Topic: Rate the last movie you've seen

[Plugabugz]

Saw Iron Man 3

It was good.  Now that that is out of the way.  I have to real complaint about their portayal of Tennessee.  For one their was snow and people were reacting to it like Northerners.  I live near where they placed that city.  If their was snow everyone be at home and the stores be raided of Milk and Bread.  More than likely though is that their is not snow.  Then they had him go to Chattanooga of all places and they had the Miss Chattanooga in a High School.  That be like Miss New York being in a High School.  Not to mention only 9Mb internet.  Chattanooga is wired for 1Gb Internet.  *shrug*  If you are going to my Backward state at least portray it right.

The bit that got to me was his technobabble line about ISDN in the reporters truck. Yeah sure, i'll just climb up on top and fiddle with the satellite dish (which usually has nothing to do with connectivity) and boost the speed significantly.

Technobabble in "harder scifi" like Star Trek and Stargate and Doctor Who is acceptable given its nature, but Iron Man is based on a present-day Earth.

[Ceric]

Saw Iron Man 3

It was good.  Now that that is out of the way.  I have to real complaint about their portayal of Tennessee.  For one their was snow and people were reacting to it like Northerners.  I live near where they placed that city.  If their was snow everyone be at home and the stores be raided of Milk and Bread.  More than likely though is that their is not snow.  Then they had him go to Chattanooga of all places and they had the Miss Chattanooga in a High School.  That be like Miss New York being in a High School.  Not to mention only 9Mb internet.  Chattanooga is wired for 1Gb Internet.  *shrug*  If you are going to my Backward state at least portray it right.

The bit that got to me was his technobabble line about ISDN in the reporters truck. Yeah sure, i'll just climb up on top and fiddle with the satellite dish (which usually has nothing to do with connectivity) and boost the speed significantly.

Technobabble in "harder scifi" like Star Trek and Stargate and Doctor Who is acceptable given its nature, but Iron Man is based on a present-day Earth.

Agree.  That got me too and you know what the ironic part was?  He could have either had the satellite dish pointed to one of his satellite with better speeds or connected to a 4g network.

[ShyGuy]

I saw Iron Man 3 as well, it was pretty good with lots of humor.

[Pixelated Pixies]

Good Vibrations - This is definitely my film of the year so far. Set during height of 'The Troubles' in the 1970s, this film takes a comical look at the so-called 'Godfather of Belfast Punk' Terri Hooley, whose dream of opening a record shop helped create and promote some of Punk Rock's most enduring bands.
 
Beautifully shot and with a real sense of the era and the place, Good Vibrations is highly recommended to those of you who have even a passing appreciation for Punk, or for those that simply enjoy intelligent comedies.
 
I urge you to check it out!
 

 

[Plugabugz]

Star Trek Into Darkness.

This film covers plot points seen over all of the live action series. It is a little denser compared to the previous but the chemistry of the actors and the set design was on point. The music was fantastic. The 3D was soft, nearly missing in placed, but appropriately done. Given i dont pay the "uplift charges" for 3D movies (i pay £200/year for unlimited movies including 3D now lolz) it didn't bother me.

Despite the title being "Into Darkness" this does not hold a patch to some of the darkest episodes DS9 put out over its run. It's not "old trek" where the pacing was slower, and i admit i would prefer slower pacing but it connects very well to the existing mythology and ensures new people watch it - which ultimately is more important. I went with two total Trek-newbies last night and both liked it.

There is a small homage to TNG with the engine room and the warp core chamber, and the episode where people jumped into the beam and disintegrated themselves. I don't remember that eps title though

[oohhboy]

Just watched that a couple hours ago myself. It's better than than Star Trek 2009, but that's not hard to do considering what a bloody mess that was. It is an entertaining action movie, but it's not really sci-fi or Trek. I would have to disagree on the music, outside of the main theme, it felt nonexistent and paled next to James Horner. The GFX was quite good, but there was a disturbing lack of color made worse by the Star Wars Imperial uniforms Star Fleet were wearing. Thankfully they cut back greatly on the lens flares. Camera and editing work is disappointingly still shaky and cut up. It's almost like they couldn't get everybody together long enough to remember more then 2 lines before they had to cut to another angle.

The plot was serviceable and wasn't too predictable but utterly retarded at times. The pacing was crazy frantic, never letting up to it's own determint. But in the end it was really a massive collection of Star Trek references arranged into a movie. In a way it is not too different to how Family Guy is written to be a collection of references. The Chekhov's Guns were far too transparent, ruining any attempt at tension. This Kirk is a very bad Captain, he is absolutely terrible at his job. He literally lucks his way through this movie. Also **** Chris Pine, the guy can't act. The other characters in general weren't much better devolving into cartoons of themselves swinging their personalities like baseball bats. Karl Urban, Peter Weller and Cumberbatch stole every scene they were in so there is actual acting in this movie.

Being a collection a Star Trek reference it tries to ape the scenes they are based off, but utterly fail because they never understood why it worked so well in the first place, it comes off as a parody in this movie. I actually laughed out loud when they reversed the Wrath of Khan warp drive scene both during the exchange and when Spock breaks out a KHAANNNNN because the combonation of atmosphere, music and the fact that the actors just weren't up to the job. Considering that original scene makes me shed a tear almost everytime even now, it's embarrassing how badly they messed this scene. It didn't help the pacing was so impatient to move on to the next plot point or action scene. There just wasn't anytime for emotion, just lots of unintentional comedy.

I have to agree with Plugbugz regarding "Into Darkness". The films colors are dark, almost black and white, but that is pretty much it as "Darkness goes". What was there was pretty hamfisted.

There are a bunch of plotholes and WTF moments, but I am not going to poke at them since the movie would completely fall apart otherwise. I rather plaster over it at this point rather than to distroy what entertainment value I got out of it.

It's a perfectly serviceable action flick and it is quite enjoyable in that respect, but it's definitely not Trek and barely Sci-fi despite having spaceships. Go with that in mind and you will have a bit of fun. For a Trekkie, it's a great exercise in spot the reference. Just don't go in there expecting it to be better than the classics, not even close.

[Pixelated Pixies]

I also saw Star Trek this week. 'Into Darkness is undoubtedly entertaining in terms of the spectcle, but in a bid to appeal to as many people as possible it is also incredibly prosaic. It's what I would call a 'Vanilla flick'. Nothing surprising or interesting happens, but it all looks so pretty and the spectcle is such that you enjoy it anyway.
 
There are some attempted twists, but they were all so obvious that I didn't think they were particularly effective. If you have an awareness of some of the more memorable events from the original Star Trek, and if you saw what Abrams did with his first Trek film, then you can pretty much surmise how events will unfold. An example of how Abrams plays with the history of Star Trek would be the fact that in the first film Uhura hooks up with Spock instead of Kirk, right? Well, without going into spoilers, It's safe to say that that same methodology continues with 'Into Darkness'. It's all rather predictable.
 
There was one reference, however, that made me laugh, which was the appearance of a Tribble.
 
 

[oohhboy]

I really should be ripping Into The Darkness a new one, but I am just in a far too good of a mood to let this movie get me down. As a Trek movie it should really **** off.

[Ceric]

So this movie is as bad as if a Star Trek hater made it?  Oh Wait...
Their is a large group of people that would be eunuchs for the chance to direct a Star Trek reboot.  Then they give it to this clown who thinks the series is Star Wars...

[nickmitch]

Oblivion:

It's a good movie. There are plot holes, yeah. But they don't distract from the film while you're watching it. Yes, the trailers gave away a large part of the film, but there's still something in it to make it interesting. Good popcorn flick as the plot reveals itself at what I'd call a good pace (maybe a tad slow early on).

[oohhboy]

My mood on Oblivion improves with time compared to Into The Darkness. The more I poke Darkness, the more it falls apart. I think at this point it has crossed over and I see Oblivion as the better movie. I believe this is relevant.

[Oblivion]

The Great Gatsby was... interesting. Despite what it appears to be on the outside, it actually is very true to the novel and I didn't realize how so until I was leaving the theater.


EDIT: LOL, ohhhboy, if you think Star Trek is "deep" and "philisophical", then you need to up your game. Star Trek is just as flimsy as all the other mainstream sci-fi shows/movies out there. The majority of the original show was awful, and same with the first three or four seasons of The Next Generation. And do I honestly need to say more about the other shows?
Who gives a **** if they weren't fans? Being a fan certainly didn't help M. Night Shamafuckhead when he directed The Last Airbender, so why is that such a big deal with Star Trek? Fan Wank at its finest.

[oohhboy]

It's not just that Darkness doesn't have any depth. It's one thing to say that you didn't watch any of the episodes before writing and directing the movie as Nicholas Meyer did. But to openly dislike it is what I consider a conflict of interest. The characters and plot make no sense even within it's own timeline.

Even as an action movie it loses it's luster really quickly. Darkness is just like Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol where Ethan Hunt is a terrible at his job and simply fails upwards. Kirk is the same, he spends most of his time failing upwards right from the very first scene. In the very first sequence the "Plan" makes absolutely no sense unless you are trying to make the mission as dangerous as possible for absolutely no addition benefit and even he doesn't know what the entire plan is.

This repeats until you reach the end of the movie. It's asinine. Micheal Bay made a more cohesive movie with The Rock.

[Oblivion]

You didn't like MI4? That wasn't even directed by JJA.

[Stogi]

I didn't really like MI4, but the directing was spot on. I think that was Brad Bird's first directing job for a non-CGI movie.

[NWR_insanolord]

Nicholas Meyer found the success he did because he had no nostalgia or attachment to the franchise, but was still open to it. It allowed him to keep what was good and cut what was bad without letting his feelings get in the way, and he made the two best Star Trek movies that way.

J.J. Abrams is no Nicholas Meyer.

if you think Star Trek is "deep" and "philisophical", then you need to up your game. Star Trek is just as flimsy as all the other mainstream sci-fi shows/movies out there. The majority of the original show was awful, and same with the first three or four seasons of The Next Generation. And do I honestly need to say more about the other shows?

Multiple aspects of this post suggest you haven't watched Deep Space Nine, something I suggest you rectify immediately.

[Caliban]

Star Trek into Darkness - It was fucking awesome.

[Oblivion]

I've seen a few episodes of DS9, but it felt like a cheaper, lamer version of TNG. Hell, the only Star Trek show I liked was TNG, and not even all of it. As I said earlier, I pretty much only like about 80% of TNG. I'm not a Trekkie whatsoever.

[azeke]

I pretty much only like about 80% of TNG. I'm not a Trekkie whatsoever.

80% of something being good is an extremely good quotient. I wish half of the thing i'm a fan of could claim those rare 80% percents.

I'm still slow burning through TOS and went to watch "Into Darkness" with a friend yesterday.

Into Darkness is an okay action movie, but yeah the plot is retarded. You know it's bad when people say first movie made more sense and that movie had parallel realities and time-travel.

It felt like they first decided on how they're gonna pander to fans, and THEN decided on plot to wrap fanservice around. No, guys. You're supposed to make a good movie first and foremost and secondmost and thirdmost and so on. Once you have that, THEN you include nods and references and winks. Do it the other way around and you turn into Family Guy.

I didn't hated it though. I'm not a fan about Star Trek enough to spew bile on internet how they raped my childhood and "not muh star trek" and stuff. It's an okayish, stupid romp, i guess.

On TOS, i think i started liking the show after early episode where Kirk had that speech to atomic non aging kids who wouldn't listen to him. That was really good. Also around that time they found their thing with trinity dynamic and started employing it and show became much more enjoyable overall. I'm on the last half second season, watched mafia episode (eh), private little war (ending was very good and that whole non-interference thing resonated nicely in the movie), and that space amoeba episode (also good).

[Ceric]

I've seen a few episodes of DS9, but it felt like a cheaper, lamer version of TNG. Hell, the only Star Trek show I liked was TNG, and not even all of it. As I said earlier, I pretty much only like about 80% of TNG. I'm not a Trekkie whatsoever.

DS9 is the most Political of all the Star Treks.  Their is stark social commentary throughout and some episodes they don't even try to hide it later on.  Its not surprising that Voyager is sort of a swing the other way.

[NWR_insanolord]

I've seen a few episodes of DS9, but it felt like a cheaper, lamer version of TNG. Hell, the only Star Trek show I liked was TNG, and not even all of it. As I said earlier, I pretty much only like about 80% of TNG. I'm not a Trekkie whatsoever.

You should give it another shot. It's slow to start, but once it gets rolling it's easily the best written Star Trek series. It can pull off emotional depth like "The Visitor," political suspense and intrigue like "In the Pale Moonlight," and legitimately funny comedy like "Little Green Men."

[Ceric]

I've seen a few episodes of DS9, but it felt like a cheaper, lamer version of TNG. Hell, the only Star Trek show I liked was TNG, and not even all of it. As I said earlier, I pretty much only like about 80% of TNG. I'm not a Trekkie whatsoever.

You should give it another shot. It's slow to start, but once it gets rolling it's easily the best written Star Trek series. It can pull off emotional depth like "The Visitor," political suspense and intrigue like "In the Pale Moonlight," and legitimately funny comedy like "Little Green Men."

In general I agree but, their are some episodes that are trying their hardest to tank that.

[TJ Spyke]

Every Trek show starts off slow, but DS9 picks up a lot faster than TNG. TNG season 1 just blows, and a large chunk of season 2 is bad as well. The Dominion War arc is easily one of my favorite storylines in any sci fi show.

[Plugabugz]

Fast & Furious 6 - yes this film has a lot going against it in the realism department but the bit that got me was the final action scene where they are chasing the plane down the runway. 1 - The plane would have accelerated so hard it would have outstripped the cars and possibly thrown them off. 2 - There is no way the runway would be THAT long. 3 - they conveniently reach the end of the runway as the plane blows up?

[TrueNerd]

STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - So, not a Star Trek movie. Feels more like a mission or two in Mass Effect 2. I was into that! It was dumb, and full of of Roberto Orci's awful 9/11 truther bullshit, but it was fun despite all of these things. UNTIL THE LAST TWENTY MINUTES.

So, in STAR TREK 09, when they had Zachary Quinto basically look at the camera and say, "This is a new timeline. We can do whatever we want," I took that to mean that this reboot series wasn't going to bother with the past of Star Trek and just do their own thing. And I was fine with that. But, based on this sequel, what it really meant was "We're going to take a bunch of elements/characters/scenes from your favorite Trek moments and rearrange em and throw em all in and hope they all work together!" And I am NOT fine with that. The WRATH OF KHAN ending redux was the worst. What was even worse than that was that I knew the second Scotty said something about the warp coil being busted that they weren't even gonna let Kirk stay dead and they were gonna cop out with the Magical Khan Blood. AND SURE ENOUGH. I do think Kirk sacrificing himself works in terms of his arc in this movie, but I really have no interest in seeing the exact same self sacrifice scene just played out with a different character. I don't want to see scenes, ICONIC SCNES, again just played out slightly differently. That is the opposite of interesting to me. That is the opposite of dramatic to me. This scene is obviously meant for fans, but do fans really want that? I love WRATH OF KHAN more than some of my family members and that scene had me rolling my eyes and sighing heavily. And the Magical Khan Blood is one of the dumbest plot devices ever.

I'm going to put this in spoiler tags even though I don't think it's a spoiler, but the "reveal" that Cumberbatch is Khan is retarded. None of the characters care that John Harrison is Khan because they've never met him before. It's a reveal meant to excite the fans, which is the wrong motivation for reveals. This is more of an issue with the marketing/JJ Abrams mystery box bullshit than it is with the movie though.

In the end, this movie left me really unexcited about EPISODE VII. Based on this movie and SUPER 8, it appears Abrams is only capable of making cool looking but ultimately hollow re-appropriations of past classics without doing anything new with them. Or, to be mean about it, really expensive fanfic. The only thing I take solace in is Kathleen Kennedy is an excellent producer and, based on Michael Arndt's past work, the EPISODE VII script will very easily be the best script Abrams has worked with. So hopefully they do a good job.

PS - I realized the other day that it was barely more than three years ago that I loved Damon Lindelof. Now? I don't think that guy could write his way out of a paper bag. THAT GUY WROTE "THE CONSTANT", AKA ONE OF THE BEST EPISODES OF ANY TV SHOW IVE EVER SEEN. What the hell happened?! Was it all Carlton Cuse?!