MovieChat Forums > The Andromeda Strain (2008) Discussion > I thought this sho was FANTASTIC, why al...

I thought this sho was FANTASTIC, why all the haters?

posted 15 years ago by the_denv
49 replies | jump to latest

Hello,

I had to register to ImDb just to ask everyone here, "Why all the hate for this show"?

I thought it was fantastic, and I did film studies & photography, my brothers friend made the film "Shrooms"; I am just letting you know that I know a good show/film when I see one. In my eyes and in my opinion I absolutely loved "The Andromeda Strain", I think it hit the screens at a very crucial time, especially with all the conspiracies flying around at the moment on the Internet about the H5N1 strain and the New World Order.

It seems that I am the only one here that likes this show, can anyone please explain why a great show like this has got so much hate? I am completely shocked and just had to register to get my opinion broadcasted on the message boards.

Filled with suspense, great camera work, great music selection, great story line, the acting is fantastic and you gotta love that voice of "Andre Braugher", it 100% a replica of "Dennis Haysbert", for example Dennis Haysbert's voice in the game "Splinter Cell". Fanastic, I love this!

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] advice31765 15 years ago

How can you say there was good acting? What was absolutely shocking is that there were some good actors and somehow the director and script made them act badly. I just finished watching it and I still don't believe it. There were scenes so bad that it was almost as if the actors knew how bad it was and wanted to communicate that to the audience without the director realizing it, almost as if the wooden delivery was purposeful on some really bad lines. And don't even get me started on the action in the utility shaft throwing the thumb up god knows how many floors and the ridiculous countdown to the nuclear explosion that failed to generate any tension. The repeated scene of the drunk approaching the military vehicle in the beginning. The cocaine snorting. The sexy talk on the telephone. I don't even want to think about it. What a disappointment.

And to think how long the damned thing ran.

[–] JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies 15 years ago

How can you say there was good acting?

Whether acting is good or bad is subjective. I thought the acting was fine, too, and I also enjoyed the film overall.

http://www.rateyourmusic.com/~JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies

[–] patriotx29 15 years ago

Watch the original and you will see the difference. The PC claptrap in this version was so predictable it was disgusting. The EEEEVVVVIIIILLLL Military-Industrial Complex behind it all, bumbling military personnel, the reporter on drugs, the paranoid source, etc. Pathetic at best.

[–] ronc-5 12 years ago

Well, in the original, it was the military that was behind it all. But that wasn't revealed until the very end, just before the countdown scene, as a punch line to a very tense 130 minutes. This film appears to have started with the punch line and worked backwards, which works as well for movies as it does for jokes.

Now that I think about it, this might be the reason the plot was so incoherent, *and* the reason for the moronic and totally pointless tacked-on time travel ending. When you have a plot that leads up to a big reveal, and you remake it with the reveal in the first 15 minutes, what do you do for the remaining 159? More importantly, how do you end it if you've already revealed the original ending?

[–] leyenda61 15 years ago

just finished watching the dvds last night. i never saw or read any previous incarnations, but i was entertained well-enough.

[–] filmeuro 15 years ago

Boy, I'm getting really tired of people calling others "haters" any time their view is different. Get a flippin' life.

It was a really, really bad remake.

End of story.

[–] gayspiritwarrior 15 years ago

A remake isn't bad just because it isn't as good as the original. Yours is just one opinion [even if shared by many people] and that's the REAL end of this story.

"The value of an idea has nothing to do with the honesty of the man expressing it."--Oscar Wilde

[–] ronc-5 12 years ago

You are absolutely right. A remake really isn't bad just because it isn't as good as the original.

Some remakes are better than the original. Some are mediocre, and some are flawed but still entertaining.

A remake is bad when it's bad. And this one was. More than anything else, the story didn't flow. It didn't have coherence. It was a bunch of things that happened, not necessarily related to each other, with a few visual cues from the original film. I didn't dislike it because it remade a film I liked, I was actually looking forward to an update. I disliked it because it was a bad movie in and of itself, not even having to compare it with the original.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CGSailor 12 years ago

Probably for the same reason you sound like an *beep* for calling him a retard for daring to have an opinion differing from yours.

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

[–] ryangosden 15 years ago

Found it great too, obviously film didn't have enough boobs and explosions for some people's liking :)

[–] bobh99 15 years ago

One of the most tedious, boring films I have seen for ages. It was a real Sunday afternoon film to nod you off to sleep. There was no tension and the plot so full of holes that I laughed at several points.
The CGI was very poor and the actors just walked though an embarrassing script
Ridley Scott should be ashamed that he was involved in such unconvincing tripe.

[–] aussievic0 9 years ago

main reason for remakes is usually P R O F I T, NO MONEY NO PICTURES

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] kano33339 15 years ago

Meh I didn't like this film at all, it was boring and gave me the feeling of waking up from a bad nap, not to mention the movie made me pretty sleepy and I ended up falling asleep near the end which ended up resulting IN A BAD NAP. I don't like how they constantly showed commercials of the movie trying to make it seem like the cream of the crop.

The actors in the movie were lackluster with the material given to them, like they weren't even serious half the time, I didn't like Benjamin Bratt's character at all or the way he acted. He was good in L&O though... It was funny when he seemed like a drunk trying to press the abort button in the wannabe suspenseful countdown scene. It just seemed so predictable. As usual, I prefer the original to most remakes nowadays, the 1970 one was great. When the Earth stood still ended up being *beep* over too, with the original keeping its throne of course. This movie just had made-for-tv written all over it.

[–] Esplin 15 years ago

Looks like you're just the mediocrity-loving lowest common denominator that this garbage was marketed toward.