Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (Video Game, 2004)

Introduction:
Growing up, GTA was on the top of the list of games I was not allowed to play. I don't dislike that, as it helped me hone in my gaming skillz (that z was actually an accident, but...) In other genres, such as Strategy and RPG games. But the first thing I did when I got old enough to play whatever I wanted was buy myself a mint, unopened GTA: San Andreas from the local old games store. Damn, what a good game. I played it through for the first time back then, and I go back to it ever since. But, is San Andreas at the top of the gaming world, or are people blinded by nostalgia? Let's find out, shall we?

How it Looks:
GTA: San Andreas is... Well, not pretty. Even for the date it was released in, the graphics of this game are below average, but I can forgive it for that. Back in the PS2 Era, open-world games like this were a rarity, and few had such a complicated story. (More on that later.)

How it Sounds:
The game sounds pretty good, for it's time, with specific sounds for each weapons, a good cast of characters, and good-sounding cars. Even the music that plays from the radio sounds good.

How it Plays:
San Andreas' biggest boon is it's gameplay. The open-world, car-riding, gun-shooting experience this game created left a much-talked about impression on it's players, even to this day. The controls take a bit to get used to when compared to today's more organized controls, but back when they were made, this was the way to play.

How it Stories:
I never thought GTA could have a deep story, but here we are, giving props. I won't go into specifics, but San Andreas has a fantastic story, with quite a few heavy-hitting plot points and twists.

Veredict and Conclusion:
San Andreas is definitely one of the most iconic games for our generation, and rightly so. It earns a good 4 out of 5, and the star it loses is because the game glitches out sometimes, leading to annoying repetitions of certain areas.

Christopher Robin (Movie, 2018)

Introduction:
I never had the blessing of growing with the whole of Winnie the Pooh. At most, I had one of those VHS with a handful of episodes, but that was about it. So when Christopher Robin showed up as a upcoming movie, it did very little to me. Enter today, where my SO decided that we'd watch it. Is it a really good movie, or is it just another cashgrab that ruins our childhood? Let's find out, shall we?

How It Looks:
Christopher Robin looks great, for what it is. The mayority of the movie is fully live-action, bar the actual classic characters, who are digital. This is not to say it takes away from their existence, as Pooh looked impossibly adorable, arguably more adorable than it ever did. The visual effects were few, as the movie kept grounded in reality, but when it went off on it and used those effects, it was really impressive. The movie also does a fantastic job of splitting the reality of showing Christopher's life without the use of narration, creating a heart-breaking montage of how he became an adult. All in all, this movie looks wonderful, and uses it's visuals to their fullest.

How It Sounds:
Just like in visuals, the sound of this movie is on point. The characters sound and feel spot-on, as they would if they truly existed, and if those aren't the original voice actors, they definitely nailed the essense of those voices, whisking me away back to that one VHS that I used to watch over and over. The music is also beautiful, using the old classics to perfectly capture the nostalgia of returning to your childhood, much like the character himself did.

How it Stories:
This movie's most impactful part is the story. Let's get it out of the way: The story is perfect. Sure, it's a bit on the whimsical side, but in it's essence, this is a children's story. And it delivers beautifully. The balancing act between the story directed at children is masterfully balanced with the message that the movie so clearly wanted parents to get, making a movie that all can enjoy.

Veredict and Conclusion:
This movie spoke to me on such a fundamental level that I have little in the way of wit to spout for this conclusion. I spent half the movie crying, not just because there is rarely a cast of more lovable characters, but because I saw myself in Christopher. I realized many things about myself and where I want to be, whuch speaks volumes as to the purpose of this movie. This movie, as is to be expected, gets 5 stars out of 5, for making a grumpy soul like mine realize that I still have time to do 'nothing'.

Fire Emblem Heroes (App, 2017)

Paladins Strike (App, 2018)

Paladins (Video Game, 2018)

The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild (Video Game, 2017)

Introduction:
Breath of the Wild is the latest entry in one of Gaming's biggest and most successful franchises, and it's been hailed as the greatest game ever made. Since it's birth, this game has taken the Franchise we love into an all-new location, but is that a good thing? Is this game really revolutionary, or does this transformation take the franchise in a terrible direction? Either way, we're about to find out if The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild can stand on it's own two feet, without relying on the glory of it's mighty (And not so mighty) predecessors. As usual, beware spoilers.

How it Looks:
Breath of the Wild is, by no means, an ugly game. The world is beautiful and diverse, using a mixture or earthly colors and dreary tones to create a beautiful, yet decrepit sight that speaks of it's thousands of years of history. The creatures look vibrant and powerful, specially the Guardians, and Link himself looks very unlike anything we've seen before, but somehow retaining that iconic Link look. Everything in this game looks great, but there's a bit of a problem with that: The game looks great, but it also can get repetitive. It might be a limitation brought about by the size of the map, but there's very few Monster variations. Or, rather, the majority of the Enemies in the game are simply recolors of each other. Beyond that, the game's bosses are almost identical, mostly because they're basically the same thing but altered to fight a different type of fighting style. Although beautiful, the landscapes look bland, with certain landmarks (Shrines and towers) copy-pasted all around, as if more of the exact same building would give it 'life'. Though the specific towns look great by themselves, the landscapes surrounding them don't, as mountains just feel the same, valleys don't feel unique. The map itself feels unnecessarily large based on the amount of content that's actually there, but more on that later.

How it Sounds:
Would you believe me if I told you that I don't recall any of the music from Breath of the Wild? It's true! I am aware that there's something there, but it's so low, or nearly nonexistent, that I can't remember it. No sound effect, bar the lightning, stood out to me as great or perfect, or even stood out to me at all. The sound effects are good, mind you, but nothing too precious, or memorable. It's unfortunate, as a strong soundtrack would've been able to boost this game into legend, if it had tried.

How it Plays:
Unfortunately, Breath of Wild has a lot of ideas, and no way to execute them in unison. Climbing, a new addition to the franchise, doesn't work well, with Climbing being clunky and slow. The Stamina option discourages relying on movement when in combat, as a lot of the things you do (Like running) take away your stamina. The combat feels stiff, not very organized. The runic system that replaces items is good enough to solve the game's slew of unnecessary puzzles, but does little to provide proper help in battle. Taming is incredibly tedious, and after you get your first horse, it's basically unnecessary. Cooking is so insignificant you can pass the game without ever using it. The problem with these things is not that they exist in the game, but that they weren't implemented properly, leading Breath of the Wild to look more like a proof-of-concept rather than a full game. And don't get me started on the whole weapon-breaking system. If you've never played the game, let me set the scene: You slog through the impossibly large terrain, following clues to find Shrines, and eventually, you gather thirteen hearts (I believe it's thirteen). Finally, you go to the Deku Tree (Yes, he's in the game) and there it is: The Master Sword. You pull it out, only to find out that it is one of the most easily destroy-able weapons in the game, and only actually works against very specific enemies. Oh, but that's not all. You know that iconic shield from the series? Yeah, there's only like, three of those, and they break eventually. The fact that after all your trouble you're unable to use the Master Sword all the time feels like a crappy game design choice, as it's supposed to be THE MASTER SWORD! I can forgive the shield being broken eventually, but after having to go through so many hoops to get it, the Master Sword should be immortal. In the end, the game feels incomplete, and unnecessarily large.

How it Stories:
Breath of the Wild suffers from the Star Wars problem: It tells a story that references a story that is millions of times more interesting than what is actually being shown. The game itself relies on a narrative that, in itself, relies on reminding you that 100 years ago, a colorful cast of powerful individuals (As well as Link and Zelda) fought, and lost, against Ganon, the great pig-king. This, however, is shown to us in cut-scenes here and there, not letting us play or even experience that story beyond carefully fabricated movies, basically. The game's story itself, however, is paper-thin: Zelda is fighting Ganon, and you have to go safe her. Before that, go to these four places and defeat Ganon's minions, Mini-Ganons (That's not their name) and 'recruit' a less-interesting version of those heroes that helped fight alongside Link, who will then waste all of their power dealing one blow (And one blow alone) to Ganon in the final battle. That's it. Really, that's all there is to this 'story'. It's unfortunate, but it could've been so much more.

Verdict and Conclusion:
Usually, I just finish up the review here, but I did want to give a few ideas on how the game could've been so much better. Now I know making a game is hard, and there's a lot that goes into that, but bear with me. Imagine, if you will, a Breath of the Wild that has both the classic story-driven narrative and the free, open world aspect that they wanted to go for. Imagine if this Breath of the Wild opened with you playing through the story of 100 years ago, leading up to a mock ending where you lose, only to reopen your save file and start from what the game is now. You'd have the two-world aspect from all of the games (the past, and 100 years later), you'd have an interesting story without sacrificing the open-world aspect (As you'd be playing through the story from 100 years ago, as well as what's already in the game), and we'd feel more in connection to the few characters that exist, as the five that fight with Link and Zelda in the past are criminally underused characters. It would've been so much better! Either way, in the end, I'm going to give Breath of the Wild a solid 3 out of 5, not because of what it could be, mind you.  It gets those because of what it is: A proof-of-concept that could've been so much more.

Fortnite Battle Royale (Video Game, 2017)

Introduction:
Fortnite is a game I've been hearing a lot about in the last year, but I knew very little about it. It showed up on the Nintendo Switch's eShop, so I checked it out, and after some research, found out that what was on the Switch wasn't the actual Fortnite, but Fortnite Battle Royale. Now, this review is about Fortnite Battle Royale as it's own entity. It isn't about the PvE elements of the actual Fortnite, nor is there going to be some comparison with a certain other game I won't mention. I will be judging what exists on Fortnite Battle Royale as of this writing, so here we go.

How it Looks:
Okay, let's get this out of the way: Fortnite's art style is gorgeous. It looks really good, but that's a bit of a downfall. It's a very beautiful game that you see again and again and again and again. At no point does the game shows anything that stands out as unique, as far as I've been aware in the time that I've played it. The characters in the game, or outfits as the game itself calls them, are pretty awesome, with both genders being represented well. However, there's far too many similar characters, to the point that I can't tell some of them apart. Maybe that's just the fact that I'm not used to the characters, but regardless. The game relies on aesthetic items for it's variety, providing a large amount of them, either by achieving Tiers or by buying them from the store. Now, just as you expect from these items, they do absolutely nothing, and are just there to look pretty, or as a sort of trophy: 'Look, I have Omega, which means I'm so cool'. Unfortunately, unlike repetitive games like Minecraft, Fortnite has no aesthetic changes to the environment, which ends up becoming boring really, REALLY fast. Sure, it looks pretty, but who loses their breath when they see the Mona Lisa anymore?

How it Sounds:
Fortnite sounds good. There's really not much else to say about it. The sounds are good. Nothing too fancy or over-the-top or special, just good old multiplayer auditory goodness.

How it Plays:
Fortnite's most important aspect is it's gameplay and it's where it shines and fails, at the same time. First off, there's only one game mode disguised as different ones. There's Solo, where you jump into a cage match against ninety-nine other individuals. There's Duos, where you and a buddy jump into a cage match against forty nine other Duos. And then there's Squads, where you and three other buddies can jump into a cage match against twenty four other Squads. The same thing, different name. Once in the game, the way that the system works is fairly simple: You jump down into the arena (The same one map) and end up shooting it out with others. Or, if you're smart, you wait until the other side of the map and jump into a next-to-empty area full of loot. Like all other MMOs, this one has a system, and once you figure it out, you will get bored very fast. Example: I joined Fortnite a few days after it came out on the Switch. Before my first week was done, I already had several solo wins and every Challenge done. Unfortunately, the map becoming smaller due to the storm doesn't do anything to punish you for sneaking around and letting others kill each other, then swooping in to take the win, a strategy that works far too well. Not only that, the equipment feels scarce and repetitive. You'll come across the same exact weapon almost ten times in a match, if you search around long enough, and most of the time, you won't even care. And then there's the in-game purchases. Now, I must say, I've become a victim of this. I actually bought a few things, the Battle Pass included. But, for a game that has so little actual game, this game has an overabundance of purchasable items. Worse off, none of it actually changes the gameplay, just how it looks. A single snap of the fingers can cost 200 V-Bucks, which is about two bucks. But an Outfit can cost as little as 1,200 V-Bucks, or twelve bucks. Not only that, but the Battle Pass itself costs 950 V-Bucks, which is a grand nine bucks and a half. If you're not careful, your entire wallet will go on what amounts to filters. Don't get me wrong, some of these look great, but considering how little the game actually has, it feels more like a cash-grab than an integral part of the game's system. Since there's no trading of these items, no selling them forward, it makes the game look bad. Worse off, you only have three refunds. Three. If your child or friend bought the wrong thing, or something, and you don't want it, you're only able to refund it three times. It feels kinda shady, specially since these items are purely cosmetic in nature, and don't actually provide any benefits to the player.

How it Stories:
It has no story, as far as everyone knows. I've searched around to see if there's a story I've missed, but all I really got that was in some way resembling a story was a group of loading screen images that have a very little line of dialogue or something next to it. So, no story. No real lore. Just combat.

Verdict and Conclusion:
Unfortunately, although I love playing the game (Mostly because of the people I've met on there), I can't give this game high praise with a straight face. As it is right now, Fortnite is a laughable excuse for a game, with four of it's five menu tabs dedicated to cosmetic things that, unless you shed some real cash, will remain empty for a long time. It is sad, but I give Fortnite a strong 1 out of 5 stars, because of it's many unfortunate downfalls. If this game is incomplete is irrelevant, as it is already released and earning money. Nor does it have anything that informs the player that it is incomplete, therefore, what I've played has earned itself that 1 star.

Pokemon Quest (Video Game, 2018)

Introduction:
Pokemon is one of my favorite game franchises of all time. It has had a lot of successful spin-offs, from the social commentary of Pokemon Ranger to the heart-string pulling of the Mystery Dungeon series, Pokemon knows where it's at when it comes to creating new game. Enter Pokemon Quest, a Free-to-Start game that dropped for the Nintendo Switch out of nowhere. Literally. There was no build up for it. Anyway, how does this free addition to the Franchise measure up against my judgement? Let's find out, shall we?

How it Looks:
The game opens up to a new art-style for the game, in the same vein as to how every sub-franchise tries to have it's unique look. Pokemon Quest's style is box-like, almost like a smoother Minecraft look to it. This is by no means a bad thing, but there's little to look at in the game, except Pokemon and repeated or nearly identical locations that change in coloring and little more. This makes Pokemon Quest one of the least interesting games to look at, as the aesthetic grows old pretty fast. Not only that, because the game only has the first 150 Pokemon, it tends to feel very repetitive, as you'll start fighting your way through the same Pokemon over-and-over again. Something that's good to point out is that Shiny Pokemon, alternate-colored versions of existing Pokemon, actually apear in this game. How much this really matters is up to everyone who plays it, but to me, it's something worth mentioning, though it doesn't really do much to break the monotony of the game play.

How it Sounds:
To be perfectly honest, I play this game on mute. Not because I don't like the sounds, but because I usually leave it running and only use it to get the next expedition running (More on this later). However, the sounds are all there, all Pokemon like, though it doesn't really do much. The attacks' generic sounds get boring fast, and the sounds of the Pokemon, though following through with the original sound design of the games (Not like the anime), it doesn't provide much in the way of breaking the monotony.

How it Plays:
Here's Pokemon Quest's biggest flaw. There is no 'Game-Play'. You don't do anything, per se, and that's a problem. The way the game works, you pick three Pokemon to be your party, then you send them on expeditions, which just means you're watching three Pokemon fight groups of other Pokemon and all you can do is press the buttons at the bottom, two actual Attacks per Pokemon, up to six Attacks. Most of the time, you'll just watch the Pokemon fight on their own, which is counter-intuitive. No one played Pokemon for the cooking, after all. And, speaking of Cooking, it seems Nintendo saw that people loved Breath of the Wild and said 'lets add cooking to Pokemon', then removed everything that made Pokemon enjoyable. Cooking isn't intuitive, the recipes don't actually help, and the game uses a color system that doesn't correlate to the Pokemon in any shape or form, as I got a Digglet to appear from a soup specifically oriented at 'Red' Pokemon. And that's one of my biggest grievances with the game: It doesn't tell you what anything means! Your recipes are shown but only the results and a hint, so you don't know exactly how to replicate it, unless you specifically took the time to learn it. Pokemon have 'colors' but there is no actual description of which Pokemon are 'Red' or 'Blue', as other Pokemon that don't have those colors still appear around the place. Even though certain Areas have a specific type that increases the Power of specific Pokemon Types, there are Pokemon that might appear in these areas with Types strong against the Pokemon getting the Boost. When the list of Pokemon grow, so does the tediousness of finding Pokemon, and you'll either have to make a list of your own, or try and guess whether you already have that particular Pokemon more than once or twice (Since you'll probably want to evolve specific Pokemon). Not only that, but Evolution doesn't work the same anymore, either, so Pokemon like Eevee that have special rules have different rules, while Pokemon that evolved from trades only evolve at impossibly high levels.

How it Stories:
There's very little story to the game. It starts you off with a story of some sort, but you spend so much time without hearing about it that you forget, but it's something about you going to a new island and trying to find a series of Statues that open the Chamber of Legends. I think. It's the same generic story of Pokemon, just bypassing the GYMs and replacing the Badges with Statues. Nothing really interesting here, people.

Verdict and Conclusion:
As much as I'm genuinely enjoying leaving it running in the background while I do other productive things (Like writing this Review), Pokemon Quest falls far too short of the standards played by the Pokemon Franchise. I give it a very small, very dignified 2 stars out of 5, it keeps the two stars because it's free, and you can enjoy it without spending any real money. And, because Kabuto is the most adorable little thing in that game. Like, seriously. Just, so cute.

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (Book, 1954)

Introduction:
Growing up, one of the best movies I had ever watched was Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. I had always wanted to read the original book, but it never really happened until last year (As of the time of writing), and wow. Let me tell you, I was incredibly surprised by the story. Here, ladies and gentlemen, is my review of The Fellowship of the Ring, the first book in the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

How it Settings:
Lord of the Rings is very beautiful sounding. The settings are described, mostly, in great detail, specially in the earlier parts of the story, while the main characters are in the Shire. As the story progresses, there's less local narrative, but there's plenty of 'over there stands a mountain, and next to it a river' which are irrelevant to the story it tells. Even though the book is incredibly detailed, sometimes details are lost in the sea of words, leading to feelings of places being disjointed, which happened to me far too often. I found myself rereading some lines, other times finding myself lost in the places he described, as some connections between everything are either minimal, or drowned in large paragraphs. I understand that writing changes throughout the years, but even for old stories, the narrative related directly to the settings and locations seem to be uneven and sometimes just unbalanced, as places like the Shire have directions such as 'beyond the river', but other places completely lack details.

How it Characters:
When it comes to characters, they are two dimensional for the most part, there to serve an archetype. This is not to say that some characters, Aragorn and Sam primarily, are very deep in their execution, but Frodo, for example, lacks much in the way of personality, resembling more a silent protagonist for the reader to 'replace' in their minds. Not only that, but the narrative sometimes introduces characters name-first, not explaining who that character is, or where they came from or anything. Beyond that, there's a particular character included that just screams 'Deus Ex Machina', existing to save the characters from certain events that occurred. This character never appears again after the few chapters he helps the main characters in, and is only mentioned once (Not explained) later on in the book.

How it Plot:
The plot is a classic case of 'magical item that must be taken to a distant destination and along the way the heroes traverse various locations each with a final confrontation of sorts'. This is not a bad thing, mind you, it's just a pretty generic story, accompanied by a few cliches that this story might've been the original birther of them. There's not a lot to say about the plot beyond that, mind you, as the story is pretty straightforward and doesn't deviate from the previously stated.

Verdict and Conclusion:

Okay, so, even though there's a lot of not-necessarily-good stuff about the story, this is a solid 3 and a half out of 5, because what's there is amazing. When Tolkien hits the spot, there's no one that can match him, but that doesn't mean there aren't flaws to this story. Those Flaws don't make this a bad story in any way, as it's still one of the best stories I've read, but I genuinely couldn't help but point out the mistakes. Anyone who reads the story can see the positives, however, as they're massive. And there you have it, a solid right above the middle for Tolkien's first Lord of the Rings book.

Cube (Movie, 1997)

Introduction:
Despite what anyone might think, I'm not super into horror films. Oftentimes, horror films take me out of the horror because of stupid characters, confusing locations, or just downright not interesting villains. Enter Cube, a 1997 Canadian Horror/Sci-Fi film that delivers something very unique, and very engaging. The setting is a maze filled in identical cube-shaped rooms riddled with traps. A simple setting, but one the film pulls off properly, and the actors sell their characters very convincingly. But, how well does the film does it job? Here we go.

How it Looks:
The thing about the Cube is that, well, there's really not a lot of diversity when it comes to the setting. The behind-the-scenes guys reused the same cube, changing the panels on the wall to have different colors, and that's about it. The traps look good, even after all these years, and the moment there's a break in the not-so-monotonous cube also looks good. And, that's about it, really. Everything looks good, mostly because there's very little to look at, when it comes to things that aren't the actors.

How it Sounds:
Just like in the 'How it Looks' category, the sounds are simple and minimalist, leading to a simple judgement: It sounds great, in it's simplicity. The actors sometimes seem to have different quality in the mikes they use, but this might just be a glitch on my computer. The mechanical whirls and the grumbling of the cube sound deep and satisfying. All in all, it sounds great.

How it Stories:
This is where the review goes down, but just a bit. The movie relies on exposition between the characters to guide the story, in order to make sure the setting doesn't change, and that the movie's focus doesn't deviate. It's not necessarily bad to explains things via characters, but the exposition and character interactions are a bit convoluted in the manner that it is shown, mostly because of the fact that there's just no narration or external explanation, sort of like a show-don't-tell. Despite it being a Horror film, it spends far too much time talking math, which might be a turn-off for some people. I personally liked the story, though the change-ups for the final scenes felt forced and out of nowhere, specially since the movie tries it's best to not bog itself down with the tedious parts of the characters' journey, but this makes it hard to keep track of how long the characters have been stuck in the Cube, which is counterproductive when the characters start behaving a bit more irritable and crazy. I don't blame this on how it stories, but on the limitations of the medium, as a book or a TV Series might have been arguably better suited to tell this story in a more convincing fashion.

Verdict and Conclusion:
At the end of the day, Cube is a hidden gem of a movie that should be watched by any fan of Sci-Fi or Horror. It does feel clunky when it comes to it's story-telling, and how some of the characters rationalize certain things, but that's a flaw most horror films carry with them- A staple of the genre, if you will. However, the movie gets 4 stars out of 5, losing that one star for the exposition of the characters which, though a necessity, it still could've been shuffled around to be a bit more logical, or better constructed. I'll always suggest this movie for people to watch, though.

The Mist (Movie, 2007)

The Mist (2007)

Introduction:
The Mist is a horror movie based on a Stephen King novel of the same name, and as it's expected of Stephen King, this story really does a good job of being a Stephen King movie. Not only that, but with an awesome cast composed of the best underrated actors in the industry, this movie has everything going for it. But, is it worth watching? Read on to find out, or skip to the very end for my verdict. Also, beware spoilers down below. I'll try to avoid them, but hey, this is an eleven year old movie, so you've been warned.

How it Looks:
At first glance, this doesn't seem like a very good movie. The way it opens up, it really doesn't seem very interesting. But once the story starts going, this movie takes off beautifully. The titular mist rolls in beautifully, creating the most eerie scenario, something along the lines of Silent Hill, but done better. And once what's inside the mist is revealed... Well, let's just say the movie sold it perfectly. As a horror movie, the (SPOILERS) monsters inside the mist look amazing: realistic to an extreme, but extremely alien, as well. The tentacles couldn't look more realistic, the insects and spider monsters gave me the creeps (Even though I love bugs), and the gigantic monster at the end, with his upper body being half-covered by mist, it just did a fantastic job at showing it off without really showing off. Props to the people that made the visual for this movie, they did a phenomenal job that stands the test of time. Eleven years, and this movie still looks better than even some stuff that came out this year!

How it Sounds:
In the manner of sounds, there's two categories: Sound Effects, and actual music. The music in this movie, if there even is any, is not really impressive. No piece stuck out to me, to the point that I don't have any memory of there even being music. That said, the ambiance and the sound effects were top notch, to say the least. Every monster and every bite felt like it had life in it and weight behind it, the bullets that were fired sounded heavy and deadly, and every silent moment really gave off an incredibly creepy vibe, like something could be lurking just around the corner. The sound department really did a fantastic job of letting you know it's there, except when it's not. No Hanz Zimmers iconic music here, but that might just be for the benefit of the movie.

How it Stories:
The story of The Mist is very simple, like most Stephen King novels are. It follows a (Very good) cast as they struggle through the scenario set before them, in this case, being surrounded by monster-infested Mist. The plot is paper thin, the atheistic perspective that all Stephen King novels have is there, and the character motivations feels absent and plot-driven at times, making the story the definite low point of the movie. Characters will go from one end of the spectrum to another without really any indication to what the point of it was, there's a few 'plot lines' that are left either unanswered or simply became irrelevant, and there's a bunch of characters that could have been completely removed without affecting the story in the slightest (Specially in the first half of the movie). Though most of the cast was amazing, it felt wasted on this story, except for three characters whose stories were more fleshed out, but even then, the way they do certain things could've been shifted around to make more sense, such as the killing of a character being uncharacteristic within the context that was given to us. The only real shocker in the story, as well as the moment that really made this movie iconic, was the ending, which I won't spoil. But, the plot ends beautifully, almost melancholy, touching on a possibility that is never explored, and really letting the main character's actor shine through. I get goosebumps just from thinking about it. This final scene is the real reason to see this movie, as it's one of the best final scenes of all time (And that's saying something.)

Verdict and Conclusion:
The Mist is a movie that stands the test of time, but not because of it's plot. Paper-thin characters and equally thin plot line is hidden behind terrifying set pieces that chill you to the bone, and that's exactly what this movie wants you to feel. It's strengths lie within it's antagonists, like the best horror movies out there: Gritty, deadly, and completely alien. This movie's lack of overt jump-scares, it's reliance on the monsters' terror to truly scare the viewer, and it's desire to flesh out only two of their characters works for the movie, but it's badly contrasted by it's plot and the rest of the cast, which I've already mentioned before. In the end, I'll always recommend this movie to anyone who likes a solid, midway horror film that relies more on it's monster than on it's plot, and I'll DEFINITELY recommend it to any up-and-coming writer, for that amazing, unpredictable ending. Seriously, this movie's ending makes even the characters worth enduring. It gets a solid 4 out of 5 stars from me, with a big, old 'NOPE' to the Monsters, specially the Spiders.

Borderlands (Video Game, 2009)

Introduction:
Borderlands is arguably one of the less popular First Person Shooters out there, created by a company that hasn't really been very popular, per se. Once you get into the game, though, it's a pretty interesting FPS/RPG mixer with some equally interesting characters and plot, with a party-focused gaming system that I've never actually tried. Published in 2009, Borderlands became an icon in the gaming industry, spawning the perfect sequel, and an less-than-surprising pre-sequel. For this review, I'll be talking about the core game, not counting DLC or expansions, and I won't be reviewing the multiplayer aspects of the game, as I've never played the game with other people. Either way, let's get into the Review.

How it Looks:
Borderlands graphics are stylish, and though they've started to grow old, they were pretty gorgeous for their time. The characters are each as unique as the next, including the main characters, and the powers and abilities of each of them. The guns look good, as they usually do, but after a few guns collected, you start to notice that, though there's a few guns that stand out, the majority of them are going to end up being repetitive, with particular guns using the same parts over and over, with very slight variations to their look. Just like the guns, the world has very few places that look genuinely different, with the majority of it being colored in a drab brown. Though this is understandable, as the story takes place in a desert world, it does get boring and repetitive after a while, specially since you get to spend a long time in Fyrestone. The game doesn't really do anything super revolutionary with it's graphics, but it does look good, and the enemy characters do, if you like seeing the same character reused over-and-over again with next to no alterations beyond name.

How it Sounds:
Borderlands sounds good, but it's not all that great. No song, bar the intro song, stood out to me as interesting, even all the way to the final battle, which has... I honestly don't remember. Either way, the sound design isn't particularly stand-out-ish, as anything beyond the game's intro song is pretty standard. The monsters and enemies sound alright, the general sounds for the guns and grenades are alright. Honestly? This game sounds alright. That's about it.

How it Plays:
Borderland's strength is it's gameplay, and that's about it. It mixes an RPG loot-collecting system with a hectic First-Person Shooter play style that, unfortunately, it doesn't take advantage of. The RPG systems are too straightforward and alter the characters in too simple a way to seem like you're genuinely progressing. Often times, you pick up the same weapon repeatedly, in spite of the game's apparent randomly generated loot. You'll most probably end up with a boss-specific weapon for the majority of the game, or until the next boss drops a weapon. The FPS aspects are unforgiving at times, as enemies take far too little damage in comparison to the damage they deliver. I suspect that the multiplayer aspects of the game makes it better, but I can't say for sure. As an additional note, the bosses in the game range from incredibly easy (Where you can hide behind cover and fire at them from away) to impossibly hard (Bosses that can move through the same terrain as you, leading to your demise.) The final boss of the game is specially disappointing, as I defeated it far too easily.

How it Stories:
Unfortunately, Borderlands is not very exciting when it comes to story. It's a search quest after another, intertwined with go kill x amount of people or monsters in x place until the next marker comes along. This is a pattern that flies throughout the entire game, leading up to a final confrontation that honestly, leaves a lot to be desired. The reason I mention quests, is because that's the way Borderlands delivers it's story, and if you're not paying attention, you'll probably miss a lot of the story. And, leading up to the final boss, you'll be so out of tune from the quests, you'll probably end up forgetting what that giant, one-eyed creature is. Or, you know, what you were supposed to be doing that entire time, story wise. Borderland's story fails to deliver, and as a result, whatever positive the rest of the game might have, the story fails to bring it all together appropriately. In the end, it could have done so much more, but failed to do so.

Verdict and Conclusion:

Don't let all my negative points deceive you, as the game is genuinely fun, in short bursts.  There's little point to picking a specific character, beyond what their Action Skills do. Regardless, Borderlands is a very ambitious take on the FPS genre, specially as it attempted to mix RPG elements with it's FPS elements, creating a formula that would become incredibly popular a long time later. Needless to say, Borderlands gets a solid three stars from me, for it's interesting mechanics, but it loses those two additional stars mostly due to it's inability to optimize those same elements to it's advantage.

The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker (Video Game, 2003)

Introduction:
The Legend of Zelda is one of the biggest franchises in gaming history, and it's incarnation known as The Wind Waker is one of it's most polarizing. Dividing fans into those who saw it for it's childish look alone, and those who saw beyond that, Wind Waker has since become a classic, spawning several direct sequels, being the target of Hyrule Warriors biggest DLC pack, and even being the artstyle of preference for most of the handheld games in the franchise since it's first appearance. But can this childish, colorful world live up to the expectations of it's fans? Or does it sucumb to a degrading half-existence, where everyone acknowledges it exists but don't really like to talk about it? Read on to find out, or skip to the end to see my verdict on it. Either way, beware of spoilers, and here we go.

How it Looks:
The first thing fans notice about The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker is how it looks. And, let me tell you, it's a jarring change from the rest of the franchise. Relying more in a unique little artstyle of it's own, The Wind Waker looks like it'll be a watered down, children-friendly version of the more robust games in the series, but to be perfectly honest, there is no game in the franchise as of this point that is more beautiful than this game, and yes, I'm counting Breath of the Wild. It's vibrant colors contrast and work perfectly in unison, creating a beautiful, vivid world that feels as mystical and lived-in as the story it tells. From the way the sea changes it's waves to the way the storms alter the reality of the world you live in, this game is gorgeous. Each character is hand-crafted to perfection, there are no repeat models for the NPCs, and even the new species added to the game feel great, like they have existed in this world for ages past. Although the islands that are directly related to the story are beautiful, the rest of the islands do lack a bit in the variety department, with several of them being slightly altered versions of each other. But this is a minor thing, so minor it's barely noticeable when playing the game. I could go on a ten thousand word rant about how beautiful this game is, but let's just put it this way: You spends all your time surfing around on the back of a small red boat, and at no point during this game you'll get bored of how it looks. No dark colors are used, except at night, and even then, the game is gorgeous. On a side note, Link has never been this expressive, but more on that later.

How it Sounds:
The theme song for The Wind Waker is hands-down one of my favorite video game tunes of all time, and I often find myself listening to it whenever I see the sea, which is often, since I live on an island. There's a sense of wonder and discovery when you're out in the Great Sea, hunting for treasure and traveling to and fro other islands. The music during battle is exciting and does a great job at pumping you up for battle, and the music for when the storms kick in and you're caught in a whirlpool is perfect for the situation, giving off a very peculiar feeling of excitement and dread. The music is on point, but so is the sound effects. When you pick up a Rupee, throw a jar, or strike an enemy, you'll feel it in your core. There's no sound effect more satisfying than running through a group of rupees and just hearing them all jingle. All the classic Legend of Zelda sounds are there, but with a distinctive Wind Waker sound, which gives it a very unique vibe. All in all, the sound of this game is gorgeous.

How it Plays:
Man, Wind Waker plays well. The controls are more intuitive than ever, giving more control during battle, or so it feels. Battling doesn't feel like a shore, and instead feels satisfying when you finally take down your first Darknut. The surfing through the Great Sea feels great, with a few cool mechanics hidden there for better navigation, such as quick-turning and jumping. There are a few items that work differently if the player uses them while on the boat, which gives a much-needed variety to the whole 'being on a ride' aspect of the game, and makes the boat feel much more like a helpful tool, rather than a means to get around. This game also makes you feel like all your items are useful, rather than letting you get some items that make the others unusable, meaning that even by the end of the game, you'll probably end up using all your items, instead of just a few. The game has a bunch of nuances and interesting secrets, and it won't let up, all the way to the end. Not only that, but the game has a very cool mechanic that I love very much, that I haven't seen in any other game yet: Link's eyes. Not only is Link a very expressive young man, that expressiveness is a feature of the game in the sense that it helps you, the player, find secrets. Oftentimes, Link will look at something, and if you pay close attention, you'll be able to discover what he's looking at: Be it a secret item, a hidden chest, or a pig. This game plays perfectly, and I found no glitch in the Gamecube version, even though I've played it for years.

How it Stories:
The story is explicitly a sequel to Ocarina of Time, but set a long time in the future. The story of the game is pretty straightforward, like most Legend of Zelda stories are, but it does a fantastic job of doubling back on itself to make you thread through paths previously passed without making you feel like you're back-tracking inecessarily. It has a few twists and turns you don't expect, more so than most other Legend of Zelda games out there, and it does a good job of realistically take a young islander to his destiny as the Hero of Wind. Not the strong point of the game, but it definitely doesn't lack in the story department, except during a portion of the game, where the player needs to find the pieces of the Triforce of Courage. At that point, the story comes to a stand-still, and won't progress until the player has successfully collected the pieces from throughout the Great Sea. Not a big issue, since it makes sense, but it's still a bit annoying to have to stop and explore, if you're more into the story and less into the exploration. It's a good way of getting the player to be free and explore, however, so it balances out.

Verdict and Conclusion:
Wind Waker is a solid entry in an already solid Franchise. Utilizing it's beautiful look to it's advantage and understanding what makes a Legend of Zelda game tick, this entry in the series holds it's place as my favorite game in the entire franchise because it does exactly what it wants to do, and doesn't take no for an answer. Do you want a beautiful game that you can sink hours into? Or do you prefer a good story that will surprise you? Or do you prefer intuitive combat with a vast array of varied enemies? Or do you prefer tongue-in-cheek comedy mixed with almost-fourty-year-old-men dressed in unitards? All of that is here, all coated in a beautiful graphical caramel that looks amazing, even now. In the end, if you're not a fan of the more famous Legend of Zelda fans, this one isn't for you. It's very much a Legend of Zelda game, and it carries itself with that same style, just with a little more flourish. This shouldn't deter RPG fans who enjoy a good game about exploration. My unbiased review of it is a solid 5 out of 5 stars, because it earns them. And, before anyone says I'm biased about it, if I HAD been biased, I'd have given it 50 stars out of 5, so there. Just, stop reading, and go play Wind Waker. I'll stop writing now, and go play it myself!

Introduction to my Review Blog

Hey there, before this actual review begins, let me tell you a bit about how this works: I'll be reviewing everything from video games to movies to TV Series and books. Every week, on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, I'll be posting a random review on anything that strikes my fancy, and I'll be trying my best to be fair and unbiased. Not only will I judge things on a specific set of rules, I'll be giving things leeway based on the time of their release. Example: The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time looks terrible by today's standards, but for it's time, it was revolutionary. And, on the topic of video games, I'll be judging them based on the following:

• How they look: The graphics of both the gameplay segments and the cutscenes (Each judged differently, of course)
• How they sound: The voice acting (If there's any), the sound effects, and the music for the various parts of the game
• How it plays: The gameplay mechanics, gimmicks (If any), and the UI (Or, user interface)
• How it Stories: If the game has a story, I'll be judging it's logic, how well it takes the player through it, and how it develops.

Just like with Video Game Reviews, I'm going to be reviewing movies and TV Series with similar rules, focusing more on the story elements. As well as judging the sound, the look, and the story of the movie or TV Series, I'll also be judging the story heavily, as they are more about stories than video games are. These story-based criteria are, among others:

• The characters: Their development and their relevance to the story
• The Twists: The importance of them, and if they were even well-planned out
• The plot: How well it comes together, and if it relies on unnecessary things
• The ending: How well the story brings everything in and ends it, though this won't affect negatively stories with sequels or planned sequels (Unless the sequel is something along the lines of 'let's expand, rather than continue')

Books, on the other hands, will be a purely story-based review, relying heavily on the story's use of narrative to be judged appropriately. Characters, settings, the writer's ability to properly portray the image they want, and the potential reliance on ex machinas for the resolution of it's story. Every item I review will be based and reviewed completely based on it's own. It doesn't matter if it's from a magnificent series, or if it's actors are the best of the best, if the movie, book, game, or series sucks, I'll let you know, without bias. This is a sort of guide for how my reviews work, so if anyone ever has an issue with how my reviews work, here you go. Now, to end in a positive note, I'll be reviewing things as I finish them, so there will be no intentional bias. And, to top it off, I'll happily accept suggestions for things to review, but I won't be able to review things until I acquire them and then watch/read/play them first, so it will take a while. Keep an eye open this Friday, for the first review will be going up then.