Star Trek Beyond

The Enterprise might not get destroyed. Best we can say is it's very damaged.

I see they're doing the classic Star Trek movie plot set-up. Characters get split up between the ship and a planet its orbiting. That's like half the movies.

They do that with every great movie.

I definitely can't be bothered to see this opening weekend, if at all.  Why anyone would put Justin Lin in charge of anything more sophisticated than a Fast & Furious movie would be beyond me, if I thought that this was actually going to be a sophisticated science fiction film.  It's not though, not anymore.  Star Trek is just action schlock now, like Transformers and GI Joe.

Yeah, and then it was "too Star Trek" so they changed it and then reshot it.

Jibbs Doomsday Wyldstaar

Paramount changed its mind. Reviews will be released tomorrow.

89% on RT right now with 18 reviews.

Dracula PG Cooper SnoBorderZero Wyldstaar FShuttari







www.indiewire.com/2016/07/star-trek-beyond-review-chris-pine-zachary-quinto-1201706261/

Had an interesting conversation with a friend today about the prediction that cinema is morphing into two extremes: hundred million dollar tentpoles and microbudget indies. It's generally expected that the mid-budget flicks are the ones that are going to vanish from the multiplex while the fx-heavy epics make billions and the indies make a profit due to their minuscule initial cost.

Then we realised that these blockbusters are going out of their way to be built around huge, FX-heavy set pieces because that's the reasoning they use to convince would-be consumers that it's worth seeing it on the big screen.

"Hey, this action is so bombastic and over the top and BIG that the only way to consume it and appreciate it is on the big screen with a 50,000w sound system."

Then we realised that they're already doing that and they've been doing it for a while now, and it explains why so many blockbusters seem to be trying to outdo each other when it comes to what's "at stake" and the conclusions to pretty much every recent blockbuster.

Popular film is no longer about story or performances. It's about who can bring the most epic, overwhelming set piece and remind the average Joe that cinema can create scenes of such gravity that they eclipse the small screen and make it seem wholly redundant.

All of us here love cinema. We don't need convincing that it should survive, but the average person couldn't care less - that's why they need to be convinced in a different way. They need to be shown something like Avatar, or Furious 7 or even Ghostbusters or Star Trek - just to be reminded that cinema can do things that all the other mediums they consume can't.

Thus explains the rise of the generic set piece. (I may be making that conclusion up.)

Nolan is still in a league of his own, though. He's the anomaly. (Hi Dooms.)

It's 5am and the above makes complete sense guys. Don't even try to argue with this water-tight logic.

What comedy? Nolan's comedy? Are you pulling my leg? I think Dooms' Nolan beef goes deeper than that.

I actually think he and his brother's humourous elements in their films are above par and I personally find them surprisingly down to earth when compared to the calculated worthiness of their scripts. Maybe I'm alone on that.

Your animated observation is interesting though. I feel like at this point the combined experience of Disney and Pixar means that they literally can't fail. Kids' movies are unique in that every few years there's a new market, a new generation. They can regurgitate what they know works. A fresh childhood demographic will never get old or bored of what they're producing. It's literally a perpetual well from which to draw money, and I can't see how they can mess that up in our lifetime.

It was a HUGE hit in China. The Mermaid, by the way, is a Chinese movie. China is as big, if not bigger, than America these days.

Nah. Apparently, the Chinese don't believe in mocking the dead.