Crossroads of Twilight (Robert Jordan)

The Wheel of Time saga continues! Concurrently with and shortly after Winter's Heart . . .

Perrin continues looking for his wife. Mat is still fleeing Ebou Dar. Egwene and her army are encamped outside Tar Valon, debating how to remove Elaida without destroying any hope of reuniting the Tower's factions. Rand is debating his next move. And those in league with the Dark One plot their evil schemes . . .

Ugh! Possibly the worst book so far. Almost nothing happens for the first 600 pages. The last 220 are mildly more interesting, but only in places. Seems like a waste of a book. 

Rating: C-

Entrapment

Entrapment is a 1999 'caper' film starring Mac (Sean Connery) and Gin (Catherine Zeta-Jones). Mac is a well-known thief; Gin works for an insurance company. She wants to trap Mac by posting as a thief herself and collaborating on an epic heist. The company goes along with it, but is leery of the dangers. Things seem to go well at first, but it's soon clear that nothing is as it seems. Will the trap work?

This is a decent film. The plot has multiple layers and twists- that was good. I just couldn't buy into the chemistry between the two stars, perhaps because the character development was really rushed. The highlight for me (and why I wanted to see this in the first place) was one of the settings- Duart Castle, which I visited twice (recaps here and here). That was great to see.

Rating: B-

The Green Knight

 

The Green Knight is the tale of Gawain, King Arthur's nephew who aspires to become a knight. One Christmas, a Green Knight appears at Arthur's court, offering to receive a blow from anyone present, on one condition: that the Knight would return the favor one year hence. Gawain takes him up on the challenge, and chops off his head. Shockingly, the knight picks up his head, tells Gawain where to find him in one year, and rides off. Gawain is understandably downcast but sets off in a year to find the magical man. On his journey, he'll encounter hardship, people in need, and temptation. Can he navigate these- or should he- as he approaches what must surely be his life's end?

This movie is based on Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, one of English literature's oldest surviving stories. And . . . they pulled it off! They actually pulled it off. They made an Arthurian movie that is faithful to the original text, without the trappings of modernity. The atmosphere is impressive and almost exactly as I imagined the setting as I read this book nine years ago. The tale is haunting, bizarre, captivating, and magical. The dialogue is minimal, and pace is slow- exactly like the book. There are some tweaks (this article has some good observations in this vein), and hints of gross scenes (this is rated R), but overall, I was impressed. The message is good, too. Now, be warned- they didn't tell tales in the 1300s like they do today, so while I believe this is an authentic presentation, it's also very slow. I was both bored and enthralled watching this ("yes, they did it!" "no, this is so boring!" "yes, but it's faithful to the text!"). If you're into Arthurian lore, check it out.

Rating: A-

The Suicide Squad

They're back! Amanda Waller is at it again, using expendable but gifted criminals to carry out secret ops. This time, the team must infiltrate an island fortress on Corto Maltese to destroy a captive space monster before the new hostile government of that land unleashes it on the USA- and the world. Is the squad up to the task, or is it . . . Suicide?

Ugh. I really had high hopes for this one. Five years ago, the original came out,  and that fell flat for reasons I explain in that review. This time, the movie falls flat- for the exact same reasons. It's trying to be multiple things and failing at all of them. This one is rated R, though, so it's a lot bloodier. This whole situation reminds me of the Ghost Rider films. The first was bad, so they made a second with the same actors- a soft reboot- and it turned out worse. Same here.

Rating: D+

Batman: Europa (Various)

Batman is dying, infected by an unknown enemy- and with no known cure. The Joker has the same infection. If they are to survive, they must team up to track down the perpetrator . . . can either survive such an alliance?

Ugh. There were some quality names involved in this production, and I loved that each issue was set in a different European city (Berlin, Prague, Paris, Rome) but this left me wanting much more. The art was superb, but the story was poorly executed. The overall premise is fine, but the details fall flat. The antagonist provides no compelling reason for their conduct, the plot gaps are frequent, and there's no interesting reason for the city hopping. This would be a straight fail if the art wasn't so great. I'm picturing the pitch meeting for this one: "hey, let's make a story with amazing art and have Batman see European cities." But then they never developed it further.

Rating: C

Black Widow

Life is hard as a Black Widow. Taken as a child and trained/brainwashed, they are killing machines completely enslaved to General Dreykov's will. But some break free . . . Natasha Romanoff did so years ago, and believed the General dead. But he is very much alive, still at the helm of the 'Red Room' and with an army of Widows at his disposal. When Romanoff learns this, she decides to take action to rid the world of this menace for good. But nothing is as it seems, and this Avenger may have bitten off more than she can chew. Will she prevail?

Black Widow tells the character's backstory. It's nice to have; we know her fate (see the last two Avengers movies), but this is set immediately after Captain America: Civil War, and covers Romanoff's actions in that time. It has elements of an origin movie, but displays a very different tone than most MCU offerings; this one is darker, with more of a cold war thriller vibe. It does well fleshing out the character, presenting some moral dilemmas, and has amazing effects, but falls flat: there are several ridiculous plot leaps (or holes) that ruined this one for me. It seemed to run long had me wanting it to end (never a good sign). It's okay, but not great. Not the MCU offering I was hoping for after waiting two years.

Rating: C+

Greyhound

Based on a C.S. Forester book, Greyhound looks at the horror of crossing the Atlantic in 1942, shortly after America enters World War II. Tom Hanks plays the captain of a destroyer, and he leads a 37-ship convoy across the ocean while menaced by a 'wolf pack' of U-boats. The movie is set during the ~52-hours where ships were out of aircraft support range and therefore most vulnerable to the German subs.

This movie (which I learned was released on Apple TV+ after the pandemic scrapped a theatrical release) was exhilirating- suspenseful and with amazing effects. Though the book is [apparently] more about Hanks' character than the movie displays, I appreciated the film's focus on the crossing itself, which was horrifying. Highly recommended.

Rating: A

Marvel Fluxx

Today's review is of the 2019 release, Marvel Fluxx. For 2-6 players, it takes 5-30 minutes.

Overview

The initial rules are simple: draw a card and play a card. But in Fluxx, nothing is constant . . . and the card(s) you play each turn can change the rules and introduce (or change) win conditions. In brief, there are:

• keeper cards: cards of characters or items you play on your side of the table and use to satisfy goals
• goal cards: cards that specify the win condition. It is a set collection- if you have the keepers indicated on the goal, you win! But beware: if someone plays a new goal later, it becomes the new win condition.
• new rule cards: cards that change the number of cards you draw, number you play, or introduce another rule to the game
• action cards: one-time effect cards

types of cards; image from here

Do you have what it takes to win?

Review

Fluxx has been around for years and has many variants (check out those here). The difference between them is largely theme, so I think I can review Marvel Fluxx and speak for all variants. This game is okay, but not great. To be good, games require (among other things) meaningful decisions. This has very few; I'd call it more of a curiosity than a game. Yes, there is some choice, but this is mostly chance. The changing rules and goals is an interesting twist, and can make for some fun times, but I don't view this as a game you can play with too much strategy in mind. The goals are extremely specific and change constantly, making planning difficult if not impossible. This appears to come down to luck of the draw. For that reason, I don't mind an occasional game, but put this in the same category as purely luck games like Candyland or Chutes'n'ladders.

Rating: C+