*** Official "STAR TREK: NEMESIS" Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Lou Sytsma]

It's what I feared then:
http://linux10985.dn.net/display.cgi?id=14008
The horror of it is I will go to see this in the theatre like a ghoul who has to look at a car wreck.
Totally sad.

 

[JohnS]

The trailers don't look that great.
which really makes me not pre-liking this movie.
But alas, I will go see it.
Like I've been saying all along...
They need Star Trek Q movie.
I think it would be really interesting to bring Q into a STG movie

 

[Sean Laughter]

This is the man that loved Phantom Menace (Jar Jar in particular) and Armageddon. Fortunately for him the only other "geek" movie this season is "Two Towers" which it will definately be "safe" for him to praise. I'll take my chances with the film. The whole thing sounds so bitter and juvenile I can't help but sit there wondering why I'm reading a review that a freshman high school student could make more interesting and relevant.

 

[Robin Warren]

Harry made some pretty good points in my opinion. He knows movies, I'll give him that, but his taste is very suspect. He rarely slams a movie and that in itself makes me worry about the new Trek flick.

 

[Greg_S_H]

While I disagree with you about TPM, I do agree that I wouldn't take Knowles's word for it. I'm not going to bother reading his review (but, mainly because I know little about the movie and don't want it spoiled). The trailers look okay, and I like how they are setting up the "opposites" theme with Picard/main villain and Data/Lore. Hopefully, that will pan out. Either way, I'll go see it.

 

[Malcolm R]

The only ones I've heard with anything positive to say about "Nemesis" are the cast, and they're being paid to do so. :frowning:
Sad, because "Nemesis" was going to be my weekend flick. Guess I'll catch something else instead.

 

[Kristian]

The only ones I've heard with anything positive to say about "Nemesis" are the cast

Here's a positive review of the movie:
Hollywood Reporter review (possible spoilers)
I for one will be there on Friday. I'm not going to let one bad review (from Harry Knowles, of all people) keep me from seeing a movie I've been waiting years for.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

The horror of it is that people now take Knowles's opinion seriously enough to decide the fate of a franchise. He's probably just upset that Stuart Baird didn't fly him to the premiere or some other extravagancy like too many other directors do. (You can tell I like the guy, can't you?)

 

[Michael St. Clair]

When I hear of a bad Knowles review of a movie, I immediately assume that they wouldn't invite him for a VIP tour of the set and shooting.

If HTF members give Knowles' opinion alone any credibility, then HTF members just lost a lot of respect from me.

 

[Sean Laughter]

Come to think of it, I didn't see him anywhere in the footage from the premiere so he apparently didn't go, figures.

 

[Romier S]

An excerpt:

Because STAR TREK fucking deserves better than this shit. Because this shit is just awful. Because this doesn’t work. For brief moments we have cool space stuff, and woo hoo, COOL SPACE STUFF, but god damn it, let’s have some decent character work

Or how about some decent writing? My god how did a man with the mental capactity of 12 year old get to a position where people actually take his nonsensical drivel seriously (here or in Hollywood!).

To hell with the Star Trek review here. I could care less what he says about it because I can't get past the pedestrian writing that looks as if it were written by some child on a Usenet. This is what many people actually consider a "professional" reviewer? UGH.

 

[Seth_S]

Harry is the comic book guy from The Simpsons. Besides having quite possibly the worst taste in print, anything he doesn't like is "worst.movie.ever".
Personally, I have no grand expectations for this film, (especially after the last Trek feature), but I'll see it anyway.

 

[doug zdanivsky]

To hell with the Star Trek review here. I could care less what he says about it because I can't get past the pedestrian writing that looks as if it were written by some child on a Usenet. This is what many people actually consider a "professional" reviewer? UGH.

Agreed. I'm assuming this is an excerpt from the review mentioned in the original post. If that's the case, I won't bother reading it in full. I'll wait for the EW review, they're usually pretty good.

I'll see it, anyway, in either case. You can read all the reviews you want, it's still someone else's opinion!

 

[Todd K]

The problem is, I find myself agreeing with Knowles on exactly which Star Trek movies were the worst (mostly generations, since everyone knows 5 and 9 sucked), and which characters/actors aren't living up to their potential.

The Hollywood Reporter's review sounds better. That'll be the last one I let myself read. It will be nice to go into the theater on a high note.

 

[Tom Ryan]

I think most of the people ragging on Knowles in this thread should really do their homework on the man. Yeah, he can be childish at times, but he likes what he likes and he writes accordingly. Harry does not consider himself a professional, he considers himself a fan. His writing is very stream-of-consciousness, almost like he was telling it to the person next to him. Whether he gets invited to premieres or not has nothing to do with how he reviews the film.
Case in point: Knowles had the opportunity to go to the New York premiere of The Two Towers, but he wanted to see it with fans. So he passed up the chance, and he gave it to one lucky guy from the chat channel that AICN runs. I know this guy, and he was absolutely ecstatic when Harry offered him this opportunity. He's a huge fan of LOTR who got to take six friends to the premiere of TTT, all because of Harry's generosity. You can read all about this, the story's posted on the main page on www.aint-it-cool-news.com
So, maybe you should investigate a little before jumping to conclusions. Incidentally, I'd like to see any one of you write a film review that's as entertaining or as heartfelt as the stuff Harry writes. I may not agree with his taste in movies all the time, but I appreciate his enthusiasm.

 

[Adam_S]

Wow a lot of people hate Harry Knowles. I don't really see any reason why to, sure his writing is not the sanitized schooled prose of Owen Gleiberman, but then Harry liked O Brother Where Art Thou?, but Gleiberman had the enlightened opinion that it was the worst film of the year.

Give the man a break, he created a successful carrer for himself out of his love for movies, not too bad for a guy that couldn't move out of his Texas basement.

Harry very rarely slams a film, if he doesn't like it he doesn't review it, look at the recent reviews, he hits a few of the major blockbusters, and his favorite directors but he reviews a lot of things major critics don't either. he reviews one or two movies every couple weeks, if he really loves a movie, really hates it there will be a review, and if he felt it could have been much better he will also do a review (Bloodwork, the only lukewarm review I've read of his)

OH yeah he slams every movie when he's not given a set visit. Lesse I can think of exactly three visits I've heard of in the last two years and all of those were because he was good friends with the director anyway. There was LOTR the last ten days (which I think is half because Harry and Peter Jackson are the two biggest king kong worshippers in the world, and just wanted to meet), Kill Bill - Harry and Quentin have been friends for quite a while because of their love of bizzarre genres and awful exploitation flicks and a willingness to champion those films. and Spy Kids 2 and I think that's because he and Rodriguez are extremely good friends, he won't even review any of Rodriguez's films because of it. Wait, there was also Monkeybone set visit, but when that film came out he slammed it, yup he's just the voicepiece of the studios puppeting what they tell him.

I generally enjoy reading Knowles' reviews, his comments are occasionally spot on (except for Spielberg, whom he won't give a chance b/c he can't let go of that 75-87 period and move beyond it, IMO), and I sought out Gems like Almost Famous and Requiem for a Dream becauseof him. regardless of whether or not his grammer or diction is as refined as EW or HTF, there is real passion in his reviews when he loves a film, and that comes through. More than any other critic I can think of, Harry Knowles loves film, good films, 'bad' films, old films new films, and films nobody's ever heard of (and some you don't want to). I get the feeling that he sees almost all the movies he does with a truly open mind to whether the film is good or bad.

just to back up my reputation, Knowles is only one of many critic I read, but a passionate entreaty about a film from him is much more meaningful than an A grade from Entertainment Weekly.

right now this thread sounds like a refined version of "HaRy NollS sCKs Cuz he liKEd ArmgDOn and Jar JAr. Yo R so Stpid NoLs, you Write Lik crap hahahah, you R suc a StdIO BitcH and R jus pissed cuz you didn't Go to the prmeir!!" In other words like one of AICN talkbacks but with more education

As to his being mad because he didn't go to the premier, well he gave away 6 tickets to the TTT premier, and didn't see it with the Austin press so he could see it with his family and buddies, yup he's just capitalizing on his 15 minutes of fame...

 

[Craig P]

I seem to recall Harry absolutely savaging Rollerball, despite getting a special junket to NYC to see it.

 

[Scott Weinberg]

I won't comment on my opinion of Knowles, but I saw Nemesis and it's pretty darn weak.

Not ONE of the Next Generation movies is as entertaining as any random episode of the TV show. Great show, though.

 

[Robert Crawford]

This thread is now designated the Official Discussion Thread for "Star Trek: Nemesis". Please, post all comments, links to outside reviews, film and box office discussion items to this thread.
All HTF member film reviews of "Star Trek: Nemesis" should be posted to the Official Review Thread.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Crawdaddy

 

[Adam_S]

This is the struggle of genius to weather hell. The pursuit of a dream through the darkest recesses of the human existence. THE PIANIST is a towering work of genius, breathtaking at each and every corner it takes.
Seeing what he saw, being told by a filmmaker that was there, a filmmaker that would not blink or fail to show the depths that man could sink. This isn’t the story of the noble Jew enduring the Nazi torments… This film shows that starving hordes would rip a bowl of soup from a woman’s hands to lick the spilt soup from the street as it flowed into the gutter. This shows how humans were made inhuman. It is a wonder that on the other side, any survivor could ever readjust. It wasn’t just what the Nazis did, but what they did to themselves. This film shows that not every Jew went softly, that not every Polish person ignored it, that not every Nazi hated the Jews. This film is about laying one man’s life down as to how it went.
Movies are not getting worse, audiences are. Films like this one don’t deserve to be hidden in the dank recesses of College Theaters, they deserve to be seen at a theater near each and every single one of us. This is a huge story, and just because it isn’t being told by a Steven Spielberg, doesn’t mean it isn’t an absolutely arresting film experience worthy of being seen by everyone on this planet. The fact that it won’t, is just another testament to just how fucked up the film industry, the distribution system, the advertising and the audiences of film can be.
Absolutely the best film I’ve seen this year to date.