• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Blogger watching all 10 movies back to back

How can we possibly take him seriously when in his review of TMP the picture's caption reads "The Enterprise approaches V'ger" while the picture itself is of the Enterprise facing a Klingon BOP (which I presume is from STIII)?

Just sayin'.. :D
 
Is this blogger in total control or is someone else doing all the graphics and whatnot for him?

Watching 10 straight movies has got to get boring. That's 20 hours!!!!
 
Oh...my...God. Much and all as I enjoy some of the films, I don't think I could sit through even half of them in one go, let alone all of them. I think this is the way I'd try to keep someone OUT of Trek, not into it.
 
How can we possibly take him seriously when in his review of TMP the picture's caption reads "The Enterprise approaches V'ger" while the picture itself is of the Enterprise facing a Klingon BOP (which I presume is from STIII)?

Just sayin'.. :D

be nice. he's a n00b.
 
The new film will look like Citizen Kane by comparison.

Galaxy Quest looks like Citizen Kane in comparision with some of 'em.

I liked this:

know this is a fan favorite, but it's a far less elegant film than the first in the movie series, particularly with regard to the score - which sounds at times like an "A-Team" episode - and the set dressing. (Seriously? An infinity mirror?) It's all a reflection of the lower budget on this one, which cost nearly a quarter of the original to make, and the fact that Paramount's TV division made it as opposed to their feature film division.

Yeah, but as he goes on to note, "the story is the thing."

Also:

The rule of thumb says that the odd-numbered "Star Trek" movies are worthwhile and that the even-numbered installments are lousy. So far, I've seen two of the even-numbered films in my insane little marathon - "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" and this one - and both are enjoyable. Not socks-knocking great, mind you, but not at all bad. (Does that mean I'm a total nerd?)

Actually, it probably means the opposite.
 
Poor guy. I think he's probably watching NEM right about now :-(.

And I'm a little worried by the fact that he liked the humor in INS. Maybe it's fatigue... ;)
 
Looks like a bunch of writers post on that blog, so this guy is probably just a writer and the web designer screwed up the caption (or more likely the caption of the picture was wrong to begin with and the web designer didn't know better).
 
I liked this:

know this is a fan favorite, but it's a far less elegant film than the first in the movie series, particularly with regard to the score - which sounds at times like an "A-Team" episode - and the set dressing. (Seriously? An infinity mirror?) It's all a reflection of the lower budget on this one, which cost nearly a quarter of the original to make, and the fact that Paramount's TV division made it as opposed to their feature film division.
Yeah, but as he goes on to note, "the story is the thing."

I'll give him the elegance - it isnt there in comparison to TMP. But the score imo is one of the best. And I dont know many who think otherwise.
 
Thanks for posting this link. I enjoyed reading a non-trek fans opinions of the films after seeing them for the first time!
 
I enjoyed reading this very much. More often than not I agree with his views (ST5 being the worst movie, Trek movies generally enjoyable but not great, etc).

He also makes the same claim that I did (in the Trek movies forum), that the much maligned Nemesis is the 2nd most cinematic Trek movie (behind TMP, which is far ahead of the others on that front). Stuart Baird was lousy at getting good performances out of actors, but his long experience in the movie industry as a great editor gave the movie a nice cinematic visual style.
 
How can we possibly take him seriously when in his review of TMP the picture's caption reads "The Enterprise approaches V'ger" while the picture itself is of the Enterprise facing a Klingon BOP (which I presume is from STIII)?

Just sayin'.. :D

Actually a more balanced overview than I expected. Interesting.

RAMA
 
One thing wrong with his GEN review: He states nothing much happens in the film, as in nothing of consequence. He then goes on to point out that the ship crash is a major event of the kind the other films needed.

I'd say the Enterprise crashing was pretty damned major!
 
^
I think the real issue is that not much (if anything) changes on a character level. Yes, the ship goes to pieces. But what effect does it have on the crew? Nobody dies. Picard remains captain, Riker remains first officer, etc.

If you look at TSFS, for example, the 'death' of the Enterprise is a core element in Kirk's storyline from TWOK through TVH. He loses his best friend in TWOK, then goes against orders AND sacrifices what some would argue is the love of his life in TSFS and finally faces the consequences of his actions as he returns how.
Granted, the probe in TVH affords him the chance to substantially reduce the charges against him. Still, I feel there is a lot more meaning of the Enterprise going out in a ball of flame than the crash of the D in GEN.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top