Wherein we discuss scripted events which are broadcast over analog and digital channels.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby kenzo » Apr 24th, 2013 @ 3:46pm

Japanese Trailer which of course shows more shit going on than the US/Int ones:



Why do Klingons wear stupid helmets in JJ Abrams's world?
kenzo
User avatar
 
Posts: 26706
Joined: Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:01pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby LiQuid » Apr 28th, 2013 @ 2:06pm

Haha, Cumerbunch is Khan after all? Epic kenzo troll.
LiQuid
User avatar
 
Posts: 28315
Joined: Mar 9th, 2009 @ 8:57pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby kenzo » Apr 28th, 2013 @ 2:13pm

LiQuid wrote:Haha, Cumerbunch is Khan after all? Epic kenzo troll.
Spoiler: show
This time, instead of Spock dying at the end to fix the ship, it's Kirk. And they un-kill him pretty immediately by giving him a transfusion of Khan-blood which heals him.

J.J.Fucking.Abrams.... go kill yourself.
kenzo
User avatar
 
Posts: 26706
Joined: Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:01pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby LiQuid » Apr 28th, 2013 @ 2:17pm

Well obviously he can't keep it exactly the same otherwise what would all the fantards rage at?!
LiQuid
User avatar
 
Posts: 28315
Joined: Mar 9th, 2009 @ 8:57pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby kenzo » Apr 28th, 2013 @ 2:36pm

I'm not really sure what's raped my childhood more, this or Transformers. Because at least Transformers was always retarded to begin with, so there's no real downgrade with the Michael Bay films.
kenzo
User avatar
 
Posts: 26706
Joined: Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:01pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby LiQuid » Apr 28th, 2013 @ 4:41pm

Transformers may not have had as far to fall but Bay really found a way to plumb the bottom of that barrel.

Tho all your tears and heartache try to say otherwise, at the very least 2009 Trek was at least a fun movie. There was nothing fun about Transformers
LiQuid
User avatar
 
Posts: 28315
Joined: Mar 9th, 2009 @ 8:57pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby kenzo » May 10th, 2013 @ 2:29am


Damn, that's disrespectful.
kenzo
User avatar
 
Posts: 26706
Joined: Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:01pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby Fade2Black » May 15th, 2013 @ 11:39pm

I saw Star Trek Into Darkness with Toby and Charlie tonight as well as most of the Infinite Longbox posse. Without going into any details, I'll just say that the unanimous consensus was that it was pretty good.
We saw the IMAX 3D version which, admittedly, is not my preferred viewing format, but I'll concede that the picture looked exceptionally clean and the implementation of the 3D was better than most of the IMAX 3D films I've seen. The theater we saw it at really cranked up the sound to the point where every explosion seemed to reverberate through our bodies. In retrospect, the trailers probably gave too much away, for as the film progressed there were several scenes where I could predict what was coming next. The poster they gave away at tonight's showing is actually fairly decent. It's on heavy stock and it features a glow-in-the-dark white silhouette of the enterprise that sits atop a white star as well as another image of the Enterprise off to one side. The silhouette atop the star is barely discernible in ambient light, but in darkness it's all that is visible giving the illusion that the Enterprise appears to have migrated across the poster.
Fade2Black
User avatar
 
Posts: 814
Joined: Apr 5th, 2011 @ 10:37pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby Mr_eX » May 16th, 2013 @ 9:31am

Just saw it and it was fantastic. It's going to be hard for any movie this year to top this.
Mr_eX
User avatar
Geekbox VIP
 
Posts: 15654
Joined: Apr 8th, 2009 @ 3:01pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby darfox8 » May 16th, 2013 @ 9:52am

On my way out to watch it now... what if it suuuckss?????? Dis gon be good.
I stream games some times. Come and watch www.twitch.tv/darfox8 These are my Highlights.
darfox8
User avatar
 
Posts: 2899
Joined: Mar 8th, 2009 @ 3:23pm
Location: Ocala, Florida

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby Mr_eX » May 16th, 2013 @ 10:02am

Been reading old posts in this thread and it's pretty funny how kenzo was nitpicking every little thing out of context and even looked up spoilers. It's like he was activity trying to ruin the movie for himself.
Mr_eX
User avatar
Geekbox VIP
 
Posts: 15654
Joined: Apr 8th, 2009 @ 3:01pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby kenzo » May 16th, 2013 @ 10:14am

Mr_eX wrote:Been reading old posts in this thread and it's pretty funny how kenzo was nitpicking every little thing out of context and even looked up spoilers. It's like he was activity trying to ruin the movie for himself.
You apparently don't understand hardcore fandom.
kenzo
User avatar
 
Posts: 26706
Joined: Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:01pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby Mr_eX » May 16th, 2013 @ 10:21am

Real fans wouldn't look up spoilers
Mr_eX
User avatar
Geekbox VIP
 
Posts: 15654
Joined: Apr 8th, 2009 @ 3:01pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby kenzo » May 16th, 2013 @ 11:24am

If you think real fans wouldn't be so excited/nervous about something upcoming that they don't accidentally spoil themselves while scouring the internet for information, you're a retard.
kenzo
User avatar
 
Posts: 26706
Joined: Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:01pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby Fade2Black » May 16th, 2013 @ 2:21pm

Mr_eX wrote:Just saw it and it was fantastic. It's going to be hard for any movie this year to top this.

Two out of two judges agree.
Fade2Black
User avatar
 
Posts: 814
Joined: Apr 5th, 2011 @ 10:37pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby darfox8 » May 16th, 2013 @ 2:39pm

I liked it. It was some pretty epic action and all the weird Un-Star Trek stuff didn't bother me too much. They're mostly explained by...
Spoiler: show
...evil star fleet Admiral and retarded young Kirk.
I stream games some times. Come and watch www.twitch.tv/darfox8 These are my Highlights.
darfox8
User avatar
 
Posts: 2899
Joined: Mar 8th, 2009 @ 3:23pm
Location: Ocala, Florida

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby kenzo » May 16th, 2013 @ 3:50pm

Preliminary thoughts: Pretty good and fun film, amazing Star Wars film, and an awful Star Trek film. So basically more of the same. I would probably have loved this movie if I didn't know anything about Star Trek. But there were a lot of times where I groaned painfully because of really stupid shit happening on screen:
Spoiler: show
Like the entire Kirk death scene being completely lifted out of Wrath of Khan; they didn't even try to put their own spin on it, it was the exact same dialog.


Also, the 9-11/war-vet dedication at the end made like, zero sense to me. Especially when, as far as I could tell, this film ostensibly is supposed to be a denunciation of the American response to 9-11 (a clumsy denunciation and not nearly as well done as Enterprise's, but it was functional).
kenzo
User avatar
 
Posts: 26706
Joined: Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:01pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby totoro » May 17th, 2013 @ 8:46am

Planning it out with mrstotoro to go out and see this tomorrow evening with another couple. Kind of killing me to wait, but hey, that's life I suppose.
Nintendo 3DS Friend Code: 0559-6917-7116
totoro
User avatar
 
Posts: 2226
Joined: Dec 28th, 2010 @ 10:32am
Location: Louisville, KY

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby Master Higgins » May 17th, 2013 @ 2:02pm

As good as the first, if not better.
--
Ryan Higgins
Comics Conspiracy
115-A E. Fremont Ave
Sunnyvale, CA 94087
http://www.comicsconspiracy.biz
Master Higgins
They go up
 
Posts: 5095
Joined: Mar 9th, 2009 @ 9:46pm
Location: Sunnyvale, CA

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby Fade2Black » May 17th, 2013 @ 4:56pm

kenzo wrote:...Also, the 9-11/war-vet dedication at the end made like, zero sense to me. Especially when, as far as I could tell, this film ostensibly is supposed to be a denunciation of the American response to 9-11 (a clumsy denunciation and not nearly as well done as Enterprise's, but it was functional).


http://trekmovie.com/2013/05/11/star-tr ... d-in-film/
Fade2Black
User avatar
 
Posts: 814
Joined: Apr 5th, 2011 @ 10:37pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby kenzo » May 17th, 2013 @ 4:57pm

Master Higgins wrote:As good as the first, if not better.
Some things were better, some things were worse. This film had a way better villain, whose motivations were a lot more fleshed out - but I can't really determine if that's because we already know who these badguys are (Khan, Section 31) so that the gaps are filled automatically in our heads. There was also actual character development in this movie, where as the first film was just character establishment. And I feel like this movie did a better job of integrating the cast so that they all felt like essential members of the crew that all did important shit (except for Uhura, who continues to remain useless). This film also had attempts at philosophical messages, even if they were handled very clumsily and poorly. There were also a lot of steady and sweet money-shots of the Enterprise looking all majestic and awesome, which we didn't get much of in the '09 film. And a lot of the little winks and nods to old Trek stuff was nice (though entirely disposable) like the little model NX-01, or Sulu getting captain's chair lust, or the Kelvin Memorial whateverit'scalled.

The shit I didn't like was a lot of small details that didn't really jive with Star Trek and were just there as poor excuses for plot devices to further the story. For example, having top Starfleet brass meet to discuss top security issues in the UFP's version of MIT is just dumb. And the whole prime directive shit in the beginning was a poorly executed excuse to give Kirk some humility and self-doubt. I can forgive a lot of this mostly though because it served its purpose and doesn't really detract from the film, just get under my skin as an uber-nerd. Also, the film's trailers really blows a lot of the more shocking events in the movie and made the entire film very predictable (which isn't really the movie's fault, but it lessened my enjoyment of the film). And the thing that pissed me off the most was the entire Kirk death scene - I was fine with the events, the homage itself and how it played out, but lifting the entire scene's dialog from the Wrath of Khan verbatim was groan-inducing. Instead of owning that scene, doing an original take and making it its own, it felt like a poor knock-off. And while this was a fine movie, it felt a little too grounded and attached to Earth for Star Trek. The story worked I guess, but I really wish they were finally exploring strange new worlds and seeking out new life and new civilizations already.

This film also left me feeling kinda empty inside. There was so much cool stuff in the background and floating just underneath the surface that I'd rather the film have focused on and wanted the movie to go into more depth but it didn't (shit like seeing Praxis blown apart, or further exploring the nature of Section 31) and it left me feeling kinda empty. When the film draws to a close and Kirk cites the show's preamble, instead of being overwhelmed with the film I'd just seen, instead I felt like shit. The Enterprise's five year mission of awesomeness is just about to start, and instead of getting to see that we have this movie and it's already the end. It left me lamenting that we had this movie made and not a new TV show instead.
kenzo
User avatar
 
Posts: 26706
Joined: Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:01pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby kenzo » May 17th, 2013 @ 5:04pm

Fade2Black wrote:
kenzo wrote:...Also, the 9-11/war-vet dedication at the end made like, zero sense to me. Especially when, as far as I could tell, this film ostensibly is supposed to be a denunciation of the American response to 9-11 (a clumsy denunciation and not nearly as well done as Enterprise's, but it was functional).
http://trekmovie.com/2013/05/11/star-trek-into-darkness-dedicated-to-post-911-vets-four-vets-from-mission-continues-featured-in-film/
I've got no problem with honoring vets, and "the mission continues" is awesome but as a theme isn't really represented in the film that I can see. Instead, we have a movie that, as far as I can tell, condemns the expansion of the military and the sacrificing our morality at the alter of increased security - something every post-9/11 vet has been a part of. It just felt weird and out of place at the end of the movie, is all.
kenzo
User avatar
 
Posts: 26706
Joined: Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:01pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby kenzo » May 17th, 2013 @ 6:01pm

Image
kenzo
User avatar
 
Posts: 26706
Joined: Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:01pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby LiQuid » May 17th, 2013 @ 6:09pm

Haha are they calling them Prime and Alternate universes???
LiQuid
User avatar
 
Posts: 28315
Joined: Mar 9th, 2009 @ 8:57pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby kenzo » May 17th, 2013 @ 10:02pm

LiQuid wrote:Haha are they calling them Prime and Alternate universes???
Unfortunately so. Still, it's better than other shit I've heard such as "JJverse".
kenzo
User avatar
 
Posts: 26706
Joined: Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:01pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby LiQuid » May 22nd, 2013 @ 1:31am

This doesn't look so bad.

Image
LiQuid
User avatar
 
Posts: 28315
Joined: Mar 9th, 2009 @ 8:57pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby Master Higgins » May 22nd, 2013 @ 8:54am

That's what my nightmares look like.
--
Ryan Higgins
Comics Conspiracy
115-A E. Fremont Ave
Sunnyvale, CA 94087
http://www.comicsconspiracy.biz
Master Higgins
They go up
 
Posts: 5095
Joined: Mar 9th, 2009 @ 9:46pm
Location: Sunnyvale, CA

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby BeowolfSchaefer » May 22nd, 2013 @ 9:27am

I just got back from seeing Star Trek. In general didn't really dig it. Tons of bad mcguffins I thought.
Spoiler: show
Why the fuck was the Enterprise under water at the beginning of the movie anyway? What could it have possibly done there that it couldn't have done from orbit?

We need something to cool down a volcano. How about cold fusion? That's what that means right?

Nobody in section 31 noticed that their shiny new weapons had fucking people inside them?

Kirk was surprised that Spock filed a report? Isn't like everything on a starship logged?

The writers seem to have no sense of scale at all. They treat every space or flight scene like an xwing battle.

The neutral zone is only 20 minutes from Kronos? The whole galaxy must only be a few hours across in this universe.

Why was there a shattered moon around Kronos? Was that Praxis that for some reason blew up ~30 years early?

Why did they need Khan's blood to save Kirk? Wouldn't the other 72 sleepers' blood presumably have the same properties?

The Enterprise doing atmospheric flight and now being a submersible really bothers me.

Chekov could beam people up while falling straight onto a planet in the last movie but this time not from the top of a moving car.

Bones kept saying how there was something wrong with Kirk. I kept waiting for some explanation. Nothing.

Why did Spock call Spock anyway? He didn't seem to learn anything valuable from it. If anything it would have made more sense for Kirk to talk to him since he was th one who ended up using a similar solution.

Nothing like a genuine panacea to macguffin it up.

I didn't mind the revamp of Khan much but the extreme parallels at the end were a bit much and didn't have the weight of the originals. Kirk and Spock had barely been friends in this timeline. They seem to be at eachother's throats most of the time rather than the 20+ years of friendship and respect in the prime continuity.

One or two fan service bits were cool like the reference that the cargo ship was Mudd's. Adding in Carol Marcus was OK, it always bothered me a bit in WoK that she just kind of showed up with us never having seen her before. The most accurate and likable portrayal of one of the original characters is by far Karl Urban. He fucking nails bones more than any of the rest of the cast does their roles.


I'll probably like it more after I have seen it a couple more times like I did with the 2009 movie but damn I was actively waiting for it to be over.

EDIT, this seems to hit a lot of the same points that bothered me http://io9.com/star-trek-into-darkness-the-spoiler-faq-508927844
BeowolfSchaefer
User avatar
 
Posts: 233
Joined: Sep 30th, 2010 @ 6:53am

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby kenzo » May 22nd, 2013 @ 4:03pm

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:I just got back from seeing Star Trek. In general didn't really dig it. Tons of bad mcguffins I thought.
This will be fun!

Spoiler: show
BeowolfSchaefer wrote:Why the fuck was the Enterprise under water at the beginning of the movie anyway? What could it have possibly done there that it couldn't have done from orbit?
Because we needed a majestic money-shot of the Enterprise rising from the ocean depths (which looked pretty sweet) and an excuse for Kirk to get demoted/put in his place. On a side note, I really liked the reboot's insistence on using shuttles more often and shying away from transporters because it kept things a little more grounded and gave periods of downtime where the characters can talk to each other. The show Enterprise was a much better show because it didn't rely on transporters as much because it had a technical reason not to. Too bad having shit like transwarp beaming kinda ruins any reason for not using transporters ever.

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:We need something to cool down a volcano. How about cold fusion? That's what that means right?
You know what 'technobabble' is, right? That's something you just have to roll with if you're a Star Trek fan.

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:Nobody in section 31 noticed that their shiny new weapons had fucking people inside them?
I like to imagine that they did notice it, which is why they sent them along with Kirk. Get rid of two birds with one stone.

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:Kirk was surprised that Spock filed a report? Isn't like everything on a starship logged?
Kirk wasn't surprised that Spock filed a report, he was surprised that Spock threw him under the bus in his report. Like you said, everyone has to file reports on everything. But Kirk just automatically assumed that Spock would use good taste and common sense to leave some bits out - you know, the kinds of bits that result in an automatic court marshal (willfully breaking the Prime Directive).

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:The writers seem to have no sense of scale at all. They treat every space or flight scene like an xwing battle.
This is something I'm going to have to disagree with. I actually think these reboot movies establish the size and majesty of Starships pretty well. If you're talking about the chase-scene, those are far smaller vessels that ships like the Enterprise dwarf in comparison.

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:The neutral zone is only 20 minutes from Kronos? The whole galaxy must only be a few hours across in this universe.
I can't remember the exact quote, but TNG establishes that something small like only 2% of the galaxy is ever charted in the TOS era. Places like Vulcan, Earth, Qo'nos, Romulus, etc are all in relatively very close proximity to each other. Kirk's five year mission (and other voyages of exploration like it) are a big deal because they're the Federation striking out into the vast reaches of the cosmos.

Edit: In the first few episodes of TOS, the Enterprise travels to the edge of the galaxy and back, and in Star Trek V, they travel to the galactic core and back - both events happening in a very short period of time. Star Trek's never been that consistent on the time of space travel, and very frequently fudges numbers for the sake of plot. It honestly isn't really until DS9/Voyager that they begin concretely ironing out exactly how big the galaxy is and exactly how long it would take starships to travel from one place to another.

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:Why was there a shattered moon around Kronos? Was that Praxis that for some reason blew up ~30 years early?
It's obviously a reference to Praxis. And while this is merely speculation, I assume that the same technological advancements at an accelerated rate that happened for the Federation in this timeline also happened for the Klingons, which sped up the rate at which Praxis was dangerously overmined and exploded. On a side note, we can also assume that the reason why an entire province was abandoned on Qo'nos (and why security in general around that planet was very lax) was because plans for evacuation of the planet were already well underway.

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:Why did they need Khan's blood to save Kirk? Wouldn't the other 72 sleepers' blood presumably have the same properties?
Scientifically speaking, you can't assume that just because one person's blood has this property, that all of his genetically engineered companions have the same modifications that work in the exact same manner. Plus, McCoy establishes pretty early he has no idea how to deal with cryogenics, and time was of the essence (since you need to revive Kirk before brain damage begins to occur) so that didn't really bother me.

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:The Enterprise doing atmospheric flight and now being a submersible really bothers me.
That's certainly not something normal, but there's plenty of precedent for atmospheric flight in Star Trek (be it Birds of Prey during the films, the Enterprise during TOS, Voyager a number of times, etc). This isn't the Planet Express Ship - the Enterprise fends all kinds of crazy assaults and interstellar phenomena. Being able to fly in an atmosphere or under water doesn't really seem that stressful on the ship in comparison.

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:Chekov could beam people up while falling straight onto a planet in the last movie but this time not from the top of a moving car.
To be fair, a moving car isn't necessarily traveling with the same predictable acceleration and vectors as someone in free-fall.

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:Bones kept saying how there was something wrong with Kirk. I kept waiting for some explanation. Nothing.
I simply took that as a not so subtle hint that his state of mind was clearly being affected by the situation and that he was trying to intimate that maybe he wasn't in the best frame of mind to be making such rash and important judgments.

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:Why did Spock call Spock anyway? He didn't seem to learn anything valuable from it. If anything it would have made more sense for Kirk to talk to him since he was th one who ended up using a similar solution.
He called Old-Spock because Spock is his strategy guide. And Old-Spock was like, "dude, don't horde your items until the end - because this guy IS the final boss, go all out on him." But yeah, it was mostly superfluous and for fan service. Not the worst scene in the film but could have easily and comfortably been left on the chopping room floor.

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:Nothing like a genuine panacea to macguffin it up.
Yeah, this was pretty dumb. However, I'm at least satisfied that:
1.) They establish his blood's curative powers very early in the film, rather than conveniently discovering this fact a few seconds before they need it.
2.) I'm glad they revived him in this film, rather than having Star Trek III: The Search for Kirk. I always resented The Search for Spock because it was a waste of time to devote an entire film to reviving a single character when there were far more interesting stories they could have told in the meanwhile.

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:I didn't mind the revamp of Khan much but the extreme parallels at the end were a bit much and didn't have the weight of the originals. Kirk and Spock had barely been friends in this timeline. They seem to be at eachother's throats most of the time rather than the 20+ years of friendship and respect in the prime continuity.
I have to agree, except that Kirk and Spock's friendship isn't as well established by the time of Wrath of Khan that people like to imagine. The TOS years, their relationship was relatively trusting and friendly, but also fairly adversarial (Spock always giving advice that Kirk didn't want to hear or didn't agree with) and we don't really see the ensuing years after the first three TOS years (which include two more years of their original five year mission, some intermediate years, and presumably a second two year mission after the events of The Motion Picture). This "I have been and always shall be your friend" business is really only played up for the first time in The Wrath of Khan, and people have to assume such a close friendship has evolved off screen (and in the minds of fans and on the pages of fan fiction).

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:One or two fan service bits were cool like the reference that the cargo ship was Mudd's. Adding in Carol Marcus was OK, it always bothered me a bit in WoK that she just kind of showed up with us never having seen her before. The most accurate and likable portrayal of one of the original characters is by far Karl Urban. He fucking nails bones more than any of the rest of the cast does their roles.
I was fine with Carol Marcus showing up in the Wrath of Khan - their relationship had ended decades before, and she wanted no part of his 'gallivanting throughout the stars' during TOS. She serves a very important role in that film, linking Kirk to and reminding him about his youth, and helping him to feel better and more secure about growing older.

BeowolfSchaefer wrote:EDIT, this seems to hit a lot of the same points that bothered me http://io9.com/star-trek-into-darkness-the-spoiler-faq-508927844
I would actually be fine if they redid the Space Whales plot, because you could do a more modern take on it, involve some shenanigans like Whale Wars, and then at the end of the film, you could have Kirk be like, "wait a minute... we can time travel... let's undo this shitty reboot universe." and then they reset everything so that these stupid films never happened.
kenzo
User avatar
 
Posts: 26706
Joined: Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:01pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Postby kenzo » May 25th, 2013 @ 8:04am

Red Letter Media (Mr. Plinkett Reviews guys) review of Star Trek Into Darkness. I think it's a little too harsh, but pretty spot on when it comes to the film's short comings:

http://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-b ... -darkness/

Personally, I wasn't as bothered by some of the issues, and more at peace with them. But I do resent that this film settled on being a dumb retread rather than making something remotely original.

And here's a funny 'summary' of the '09 film:

http://thylaa.tumblr.com/post/51231170323/more
kenzo
User avatar
 
Posts: 26706
Joined: Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:01pm

PreviousNext
Forum Statistics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests

Options

Return to TV and Movies

cron