Attention! Release date has changed in some countries. Japan 21 th october. USA still 21 th july.
http://p.twpl.jp/show/orig/cR8ve
http://p.twpl.jp/show/orig/cR8ve
Last edited:
Spoilers STAR TREK BEYOND
- Thread starter Khan 2.0
- Start date
October 21st in Japan.
Odd that China isn't on there at all.
Japan is always later for some reason. Same during STiD.
Yeah, I saw that China wasn't on the list. But they do have a local distributor now via Alibaba.
From memory, STB would be released in China in Aug, after the traditional summer blackout period of Hollywood movies.
Is it time for dubbing the audio maybe?
Well, I wouldn't trust me to fix a sink, so you might have a point there.
Otherwise, I know that different individuals put more (or less) stock in the critics than others. I personally have little regard for critical reviews and very rarely do they impact my film going choices.
I sample critics until I identify one with roughly the same tastes I have. Usually if they like it, I like it. The reverse is less often true. For film my go to critic used to be Ebert. Still is for films I haven't seen but were reviewed by him. Since his demise, Kenneth Turan of the LA Times is the most reliable, though not as much as Ebert.
Doesn't really matter which critic you pick as long as they have similar taste as you. Most useful aspect of such a critic, to me, is the increased odds I'll try something I might not otherwise have heard about. But if a critic doesn't like something it won't stop me from seeing it and deciding for myself.
Doesn't really matter which critic you pick as long as they have similar taste as you. Most useful aspect of such a critic, to me, is the increased odds I'll try something I might not otherwise have heard about. But if a critic doesn't like something it won't stop me from seeing it and deciding for myself.
A
Amaris
Guest
Indeed, I love Roger and miss his point of view. Just about everything Roger liked, I ended up liking, or at the very least found worthwhile. I don't know if there's anyone else out there that approaches his level of analysis and passion. Well, actually, there is James Berardinelli, of whom I am a fan. He comports himself in the Roger Ebert style, though he clearly has his own preferences.
Ebert didn't like ST09, or at least it left him unmoved, because the review read as if he wanted to like it. I really wish he'd have had a chance to review STID, given some of the last lines of his ST09 review say he hopes the next movie is a real test of personalities rather than just establishing them, and a more challenging and devious story rather than narrative housekeeping.
I never missed Siskel and Ebert on TV, but in recent years I find myself going more and more with a consensus of critical opinion, weighing some critics higher than others. A website like Rotten Tomatoes allows that. I'm sorry, but I do put stock in the Tomatometer. If there are over 200 reviews of a movie and only 30 percent are positive, I'm less likely to get out my wallet than if the consensus is more positive. It doesn't mean I don't read a lot of the reviews, but if they are forming an obvious consensus, I take that seriously. For example, both my wife and I were looking forward to "Batman v. Superman", but when only 27% of 331 reviews are positive, and the negative reviews are all touching on the same things, we begged off seeing it. NEM is the only Trek movie I've never seen in the theater because it was resoundingly panned.
I never missed Siskel and Ebert on TV, but in recent years I find myself going more and more with a consensus of critical opinion, weighing some critics higher than others. A website like Rotten Tomatoes allows that. I'm sorry, but I do put stock in the Tomatometer. If there are over 200 reviews of a movie and only 30 percent are positive, I'm less likely to get out my wallet than if the consensus is more positive. It doesn't mean I don't read a lot of the reviews, but if they are forming an obvious consensus, I take that seriously. For example, both my wife and I were looking forward to "Batman v. Superman", but when only 27% of 331 reviews are positive, and the negative reviews are all touching on the same things, we begged off seeing it. NEM is the only Trek movie I've never seen in the theater because it was resoundingly panned.
I still don't get the mentality that someone has to rely on someone else's opinion for their own.
Ebert was a very sincere guy generally but I still didn't agree on half his preferences in movies. He also was a failed screen writer, and that often seemed to color his views.
RAMA
Ebert was a very sincere guy generally but I still didn't agree on half his preferences in movies. He also was a failed screen writer, and that often seemed to color his views.
RAMA
October? For F'sake.
I could understand an August release date since most schools are off then but I don't get October. No holidays then. I guess they don't care about Star Trek as much.
I don't know all that much about Ebert. How did his screen writing career color his views?
A
Amaris
Guest
Movies are expensive. Before throwing down that kind of money, I like to be certain it's worth both the two hours and my cash. Roger Ebert was a well versed cinephile who had a deep knowledge and understanding of movies and what made them work. His observations were often on-point, and his humor and wit made discovering new movies fun and engaging. His screenwriting career had nothing to do with any of that. In terms of writing, he has won the Pulitzer Prize, and his books have sold in the millions. He could hold his own with the movie snobs, and then laugh it up with the regular crowd. There's a reason why so many people trusted Roger's critiques.
The current 'Manifest Destiny' miniseries is apparently as close as we're going to get to a comic Beyond prequel (and I'll be highly surprised if any of it ties into, or is mentioned, in the movie).
I think that they had no time to plan a comic prequel
Ebert was hardly a "failed screenwriter." 
He was, more accurately, an occasional tv and screenwriter at several points in his long writing career. If he suffered any sense of disappointment at this or any aspect of his life he hid it marvelously.
That Ebert was in fact a screenwriter and had the experience of working on films in his background was one of the things that informed his work. For most people, personal experience extends their creative range and enhances their capabilities. The "failed screenwriter" shot is a cheap, uninformed and unobservant way to try to score points in a debate.
He was, more accurately, an occasional tv and screenwriter at several points in his long writing career. If he suffered any sense of disappointment at this or any aspect of his life he hid it marvelously.
That Ebert was in fact a screenwriter and had the experience of working on films in his background was one of the things that informed his work. For most people, personal experience extends their creative range and enhances their capabilities. The "failed screenwriter" shot is a cheap, uninformed and unobservant way to try to score points in a debate.
Last edited:
It's not about relying on the opinion of others as a surrogate for personal opinion. It's about becoming informed about whether or not a movie may be worth seeing. If I want to see something bad enough, I'll go despite the reviews. Still, when there are over 300 accumulated reviews of something, and only about one in four are positive, I'd take that as a red flag. The older I get, the more I want to avoid possibly wasting two hours of my life that I'll never get back.
You've never sought qualitative advice from an adviser who you thought might have more experience, knowledge, and methods of evaluation you might not have considered than your own before making a decision of some personal value? Such as doctors, lawyers, sportcasters, teachers, college advisors, financial advisors, etc., or Google?
The movie critics allows you to evaluate their analysis to make your own decision because they have seen it. They are your proxy to remain mostly unspoiled. If you wait for your own opinion, you've already seen the movie and it's too late. No one wants to waste their own time and money. Further, you might trust their opinion to be opposite of yours and take that route. The evaluation does not always depend upon congruence.
Last edited:
I read the article updates on movies, I read the critics articles, and then I go see the movie in question. I enjoy reading other people's thoughts on movies but I make up my own mind how I love, like, kind of like a movie.
I am more of a find the good in any movie, book or tv show, and I do feel that sometimes Professional Critics hate, like etc. predispose the general public to feel the same as a powerful critic's article. Opinion is a dime a dozen and just because some people in critic land bash, hate something; does not make up my mind for me.
I am more of a find the good in any movie, book or tv show, and I do feel that sometimes Professional Critics hate, like etc. predispose the general public to feel the same as a powerful critic's article. Opinion is a dime a dozen and just because some people in critic land bash, hate something; does not make up my mind for me.
Professional critics tend to be a lot harsher on movies than I am, but they're a good source of information usually. I find their opinions interesting, even if I don't agree, I like reading well thought out opinions I disagree with. Sometimes it gives a new perspective. Ebert is one critic I could listen to all day, even when he's totally missing the mark.
Similar threads
