JamesM
- 17 comments
- 0 likes given
- 0 likes received
Bio not provided
Yes! Action, in a Star Trek film - you know, one of the things that made the last one so great?
Action doesn't intrinsically mean dumbed down, or lowest common denominator, at least it doesn't have to.
JJ Abrams demonstrated that with his first effort here. He even commented that before this, at it's best, Star
Trek was "submarine warfare" - he moved it beyond this, in a good way, and I'm happy he did with great success.
The last Star Trek was smart, as well as action packed - I see no reason to change it.
Abrahms seems to know what he's doing. I don't imagine he's going to look at the critical and
financial success of the first film and think "hey, I think I'll go back to the pure cerebral, submarine
warfare mode of the original series"
What?
Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s character was set up as Robin at the end of DKR, not a Batman replacement.
Ugh!
Batman needs to be BIG, square jawed - some miles on him.
Not Christian Bale, and certainly not this kid.
I've given up on ever seeing a properly cast Batman in my lifetime.
9 out of 10 is extremely generous.
Too much depressing, dark drudgery, not enough Batman and Catwoman.
Also, you didn't talk (maybe didn't notice, although I find that hard to believe) Nolan's odd timeline
when all 3 movies are considered.
How long was Bruce Wayne actually Batman before he retired? 6 months? A year? He just became Batman in the first movie, and we see Joker's card at the end of it. Joke says "6 months ago they wouldn't dare touch you" in the second movie - see where I'm going?
So Bruce Wayne acquired all those injuries in that short time?
Seems kind of silly to me.
Fight scenes in this movie were a bit weak as well. We went from Ninja Batman to 60's TV Batman
in the fighting skills department.
7 out of 10 - too damn long for so little Batman on screen.
"Starring as Clark Kent’s adoptive parents, Martha and Jonathan Kent, are Diane Lane and Kevin Costner."
You might want to reconstruct that sentence.
I thought Brave was fantastic on every level, one of the best Pixar efforts to date.
I cant tell you have many times I laughed at the character/voice acting, and nuance in the character animation.
Also, the film was light on Disney cliche's (no dead parent for instance) which was welcome.
The quality of CG work set a new standard.
Like you said, it's all subjective, but I loved this effort - excellent film
So apparently, according to this, if I purchase the Avengers Blu Ray, it will contain the actual Avengers movie! Good to know, and pretty much the only thing one can assume watching the that trailer.
General layout, colors, darker theme - from a graphics standpoint. Although it doesn't look horrible or anything.
I liked the "the good" "the bad" format of the reviews, and John doing the video reviews was great.
It really was almost like the site was the touted "home of correct movie opinions"
He lent some personality to the site - an identity. He had a good track record, and I actually trusted his reviews.
Now it's just words written on a website by multiple anonymous people - lots of that on the web to go around. I can get a score from Rotten Tomatoes, and given that it's an average of many reviews, it's actually something to go on.
I think, and I offer this as friendly input, you need to offer something more.
Judging from the lack of comments nowadays, I'm guessing traffic is slow - the above reasons (minus the color comments) have a lot to do with that I think.
Cheers
I miss the old Movie Blog
I love a good musical, but this movie was flat out horrid. Katherine Zeta Jones should be embarrassed, as she was easily the second worst thing about the film. Her facial expressions, her awkward movement, her chicken legs - get off the screen. The first worst thing was the corny, silly, sappy way the various songs were worked into the film - and like I said, I'm a fan of a good musical.
I don't remember ever being actually embarrassed to be sitting in a theater watching a movie - this was a first for me.
Mary J. Blige was indeed a bright spot, and Tom Cruise wasn't horrible, Russel Brand can read a phone book and be funny, but it wasn't enough to save this train wreck.
3.5 is pretty generous if you ask me.
It would be nice to see someone with an actual build play Batman for once, so they don't have to rely as heavily on the lame armor thing.
Look at Batman in Arkham City - THAT is what Batman's costume should look like. The costume in this movie about to be released once again looks horrible. Get some guy who's about The Rock's size, then push it a LITTLE bit more, and you're good. Bruce Wayne isn't a wee little guy, but that's Hollywood for you.
Captain American had the same problem - Chris Evans is too small.
Meh...needs ABC robots or Mean Angel.
Also an actor with a deep voice, and not some guy dong the lame Christian Bale super hero whisper.
I actually liked the way the city looked in the lame Stallone version better than this.
Not too impressed.