Colin Olmstead

This story started out very interesting, quirky, offbeat and interesting/entertaining. But the main character is apparently, at first, a hetero man involved in relationships with women. Then he seeks an intimate relationship with a transgender, I guess you say woman? He starts having sex with a man dressed as a woman is another way of saying that. I don't understand that. What is the point of that?

I love a good drug lord story, a true drug lord story is even better. This is neither. Griselda was a psychopath. In this series Vergara is a timid plucky beautiful woman getting abused by men left and right. She is just trying to sell a few kilos of blow and love her family. Later because men are so bad and women are so good she has to really start killing people just to get by doing what she has to while still somehow maintaining her battered virtue. The acting is so bad. The prosthetics have her looking like a combination of Pinocchio and a cheesy Halloween witch. Soooo bad. Absolute garbage. Watch it if you don't believe me. Nothing realistic For example: In the first two episodes Griselda who is supposed to be a hardcore street smart builder of a cocaine empire gets beaten up 4 times in predictably dangerous situations. As usual: There are a massive amount of fake 5 star reviews paid for by the publisher and posted at google reviews. Netflix has it ranked #1 and Rotten Tomatoes has given it 88% at the time of this review based on obscure critic reviews paid $50 dollars each (by The PR firm, Bunker 15) We live in a time that is rife with deception. Just read the reviews.

Note: look very carefully at the massive number of fake reviews for this movie. Pay special attention to the names. When the soviets invaded Afghanistan 1979 to 1989 much of the local resistance were called Mujahideen. The American press called them freedom fighters and we sent Stinger Missiles capable of taking down very expensive Russian super Helicopters called Mi-24D's (along with a lot of other stuff). In America the Mujahideen were celebrated as freedom fighters and glorified in movies like Rambo 3. A large number of todays Taliban (very likely a large majority) are descendants of or the same fighters from the Russian invasion. But they have a different name now, Taliban. In Guy Ritchie's movie the Taliban that fight against America's invasion are portrayed as evil demonic people that the locals all hated. What a difference a new invasion makes. The movie begins by describing our invasion as a response to September 11. He does not mention that we were supposedly invading Afghanistan to kill Osama Bin Laden who was CIA trained, funded and armed to fight against the Mujahideen. (dig deep on this one, google is dominated with counter claims) The FBI identified all the 911 hijackers as being from Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Egypt and Lebanon. The US congress much later passed a law allowing victims of 911 to sue Saudi Arabia. Osama Bin Laden was later supposedly found and killed in Pakistan. His body was then dumped in the Ocean as the story goes. But there was never any international identification of his body. He was simply dumped in the Ocean because the US was "afraid his body would become an important symbol to his followers". I guess they thought they would be able to visit his grave and it would have been impossible to hide. I am joking about that last part. A six year old could tell you how the US Government could have made a body disappear after proving to the world that they had indeed captured CIA trained (a matter of record) bin laden. Many believe we invaded Afghanistan for oil and to secure pipelines. There is much video evidence of US soldiers also guarding poppy fields that are used to manufacture various opiates including heroine oxycontin and so on. It definitely happened and is a matter of record. In guy ritchies movie we invaded Afghanistan as a response to 911 and we stayed to stop the evil Taliban from doing bad things to various people. There is no mention of the fact the US military committed great atrocities against the Afghan people and destroyed infrastructure that certainly resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people if not millions directly and indirectly. General Wesley Clarke has revealed that 10 days after 911 there were plans to invade "Seven countries in Five years finishing up with Iran". As usual the pentagon lagged behind but 6 of those countries have been invaded and we are waiting for them to finish up with Iran at the time of this review. Afghanistan was on that hit list. General Wesley Clarke claims that none of those countries would have been invaded if they were not oil rich.

Simply one of the greatest RPG's of all time. Rarely will you find a game that caters to the gamer so well. If you played D&D ever this is the video game you dreamed of. If you love RPG's in the fantasy genre this is the game you dreamed of. It would be a disservice to criticize this title but it would be fair to say the difficulty could max out harder. Then again if you choose a party that is unbalanced you can very quickly crank up the challenge level. BG3 was in pre-release for about three years. It became a running joke year after year. Surprisingly it was worth the frustration. It was worth the wait. Larian took an approach that Starfield and Microsoft could learn from. Starfield is a soulless clunky mess. It is well known that it was rushed to market. Gamers know what a good game is.

****I would have given this title (generously) 2 out of 5 but to balance (in some small way) the massive number of fake reviews I dropped it to 1 out of 5 .**** We see a lot of fake reviews here. If you see a 5 star review it is HIGHLY LIKELY that it is a fake. I have not played a lot of this game but it doesnt live up to the 1000 planet open world exploration titan it claimed to be. If you run into or interact with npc's they act like nothing happened. If you jump on top of one from two floors up they do not react. So far it feels a little soulless I am sorry to report. BG3 absolutely destroys starfield it is a disservice to BG3 to even compare them. There is zero chance Starfield is in the running for game of the year. Absolutely zero, less than zero.