Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

"Now Showing"

I too watched Star Trek last night and had similar views.

Good action scenes, nice effects etc. Took me a while to get into (having not seen any previous Star Treks) and at points it took me a little while to understand.

It seemed to jump from scene to scene a bit to rapidly though, especially at the beginning which annoyed me.

Neverthless, a good way to kill a couple of hours. I'd give it a 7/10 probably.
 
I can see what you mean Lain as the other stuff has already happened as its just Spock that went back in time or whatever happened. Just means the future is now different like in Terminator for example.

But this is what I find a bit frustrating with new films, the only way they can do them is to change the time line.
 
Terminator has always have a mucked up timeline though surely?

That's the problem with time travel, plot holes occur incredibly much in series...

On the Star Trek theme, it was the best idea so he can make it accessible to people not that into Star Trek by keeping it Trekkie but also separate from the rest...

Imagine needing to see the stuff before to get the general idea... How many of the target audience will have seen the original movies (i.e. before Next Generation)... I doubt many...
 
I agree but for people that have seen it before it mucks it up and then it leaves it to feeling how I feel.

I am not a Treky btw, but I have seen all the films and all the episodes, and in my view this new film plays with it to much.

Its a good film dont get me wrong, but it is not Star Trek. Yes it has the same named people and it covered a few things from the past, but as I said it played with the time line to much.

Yes Terminator did always mess up the timeline, but now that have messed up the Star Trek one and I dont think they should have. Terminator they can get away with but Star Trek no as there are to many films and series. My view on it btw.
 
I went to see 2012 today and I thought it was great! One of the best films released this year without a slight of doubt.

It was spectacular to look at; the visual effects were outstanding and there is some excellent intense action sequences for you hardcore viewers to enjoy. The combination of visual effects and sound are enough to fulfill your need of a cinematic thrill, watching the world collapse in front of you has never seemed so realistic and stunning. From the soundtrack to the thuds of bass trembling the screening, you'll find it hard not to enjoy the exciting trip through the ending apocalypse, some scenes will leave your heart-fluttering as you watch the main protagonists come inches to falling into a deadly abyss. Some segments do seem a little "too" extreme, and make you see that the characters are maybe a little too lucky to be true, but it all follows the far-fetched nature of an American thrill ride A-Class film.

As with all films, there are bad points to balance out with the good. My main concern about 2012 is that the story dragged on way too long, you could easily have cut out 45 minutes and it will still grasp all of the main story elements in order to emotionally please the audience. The characters are rather good, sometimes pretty bland, for a film like this you do wish for a bit more "beef" and "hardcore" into a hero, you wouldn't believe half of these guys would make some of this stuff possible!? Many scenes need to be recycled or trimmed as they really got on my nerves when they drag on for more than several minutes, films like this need to be more "snappy", I was becoming bored after the first half of the film; it just exhausted me and then I started to lose the tension later on.

The true question I bet you're asking is that does it scare you for what will possibly happen in 2012. Personally, no. It's very interesting to watch, but I'm stuck in disbelief of the possibilities of such event occurring so soon. You really need to use your optimism to see what you believe.

I'll give 2012 an 8/10, generally because it is the most thrilling film I have seen out for a long while and the effects are outstanding! I really recommend this film to anyone who can cope for over 3 hours watching the world collapse, or anyone who can stomach the anxiety of a possible disaster, lovely orchestra of explosions and oblitteration.

Intense.
 
Gave New Moon a chance coz everyone kept hyping it. I never really understood the whole thing..

And I still don't! It was so boring and the story was AWFUL, I didn't feel for any of the characters and the audience was THE most annoying audience in a Cinema ever! They found everything funny!.

1/10 (Taylor's body MMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!)
 
Saw The Blind Side today.


Overall it was a really great movie, amazing story. It had a lot of good quality in it what with the story, and it had a lot of comedy in it, and I've seen him play in professional football and Michael Oher is a beast. And Sandra Bullock wasn't that bad looking either. :wink:

Overall I give it a 10/10 I recommend seeing it.
 
LiveForTheLaunch said:
(Taylor's body MMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!)
Click to expand...

Haha this made me chuckle :p . I could so misquote you with that, but I won't, aha.
Click to expand...

Taylor Lautner plays the part of the werewolf crap.

I'm half tempted to see it, just to yell things at the screen. I hate Twilight, but love to hate it.
 
bob_3_ said:
(Taylor's body MMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!)
Click to expand...

The only part of this film which is acceptable.

I just watched it online, what a terrible film. Encouraging young girls to jump off cliffs to find see their true "loves". :roll:
 
Marc, Star Trek does work, because they use the correct time travel theory.

There are a few, but the two main ones are (to avoid paradox):

1. What has happened will always happen. In Star Trek 4, the crew go back in time, but don't alter the time line in the future. Likewise, in "First Contact", the crew go back in time - but they ensure the time line isn't ruined. What happened always happened. In both cases, the time line is held solid.

2. When you travel in time, you create a split in the time lines - alternative dimensions. This is how the new Star Trek handled it. In this case, when Spock (and the Romulans) travelled in time - they did so to a new dimension, created because they caused an alteration in the time line. This rupture is created to stop paradox.

If in First Contact the Borg had stopped the launch of the warp drive ship, then the entire Star Trek universe would have collapsed. So, they either had to fail, or if they had won, then a new alternative dimension would have formed around them - with a new future. This timeline would no longer be able to interact with the old time line. This is what we have with Star Trek now. Both timelines run parallel and separate and must be treated as two different entities.

Terminator shagged this by just making things up as they went along. Having the future affect the past, which affected the future and it all just collapsed in a black hole of paradox - because they never had a time travel back bone theory to base the story on (they're just action films and you're not meant to think too much about them as their plots are holey at best :p ).

Anyway, I thought Star Trek was okay. I'm in no hurry to watch it through again. It seemed a bit pushed at times to shoe horn in bits of story which needed to happen. The flow wasn't quite there. It also didn't happily straddle the line between Trek and action - it wasn't enough of either to be a really good film (not that Trek films are often any more than "alright" mind :lol: ).
 
I honestly can't see why people don't like Star Trek. Oh wells.


Watched The Wild on Blu-ray.

It's not very good. Although the animation was good, I loved all the textures etc used but the film as a whole just didn't seem to work. Shame.

Rating: 2/5
 
Watched the conclusion of A Room For Romeo Brass today in Film Studies.

It was quite a good film actually. It has many comic moments which I know will be the subject of repetition between those in my FS class (see below), and plucked a few heartstrings about friendships.

A nice little film, shame it wasn't particularly mainstream, though was the first film role for Paddy Considine, to which he played his character very well.

7.5/10

Here is the hilarious clip:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVe3qH45-Jk&feature=related[/youtube]
 
3 movies today. Technically 2 and a half but hey.

First was the second half of Twilight... Why are Edward and Mary sue so ****ing boring? Seriously, all the other character were way more interesting. That Guy with the curly hair looks like a Psychopath.

Next Was American History X.

Holy ****. Wow!

Finally BTTF Part 3.

Yeah, That was enjoyable as well
 
watched 2012 last night and its one of those films again that is enjoyable to watch but you wouldnt watch it again. Its a leave ya brain at the door FX fest and it passed 2 hours odd its not awfull but its also not great its just another big budget MEH.
Also watched a docu/film called "Not Quite Hollywood The Wild, Untold Story of Ozploitation!"
it was rather interesting and told the history of australian films from way back when to now and also perked my interest in a few films im now huntin down if your into film history and stuff i recomend it to all especially PEEP lol
 
Furie thanks for clearing that up, if it's a different dimension then it does work. That Kirk gets on with his life and the other Kirk gets on with his :)

I also agree with you the film was ok, it was a good action film that did seem a bit rushed at time.

Tonight we will probably watch Terminator Salvation.

So far this year I have not liked many films or games people have raved about so lets see how I get on with one that was slated lol.
 
Twilight related comic from C&H...

excuses.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top