The Year in Review

As I did last year and the year before, I find it helpful to reflect upon the good and the bad of 2017.

Minimization

My 2015 focused on minimization, and I've tried to maintain that mindset.  I'm now fine with books- I'll buy a few each year but remove about the same.  The main progress in 2017 was Lego: I've finally relegated that hobby to my children, keeping a handful of favorite sets and turning over the rest to them (or selling some for a tidy profit).  It was hard, but maintaining a "use it or lost it" mindset is valuable.  Next up is board games (more on this below).

Personal Spending

I did reasonably well here, using only gift money (or proceeds from game/card sales) for personal spending.  I'm less materialistic than I used to be, but I'm not there yet; I still covet far too much.

Reading

My goals here were simple:
- Keep my "owned but unread" pile small (under 10 books)
- Read up on the Reformation, as this year marked 500 years since Martin Luther and his 95 Theses
- Read a few books I own but haven't read for years

I met all three goals . . . and it was fun, as always.  I read about 60 books and over 15,000 pages this year; I'm happy with that, but may read a tad less (40?) next year.  My post here recaps this year's recommendations.

Board Games

I played a lot of games this year, and the blog reflected that, with board game reviews featuring heavily (about one-third of my posts were game-related).  Check out the master game page here for an aggregate listing.

I see the trend in board games that I've seen in books, movies, and other problem areas in my life: I start a hobby by purchasing far too many things, then pare down and become more responsible as I learn my tastes and dial it down to acceptable levels.  I'm still in the initial phase of this hobby- buying too much.  I own "only" 60 games but have yet to play a quarter of them.  I hope to tackle that problem next year, playing them all and minimizing where appropriate.

Fitness

My goal was to lose 15 lbs and stretch more; I dropped only 5 lbs but met the latter, now stretching after every gym workout.  This noticeably decreased my back pain and is now a part of my routine.

My overall fitness levels stayed about the same as 2016, as shown below.  I had fewer runs than I would have liked; my 2-year-old decided waking up early was fun, so I had to back down running to give my wife a breather during the week.  I did the gym three times each week plus one run on weekends . . . I hope to get back to more frequent running next year, but that depends on how the little one does.  My distance increased, though, which was a good thing: I'm back to 5K (3.1 miles) as my standard distance.

2014: 51 runs for 104.6 miles, 98 gym workouts
2015: 47 runs for 103.0 miles, 81 gym workouts, 5 soccer games, 5 PT sessions

2016: 98 runs for 205.8 miles, 115 gym workouts, 4 bike rides
2017: 77 runs for 203.9 miles, 111 gym workouts

I also did 25 yard work sessions (mowing, raking, weeding, trimming), which definitely counts as exercise.

Blogging

I blogged more this year than I did the two prior, and continue to enjoy this hobby.  Though most of the posts (as always) were book reviews, game reviews were a close second.  Mid-year, I discovered this concept of "pages" vs. "posts," and made some changes.  Now, the sections across the top are pages, which are more visible (since they're not tied to date of publication, like posts are).  Most of my summary posts were so converted and are now easily accessed.

Spiritual

My relationship with the Lord still isn't where it should be. I need to figure out better approaches to prayer & Bible study within the realities of small children and early morning demands.  I did slightly better than last year, but much improvement is necessary.  On the plus side, we did family devotionals for about half of the year, at dinner time, and that went well.  Now to get back into those . . .

Parenting

This section is a verbatim repeat from last year (and the year before).  I'm not a great parent. I'm too quick to anger at home- I have to remember that I can't expect my children (ages 7, 5, and 2) to act (or reason) like adults. I also get uneasy when the house is a mess- which is all the time- so I have to dial back the OCD if I have any hope of surviving their childhood. Finally, I don't do a good job cherishing the time, frequently looking away to the future when the current challenges will be overcome. May I remember that current challenges will be replaced with other, possibly harder, ones, so I need to learn to enjoy each stage for what it is. Our kids actually like us now- so may I take advantage of that rather than view it as a burden that they're CONSTANTLY in our faces, even when we're in the bathroom.

Conclusion
This year, I was comfortable with progress in reading, weight loss, flexibility, family devotions, and blogging.  Next year, I need to lose more weight, improve personal devotions, and work on parenting skills.

I'm glad I made certain strides, but 2018 needs to see improvement in many areas.  This will always be true, I suppose, but it's important to keep striving.

The Lego Ninjago Movie

Just seven months after The Lego Batman Movie, Lego released a Ninjago flick, based on its long-running brick theme.  Here, teenage ninja Lloyd Garmadon is shunned by the world due to his lineage (his father is the evil lord Garmadon), though his Master Wu and fellow ninjas accept him.  He dedicates his life to working to defeat dad's evil schemes, but events and forced interactions with dad force him to re-think his life.  But he doesn't have long . . . Meowthra (a giant cat) is loose in Ninjago City and will destroy them all if the team doesn't act fast.

This movie is . . . decent.  I couldn't quite figure out the theme (reconciliation and finding your place, I think), but I may have been hampered due to distractions (watching with two chatty 5-year-olds).  The film retains the flavor of The Lego Movie and The Lego Batman Movie, with witty asides, cultural insights, and surprisingly poignant moments interlaced with action and intentional silliness.  Though it doesn't quite reach the heights of its brickfilm predecessors, it's worth a look.

Rating: B

Thus Concludes 2017

Another enjoyable reading year "in the books." This post recaps the year and presents what I consider the best of the bunch.

According to my spreadsheet, I completed 54 books this year, but read a percentage (10%-50%) of 6 more works.  So let's make it 60 books read, and those totaled 15,792 pages- about 43 pages a day. That takes less than an hour- it's not nearly as imposing as some think, especially when ~1,500 of those pages were listened to on my commute into work.

Of the 60 books, 3 were audiobooks, 3 were eBooks, and 22 came from the library or friends. I rated 31 a solid 'A' or higher, and 6 a 'C' or lower. By category, I read 10 history books, 7 religion, 5 fantasy/mythology, 3 literature, 3 Arthurian, 19 graphic novels, and a smattering of other genres.

Here are my top ten reads from this year:

Christopher Morgan: Fallen: A Theology of Sin
Alister McGrath: Christianity's Dangerous Idea
Stephen Ambrose: Undaunted Courage
J.R.R. Tolkien: The Hobbit
Various: Batman: Year One
Various: The Long Halloween
Stephen King: Carrie
Charles Dickens: David Copperfield
Alexandre Dumas: The Three Musketeers
Bruce Metzger: The Canon of the New Testament

And three honorable mentions:

C.S. Lewis: The Screwtape Letters

Susan Wise Bauer: The History of the Ancient World
Tristan Donovan: It's All a Game

Happy reading in 2018!

The Five Love Languages (Gary Chapman)

What is love?  True love is concerned with fostering the growth of another person.  "Love is something you do for someone else"  It's a choice; an attitude that chooses to look out for another's interests.  You do things for their benefit, and in so doing, reflect the fact that "life's deepest meaning is not found in accomplishments but in relationships."

Loving is our responsibility; and on the flip side, we need to know that we belong and are wanted.  "At the heart of mankind's existence is the desire to be intimate and to be loved by another."  "Our most basic emotional need is not to fall in love but to be genuinely loved by another, to know a love that grows out of reason and choice, not instinct.  I need to be love by someone who chooses to love me, who sees in me something worth loving."  And we each have what Dr. Gary Chapman calls an "emotional love tank," which (when full) makes us feel loved.  His book, The Five Love Languages, looks at how we're wired.

We all have different ways of feeling loved (our "love language"), and we need to know our own (and our spouse's) to effectively love each other.  Chapman argues there are five categories that make us feel loved:

Words of affirmation: kind, encouraging, and humble words (making requests, not demands)
Quality time: spending focused time with someone (togetherness, quality conversation, quality activities)
Receiving gifts: (not just physical gifts and money, but also the gift of self)
Acts of service: doing things you know your spouse would like you to do.  Seeking to please by serving.
Physical touch: back rub, holding hands, embracing, sex, and more

There are different 'dialects' within the five, so an two people who both love acts of service (for example) may desire very different ones.  But the bottom line is to know your spouses- and your own- and act accordingly.

How do you determine your own language?  Ask yourself the following questions: "What does your spouse do (or fail to do) that hurts you most deeply? What have you most often requested? In what way do you regularly express love?" Reflecting on this may help you understand what resonates with you.

When you know your (and your spouse's) love language, proceed accordingly.  Love them the way they feel loved, even when it's hard (our actions precede our emotions), and watch your relationship grow.

Review
This is an excellent book.  A fast read, it helped me understand my own language (and that of my wife's), and it explained how some of my efforts don't resonate with her (and vice-versa).  I look forward to applying some of these principles.

Aside: though geared towards spouses, the principles apply to our children, friends, coworkers, and all in our lives.  So this book has value regardless of your relationship status.

Rating: A

The Three Musketeers

The Three Musketeers is Disney's 1993 film based on Dumas' book (see previous post for that review).  Here, D'Artagnan helps the recently-disbanded musketeers save the king from the cardinal's overthrow plans.  Can they prevail against hopeless odds?

I need to stop watching movies immediately after reading the book on which they're based; it's invariably disappointing.  I enjoyed this when first released (and I was thirteen) . . . it has some humor and action/adventure.  But now?  It's cheesy (in all facets- acting, dialogue, humor, plot) and, unforgivably, deviates dramatically from the novel.*  And, something I didn't pick up on earlier: it bears striking resemblance, in places, to 1991's Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, no doubt hoping to copy its success.**  It is a product of its time . . . and one that need not be revisited.

Rating: C

*I don't expect movies to follow books to the letter- but they should maintain the spirit.  This one does not.

** It didn't come close, grossing about a third of Robin's $165 million (according to boxofficemojo).

The Three Musketeers (Alexandre Dumas)

Set in the 1620s under the reign of Louis XIII in France, The Three Musketeers follows four companions as they serve his majesty and grow in friendship with each other.  They are:

Athos, quiet stoic with an unknown past
Porthos, flamboyant with an eye for the limelight (and the ladies)
Aramis, fighting until he can no longer reject his inner desire for the monastery
D'Artagnan, young Gascon eager to prove himself, and the central hero in the tale

They find themselves in a France wrought with tension.  The King's chief minister, the Cardinal Richelieu, has considerable power, and the country is divided between Royalists and Cardinalists (frenemies is an apt description).  The foreign-born Queen is distrusted, and the Cardinal seeks to use that to his benefit as external perils (from England, Austria, and Spain) loom.  The Musketeers, as Royalists, battle against the Cardinal's schemes and allies, including the dangerous Milady de Winter, all while fighting for King and Catholicism against the Huguenots at the Siege of La Rochelle.  "All for one, and one for all," can they prevail against such powerful foes?

This "historical fiction"* is a classic for a reason.  It's full of suspense, comedy, tragedy, and adventure.  It also reflects  aspects of the society of that era (to include the common extramarital relationships practiced by "good guy" and bad alike).  Overall I liked it, despite the number and magnitude of coincidences or "right place at the right time" situations, which seemed excessive.  (And I wasn't a fan of the morals of the age.)  But the characters, humor, and suspense were top-notch.  It's not as good as The Count of Monte Cristo, but it's close.

Rating: A

*the main personalities existed, but Dumas uses them with no attempt at historical accuracy.  Historical fiction is probably an incorrect term as a result . . . 

Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi

Picking where The Force Awakens left off, The Last Jedi follows Rey, Finn, Poe, and the Resistance.  Fresh off the heels of their defeat of Starkiller Base, they have little time to celebrate: the First Order's remaining forces are hot on their heels, with Supreme Leader Snoke and Kylo Ren leading the charge.  Meanwhile, Rey has finally found Luke Skywalker . . . but will it make a difference?  I'll say no more to avoid spoilers.

This film is different.  Like The Force Awakens, it's funny, suspenseful, fast-paced, and action-packed.  But where Episode VII looked disturbingly like an Episode IV reboot, The Last Jedi is full of fresh twists and unexpected events (while still paying homage to the originals).  As I watched, I cycled through thinking "this is weird, this is cool, this is surprising, this is good, this is different, this is too much, this is right on."  In the end, the film wins because it leaves the viewer both satisfied (the plot moves the overall story forward nicely) and wanting more (so much remains to know).  I have no idea what to expect for the next film- and that's a good thing.

Rating: A-

December 2019 update: I re-watched this film with my children.  I was disappointed; it's more like Episode V than I originally realized, and though it has some new material, what it introduces is conflicting, confusing and bizarre. 

New rating: C+

Tournament at Camelot

Today's review is of the 2017 release, Tournament at Camelot.  For 3-6 players, it takes 45 minutes.

Overview
You are in Arthur's circle of friends (or foes), eager to prove your prowess at the tournament.  Each round, you'll deal (or receive) damage.  When the first person drops to zero health, the player with the highest health wins.

Each player will be a protagonist (Arthur, Sir Gawain, Mordred, etc.), which gives him/her a special ability.  Each protagonist has a corresponding companion (Excalibur, etc.) for an additional ability when his/her health falls below a stated value.

The play revolves around dealing damage using weapons cards.  There are five suits of cards- four standard (swords, arrows, sorcery, deception) and one suit of wild cards (alchemy)- and a few other special cards.  Each suit has cards valued 1-15, and some are 'poisoned.'  See below image for an example.  Play will revolve around skillful use of these cards, as explained in the next section.

examples of cards; image from here

If you fall behind, don't worry- there is hope.  Godsend cards are distributed at the end of each round to those in greatest need, giving a further boost to level the playing field.

Simplified Gameplay
This game is played over a series of hands (called "Tourney rounds").  The dealer gives each player 12 cards.  The player to the left of the dealer leads with a suit of his/her choice.  From there it's a simple trick-taking game:

- all players, in clockwise order, must play a card with matching suit (if they have one) or wild card (if they have one).  If they have neither, they discard a card and lose 5 health.
- once all cards are down, the person who loses the trick (has the lowest number) takes the pile and places it in front of him/her.
- that player plays a new card, and things proceed until all hands are empty.
- at the end of the tourney round, each player receives damage based on the cards they have.  A 'normal' card is 5 damage, 'poisoned' are 10, and special cards (like Merlin) can be much more.
- each player deducts the damage they've received from their total health.  If nobody's reached zero, cards are shuffled and a new round begins after godsend cards are distributed.  If one or more have zero health, the game ends, and the person with the most health wins.

The player's protagonists, companions, and godsend cards give them unique abilities to introduce twists in the game.  Some, for example, give other players more damage in certain conditions, or shield the player from damage from a certain type.

Review
I enjoyed this game, a simple trick-taking contest with twists.  The art is good (and suitably Medieval in flavor), play is fast, and the protagonist/companion/godsend cards give a surprisingly authentic Arthurian flavor as well as introduce fun variations.  Best played with 5-6, give this one a try at your next game night.

Rating: A

Port Royal

Today's review is of the 2014 release, Port Royal.  For 2-5 players, it takes 20-50 minutes.

Overview
You are a merchant at Port Royal, charged with maximizing your operation.  In the harbor are ships of up to five different nations and people with different skills.  Ships are used for income, and people are recruited for use in missions or have other abilities to aid you.  There are also mission and tax cards (described below).  As the game progresses, skillful accumulation of income and recruiting of people is key to success!  Missions and some people have victory points- first to twelve wins.

some cards; image from here

The back of the cards have one coin each, and are used for currency.

Simplified Gameplay
On your turn, you first discover, then trade & hire.

Discover
Draw cards one at a time from the draw deck and put (most of) them in the harbor.  You can stop drawing whenever you wish.  Ships and people are placed in the harbor.  When two ships of the same nationality are in the harbor, your turn immediately ends (skipping the next phase) unless you have enough sword icons (on people you've recruited) to repel the most recently-drawn ship.  So be careful!  Mission cards are placed above the harbor and will remain in play until someone completes them.  Tax cards are immediately applied (anyone with 12+ gold discards half) and discarded.

Trade & Hire
As first player, you choose 1-3 cards in the harbor (depends on how many different flags are present).  Ships give you the amount of gold indicated on the card; people are obtained (set in front of you) by paying their cost.  Then each other player gets to choose one card (obtaining gold or paying costs as appropriate), giving you one gold for the right to do so on your turn.

After these phases, anything left in the harbor is discarded, and the next player's turn begins.

At any point during your turn, you can complete a revealed mission card by discarding characters with matching icons.  Missions and some people give you victory points; first to twelve wins.

Review
This is a really good game.  The press-your-luck element (choosing when to stop drawing) adds suspense, and the available people each have abilities that introduce an interesting twist.  It's simple to learn, fast to play, and engaging for all involved.

Rating: A

The Quest for El Dorado

Today's review is of the 2017 release, The Quest for El Dorado. For 2-4 players, it takes 30-60 minutes.

Overview
You seek the city of legend: El Dorado, overflowing with gold.  But you're not the only one . . . so build your team [deck] well.  You must cross jungles, rivers, mountains, and other obstacles in your way, but if you make it first, the reward will be far more than you can imagine.

A deck-building game similar to Dominion in mechanics, here you start with a hand of basic cards, and add to the deck through smart purchasing of cards in the marketplace (pictured below). 

the marketplace; image from here

Each card has an ability that helps you navigate the map or fine-tune your deck to maximize  efficiency.  The map is modular, with many arrangements possible (see below for one layout).  They include recommendations for a starting layout and several others of varying difficulty levels.

one layout; image from here

Each map hex has symbols on it indicating what is necessary to enter that space.  Two machetes, for example, means you need one card with at least two machetes (you can't combine cards) to pass through.  You'll need machetes, paddles, and coins as you proceed, and some squares make you discard cards- which isn't always a bad thing.  Examples below.

image from here

Simplified Gameplay
You start each turn with a hand of 4 cards.  You use those cards to do two things:
- advance your explorer(s) on the map
- buy cards in the marketplace

At the end of your turn, unused cards can remain in your hand or be discarded (to your personal discard pile; any purchased cards also go there).  Then draw your hand back up to 4 cards for your next turn.  When your draw deck is empty, shuffle your discard pile and make a new draw deck.

As the game progresses, you'll encounter hexes (or cards you purchase) that make you discard cards.  This can be handy for getting rid of some of your initial (weaker) cards, as you'll want as many power cards as possible for your final push to El Dorado.

Review
A finalist for the Spiel des Jahres (German Game of the Year), this is a solid game.  It's straightforward- easy to learn and play.  The modular map makes for a new experience each time.  It's not spectacular- early mis-steps can put you out of the running early- but it's good.  It's on par with Dominion, though I think my favorite deck builder remains Clank!

Rating: A-

Ethnos

Today's review is of the 2017 release, Ethnos.  For 2-6 players, it takes 45-60 minutes.

Overview
You are vying to be the next lord of Ethnos, doing so by exerting your dominance in the six kingdoms.  You'll need bands of various tribes to help you, each of which has a special ability usable only when you name that tribe the leader of a given band.  Choose wisely, and you shall rule.

Each card in Ethnos has a tribe (one of twelve; only six are used in a game) and color (one of the six kingdoms).  Each tribe has a special ability as printed on the cards.  The game is about using bands to add influence in a given kingdom.  A band is a set of cards with either all the same color (with different tribes) OR all the same tribe (with different colors).  The leader of a band- the card you put on top- tells you two things:
- the color shows which kingdom is being influenced
- the tribe shows what special ability you can use when you play the band

examples of tribes and colors; image from here

Simplified Gameplay
Ethnos is played over three ages.  In each age, on your turn you either play a band or draw a card.  If you draw, it can be from the draw deck or face-up pile of cards.  If you play a band, you play it in front of you with leader designated.  If the number of cards in the band meets the requirements for that kingdom at that time, you place a control marker there (this will vary; you can play a band without qualifying for a control marker).  Then you discard your remaining hand, putting it in the face-up pile of cards from which all can draw if they so choose.

game setup; image from here

At the end of each age, the player with the most control markers in a given kingdom gets the points allotted for that kingdom in that age.  In addition, each player gets points ("glory") based on the number of cards in each band that played during that age.  Control markers remain from age to age, but cards are returned and shuffled, starting a new age.  After three ages, the game is over; most glory wins.

control markers in different territories; image from here

Review
This is a good game; surprisingly so.  It takes basic concepts but executes them really well.  It's a set collection/area control game, with enough options (choosing tribe or color for a set), variability (through randomly-selected tribes and victory point values), and twists (through tribe abilities) to make things interesting.  The theme is pasted on, unfortunately, but this is a solid offering.

Rating: A

A-team & MacGyver

Today I reflect on two of my favorite '80s TV shows: A-team and MacGyver.

A-team

"In 1972, a crack commando unit was sent to prison by a military court for a crime they didn't commit.  These men promptly escaped from a maximum security stockade to the Los Angeles underground.  Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as soldiers of fortune.  If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire . . . the A-team."  So begins The A-Team, an action series that ran for five season (1983-87).  It follows the adventures of Hannibal, Face, Murdock, and B.A. as they help those in need against greedy and dangerous adversaries.

Hannibal always had a plan (and loved when it came together), Face used his looks to help whenever necessary, Murdock was howling mad (and used that insanity to deliver great lines), and B.A. provided sheer muscle, attitude, and intimidation.  It was a great combination, and I loved this show as a kid.  Bullets flew (but nobody ever got hit), cars went airborne (and often into buildings), and there was plenty of general mayhem.  One favorite episode is "Pure-Dee Poison," where the team takes on a bootleg distiller whose poisonous concoctions is hurting a small town.  The boys get captured, but thankfully their prison is a barn with a working construction vehicle, scrap metal, and welding tools, enabling them to build a customized tank and effect a spectacular escape with a flair typical for the series.

My favorite character was Murdock, whose insanity was always enjoyed (pleas to name my baby sister after him were mercifully rejected by my parents), though I also appreciated B.A.'s ability to shake things up.  That said, the A-Team has not aged well.  Poor acting, cheesy dialogue, and ridiculous characters are hard to stomach in today's entertainment-saturated world.  But an occasional episode is an enjoyable jaunt down memory lane, and brings to mind the expectations and limitations of media in that era.

MacGyver

Angus MacGyver was a jack-of-all-trades who used his wits and scientific understanding to improvise on the fly, building ingenious devices to get him out of a tight spot and improve the world, be it to save the forests or help someone out of a scrape.  He worked for the Phoenix Foundation, lived on a house boat, rocked a mullet, hated guns, and loved hockey (he's the reason I'm a Calgary fan).  His boss, Pete, was frequently used to introduce the stories (and fret the entire time).  His friend, Jack, was a lovable mischief-maker who always shook things up.  His show ran for seven seasons (1985-92). 

Like the A-Team, MacGyver was full of cheesy acting, plots, and dialogue.  That said, it was more polished and suspenseful than the former.  I recall many childhood afternoons watching the episodes, fascinated watching MacGyver use everyday items to build amazing things.  One episode that sticks out is "Trumbo's World," where a horde of killer ants is approaching, and Mac must find a way to stave them off.

Reflecting

I watched episodes of both series recently, and was reminded that the '80s were a very different world, and television of the era reflects it.  Simple characters, moralistic societies, horribly cheesy sequences . . . I both miss and mock the time.  Current technologies and cultural sensibilities have greatly altered what's considered acceptable on television, and I don't think the trend is in a positive direction.  And yet . . . perhaps childhood fancies are best left in the past, where naivete and immaturity blinds us to their flaws.  Invariably, any venture into my childhood whims leaves me cycling between amazement ("why did I think this was good?"), amusement ("this is so bad it's funny!"), and enjoyment ("ahh, the good old days.").  The last is good, but the first two diminish it.  I'll have to chew on this more.  

Justice League

Effectively the sequel to Batman v Superman (though Wonder Woman also provides some backstory), Justice League opens to a world without Superman- and the galaxy has taken notice.  As Steppenwolf arrives to remake the Earth, Batman and Wonder Woman recruit Cyborg, Flash, and Aquaman in a desperate attempt to stave off this threat.  But without Superman, is all for naught?

Oh, what might have been.  DC is taking a much different approach to their story arc than Marvel, and so far, they're falling short.  While Marvel's Cinematic Universe built characters with individual movies and then brought them together in The Avengers in a suitably climactic way,  DC's Extended Universe elected to give big screen backstories only to Wonder Woman and Superman* before this compilation film.  The result is disappointing (and perhaps predictable): we're left hanging when it comes to Cyborg, Flash, Aquaman, and even Batman.  We have such little backstory that it diminishes the characters; by necessity, they're all thrown together with little build-up.  It results in a disjointed film with poor plot/character development, shallow dialogue, and forced humor.  We glimpse fascinating stories- I counted five of them!- but all go undeveloped for the sake of getting the team together so the audience can say "wow, the Justice League!"  Problem is: I didn't know most of the characters well enough to care about or enjoy their unification.  Another problem: casting.  I just can't get behind Ben Affleck as Batman, Jeremy Irons as Alfred, or J.K. Simmons as Commissioner Gordon. 

Perhaps I'm being too harsh.  I went in to the film with low expectations, and it did meet those.  There were a few amusing moments . . . but the Justice League should be an epic film, and it wasn't.

Rating: B-

*here is the list of movies in the DC 'canon'

Reset (David Murray)

Pace matters.  In today's American culture, that pace is frequently too fast.  We burn out, fall apart, wear down, and (ultimately) destroy ourselves in today's frenetic society.  In Reset, David Murray challenges us to change the way we think, and live "a grace-paced life in a burnout culture."

The point of the book: "by connecting God's grace more and more to our daily lives . . . we can learn how to live grace-paced lives in a burnout culture."  Murray points out five powers of grace:
- motivating ("in view of God's amazing grace to me in Christ, how can I serve God and others?")
- moderating (we're not perfect; we accept that both work and relationships are flawed, and therefore take them to God and don't seek human or divine approval)
- multiplying (we depend on God to give increase, not on our own effort)
- releasing (we release control to God's hands, which "humbly submits to setbacks and problems")
- receiving (we recognize and receive weekly Sabbaths, exercise, sleep, and fellowship as blessings)

He then takes the reader through chapters teaching to rest, re-create, relax, rethink, reduce, refuel, and relate, among other things.  His more cogent points:
- Physical and spiritual health are connected.  Ignore one, affect the other. 
- Sleep matters- a lot.  Some championship athletes (like LeBron James) sleep 12 hours a day!  Everyone's needs will vary, but 7-9 hours a night is a must for almost everyone.  Neglect this and everything else will suffer.
- "We must nurture our lives with regular recreation, especially physical exercise."  Doing so is imperative to think more clearly and be more effective in our vocations.
- "We need rest for the body and the mind."  We need to turn down the volume in our information-soaked life.  Minimizing screen time (in any form), breathing exercises, yoga, vacations, and regular Sabbath-keeping are some tips for increased inner peace.
-  We need to re-think the answer to a basic question: "who am I?"  How we answer that- often with a list of roles and responsibilities- reveals a good deal about our priorities, and it's the starting point to  recover our true identities.  Priorities must align with how we should be living.
- We do too much, and need to reduce.  Come up with a routine and prune activities accordingly.  Many good things will never get done- but as people with finite capacity, that will always be true.  Accept limits and stop pretending we're more than we are.
- Food matters- the fuel you consume has a marked impact on mood, energy levels, and more.  And everyone needs activities in their lives that "refuel" them.  For example, keeping a blog.  Seems like a good idea.
- "The joy of [our] journey depends so much on who's riding with us."  As it is not good to be alone, we need to prioritize our relationships with God, spouse, kids, and friends.

This book is good, if much seemed like common sense.  I can't say I learned a lot of new things, but I was reminded of things I need to improve.  In that sense, it was valuable.  It's so easy to go down rabbit holes of false gods and forget what matters in life. And living where I do- in a high-paced area- heightens the pressure to "go, go, go."  Slow down, plan & prioritize, remember what matters.

Rating: A-

It's All a Game (Tristan Donovan)

As the subtitle states, It's All a Game covers the long history of board games.  Tristan Donovan gives an overview of ancient games and explores the origins of chess, backgammon, Life, Monopoly, Risk, Clue, Scrabble, Mouse Trap, Operation, Trivial Pursuit, Settlers of Catan, and more.  Further, he provides a fascinating look at the significance of each of these games, and how culture influences games and vice-versa.

Historical Summary
"Senet," an ancient Egyptian game, was played from at least 3000 BC.  Game boards were found in Tutankhamen's burial chamber and depicted in paintings in Nefertari's tomb.  The royal game of Ur and Mancala also have ancient origins.

Evolving from an ancient game, chess got its start in India around the fifth century.  From there it would change incrementally as it spread through Persia and Arab lands and then into Europe (in 711), with each culture contributing an element recognizable to modern eyes that reflected regional politics and religion in these different eras and regions.  The standard chess set wouldn't be established until 1849.  "The folk game born in the Gupta Empire had traveled the world and back again for centuries.  Along the way it had been molded by religion, war, female monarchs, and neoclassical architecture, and turned into an international sport."

Backgammon, huge in the 1970s, was a possible descendant of the ancient royal game of Ur.  A early version was popular in Greece and Rome (Claudius "had a board affixed to his chariot to he could play on the move"), and remains huge in the Middle East- Crusaders brought the game home with them in Medieval times.

Games reflect culture, and their evolution does the same.  The Game of Life started in the 1860s "as a highly moral game . . . that encourages children to lead exemplary lives."  And it had to do so: "religious New Englanders viewed board games as gateway drugs that could lure children into a life of gambling and sin."  But later iterations would put the focus on money, reflecting American values a century later, and further tweaks would reflect the ever-shifting realities of American society.

Monopoly was first envisioned, in the 1880s, as a cautionary game showing the evils of monopolistic landlords of the age.  Little did its inventor know that the game ultimately became popular because, rather than admonished, players desired to be the cutthroat king of property.  Thankfully, some good would come of it: modified Monopoly boards were given to American POWs in Europe during WWII to aid their escape.  The modifications included hidden silk maps and small tools.

War games are not a new concept.  The Japanese ran game simulations before Pearl Harbor, using their conclusions to refine the attack plan against the USA.  But they were far from the first- Germans started in the 1550s to tinker with the concept, which would be refined over the centuries.  By 1824 "Kriegsspiel had become part of Prussian military training," by 1850s it was "a central tool" in so doing, as the world would discover in 1870 during the Franco-Prussian War.  A century later (1950s), Risk would burst on the scene and bring war gaming into the home.

Clue (1940s) grew out of a British love for detective stories (which themselves originated out of a public fascination with murder).

Scrabble (1930s) spawned a new concern for what a true word was- as the official Scrabble dictionary testifies.

Mouse Trap and Operation (1960s) brought games into the plastic age.

Twister (1960s) and Monogamy (2001) revealed societal attitudes towards sex and gaming.

Trivial Pursuit (mid 80s) helped make games for adults more acceptable and mainstream.

Germany became a board game powerhouse in the last 70 years.  After World War II, as West Germany rebuilt, "board games became associated with togetherness and wholeness."  It was (and is) a preferable alternative to television and similar pursuits. In the mid 90s, a new wave in German games changed the landscape.  In these games,
- the outcome is governed by player decisions rather than fate; it's about decision making and planning relative to others
- streamlined rules became more common, making games more accessible
- social activity was key, so all were involved to the end (no early player elimination)
- there are often concealed victory conditions (vague frontrunner) to keep all interested/involved

The Settlers of Catan illustrate these concepts well and is indicative of the mid 90s wave in Germany; the trend would follow suit in the US a decade later.  Today, games like Catan, Pandemic, and Ticket to Ride are common sites around the world.

Board games are exploding.  In 2014, game sales were up 20% (reaching $880M) in the US alone.  From 2009-15, Kickstarter saw $196M towards development of new games.  And now, "legacy" games (making permanent changes to the board through multiple plays) are the latest concept to gain traction.


Why Games Matter
Games help people.  People use chess and other games to explore brain activity.  We use them to encourage ourselves to open up about our feelings (like in Ungame).  Psychologist Jon Freeman created programs "to activate and develop particular parts of the brain through games that emphasize strategy of chance.  The approach is based on the concept of neuronal plasticity, the idea that the neuron connections in our brains are constantly rewiring themselves in response to stimuli. . ."  He and other people are using games to teach math, develop social skills, help those with special needs, and diagnose medical conditions.

Games help machines; they "powered the development" of artificial intelligence (remember "Deep Blue," the chess computer?).

Games teach.  They can refine views on topics through interactive and experiential learning- and grant empathy/understanding by encouraging players to step into another's shoes.  Pandemic "is a prime example of how board games can make the complexities of the world around us easier to comprehend."  Games like Twilight Struggle can re-create reality and make "geopolitics easier to understand."

Games reflect culture.  In America, "dog-eat-dog competition" is common.  In Europe, it's more about player cooperation, or at least indirect competition (where players focus on managing their own resources as much as possible rather than wiping out others).  In each case, they point to cultural values.

Games bring us together.  They're a counter-trend to digital.  People want to connect; games help them make the time, bring us together face-to-face, and "reflect our needs and desires and our outlook on life."

Review
This is a good read.  I enjoyed the interesting anecdotes Donovan includes, and the breadth of material is nice.  The stories can get repetitive- many games took years to take off, so you hear familiar (and decreasingly interesting) stories of determination to overcome initial setbacks- but it's valuable nonetheless.  Initially, I had hoped for a more cohesive history, with scholarly analysis showing linkages between games proving some sort of tidy evolution, but in hindsight, I don't think such a thing is feasible.  Board games arose at different times and cultures, and the author's "one game at a time" approach is probably the best way to present things.  Most of all, I appreciated his discussion of the way culture influences games, how games help us as a society, and why people are increasingly drawn to them.  If anything, reading this deepened and increased my appreciation of this wonderful hobby.

Rating: A

The Joys of CCG

And here is my second talk (see previous post for backstory).

-------------------

Most people know I love tabletop games. It’s an excellent hobby for many reasons: mental exercise, social interaction, teamwork, imagination, and just plain fun. But my very favorite type of game is called a collectible card game, or CCG. In a nutshell, this is a game where each player builds a deck of cards and uses it to battle opponents to the stated victory condition.

CCGs differ from typical games in two ways: distribution model and preparation.

Distribution: You can't pick up the complete game in a self-contained package.  Instead, players obtain cards by purchasing randomized packs, with varying rarities. New sets of cards (called expansions) are released regularly, adding to the available card pool.

Preparation: Players must build a deck before any play happens.  Often, they invest a considerable amount of time learning cards, testing interactions, and constructing their decks. Most players spend more time preparing for games than playing them.

CCGs burst on the scene in 1993, when mathematician Richard Garfield wanted a compact filler game to pass time between games at board game conventions. He invented Magic: the Gathering, and its phenomenal success would see a predictable boom in the industry by 1995. Anything and everything had a CCG. There were encyclopedias and magazines dedicated to the hobby. There were even three Christian-themed games. But the bubble burst as quickly as it had formed. There were later successes- like Pokemon and Yu-gi-oh, but the golden age had passed.

That said, the hobby enjoys a steady following today: there are over 20 million Magic: the Gathering players in the world today, with tournaments occasionally appearing on TV.

Sometimes, we’re drawn to hobbies- consciously or otherwise- because they point to truths greater than themselves. I believe CCGs have several unique characteristics that reflect our reality more than typical tabletop offerings. Just a few:

- (top left picture in above slide) The joy of creating: your deck is a personal creation you nurture to reach its potential, which echoes of the Genesis cultural mandate and our responsibilities to do the same for creation as stewards of the Earth

- (bottom right) Diversity & Vastness: with over 15,000 unique magic cards, the possibilities are nearly infinite. Like the world, it’s too big to experience it all- though maybe you can reach .002%.

- (bottom left) Progressive revelation: the games are a living, unfolding drama. You know there’s a plan, but never know what’s coming. Cards which seem to have no purpose can become valuable when paired with later releases.  We can experience this in our lives, at times being unsure where we fit.  But as life progresses, our purpose can become evident.  Additionally, as new expansions release, which cards are important changes, reflecting our changing roles in society as we age and pass the torch to the next generation.

- (top right) The need for synergy/community.  New players often make the mistake of packing their decks with expensive and powerful cards.  But the best decks are ones that synergize well, where each card plays a role and some of the most key cards can be the most common.  It reflects the Christian Church as a whole, as discussed in 1 Corinthians 12 and elsewhere.  There are many members, gifts, and functions the body requires- and the most important is not always visible.

- (also top right) Need to focus and develop.  Individual decks must have internal synergy, but even then, no deck does all things well or wins in all conditions.  This reflects our finite capacities and need to nurture specific gifts to fulfill our calling.  No community is perfect, and each is geared to thrive in certain scenarios.

For these and other reasons, CCGs have a special place in my heart. I’d be happy to demonstrate them sometime; see me if interested. And I encourage you to look at your hobbies and determine the greater truths behind them- for the Lord’s invisible attributes have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made (from Romans 1).

The Morasse of Materialism

Today, I gave two talks at our Church's annual men's event, called Ignite.  Similar to TEDD talks, the rules were no more than five minutes and five powerpoint slides.  What follows is the first presentation; I hope you enjoy.

----------------------------

Hi, my name is John Mark, and I confess I like my stuff more than I like most of you. But the Lord is at work, and it starts with a story.

Four years ago, a family member (“Sue”) had a problem. She was a lifelong collector of stuff. Her house was packed and poorly tended. Years of this unchecked accumulation and neglect had produced decay and a remarkably unpleasant odor in all she owned. At the advice of professionals, we had to throw away nearly everything in the house. It was very difficult for her, and a stark example of the warning found in Matthew 6:19. It’s hard-but good- to be confronted with the futility of our false gods.

“People need dramatic examples to shake them out of apathy.” (Batman Begins, 2005). This was a wake-up call for me. Sue wasn’t alone in her addiction; I, too, love things far more than I ought. In fact, nearly all of us have too much. A recent study found that a typical British child owns 238 toys but consistently uses only 12. Despite fewer offspring, the average American home has tripled in size in the past 50 years and contains 300,000 items. And even popular slogans like “collect memories, not things,” have inherent in them this idea that accumulation is the goal. We have a problem. 

Sue’s situation sparked a personal struggle. Like Gollum/Smeagol, I felt conflict within me. Change was needed but I was resisting. Thankfully, help would soon arrive from an unexpected quarter.

As a voracious reader, one day I decided on a whim to calculate how many books I could read should I enjoy a standard lifespan. The answer- .002% of the 130 million books written in English- hit me like lightning. A lifetime of dedicated pursuit for .002%?! Finally, my heart was starting to see the asininity of accumulation. All human endeavors are bounded; our stuff should be too. At that point, a message popped into my head: “there are many good things you’ll never get to experience, and that’s okay.” That has stuck with me, and to this day I repeat that phrase during times of temptation.

My mindset shifting, I started looking at possessions differently. I took stock of what I owned. And rather than asking “do I like this?” the question became “do I use this?” The answers were humbling; the way forward clear.

“Let it go.” (Frozen, 2013). Finally convicted, I started purging. I sold or donated over 500 items: books, toys, games, clothes, DVDs. Though hard at first, I soon found it liberating. To my delight, I didn’t miss what I removed, nor did I need something after I jettisoned it. In fact, I enjoyed what remained more, because I had more time (and peace of mind) to appreciate it. And I made $4,000, which encouraged me further.

The Argonath in The Lord of the Rings were pillars to provoke pause in passersby. Through many trials and much error, I’ve learned a few principles to do the same in this area. First, maintain a “use it or lose it” mindset. If you have trouble with this, move every few years- it’s an impressive deterrent to accumulation. Second, develop criteria for ownership. Study your own usage patterns and use that knowledge to inform purchasing and retention decisions. Finally, set physical limits. This creates a tradeoff mindset and discourages irresponsible collecting.

I’m a work in progress. Though minimizing is now easier for me, I’m not better yet; I still love stuff and still buy too much. But this needs to happen; we cannot serve two masters, and “one’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.” (Luke 12:15) I’ll end with a challenge: get rid of 100 items in your home. Sell them, donate them, put them on a friend’s lawn. Perhaps you, too, will experience the “liberty of less,” for “where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” (Matthew 6:21)

Thor: Ragnarok

The latest Marvel Cinematic Universe offering, Thor: Ragnarok picks up where 2015's Avengers: Age of Ultron left off (though familiarity with other MCU movies is advantageous).  Here, we pick up Hulk and Thor's story (both disappeared at the end of Ultron).  While Thor tries to stop Hela (goddess of death) from destroying Asgard, Hulk chills out as a gladiator on mysterious world.  They'll need to join forces if they have any hope of saving Thor's homeworld . . . can they do so before all is lost?

This film has been well received, but I wasn't as enamored as the majority.  It was certainly better than Thor: The Dark World, and retained the stunning visuals common in the series.  It struck a markedly different tone- much more humorous and zany, with odd characters; it all was reminiscent of Guardians of the Galaxy 2.  I enjoyed the change, but uneven pacing and oscillation between offbeat and deadly serious wasn't done as well as in Guardians, character (and plot) development was poor in places, and it was light on meaning ("Asgard is a people, not a place," was about it).  It was pretty good, but not great. 

Rating: B+

Carrie

Carrie is the 1976 film based on the 1974 Stephen King book (just reviewed).  It follows the plot reasonably closely- an oft-wronged telekinetic girl goes bonkers at the prom and kills lots of people. 

As is typical, the movie fails to convey the power of the book.  The casting is reasonable (mostly fine, though John Travolta was a weak point), the characterizations accurate, but it's just too rushed.  At 90 minutes, the film fails to convey the depth of pain Carrie experiences, and the problems/sins of those around her.  You get the idea, but just a taste.  And, as the above poster implies, I think it misses the point that all involved are monsters.  It's not just about Carrie.  Finally, it's a product of its time- poor effects (by today's standards) and so on.  Read the book, skip the movie.

Rating: C

Carrie (Stephen King)

Carrie White is a sixteen-year-old telekinetic, able to control objects with her mind.  Raised by a mother practicing an extreme* interpretation of Christianity, Carrie is a sheltered outcast.  Relentlessly teased by kids at school, things seem to turn in her favor when her crush asks her to prom.  Things go well at first . . . but when her world comes tumbling down, she'll make sure everyone else's does, too.

I really liked this book.  A master of suspense and horror, renowned author Stephen King does an impressive job here, in his first published work.  The tale is told in nonlinear fashion and alternates between "standard" omniscient narrator, newspaper clippings, AP reports, book extracts, and various character points of view.  I loved that aspect, and was particularly impressed that the reader knows early on how the tale ends, but that foreknowledge heightens (rather than detracts from) the suspense.

Though Carrie is seen by many in the tale as a monster, I believe King's point is that we're all monsters.  Almost everyone in the book has a hand in the tragedy that occurs; such is life for our fallen race.  We use our powers (words and deeds) to torment and destroy others . . . at times to the ruin of all.

Rating: A

*and blatantly incorrect

Tales of King Arthur (Henry Gilbert)

Tales of King Arthur, published in 1911, is a re-telling of the Arthurian legend for children.  A classic treatment, there are many familiar stories and figures here.  The chapter [story] list:

- How Arthur was made king and won his kingdom
- Sir Balin and the stroke dolorous
- How Lancelot was made a knight, the four witch queens, and the adventures at the chapel perilous
- The knight of the kitchen
- How Sir Tristram kept his word
- The deeds of Sir Gertaint
- How Sir Perceval was taught chivalry, and ended the evil wrought by Sir Balin's dolorous stroke
- How Sir Owen won the earldom of the fountain
- Of Sir Lancelot and the fair maid of Astolat
- How the three good knights achieved the holy grail
- Of the plots of Sir Mordred; and how Sir Lancelot saved the Queen
- Of Sir Gawaine's hatred, and the war with With Sir Lancelot
- Of the rebellion of Mordred and the death of King Arthur

I liked Henry Gilbert's take on Robin Hood, so I was anticipating this one.  Unfortunately, this didn't do it for me.  The tales weren't compellingly told and, worse, diminished the power of the tragedy by watering down or minimizing key aspects of the story (like Lancelot & Guinevere's relationship).  I assume the changes were made to make it more appropriate for children, but other versions for children- like Rosemary Sutcliff's- are much superior.  I read half, skimmed the rest, and moved on.

Rating: C+

Exit: The Game- The Pharaoh's Tomb

Today's review is of the 2016 release, Exit: The Game- The Pharaoh's Tomb.  For 1-6 players, it (supposedly) can be done in one hour, but will likely take much more.

Overview
On a vacation to Egypt, you're enjoying a tour of an ancient tomb when the unthinkable happens: you get separated from your group and trapped in a burial chamber.  With only a notebook full of clues and a dial, you don't have long before you'll be trapped forever.  Can you figure out a series of riddles in time to escape?

This is a cooperative game, modeled after the escape rooms so popular right now.  You may have to cut or modify clue cards or other components, meaning it can be played only once (though once you know the clues, playing again would be pointless anyway).  The notebook is key but doesn't hold your hand- you'll have to think outside the box on this one- assume nothing.  You're supposed to be able to solve every thing in an hour . . . good luck.

Review
I played this with a group of four other highly educated individuals . . . and while we figured out many riddles, we got stumped more than once and had to rely, more than we expected, on the hint cards provided- and it still took us almost two hours.  I appreciated that it was challenging, but some steps seemed unfairly difficult . . . maybe that's the point.  As this is one in a series, I wonder if playing other offerings would be much easier, now that I know the range of things to expect.  In the end, it was enjoyable enough, but not something I see myself doing frequently.  I'd like to try a physical escape room to see how that compares.

Rating: B

Inis

Today's review is of the 2016 release, Inis.  For 2-4 players, it takes 60 minutes.

Overview
A newly discovered land begs for colonization; your goal is to be elected High King over disparate clans.  To do so, you must satisfy the most victory conditions:
- be present [have at least one clan] in six or more territories
- be chieftain* over a combined total of six or more opposing clans
- be present [have at least one clan] in territories with a combined total of six sanctuaries

Inis actions are taken using different types of  cards:
- each territory has a corresponding advantage card, given to the chieftain of that territory at the start of a round
- action cards are a common pool of actions, drafted completely each round and reused in subsequent rounds
- epic tale cards are generally obtained by playing certain action cards; powerful, they can be used only once per game

Throughout the game, players will use advantage, action, and epic tale cards to place new clans, citadels, sanctuaries, and territories, move clans between territories, and clash with opponents.

the game's contents; image from here

*the chieftain of a territory is the player who has the most clans in that territory. 

Simplified Gameplay
Inis is played over rounds; each round has two phases: Assembly and Season.

Assembly
- the chieftain of the Capital territory is designated as the Brenn (temporary leader or first player)
- check to see if anyone has won the game (players must have obtained a pretender token the round before to be eligible; the player who has a token and has satisfied the most victory conditions wins)
- each player takes any advantage cards corresponding to territories where he/she is chieftain
- the Brenn shuffles the action cards and manages the drafting of cards as described in the rules

Season
- each player, starting with the Brenn and rotating, can take one action on his turn: play a card, take a pretender token, or pass.  Every card played is discarded; some (action and advantage) will be used again in every round; epic tales will not be
- play continues until everyone has consecutively passed; then a new round begins with the assembly phase
- some cards can provoke clashes, which will force participants to lose clans or cards from their hands until all involved agree they've had enough

a game in progress; image from here

Review
This game initially appealed to me due to the breathtaking artwork- and it is a very 'pretty' game.  The rules are simple, the game moves quickly, and it's pleasantly interactive with lots of decision making.  That said, playing with just two players felt anticlimactic.  It's good, but there's something I can't identify that precludes it from being great.  I need to try this again with three or four participants.

Rating: B+