• Hello,Welcome to Play.com.  . (Not youSign in?) | Register
  • 0 SuperPoints
  • Your Account
  • Help

Product Reviews

Reviewer:
SebEless
Reviews:
0
Votes:
9 (44% helpful)

Page 1 of 0

  1.  A great, unpleasant experience!

    Posted: 

    When I first payed the demo I was not impressed. It seemed like a lackluster CoD rip-off. But, whoa!, was I wrong.
    This game is amazing. A retelling of Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" in the setting of modern Dubai. Much like the spiritual predecessor, Apocalypse Now, it deals with the horror of war and post traumatic stress disorders of veteran soldiers. The Line in the title refers to the line between good and evil, helping and destroying, your experience and the objective reality.
    This game speaks to the player through dialogue, visuals, audio design and game mechanics. The overhead-thermalcamera-shooting part that is in most action games today is at once unique, symbolic and disturbing.

    I have to say, while not being "fun", this is one of the best games I've played.

  2.  Not action or thriller, but an amazing characterstudy.

    Posted: 

    An average person touches his or her face about 3000 times per day, and with it brings residue and bacteria from what ever that person touched in close contact with mouth, nose and eyes. From there the eventually dangerous organisms and viruses can travel into lungs, digestivesystems and brain to live long and prosper.
    That is exactly what the new influensa does in this movie. The perspectives are many from all stratas of existance: the medical researcher trying to track down the point of origin for the flu, the immune father who loses wife and son and now tries to protect his daughter, the director of the institute of prevention of infection desperately acting to keep all cogs of the machinery together, There is no clear antagonist. All hinderances are mostly people just doing their job, or fully understandable security protocols.
    The film moves slow, with a distant, but detailoriented photography. The mood is solemn and there is almost like we're watching a dramadocumentary. The science is spot on, and the scientists act like scientists, not like megalomanical madmen. The general tries to keep the peace, not bomb the world to sterilise it. All characters act like people, not cardboard cut outs.
    Some, on this site as well, have complained it is too slow, and that this is not an apocalyptic movie. Who told you it would be? This is the most accurate depiction of a true pandemic I have see. As a complete opposite we can show Outbreak (Petersen, 1995) where the science and drama take a backseat to the thriller. Not so in Contagion.
    Is it a horrormovie? No. Is it a thriller? Not really. It is a characterstudy of people and a society infected both by a sickness but most dangerously by fear.

  3.  Well worth it

    Posted: 

    This is great for not only to update and polish your battlestrategies, but also to be able to take actions and well tough-out choices and finding the best armour.
    The writing and descriptions are also well done. Fun to read with sometimes a dry, sometimes a wet, wit.
    Although the previous reviewer had a problem with accesibility compared to the Origins Guide. I have had no problems finding what I need, and I haven't compared it to the other since I don't own that.
    The extras with fluff and extra sketches was also intresting.

    [edit] This is not a comment on the game, just the guide itself.

  4.  Alternate history and timetravel

    Posted: 

    I am usually not very intrested in alternate history stories, where everything is the same as, for example, the historical 1860's but with a twist. Like, what if there was magic during the blitz or what if Nichlai Tesla invented a clone/transporting-machine?

    This book however is great. The characters are likable and sympathetic. The alterations to our common, established history is within the realm of suspension of disbelif. The magic in use are very interesting and mystical and opens up for many avenues where continued stories may develop.

    The writing style of Tim Powers is that of filling the pages like a glass of wine. He fills them just enough for the sidetastes to develop. He does not filling it to the brim where your own imagination is completely barred, but still enough to get a complete view of the situation and the mileu of the characters.

    The story is in some parts slow moving, in others fast paced, with a balance between the quiet and loud moments. The narrative changes hands a few times, but not too jarring. Now, the story is amazing, with small moments that reflect the ever moving time. The jumps in time is never as simple as a policebox or the like, but is a hole in time and space the characters must launch themselves though.

    All in all, an amazing read, that I highly recommend. Fantasy, sci-fi, romance, philosophy and action all find a place in this great book.

  5.  Amazing...

    Posted: 

    An impulse-bought dvd of Cronos was my introduction to Guillermo del Toro and his movies about five years ago. The dvd quality was crap but I loved the movie. I recently got a bluray player and thought of switching up.

    This film is very unusual. It is a mexican vampire-as-a-natural-phenomena horror film blended with the singular style of del Toro with an art-house feel to it. Insects, gears, humans as flawed being with character, colour-coding and so on. The lighting and photography in the hands of Guillermo Navarro is striking, with large amounts of black in frame. One of my favourite movies.

    The film is the same, no added or cut parts changeing it. The only difference from the dvd release is the better quality. I can finally see the smal subtle details in the frame.

    As an extra this release also include Geometria, one of del Toro's early shortfilms. It is hard to come by, and I was able to see it about a year ago only thanks to a national film archive. Other extras are interviews and a commentary track by del Toro.

    Glad it's finally on blu-ray. I love this movie.

  6.  How did I miss this?

    Posted: 

    This is a great film for anyone who likes fantasy and the idea of alternate history. I could not belive I hadn't sought this movie out until now.
    The directors cut restores many of the scenes of Conan thinking, which brings more depth to an otherwise monosolabic hero. He is also given an intresting characterarc (unlike the recent reboot). The character of Conan grows through out the movie.
    No, this is not the literary Conan the Barbarian, no film could be. And it is not the greatest movie of all time. But it is entertaining and interesting, with interesting characters and cool ideas.

    So, all in all, a good movie. Worth watching.

  7.  Have seen worse... It's ok.

    Posted: 

    That is pretty much my reaction. To sum up, I sort of liked it. The plot is more like the DnD books and campains, the props looks better, the effects still suck, the actors aren't too bad.
    A more detailed description follows below.

    Where the first DnD movie was so unlike anything close to DnD (although it seemed that the screenwriters had read Hickmann and Wiess' "Dragons of..." series and hated it, and wanted to pull a few inspirational keys and butcher them) with an outragesly unbalanced party, nothing like an actual campain structure, a complete bull script and Bruce hurts-my-skull-say-your-lines-faster Payne, this second movie has more to do with the sourcematerial.

    The story has a campain structure and revolves around a (balanced) party and showing some of the internal struggle and friendship that is the result of different individuals working together. The actors are not usually the best, some of it seems phoned in and some are there for their looks not their acting-chops, and Bruce Payne-ful is still around, but most of them do an alright job. The party do a good job and deliver, but most of the cast is hamming it up. Some very odd or downright bad linereads creep into the movie.
    The visual effects are defenitly dated and not very well executed. This movie was made in 2005 and it shows. The effects are on par with the ninth doctor's Doctor Who season (Aliens of London for example), or worse. Sometimes the camera lingers way too long an effect, so we can see it in it's complete and utter awfulness.
    The props are not of the best making, not Weta-workshop class, however it seems the person making the weapons and armor is someone else than in the first movie, they are less plasticy and look more like actual metal.

    All in all... ok. Not too bad I guess, and real funny to watch with my brother as we both enjoyed and made fun of it. His reaction was pretty much "That both sucked and was good, and it made me want to play DnD."

  8.  Not good, but not really bad either

    Posted: 

    This is not really a sequel to She, as the countinuety between the two are a complete mess (She = 1918 and Vengeance...= 1960's but everything looks different, the magic works differently and the mages of Kuma has been under the orders of Leo Vinci for generations...). This is more of a retelling of the story of She, but the roles are the opposite, and the "calling" to Kuma is more forceful than in She. Where Leo traveled voulentarily, Carol is forced by magic.
    Looks good, cheezy, stupid, but in the end enjoyable.

  9.  Great horror, with "real" magic

    Posted: 

    A film that, even if old, gives me a bit of the creeps. As a person who have investigated the practices of "real" mages and "real" magic it really strikes a clean chord. Christopher Lee is always good and even the child acts well.

    I truly love this movie and have seen it many times now.

    Again as some of these Hammer films, the transfer to DVD is a bit strange and it doesn't fill the 16:9 size. It is high enough but not quite wide enough.

  10.  A classic adventure film

    Posted: 

    A lovely film, with a great pulp-adventure story. Definitely an inspiration to the old Indiana Jones movies (less action and nazis in this one though). Has a few scenes filled with pathos and some real cheesy acting, however I found it a quite enjoyable to watch. And then there are a few dumb moments, of course, but all in all a good film. A guilty pleasure for one that should know better.

    The transfer to DVD is a bit off in the opening, but otherwise it fills the 16:9 screen perfectly. Though the 35mm copy they used is clearly slightly worn with dust and marks (I for one can enjoy that, and get the same feeling as in my local cinemateque, showing old movies).