You really have to give the guys from back then credit, turning a colorful spinning cube into a thread to the Enterprise. Thex had to come up with cool concepts.
This is another one of the great episodes. A thriller in space. Kirk's bluff was well played. But it also has a lot of great pieces that make up the background. I like Bailey who seems to be a bit out of his league and overwhelmed by everything that's happening around him. Until he finaly lost it under the pressure on the bridge. It's very relatable, it's human !
In that context it was also great to see McCoy challenging Kirk on that subject. You see that they have different opinions which is so much better for giving the characters depth.
I remember that as a kid I found the alien face of Balok very creepy and something as little as the wavering screen gave it the extra notch.
At the end we then witness that the words of the Federation are not just hollow phrases, as Kirk wants to rescue an enemy who minutes before wanted to kill him. That's the kind of future Star Trek often showed us.
Now, is it just my imagination or was Kirk flirting with a minor ?
The most interesting part of this epsiode, the second Earth is never explained. It's just a throw-in. And how does a civilization on par with 1960s Earth posess such knowledge as to experiment with immortality on that level ? That would've been important to look into.
The rest of the episode is rather thin. The kids really are annoying and somehow I have my doubts that they even would behave that childish if they are 300 years old. As it stands the plot implies that a human cannot learn by himself if no one is around to teach him. And Kirk said it himself - kids want to be told. They need the guidance of grown ups. In any case those kind of stories have the flaw that you know a death threat to the main cast bears little weight. And Janice being proud that she could make Kirk look at her legs....yes, it's the 60s.
I liked Kim Darby who played really well and of course she was way older than the character she portrayed. I don't think the studio would have gone for an actual teen with Shatner. The Grups makeup was well made. Sure, on HD it looks cheap but on a 60s TV set this must have looked very real.
Intrestingly both red-shirts survived. Must be one of the only times.
Harcourt Fenton Mudd - The name alone is some stroke of genius. And Roger C Carmel makes him come to life with a great performance.
Yes, there is sillyness and sexism. You can call Mudd a pimp and look at the women as prostitutes. It's not far reaching to see it like that. But there is also a seriousness to it all. It takes a stab at drug abuse and it shows that, ultimately, it's not a solution but part of the problem.
There sure are some holes in the story as it was with many episodes. Many of them because they wanted to conceal something from the audience like, in this case, Kirk knowing about the drug and replacing it with some placebo. Probably forcing Mudd to reveal the truth before beaming down to the miners. Otherwise it wouldn't have worked.
I like to read up on imdb after each episode as there are some really cool facts. Like this episode being one of three being considered for the second pilot. I wonder how that would've worked out. Or the, then NBC Program Manager, talking about Roddenberry's sexual phantasies coming to life in the scripts, calling them unaccebtable. So a lot of it was probably toned down and one can only wonder how the original script went.
I've also noticed that the close ups are often times not matching the scene. They are clearly shot later and then inserted in editing. Sometimes the background is different. In the transporter room scene McCoy even changes his tunic for a second. Might be I'm just noticing this due to the HD version I'm watching.
Why didn't they just send a shuttle to pick Sulu and the others up ? (according to imdb the shuttle was introduced in episode sixteen so at this point there actually wasn't a concept for the ship having any. Plus the whole part with the team being stranded on the surface was not in the original script)
Putting that obvious flaw aside I think this is a great episode. The concept of having a good and an evil side is part of being human is what I love about Star Trek. It takes two sides to make a coin. I believe everyone of us has the cabability to do good or bad things. Is it, like Spock said, our intelligence that helps us deal with that and make the right decisions? I don't know. I once read a quote that being evil is easy, but being good takes an effort.
We also see that Spock really cares for Kirk when he tells him he can't afford to appear weak in the eyes of the crew. The attempted rape of Rand was really creepy and a massive thing for that time period. That could not have been easy to run by the studio. And Janice saying: "what was I supposed to do - he's the Captain" sends another wave of shivers down my spine.
(another bit of information from imdb: Grace Lee Whitney said she got slapped across the face by Shatner to recreate the emotions from the rape scene that got shot days earlier. Whew, that's a disturbing piece of info.)
Shatner helps sell this with his perfomance and for once his overacting (yes, he does) actually is favorable. And this isn't really about if it is good or bad. I think it just worked. It's not nuanced but at the extrem ends of the spectrum. Which is Shatner's acting ability in a nutshell.
So, they did the close-ups quite a lot. They use it very often I must say. Was probably a thing then.
The early episode could be quite odd at times. We get Uhura singing in the mess hall. And I notice that Spock is a bit too emotional, he even smiles (a little).
Charlie is basically a teenager in puberty who tries to make sense of things he doesn't understand. And he wants everyone to like him and be at the center. That is something very relatable and I wonder how much of Roddenberry, who wrote the story, is in Charles Evans. But he is an adolecent with a dangerous talent. He has the power to make people and things dissapear, hurt them and even change them. This is where the relatable meets SciFi.
At the end we learn there's another reason to Charlie's behavior and it becomes very dramatic with him pleading for help from people he just recently threatened and tormented. But one can almost understand his behavior, he's afraid. Again we're shown that you shouldn't judge before you know the whole picture.
The quote that "he will use his power no matter what" and that it will ultimately lead to him destroying them (the crew or all mankind ?) or be destroyed himself, for me, reads that no one person should have the power to force his will upon others.
And on a completely unrelated subject: no matter how often I watch the show - I always go crazy about Rand's hairdo. There, I said it.
There's always the danger of rating an over 50 year old show like Star Trek simply by its look. Which wouldn't do it justice.
Now, for what is supposedly the pilot episode it doesn't do a good job of introducing characters and relations but throws you right in. Some things seem out of place even if you've already watched the show, like Uhura hitting on Spock of all people. Not that it is odd she's got a thing for him but it feels utterly out of place doing it on duty. But that's the 60s for you right there I guess.
The story seems like a simple horror setup but there are those questions about destroying the last of it's kind, and is any creature, that just tries to survive, really evil. Is a Lion evil because it hunts and eats game ? Those are the things that Star Trek does well and why I (or you) can come back to it ever so often and ask yourself those questions.
I find it interesting how many close-ups they used. I need to pay attention if that's continued throughout the show or just a trait for a certain director. I honestly don't remember. A lot of time it felt thought those shots were added in post from a library of shots they had. They don't seem to fit.
So, the most interesting bit of the story is the fact, that Q is dying. But this is but a flicker amongst a chaos of nonsense. Even this fact doesn't seem to be related to the main arc.
But we get to see the long awaited first meeting between Q and Guinan. In the cellar of a secret FBI facility with Q posing as an agent (how did he get in there ? No one seemed to have a problem with him being there. He has no power so he works for the FBI ??). Only this isn't their real first meeting, no. That, according to Q, hasn't happened yet.
The facility is run by an agent who saw aliens visiting earth (Vulcans in the 1970s I suppose which is such a huge thing to add to Trek-lore, it shouldn't be done like that) who then spend his life to the pursuit of proofing that aliens exist. Now where have I heard that before ? Right, that's the kind of "original" writing today.
Now this seems to be a battle between Q and The Borg Queen, who is also still Jurati, who wants to "borgify" humanity. That I get. And Q ? He wants to escape from the timeline he himself created ? Renee is but a means to an end and the fact she's a Picard ancestor just an added extra. If they send anyone else instead of her (which clearly would happen as there are always backup crews) they wouldn't discover whatever she would ?
Meanwhile Rios finally get's to kiss the girl while Annika (she isn't Seven in this reality) and Raffi use every available moment during there hunt for the JurQueen to talk about their relationship.
Where is the cohersion in all that ? I don't know. But I think we'll get five minutes at the end of the season to explain it.
(If you want to tell me that I'm just a digruntled old Trekkie who clearly is way too stupid to understand and aprreciate the new Star Trek, please hit "Reply" now and leave a message after the beep)
House of Cards, for me, categorizes as what I call shooting star shows. They come out of nowhere, shine bright for a while until they ultimately fade to the point they disappear from sight.
Don't get this the wrong way - this is a well made show. The acting, especially Kevin Spacey, is top notch. The breaking of the forth wall was genius. I liked the first season a lot as it showed the game of politics as I could very well imagine it to be. Or I should probably say, as I think it actually is. But there came a point where it became just too much. Watching bad people do bad things and come away with it each and every time was nothing I would continue to watch. Plus they introduced so many uniteresting sideplots that made me at times left the show running while I went out of the room. Like I said, it just went on too long. There wasn't a single character I could get behind. Had it finished after the third season with the Underwoods going to jail for what they did, I would have given it a much higher rating.
I made it to the end of season four and, seeing how the ratings drop, went on to look what transpired in season five and six. And I'm fine with stopping there.
Acting wise this was probably the best I've seen from Stewart in this show. No, not the lying on his back part. But the sessions with his shrink/father had at times at least some fire in his acting.
As for the story itself, well, I didn't like the presentation. The horror movie scenario looks a bit to B-movie. The part about Picard's mother having some mental illness as explanation of his behaviour towards others doesn't (yet) make sense to me. And now the whole thing isn't about Reneé at all ?
The Alladin like summoning of Q was a bit stupid, too. Here I was hoping we were finally shown the first meeting between him and Guinan. And if El-Aurians can summon a Q doesn't that make them more powerful ? Well, in walks this FBI guy arresting both, Guinan and Picard. End of episode. Another missed opportunity.
The writers throw in some more references to "old" Star Trek. "I'm from Chile, I only work in outer space" - not funny. Oh, and nice job preserving the timeline bringing them on board. Maybe Rios will stay in the past - he obviously likes it there.
The Borg Queen formaly known as Jurati trying to assimilate mankind "before they are ready". Been there, tried that, didn't work. All that really isn't very original.
Like I said before, I see flashes of what could have been a good story for a movie (which according to the internet rumor mill is in the works) but a lot of it is just filler to get ten episodes. This will either cumulate in a spectacular finale or it will be a major dud.
On a side note: I wonder why they released the teaser for season three before this season is even finished. Are they already afraid people will turn away and this is an efford to make them stay ?
I doubt this was a plan they had in mind starting this series, as Stewart always said this will not be another TNG show.
More pieces of the puzzle but still no full picture developing.
It actually wasn't too bad. We see more of Q, which is a good thing given deLancies great performance. Concerning Q: Why would he rip himself of his own power in a scenario he himself created ? Doesn't make sense and suggest that someone else is involved ?
So, Laris isn't Laris but a supervisor like Gary Seven. That's an interesting angle that I hope get's further developed than just this short mentioning. I'm also getting some Edith Keeler vibes with Renee Picard in the sense that she was essential for the timeline. Interestingly Keeler's survival would have let probably to the same future as Renee not making the flight. Coincidence ?
The ICE storyline is hopefully done with and it was obviously just there to make a point. Let's leave it at that.
I don't like the Jurati plot because I don't like Jurati. And I'm dissapointed in how they used the Borg Queen so far. But that's just me personally.
Bringing in Brent Spiner as another Soong ancestor is a nice angle that, in a way, gives more depth. Althought I fear he's just a tool here. And Isa Briones finally got to make her appearance in this timeline, too.
One thing that pains me to say a bit is that it feels that Patrick Stewart seems exhausted in almost every scene he's in. It could be intentional in how he plays Picard as a fragile old man. I hope it is because otherwise it would mean it's too much for him. Which could be normal given his age but makes me wonder about his involvement in season 3.
It's not awful or un-watchable. This is a European production. Which works both, in its favor, as well as against it at times. It hasn't got the "Hollywood-Shine" which makes it look more natural and more believable. Since it envolves cast memebers from all over Europe they choose to produce it in english. Which makes sense. And in some cases the accent spoken by the actors help sell the character. But you also notice that for many actors it isn't their natural language and they seem to feel a bit uncomfortable. I want to point out Isolda Dychauk, who play Lucretia Borgia. She always sounds as if reading from a sheet of paper instead of sounding natural. Others have problems as well. Like Andrea Sawatzki, who speaks the typical german accented english. That's a bit of a downside.
As for the plot, it is historical drama. And the emphasis lies on drama. They've surely cut corners with the historic facts and a lot of things might be added for the sake of drama. It comes with the genre. That's not my main problem. No, it's the fact that there is no one to like in this story. They all are scheming, manipulating and spinning intrigue for their own good. But, of course, all in the name of a higher calling. Which shows a lot of hypocracy. There are no selfless acts. Might be accurate but doesn't sell well. It is very repetetive. Which by the way are all problems I had with the version featuring Jeremy Irons, too. Those characters are all very unlikeable.
There is a lot of sex and violence here. And it is portrayed rather colorful. Again, compared to US productions, who tend to tune this down at times, it can be good or bad. While it helps the story to a certain degree to display the times, the more the show progresses it just seems to be there for it's own good. Now, I don't want to preach moral but you need to find the right balance.
I'm about half way through the show and not sure if I go to the end. My interest is dwindeling. I don't think there will be any new angles of interest. Maybe I watch an episode now and then to close it out.
Well, this was way better than I expected it to be. Which isn't that much of a surprise because many don't like it and I'm usually swimming against the stream. And since I have forgotten most of the previous movies, I could see this without comparing it. That's where a lousy memory comes in handy.
I like when they integrate real historic events around a fictional story. It's a "what if it is was like that ?" scenario you shouldn't take too serious. I also did like the undertone about war. How people where eager to get into it (which is actually true at the time) but how they all learn it's utter crap what you're being told. There is nothing glorious about it. It's people dying, period ! I did not expect that from a movie like this.
Some things were a little streched out. As much as I liked Ifans Rasputin I think the fight with him was a bit too long. You could probably shave another couple of minutes here and there. But overall It never felt boring.
So in an overall underwhleming movie year 2021, from my point of view, I consider this one of the better movies. Be it just for it's entertainment value.
Harris writes historical fiction. He puts a fictional story inside a historical event. I just mentioned that because I've read some comments saying they don't believe something like this happened. It's not based on anything that happened it's him toying with an idea.
I am a huge fan of Robert Harris and have read about all of his books. Many of his novels have been made into movies so I wasn't surprised "Munich" did, too. I can't say how it compares to the book because it is just about the only one I haven't read yet. So I look just at the movie.
Concerning the story - like I mentioned it didn't happen. But it could have, I guess. And that's what I like about Harris. He gives you something to think about. What if Chamberlain had had this info ? Would he still sign the agreement? Did he, like the story want's to make us believe, bought time ? And what if he didn't sign ? Would it ultimately changed anything ? No one can really answer that. It's all theoretical.
I think they got the look alright. You get something from the atmosphere of the time in both, England and Germany. Especially the German arrogance was displayed rather well. Jeremy Irons seem like the reincarnation of Chamberlain from all I know of the historical footage. On the other side Matthes wasn't a perfect look alike. Nevertheless his portrayal of Hitler was very uncomfortable to watch. And I mean that as a compliment. As a whole I did enjoy the movie very much. It's more along the lines of classic film making far removed from blockbuster cinema.
Funny how the reality of the science in this movie doesn't seem to apply when it comes to the survival of your protagonist. Because in reality she'd have probably died half a dozen times. And what does a medical engineer have to do with repairing the Hubble anyway ? Is it ill ?
Watched it for the second time to see if there is more to it then what I saw the first time. And it's actually worse.
The movie pretty much starts with the desaster happening and since up to this point you know about nothing about the characters there is zero emotional investment. Maybe make the movie a bit longer at the beginning so we can know those guys. The SFX and the grandious score makes this appear larger than it actually is. Reduced to the story alone it is a simple survival tale with a predictable end, where our protagonist has to jump through some hoops only to come out unscathed at the end.
Looking at the Oscars they are all technical and I can get behind that. Bullock itself was nominated but didn't win and , again, I am on board with the decision. I've seen much better performances over the years.
Judging by the rating I'm rather the minority with my opinion, But that's how it is.
This production brings something back to attention we don't think about so much today. In fact, in my case, I don't think about it at all. And I was old enough to remember it well. But it is still there, the danger is not gone, it sleeps. And at some point in the future someone will have to deal with it again. Maybe they will play it down too and try to sweep it under the rug.
Ultimately it isn't important if the events depicted here are 100 % accurate. It is historical fiction. Even the producers will admit to that. It's about the dangers, the negligence, the bureaucracy in the system, all the lies and misinformation that lead to this desaster and the aftermath. It is about the price of the lies.
The state was unfailable and everything proofing otherwise simply doesn't exist. The former Soviet Union surely doesn't hold a monopol on those kind of things (heaven knows the US is no stranger to that), but they had this down to a T and turned this into an art. We see this again years later with the sinking of the Kursk.
I had to give this a "10" not because it is enjoyable but it is important to be reminded so that those things don't happen again. That's the wishful thinking. Sadly I'm fairly certain next time something big happens everything will repeat itself.
I watched the 2005 movie and therefore decided to give this one a try also when I found the DVD box online.
This wasn't a cheap TV production. And while it surely looks outdated, especially in terms of the SFX and rather like being even ten years older than it is, all this doesn't matter. The movie, according to imdb, had a 180 m$ budget (which is huge) and benefited from better technology. But this is made with a lot of love and dedication for detail and espcially the animal costumes are phantastic.
From the three parts I like "The Lion...." the most. Which is part due to the fact that the protagonists change moving forward and I didn't like Eustace or Jill that much to be honest. There is obviously a strong christian theme which starts and ends with Aslan. Interestingly, as a full fledged astheist, that didn't bother me at all. The funny thing is, I didn't even made the connection until I read about it. Then many things present themselve in a different light.
It's still a great adventure story for kids to dream about traveling to a mystique land and living through a series of adventures.
This one didn't work quite as well for me. I like how they are trying to give Fett depth and story. I actually really liked how he treated the Wookie (which might payoff later) and especially the Rancor. That shows his character apart from just being a bounty hunter. This is not the Boba Fett we knew from the first trillogy, he's changed by what happened to him. And I can understand where this puts people off. But I think it makes him much more interesting.
What I absolutely didn't like was this teen gang. It does not feel like something I would attribute with Favreau or Filoni but rather something that came "from above". Plus, the whole scene itself looked slow and the CGI outdated. Add in some useless humor and this was a low point for me. Yes, the way Boba treated the kids showed again how he want's to be percieved but that is by now established and adding the bunch really does nothing at all. Leave them back in the alley and it works just as well. It should have been Fett chasing the Majordomo anyway.
Seeing the Tusken butchered was a real punch in the stomach and I'm already looking forward for the repayment that is hopefully to come.
As with "The Mandalorian" I'm sure there is an endgame so I'm very lenient with how they play this. Some very cool stuff in the background that gives this a timeframe.
And welcome to the SW universe Mister Danny Trejo.
Well, I am not a Marvel Fan as such and I certainly don't read the comics. I watched about 90 % of the movies but they became more and more tedious for me. I just mention this so you better understand my comment.
I watch the Marvel shows because they are on Disney. Simple as that. Some I liked (Wanda and Falcon), some I didn't (Loki) and this one is kind of in nowhere-land. Started well and I hoped it would make the character of Hawkeye more interesting. It didn't, and after the first couple of episodes I liked it less and less. The story just didn't make me care for anything that happened on screen. And the humor and awkwardness that nowadays seems to be a must-have doesn't sit well with me either. What some percieve as funny are roll-eyes-moments for me I could live without. There were no real highlights and I really didn't like Kate Bishop. Bringing back Kingpin only made me realize how much I would love to have had another Daredevil season.
Since this shows main purpose is to be a precursor for upcoming movies I might not even watch, it is entirely possibly I am not getting the point of them. Maybe they don't work as stand alone because they are not supposed to. And because of that maybe I should not watch another.
I am not ripping them of or calling them awful but that's my point of view.
I actually did it. I watched the Ewoks again. Let's look at this practical.
Don't take it too serious.
The movie is very well made. Everything from the sets to the costumes and the acting is, in typical Ridley Scott matter, flawless.
However the way the story is told is not to my liking. You have about 45-50 mins of content but, due to the multiple perspective way of storytelling, you have to watch it three times. It's a "he said, she said" that in the end isn't proven one way or the other because, let's face it, "God has spoken" and "an honest man can't die" is as stupid as "you can't get pregnant from a rape because if you don't enjoy intercourse you can't get pregnant. That's sience"
And there lies the biggest issue I have - the movie criticizes a whole society for there misogynistic ways but like with the above that was how it was. Women were property just like men could be. Or what do you thing all the folk working for those nobles were ? From our moral point of view this was wrong but pointing a finger back 700 years in time is easy to do.
Well, it's not a political forum here and I think I will attract comments with what I said no matter what.
The actual duel at the end was great, very well filmed, with the instense and brutality you imagine had to be there in a fight for ones honor to the death. But after sitting through more than two hours it wasn't enough to save the movie in my eyes.
I don't think this is a great movie, it's not even better than the first.
The positives are the same as in part one. The movie looks believable, it's not over the top. The stunts are practical and still look good today. But the story is flawed from the beginning on. It's constructed to fit a certain need and because of that is illogical.
No one in the whole CIA questions why on earth a trained super assassin like Bourne leave his fingerprint at a scene. That's the door slammed shut for me right there. It takes until the middle of the movie until some low assistant recognized that and instantly get killed. That's a prime example for a plot to fit a need.
Of course we have bad Russians and a US Government official working with them. That already wasn't original fifteen years ago.
And Marie's death only surves the purpose to remove her from the story so Bourne can go on his business. It had no weight and/or emotional impact at all. If not for the final scene in the first part there wouldn't be a reason for her to be in this at all.
What can I say, it's how I see it.
It took me some time to finally watched this movie. There was no specific reason, it just happened.
Meanwhile this has become a franchise with lots of movies and even a series (which I did watch but didn't particularly liked). This movie is OK in terms of its entertainment value. The story is as deep as it needs to be, no surprising twists and turns. Which I must say I see as a plus because I hate it when movies have too much of them. The action and stunts are good and, because they are physical, look believable. But the sound effects during the fights are a bit too much at times.
Matt Damon does a lot of stuff by himself and it helps sell the character. I'm not a huge fan of Franka Potente. By that I mean that I don't think she stands out in a way that it couldn't have been anyone else playing her part. At the same time I applaud the casting as usually you get some Hollywood sweetheart for that kind of role.
The romance was lame, though. You know from the second they meet this is going to happen. It's a trait of storytelling no writer can stay away from.
So why not a higher rating? Well, altogether the movie is rather generic. It goes from A to B to C checking boxes along the way. Still overall not totally boring and since I do own the trillogy I will now watch the rest.
This movie is listed as #21 of Tom Hanks' most successful movies by box office numbers and I don't get it.
Personally it is one of my favorites from him. It is not your usual Tom Hanks movie which is why I like it even more. Hanks, like always, delivers a great performance. He plays pretty much a bad guy but one you can sympathize with as he isn't intentionally evil. He's a victim of the circumstances and times he grew up and just wants to provide for his family. The movie uses the action scenes well as this isn't a revenge movie as such. Action is there when it is needed and not as a means to an end. It is mainly about the characters, about the relationship between father and son. Or fathers and sons for that matter.
Jude Law's character is really creepy and we have the great Paul Newman in one of his last physical roles on screen.
The film did age really well due it not being CGI and you will be able to watch it ten or twenty years from now and still enjoy it. It looks believable because of all the old cars they used and the set dressing. Hall even got the Oscar for Best Cinematography.
Like I said, the movie deserves more recognition.
For sure this isn't in the category of "unwatchable". But it is one of those sci-fi-action flicks where you have to suspend belief and logic. And depending on what you expected you might enjoy it or not. It can be that simple.
They borrow pretty much from every major sci-fi franchise of the last couple decades. Most notable Alien, Starship Troopers and Terminator. The whole stuff about Forester's character and his relationship with his father and daughter seems like an apendix to the story that doesn't want to gel with the rest. There just isn't any emotional investment or connection to begin with for me to care at all. Which pretty much only adds runtime to an already too long movie.
I actually like the idea that those ship crashed centuries ago and therefore no one could discover them in the present when they "arrived". But the implication they got out because of global warming and in effect killed humanity is a little to tongue-in-cheek for my liking. Like I said, if you start to pick at the story it falls apart rather easy.
So, if you have an afternoon, or evening, to spare, grab maybe a beer ond some snacks and take it for what it is.
According to wikipedia TMZ is a tabloid journalism online newspaper. That immediately raises a flag in regards to a topic like that. And the whole thing is edited like a very long trailer for the actual show.
Now, I am a firm believer that there is extraterestial life somewhere. But I don't think they (whoever) have been here, yet. And those videos are not really proof to the contrary. And why haven't we managed to take a single photograph/video that is not blurry, out of focus or shaky in over 70 years. Even by pure chance this should have happened. Those objects are not hiding. They are in plain sight. The pilot was talking he saw them daily for a year. He should be prepared to take a photo. And did you notice how those two men where always using phrases like "could" and "might" ? They are talking about possibilities not facts themselves.
This is still all circumstantial as proof, by definition, is sufficient evidence for the truth of a proposition. The proposition is: these are extraterrestial craft. And the videos's supposed to be the proof. Well, I don't see it. And believe me when I say: I'd love to. Because like I said I do believe.
Starts out good with Logan dealing with the loss of Jean. If the whole point of this movie was to bring him back from his agony I wonder why they choose the Japan angle. No, I don't read the comics. What I mean is that the whole story seemed to generic. You could have substituted him for any character and it would have worked as well.
Robbing Wolverine of his healing abilities was a nice idea but you know it wouldn't last. Unfortunately the story went a bit of the rails. The romance with Mariko, telegraphed from afar, makes no sense. I know that years have past since Jean's death but he's still madly in love with her. It feels so Hollywood to bring in someone new for him to fall in love with, too.
And the final fight is like something out of the computergame genre where you fight the big boss at the end of the level. An adamantium samurai with glowing swords is a bit too much for me. And the reveal was obvious as well.
Oh, I almost forgot Viper. That's because she's just that: forgettable.
So, first half great, second half meh. That's a rounded seven.
Is this a great movie ? No !
Is it an awful movie ? Again, no.
It places way more emphasis on effect than on story but within the context of a superhero movie it is ok. Everything is rushed through so that we can get to that final battle. All the elements that should have weight, like Xavier's death, seems just a nuisance to get out of the way. Even Jean's death felt just like a box to tick off. You knew it would be coming.
Magneto has become a one-dimensional, manipulating villain who has become what he claims to be fighting against. And why do all the Brotherhood mutants have to be some kind of tattooed, pierced, made up, leather wearing kind of thug/punk ?
The idea with the cure isn't illogical to me. If it is a genetic mutation it ought to be possible to work something like this up. Within the realm of scifi at least. The illogical part for me is a mutant than erases mutations. Wouldn't he erase his own as well ??
But they boxed themselves in a corner with this story. They killed off or "cured" so many characters that there was hardly anything interesting left.
The end credit scene beeing a foot in the door.
I have watched all the "X" movies before but this time I decided to do with the chronological order.
I already liked this movie a lot but as an origin movie it works even better. You see where everything started, how they got to know each other. Especially the relationship between Charles and Eric gives the later movies in the timeline more depth. Especially Eric get's to look at from an angle that actually makes you feel sympathetic for him. You asks yourself if you would have done something different. There isn't the hard line of good or evil. McAvoy and Fassbender do have great chemistry and Kevin Bacon plays a great villain. Alltogether I really don't see a weak spot in the cast.
I can't say how true everything is to the comics as I never read them but this movie has a really good story. Putting it into a historic timeframe of events which actually did happen gives it a nice extra touch. The movie still looks awesome, which isn't always a given with 10 year old CGI movies. Nothing looks dated and could easily have been from today. I also did like the Bond-ish feel it has.
Overall really entertaining and among the better movies of the superhero genre.
I am really rather tired of sentient holograms and this whole oppression thing. And the Doctor always in the middle, taking sides, than seeing how he was wrong.
First off, when they created Moriaty it was a "technical glitch" caused by a slip of the tongue. You could already argue how the Enterprise computer created a sentient, self-aware hologramm. But it's scifi so you let it stand.
Than they created the EMH, which makes sense. A computer programm, meant to do certain tasks, put into a holo matrix. But, you just leave it running long enough, give it some subroutines and memory, and it magically develops a personality. And now we discover sentient or self aware hologramms everywhere.
With the Doctor it is the quest to find humanity, much like they did with Data. I can get behind that. The rest is just ridiculous and serves no real purpose. And a religious, fanatic hologram who sees himself as some kind of Messiah ? That's going overboard.
The positives of this story is that we again pick up consequences of Janeways actions because everything that happened here comes out of her decisions. I was actually surprised how they talked about how often they gave away replicator tech and stuff. I thought that was a absolute no-go.
In any case, you could probably do another seven season show that just deals with those kind of consequences.
You know, I'd actually watch that.
I thought we're getting Voyagers version of "Lower Decks". No, not the animated show. But this is different in many ways.
Where the TNG episode made me care for the characters, I couldn't care less here. Voyager always displays problems when it comes to secondary characters and their impact on the story. The just aren't that interesting.
On the Enterprise the department heads, Dr. Crusher and Worf, show deep care for their subordinates, and help them with their problems. And B'Elanna ? She shrugges everthing off and goes like "Yeah, I tried but if he doesn't want to I don't care". That's bad leadership to say the least.
And ultimately this episode is more about Janeway anyway. The title refers to her and the episode ends with her stating she achieved what she wanted. She just can't accept that there are people on the ship that don't want to be there. Who are victims of circumstance and can't, or don't want to, adapt. Even Chakotay thinks it might be better to relief them of duty and that it wouldn't hurt the ship. It might help those crewmen. Oh no, says Janeway, not on my ship. I force them together and make them see my view. They'll come around.
Since this is Voyager we'll most likely never know if they did.
