Looking back over the year of games, I have noticed that very little actually caught my attention. Apart from the generic continuation of the basic and repetitive instalments of CoD and Battlefield, that leave little to be desired apart from a new 6 hour campaign and new maps for the online play. I would have written have like to have done an unboxing video on the youtube channel (Black Ribbon Gaming Youtube Channel) of the new generation of consoles but seeing that I could just about afford the Xbox One and only just received it, I felt it a little pointless to do one so late on. I would also like to stress that I only have an Xbox 360. PS3 games, unfortunately, cannot make it into my top games as of yet.
In no particular order:
1 - The Walking Dead - Telltale Series.
Yes I know that it came out last year but the full hard copy came out earlier this year with every episode and also the 400 Days dropped too. Plus the new one comes out in a few days and I'm wetting myself with excitement. Possibly one of the most innovative games in many, many years.
A cinematic story that forces you to make moral decisions that affect you later on (Don't worry, forums and Wikia will help you to get the perfect ending that will help you in the next series!). With a creative art style and brilliant script writing, this game will stand as one of the best for many years too come. The Walking Dead - Review
2 - Bioshock Infinite
Originally destined for release in 2012, Bioshock was pushed back into the earlier part of this year. Saddened by the wait, hopes were high for an even stronger game. In true fashion, it was out of this world. A change in scenery was worrying to think about but the overall outcome gave you a new story that can go so many different ways. Take the DLC for example. You get to return to Rapture and it's just awesome to see the world again but with people actually living there, not some crack heads and adorable Big Daddies... A tense and exciting game. Ken Levine has done it again and should just be aloud creative freedom to do what he pleases! Bioshock Infinite - Review
3 - Tomb Raider
An unexpected favourite of mine. Earlier this year, Josh wrote a review praising it for being amazing. I held back for a while. I didn't want to spend too much money on something that I may not enjoy. Eventually I caved in and bought the special edition box set version with some really cool additions in it for only £20. Bargain! I kid you not, the game was awesome. A mix of fantasy carved into a survival story doesn't always work but Square Enix knocked it out of the park. A vast landscape with lots of free-reign to do as you please but enough guidance to keep you on track without being too intrusive. Combat is simple and realistic and the visuals are astonishing. Nothing short of incredible and too think they have just released a special edition with upped graphics for the next gen consoles. Square Enix have a prize winner by keeping their trademark cinematic footage but moved away from sponging from the Final Fantasy series. Tomb Raider - Review
4 - Assassins Creed 4 - Black Flag
Yeah. Do I really need to explain this? Pirates, Assassins, Sailing, killing shit and all that fun stuff that we've come to expect from the AC franchise. I'd have to question you if you did not enjoy this. The story is far superior to AC3, the visuals are fantastic, sailing is no longer a gimmick and you're a motherfucking pirate assassin! The game drops the mini games and really focuses on experiencing the incredibly vast world. It's sandbox but MASSIVE. A very similar combat system with little change makes it easy to jump back in and frolic around the deck of your ship, pestering the local wildlife or stabbing anything in a red coat... Assassins Creed 4 - Review
5 - Grand Theft Auto 5 (Not the multiplayer)
One of histories most successful games, this list simply could not ignore it. Seeing that GTA4 bored me, I wasn't expecting to have so much fun. Yeah, it lacks top of the range visuals and is extremely glitchy but the huge story and the mad antics are entertaining. It's a game you can pick up and enjoy without having the use your head. However, I don't enjoy the multiplayer much. It's a cluster of people paranoid that they're going to get wiped and will shoot without a thought. Simple, crazy and unruly. Great with a few friends, some beer and some terrible food.
If you have enjoyed what you have read, please subscribe to the blog! There is so much you can also do, like Facebook, my Twitter and my Instagram for early previews of what I will be writing about each week. Or pictures of my dogs...Stuff.
Immature Professional procrastinators (PP's) bring you mediocre entertainment news and reviews.
Monday, 16 December 2013
Top 5 Movies of 2013!
2013 has been one hell of a year. We have yet to hit our first birthday (Feb. 18th) but I've had plenty of time to spend procrastinating, watching films and playing games. Nothing different to my normal lifestyle, apart from the fact that this site gives me a reason to sit up until 3AM.
In no particular order, I have chosen my 5 favourite movies of the year.
1 - Rush
Starring Chris Hemsworth, Rush details the lives of famed racing drivers Nikki Lauda and James Hunt. Ron Howards directions gave this movie an incredible feeling. It is a raw depiction of one of the most dangerous sports with little regulation and safety precaution. Gloriously shot, the colours pop and focus is always drawn perfectly with the right balance of focus in high speed chases. An exciting thrill ride with an intriguing story and a must-see for any F1 fans, both new and old. Full throttle excitement with some strong language and a feels trip for old fans. Rush - Review!
2 - Captain Phillips
Based on the events in 2009 where Somali pirates board the MV Maersk Alabama. The five day ordeal is compressed down quite substantially but still is a brutal watch. Nothing is skimped out and you can really feel the tension oozing off screen. The space that they had to work in is also incredible when you think about it. The work that went into getting the stunning shots is massive and it paid off 100%. With Tom Hanks at the helm, his acting talent shines. Contrasted against Barkhad Abdi, two completely different men bounce off of each other. Abdi's skeletal frame is token to how well they have cast everyone. A roller-coaster ride with one of the best ending scenes I have ever seen. Packed with emotion, superb acting and gorgeous filming, anyone with half a brain will adore. Captain Phillips - Review!
3 - Pacific Rim
Giant monsters, giant robots and a shit ton of action? What's not to love!? Yeah the script and acting are a little wack but no one can say that Pacific Rim is a terrible movie. Visual effects are probably the best I've seen in many years and the choreographed fight scenes are just epic. Plus a bit of Idris Elba never goes a miss. The perfect movie. Nothing to complicated, great fun and a gaggle of laughs. Pacific Rim - Review
4 - Only God Forgives
Considered the biggest Marmite film of this year, I felt that this movie was a work of art. Directed by the same guy as Drive, the gruesome violence transcends into this wonderfully excessive environment. Yeah, sure, Ryan Gosling isn't an amazing actor and has the voice of a prepubescent boy who can't convey anger without squeaking away like he lost a game of Call of Duty. All that aside, it is a really meaty and creative piece of work. It's a film that demands a lot from it's audience and if you're in the right mindset, you could really enjoy the neon lights and the twisted story to this dramatic thriller. Only God Forgives - Review
5 - Saving Mr. Banks
Seeing that I only just reviewed this the other day, I was in love with this movie. It's a real feel good movie which feels like it has every bit lovingly worked upon to give it this feeling. The jumping between time periods to elaborate and expand the story is a wonderful addition to document the life and creation of the beloved Mary Poppins. An all around great film with little - if anything wrong with it. Saving Mr. Banks - Review
In no particular order, I have chosen my 5 favourite movies of the year.
1 - Rush
Starring Chris Hemsworth, Rush details the lives of famed racing drivers Nikki Lauda and James Hunt. Ron Howards directions gave this movie an incredible feeling. It is a raw depiction of one of the most dangerous sports with little regulation and safety precaution. Gloriously shot, the colours pop and focus is always drawn perfectly with the right balance of focus in high speed chases. An exciting thrill ride with an intriguing story and a must-see for any F1 fans, both new and old. Full throttle excitement with some strong language and a feels trip for old fans. Rush - Review!
2 - Captain Phillips
Based on the events in 2009 where Somali pirates board the MV Maersk Alabama. The five day ordeal is compressed down quite substantially but still is a brutal watch. Nothing is skimped out and you can really feel the tension oozing off screen. The space that they had to work in is also incredible when you think about it. The work that went into getting the stunning shots is massive and it paid off 100%. With Tom Hanks at the helm, his acting talent shines. Contrasted against Barkhad Abdi, two completely different men bounce off of each other. Abdi's skeletal frame is token to how well they have cast everyone. A roller-coaster ride with one of the best ending scenes I have ever seen. Packed with emotion, superb acting and gorgeous filming, anyone with half a brain will adore. Captain Phillips - Review!
3 - Pacific Rim
Giant monsters, giant robots and a shit ton of action? What's not to love!? Yeah the script and acting are a little wack but no one can say that Pacific Rim is a terrible movie. Visual effects are probably the best I've seen in many years and the choreographed fight scenes are just epic. Plus a bit of Idris Elba never goes a miss. The perfect movie. Nothing to complicated, great fun and a gaggle of laughs. Pacific Rim - Review
4 - Only God Forgives
Considered the biggest Marmite film of this year, I felt that this movie was a work of art. Directed by the same guy as Drive, the gruesome violence transcends into this wonderfully excessive environment. Yeah, sure, Ryan Gosling isn't an amazing actor and has the voice of a prepubescent boy who can't convey anger without squeaking away like he lost a game of Call of Duty. All that aside, it is a really meaty and creative piece of work. It's a film that demands a lot from it's audience and if you're in the right mindset, you could really enjoy the neon lights and the twisted story to this dramatic thriller. Only God Forgives - Review
5 - Saving Mr. Banks
Seeing that I only just reviewed this the other day, I was in love with this movie. It's a real feel good movie which feels like it has every bit lovingly worked upon to give it this feeling. The jumping between time periods to elaborate and expand the story is a wonderful addition to document the life and creation of the beloved Mary Poppins. An all around great film with little - if anything wrong with it. Saving Mr. Banks - Review
Labels:
2013,
action,
Adventure,
captain phillips,
Chris Hemsworth,
entertainment,
films,
Idris Elba,
movies,
only god forgives,
pacific rim,
review,
Ryan Gosling,
Saving Mr banks,
thriller,
top 5
Sunday, 15 December 2013
Saving Mr. Banks - Quicky Review!
Yeah, so this has been a draft for about 2 weeks now. Sorry about that....
Mary Poppins is a character that will stay with many of us for the rest of our lives and will be remembered for many years to come. A tale of a wondrous nanny with magical abilities and a loving heart cemented it's place in many hearts and minds, even when it was just a book! Saving Mr. Banks details the creation of Mary Poppins and P.L. Travers' aversion to it's filming without her specific sign off.
Going into the theatre, the trailer didn't look all that, but considering I have a soft spot for anything vintage or Disney orientated, I looked forward to exploring the workings and production of a story that was a staple in my childhood. The opening scene of the iconic Disney castle logo was the 1960's version and kept it's grainy 30mm film aspect and was an incredible gorgeous but subtle piece even before the movie starts, almost as if it's taking it's hat off, bowing in respect to the past.
Jumping into the movie, we follow 2 time lines. The first is obviously the 1960's era that depicts Travers' struggles and the weeks she spent in California working on the film. Our second time line is Travers as a young girl in Australia that depicts a life vastly different to her current lifestyle. The stories merge intermittently throughout to give context to certain scenes and motivations. They also help illustrate Travers' attitudes and aversion to change. The merging of the lines is perfectly done. Nothing is harsh on the eye and you don't get dropped into another scene that opens up another avenue, it seamlessly blends together. Even though the stories follow the same character, the pieces are juxtaposed against each other. While one starts off happy, it deteriorates while the other flourishes the longer it goes on.
Many scenes are dotted throughout the movie that are just perfect. There is no doubt about it. A mix of the exuberant colours, great acting and a brilliant script that really resonates. A particular favourite was when Travers' was leaving the US. Through the time she spent there, a personal driver was assigned to drive her where ever she chose. Ralph (Paul Giamatti) was his name. Blissfully unaware to who he was driving about, he would talk about the beauty of life in LA and his disabled daughter. Just before Travers leaves, Ralph found out from his daughter about her and asked for a signature. The ensuing conversation is a real tear-jerker and still stays with me even when I saw it weeks ago.
With a huge cast of actors and many recognisable faces, we understand their abilities. Fortunately, they manage to maintain a high standard of acting that doesn't diminish. I was extremely surprised to see Colin Farrell appear. I didn't expect to see so many people. Farrell also has experience as an alcoholic, so jumping into the boots of one isn't much different to what he used to do. Not being a huge fan of him, I do have to say that he played the role with dignity and portrays Travers Goff as a wonderful human being struck by something difficult to control. Obviously, Tom Hanks is Walt Disney and I really enjoyed his performance, even though I'm hearing complaints about his southern accent. Personally, I have no idea what they are grinding at but otherwise all the acting was superb.
Over the past few weeks, I've had real trouble trying to find something wrong with the movie. I didn't want to sit here a praise it endlessly without something to pick on. The only thing I can think of is that I would have liked to have seen a bit more of Disney. Not just the theme park but a little more into the background of Walt. Seeing I've run out of things to say, I believe that this movie is worth a good 9/10. Mary Poppins is brilliant story that has influenced countless generations and the premise to delve into it was a great idea while seamlessly blending two time lines into one.
Mary Poppins is a character that will stay with many of us for the rest of our lives and will be remembered for many years to come. A tale of a wondrous nanny with magical abilities and a loving heart cemented it's place in many hearts and minds, even when it was just a book! Saving Mr. Banks details the creation of Mary Poppins and P.L. Travers' aversion to it's filming without her specific sign off.
Going into the theatre, the trailer didn't look all that, but considering I have a soft spot for anything vintage or Disney orientated, I looked forward to exploring the workings and production of a story that was a staple in my childhood. The opening scene of the iconic Disney castle logo was the 1960's version and kept it's grainy 30mm film aspect and was an incredible gorgeous but subtle piece even before the movie starts, almost as if it's taking it's hat off, bowing in respect to the past.
Jumping into the movie, we follow 2 time lines. The first is obviously the 1960's era that depicts Travers' struggles and the weeks she spent in California working on the film. Our second time line is Travers as a young girl in Australia that depicts a life vastly different to her current lifestyle. The stories merge intermittently throughout to give context to certain scenes and motivations. They also help illustrate Travers' attitudes and aversion to change. The merging of the lines is perfectly done. Nothing is harsh on the eye and you don't get dropped into another scene that opens up another avenue, it seamlessly blends together. Even though the stories follow the same character, the pieces are juxtaposed against each other. While one starts off happy, it deteriorates while the other flourishes the longer it goes on.
Many scenes are dotted throughout the movie that are just perfect. There is no doubt about it. A mix of the exuberant colours, great acting and a brilliant script that really resonates. A particular favourite was when Travers' was leaving the US. Through the time she spent there, a personal driver was assigned to drive her where ever she chose. Ralph (Paul Giamatti) was his name. Blissfully unaware to who he was driving about, he would talk about the beauty of life in LA and his disabled daughter. Just before Travers leaves, Ralph found out from his daughter about her and asked for a signature. The ensuing conversation is a real tear-jerker and still stays with me even when I saw it weeks ago.
With a huge cast of actors and many recognisable faces, we understand their abilities. Fortunately, they manage to maintain a high standard of acting that doesn't diminish. I was extremely surprised to see Colin Farrell appear. I didn't expect to see so many people. Farrell also has experience as an alcoholic, so jumping into the boots of one isn't much different to what he used to do. Not being a huge fan of him, I do have to say that he played the role with dignity and portrays Travers Goff as a wonderful human being struck by something difficult to control. Obviously, Tom Hanks is Walt Disney and I really enjoyed his performance, even though I'm hearing complaints about his southern accent. Personally, I have no idea what they are grinding at but otherwise all the acting was superb.
Over the past few weeks, I've had real trouble trying to find something wrong with the movie. I didn't want to sit here a praise it endlessly without something to pick on. The only thing I can think of is that I would have liked to have seen a bit more of Disney. Not just the theme park but a little more into the background of Walt. Seeing I've run out of things to say, I believe that this movie is worth a good 9/10. Mary Poppins is brilliant story that has influenced countless generations and the premise to delve into it was a great idea while seamlessly blending two time lines into one.
Labels:
B.J. Novak,
Bradley Whitford,
Colin Farrell,
disney,
Emma Thompson,
entertainment,
film,
Jason Schwartzman,
mary poppins,
movie,
Paul giamatti,
review,
Ruth Wilson,
tom hanks,
walt disney
The Hobbit, Desolation Of Smaug - Review - SPOILERS
Hello to anyone subscribed, checks back or any other form, I'd just like to say that I have been busy procrastinating a report of mine and lost a lot of motivation to do any work. If you'd hit one of the multiple links to around the page, you can get notifications of when I post new bits of just take a look into the incredibly mundane life of mine!
Moving on to the actual meat of this post. Finally, after a year, the next instalment in The Hobbit series has finally arrived. Pumped up with the exciting news of Legolas coming back and busting some Orc butts, I was thoroughly prepared for moments of badassery and witty commentary. However, that is for a little later. My hopes were high for this movie. I have even put off releasing a "Top 5 of 2013" list until this was released. Unfortunately, it was a wise decision. My expectations had clouded me and left me grasping for more meat on the apparently succulent bones.
Getting right too it, one of my annoyances was the year gap between the movies. If you don't have the time to re-watch the previous films in a series, it's no easy feat to remember where exactly it all left off. But ignoring this fact, it is very easy to get into the swing of things when the travellers didn't actually get very far. Considering that the story is no considerable difference in the movie apart from them FINALLY making it to the mountain of the Dwarven kingdom and the introduction of a few new characters.
The new/returning characters are really good to see. They hold enough screen time to really illustrate their stories and build upon their roles. Hopefully, it will continue into the next instalment as some characters were unfortunately lost in the mix and easily forgotten when you're jumping from 4 or 5 different locations. My personal favourite from the Lord Of The Rings series is and will always be Legolas. He is wise, courageous and generous to those around it. Surprisingly, he holds more of a grudge on the outside world and orcs. Appearing distasteful at the thought of dealing with matters that do not concern his people. Coldly indifferent and yet struck by love for Tauriel, of which she is not permitted to react to by his fathers orders. The elements really do show a much darker side to
him. Something a little more raw and interesting, especially when moments refer to Gimli (Having not met until the Fellowship of the Ring, Legolas makes a joke about one of the dwarves son who is Gimli!). Now obviously, Legolas is not at the forefront of the movie, although he is a bit of a gimmick to draw in more sales, we do see this for other characters. Smaug; the giant ass dragon that is reputedly voiced by none other than Cumberbatch. I use the term reputedly for many reasons, one being that they did so much work to his voice, it sounded NOTHING like him. Genuinly, I couldn't tell it was him. If I had to pick out of a list, I would have picked the hulking great big dude with the awesome moustache, not the lanky, fairly intelligent (I presume) Mr Cumberbatch with the face of a babies ass. Ben, as I shall now call him, also voiced the Necromancer, who also sounded nothing like him! Once again, as we see with Legolas, he is very much a tool to draw in money to fund Peter Jackson's need for overpriced cameras.
On the topic of overpriced cameras, which I would like but can't afford but would kindly take to any offer that chooses to come my way, WHY THE HELL ARE YOU USING GO PRO'S!? I shit you not, a sequence which involves a lot of water, some barrels and general chaos was plagued by disgusting shots that dives under the surface with a lacking resolution and quality compared to the rest of the entire film! A big budget movie can afford something far more advanced than a GoPro. Don't let a boy do a man's job. I'm also incredibly shocked by a lot of the CGI. At points, it was saddening to watch. Nothing fit into place and never reflected the light and surrounding effectively, thus making them obscure and vividly annoying. It's easy pickings but could have been avoided easily. It's almost as if they handed me a fish on a silver platter and begged me to slap them with it because they have some kinky fetish. The rest of the footage was half decent and the CGI that went into Smaug was fairly impressive. Shame it was never transferred equally.
Now to the cast! We have a really big range of stars that perform their roles brilliantly. No qualms can be brought against them. Although he held little screen time, Luke Evans (Bard/Giroin) was a possible favourite of mine. He maintains an air of mystery that I hope is explored in the next film. Stephen Fry pops in for a short role, completely juxtaposed to the Fry we know and love. A pig of a man, driven by greed with an unkempt moustache and wardrobe to boot. It's great to see him play someone vile for a change compared to the typically nutty guy who is always on the good side. According to IMDB, even Stephen Colbert made an appearance as is rumoured for the next film too.
The question to be asked about the Lord Of The Rings franchise is what draws us too it? The magical world?, an exciting story?, or just pure action? Personally, I feel it's always been the perfect combination between all points and the action was always something that excited me. Vast battlefields and skirmishes across middle earth. The brilliantly choreographed fights that built upon elements of light hearted humour in a dark world in some of the most aggressive wars. We still have elements of the epic fights and action with the comic relief within them but we also have to deal with much slower action. The cause, blame and my hatred falls upon 3D. Because fast images in 3D will
cause motion sickness and can't be viewed easily, the scenes have to be longer to counter this issue. This also causes another issue. I prefer 2D. I tend to despise gimmicks and my beloved Hobbit has been tainted by it, marginalising those who watch it in 2D who notice the loss in pace.
Finally, one last point. If another movie ends with a cliff hanger as big as this, then demands we wait a year until the next part, I may have to sue for emotional compensation. I think my overall score for it will be a 7/10. I didn't want to be so brutal but I can't agree with the IMDB public vote on this one. There were too many issues for me to simply ignore.
So, yeah. Tell me what you thought of it in the comment section and if you could subscribe or share this about, it would be much appreciated!
Moving on to the actual meat of this post. Finally, after a year, the next instalment in The Hobbit series has finally arrived. Pumped up with the exciting news of Legolas coming back and busting some Orc butts, I was thoroughly prepared for moments of badassery and witty commentary. However, that is for a little later. My hopes were high for this movie. I have even put off releasing a "Top 5 of 2013" list until this was released. Unfortunately, it was a wise decision. My expectations had clouded me and left me grasping for more meat on the apparently succulent bones.
Getting right too it, one of my annoyances was the year gap between the movies. If you don't have the time to re-watch the previous films in a series, it's no easy feat to remember where exactly it all left off. But ignoring this fact, it is very easy to get into the swing of things when the travellers didn't actually get very far. Considering that the story is no considerable difference in the movie apart from them FINALLY making it to the mountain of the Dwarven kingdom and the introduction of a few new characters.
him. Something a little more raw and interesting, especially when moments refer to Gimli (Having not met until the Fellowship of the Ring, Legolas makes a joke about one of the dwarves son who is Gimli!). Now obviously, Legolas is not at the forefront of the movie, although he is a bit of a gimmick to draw in more sales, we do see this for other characters. Smaug; the giant ass dragon that is reputedly voiced by none other than Cumberbatch. I use the term reputedly for many reasons, one being that they did so much work to his voice, it sounded NOTHING like him. Genuinly, I couldn't tell it was him. If I had to pick out of a list, I would have picked the hulking great big dude with the awesome moustache, not the lanky, fairly intelligent (I presume) Mr Cumberbatch with the face of a babies ass. Ben, as I shall now call him, also voiced the Necromancer, who also sounded nothing like him! Once again, as we see with Legolas, he is very much a tool to draw in money to fund Peter Jackson's need for overpriced cameras.
I'm so high right now. |
On the topic of overpriced cameras, which I would like but can't afford but would kindly take to any offer that chooses to come my way, WHY THE HELL ARE YOU USING GO PRO'S!? I shit you not, a sequence which involves a lot of water, some barrels and general chaos was plagued by disgusting shots that dives under the surface with a lacking resolution and quality compared to the rest of the entire film! A big budget movie can afford something far more advanced than a GoPro. Don't let a boy do a man's job. I'm also incredibly shocked by a lot of the CGI. At points, it was saddening to watch. Nothing fit into place and never reflected the light and surrounding effectively, thus making them obscure and vividly annoying. It's easy pickings but could have been avoided easily. It's almost as if they handed me a fish on a silver platter and begged me to slap them with it because they have some kinky fetish. The rest of the footage was half decent and the CGI that went into Smaug was fairly impressive. Shame it was never transferred equally.
Now to the cast! We have a really big range of stars that perform their roles brilliantly. No qualms can be brought against them. Although he held little screen time, Luke Evans (Bard/Giroin) was a possible favourite of mine. He maintains an air of mystery that I hope is explored in the next film. Stephen Fry pops in for a short role, completely juxtaposed to the Fry we know and love. A pig of a man, driven by greed with an unkempt moustache and wardrobe to boot. It's great to see him play someone vile for a change compared to the typically nutty guy who is always on the good side. According to IMDB, even Stephen Colbert made an appearance as is rumoured for the next film too.
The question to be asked about the Lord Of The Rings franchise is what draws us too it? The magical world?, an exciting story?, or just pure action? Personally, I feel it's always been the perfect combination between all points and the action was always something that excited me. Vast battlefields and skirmishes across middle earth. The brilliantly choreographed fights that built upon elements of light hearted humour in a dark world in some of the most aggressive wars. We still have elements of the epic fights and action with the comic relief within them but we also have to deal with much slower action. The cause, blame and my hatred falls upon 3D. Because fast images in 3D will
Finally, one last point. If another movie ends with a cliff hanger as big as this, then demands we wait a year until the next part, I may have to sue for emotional compensation. I think my overall score for it will be a 7/10. I didn't want to be so brutal but I can't agree with the IMDB public vote on this one. There were too many issues for me to simply ignore.
So, yeah. Tell me what you thought of it in the comment section and if you could subscribe or share this about, it would be much appreciated!
Labels:
Benedict Cumberbatch,
desolation of smaug,
entertainment,
evangeline lilly,
film,
ian mckellen,
luke evans,
Martin freeman,
movie,
orlando bloom,
peter jackson,
review,
richard armitage,
Spoilers,
the hobbit
Thursday, 28 November 2013
Hunger Games: Catching Fire - Review - SPOILERS
As an excessive internet fiend, I've been involved with many communities on the internet, particularly Tickld.com (go check it out!). My involvement with this community brings many fandoms to my attention on a regular basis and anything that involves Jennifer Lawrence tends to be fairly popular. With the constant push of these groupies, I caved in and watched the first of this series, the night before we saw Catching Fire. Unfortunately, I was let down. I'm still adamant that the Hunger Games is just Battle Royale with cheese and less blood. I had high expectations of violence, excitement and characters that would grasp my interest. After my disappointment and being reassured that the second book in the series is far more action packed, I went in with hope. What I've failed to grasp is the tween audience and devout love for everything and everything related to it, but it could be worse, they could have been "Beliebers"...
Carrying on. With a lot of hope, I sat through the movie. Considering I haven't read the books, I was a bit pissed with the cliffhanger ending but otherwise, it was alright.Very little has changed from the first film. a lot of shit is still going on, riots have put various districts under lock down and general discomfort feeds a waiting beast. The only thing that has really changed is the settings for "Peeta" and Katniss which lacks any of the suspected riches. A year has rolled on, comfortably living in their shabby mansions with little colour and all the aesthetics of a mental institute plucked from Batman's Gotham city; suddenly joined by Tim Burton's wet dream - Effie Trinket (Elizabeth Banks), garnered in vividly sickening colours with influence from Medieval England and a bin, she begins spluttering about some tour across the districts and all that jazz. As I couldn't work out a name for this tour, lets call it the, "Look how rich I am because I won a game tour of 2013". Funnily enough, Katniss was oblivious to the riots she caused with the salute mid-game and notices an impending trend which she begins to abuse. Noticing that it gets people killed, she backed
up and did what she was told. Until, you guessed it, the Hunger Games. Each districts winners are called upon for the 75th anniversary slaughtering because grumpy old president doesn't like being beaten. Once the big baby is satisfied, the games start but don't end in your typical fashion. Yeah, so as a story, it's pretty easy to deduct how big plot pieces unfolds with a few additional little surprises tucked away. Even if I had watched the previous movie on release day, I could have jumped into this movie without worrying to much about a complicated story line and forgetting everything that previously happened.
I'd like to pick on the visuals a little. I'm an ass for good CGI and FX from big budget movies but there is certainly occasions that I have to question what on earth they were thinking. At one point there centre island and the water effect around it lost a lot of it's focus and resolution and some of the rocks genuinely looked like set props from the Flintstones movie. I fully understand that the Hunger Games world is representing the deformities between the bourgeois and proletariat with the upper classes manipulation of those with little power but I feel it really misses the potential to really portray it after the whole Occupy movement, but I digress. On a positive note, the CGI for the baboons was far better than the ass-faced 'dogs' from the end of the previous movie. But then we get to a few of the deaths. If you're going to walk about without a top, I would at least like to see some blood when you get shot in the chest with an arrow.
Being that Jennifer Lawrence won an Oscar for her performance in Silver Linings Playbook, It's a common belief that they could continue this streak through their other projects. Occasionally, it felt as if she was really struggling to push Katniss. It's hard to get much when he doesn't play much of a role in the actual fighthing too. When Katniss has to act joyfully and blissful, she can do that but it's nothing we don't expect from a person that is a very much the same. It's when she has to portray despair, fear and the really raw emotion. Perhaps not Michael Fassbender's breakdown in The Counsellor with snot smearing his face like a Jackson Pollock painting, but a medium. This issue probably falls on the script and poor directing for not really exploring her to give J.Law some form of platform. Peter, or the incompetent way of spelling it - 'Peeta' (Josh Hutcherson) is a fairly standard role. With very little context to him, he's once again left out by a weak script that makes him look like a giant pussy. The rest are fairly standard, Liam Hemsworth decided he'd tag along and take a bit more time on screen but then just blends back into the ether for the rest of the film. Philip Sermour Hoffman is probably the strongest of the cast, he powers through the lines and enjoys to play a game like a cunning fox, throwing you from pillar to post wondering what he'd do next and redeem himself for playing both sides of the fence.
With all of it's flaws, the film is better than it's predecessor. Not massively but a little better. Created for teens, I may just be an old git. The overall will probably be a 7/10. The script is weak and reflects on everyone. Without the aggression, you never feel the rush of excitement that is a foundation for anything action. A few of the FX were weak and I just longed for more from a production of it's size.
Sorry for the chaotic review. I've been procrastinating all week and it's a bit of a mess so I could get a review up for Saving Mr Banks tomorrow!
Carrying on. With a lot of hope, I sat through the movie. Considering I haven't read the books, I was a bit pissed with the cliffhanger ending but otherwise, it was alright.Very little has changed from the first film. a lot of shit is still going on, riots have put various districts under lock down and general discomfort feeds a waiting beast. The only thing that has really changed is the settings for "Peeta" and Katniss which lacks any of the suspected riches. A year has rolled on, comfortably living in their shabby mansions with little colour and all the aesthetics of a mental institute plucked from Batman's Gotham city; suddenly joined by Tim Burton's wet dream - Effie Trinket (Elizabeth Banks), garnered in vividly sickening colours with influence from Medieval England and a bin, she begins spluttering about some tour across the districts and all that jazz. As I couldn't work out a name for this tour, lets call it the, "Look how rich I am because I won a game tour of 2013". Funnily enough, Katniss was oblivious to the riots she caused with the salute mid-game and notices an impending trend which she begins to abuse. Noticing that it gets people killed, she backed
I'd like to pick on the visuals a little. I'm an ass for good CGI and FX from big budget movies but there is certainly occasions that I have to question what on earth they were thinking. At one point there centre island and the water effect around it lost a lot of it's focus and resolution and some of the rocks genuinely looked like set props from the Flintstones movie. I fully understand that the Hunger Games world is representing the deformities between the bourgeois and proletariat with the upper classes manipulation of those with little power but I feel it really misses the potential to really portray it after the whole Occupy movement, but I digress. On a positive note, the CGI for the baboons was far better than the ass-faced 'dogs' from the end of the previous movie. But then we get to a few of the deaths. If you're going to walk about without a top, I would at least like to see some blood when you get shot in the chest with an arrow.
Being that Jennifer Lawrence won an Oscar for her performance in Silver Linings Playbook, It's a common belief that they could continue this streak through their other projects. Occasionally, it felt as if she was really struggling to push Katniss. It's hard to get much when he doesn't play much of a role in the actual fighthing too. When Katniss has to act joyfully and blissful, she can do that but it's nothing we don't expect from a person that is a very much the same. It's when she has to portray despair, fear and the really raw emotion. Perhaps not Michael Fassbender's breakdown in The Counsellor with snot smearing his face like a Jackson Pollock painting, but a medium. This issue probably falls on the script and poor directing for not really exploring her to give J.Law some form of platform. Peter, or the incompetent way of spelling it - 'Peeta' (Josh Hutcherson) is a fairly standard role. With very little context to him, he's once again left out by a weak script that makes him look like a giant pussy. The rest are fairly standard, Liam Hemsworth decided he'd tag along and take a bit more time on screen but then just blends back into the ether for the rest of the film. Philip Sermour Hoffman is probably the strongest of the cast, he powers through the lines and enjoys to play a game like a cunning fox, throwing you from pillar to post wondering what he'd do next and redeem himself for playing both sides of the fence.
With all of it's flaws, the film is better than it's predecessor. Not massively but a little better. Created for teens, I may just be an old git. The overall will probably be a 7/10. The script is weak and reflects on everyone. Without the aggression, you never feel the rush of excitement that is a foundation for anything action. A few of the FX were weak and I just longed for more from a production of it's size.
Sorry for the chaotic review. I've been procrastinating all week and it's a bit of a mess so I could get a review up for Saving Mr Banks tomorrow!
Labels:
2,
2013,
action,
Adventure,
catching fire,
entertainment,
film,
films,
hunger games,
jennifer lawrence,
john huterson,
katniss,
liam hemsworth,
movie,
peeta,
philip seymour hoffman,
review,
Spoilers
Monday, 18 November 2013
The Counsellor - Quicky Review - MINOR SPOILERS
Ever since the release of the teaser trailer, I was hooked. Checking back at IMDB on a regular basis to see any information about a release date, turns out you guys in America received it before us in the UK, I was only mildly peeved but then I remembered that we got Iron Man 3 and Thor so...yeah. HA!...
Anyway, after all the hype, I noticed a low score for it on IMDB and fairly mixed reviews. Trying to keep positive, we hurried to the release, only to come out wondering what on earth just happened. (Update - I just watched Prometheus and I'm just as confused). From what I can fathom, The Counsellor is about a partnership between "Counsellor" (Fassbender) and Reiner (Javier Bardem) who have expanded Reiner's already booming drug business. Something goes wrong and their cartel connections decide to go around killing them. In terms of realism, the outcome is no where near what would typically happen. Portraying everyone as philosophical, highly educated players doesn't really aid the movie in any form. If you do any research into these topics, the majority of the players have crawled from the bottom and lacked a lot of support and wouldn't experience such literature.
So, the film's story didn't make sense and the cinematography reflects this. It shows a higher interest in the way the movie looks rather than flows. You jump from America to Europe, with not so much as a warning. Time apparently passed rather rapidly but you struggle to get to grips with the lay of the
land. Visually, the movie is gorgeous. The blood, gore and shit (yes. Shit.) looks real and the crap certainly made me gag once or twice while the chopping off of the dudes head was epic. The focus and lighting on screen were beautiful and lavish set pieces really push the representation of being young and rich. Yet, there was many continuity errors throughout and they would stick out obtusely like a whore at a dinner party.
One of the redeeming factors for the film is its scripts. Even when they are being philosophical, what they are saying is strong and really resonates (even when factually wrong at points). A personal favourite is even in the trailer and said by Westray (Brad Pitt), "If your definition of a friend is someone who will die for you, you don't have any friends" - It's phrases like this that pop up continually throughout the movie and really pose moral questions in a thriller. It just doesn't fit into the perimeters of the movie, which if the story was stronger, perhaps it could have really flourished. but then you have the screen play reering it's head and pissing on the parade. We have scenes that are so obscure, not even Tarrintino would think of it. Malkina (Cameron Diaz) has sex with a Ferrari. You may be asking how, turns out rubbing your junk over the windscreen while doing the splits constitutes sex. I think the quote best describes it, "It was like one of those bottom feeders, sucked to the glass".
Swiftly moving on, my final attack is at the acting. With A-listers everywhere, top quality acting is supposed to be insured, but we do have Penelope Cruz who only gets jobs because she's willing to go that step further (sex talk with Fassbender and a weird ass opening scene of him, shall we say - "munching the rug"). Personally, I've never been keen on her as she lacks a lot of emotion and I can't see the sexual attraction of many. My favourite was Brad Pitt, typically he gets a lot of grief for a few bad moves over the years but recently, he has stepped up his game (E.g - World War Z). Being given a cowboy middleman to play, you can't expect much from him but he oozes with swagger. The minor mannerisms make his character, from the way he puts his hat on too the way he talk. It's brilliant. At the end of the movie, Fassbender looks like he's been on a children's TV show and got gunked, spluttering snot everywhere without a care in the world. It's almost cringe worthy then he did so well up to this breakdown. Javiers accent is killer and fits the role he plays as a psycho business man. With an accent like that, I feel he can play a criminal any day, just look at Skyfall! (I guess it helps that he can act too). Oh, let's not forget Diaz who plays a psycho gold digging bitch with a wealth of knowledge and some cheetahs that fuck off when they get bored. Yeah, she played it fairly well, but I think many people could do it.
In total, the film was really weak. Most likely a flop or just about breaking even in the long run. Probably will be showing on BBC 1 at midnight in 10 years and ITV in 5. So, if you don't fancy paying for it, it's not long too wait. The movie deserves a 6/10. Putting my critical head on, you really do feel let down coming out of the movie when you haven't had it explained to you. There's very little excitement and you would think that a movie of this scale wouldn't have so many cock-ups throughout.
Anyway, after all the hype, I noticed a low score for it on IMDB and fairly mixed reviews. Trying to keep positive, we hurried to the release, only to come out wondering what on earth just happened. (Update - I just watched Prometheus and I'm just as confused). From what I can fathom, The Counsellor is about a partnership between "Counsellor" (Fassbender) and Reiner (Javier Bardem) who have expanded Reiner's already booming drug business. Something goes wrong and their cartel connections decide to go around killing them. In terms of realism, the outcome is no where near what would typically happen. Portraying everyone as philosophical, highly educated players doesn't really aid the movie in any form. If you do any research into these topics, the majority of the players have crawled from the bottom and lacked a lot of support and wouldn't experience such literature.
So, the film's story didn't make sense and the cinematography reflects this. It shows a higher interest in the way the movie looks rather than flows. You jump from America to Europe, with not so much as a warning. Time apparently passed rather rapidly but you struggle to get to grips with the lay of the
land. Visually, the movie is gorgeous. The blood, gore and shit (yes. Shit.) looks real and the crap certainly made me gag once or twice while the chopping off of the dudes head was epic. The focus and lighting on screen were beautiful and lavish set pieces really push the representation of being young and rich. Yet, there was many continuity errors throughout and they would stick out obtusely like a whore at a dinner party.
One of the redeeming factors for the film is its scripts. Even when they are being philosophical, what they are saying is strong and really resonates (even when factually wrong at points). A personal favourite is even in the trailer and said by Westray (Brad Pitt), "If your definition of a friend is someone who will die for you, you don't have any friends" - It's phrases like this that pop up continually throughout the movie and really pose moral questions in a thriller. It just doesn't fit into the perimeters of the movie, which if the story was stronger, perhaps it could have really flourished. but then you have the screen play reering it's head and pissing on the parade. We have scenes that are so obscure, not even Tarrintino would think of it. Malkina (Cameron Diaz) has sex with a Ferrari. You may be asking how, turns out rubbing your junk over the windscreen while doing the splits constitutes sex. I think the quote best describes it, "It was like one of those bottom feeders, sucked to the glass".
In total, the film was really weak. Most likely a flop or just about breaking even in the long run. Probably will be showing on BBC 1 at midnight in 10 years and ITV in 5. So, if you don't fancy paying for it, it's not long too wait. The movie deserves a 6/10. Putting my critical head on, you really do feel let down coming out of the movie when you haven't had it explained to you. There's very little excitement and you would think that a movie of this scale wouldn't have so many cock-ups throughout.
Tuesday, 5 November 2013
Tinie Tempah - Demonstration - REVIEW
No, I don't get it either... |
Tinie Tempah’s new album was released today. Seeing as I
loved his first big album, I decided to actually go out and buy this one. First
time in many years! With that in mind, I have really high hopes for the album
and hope he shines through.
This time around, Tinie isn’t an unknown artist with very
little supporting artists. Now he is teaming up with the new T-Pain/Lil Jon – 2
Chainz for his first single and as much as I tend to ignore 2 Chainz, I felt it
was very good but still a huge rip off of Hopsin’s – Trampoline from a while
back which consists of much the same material… Upon stating that one of his
biggest inspirations for the album was Dizzie, you would expect a real grime
element brought to the music and it’s safe to say, some of the songs do emulate
the bass and aggressive beats really well. Don’t worry yourself, it’s now all
smashing beats!
There is a nice variation of styles throughout, you can move
from party tunes to a slow, mellow song and then to the catchy chart hits that
made Tinie who he is today. Fortunately, he hasn’t forgot his beginnings on the
streets of London. The variation of styles can be a bit confusing to listen
first time around but they catch on after a full listen of the album. As I
write this, I’m listening through for the 4th time and I haven’t got
sick of it but already have a few I adore so far. Each featuring artist has
brought their flare to the song and the two that Labyrinth in resonate Pass Out
which is quite possibly his best and key moment (Hipster moment – I loved it
before it went big!).
Back on subject, Tinie’s flow is awesome and doesn’t made it
hard to understand at any point. Yet, In Tears Run Dry, he sounds like he is
having hairs plucked at the end of every sentence, making a little squeak which
just destroys the song and emotion that it’s supposed to portray. With the
variations, the lyrics have to switch consistently and thank god, a lot of it
is logical, relatable and a little less about money, fame, women and drinking.
Witch Doctor is a song that is a little confusing. The chorus and name don’t
really reflect that it’s about a women, thus making it a little weird to hear.
Typically, the bigger starts throughout talking about who rich they are.
Lyrically, Don’t Sell Out, It’s Ok, and Children of the Sun are a few personal
favourites and warrant a listen if you’re considering the album anytime soon.
PS – If Tinie’s iconic “Yeeaaah” annoys you, expect to hear it a lot.
As a huge fan of Tinie’s and being that I have quite a
hipster moment with his music, I felt I should go out and by the physical
album. I would highly recommend that you go and get it too. As ever, I have a
couple of songs that are weak compared to the rest but the album is really
catchy and does show Tinie’s status within the music industry. 8/10 for this
album – a few songs didn’t actually catch me and didn’t feel as strong as they
could have been, especially when you are singing “A Heart Can Save The World”.
Labels:
2013,
children of the sun,
demonstration,
Download,
entertainment,
london,
lyrics,
MP3,
music,
review,
song,
sound,
tinie tempah,
tune,
tunes,
UK
Sunday, 3 November 2013
Battlefield 4 - Quicky Review
I really don't know what I expected from a game that is only made for online purposes. Over the last few years, I only bought into Call of Duty and would spend time doing the campaign while sighing over the poorly developed story. This time around, I decided to get both. Seeing that Battlefield 4 was out in America before it was in the UK, it surly pissed a few people off. Alongside pissing off numerous amounts of Russians and Chinese nationals....
Around everything else I had to do, I didn't stick many hours into the game at all. Probably about 4-5 hours overall. It's really short and very confusing when you have no idea who "Chang" is. I still don't know if he has been a theme through the last couple of games but not addressing this to the new players is a really bad play on their behalf. With about six missions that are spread over a few days, everything moves fast. Perhaps a little too fast. The plot twists where predictable and lacked anything that would truly inspire or help you to interact with the characters on a deeper level. So throughout, characters were just distant. You are placed as a Sargent called Recker who doesn't actually say anything, even when he is being spoken too, a little anti-social if you ask me. It also appears that even when he is in command, everything is decided by everyone else. The rest of the characters are fairly annoying, you cannot relate to them and you learn nothing about them through the time you are with them.
For a game that competes with Call of Duty, every damn year, they should have a lot of effort and resources into the build and development of the game. However, the image was never clear. Surfaces looked fuzzy, AI's would glitch out, the environment never looked real enough to immerse yourself in. for my first outing, I had really high hopes for it, even with it's imminent next gen release bragging about higher visual specs.
Where the game shines is in combat. Plug in the headphones, crank up the noise and get ready for a shit show. Reserve ammo and steal what you can as enemies come thick and fast with little room for mistake and manoeuvre. Combat is quite fun, it's a bit of a switch from CoD but it's fairly easy to grasp. You cannot just shoot a moving target by sticking the dot on him, you have to consider that the bullet needs to travel to get there, this makes it feel very real and when you have bullets pinging around you, the only thing you want to do is pop the enemy quick before they overwhelm you. The glitchiness (if that's even a word) of the game got in my way a few times, lining up an enemy only to have it push you away several time, the enemies are also fairly spongy and do take accuracy to put down effectively. This isn't the case on multiplayer.
In total, it's a fun and enjoyable game to play, all be it stressful at times but it's weak and short story mixed in with the general glitches and underwhelming visuals, I have to give it a 7/10.
Tune in next week to see my CoD Ghosts review!
Around everything else I had to do, I didn't stick many hours into the game at all. Probably about 4-5 hours overall. It's really short and very confusing when you have no idea who "Chang" is. I still don't know if he has been a theme through the last couple of games but not addressing this to the new players is a really bad play on their behalf. With about six missions that are spread over a few days, everything moves fast. Perhaps a little too fast. The plot twists where predictable and lacked anything that would truly inspire or help you to interact with the characters on a deeper level. So throughout, characters were just distant. You are placed as a Sargent called Recker who doesn't actually say anything, even when he is being spoken too, a little anti-social if you ask me. It also appears that even when he is in command, everything is decided by everyone else. The rest of the characters are fairly annoying, you cannot relate to them and you learn nothing about them through the time you are with them.
For a game that competes with Call of Duty, every damn year, they should have a lot of effort and resources into the build and development of the game. However, the image was never clear. Surfaces looked fuzzy, AI's would glitch out, the environment never looked real enough to immerse yourself in. for my first outing, I had really high hopes for it, even with it's imminent next gen release bragging about higher visual specs.
Where the game shines is in combat. Plug in the headphones, crank up the noise and get ready for a shit show. Reserve ammo and steal what you can as enemies come thick and fast with little room for mistake and manoeuvre. Combat is quite fun, it's a bit of a switch from CoD but it's fairly easy to grasp. You cannot just shoot a moving target by sticking the dot on him, you have to consider that the bullet needs to travel to get there, this makes it feel very real and when you have bullets pinging around you, the only thing you want to do is pop the enemy quick before they overwhelm you. The glitchiness (if that's even a word) of the game got in my way a few times, lining up an enemy only to have it push you away several time, the enemies are also fairly spongy and do take accuracy to put down effectively. This isn't the case on multiplayer.
In total, it's a fun and enjoyable game to play, all be it stressful at times but it's weak and short story mixed in with the general glitches and underwhelming visuals, I have to give it a 7/10.
Tune in next week to see my CoD Ghosts review!
Labels:
2013,
4,
battlefield,
bf4,
call of duty,
call of duty ghosts,
campaign,
china,
DICE,
entertainment,
first person shooter,
gamer,
gaming,
quicky,
review,
russia,
Spoilers,
us,
war
Friday, 1 November 2013
Assassins Creed 4 Black Flag - Review - SPOILERS
Following on from the death of Desmond Miles in the 3rd instalment, you are now an employee at Abstergo Entertainment who create movies from the stories collected in the Animus. This obviously is a front from the Templars who are using it for research and another source of income to fuel their operations. This unknown character is played in first person and can be rather annoying in the present day missions to actually move about and look about when you you have toiled away in 3rd person missions within the Animus. Otherwise, when you are actually playing the game, you are Edward Kenway, a relentless pirate sailing the oceans and driven to make his fortune and dropped right into it knowing very little.
In terms of story, it was really enjoyable, searching for the observatory with a bunch of pirates and a multitude of others was good fun. As ever, it is the same sort of tale from the rest. The search for an artefact that Templars want so they can control the world while the Assassins will stop at nothing to prevent this. The mix of characters and players during the game was a nice mix. You didn't feel like you had to repeat something so many times that it became meaningless and repetitive. With a load of twists and turns, you are thrown through hoops, even if you aren't engaged with Edward as a character, you still feel for him when friends die or chaos ensues around him. As a character, Edward is fairly packed with a load of crap weighing him down. When he gets the sea, he is extremely cocky and arrogant which makes him really difficult to like but the badass attitude to life and the mannerisms really fit the wicked pirate design. However, he does feel a far better character than his grandson, Connor.
SPOILERS - If you have finished the game, you may have noticed that the Abstergo server room at the end is full of little cubes up the wall. I believe these to be the viles of blood used in the observatory, thus meaning that the memory mining Animus IS the observatory in a new form. The alien figure at the end also means that we are most likely to see another instalment at some point next year.
The gameplay is still plagued by the problematic free running controls. Being chased by 8 heavily armed men?, running through this open door? NOT TODAY!, as you run up the side of the door or stop all together as you have to release all the controls, wait and then move around. This isn't something you want to be faced with on a fairly regular basis. It's much the same with the camera angles when climbing through an obstacle course. You catch try to move on the trigger for the new camera angle, you will find yourself having an epileptic fit. You also won't have a clue about what level your ship is and why any ships have levels. When you are on your own and you are vastly outnumbered, consider yourself dead and get the hell out of there. If you are fortunate enough to defeat several Man O' Wars and then board them, be sure to send them to Kenway's Fleet as this mini game will get you a load of money and a few little extras. These are just a few of my gripes with the gameplay but if you grind through this, you will enjoy the rest. Sailing the ocean is incredibly relaxing and can change at a moments notice, especially if you decide to piss on any countries parade by killing them all and then getting chased by pirate hunters. Fighting in general hasn't changed one bit. You simply have to mash X and B as soon as you see a big red dot coming at you. Not much has changed in the way of gameplay from the rest of the games. It is fairly fast action but minimalism to much smaller spaces, like the deck of a ship and that can make it hard to actually move about. It's also awesome to see that you wanted levels in towns and cities have disappeared. You can disappear
in moments rather than bribing your way through every place you visit, simple because you decided to start a fight with every human soul walking past you at the time.
As ever, there is a lot for you to do in the world, but now we have the addition of fishing. Yes, you heard it right. The fishing is probably a bit controversial as you hunt white whales, humpback whales and many other endangered marine species. You can also play checkers with other pirates. However, playing with them guarantees an unfair game.When they have no move, they simply move the king back and forward, screwing with you and denying you any chance that you could get. If you have any decency when it comes to checkers, stay away from this.
The last few bits is the visuals and sound. Up close and personal, everything can look a bit blurry and uncomfortable to look at, shading can be erratic and too much at points, making it look like characters are grids rather than forms. Yet, when you look at a distance, it is gorgeous. Bright with colour and great with lighting. It makes everything seem real and very lifelike, until you come up close. The colours of the Caribbean ocean are wonderful and really bring back memories of holidays I went on as a kid. Sound is my big problem. I found myself turning the volume up and down on my TV so I could hear with without it knocking down any walls. It was never equalised and made it quite painful when using a headset. The actual music for the game is alright. It reminds me of Pirates of the Caribbean, as it should for the era and style, but it seems way to similar. Continually having to shut up humming POTC while I mortar people and run the decks, stabbing the army in the face. It's pretty damn fun. Then we have the voice acting. At points, Kenway does down like Chris Hemsworth, but it's not! A lot of the voices fit the characters perfectly, apart from Jack Kidd...who always felt like it needed a bit of work.
With everything considered, it has to be one of the most fun Assassins Creed games and the addition of all the extras and the awesome sailing missions, I think the game deserves an 8/10 for it's change of scenery and it's involvement from an overly complicated story, to a truly fun pirate adventure.
Labels:
2013,
ac4,
Assassins creed 4,
black beard,
black flag,
edward kenway,
entertainment,
game,
gaming,
new,
pirates,
review,
Spoilers,
ubisoft,
xbox
Thursday, 31 October 2013
Thor - The Dark World - Review & SPOILERS
Seeing that over the last few days, I've been hammering out Assassins Creed: Black Flag so I can get a review out of it, I didn't want to leave anyone out of my recent travels.
Earlier today we Brits were treated to the release of yet another Marvel movie! This instalment of Thor details the resurgence of the Dark Elves - a race who ruled the universe in complete darkness and seek to bring back the black with the use of a super weapon which does a lot of complicated science stuff. So, we have more aliens fighting alien. I always feel that this is what makes Thor shine. It's not always bound to saving earth. It's a much wider aspect that opens up far more avenues for high octane fun. With a mix of brilliant cameos and sassy jokes, Thor is definitely a must-see.
As I've already explained the story, I don't feel much need to complain about it. With a lot of twists and turns, you are drawn into the story, even if moments are predictable. Being that it is a Marvel movie, it is going to have the good vs bad which drives the story forward even if it feels a little generic.
Visually, it was almost perfect. ALMOST. Certain green screen scenes and long distance shots made characters stick out like a sore thumb, overly bright in a dark area and this really agitated me. The same could be said about some of the fight sequences that do exactly the same. Otherwise there are some brilliant visual effects all the way through astonishing costume design that makes everything look badass.
Marvel are not known for Oscar worthy scripts and acting but it wasn't bad. Yeah, there was a few cheesy lines but they were mixed in with witty one-liners that were very funny and kept a continual up beat feeling throughout. The sassy nature of Loki with his banter towards Thor is golden. It helps to enforce the fact that they are siblings. This sassy nature also uses Loki's power to transform himself into Captain America and spout excitable, patriotic nonsense which he is notorious for but also makes Loki look like he is trying to impress his older brother. With another guest appearance from Stan Lee, the film seems complete. The only other thing to focus on is the acting. Hemsworth and Hiddleston were perfect, as ever. My issue rides with Natalie Portman who plays a pretty pathetic character in the first place but she doesn't look genuine - almost uncomfortable in her role. Fear ends up looking more like shock. An additional actor that many people don't really focus on when they think Thor is Idris Elba. If you haven't read my Pacific Rim review, you should know that I love this man and I feel he didn't have a big enough role within this film and I wanted to see what happened to him at the end.
Overall, I consider a 8/10 a good score. It's a darker and more personal twist for Thor to undertake
and appears to be the current trend at Marvel (Look at Iron Man). Yet, some acting, some poor CGI and a few loose ends within the story do drag it down for me. Superhero/action movies will never achieve a 10/10, simply because they are more for fun rather than the critical film making that many critics desire.
I'm sorry for such a short and crazy review but seeing I'm running on 5 hours sleep and trying to keep up with everything that's going on is not an easy task.
Earlier today we Brits were treated to the release of yet another Marvel movie! This instalment of Thor details the resurgence of the Dark Elves - a race who ruled the universe in complete darkness and seek to bring back the black with the use of a super weapon which does a lot of complicated science stuff. So, we have more aliens fighting alien. I always feel that this is what makes Thor shine. It's not always bound to saving earth. It's a much wider aspect that opens up far more avenues for high octane fun. With a mix of brilliant cameos and sassy jokes, Thor is definitely a must-see.
As I've already explained the story, I don't feel much need to complain about it. With a lot of twists and turns, you are drawn into the story, even if moments are predictable. Being that it is a Marvel movie, it is going to have the good vs bad which drives the story forward even if it feels a little generic.
Visually, it was almost perfect. ALMOST. Certain green screen scenes and long distance shots made characters stick out like a sore thumb, overly bright in a dark area and this really agitated me. The same could be said about some of the fight sequences that do exactly the same. Otherwise there are some brilliant visual effects all the way through astonishing costume design that makes everything look badass.
Marvel are not known for Oscar worthy scripts and acting but it wasn't bad. Yeah, there was a few cheesy lines but they were mixed in with witty one-liners that were very funny and kept a continual up beat feeling throughout. The sassy nature of Loki with his banter towards Thor is golden. It helps to enforce the fact that they are siblings. This sassy nature also uses Loki's power to transform himself into Captain America and spout excitable, patriotic nonsense which he is notorious for but also makes Loki look like he is trying to impress his older brother. With another guest appearance from Stan Lee, the film seems complete. The only other thing to focus on is the acting. Hemsworth and Hiddleston were perfect, as ever. My issue rides with Natalie Portman who plays a pretty pathetic character in the first place but she doesn't look genuine - almost uncomfortable in her role. Fear ends up looking more like shock. An additional actor that many people don't really focus on when they think Thor is Idris Elba. If you haven't read my Pacific Rim review, you should know that I love this man and I feel he didn't have a big enough role within this film and I wanted to see what happened to him at the end.
Overall, I consider a 8/10 a good score. It's a darker and more personal twist for Thor to undertake
and appears to be the current trend at Marvel (Look at Iron Man). Yet, some acting, some poor CGI and a few loose ends within the story do drag it down for me. Superhero/action movies will never achieve a 10/10, simply because they are more for fun rather than the critical film making that many critics desire.
I'm sorry for such a short and crazy review but seeing I'm running on 5 hours sleep and trying to keep up with everything that's going on is not an easy task.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)