Roderick

I booted it up and then I couldn't stop playing. Only after I'd done the whole desert world did I tear myself away for food and some podcasting. It's really good. I was so on the fence before, so this is a good feeling. Some random observations: - I love how adventurous the structure is. Mario Games usually telegraph very clearly that you're in a new level and this or that is the objective. Everything here's more free-roaming and as a result it feels so much more like a grand adventure full of unexpected things. I'm never sure when a boss is coming or where we're going next. - I used my Waluigi amiibo to give Mario a Waluigi outfit and it's just perfect. - The first real level you enter, the little dinosaur island, is everything I want from Mario: a compact, interesting place to explore, jam-packed with secrets and corners and jokes. - Love the weirdness. Odyssey trades in visual consistency for maximum surprise: you never know what weird thing or graphical style is up next. Odyssey isn't a beautiful game in the way Breath of the Wild is beautiful, and it's not really trying to be. I will take that over the tired and self-cannibalizing 'New' Mario series any day of the week.

Well, color me impressed. I just watched Thor: Ragnarok and it's a delight. [Not just because of Jeff Goldblum.] [But also kinda because of Jeff Goldblum.] The 80s aesthetic and music (thanks composer Mark Mothersbough!) hits home and the movie is - save for some less-interesting bits where there's a necessary ramping up of plots and stakes - basically a superhero spoof/comedy. Thanks director Taika Waititi! After two passable outings, it's good to see Thor finding its groove by taking itself way less seriously. It's like Marvel finally dared to go all the way due to the success of GotG. It also reminds me a bit of how Ubisoft started doing crazy things in expansions, starting with Far Cry: Blood Dragon, which then saw this hausse of 'anything goes, let's go apeshit' high concept stuff unleashed on what used to be so predictable a field. Anyway, Marvel is on a roll this year. Where they were flopping about last year with meh stuff like Dr. Strange, it's been nothing but Spider-Mans and Guardians of the Galaxys and Thors up until now.

Veering dangerously off-topic: I recently read Ian Flemings You Only Live Twice, and where the movie has a terrific plot concerning volcanic lairs and stolen spaceshuttles (setting up the very archetype that Dr. Evil later played off of), the book's plot is legitimately bonkers. All I'm saying is, the Bond movies are the sane ones, triple-nipples and all.

The reason this one jumped out at me was because it made me believe there was way more to the mystery than there was, and because of it I didn't fully 'get' the reveals and emotions the movie was setting up. I don't mind movie logic, except when it undermines my experience of said movie. But it's not a big deal or anything, just something I needed clarification on.

Well...

Up to date again, and despite some misgivings, what sticks out to me is how much fun I'm having. Every episode has at least one neat little scifi idea going on, the characters are growing on me, and the latest ep had a very very very old acquaintance checking in, which pleased me. I'm shocked at how easily Starfleet humans win in fisticuffs with Klingons though. Those guys should be physically way out of our league.

I just came out of the film and my feelings are equally conflicted. I did like the film, the experience of seeing it, quite a lot. The visuals are superb and all in all I think it does a great job of respectfully adding to the Blade Runner universe. At first I didn't think a sequel was a good idea at all, but whatever this is, it's not a throwaway film. It has something to say, it says it with great gusto, and it's a miles better cinema experience than half of what I see. So, props for just putting out a thoughtful and interesting science fiction film. The length is an issue. It really is long and the characters largely don't support that length. I always defined Blade Runner as a movie that felt like it was 45 minutes long, no matter how often I watch it. It just flies by. This, in contrast, takes its time. There are also loose strings that reek particularly of setting up a sequel, which I didn't really care for.

Oh, this looks so delicious.

I doubt I'll go for the DLC. I had a perfectly good time with Mario + Rabbids, but am also happy that it's done. [Currently I can dream the battle music, it really gets its hooks into you in that 'Danny Elfman' kinda way.]

Wait, is Discovery not on Netflix in the US? I see everyone talking about another streaming service, but over here in the Netherlands it's on Netflix. It's even a Netflix Exclusive! What gives? I hesitate to see The Orville. I can just about smell the kind of cheesy humor involved. I'll pass up on Star Trek with dick jokes. But I might be wrong. It's a tough deal to have to go up against Galaxy Quest and I really doubt MacFarlane can pull it off. I don't doubt it's lovingly made, with great fondness for Trek, but the execution of it I'm less sure of.

I am finishing up Mario + Rabbids, currently in the process of getting the final few perfect scores for levels and the ultimate challenges. Time for thoughts! The game is really well paced and has a good length. One more world and I'd have gotten quite bored with it. Looking back, I played 95% of the game with the standard team of Mario + Rabbid Peach + Rabbid Luigi. That is just such an unkillable setup (vampire + healing abilities) that I never bothered with the others. I sometimes switched it up with Rabbid Mario or Luigi Actual, but those felt less versatile. Specialists like Rabbid Yoshi or Peach - I just never found a good use for them. On the one hand, it's good that the game never enforces one over the other (save for a few moments when Luigi Actual's movement bonus is a MUST), but it makes it all too easy to stick with the team you like and never venture outside of that. That's also a personal flaw, I know. When something feels comfortable and good, I am loath to abandon it. I think it's safe to say Ubi will release a Kingdom Battle 2 in a few years. They've got an amazing engine running (Snowdrop), the assets are easily reused and the game is I believe a big hit. Hopefully not too soon though: if I play another one in a year, I'll burn out on it.

I too liked the third ep a lot better than the second. I see promise for the Discovery! I liked how they portrayed the captain as ultimately a solid guy, but then didn't like that they instantly flipped back and showed him with his weird alien menagerie. Saru is still great, he has exactly what was good about Spock: a character that is good for both comedy and drama in the show. The energy-eating bugs in the beginning were neat. I don't mind action at all (Star Trek is full of it), as long as it has some scifi cause and it's not all just characters butting heads or political stuff. That's super fine for Battlestar Galactica, but Star Trek needs to have a bit more scifi going on.

Better at making me interested in playing it. [Or at least the first level.] You made what is essentially horrible sound hilarious and self-aware.

Well, that is something we've all lacked in our lives. A man in a iron pot with a sledgehammer trying to inch his way forward in life. Is this set in the Firewatch cinematic universe?

That description is better than anything I read on the game when it released, Ben.

Oh yes, the Duke Nukem Forever timeline of previews and teasers is a joy to follow. Related: do not forget to watch the classic, official trailer 3D Realms put out to its Duke trilogy in 2008. When it comes to my gaming appetite, I notice that I need quite some variety. It just won't do to play two Mario games in a row for instance. I need to switch up between platformers, adventure games, action, 3D stuff...

I look forward to the next game in this topic tomorrow. I concur with Osmosisch! What a project. But aren't you grossly burned out on shooters at this point? Surely if you binge this stuff for years and years, nothing will tickle your fancy anymore?

See, I was denied even that. There was duality of elderly people who left, but that was in stealth mode during the break. Not even a single goddamn tantrum. To be fair, I don't think mother! especially deserves a non-silent storm-off, but it may have been my one chance.

Now I'm a little miffed that audiences are generally really quiet and to themselves over here. For 99,9% of movies, that's bliss, but I would've loved some shocked gasps or horrified 'well I never'-s during mother!.

I thought Kingsman 2 was fine. Not as pitch perfect as the first one, mind. I was very happy with some of the spy cliché deconstruction and a certain foul-mouthed rock legend.

It's still a thing in the Netherlands. The Pathé line of cinemas has done away with breaks, which I prefer (for movies <2hr), but Vue (formerly JT) and others still have them. It's a bit of an interruption most of the time, but you get used to it and it's nice to at least be able to go to the toilet and get some refreshments. For mother! it didn't feel particularly like respite. I had steeled myself especially for the second half, so I knew I was going into heavier territory after. The films breaks up exactly in between the two major visits to the house. In the second half we (unfortunately) no longer see Harris of Pfeiffer, and it's when Lawrence gets preggers. I prefer the first half, where it's more 'death by a thousand cuts' than one big wallop of misery.

Oh yes, Bardem is absolutely the worst to her. He is continuously going behind her back and ignoring her wishes when he's inviting people over. Lawrence may annoyingly never dig her heels in the sand (possibly because she's so completely ineffectual at getting anyone to listen to her, which in fact does resonate with some feeling of powerlessness inside me), but her husband should absolutely take her needs and desires into account. Possibly my favorite thing about mother! is how Ed Harris and Michelle Pfeiffer suddenly become like little children after breaking Bardem's little doodad. They get apologetic and churlish and sulk. Part of why I wanted to see this movie was the wildly diverging reactions to it. My friend was also highly entranced and unnerved by the film, while I was totally the only one in the theater chuckling. An elderly couple walked out during the break. These sort of divisive experiences are usually worthwhile, since they have something real on offer, something that may do something with you or not, but at least they're not unisexually appealing, committeed-to-death entertainment.

I was never into Stargate, and whenever I saw shards of the show on tv, it was Richard Dean Anderson not being MacGyver and people with snake heads jumping through shrubs. Honestly, it always looked a little cheap compared to Star Trek TNG or other concurrent shows. But I figured that if so many people liked/loved it, it must have some qualities. A few years ago I watched the movie for the first time since my childhood and it was complete scifi schlock. I was kinda shocked by how few ideas there were. I was expecting bombastic world building, but most of it is just setting for action set pieces. It didn't feel coherent or all that interesting. I'm sure the show has a lot more going for it though. It has Teal'c! Whom I know to be a character!