MovieChat Forums > slyck > Replies

slyck's Replies


Yeah it's alright. It's the best of the new live action series for sure based solely on the pilot, but it still wasn't amazing. There are some minor nitpicks here and there as another comment mentioned re: mannerisms and such but nothing too glaring (except for the last scene has some hot garbage from the bridge crew). One thing I have always said tho is that the current people in charge still fundamentally misunderstand the philosophy of Star Trek and the internal logic it operates by but that isn't even my main criticism of the nuTrek shows (that problem still persists in SNW but seems to be limited to secondary characters and not necessarily the overall show as it was in STD). My main criticism is that the shows just features bad writing. It's that simple, now it seems better in the first ep of SNW, the melodrama is mainly restricted to little cutaways, the occasional soap level monologue (but nowhere near the same level as STD) and just unnecessary scenes and lines reminiscent of a student film script. Those elements, while extremely less prevalent in SNW are still there. They need a full clear out of the writers room and show runners of the entire Star Trek department and start with a new crew. While SNW is definitely better than the other shows and it does show promise I fear it may do what the other shows have done and just chose the wrong path with every decision. The bad writing at the core of nuTrek makes me hesitant to hope it will improve but it, at least for now, it stands on firmer footing than any of the shows thus far. 6.5/10 Good reply. I think maybe everyone just needs to have a good read of Don Quixote. You're overthinking it, it was just a reboot of the series to do a bit of a rebrand to earn more money. They killed him to finish his arch in one complete story so they can be done with it and they can go either back to the old chronology or try something new again if they want. Also we know the code name stuff is nonsense because previous Bonds have mentioned (Dalton) or even had flashbacks (Lazenby) to events from prior Bonds confirming they are all the same. Indeed they were, when you mention "wasted" that implies to me not just alcohol so I thought I'd just comment that he could've been "wasted" during his films but not from alcohol. I've spoken to a cinematographer that has worked a couple movies with Ford in the 90's and some recently and claims among the professional community he had (and I think still does but I can't recall) a reputation as a major pot head. He also provided a personal anecdote from a film he was a shooting with Ford who at the time didn't have any with him and didn't want to buy locally so he had some of his personal stuff sent overnight by FedEX. Not saying I didn't enjoy it, I did. Just could've benefited from some changes and it might've been nice to see a more culturally different film. If I remember correctly it was right at the time that EON acquired the rights to Casino Royale. So it was just good timing, new millennium, new actor, new Bond. Something different after 40 years. This would also follow as they introduced Blofeld right as they re-acquired the rights to the character. Haha yeah that is true, I only roll my eyes and laugh when that happens. I felt the first episode where they where at Fox was particularly bad at that. Can't disagree with you there. The writing and Tim's performance and general atmosphere of the show in terms of themes and such is probably one of my main criticism's, especially when you compare it to Home Improvement. Whereas HI seemed more sitcom with a writer's room that Tim had input in LMS seems more Tim tells them some jokes and a core theme and they try and intertwine those with regular dialogue and give it a plot enough for a half hour sitcom. Basically HI seemed like a much more well rounded show to me. I can tell you my final straw down to the specific scene in Skyfall. It was when Q, the IT professional, plugged a USB drive from a known hacker into a non-Firewall-ed and networked laptop without talking any precautions of any sort. And since then the writers have done nothing to try and earn my respect back as a viewer or even to earn any of the dramatic tension. The films are just being edgy as it is the current flavour of the month. None of the drama in them is legitimately earned, this is exaggerated further by the stupid "plot-twists" and ret-conning. Agreed. I honestly feel they're just making the same song again and again. They all sound very much the same. I felt the song was very flat, no tension. The melody was alright enough but the vocals seemed far too much the same throughout. I was never a big fan of "Writings on the Wall" but this makes that seem spectacular. Maybe that's a bit of an exaggeration but you get the point. Honestly yes, when I watch something I watch something. If it is that bad I will turn it off but I badly want to like this so I give it my all, I find myself having to multitask with something while I watch so I can half pay attention and keep it on. I find it melodramatic with bad dialogue and inconsistent tone but I try my best. I really hope season 2 is better but so far I give it 5/10. I don't mind the show, entertaining enough to kill time, but is it necessary? No. Just for clarification because I think you might've misunderstood me. That is what I meant. Also just to further clarify my point (this bit isn't necessarily in response to you however but I guess you could clarify for me), does he also not receive training pre-ROTJ? Further increasing the gap in training and abilities between Luke and Rey? Well after my mate made some comments and I realised I had no clue about any of this and did some online research I found some interesting tidbits. Apparently originally Mandalorians were supposed to be a sort of Spec Ops group of stormtroopers, Mandalore supposedly the system where their training base is located specifically for their units, Mandalorian being a title similar to Ranger for example. This eventually wen through some changes and revisions and eventually was dropped completely before being elaborated upon in the EU. So it wasn't until the EU that Mandalorians really became what they are today in universe which is a race of people with a warrior centric culture which inherently makes them proficient soldiers. Or something along those lines anyway. Been a few weeks now. So we see Luke do some on screen force training with Kenobi, we are unsure if he received more training off-screen between scenes in the film. A point of dialogue is put in the film to show Luke is starting to learn the force. In the film we see him able to move two objects in the form of the bombs into the Death Star port, he didn't blow up the Death Star with the force he moved two objects with the force. We then see hime receive much more extensive training in ESB which we know continues off-screen. Rey we are aware is able to fight without a strict disciplined style with staff weapons, however this seems to magically correlate to being able to fight with a bladed weapon against a trained opponent (as you said yes she might have basic undisciplined combat skills, Ren has much more than that, wounded or not that fight was much too easy for her). There is also indication that she somehow used the force to win that fight. We also see Rey, who having literally just heard about the force and having no idea what it is, use Jedi mind tricks on storm troopers, move objects and other such abilities, in the OT for specific example we see using the force is difficult and requires disciplined training. I think this is a big problem for her character as we don't see her struggle, we see her succeed immediately and at everything. How can an audience identify with that? There's no struggle or tension with her character (or really any of the good characters in the films). So you still haven't really answered my question, you also seem to have not really paid attention to the films as we see Rey without training and having just heard about the force use multiple force abilities with a comedic ease, we see Luke with minor training move two objects into a hole with greta concentration. Pretend I'm an idiot and please explain to me how the Mary Sue thing was debunked? Explain to me with references how and when Rey received more extensive and rigorous training than Luke? How Rey's first use of the force is more believable than Luke's? And how her backstory is more effective and providing motivation that the audience is supposed to understand? You should check out the film Russian Ark. It's an experimental historical drama, about 90 minutes, all one shot. I think they did it on the third take. Very impressive. Edit: the way 1917 is filmed makes me think of the X files episode Triangle, set in real time it was done using four eleven minute single takes. I think, I may be wrong, they originally wanted one single take but because of the recording format that wasn't possible so they decided on the multiple long shots. My best advice is watch and or read reviews on the directors other film The Lost City of Z. While they are, in terms of genre, very different films. In terms of style, atmosphere, writing, etc. they are very similar. Chances are if you don't like Z (or the look of it), probably give Ad Astra a pass. Personally I didn't Z, I did find it a bit slow and tedious but end of the day worth at least one watch. Ad Astra I preferred, thought it had a bit more going on to keep me interested. Now this isn't hard sci-fi either so don't think about if the science works or not, I think if you can stomach Star Trek The Motion Picture this film probably would be worth a crack.