New STAR TREK Review

[Thestral]

Regardless, the guy may not be particularly elegant in articulating his view of the movie, but that in no way should be used as a reason for summarily discounting his opinion as not having "anything worth considering". I personally found that he had some good points and made me laugh while doing it.

(most) People aren't discounting his opinion and the supposed "flaws" he's found because he can't string a sentence together more coherent than a chimpanzee. Criticizing him for that is just icing on the cake (though for some people, his inability to communicate puts them off from the very start - if you're going to call something a "review" and want it taken seriously it would behoove you to write as such).

No, what people are discounting him for is that the "good points" he brings up aren't - by and large they're easily answered and betray a stunning lack of film comprehension or an inability to fill in the blanks using common sense (let alone genre savvy) - you know, imagination. I mean really, complaining that Nero didn't just immediately work to save Romulus? As stated, he had over 100 years - and was half-mad with rage and grief. Plenty of time to save Romulus after you've punished the people you blame for your own suffering.

Both are serious criticisms, but are not linked. See?

 

[StarTrek1701]

“Hey Spock, I think we both have the same lasting image of your mother. The top of her head as she was going down. OH, SNAP!”

That's pretty funny though.

 

[DiSiLLUSiON]

He said "Uhm, no. None that I can see. Zero. Zip. Nada. Nul. Nothing." I don't know any other way to interpret that.

Listen to Dennis; he's right.

Of course the movie has serious flaws. There are any number of negative reviews on the internet that together have pointed out nearly all flaws in the movie, multiple times. Not only doesn't the one we're talking about touch upon any of those points in a non-biased way, it also has no added value. Add that to the style of writing and you get a 'review' that just not anybody's cup of tea.

If a person has a horrible grasp of grammar and the like, that doesn't mean he/she doesn't have an opinion worth considering. However, if one writes a review, one is expected to put some effort into it; especially in the way of knowing your weak points and trying to better them.

English isn't my native language; still, I try to make myself understood. I re-read my posts and edit them where necessary. And those aren't even reviews, they're small posts on an online forum. People expect much more from a review.

If this 'review' is the very best the writer can do, I'd say he/she needs a beta reader. Badly.

 

[pookha]

Regardless, the guy may not be particularly elegant in articulating his view of the movie, but that in no way should be used as a reason for summarily discounting his opinion as not having "anything worth considering". I personally found that he had some good points and made me laugh while doing it.

well then it can be called into question just how seriously you were paying attention to the film since many of the supposed points he bought up were errors on his part due to not listening to what was going on within the film itself.


and it wasnt just one or two of his issues but the vast majority starting with not even getting the kelvin's name right.

as for the lighting storm in space.. i and several others already addressed this issue earlier.
chekov was giving a summary of current odd events with the lighting storm being one of them.