![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
on the plus side, finally watched star trek tonight.
it did not suck.
( ,
Sun 2 Oct 2011, 22:13,
archived)
it did not suck.
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Too much baffling cinematography (CONSTANTLY sweeping / moving cameras, too much lens flares etc) and some sci-fi movie cliches that keep bugging me, like why did the baddies have to LOOK evil, and have a big pointy EVIL spaceship, that was all darkly lit and EVIL inside?
I hate it when sci-fi film baddies look evil just because they are evil. I mean, really - what benefit does a baddies ship have being poorly lit, full of chasms and deadly drops, sparks flying and loose tubing?
( ,
Sun 2 Oct 2011, 22:20,
archived)
I hate it when sci-fi film baddies look evil just because they are evil. I mean, really - what benefit does a baddies ship have being poorly lit, full of chasms and deadly drops, sparks flying and loose tubing?
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
but as to why the bad guys have to look evil, well, the american film board view the american public as drooling spastic shitcunts, so they try to make things as easy on them as possible.
( ,
Sun 2 Oct 2011, 22:23,
archived)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
It looked like a 20th century chemical plant. Not even the Enterprise on Star Trek:Enterprise looked that bad.
( ,
Sun 2 Oct 2011, 22:34,
archived)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
futuristic, yet believable
( ,
Sun 2 Oct 2011, 22:42,
archived)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Managed to appear like what it was supposed to be, namely a lower-tech version of the original series, and without a big-arsed wide diameter metal pipe in sight! Shame it got cancelled; most of the stories in the final two years were rather good (and a hell of a lot better than Voyager).
( ,
Sun 2 Oct 2011, 22:57,
archived)