Official NNN 2009 Summer Movie thread

Ramblings
41

I’ve only seen Star Trek thus far and I thoroughly enjoyed it (this coming from a very anti Star Trek person who thought the original stuff was dry and boring). I love JJ Abramhs, the guy knows what’s up when it comes to sci-fi.

I’ve decided I’m going to hold back on seeing Wolverine in theaters after the terrible reviews it got and what I’ve been hearing from friends. I don’t need to see another bull crap X-men movie in theaters after the X3 debacle.

I think a lot of you are going to be very surprised with how amazing Terminator 4 will be. I really think it’s going to completely reboot the franchise the same way that Batman Begins rebooted that franchise, maybe even in a bigger way. Everything I’ve seen and read about it so far indicates that it will be a great film and I have high expectations for it, probably more-so than any other movie coming out this summer.

42

[QUOTE=ninerball49;407942]Star Trek is incredible. Wasn’t filmed for IMAX so definitely wouldn’t matchup to The Dark Knight but it might be a pretty good experience. For whoever asked, there are 2 IMAX theaters in Charlotte. Discovery Place and at Stonecrest down in Pineville. Discovery Place doesn’t play R rated movies, but I saw TDK there and it was incredible…best movie experience I’ve ever had. Terminator and Transformers are also being released in IMAX. I think Transformers is shot with IMAX cameras. T4 is definitely not because McG sacrificed shooting in IMAX for using a special type of film to give the movie a different look.

I definitely recommend seeing Star Trek…all-around great movie, and this is coming from someone who absolutely despised ST before this movie. Never got into it…but this movie is an enjoyable, well-acted, brilliantly cast action movie.[/QUOTE]

The one at Discovery Place is Imax Dome (it used to be called Omnimax), not regulation Imax. It’s more cone shaped. Is the one at Stonecrest the same?

Dark Knight only had 1 scene shot with Imax cameras. The rest of it was regular 35mm that was then blown up to Imax gauge. I thought the Imax presentation SUCKED. It wasn’t a film – it was a cheesy rollercoaster at the county fair. Corny and kitschy.

Same thing for Transformers, from what I’ve heard… Bay shot 2 or 3 scenes with the Imax cameras. the rest is traditional 35mm.

43

Double Post

44

[QUOTE=SteauA;408793]I think a lot of you are going to be very surprised with how amazing Terminator 4 will be. I really think it’s going to completely reboot the franchise the same way that Batman Begins rebooted that franchise, maybe even in a bigger way. Everything I’ve seen and read about it so far indicates that it will be a great film and I have high expectations for it, probably more-so than any other movie coming out this summer.[/QUOTE]

I am looking forward to T4, but those are awfully strong words. James Cameron is just about the best you can ask for. T3 was not that good - but expecting T4 to be better than T2 is asking a lot - particularly when it’s coming from the Charlies Angels dude. Now I am not saying that T4 is not going to be great, just that I am going to keep my expectations lower than yours and be happy if I am surprised. My experience watching T2 in the theaters is one that was on par with walking out of the Matrix - movies that changed the industry. I do not expect T4 to do that.

45

[QUOTE=Sideshow;408800]The one at Discovery Place is Imax Dome (it used to be called Omnimax), not regulation Imax. It’s more cone shaped. [B] Is the one at Stonecrest the same? [/B]

Dark Knight only had 1 scene shot with Imax cameras. The rest of it was regular 35mm that was then blown up to Imax gauge. I thought the Imax presentation SUCKED. It wasn’t a film – it was a cheesy rollercoaster at the county fair. Corny and kitschy.

Same thing for Transformers, from what I’ve heard… Bay shot 2 or 3 scenes with the Imax cameras. the rest is traditional 35mm.[/QUOTE]

It’s not a dome but the screen is larger than standard and curved. I enjoyed Star Trek on it and there was only a few sceens in IMax. I believe that Transformers 2 is mostly IMax.

46

[QUOTE=49RFootballNow;408861]It’s not a dome but the screen is larger than standard and curved.[/QUOTE]

Hm, that sounds more like (real) Imax. I shall have to investigate.

47

Saw a screening of T4 last night. A little long at some parts, good action, not bad. Way better than T3.

48

[QUOTE=NinerWupAss;408750]Well I am 3 for 3 on big summer movies! Saw Angels and Demons last night. It was very entertaining. I have not read the book, I had read the Davinci Code,.

I am sure there are some issues people have that read the book, but I found it enjoyable. One of the big scenes towards the end of the movie was really cool! So here is my 2099 Summer Movie ranking thus far:

1 - Star Trek
2 - Angels and Demons
3 - Wolverine[/QUOTE]

A&D is the one I want to see. Glad to hear you though it was entertaining. I have read the book so I’m sure I’ll compare it to that but hopefully it’s better than Davinci Code.

49
I thought Machinist, Batman Begins and 3:10 to Yuma were all pretty amazing, especially the acting. I'm pretty sure you're in the minority on all of them...

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/machinist/

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/batman_begins/

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/310_to_yuma/

christian bale may be a douche…it’s up for debate. but he’s a brilliant actor, IMO

I’m with PB on The Machinist. Also didn’t like Rescue Dawn. But did like The Prestige and 3:10 to Yuma.

50

[QUOTE=Normmm;409095]I’m with PB on The Machinist. Also didn’t like Rescue Dawn. But did like The Prestige and 3:10 to Yuma.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I don’t understand how anyone could have liked that movie. It was one of those band Memento ripoffs.

51

Wolverine isn’t X3, it’s X4, NWA? When did X3 come out?
And GI Joe should be good, unless they try that Omega 6 crap. I saw that on a Sat. morning 2-3 years ago, & it was a cartoon of toy men, not a cartoon of real men. WTF? And the acting was horrible, not that it takes an acting master to do GI Joe.
Plus the Baroness & Scarlett in Black Leather. YUM-YUM!

52

The plot of T4 is great, I’ve gotten detailed info on it for the paper, I couldn’t make the screening since I’m still at home though.
-I’m going tomorrow at midnight I think, but from the stills and clips I’ve gotten a chance to see this should be great

53

Note - I am not a Trekkie. Just a casual fan.

Star Trek - 2.75 out of 4 stars.

Not a clunker, but unevenly cast and poorly written. Eomer is not Bones, and is trying to play DeForest Kelly instead of McCoy. Every tagline was forced into the story, and it was awkward, and the general plot was really weak, (Spoiler - Highlight following to read) [COLOR=LemonChiffon]and just an excuse to not have continuity problems with the established characters.[/COLOR]

Tension in the movie was all based on fast action scenes, and not the classic slow build tension of the original movies (which I rather missed). This iteration of crewmen are a bunch of adrenaline fueled cowboys (even Spock, comparatively), and the movie suffers, missing the feeling of the classic high seas explorers that the series was based on (and reinforced on the big screen).

Definitely didn’t hate it, but the bottom line is that the script was an exercise in trying to include as many referential line items from focus group sessions as possible, plus the aforementioned continuity exercise. There was no depth to it at all. It felt very Starship Troopers, and less classic character drama set in space.

IMHO - Abrams (sp?) needs to invest some serious effort into the plot and character development of the next script, or this is just going to be another Starship Troopers sequel with a better backstory. They may also have to pull a Batman and recast some of the actors. Karl Urban is not McCoy.

I will say that the new Scotty was refreshing, and likeable. The special effects, are, of course, amazingly polished and pure eye candy.

54

[QUOTE=NinerAdvocate;409913]Note - I am not a Trekkie. Just a casual fan.

Star Trek - 2.75 out of 4 stars.

Not a clunker, but unevenly cast and poorly written. Eomer is not Bones, and is trying to play DeForest Kelly instead of McCoy. Every tagline was forced into the story, and it was awkward, and the general plot was really weak, (Spoiler - Highlight following to read) [COLOR=LemonChiffon]and just an excuse to not have continuity problems with the established characters.[/COLOR]

Tension in the movie was all based on fast action scenes, and not the classic slow build tension of the original movies (which I rather missed). This iteration of crewmen are a bunch of adrenaline fueled cowboys (even Spock, comparatively), and the movie suffers, missing the feeling of the classic high seas explorers that the series was based on (and reinforced on the big screen).

Definitely didn’t hate it, but the bottom line is that the script was an exercise in trying to include as many referential line items from focus group sessions as possible, plus the aforementioned continuity exercise. There was no depth to it at all. It felt very Starship Troopers, and less classic character drama set in space.

IMHO - Abrams (sp?) needs to invest some serious effort into the plot and character development of the next script, or this is just going to be another Starship Troopers sequel with a better backstory. They may also have to pull a Batman and recast some of the actors. Karl Urban is not McCoy.

I will say that the new Scotty was refreshing, and likeable. The special effects, are, of course, amazingly polished and pure eye candy.[/QUOTE]

Interesting. You’re the first person I’ve read who didn’t like Urban’s McCoy. In fact most publications I’ve read praised his performance as the best of the whole movie. My only real issues with the movie was the Nero character was a weakly developed villian with very little dialog and a hollow and forced backstory. Also, Kirk from Cadet to Captain was one of the greatest stretches of rank structure in Star Trek history.

55

Saw a screening of the hangover. Funniest movie I’ve seen in awhile.

56

Wow, really? Will you link one? Cause I am an LotR nerd, so of course I loved Eomer, and I thought Urban stunk in this. He was awful. He was too busy trying to copy Kelly’s speech patterns instead of developing the character.

My only real issues with the movie was the Nero character was a weakly developed villian with very little dialog and a hollow and forced backstory.

You said it better than I did. Terrible plot. Weakest villain since Quantum of Solace.

In 7 minutes?

I thought it felt forced. That whole stretch was what brought on the Starship Troopers references I made.

57

[QUOTE=wayton5646;409926]Saw a screening of the hangover. Funniest movie I’ve seen in awhile.[/QUOTE]

cant wait to see this.

And I cant wait to see UP w/ my son. It’s getting rave reviews, even from adults. Supposed to be the best thing Pixar’s possibly ever done, which is saying something.

58

[QUOTE=NinerAdvocate;409929]cant wait to see this.

[/QUOTE]

me too. what a great concept for a comedy. It’s like a slapstick Memento.

59

I saw Star Trek and Terminator this weekend, both were pretty good I thought, but I enjoyed Terminator more.

Can’t wait to see Hangover also, looks pretty funny.

60

[QUOTE=Sideshow;408800]The one at Discovery Place is Imax Dome (it used to be called Omnimax), not regulation Imax. It’s more cone shaped. Is the one at Stonecrest the same?

Dark Knight only had 1 scene shot with Imax cameras. The rest of it was regular 35mm that was then blown up to Imax gauge. I thought the Imax presentation SUCKED. It wasn’t a film – it was a cheesy rollercoaster at the county fair. Corny and kitschy.

Same thing for Transformers, from what I’ve heard… Bay shot 2 or 3 scenes with the Imax cameras. the rest is traditional 35mm.[/QUOTE]

Actually there were 6 scenes shot with the 70 mm IMAX cameras. Almost 30 minutes of the movie. I definitely wouldn’t have enjoyed the entire movie being shot that way…they chose several action scenes to do it and I thought it was pretty amazing.