The premise was pure sitcom. Two girls, one living on the poverty line and works two jobs to get by and the other a heiress from a family that just had their indicted and has had their finances frozen, wind up working together in a Brooklyn diner. They realize that with Max’s baking skills and Coraline’s business education could create a new business opportunity. About two thirds of the way through the second episode I turned it off. This is why.

The concept creates problems. It’s easy to come up with a concept for a sitcom – coming up with one that will sustain a long narrative is a different deal altogether. It needs to be simple enough that it’s not going to get in the way of a typical episode, flexible enough to be molded to different situations and open enough to be the basis of the show for potentially years to come. How I Met Your Mother is constantly struggling with this idea, but the concept is flexible enough to be keep the show afloat because it’s really a simple idea – a guy retells his life. My Name is Earl is a prime example of his this goes wrong. 2 Broke Girls stumbles on its way out of the gate, with the story having so many parts to it that fitting them into a 22 minutes story every week leaves the writers juggling to many balls. It’s also so inflexible that it dominates each episode. HIMYM is a bit anchored by it’s concept but it doesn’t have to dominate every story.

Two characters can be enough to carry a comedy show, but they need really good chemistry or talent. Kat Dennings is doing most of the heavy lifting here and I’m not convinced that these two actors actually speak to each other outside of the set. This doesn’t kill a sitcom though – they can have a strong supporting cast to help carry the show. Let’s look at what we’ve got here…

Supporting Character #1: The Black Guy. This guy sits in the corner of the diner all day and switches between imparting sass or folksy wisdom. He is literally introduced as someone who will make you feel ‘whiter’, and I believe it. That kind of stereotyping really emphasizes the difference between races.

Supporting Character #2: The Russian Guy. Going the Borat route with the approach to Eastern European stereotyping he’s ugly, sleazy, disrespectful to women, dresses in dirty clothes and works as a short order chef.

Supporting Character #3: The Asian Guy. Speaks in broken English, talks politely, dresses like a kid going to Sunday school, is awkward around women and wants to be good in business.

Supporting Character #4: The White Guy. He’s dumb and loud. That’s about it.

No doubt a Latin character will be introduced in the next season. Riding a donkey.

Finally, we have the humour, and let me tell you that this is where the show really falls down. The jokes almost consistently fall flat. Most of them rely on racism. One would’ve hoped that we were past this type of humour, the “look how black that guy is” type of humour. Making fun of stereotypical racists has replaced it. See Pierce and Britta from Community for characters who do this well. Pierce is the stereotypical old man who hasn’t adjusted for political correctness and Britta is the opposite end of spectrum, who winds up being offensive by doing her best to be ‘accepting’ of people. Yet 2 Broke Girls proves that people who actually sell themselves as comedy writers still go in for this kind of humour.

Whenever there isn’t any racial stereotypes around to impart whacky cliches, the girls clumsily fall back of crude, risque humour. This always comes across as forced and awkward. There’s a place for this kind of humour and this isn’t it. It looks like a 7pm sitcom, it sounds like a 7pm sitcoms and jokes where the entire punchline is ‘backdoor’ or ‘masturbating’ simply doesn’t gel. South Park succeeds with this because it contrasts with the ‘Peanuts’ style animation, and Weeds manages it because it is part of shows concept. in 2 Broke Girls it’s completely out of place and isn’t clever enough to have shock value.

If there’s one moment that really encapsulate this lack of talent or smarts on behalf of the writers comes when Caroline wanders into Max’s room at night only for Max to pull a knife out from under her pillow. “This is the only home security I can afford,” she explains.

Ok, that was kinda amusing. She has this risky sleeping arrangement because she’s poor and…

“Also, I’m a cutter.”

WHAT.

THE.

FUCK.

Holy sweet bejesus you just made a joke about self harm. You did it with a smirk. It was a throw away line. It was chucked in there as a side thought. The timing suggests that this is the gag used to diffuse the awkward situation of Max being to poor to afford to protect herself…and for that they went for a JOKE about SELF HARM.

Seriously show, that’s cheap. Cheap and low. I like me some inappropriate humour. I have the special edition of Bad Taste and every season of South Park. The difference is those materials have something to say about the controversial topics or a clever, subversive approach to humour. They don’t simply use a topic like this for cheap shock value or a throwaway gag.

I stuck it out for another ten minutes after this but nothing funny happened, meaning the last joke I left the show on was the one about cutting yourself. I did have a few episodes on my computer to watch, but they have met their fate.

Directed by: 

Starring: Mel Gibson, Kevin Hernandez, and Peter Stormare

Plot: A career criminal (Gibson) escapes to Mexico after a big heist. Once there, he is arrested and thrown in jail while the arresting officers take his money.

Review:

The film takes place inside of a Mexican prison that is more like an enclosed shanty town. The inmates are allowed to freely move while inside the compound. They have jobs, currency, and stores and venues to spend that currency. I have absolutely no idea if this is accurate or not, but it is best not to dwell on the situation. While the place is technically run by a warden and security team, a rich and powerful gangster has the whole place in his pocket. The inmates are also allowed to bring in their family if they have enough money, but I believe they were allowed to leave. This leads Gibson to meet a new partner in crime, a spunky and resourceful 10 year old boy, who is tragically tied to the gangster in charge.

After causing a lot of misery for himself in his public life, Mel Gibson gets back to basics in Get the Gringo. It is as close to a Payback 2 as we will ever get. Mel Gibson plays a career thief and small time con artist who spins us a yarn with a trademark cynical narration. Gibson slips back into familiar territory as if he never left. His old charismatic self is on full display, yet at the same time he embraces his “advanced” age.

What I mean by that is, Get the Gringo is not a pulse-pounding action thriller. Besides the beginning car chase, the closest thing to a proper action scene is the shootout near the end of the film. The only thing that stops it from being incredible is that it is shot in slow motion, which seems to be mostly for Gibson’s age sake. It is more like a clever light-hearted thriller, if there is such a thing. Gibson is more of a mastermind than a bruiser here. He moves the pieces around like an expert.

The movie is really clever, but something about it just falls flat. It is never laugh out loud funny. It feels like it wants to be an uber cool crime caper in the same vain as Quentin Tarantino or Guy Ritchie. It gets close, but it is missing some serious personality. The danger and stakes also feel kind of small time as well. If you knew what was at stake, you’d think I was crazy, but I guess it just works better on paper. I never felt like Gibson was ever in real danger, and I never believed that the boy was ever going to get taken advantage of. A certain random senseless murder near the end of the movie is the icing on the cake that this is a wannabe Tarantino/Ritchie caper.

The small lack of overall oomph from the movie does not stop it from being overall a fun watch. It is nice simply to see Gibson back in the saddle.

Rating: 7/10

When news and rumours have circulated about the newest outing, Skyfall, I’ve ignored it. But today is different. Today we have seen a trailer. It’s not a trailer that gives much away – in fact it could be described as abstract. So that’s why we’re going to pick it apart…

The clip begins with the audio of Bond completing what seems to be a word association activity. This is intercut with footage of London and clips of an underground training facility. The implication (coupled with images that will appear later in the clip) is that part of the film will take place in the MI:6 headquarters. As the word association continues Bond continues to be cold and detached responding to the term ‘murder’ with ‘employment’. It’s only when Beardy Old Guy says ‘Skyfall’ that 007 looks shaken. This could be a secret code word as Bond responds by saying “done” before getting up and leaving the room.

“I have to go and look at England some more.”

This introduction is followed with a couple of shots of the locales that will make up the film, most notably Shanghai. Amid the action comes a few teases of plot. All the Wikipedia has to tell us is that Bond’s loyalty to M is tested by her actions in the past, and whatever she did it must have been unpleasant since it seems to have left a row of Union Jack draped caskets. Hints of an attack on the MI:6 headquarters is given with Bond running from a major London area while emergency vehicles converge. Some of the quieter moments feature Bond and M out in the field together and Bond Girl Eve getting intimate with Bond (also getting gun happy).

“I have to go and kick my barbers arse.”

Action-wise the film looks much more stylized than in the past with strong primary colours contrasting heavily with heavily draped shadows and silhouettes. Following the lackluster response toQuantum of Solace it’s unsurprising that the producers want to try going in a different direction. If they wanted to stay par for the course they wouldn’t have hired Sam Mendes to direct – hopefully the new flavour is worth the effort.

Ultimately we don’t learn much from the trailer in terms of story. James Bond looks to be on the defense and there is no doubt going to be different sides playing of each other. Style-wise it looks damn cool, injecting a boost of originality into a franchise that can go stale when left to its own devices. And now we wait for the next trailer…

Directed by: Wes Anderson

Starring: Edward Norton, Bruce Willis, Bill Murray, and Tilda Swinton

Whats it about: Two little kids who fall in love run away together forcing their small New England town to mobilize a search party.

http://youtu.be/eP0QJ_Ba1Bs

9. Beasts of Southern Wild

Directed by: Benh Zeitlin

Starring: Quvenzhané Wallis

What’s it about: A little girl travels through many perils to search for her mother after her father becomes mysteriously ill

http://youtu.be/LA6FFnjvvmg

8. The We and I

Directed by: Michel Gondry

Starring: A cast of unknowns

What’s it about: It is a look at a group of high school students riding the bus on the last day of school.

7. The Paperboy

Directed by: Lee Daniels

Starring: Matthew McConaughey, Nicole Kidman, Zac Efron, and John Cusack

What’s it about: A journalist and his younger brother team up to investigate a case involving a death row inmate.

6. Cosmopolis

Directed by: David Cronenberg

Starring: Robert Pattinson, Jay Baruchel, and Kevin Durand

What’s it about: A young billionaire’s life begins to fall apart as he rides in a stretch limo across New York City for a haircut.

5. Room 237

Directed by: Rodney Ascher

Starring: It’s a documentary

What’s it about: A documentary about the many theories and hidden symbolism of Stanley Kubrick’s The Shinging

4, Killing Them Softly

Directed by: Andrew Dominik

Starring: Brad Pitt, Richard Jenkins, Ray Liotta, and many others

What’s it about: Brad Pitt plays a mob enforcer who tries to retrieve money stolen by a wiseguy poker game.

3. Mud

Directed by: Jeff Nichols

Starring: Matthew McConaughey, Reese Witherspoon, and Michael Shannon

What’s it about: Mud is an escaped convict who enlists the help of 2 teenagers to evade bounty hunters and find his true love

2. On the Road

Directed by: Walter Salles

Starring: Sam Riley, Garret Hedlund, and Kristen Stewart

What’s it about: Aspiring writer, Sal, goes looking for “It” with his friend, Dean.

1. Lawless

Directed by: John Hillcoat

Starring: Tom Hardy, Shia Labeauf, and Jessica Chastain

What’s it about: A Depression-era bootlegging gang finds themselves the main target of the authorities.

Story:

Writer: Nick Spencer

Artist: Shawn Martinbrough

Before I start, I just want to say that Thief of Thieves #4 has the coolest cover yet.

Like every issue thus far, there is a backbone to the story to which a series of flashbacks is set. The backbone this time revolves around Agent Cohen, Conrad’s current lover, interrogating Augustus, Conrad’s incarcerated son, for information about Conrad. Those scenes are really impressive. Agent Cohen literally does all of the talking while Augustus just sits there and worries. The most impressive part isn’t necessarily the dialog, but the emotion on the faces of the characters. This has been a constant so far throughout the series.  Not many comic books seem to invest this much time in using the facial features to tell the story instead of the words that actually appear on the page.

The flashbacks go back to when Augustus was taking on the job that got him incarcerated. He seemed like he was down and out, and this new mission was a desperation move. It involved moving drugs for a major drug cartel. The title of the segment was “Far From the Tree.” It implies that Augustus’ physical similarity to Conrad is where their similarities end.  Augustus is a little less together. He is a bit of a slob and way less careful. By the end, Augustus is back in prison scared for his life that drug cartel that he failed will come back with a vengeance. Worst thing about it is I believe in a previous issue they said he was using Conrad’s thief brand name, Redmond, meaning Conrad might have his head on a platter as well. We end with a shot of Augustus reaching out to his father for help, an image we have already saw from Conrad’s point of view.

Thank god that this comic is able to handle drama better than any other comic because the action/thriller aspects have been a little lacking. By the end of the story thought it is a little clearer why it is that way. These 4 issues have been more backstory and exposition than anything else. The stories have had a flow and cinematic scope that made the first 4 issues feel like only 2. Now that I write that out I see the ridiculousness of the statement. Why have 4 issues if it feels like 2? But the intention isn’t necessarily that you are getting shorted story, but rather it feels like a comic equivalent of 2.5 hour movie that doesn’t drag. It is easily the my most anticipated comic month to month.

Rating: 8/10

Come, fellow traveller and hear a tale of darkness and devilry by Hedgehog

This is a spoiler free-ish review. I’ve not revealed plot points in the text and all screencaps were taken from pretty much the very start of the game, during the first few quests. You’re welcome.

So in case you hadn’t heard, because you live in a cave or something and have your daily dose of House of Geekery printed out by an acquaintance and delivered to your door/hovel/bridge you lurk under, the geekosphere is abuzz with excitement as the long anticipated Diablo III finally arrives on doorsteps and hard drives and at game stores worldwide. The third in the series of Diablo games, D3 as it is affectionately referred to (when not being called “just let me log in you sonofabitchwhorewankerfuckfuckityfuckshitdick” – more on that later) is once again set in the land of Sanctuary where apparently monsters trying to conquer reality is pretty commonplace. It sure happens frequently enough.

The basics of the plot is this: the player character arrives in New Tristram to investigate a fallen star, which many prophecies seem to point out as a possible indicator of yet another apocalypse. Depending on which class you select, your origin is quite different but all roads lead to Rome, as they say, and you wind up investigating the meteor, partnering up with locals and killing a whole ton of dead, almost dead, undead and never-to-be-dead beasties. Don’t worry, that’s not a spoiler; everything I just said is revealed in the first ten seconds of the opening cinematic.

For the TL;DR crowd, the game is fantastic. Like Skyrim (the last game I gave the Best/Worst treatment too) there is a fantasy setting here but the similarities are few. Sanctuary contains no elves or orcs, only humans of differing persuasions and the enemies are more devilish than fantastic. But it’s not all smiles and sunshine – except that one level – and so here we have the best, and the worst, of Diablo III.

Hello? Anybody there? I can hear you ya know.

The Best

It looks gorgeous.

I’m all about immersion, and one of the things I find contributes greatly to my immersion in a game is the visual depth the world provides. This is not to say I require everything to be photo-real and in the highest-def imaginable, Minecraft is one of my go-to staples after all; no what I mean is that the overall design philosophy of a game, including graphical fidelity, wold building, interactivity and a whole host of other features are something that can either make or break a game for me.

Where must one go in this town to get a decent prostitute and a stein of mead?

One of the things I loved about Skyrim was that the world it presented felt almost as real as the duller one sitting outside my front door. One of the things I dislike about Call of Duty games is how “hyper-real” everything has suddenly become, like a Michael Bay directed modern warfare film it’s less about immersion and more about spectacle. At no point do those worlds feel legitimate, to me at least. They look realistic, very well designed and textured, but I suppose if you’ve seen one beige stone Middle Eastern locale or New York City in the midst of attack you’ve seen em all

Not pictured here; a single original thought.

Diablo III has no such problem. It looks amazing – I’m lucky enough to be able to play on almost the highest possible settings, which was a surprise, given that the game is already known (I suppose, erroneously) as a beast and I’m not exactly running the Yellowstone Supercomputer over here – but more than that, the world has been painstakingly constructed to give a true impression of completeness. Ruined buildings crumble upon your approach, the homes and taverns feel lived in, catacombs dank, forests dark. Monster flesh ebbs and pulses with movement, spells dance with light. Truly gorgeous.

It’s fun to play.

The Diablo series follows a very simple gameplay strategy; you point at things and click on them until they die and vomit up gold and other items to either use or sell. Diablo III is no stranger to this system, and although that may seem a little Farmville to the uninitiated, it is so, so much more. While the gameplay mechanics may be superficially simple, the depth of character creation through spells and rune assignment gives the gameplay a certain richness and the exploration the game allows is consuming.

There are five classes, each of which you can play as either male or female:

Barbarian: smashy, smash hit things till they fall down.

Wizard: the obligatory magic user, with a range of spells for attack and defence. I play this.

Demon Hunter: probably the closest thing to the ‘rogue’ class, using ranged weapons like bows.

Monk: paladin type with a specialty in melee combat and hand-to-hand.

Witch Doctor: sort of a voodoo-necromancer-type guy, who can summon minions.

On the journey towards your assigned quest you may come across musty basements or abandoned chapels, old sheds, catacombs and caves wholly unrelated to the quest but offering an enjoyable aside and an opportunity to gain ever more loot. Because loot, my friends, is what life is all about.

Excellent learning curve.

The game (on normal) starts off with a few low level enemies at a time, then adds in a few new enemies, then suddenly enemies can teleport, then there’s more of them, then what the fuck is that thing? Never does the game seem off balance. I’ve not yet (admittedly, I’m still on a Wizard’s “quest in progress”) encountered a battle I could not win with just a little strategy and cunning, and more than a bit of pew-pew-pew.

The game is challenging, but never painful. The curve allows vets to ease themselves back into it, and for newbies to learn the ropes without feeling overwhelmed.

Lore.

Speaking of vets and newbies, the game’s lore contains something for players new and old. While the story is explained in gorgeous hand-drawn style parchment cutscenes, there are of course nods to previous games and subtle in-jokes to give those familiar with the world of Sanctuary a little bit extra. This allows everything from the ‘trying to guess what building is what in Old Tristram’ to Whimsyshire. You’ll know what I mean when you get there.

REPULSOR BEAM! I mean Ray of Frost. Or whatever, it’s a fucking ice laser and it rocks.

EAT ICY LASER FIST, BITCHES!

The Worst

Always on online DRM.

Aww hell-diddly-ding-dong-crap!

If you’ve been paying even the slightest attention to the launch of Diablo III then you will undoubtedly be familiar with the screen above. Error 37 has been a trending topic on twitter and even has its own website. The use of BattleNet as a sort of online gatekeeper to the game’s playability has been a serious bone of contention within the fan base and gamer community at large.

While the idea is mostly fine – that in order to play even the single player campaign one must be logged into, and online with, the BattleNet servers – the simple fact that the servers were, at least in the beginning, down more often than up lead to many players simply unable to play the game they shelled out money for. Even offline. Alone. Without any friends. Because they’re nerds. Not only this, but when you can play the game, you often experience lag. Lag. In a single player game. Apparently that’s a thing now.

To put it simply, there is no offline mode, meaning that not only will I never be able to have a gathering of like-minded geeks in the park to Diablo it up, but if the World of Warcraft, Starcraft or Diablo III servers are down, overburdened with players or even just offline for scheduled maintenance, then you’re shit outta luck boys and girls and may as well go watch some Legend of Korra because you sure as hell aren’t playing Diablo.

No character customisation.

Although I fully understand that there has never been much in terms of character customisation in the Diablo games, one simply picks a class and gender and is assigned the sole skin for that combination, I feel that in the era of Fallout, Skyrim and Mass Effect – three games with almost endless scope for customising the look and personality of your player character – having absolutely no options at all is a little grim.

And I mean none at all. You have one face, one hairstyle, one option identical to every single other person who also chose that class and gender. So my Dude Wizard looks the same as every other Dude Wizard and my friends Barbarian Princess looks exactly like every other Barbarian Princess in every game, on every server. I get that the series has roots and that’s fine, but I honestly think a teensy bit of personalisation here wouldn’t have gone astray.

Even just a couple of hairstyles and a complexion shifter. If you could manage it in World of Warcraft in 2004, I think you can cope in 2012′s biggest RPG release.

I guess clicking on shit till it dies might not be for everyone.

Some people are idiots after all.

In order to facilitate the auction house, in-game vendors have fucking nothing worth buying.

Okay so there is an auction house, where players can trade items with other players in exchange for gold and such, much like the WoW Auction House I would frequent in Orgrimmar back before I realised that World of Warcraft was boring and filled with dickheads.

Now, this is just speculation on my part but I believe that the existence of the Auction House is the reason why the vendors of Sanctuary have almost nothing to buy. One guy in New Tristram has a sword, an axe and a health potion. That’s it. Oh and whatever I have just sold to him. While I like that fact they don’t run out of money like the traders and vendors in Skyrim it’s a little annoying that there is nothing to buy from them. But that’s fine, you say, just go buy things in the Auction House at vastly inflated prices.

Oh and the real money (where you use real, genuine, earned-at-your-job cash money from meatspace to give your tiny fake person a slightly bigger penis weapon) Auction House isn’t running yet and has been pushed back to some indeterminate future date.

Awesome.

Logic.

Why the fuck is anybody surprised that Tristram is being attacked by the undead? Do they not remember the last two fucking games? Were none of these people paying attention the last time Tristram was levelled by Diablo? How about you all move a fifteen minute carriage ride to the South, set up a new town not called Tristram and live to the ripe old age of 60.

Remember when I said the world building was outstanding? Well it is and most of the voice acting is pretty good too, with the obligatory Medieval English twist to the accents and dialogue but it does seem amusing incongruous at times that anybody in this world is shocked by what’s happening around them.

The Verdict

There are a few gripes along side every game launch; bugs, UI issues, generally stupid design choices, Horse Armour DLC, but few so grand as Error 37. That said, I’ve honestly had no real problems myself with this particular nasty, because I chose the American servers and as an Australian this means that most of the hours available to me for gaming are also the hours spent by many Americans huddled up in bed with a duvet over their face.

When I was trying to get on the Asia servers, I got 37′d for twenty solid minutes, but thankfully I moved on.

So while the issue is a major one for many people – and, let me be clear, a major one overall, as I think this kind of always-online malarkey opens up a whole new world of game related issues, many of which we cannot even foresee and some (like the lag in a single player campaign) we’re seeing now could become commonplace – it hasn’t really effected my opinion of the game I’ve been playing.

A cemetery. At night. With monsters: Best vacation ever?

Diablo III is fun. It’s very fun. Most of you reading this probably don’t even need me to tell you that because you came here to have your already high opinion of the game reinforced. But for those who do need convincing, grab it. If you know someone with a boxed version, they got Guest Passes that let you play up to the first major dungeon boss (who I haven’t reached yet, between work and social obligations and writing this damn article). This should give you enough time to know if a) your computer can run the game and b) if you’re going to like it.

The Starter Edition will also, I’m told, be open to the public in about a month, in case you don’t have any friends with boxed editions. Or any friends. Not judging, just, you know who you are.

It really is a sterling title and, when you can log in, it’s truly a great time to be had.

SCORE: 9/10

They found the right group of idiots to playtest this thing. And I’m just one of those four idiots.

I built my character for the module the week before, to see how the Pathfinder system handles things, and just how different it is from the 3.5 edition of D&D (what we currently use). Between the DM and I, we learned a few important differences. Those differences are about as important as putting out a fire with an extinguisher, rather than a can of fuel.

1. Character Customization

The most notable difference is that the starting races in Pathfinder’s core are all useful, and I really do mean that. Comparing the races and classes in the core will show rather obvious strengths and weaknesses, and help inform players on how to build a solid starting character that they want to play.

Not only that, if two players pick the same class, there are enough options to make these two characters completely different from one another – either through feats, class features, or their skills.

Better yet, Monks aren’t useless. For a guy that punches things, Monks become a viable class even at lower levels.

2. Skills

The skill list has been simplified. By a lot. No seriously, several skills from 3.5 have been condensed under single headings in Pathfinder (like Tumble and Jump became Acrobatics). Generally this makes more sense to the players and the DM when a specific skill roll is needed in a given situation.

Add in the favored class option, and you gain additional points in class skills when you first train that skill, giving you a nice bonus early in the game.

3. Leveling

In 3.5, you’d run into what people call “dead” levels, or class levels in which the character gains no new abilities, spells or feats. That’s been fixed in Pathfinder. Characters gain a new feat every other level instead of every third. This is a great help to melee fighters as they often get eclipsed by spellcasters early on.

4. Cleave Feat is brutal

In 3.5, the Cleave feat allowed a melee fighter to hit a single target, and if the damage of the attack killed that target, they could then make an attack on an additional target in range. They could continue doing this as long as they killed whatever they hit, kept hitting a target, or still had viable targets in range.

In Pathfinder, you just need to hit the target, regardless of how much damage is dealt. By simply succeeding on a hit, the melee fighter could then attempt to hit each additional target within range until he cannot overcome a target’s armor class.

5. Spells

The differences between the two systems becomes far more noticeable when it comes to the spell lists. Several of the broken spells in 3.5 are nerfed or completely retooled in Pathfinder. Stronger spells remain they way they were, with some improved language in the spell description and mechanics.

Save or die spells are few and far between in the core book, which is a welcome change to lower level parties. Failing the saves will still result in nasty penalties, but won’t flat out kill you.

6. Combat Maneuvers

Grapple, disarm, and bull rush attempts have been overhauled into a single system called Combat Maneuver Bonus/Defense (or CMB/CMD). These values take into account all the bonuses your character has and gives you a single bonus to add to your rolls. To perform such a maneuver, the attacker simply rolls and adds the CMB. To resist or defend against a maneuver, the defender rolls and adds the CMD. If attacker has a higher number, the maneuver works. If the defender has the higher number, it fails.

7. Experience Costs

Several spells in 3.5 required the player to permanently sacrifice experience points to cast. That meant if the spell was cast enough, the player could drop a level or two. This has been removed in Pathfinder, at least in the core book. The gold costs are higher for these spells, but that’s a welcome tradeoff.

Experience costs were also removed for magic item creation. Again, it was entirely possible in 3.5 to drop a level or two after completing a magic item. Now, just like spells, the gold cost is slightly higher to make up for it.

8. Less Shenanigans

Tower shield shenanigans have been completely removed.

In 3.5, hiding behind a tower shield granted full cover for the wielder and all equipment they were carrying. Mechanically speaking, this included the tower shield they were hiding behind. This meant that the shield couldn’t be targeted to be destroyed because it was no longer in line of sight, even though it was still out in the open.

Pathfinder flat out stated no, that’s not how it works. Stop complaining you power gaming twunt.

9. Free or Cheap PDFs

Pathfinder releases new material every month, both in physical and digital forms. Modules usually run about $12 in gaming shops, and core books and other rules can be found for $30-50.

By going online to the Pathfinder website, you can find the official PDFs available for download for $10 or less. That includes the core rulebook (which usually runs for $50).

10. Community Support

The Pathfinder developers actually listen to the community of players and DMs, and improve or correct areas of the game that need it.

Additional books get released in stores and online that contain errata, or corrections of previously printed material.

Although Pathfinder is still considered a Beta product, it is constantly changing and improving on the 3.5 system. So far I’m enjoying the Pathfinder system and hope that it’s simpler to use overall.

This should be an interesting playtest.

Director: Guy Ritchie

Cast: Robert Downey, Jr., Jude Law, Noomi Rapace, Stephen Fry, Rachel McAdams, Jared Harris

Plot: When Sherlock Holmes continues following the trail of crime back to Professor James Moriarty he gets more than he expected when the crime lord turns all of his attention onto the consulting detective and his sidekick Dr. John Watson.

Review: The original Sherlock Holmes movie put together by this cast and director was good, but not great. The cast had great chemistry, the film had cool style and while the story stuttered it promised that something better was around the corner. The sly introduction of Moriarty, Sherlock’s famous nemesis, set things up nicely and it felt as though we just needed to sit back and wait for the magic to happen.

Given the extent of the Holmes canon the film-makers have a huge wealth of source material to use in constructing a story. Yet for reasons unknown they chose to ignore all that and instead borrow the story from the film adaptation of The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen of all fucking things. Seriously – a group sometimes disguised as German soldiers blow stuff up around London pushing the two nations towards war, and the group is packing advanced explosives and automatic weaponry. Oh, and the mastermind behind the scheme is Moriarty. How did this happen? The story was crap then and it’s worse now because there are dozens upon dozens of great Holmes stories to draw upon instead of this dross. Given that the plot already as enough to chew on, what with all the gypsies and whatnot, it’s astounding how plodding the movie feels at times.

In this scene he stops for a smoke break. That’s the scene.

Since they’re not really using the original source material they may have dropped the pretense of being based on Conan Doyle’s works and renamed the movie The Wacky Adventures of Robert Downey Jr. and Pals. It’s great in the first movie where they play fast and loose with the source material, making it more interesting for a modern viewer, but there’s next to nothing in this movie that ties any of the characters to their literacy counterparts. Sherlock is more concerned with wearing crazy disguises than solving crime via deduction, Moriarty is a scheming crackpot ans Watson is a clucking nanny. It’s jarring just how modernised the whole thing feels with terrorist attacks, arms races and the like – almost as though the whole movie takes place in a parallel universe where technology and fashion were time locked in the 1890s.

This is as witty as the movie gets.

The aspects of the first film that lead to its success have dried up. The banter between Holmes and Watson has been replaced by a forced bromance and created situations that might be misconstrued as gay. Oh look, they’ve been caught all wrapped up in each others arms while one of them is wearing a dress, how awkward. Goodness they’re dancing together, and in public. The humour is forced and almost every gag falls flat. The other gimmick – an insight into Holmes thought process – fails completely this time around. Instead of hearing Holmes note an opponents weakness after making observations it’s just him explaining where he’s going to punch someone, then when he does go into action his plan doesn’t work (yes, every time). That sleight of hand may have worked once, but not three times.

When he pulls the stunt with Moriarty it’s even more stupid because they BOTH start trying to out-do each other by plotting the fight in their heads. Yes, it comes down to Holmes and Moriarty having a psychic battle. There are zero new ideas in this sequel just extra bits glued onto previous concepts.

Credit where credit is due of course – the performances and action are both strong points for the film. It really is the Wacky Robert Downey Jr. show and that is something that is enough to carry a film for you then you won’t be disappointed…just pretend it wasn’t supposed to be about Sherlock Holmes. New additions Noomi ‘Girl Who Has Dragon Tattoo’ Rapace as a gypsy and Stephen Fry as Mycroft are both talented actors who are a ton of fun to watch. When the action set pieces do kick into gear it is the most entertaining parts of the movie. Sherlock chasing down a Cossack assassin is a nicely choreographed piece and the chase through the forest showcases some of the best recent use of bullet time.

Eyes up front Jude.

If you’re looking for a cool action film there are much better ones on the shelf. If you want a modern take on Sherlock Holmes then word on the street is that the BBC version is the best thing on television ever. So watch that.

Score: THREE outta TEN

Director:

Cast: Sean Connery, Gert Frobe, Honor Blackman, Shirley Eaton, Tania Mallet, Harold Sakata, Bernard Lee, Lois Maxwell, Desmond Llewelyn

Plot: Whilst recovering from a mission Bond is introduced to Auric Goldfinger, a bullion dealer and smuggler who has caught the interest of MI:6 and the CIA. During the investigation into Goldfinger’s activities Bond discovers that a much larger plot is afoot.

Review: As far as the sub-genre of James Bond is concerned, this is pretty much as good as it gets. While the series has changed faces over the decades to keep up with technology and trends in cinema and politics every subsequent entry into the franchise seems to be trying to capture the lightning in a bottle of this adventure. From the insanely named female sidekicks and gimmick centered henchmen to the gadget laden cars and set-piece finale all the aspects of the formula have fallen into place.

The story is almost episodic in the way it switches from one locale to another. Beginning (after a shocking prologue) in a Miami resort Bond first crosses paths with the dubious Goldfinger. He returns to London for briefing before tailing Goldfinger to Switzerland. The jumps between locations and scenes often happens while Bond is unconscious. While this sounds jarring the narrative flows immensely well with little to no lag. New characters are introduced whenever things look to be slowing down giving Bond a new dance partner to interact with. The action scenes never feel like contrived set pieces but instead blend into the story perfectly, especially Bond outwitting his captors using his Aston Martin.

There are numerous iconic scenes in the movie. Shirley Easton covered in gold paint is certainly the most striking moment in the film. Bond strapped to a slab with a slow moving death mechanism gets its first outing, with a castration bound laser in effect. This motif has been parodied so many times that one could be forgiven for thinking that it only exists in satire – although in those circumstances he doesn’t usually talk his way out of trouble. The best moment comes from the simple game of golf played between Bond and Goldfinger. This battle of wits between them carries all the tension of a chase scene or shoot out with just as much witty banter, capped off with Oddjob unleashing his signature attack.

When we get to the finale inside Fort Knox one might think that everything is looking to be as expected since the characters have been sitting around discussing their plots for a large chuck of the second act. Luckily the film still has a couple of cards yet to be played and it becomes a pretty gosh darn satisfactory climax. With the balance of gadget hijinks, witticisms and Bond relying on his cunning to get out of trouble. This is the one Bond movie to see, and the one for film-makers to beat.

Score: TEN outta TEN

The Mission: James Bond is assigned the task of investigating bullion dealer Auric Goldfinger who is suspected of smuggling gold internationally. After observing him in Miami, Bond is tasked with talking the millionaire to how Goldfinger is smuggling the gold undetected.

Locales: Miami, Switzerland, Kentucky.

Gadgets: Bond is equipped with a homing device that he can conceal in his shoe and trace using a sonar in his car. He also has a gold bar to use in getting Goldfinger’s attention.

Vehicle: For the first time Q Branch equips Bond with a car. The Aston Martin DB5 is kitted out with front facing machine guns, a bullet proof shield in the back, oil slick dispenser, revolving plates, smoke screen, wheel scythe and most famously a passenger ejector seat.

Sidekicks: Felix Leiter makes a brief appearance at the beginning of the mission. Tilly Masterson forms a very brief and shaky alliance with Bond when they cross paths sneaking into his Swiss plant.

The Girls: Firstly we have Dink, a poolside masseuse who is quickly forgotten when Bond meets Jill Masterson who is working for Goldfinger. Pussy Galore holds his attention for the rest of the film, possibly because he can’t work out why a parent would name a child ‘Pussy’.

The Enemy: Auric Goldfinger, bullion dealer who is obsessed with gold and will stoop to any low that helps build his stockpile.

Evil Plot: Although he draws MI:6 and CIA attention due to his smuggling operation he has a grander scheme in operation. Using laser technology he intends to break into Fort Knox not to steal the gold stockpile but to detonate an atomic device turning the gold radioactive and untouchable, increasing the value of his personal supply.

Distinguishing Features: He doesn’t have any of the unusual features of most villains, but is often dressed in gold coloured clothing and giving long, bragging speeches.

Secret Liar: Bond uncovers two of Goldfinger’s hideouts. The first is a processing plant in the Swiss Alps complete with a laser torture set-up. The second is his ranch in Kentucky loaded with revolving floors and hidden displays whose purpose seems to be giving the worlds most awesome Powerpoint presentations.

Henchmen: Pussy Galore leads his aerial division who she trains and leads in the air. His bodyguard and personal man-servant is the mute and imposing Oddjob, a hulking mass whose signature weapon is a razor brimmed bowler hat.

Facts About the Movie

Politically Incorrect Behaviour: Naming a character Pussy Galore may have won the title, but it’s really hard to ignore the scene with Dink. Dismissing the masseuse because Felix and he had to discuss “man business” is chauvinistic enough, but the slap on the ass really is to much.

The face a man plotting an uninvited spanking.

Notable Firsts:The movie opens with Bond already on assignment in a mini-mission that is unrelated to the main film, something that becomes a trend. Q Branch sets Bond up with a gadget strewn car for the first time, a series staple.

Random Trivia: The belly dancer seen during the prologue may be familiar to Bond viewers, having played the gypsy dancer in From Russia With Love.

Of the gadgets and weapons the Aston Martin is equipped with the wheel scythe, ejector seat, smoke screen, rotating license plates and bullet proof shield were actual working features, although the shield wasn’t really bullet proof.

Initially the laser castration torture did feature a real laser, but it didn’t show up on camera so special effects were used in the final cut. The flame effect was created by a technician crouching under the table with an oxyacetylene torch, working blind. No wonder Sean Connery looks so nervous.