First Contact is a terrible Star Trek film, and utter garbage TNG film. TFF and TVH are masterpieces compared to this. Though it's better than Nemesis.
Speaking of "Star Trek V: The Final Frontier": this is not a bad film. It has some iffy special effects in places and that nightmarish naked Uhura dancing, but it has a lot of good things going for it. And I think I'm the only person who undetstood the film, or at least I found deeper meaning to the Sybok plot of the film than was actually planned.
And since I'm on a Trek role: "Generations is the best TNG film. Superior in about every aspect I can come up with (except scoring; I think this and the next two TNG films, all have great scores and therefore I won't hold one up above the others).
And bodly going forward with more Trek (even though it's TV and not film): The "Star Trek: the Next Generation" episode "Code of Honor", is the most Godwaful TV Trek episode ever. Yes -- WORSE than "Spock's Brain".
"The Matrix" was good andh and had so much promise. The sequels were utter crap.
I don't entirely agree, but you're certainly not far off in your assessment of these generally quite overrated movies...nice to know it's not just me!
The first was rife with espionage/amnesia clichés, and the second and third ones were RUINED by Paul Greengrass' hideous camerawork. At last the fourth one actually looked like a FILM instead of your jittery home movies from 1987. I can't understand why they were so successful.
The first was rife with espionage/amnesia clichés, and the second and third ones were RUINED by Paul Greengrass' hideous camerawork. At last the fourth one actually looked like a FILM instead of your jittery home movies from 1987. I can't understand why they were so successful.
To me it felt they got right what the bond movies were doing wrong during that era.
I don't entirely agree, but you're certainly not far off in your assessment of these generally quite overrated movies...nice to know it's not just me!
The first was rife with espionage/amnesia clichés, and the second and third ones were RUINED by Paul Greengrass' hideous camerawork. At last the fourth one actually looked like a FILM instead of your jittery home movies from 1987. I can't understand why they were so successful.
Couldn't agree more. the first one was fun and a good little spy thriller. 2 and 3 look like they were filmed by an epileptic. Some of the worst camera work I have ever seen. Took away any and all enjoyment from the films.
