ysbreker

Movie/TV recommendations

Recommended Posts

We are talking about the Star Trek reboot, right? It was pretty good. Nonsensical in plot and riddled with plotholes, but it had great, loveable characters. And lots of strangling.

That reminds me, I should put even more strangling in my screenplays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the thing. When I first saw it (the reboot, yes), I hated it. I despised the damn thing. I got the DVD for essentially Christmas that year because "I like Star Trek". (It was given to me because of that fact, I mean.)

Yeah, it has plotholes the size of Jupiter, but the plot in general isn't horrible. I mean, it could have been a lot worse, and goes a fair way to explain the reboot.

But I watched it again a little while ago, and realized "This is. . .Star Trek. This is TOS with a new cast." Every little thing about it made me chuckle and go "Yes, you got that right!" It just feels like the right mix of camp and seriousness.

From

VaASF2fGUIs

To

"He's an Angry Future Romulan. . ." and Pine's performance during the Kobayashi Maru scenario, I love the way it's all been done.

Yes, gaping plotholes. Yes, the plot couldn't be any more sci-fi if it tried. But I feel like it was done right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else watching Forbrydelsen? Or The Killing as it's being shown as in the UK.

It's great. No spoilers, I'm only on episode 10 or something. I want Lund's jumper.

I love it so goddamn much. Who did it?!? I NEED TO KNOW NOW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, gaping plotholes. Yes, the plot couldn't be any more sci-fi if it tried. But I feel like it was done right.

I've only seen it once. I'm interested in hearing about these plot holes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the star trek movie has plotholes, yes it's special effects sometimes overshadow it's general cinemtatography, but god damn if it isn't entertraining because of it's actors and good pacing. Definitely worth watching I agree,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've only seen it once. I'm interested in hearing about these plot holes.

"Hey, potential galactic threat, lets throw ALL OF OUR CADETS at it." Five minutes later, all cadets are dead, along with many qualified officers. At least, that's the implication.

"Get him off this ship." What, the brig isn't good enough? Oh, it's because Spock Prime is down below right now. Oddly convenient.

The death of Spock's mother, while tragic, is kind of bizarre. Only the section of cliff containing Winona Ryder decides to collapse? Despite Spock being less than two feet away?

Those are some really specific textbooks, Starfleet has; The perfect time to strike is when your enemy is about to destroy the universe with a super massive black hole. (The Enterprise's perfect moment of entry as Spock Younger is about to be torpedoed to death.)

Warp 4 is max warp? Can't the NX-01 (the first Enterprise) break 5? I don't know if this was a mis-write, or what, but it irked me, because I am a nerd.

That's what I remember off the top of my head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More fun plotholes: apparently the evil dudes need a rickety, giant drill to insert a piece of volatile red matter into the planet, which is then capable of blowing it all up. If this really is dark matter times 1000, why need a rickety drill? Why not just fling it at any old planet? The answer is screenwriting: this unstoppable weapon needs an obvious flaw so the heroes have a chance.

Then, when the rickety drill goes to earth, apparently earth has not a single defensive weapon to shoot it down. No rockets, no jets, no spacecrafts, no satellites, nothing. No effing way.

And these glaring technical fudgings are besides the things Orvidos mentioned and the easy coincidences of the plot and nonsensical attributes.

Still, all this doesn't matter (that much), because Star Trek feels right. It's about fun and zany action with the characters, even though speculatory science fiction grounded in science has been unfortunately dead for a decennium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Hey, potential galactic threat, lets throw ALL OF OUR CADETS at it." Five minutes later, all cadets are dead, along with many qualified officers. At least, that's the implication.

"Get him off this ship." What, the brig isn't good enough? Oh, it's because Spock Prime is down below right now. Oddly convenient.

The death of Spock's mother, while tragic, is kind of bizarre. Only the section of cliff containing Winona Ryder decides to collapse? Despite Spock being less than two feet away?

Those are some really specific textbooks, Starfleet has; The perfect time to strike is when your enemy is about to destroy the universe with a super massive black hole. (The Enterprise's perfect moment of entry as Spock Younger is about to be torpedoed to death.)

Warp 4 is max warp? Can't the NX-01 (the first Enterprise) break 5? I don't know if this was a mis-write, or what, but it irked me, because I am a nerd.

That's what I remember off the top of my head.

Well, Star Trek is split from the continuity of the series. In the series, however, the Archer Warp Drive is maximized at Warp 5, but the NX-01 barely even makes it there on its own anyways. They typically peaked it at Warp 4.7, though maxed it out on one occasion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've only seen it once. I'm interested in hearing about these plot holes.

The one that gets on my nerves:

So a star goes supernova and destroys Roumulus. It doesn't appear to be Romulus' own star, so it's some kind of supernova that spans entire star systems. Its shockwave must be travelling faster than the speed of light somehow because they have, you know, less than several years to deal with it. Even so starships can apparently outrun it, or at least observe it. Yet Romulus fails to see the shockwave coming in time to evacuate.

So Spock drops a black hole on the shockwave to stop it. Now if this meganova really is that vast, any black hole big enough to absorb it would be a bigger threat to the galaxy than the shockwave itself. Or he's just blocking a part of it in which case: what about the rest?

They utterly failed to note Adam's Law: Space is big, really big etc.

Look, I know it's not really sci-fi, it's sci-fantasy, it's hokum etc. Part of me just hoped that one of the things they would improve upon would be the scientific base. Could they not get a cosmology consultant for the writers?

But if you focus on the characters and ignore everything else it's a really good movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about how

Kirk is jettisoned onto a random planet, and somehow stumbles into Old Spock's cave by luck? Planets are big and there are many of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I can live with just about all of those flaws, thankfully. Although the last one is particularly irksome.

I really wish Shatner had agreed to do the cool cameo they had planned, too. It would have rocked, but apparently his "I don't do cameos" ego got in the way. Fool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny how this Star Trek is often compared to Star Wars, they say it's more like Wars than Trek. However, Wars never felt illogical. Sure, there were lots of seeming coincidences, but the fact that DESTINY was such a tangible part of the universe (the Force) made it believable. Trek doesn't have that undercurrent of fate, its universe does in fact want to be realistic. In that sense, this Trek movie is astoundingly unbelievable.

@ DanJW: you put it rather cynically, but in a way, yes, characters are often more important to a movie 'feeling right' than plot. Ideally, especially in sci-fi, both are up to snuff, but in almost any story it's the characters that are the most important. I feel like a jack-ass explaining this :getmecoat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How about how

Kirk is jettisoned onto a random planet, and somehow stumbles into Old Spock's cave by luck? Planets are big and there are many of them.

Yeah, that was like a completely absurd turning point in the movie, but nobody seems to have payed attention to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, that was like a completely absurd turning point in the movie, but nobody seems to have payed attention to it.

Ah, I dunno. That whole thing got a lot of criticism in all the reviews I read. It's definitely the sloppiest part of the movie... really slows down the pace and segues into that silly pipe scene with Scotty on the Enterprise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could heap technical/plot criticism on it all day, and still love the new Star Trek movie, to be honest. Like Rodi said, they got it right, and even the inconsistencies are Star Trek in nature, at times.

Eagerly awaiting the second.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I could heap technical/plot criticism on it all day, and still love the new Star Trek movie, to be honest.

Yep, that I agree, as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, Star Trek is split from the continuity of the series. In the series, however, the Archer Warp Drive is maximized at Warp 5, but the NX-01 barely even makes it there on its own anyways. They typically peaked it at Warp 4.7, though maxed it out on one occasion.

Am I the only one that thinks it's wonderful that you know this? :clap:

Reading all the stuff above, I'm reminded of this. Looong review, but I found it to be very true. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw Rabbit Hole. Very good film.

I had one major issue with it, though:

I was very disheartened to hear the metaverse theory so poorly explained... to the point of being wrong. It actually hurt my appreciation of the film because it was supposed to be the moment where science offered solace for the religious sceptic.

Parallel universes aren't alleged to exist on our plane of existence, so the film's argument that "space is infinite" and so therefore "if you believe in science" they should exist is not only horribly flawed, but technically incorrect.

There isn't an argument that there's another you or me somewhere "out there" (meaning in the far reaches of space), but rather than there's another one on another plane of reality that we can't perceive.

How the playwright (who also wrote the script) could get this basic stuff and present it so incorrectly is horribly ironic: Science doesn't offer solace to the atheist, fiction does... Doh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is all old hats by now, but the Oscar favourites finally were released here.

True Grit: Very very good, albeit while subverting my expectations. I found it neither a typical Coen film, nor a typical western. Still, great writing, great acting. Hailee Steinfeld is going places.

King's Speech: Also good, but didn't quite live up to the hype for me. Then again, the movie seems like such Oscar bait, that I may have had predispositions against it. Even so, great performances by the main par, despite the formulaic plot (like an underdog sports movie, but with talkin').

Black Swan: Oh my god. What a harrowing, emotional experience. I'm pretty sure this set in stone DAronofsky as my favourite director. My heart is still pounding from it, and the plot themes, visual flourishes and most of all music is still bouncing around inside my head, an hour after I left the cinema.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone else watching Forbrydelsen? Or The Killing as it's being shown as in the UK.

Me! I'm watching it. It's certainly pretty good, but I must confess I'm also generally interested in seeing Scandinavian stuff because my mum is Swedish, and I've been recently feeling rather guilty for how little I really know about that whole portion of my genetic background. Obviously Sweden and Denmark are not the same, but hey, it's nearby. Also, it's nice to see international film and TV in general.

Anyway, there's something I find kind of funny: the Danes all sound kind of German to me if I don't concentrate too hard on the sound of what they're saying, but Lund's Swedish boyfriend, who is presumably speaking Danish, sounds to my idiot ears like he's speaking Swedish. THE POWER OF ACCENTS (particularly when the relevant languages exist on a continuum like the Scandinavian ones do). So that's my dumb observation. I offer no insight on the programme itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish these movies got released here :( The only one that came out was True Grit, and my friends saw that without me (I had to bail).

Anyways, I won't watch the Oscars (if I wanted to see a circlejerk I'd just use the internet), but I figure The King's Speech is going to win. It has the hype.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a billion years late, I just discovered all this in about an hour and a half, see how many bullet points it takes you to understand what movie you need to see.

- Willem Dafoe is patient zero!

- It's the next logical conclusion of shoving a pole into a person.

- I always wondered why I didn't like coffee.

- I always knew he was the clever one.

- It makes sense that something like that would go in reverse eventually.

- I can stomach excessive and realistic gore, but not simply realistic gore.

- Why was there only one black dude?

- I like movies that end with a conclusion but leave you able to fill in the rest of the story. As opposed to obvious sequels.

Daybreakers. Go see it if you haven't already. Favorite vampire movie, definitely in my top 20.

It's movie night in the Brockenflat household, so;

Alice in Wonderland.

- One complaint, and one only: Johnny Depp break-dancing. No.

- Alan Rickman is now in my top 5 voices. For those who are wondering;

1. Jeremy Irons

2. John Hurt

3. Stephen Fry

4. Richard Wilson

5. Alan Rickman

He beats out Martin Sheen by a silk thread. (Oh gods, someone shoot me.)

- Excellent VFX. I especially loved the night sky when Alice and Hatter are standing on the balcony. I do love me a good sky.

- Despite my thinking at the beginning (I was prepared for the most formulaic movie ever) I quite enjoyed the twists, what there were.

- How does anyone not like Johnny Depp as an actor anymore? PotC, Once Upon A Time In Mexico, need I go on?

Not my favorite movie, but I enjoyed it. I'm beginning to think I'm willing to watch any movie though, just for the chance to not do anything and escape for an hour or more.

Edit: Oh! And the first song in the credits, I quite enjoyed. Re-edit: Oh dear, it seems it's Avril Lavigne. . .I guess liking one won't kill me.

Edited by Orvidos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now