Search results

Nah, it's Gillian. I never hated a "Trek" character more than I hated her! :D

Like hell it didn't! :D

Yeah, worldwide the 2009 and 2016 films were pretty close. Granted, "Beyond" cost $35m more, but it's still not an enormous difference. "Beyond" looks like a "bomb" mainly if we remain US-centric, since 2009 beat it by $100m here. However, "Beyond" made nearly $60m more overseas...

Zero reason to do that - again, especially because they already have "TMNT" due 9/20. Not that a studio can't/won't release two big movies on the same day, but it doesn't make any logical sense. Even if they'd wanted to put out "Trek" on 9/20, why announce it last minute? As I noted, "TMNT"...

Zero percent chance the Blu-ray comes out 9/20. What is Paramount gonna do, announce it Tuesday? Have they ever announced a major title two weeks in advance? They've already sent out review copies of "TMNT" - there's no way they're gonna drop "Trek" last minute. They want time for...

It's also only 2.5 weeks before 9/20. Would Paramount announce the title so close to street? Very unlikely. Besides, they already have "TMNT: Out of the Shadows" on 9/20. Which they announced 8/2...

In regard to "Alice", it "looks like" a flop more than "Beyond" because of how the prior film performed. "Alice in Wonderland", made more than a billion dollars worldwide, and "Looking Glass" ended up with less than 30 percent of its take - even with somewhat higher ticket prices. That's a...

Calling "Cleopatra" a "flop" due to the budget is ridiculous. It was the highest-grossing movie of the year! Again: a popular movie shouldn't be called a "flop" because it comes with an inflated budget. It might be unprofitable but when a movie is the biggest hit of its year, it makes no...

I don't view budget as an indicator of a "flop". I mean, if someone spent $2 billion to make a movie and it earned $1 billion, would that make it a flop? No - it'd be unprofitable, but at some point, box office take trumps profits in terms of declaring something to be a "flop". The same goes...

So in other places, "museum IMAX screens" don't get IMAX feature films until a few weeks after initial release date? We get 'em same date here in DC - maybe because "museum IMAX" is the only true IMAX we have!

I also loathe shakycam - which is why I was surprised to hear comments about the camerawork. As I noted, I'm pretty vulnerable to motion sickness, and that wasn't an issue at all for me. I also didn't think the camerawork was excessively "shaky". Maybe I've been beaten down by too much...

I don't think Kirk was "bored" with the journey - I think he was questioning the point. Space is endless and I think the enormity of the job weighed on him - he felt like there was no way he could ever "complete" the task and frustrated with the never-ending journey. I did think it was a...

No problem for me on that front! I've gotten sick at a few movies - found footage usually, plus Greengrass flicks, "Speed 2" and "Battle: LA" - but didn't feel at all googly this time. Honestly, I didn't even notice the camerawork! :)

Agree - if I hadn't entered the movie with the notion that Sulu was gay, I really doubt I would've interpreted the character that way. There's nothing about the interactions between Sulu and his partner that seem "romantic" - or more than just pals/siblins, really...

I think that if "Trek" wanted to have a gay character, they could've been less on the nose about it. Picking the character played by the TOS' gay actor seems kinda dopey to me - make it Scotty or Chekov or even Bones. I think they also thought it'd be less "controversial" to use Sulu because...