|
Post by Doomy on Mar 13, 2009 12:12:58 GMT -5
It positively zipped along compared to The Dark Knight, IMO. Are you a fan of the comics, BC? I own the graphic novel and have read it a few times, but not for years.
|
|
|
Post by dharn on Mar 14, 2009 11:43:56 GMT -5
Watched Watchmen with my old friends last Friday night. Loved it. Rosharch was spot on and Nite Owl civilian look was... well... cool? (Dang, I missed the 80s look).
|
|
|
Post by Black Cat on Mar 16, 2009 14:08:25 GMT -5
Are you a fan of the comics, BC? I own the graphic novel and have read it a few times, but not for years. Honestly, I never read any American comics, only European (to the exception of Maus, by Art Spiegelman). However, I generally do love the movies that are based on American comics: V for Vendetta, The Dark Knight, Spiderman... Knowing that The Watchmen was based on Moore's work, I didn't even looked on the internet to get to know what it was all about to decide that I wanted to see this movie. And as expected, I enjoyed it. I don't know why, but I prefer reading European comics that seeing their movie version and I prefer seeing the movie version of American comics than reading them.
|
|
|
Post by zipp on Apr 2, 2009 23:12:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Doomy on Apr 3, 2009 6:05:42 GMT -5
Having seen MvA in IMAX 3D, I have to say your review is bang on target. As a film it's a fine piece of Easter holiday family entertainment, though no enduring classic. But, as you point out, the 3D is truly awesome.
|
|
|
Post by Beowuuf on Apr 3, 2009 7:39:40 GMT -5
I thought it was very funny, better than some. Howver, when watched on a normal screen, I did find the 3D elements obvious and gimicky though!
|
|
|
Post by Doomy on Apr 3, 2009 9:08:49 GMT -5
I'm not sure how well this one will perform in the post-cinema markets, not many people have 3D IMAX systems in their living rooms.
|
|
|
Post by Beowuuf on Apr 3, 2009 9:17:54 GMT -5
Oh, i think there is enough going for it without the gimick. It's just they may have been better not havign the gimmick at all in the 2D and having alternate version of the shot!
|
|
|
Post by Doomy on May 9, 2009 13:03:41 GMT -5
Saw the new Star Trek today. While the rabid fanboys will take umbrage at certain aspects of the plot, on its own merits it's a great piece of low-brow entertainment.
|
|
|
Post by Samildanach on May 9, 2009 14:48:57 GMT -5
Saw the new Star Trek today. While the rabid fanboys will take umbrage at certain aspects of the plot, on its own merits it's a great piece of low-brow entertainment. Trekkies bash new film as 'fun, watchable' ;D
|
|
|
Post by Doomy on May 9, 2009 15:09:42 GMT -5
Gotta love the Onion. Took a look on some Trek forums, it appears feathers have indeed been ruffled. However my fellow audience-members (most of whom were not in Starfleet uniform) greatly enjoyed the film.
|
|
|
Post by Simey on May 9, 2009 20:17:10 GMT -5
Well, I still have pretty much zero interest, but I'd have thought the best thing a new Star Trek film could do was be un-Star Trek.
|
|
|
Post by Beowuuf on May 10, 2009 1:11:27 GMT -5
Weird, the film is so full of homage without real explanation I thought it would be more for the Trek guy and still not accessible to the non-Trek guy.
After all, Chekov and Scotty look like swings at nationalities for no good reason!
|
|
|
Post by Doomy on May 10, 2009 4:15:06 GMT -5
In the new film, Montgomery Scott is the comic relief while Chekhov is a genius with a funny accent. In other words, it's almost as if the characters have been switched.
|
|
|
Post by Beowuuf on May 10, 2009 4:48:27 GMT -5
Nah, Scotty still gets credited with genius, and let's face it Chekov saying anything on the conn is just I liked how in an ensemble cast, each minor character got their moment to shine and be important so you recognise them as an important crew member. Dammit, I listened to a podcast mentioning the film again, and this thread has sealedit - I need to go watch that film again right now Curse you centre of town! Curse you close VUE cinema! Curse you JJ Adrams!
|
|