Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
Hey, Kermit Gosnel, I've got one more for you. The infant's name - you don't mind if it already has a name, right? - is J J Abrams.
The willing suspension of disbelief is a bitch.
Reality is the true no-spin zone.
Saw it over the weekend.What I learned was they have a hankerin' for Nazi-type uniforms.George Lucas was a visionary because I swear you could plop 1 of my fave SW#4 scenes into this with no discernible differenceWhen seconds count the police are minutes away23rd century earth is as stupid as 21st century earth.Oh, look a massive starship is falling thru the atmosphere in I think SF, LET'S RUN TOWARD IT!I was hoping it would have taken out the Golden Gate but no such luck.
That's what I see.
The willing suspension of disbelief is a bitch.I know... if only we would be that critical of stories like Benghazi, the IRS and Justice phone tapping.On the other hand, if we all did pay better attention to those things, like Benghazi, the few of us who do pay attention to them now, would probably not have them to pay attention to.Which I guess means that making a bad movie is not a far cry from governing poorly.
Wow, after reading the FAQ I am so happy that I didn't go see the new Star Trek movie. (I wasn't that interested anyway.) If I had gone I would have come out of the theater even angrier than I did for Star Wars Episode III, which left me a giant ball of super-fury because of its suckitude. But I have a theory about why the new ST movie sucks, which is as follows (and I'm sure someone somewhere has already made this point):I’m thinking that Abrams must have known he was going to be put in charge of Star Wars when he was making this film, and Disney/Lucas paid him to sabotage the Star Trek series. If that isn’t the case, I’m going to completely skip the new Star Wars movies (likely anyway, let’s be honest) and just read the FAQs.
Astro wins the thread, even if it blows up to 10,000 comments.
Which has me wondering, is there a max length for a comment thread on Blogger?
So I'm left wondering exactly what the author of that io9 piece wants from these movies.It can be hard to read meaning through the snark, but he seems to move from criticizing the movie for being too different (Pike's wheelchair) to criticizing it for not being different enough (the radiation in the warp core).
We had a great time at the Star Trek movie, but we aren't Trekkies. I agree that Star War episode III was a real stinker. This was much better.I understand the impulse to be critical and picky about something you love. I felt that way about The Lord of the Rings movies. I hate so many things about what Peter Jackson did to those stories. So, I completely get why I might have enjoyed a movie that others hated. I do remember wondering why the people weren't running from the giant crashing starship. It is just like the stupid people who go to see what that noise is in the closet or down the hall in horror movies.
I do remember wondering why the people weren't running from the giant crashing starship.Um, they were thinking it was going to bounce? And they wanted to be a little closer so it would bounce OVER them?...Nah, I got nothin'.
The people running towards the giant falling spaceship was actually a metaphor for all the people lining up to see this giant crashing bore.
I think Star Trek has joined James Bond, Superman, and Sherlock Holmes in that individual installments of the franchise may crash and burn but there will always be someone around to pick up the pieces and try again. The world needs a new rebirth of the Hopalong Cassidy franchise. The Lone Ranger has had too many failed attempts at resuscitation. Bury him..
Post a Comment