What is Digg?83 Comments
- HCJfilms, on 06/16/2009, -2/+50The fact is that only very rarely do wonderfully written gems get to see the light of day. Unless they are independently financed and then subsequently picked up at a festival, most of the ***** that Hollywood churns out is nothing more than a result of targeted demographics, compromises, and emptiness.
You learn all this in film school. - ianzu, on 06/16/2009, -0/+39Blaming the writing is too easy. Once the script is finished (final draft) the script is handed to the producer, who then (along with the director and any 'stars') pound and fluff the script with 'improvements'.
The writer is often not allowed on set after the final draft stage.
When the movie is panned, the writer is blamed. - Eupatorus, on 06/16/2009, -1/+34Really? I learned it all by watching films.
- DirtyVicar, on 06/16/2009, -0/+19What about the neverending stream of bad Hollywood scripts that constantly get greenlighted into major blockbuster movies? After seeing a number of SF franchises become a cesspool of formulaic plot and predictable storyline, I'm not exactly a big fan of what they've been cranking out.
- leontes, on 06/16/2009, -2/+21I agree that the plot was weak but I don't think to the detriment to the film. What they needed was science advisors, but I didn't have a problem with the instant Spock and Kirk coming to the Enterprise. They got on the Enterprise because of Spock. Spock knows Scotty. Spock also knows that Scotty comes up with long-distance during-warp transporter technology. Which can use Scotty's natural talents to teleport them to the Enterprise. It's the time travel thing again and it was also a callback to the "transparent aluminum" they used in ST IV.
Why was Spock there? For the same reason Pike ended up in a wheelchair? Or why the redshirt was destined to die. Even though a new universe has started : there are some things predestined in this new Star Trek universe and things will happen they way they should. It JJ Abrams signature: things happening for a reason, and I think it wasn't misplaced in this movie. - inactive, on 06/16/2009, -0/+11With explosions!
- Elranzer, on 06/16/2009, -1/+11If the Writers' Strike is to blame for all the badly written movies of late, then apparently they must have been striking since 1996...
- merky1, on 06/15/2009, -21/+31Maybe I don't get how movies are made, but isn't bad writing something that would be painfully obvious before you even begin shooting? Don't they storyboard scenes? Unless Hollywood is an echo chamber, where everyone greenlights horrificly bad concepts for fear of "rocking" the boat.
Even the shining movie, Star Trek, was a bad movie if you looked at the plot. There were great moments of dialogue, with about 10 minutes of awesome CGI tied together with nothing. Fanboys burying me, explain how Scotty & Kirk got on the enterprise. If you explanation makes sense, even in the trek universe, you get to bury me. Otherwise, accept the fact that it was a movie weaker than nemisis (didn't think that was possible) and move along. - inactive, on 06/16/2009, -3/+12The writers strike has nothing to do with it. They need to remove copy and paste from macbooks.
- ZenMojo, on 06/16/2009, -0/+7Writers got ripped off. Writers stopped writing. Hollywood comes to a standstill. Hollywood abandons writing. Hollywood sucks. Hollywood pays writers. Writers start writing. Hollywood sucks less.
Not complicated. Maybe now producers will get their ***** together and realize they're little more than ***** monkeys on telephones. - lolwatermelon, on 06/16/2009, -1/+8"Unless Hollywood is an echo chamber, where everyone greenlights horrificly bad concepts for fear of "rocking" the boat."
I could list off all the sequels that fit that description, but do I really have to?
And about Star Trek and Nemesis... if you can give a good argument proving that they're different movies, I'll give you a cookie. - llopez1223, on 06/16/2009, -3/+10Let's see Wall-e, Tropic Thunder, The Incredible Hulk, Coraline, Star Trek, The Hangover, UP are a bunch of ***** movies? If a credible source like Charlie Jane Andrews says so, it must be so. :sarcasm:
- ZenMojo, on 06/16/2009, -0/+6Keep in mind also that Scotty was frozen in a transporter and awoke in the Next Generation period. That means even if episodes of Star Trek:TNG didn't allow subspace teleportation during warp, Scotty still could have come up with it post-Picard.
So there. /geek - smotpoker, on 06/16/2009, -3/+9"They got on the Enterprise because of Spock. Spock knows Scotty. Spock also knows that Scotty comes up with long-distance during-warp transporter technology."
The problem arises due to that not only did the Romulans manage to hide out in a time they were unfamiliar with for like 25 years but they also decided to torture Spock in such a manner. It just doesn't make sense. Why send him to a desolate planet where they think he'll be stuck? If they think it's so desolate he won't really be able to witness his home world's destruction.
Further, why the ***** does Spock sit there waiting on a Kirk to show up before he runs to contact Scotty? By now he knows the time line is different For all he knows Kirk is dead or in a prison colony somewhere. Knowing of his home-world's impending destruction any sane person would seek out Scotty immediately rather than holing up in some cave for no apparent reason other than to sulk.
Finally, the whole monster chase thing didn't make too much sense. Bigger monster abandons his big monster meal to chase after measly little Kirk who amounts to about a tater tot for a creature of that size.
So here we have young Spock coincidentally ditching Kirk on the same planet Spock Prime just happened to get ditched by the romulans who coincidentally just decides to sit on his ass for no apparent reason on the same planet which just so happens happens to be star fleet has an outpost but the very same star fleet outpost where Scotty is stationed. Compared to that, the big monster just happening to get killed by a bigger monster just in the nick of time who proceeds to chase the smaller prey almost make sense!
There's a little term us super-nerds use to describe scenes/movies like this: Pure unfettered *****. Sorry to disappoint - joerad010, on 06/16/2009, -3/+8Just saying, there is this little (plot)device called a "transporter". It sends people between huge distances instantaneously.
In all seriousness, where they fudging the distances, even by trek terms, yeah, but all in all it would seem they went to some dialogue pains to explain that it was a super-dooper transport technique that Spock-Prime brought back with him.
And no, it was not weaker then Nemesis...I think it could have been a bit more cerebral, but it was a good action flick, and without the god-awfulness of Nemesis. I can't understand how you thought it was worse then Nemesis. (shudders at the memory) The coolness of cloaked vs. uncloaked space battle only lasts a few minutes without something else of substance to back it up. - Bloodwine, on 06/16/2009, -0/+5A lot of movies were ***** before the writer's strike. Only a small minority of movies have good writing.
- arashamedani, on 06/16/2009, -0/+5Oh boy, I can't wait to find sexy partners!
:\ - viper001, on 06/16/2009, -1/+6The author was just picking and choosing to skew the results. Bad movies come out every summer -- like clockwork, and never fail to disappoint. Until hack directors like Uwe Boll, Stephen Sommers, and Paul W. S. Anderson stop being given work, horrible summer flicks are going to continue being the norm.
- mythicflux, on 06/16/2009, -1/+6Can he also explain how 'Star Trek' (new movie), Star Trek: Nemesis, and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan are different movies?
I mean watching a movie about a crazed madmen with a doomsday weapon who seeks revenge on a specific member of the Enterprise crew after being marooned in deep space was fine the first time I saw it. - quamb, on 06/16/2009, -1/+5Other hollywood films that should be good this year ---
Where the Wild Things Are
Inglourious Basterds
The Lovely Bones - dafragsta, on 06/16/2009, -1/+5Wow... straining for correlation to make an article? It's not like the strike was punishing writers for writing ***** stuff, and it's not like there was any expectation raised that says "The strike is going to improve the quality of movies." Most movie scripts are bought and sold anyway, so it's not like there is a bossman watching the writers punch a clock, or not punch a clock because they are on strike. Most movie writers move from project to project unless they are under contract to one specific studio. Otherwise, they'd be idiots to sit on their hands durring the strike and not have something ready to go to market as soon as it was over.
And it's not as if there wasn't a wide array of bad movies before the strike or that bad movies were a thing of the past. Bad movies are as unavoidable as death and taxes. - inactive, on 06/16/2009, -0/+4Most of those were ready to go before the strike. Movies take a long time to make.
- MasterGrief, on 06/16/2009, -1/+4I agree with you, but the promising of free baked goods if you can be proven wrong has got to stop. It's a terribly juvenile way to end an argument.
- kdmkdmkdm, on 06/16/2009, -0/+3Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. /dr.evil
- inactive, on 06/16/2009, -0/+3Yes, the system is broken. Has been for years.
- bryantee, on 06/16/2009, -0/+3It's probably fairly profitable to go ahead and complete a CGI-laden action movie with a cheesy plot and then just market the hell out of it and cash in during the first week. Major studios aren't concerned with long-term cinema value.
- inactive, on 06/16/2009, -1/+4Just please no more Genre Movie films/movies that are produced/star/or in some way shape or form include the Wayans brothers. I can deal with disappointments like Wolverine Origins, but parodying contemporary films using pop culture references is lazy, thoughtless writing that should not be rewarded. Also every time another Genre Movie is released, 1,000,001 puppies die.
- buddamus, on 06/16/2009, -0/+3The real question is will Hollywood ever stop ruining movies
- ZenMojo, on 06/16/2009, -0/+2Double dugg.
- phogasmic, on 06/16/2009, -0/+2I don't know when the movies will stop sucking, but.... that Splice movie looks like a winner. Sooo creepy. I wanna see a trailer now.
- inactive, on 06/16/2009, -4/+6i for one thought Star Trek was too flashy and action packed, i wish i got my money back.
/sarcasm - dalittle, on 06/16/2009, -2/+4Sorry, have not been seeing any more bad movies than normal yet? Star Trek was fantastic. Drag Me to Hell, stellar. Most everything else, crap. Honestly, if this is all a crap crop of movies it is not showing compared to other years. The Hollywood machine is intact with its hit miss results.
- GamerXR72, on 06/16/2009, -0/+2After the last movie, there's only room for improvement!
- charliecharlos, on 06/16/2009, -0/+2Buried and reported.
Anybody else notice this profile was opened tomorrow? - DeathJux, on 06/16/2009, -0/+2It's "tomorrow" already in places other than the USA.
- shrudheuie, on 06/16/2009, -0/+2I dont think the strike was the problem. They have been putting out mostly crap since long before the strike
- egemenbor, on 06/16/2009, -2/+4yep i usually finish a movie regardless of how good or bad it is but tropic thunder was one of the very few where i thought ***** this ive got better ***** to do...
- Eupatorus, on 06/17/2009, -0/+2Working in a video store is the best film school ever.
Bonus: They pay you to watch movies! - egemenbor, on 06/16/2009, -0/+2drag me to hell: me and my friends (and a few others in the cinema) found this movie to be more of a comedy than a horror movie..imdb also had it at 8point something when it checked it before deciding to go watch it..
now is it just me and my friends or was this movie actually terrible? - mythicflux, on 06/16/2009, -0/+2"And by the way... in keeping with the contrived scene idea... we want to make you a bigger bad ass so we're going to give you a new off road vehicle with cool weapons and have you ignore everything we did in the show... like having Number One go instead of you, sir."
- lennybird, on 06/16/2009, -0/+2I for one was taken aback by the ice monster creature. That was one of the coolest, most scariest creatures I've seen since playing half-life and discovering what an Ichyosaur was.
- Benno, on 06/16/2009, -0/+2http://www.stardestroyer.net/Nemesis/Pictorial-1.h ...
"Captain, there's a plot device- er, ion storm approaching, so we can't beam the pieces of this mystery Soong-type android up from the surface ... even though the storm isn't here yet. Good opportunity for a totally contrived scene, sir." - Velocity14, on 06/16/2009, -3/+4Honestly, every time Tom Cruise was on screen, I remembered he was a scientologist... it just made me conflicted and unamused. I wanted to laugh, but I felt like I would somehow be supporting him.
- strafefire, on 06/24/2009, -0/+1@CanadianSixPack: I guess no one got the idiocracy jokes...
- bthree78, on 06/16/2009, -1/+2I agree, "Game" or "Gamer" did suck when I saw it back in the fall.
- DAC1138, on 06/16/2009, -0/+1You'll learn more about the production process from watching movies and documentaries than you will sitting in a classroom for 3 years.
The best "film school" is the kind where you know nothing and learn from your own mistakes. Best to learn from your own mistakes than follow the paths of others. - lolwatermelon, on 06/16/2009, -0/+1Don't forget that, while B-4 is a dumb name, the original name was B-9.
- CanadianSixPack, on 06/16/2009, -1/+2Public Enemies
- CanadianSixPack, on 06/16/2009, -1/+2uh hhuh huh.. I have a sister who's tarded... she's a pilot now.
- X9001, on 06/16/2009, -1/+2I don't know about wonderfully written gems coming out of the film festival, I mean I have seen Napoleon Dynamite. Actually no I haven't really seen it I turned it off at about the halfway point.
-
Show 51 - 88 of 88 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is