Monday, May 11, 2009

Star Trek Discussion

Hey everybody, here's where I ask Jordan some questions about his review and he asks some about mine. Check it out in the comments section.


  1. Sam's Questions to Jordan:
    Why only a B? From the sound of your review, it sounded like you had more fun than a B.

    Besides character development what was it lacking?

    You seem to be a JJ Abrams guy (you like Alias, right?) how does this stack up? Would you consider this Abrams-esque or him doing another director's bit?

  2. Sam,
    You're clearly not a huge Abrams fan? from where does your hatred stem (I know you aren't a huge Lost fan, and niether am I, but I thought Alias was good fun and Mission Impossible III wasn't half bad. Sure the guy has a tendency to write every script in the form of a fram narrative, but he didn't do that here!)? Also, you gave the film an A-, slightly higher than my grade, and didn't go too much (or really at all) into negatives. Was there anything you didn't like?-Jordan

  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

  4. Odd that we asked essentially the same questions... I gave it only a B because, although I had fun, it never blew me out of the water. The action sequences were all good, but none of them amounted to greatness in my mind (I think the set up of a samurai sword fight atop a drill is WAY cooler than the actual payoff, which was still pretty cool). Also, the movie ended up feeling like a lot of buildup, which means that tis success largely depends on the quality of the second installment.

    As for Abrams, I wouldn't call myself an Abrams guy like I'm a Whedon guy, but I don't necessarily dislike him. Like I said in my question to you, it was a departure for him in that it wasn't done as a frame tale (in which we see a suspenseful moment, then flashback to "5 days earlier" then build for the whole movie back to that moment before its resolution), but he didn't write it, so that could explain that. About 2/3 of Alias episodes are done in that style and it drove me crazy after a while. Though I liked Alias and thought it was a very entertaining show (except the last season which was predictible drivel), I hate Lost more than I ever liked Alias. I though M:I III was good but not great and I never had interest in Cloverfield. In conclusion, I would hardly call myself an Abrams guy, but his name on something doesn't put me off of it. I think he handled this large task very admirably though, and eagerly await the sequel.


  5. Sam's answers for Jordan:
    My dislike of Abrams really doesn't have to do with Alias, but with Lost and Cloverfield. I can't stand the people who talk about Lost when there are shows on TV with stories that don't jerk the audience around like a baby with shaken baby syndrome. I also thought cloverfield was shit. I've heard good things about Alias but haven't seen it so can't say anything about that.
    Also did not see Mission Impossible III because the series stopped being a spy movie and was just a straight action flick.

    There were things I did not like about the movie. I just glossed over Bana's performance saying he was over the top, at times it was to a fault and thought it was a bit laughable. I felt bad for the actor with a REAL Russian accent who got beaten out for the role of Chekov. yes, the actor was born in the USSR but he came to the US when he was like a year old. I gave this movie an A- because for its genre it was almost everything it needed to be. it was funny at times and a thrilling action movie at other times. obviously its not oscar material but it accomplished what it was trying to do extrememly well.

  6. Sam,
    I love that you disparage Abrams for his work I haven't seen, and I defend him for his work you haven't seen. Perhaps there really are two sides to Abrams...-Jordan