards from their own deck that determine what they can do in their turn. There are several different strategies you can pursue to try and win – subterfuge, violence, using spies, gathering a powerful deck etc. You can use influence that you gain in the game to buy new cards from the communal market to expand your deck and buy new minions with a range of different abilities. Random card drawers in the market can be frustrating when your opponents get the card you want straight after your turn, but that’s the nature of the game. Some of the cards can seem super–powered but there are several of these, so we find it balances out overall.
The promotion mechanic is rather interesting - it gives you the dilemma of promoting a card to gain increased victory points but means that the card (and its abilities) aren’t available for you to use for rest of the game. Do you hang on to it a bit longer to use that awesome ability and risk the game ending before you can promote that card for loads more victory points?
There are 4 decks included in the base game; Drow, Dragons, Elementals and Demons and they all play very differently. You use a mix of 2 decks each game, so that adds a bit of variety and re-playability. (Add in the 2 from the expansion for a bit more – Aberrations and Undead.)
Also worth mentioning; the artwork on the cards is nice and the board is good too.
I think Tyrants of the Underdark is a very enjoyable game and it gets a solid 9/10. I just wish there were some more expansions for it.
Night Reader Reviews (683 KP) rated Secrets in Books
Nov 18, 2020
Interesting book
Secrets by Victoria E Kuhnhardt is an interesting book about spies and you guessed it, secrets. A young teen’s world is turned upside down and she no longer knows who to trust or who anyone is for that matter. As it is a relatively short book the avid reader could finish it within a week easily.
Posy Waiters’s is a fifteen year old girl who has always questioned her parent’s love for her. This is mainly because she hardly knows them since they travel all the time for work and rarely see her. Sometimes they even forget to send her a card on her birthday. Posy lives all alone except for the live-in nanny who is only there for the money Posy’s parents are paying her. One day all this suddenly changes.
Posy’s parents tragically die and leave Posy to their friends whom Posy has never even heard of let alone met. Her greedy nanny doesn't even stick around to help her pack after hearing the news. Now Posy is living in San Francisco with the Forests but things are not quite what she thinks. While exploring the cellar of her new home Posy discovers something that will change her life forever.
I just loved how many twists there were in this book, some of which actually surprised me. One of the biggest surprises actually appeared at the very end of the book and was a real shocker (though it left a bunch of questions I feel will go unanswered as I don’t believe there is a sequel coming). I also enjoyed the loyalty and non-judgmental attitude for the friends, a rare trait anymore. There are quite a few errors in the book but that is not my largest complaint. My main issue is just how oblivious Posy and Alex are frequently. I also felt like the author occasionally forgot how old (or young) the characters are, such as when a sixteen year old Posy buys a cocktail dress.
Teens to young adults would probably like this book the most. This is largely because it doesn't go into a lot of detail. I also don’t believe the unanswered questions will bother younger readers as much. However, incest is a big subject in this book (and sex is hinted at) and those unable to handle it should refrain from reading this book. I rate this book 2 out of 4 or 3 out of 5. The book would have been much better if it answered ore of the question that it created. That along with the errors and age appropriate behavior (or lack there of) of the characters really damaged my view of the book. If going off of the plot alone I would say the book is extremely good.
Posy Waiters’s is a fifteen year old girl who has always questioned her parent’s love for her. This is mainly because she hardly knows them since they travel all the time for work and rarely see her. Sometimes they even forget to send her a card on her birthday. Posy lives all alone except for the live-in nanny who is only there for the money Posy’s parents are paying her. One day all this suddenly changes.
Posy’s parents tragically die and leave Posy to their friends whom Posy has never even heard of let alone met. Her greedy nanny doesn't even stick around to help her pack after hearing the news. Now Posy is living in San Francisco with the Forests but things are not quite what she thinks. While exploring the cellar of her new home Posy discovers something that will change her life forever.
I just loved how many twists there were in this book, some of which actually surprised me. One of the biggest surprises actually appeared at the very end of the book and was a real shocker (though it left a bunch of questions I feel will go unanswered as I don’t believe there is a sequel coming). I also enjoyed the loyalty and non-judgmental attitude for the friends, a rare trait anymore. There are quite a few errors in the book but that is not my largest complaint. My main issue is just how oblivious Posy and Alex are frequently. I also felt like the author occasionally forgot how old (or young) the characters are, such as when a sixteen year old Posy buys a cocktail dress.
Teens to young adults would probably like this book the most. This is largely because it doesn't go into a lot of detail. I also don’t believe the unanswered questions will bother younger readers as much. However, incest is a big subject in this book (and sex is hinted at) and those unable to handle it should refrain from reading this book. I rate this book 2 out of 4 or 3 out of 5. The book would have been much better if it answered ore of the question that it created. That along with the errors and age appropriate behavior (or lack there of) of the characters really damaged my view of the book. If going off of the plot alone I would say the book is extremely good.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Outfit (2022) in Movies
Jul 1, 2022
Smart, Intelligent and Understated
So much of the success or failure of a film at the Cineplex Box Office depends on the marketing of the film and the timing of it’s release. In the case of the wonderful crime drama THE OUTFIT (who’s release was buried in late January/early February 2022), the marketing did it no favors.
And that’s too bad, for this Mark Rylance film - which could easily be a stage play - is an intriguing SMART cat and mouse drama between some mob types and their tailor.
Yes, their tailor.
Rylance stars as Leonard, a tailor (he prefers to be called a “cutter”), who has a shop in Chicago in the 1950’s, THE OUTFIT tells the tale of said cutter who’s business is booming thanks to patronage of local gangsters (the titular OUTFIT) who not only frequent his shop for suits, but also to use it as a place to make “drops”. The intrigue of this film comes when “things get real” for THE OUTFIT and they use Leonard’s shop as a hideout. Leonard must outsmart the outfit - and their foes - if he hopes to survive the night.
It’s a smart premise made all the more interesting by the understated performance by Rylance who, once again, shows that his genial demeanor is disguising a very intelligent and fast-working brain. It is another in a long string of strong performances by Rylance (who won a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his work in 2015’s BRIDGE OF SPIES).
Rylance is joined on screen by some very good performances by Zoey Deutch (ZOMBIELAND DOUBLETAP), Johnny Flynn (EMMA), Stage Actor Simon Russell Beale (THE DEATH OF STALIN) and, most surprisingly, Dylan O’Brien (THE MAZE RUNNER). They bring a Broadway stage performance sense of style to this work - and it is absolutely the right approach to this material, for the entire film takes place inside Leonard’s tailor shop.
Credit for this must go to Director Graham Moore (THE IMITATION GAME) who wrote this film with Johnathan McClain. He has a firm grip on what he is attempting to do - and he does it well. He sets up the premise and the players well and then pays off the circumstances - sometimes surprisingly - in satisfying ways. It is a strong showing by Moore and I’ll be looking to see what he does next.
Intelligent, understated, stage-like, smart…no wonder the suits at Universal had no idea how to market it.
So, I’ll market/champion this film that perfectly casts Rylance. He is in almost every scene and it is his intense and interesting performance that will pull you into his shop - and into the world of the OUTFIT.
Check it out - you’ll be glad you did.
THE OUTFIT is streaming for free for those of you subscribed to PEACOCK and can be rented (or bought) on most of the major outlets for those types of things.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And that’s too bad, for this Mark Rylance film - which could easily be a stage play - is an intriguing SMART cat and mouse drama between some mob types and their tailor.
Yes, their tailor.
Rylance stars as Leonard, a tailor (he prefers to be called a “cutter”), who has a shop in Chicago in the 1950’s, THE OUTFIT tells the tale of said cutter who’s business is booming thanks to patronage of local gangsters (the titular OUTFIT) who not only frequent his shop for suits, but also to use it as a place to make “drops”. The intrigue of this film comes when “things get real” for THE OUTFIT and they use Leonard’s shop as a hideout. Leonard must outsmart the outfit - and their foes - if he hopes to survive the night.
It’s a smart premise made all the more interesting by the understated performance by Rylance who, once again, shows that his genial demeanor is disguising a very intelligent and fast-working brain. It is another in a long string of strong performances by Rylance (who won a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his work in 2015’s BRIDGE OF SPIES).
Rylance is joined on screen by some very good performances by Zoey Deutch (ZOMBIELAND DOUBLETAP), Johnny Flynn (EMMA), Stage Actor Simon Russell Beale (THE DEATH OF STALIN) and, most surprisingly, Dylan O’Brien (THE MAZE RUNNER). They bring a Broadway stage performance sense of style to this work - and it is absolutely the right approach to this material, for the entire film takes place inside Leonard’s tailor shop.
Credit for this must go to Director Graham Moore (THE IMITATION GAME) who wrote this film with Johnathan McClain. He has a firm grip on what he is attempting to do - and he does it well. He sets up the premise and the players well and then pays off the circumstances - sometimes surprisingly - in satisfying ways. It is a strong showing by Moore and I’ll be looking to see what he does next.
Intelligent, understated, stage-like, smart…no wonder the suits at Universal had no idea how to market it.
So, I’ll market/champion this film that perfectly casts Rylance. He is in almost every scene and it is his intense and interesting performance that will pull you into his shop - and into the world of the OUTFIT.
Check it out - you’ll be glad you did.
THE OUTFIT is streaming for free for those of you subscribed to PEACOCK and can be rented (or bought) on most of the major outlets for those types of things.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Post (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Landing the Hindenburg in a Thunderstorm.
What a combination: Streep, Hanks, Spielberg, Kaminski behind the camera, Williams behind the notes. What could possibly go wrong?
Nothing as it turns out. After, for me, the disappointment of “The BFG” here is Spielberg on firm ground and at the height of his game.
It’s 1971 and the New York Times is in trouble for publishing what became known as “The Pentagon Papers”: a damning account of multiple administration’s dodgy dealings around the Vietnam War, put together by Robert McNamara (Bruce Greenwood, “Star Trek: Into Darkness“) and meant for “posterity” – not for publication! Watching from the sidelines with frustration at their competitor’s scoop are the Washington Post’s editor Ben Bradlee (Tom Hanks, “Bridge of Spies“, “Inferno“) and the new owner Kay Graham (Meryl Streep, “Florence Foster Jenkins“, “Suffragette“). With immaculate timing, Graham is taking the paper public, so needs the newspaper embroiled in any sort of scandal like a hole in the head. But with the US First Amendment under pressure, will Graham and Bradlee put their business and their freedom at risk by publishing and being damned?
Bradlee (Tom Hanks) and Graham (Meryl Streep) in the Washington Post’s newsroom.
Both of the leads play characters that are quite strikingly out of character from their normal roles.
In a seamingly endless run of ‘kick-ass’ women in the movie driving seat, here I expected Streep to be in full “Iron Lady” mode, but in fact she starts the film as quite the opposite: nervous, timid, vascillating. For although the story is about “The Washington Post” and “The Pentagon Papers”, the real story is about Graham herself (Liz Hannah’s script is actually based on Graham’s autobiography). In many ways it’s about a woman, in a male world, overcoming her fear and finding her own voice. As has been demonstrated in many recent films (“Hidden Figures” for example) the working world for woman has changed so markedly since the 60’s and 70’s that it’s almost impossible to relate to these chavenistic attitudes. Graham is repeatedly downtrodden as “not good enough” by her underlings within earshot, and then thanks them “for their frankness”. When the women folk retire at dinner, to let the men-folk talk politics, Graham meekly goes with them. Even her father, for God’s sake, left the newspaper not to her but to her (now late) husband! It’s no surprise then that she is coming from a pretty low base of self-confidence, and her journey in the film – as expertly played by Streep – is an extraordinarily rousing one.
The real deal: Ben Bradlee and Kay Graham.
Hanks, normally the guy you’d most like to invite round for dinner (@tomhanks if you happen to be reading this sir, that’s a genuine invitation… we make a mean lasagne here!) also plays somewhat outside of his normal character here. As Bradlee, he is snappy, brusque and businesslike. Although I don’t think he could ever quite match the irascibility of the character’s portrayal by Jason Robards in the classic “All the President’s Men” – who could? – its a character with real screen presence.
The similarities with Alan J Pakula’s 1976 classic Watergate movie – one of my personal favourites – don’t stop there. The same sets that were once populated by Redford and Hoffman are gloriously reproduced with Spielberg and Janusz Kaminski delivering great tracking shots through the newsroom. (Watch out for Sacha Spielberg – daughter of Stephen and Kate Capshaw – who also turns up there delivering a package).
The scoop revealed: Odenkirk, Hanks and David Cross get the low-down.
The supporting cast includes Sarah Paulson (so memorable in “The Trial of O.J. Simpson”) as Bradlee’s wife Tony, Bradley Whitford (“The West Wing”, “Get Out“) and Tracy Letts (“The Big Short“) as two of Graham’s board advisors and Jesse Plemons (“The Program“, “Bridge of Spies“) as the lead legal advisor. Particularly impressive though is Bob Odenkirk (“Breaking Bad”) as Ben Bagdikian, Bradlee’s lead investigative reporter on the case: all stress, loose change and paranoia in his dealings with the leaky Daniel Ellsberg (Matthew Rhys).
Bagdikian (Bob Odenkirk) ordering a drink for himself and his travelling companion.
In a memorable piece of casting Richard Nixon is played by…. Richard Nixon. Although a silluohetted Curzon Dobell stalks the Oval office, the ex-president’s original phone recordings are played on the soundtrack. (There, I knew those recordings would be useful for something… thank heavens he kept them all!)
The film also demonstrates in fascinating style the newsprint business of yesteryear. When I click a button on my PC and a beautifully laser-printed page streams out of my Epson printer, it still seems like witchcraft to me! But it is extraordinary to think that newspapers in those days were put together by typesetters manually building up the pages from embossed metal letters laboriously slotted into a frame. Brilliantly evocative.
Ellsberg (Matthew Rhys) takes a risk.
If Spielberg has a fault, it is one of sentimentality – something that is pointed out in Susan Lacy’s superb HBO documentary on Spielberg (something I have yet to write a review on, but if you like Spielberg you should definitely seek out). Here he falls into that trap again, with an unnecessary bedroom scene between Graham and her daughter tipping the screenplay into mawkishness. It’s unnecessary since we don’t need the points raised rammed down our throats again. It’s something repeated in a rather bizarre final scene with Graham walking down the steps of the supreme court with admiring woman – only woman – watching her. These irritations tarnish for me what could have been a top-rated film.
But the movie is an impressive watch and older viewers, and anyone interested in American political history will, I think, love it. The film, especially with its nice epilogue, did make me immediately want to come home and put “All the President’s Men” on again… which is never a bad thing. Highly recommended.
Nothing as it turns out. After, for me, the disappointment of “The BFG” here is Spielberg on firm ground and at the height of his game.
It’s 1971 and the New York Times is in trouble for publishing what became known as “The Pentagon Papers”: a damning account of multiple administration’s dodgy dealings around the Vietnam War, put together by Robert McNamara (Bruce Greenwood, “Star Trek: Into Darkness“) and meant for “posterity” – not for publication! Watching from the sidelines with frustration at their competitor’s scoop are the Washington Post’s editor Ben Bradlee (Tom Hanks, “Bridge of Spies“, “Inferno“) and the new owner Kay Graham (Meryl Streep, “Florence Foster Jenkins“, “Suffragette“). With immaculate timing, Graham is taking the paper public, so needs the newspaper embroiled in any sort of scandal like a hole in the head. But with the US First Amendment under pressure, will Graham and Bradlee put their business and their freedom at risk by publishing and being damned?
Bradlee (Tom Hanks) and Graham (Meryl Streep) in the Washington Post’s newsroom.
Both of the leads play characters that are quite strikingly out of character from their normal roles.
In a seamingly endless run of ‘kick-ass’ women in the movie driving seat, here I expected Streep to be in full “Iron Lady” mode, but in fact she starts the film as quite the opposite: nervous, timid, vascillating. For although the story is about “The Washington Post” and “The Pentagon Papers”, the real story is about Graham herself (Liz Hannah’s script is actually based on Graham’s autobiography). In many ways it’s about a woman, in a male world, overcoming her fear and finding her own voice. As has been demonstrated in many recent films (“Hidden Figures” for example) the working world for woman has changed so markedly since the 60’s and 70’s that it’s almost impossible to relate to these chavenistic attitudes. Graham is repeatedly downtrodden as “not good enough” by her underlings within earshot, and then thanks them “for their frankness”. When the women folk retire at dinner, to let the men-folk talk politics, Graham meekly goes with them. Even her father, for God’s sake, left the newspaper not to her but to her (now late) husband! It’s no surprise then that she is coming from a pretty low base of self-confidence, and her journey in the film – as expertly played by Streep – is an extraordinarily rousing one.
The real deal: Ben Bradlee and Kay Graham.
Hanks, normally the guy you’d most like to invite round for dinner (@tomhanks if you happen to be reading this sir, that’s a genuine invitation… we make a mean lasagne here!) also plays somewhat outside of his normal character here. As Bradlee, he is snappy, brusque and businesslike. Although I don’t think he could ever quite match the irascibility of the character’s portrayal by Jason Robards in the classic “All the President’s Men” – who could? – its a character with real screen presence.
The similarities with Alan J Pakula’s 1976 classic Watergate movie – one of my personal favourites – don’t stop there. The same sets that were once populated by Redford and Hoffman are gloriously reproduced with Spielberg and Janusz Kaminski delivering great tracking shots through the newsroom. (Watch out for Sacha Spielberg – daughter of Stephen and Kate Capshaw – who also turns up there delivering a package).
The scoop revealed: Odenkirk, Hanks and David Cross get the low-down.
The supporting cast includes Sarah Paulson (so memorable in “The Trial of O.J. Simpson”) as Bradlee’s wife Tony, Bradley Whitford (“The West Wing”, “Get Out“) and Tracy Letts (“The Big Short“) as two of Graham’s board advisors and Jesse Plemons (“The Program“, “Bridge of Spies“) as the lead legal advisor. Particularly impressive though is Bob Odenkirk (“Breaking Bad”) as Ben Bagdikian, Bradlee’s lead investigative reporter on the case: all stress, loose change and paranoia in his dealings with the leaky Daniel Ellsberg (Matthew Rhys).
Bagdikian (Bob Odenkirk) ordering a drink for himself and his travelling companion.
In a memorable piece of casting Richard Nixon is played by…. Richard Nixon. Although a silluohetted Curzon Dobell stalks the Oval office, the ex-president’s original phone recordings are played on the soundtrack. (There, I knew those recordings would be useful for something… thank heavens he kept them all!)
The film also demonstrates in fascinating style the newsprint business of yesteryear. When I click a button on my PC and a beautifully laser-printed page streams out of my Epson printer, it still seems like witchcraft to me! But it is extraordinary to think that newspapers in those days were put together by typesetters manually building up the pages from embossed metal letters laboriously slotted into a frame. Brilliantly evocative.
Ellsberg (Matthew Rhys) takes a risk.
If Spielberg has a fault, it is one of sentimentality – something that is pointed out in Susan Lacy’s superb HBO documentary on Spielberg (something I have yet to write a review on, but if you like Spielberg you should definitely seek out). Here he falls into that trap again, with an unnecessary bedroom scene between Graham and her daughter tipping the screenplay into mawkishness. It’s unnecessary since we don’t need the points raised rammed down our throats again. It’s something repeated in a rather bizarre final scene with Graham walking down the steps of the supreme court with admiring woman – only woman – watching her. These irritations tarnish for me what could have been a top-rated film.
But the movie is an impressive watch and older viewers, and anyone interested in American political history will, I think, love it. The film, especially with its nice epilogue, did make me immediately want to come home and put “All the President’s Men” on again… which is never a bad thing. Highly recommended.