I really liked the new Star Trek film. It could have turned out a lot worse. Better this than simply a dead franchise.
WHAT I WAS THINKING!! plus Transformers rocked!!!DalekJaas said:That review sucked. Your taste in movies is terrible. Transformers wasnt that bad, at least it was entertaining, which is what a movie is meant to be. What the hell do you expect? Also you have an annoying, grating voice I'm sorry to say. Stop trying to be Yahtzee.
The problem is to do that the writers had to throw out what little the canon Star Trek universe said about how time travel worked.Mr0llivand3r said:Yahtzee: "Fans are clinging complaining dipshits who will never EVER be grateful for any concession you make"
Thanks, MovieBob for single-handedly proving how completely RIGHT Yahtzee is.
Just because it's not the Star Trek movie YOU wanted to see doesn't mean it's a bad movie. The movie was great. As someone who has never liked the other Star Treks, I thought it was a fun, action-filled ride, which is all it was supposed to be.
The filmmakers didn't set out making this movie so that it would win academy awards and tug at the heartstrings of stuffy film critics. They did it so that they could take an otherwise dead saga and give it new life and make it enjoyable, which they did with great results.
Who cares how it works.maximara said:The problem is to do that the writers had to throw out what little the canon Star Trek universe said about how time travel worked.
The City on the Edge of Forever, Tomorrow is Yesterday, Star Trek: First Contact, Past Tense (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine), The Visitor, Time and Again (Star Trek: Voyager), Future's End, Before and After (Star Trek: Voyager), Year of Hell (Star Trek: Voyager), Timeless (Star Trek: Voyager), Relativity (Star Trek: Voyager), Endgame (Star Trek: Voyager) and 10 plus episodes of Enterprise and its Temporal Cold War all say this movie has NO IDEA what it is talking about and "Parallels" (TNG) explains how Many World Theory works in the ST universe which is again contrary with the explanation we are given in the movie.
Given that under Bell's Theorem Superluminous (read Faster Than Light Communications) and Many World Theory are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE things you have to take some liberty with the Quantum Physics to make things work in what in the end is a FICTIONAL universe that has BOTH. To this end you have to keep the physics consistent and the movie does a major fail in that regard especially with it established by canon going all the way back to the original series some 40 years ago. Bag of hammer time on the part of the writers
I think the problem with MovieBob now is he's becoming what he claims hates so much, a hardcore gamer/ fanboy (plus he's a massive weeaboo). He sure in hell acts like one now a days. He doesn't care what's it about if he doesn't like something he's right and they're wroung.joe_dracos said:Chekov was rather silly. He reminded me of another character that said "Its Wego!" in a movie with slime guns, Proton packs and ghost traps that shall not be mentioned.
All in all, after seeing several of MovieBobs reviews I have to say his Criticing of movies seems to be more about who made the movie and who is in the movie instead of the movie itself and this is disappointing... not to mention that he gave transformers a bad review but GI Joe a good review (infact he seems to have gotten a line or two from a post in this thread) even though GI Joe appears to be a campy (and not Army of Darkness campy) Transformers clone movie (compare the scene were the two GI's are jumping around with the scene from the first movie where Ironhide is dodging shots from Devestator). Also, trying to be a Yatzee clone is just... campy (and not army of darkness campy). If he were more unique and had is own style (other then a red splash) it may be beter.... not to mention he might concider watching the review before putting it up so he can edit it properly so everybody could read the words that are put up for 5 frames. Also I really don't care how much you hate certain dirrectors and which actors are in the movie.... except for maybe Bruce Campbell. Yeah, I deffinatly want to know if Bruce Campbell is in the movie.
my problem wasn't with the accent... it was the rediculous way he looked (like the guy who says "It's Wigo!" in ghostbusters II. I just couldn't stand it. He looked irritating (I'm not commenting on his personality) and the hair bouncing up and down... gah! G-GAH!715 said:As for Chekov I think they were poking fun of his TOS accent, it worked for the most part (like him tring to enter his password) but over time it gotten kinda annoying.
That is because Transformers tries to get you to care about the stupid human charecters thru terrible acting instead of focusing on the excitement like GI Joe did.joe_dracos said:All in all, after seeing several of MovieBobs reviews I have to say his Criticing of movies seems to be more about who made the movie and who is in the movie instead of the movie itself and this is disappointing... not to mention that he gave transformers a bad review but GI Joe a good review (infact he seems to have gotten a line or two from a post in this thread) even though GI Joe appears to be a campy (and not Army of Darkness campy) Transformers clone movie (compare the scene were the two GI's are jumping around with the scene from the first movie where Ironhide is dodging shots from Devestator). Also, trying to be a Yatzee clone is just... campy (and not army of darkness campy). If he were more unique and had is own style (other then a red splash) it may be beter.... not to mention he might concider watching the review before putting it up so he can edit it properly so everybody could read the words that are put up for 5 frames. Also I really don't care how much you hate certain dirrectors and which actors are in the movie.... except for maybe Bruce Campbell. Yeah, I deffinatly want to know if Bruce Campbell is in the movie.
I hear halo sold well...Baby Tea said:But that's my point! As soon as it has a brand, then it better be epic or it'll be decried. It's higher rated then any previous Star Trek film, according to Meta Critic, but it gets a '6' for what? X-Men Origins slaughtered at the box office, and so did Transformers...but they are bad because...? They aren't like the show? The cartoon? The comic book?Slycne said:If this was any other generic action space movie I think I would agree with you, but Star Trek carries quite a depth to it. So I think it's a fair assessment to expect more of it.
Where has the simple enjoyment gone?