haladay

When my friend and I rented this movie, we sat down with the intent that it was going to make fun of trekkies. But after watching it, my opinion actually changed about them. And for the better.

This movie not only shows the fans, but it talks about the culture itself. I ended up actually respecting the Gene Roddenberry trekkies because Roddenberry wanted an upbeat future. Something where humanity was actually better over all. And the fans that followed his idea are very friendly and accepting. Even the ones that emulate the war like Klingons are still a lot more friendly than other sci fi fans you will meet.

I'm not saying all of the fans are like this. I've met some of the more egotistical ones, but that is mainly on the inet where you have a tendency to run into people that have very little social skills. But the people in this movie are actually quite normal! As for the movie, Denise Crosby does a great job as both host and interviewer. She asked questions in a non-biased way, which is the most we could want in a reporter.

I liked Star Trek: The Next Generation but not the other series in the franchise so I wouldn't call myself a trekkie. I never went to a convention and don't plan on ever. So this movie was an eye opener. I'll deal with theses Roddenberry fans over any other TV show fanatics any day of the week. In fact, I'll take these fans over sports fans as well. Trek may be dorkie, but I never heard of a trekkie booing the first black Star Trek actor like Philly fans did to Jackie Robinson in baseball.

Oh, and as a side note. During the Klingon language class scene, my friend and I had to stop the tape and rewind to watch it again. The one woman in the class was hot. We were dumbstruck by the fact that an attractive female was trying to learn Klingon :P

What I got out of this movie was that his idea was that Capitalism is detrimental to democracy. He did have good points but there were some flaws.

It came off as saying that capitalism is all out bad, he even had priest going against it. That would be like saying money is evil. both aren't necessarily evil, they just make people do evil things. Communism's downfall is sloth, Capitalism's downfall is greed. Both systems can work if you control these flaws. Since both are deadly sins, it would have been good to see it addressed with the priests but it wasn't. So it does feel like some of the focus is misplaced and that is something I felt watching the movie.

But he was right about many things, that democracy is hurt by capitalism, as he showed with the democrats switching on the wall street bail out last year. There was also many fine examples of how we as people, are nothing more than numbers, and in some cases, commodities to corporations (ie corp. taking out life insurance policies and the Wilkes-Barre children prison incident) where we are investments or even worth more dead to the company.

He doesn't offer a new system instead of capitalism, just reminds us that it is our right to stand up against such injustices. As was pointed out, they have the money to buy politicians, but we are the majority and its still one person, one vote.

First I want to talk about why I liked White Castle. It didn't try to be an emotional ride, it was simply 2 guys going from point A to point B. That's it, that simple. It focused more on the different events the 2 run into on the road to White Castle. I liked it for it. Sometimes you want a deep plot, great action sequences, round characters, and sometimes you just want to let your brain veg out and watch a low brow comedy. The later is what White Castle is.

This second one tried too hard to top the first. They stuck a love story that wasn't very original. The plot, dialog, and characters felt different, like another group of writers who never saw the first wrote it. The gags and jokes were more intended to offend and shock than to make you laugh. I sat there in the theater and felt like the writers were huge Howard Stern fans and were trying to pay his style and humor homage any chance they could at the cost of a better joke. Too often a scene feels like its going to be good but then they disjoint any sense of comedic timing with some needless sex visual.

Harold and Kumar is supposed to be a stoner comedy, not a sex comedy.

When I first watched it, I was so so. Then I grew to dislike it (Jar Jar) but after watching the 3 prequel movies again, i grown to appreciate this movie more. It feels more like the original series than episode 2 or 3 did.

The Darth Maul battle scene was the best fight scene of any of the movies. The pod racing scene, while it may feel like it was put in to sell a tie on video game, had a nice roman chariot feel to it. It spaced out the action scenes enough so that we could take a breather, and process what we saw. Too often, I've seen action sequences in movies go on longer than that rush of adrenaline you get from watching them. In other movies, they pack them in to close to each other. This ends up taking some of the effect it has on the audience. These kinds of things I didn't notice the 1st time I watched because I wasn't watching for the mechanics, I was watching for the story.

Yes, Jar Jar Binks is annoying. I still cringe every time I hear him say, "ex-squeeze me" or "how rude." Some of the actors come off as kind of wooden. Natalie Portman was the only one that seemed to show any real emotion. Other faults of the movie are found in the original series. Such as the dialog. This stuff isn't going to win an award, but its amazing how Star Wars quotes are probably the most recognizable quotes of any movie.

As for flow, I felt it was just right. You can almost track the 3 act formula by what planet they were on like the original. For Phantom Menace, Act 1 was Naboo, Act 2 was Tatooine, Act 3 was the return to Naboo. For A New Hope, Act one was Tatooine, Act 2 was the Death Star, and Act 3 was the space fight around the Death Star. Empire Strikes back had Hoth as Act 1, Yoda's place as Act 2, and Act 3 was Cloud City. Finally Return of the Jedi's Act one was Tatooine, Act 2 was Yoda's place, and Act 3 was the Endor Area.

Basic point is that the simple selection of locations helped carry the story along. Episode 2 and 3 kind of got bogged down by forcing the characters all over the universe which ended up adding in more to the storyline than was really needed. You already have a large cast of characters, there is no need to add a large set of locations.

For me, this movie would have gotten a higher score of 6 but, like I said, Jar Jar was annoying, and some of the actors just didn't seem into the their characters. But of the 3 prequels, I find myself watching this one the most.

I hate reality shows. Always have and I probably always will. Hated Survivor since the 1st 5 seconds I watched of it. Came off as corny. Was forced to watch it again because my friends were addicts of it and that didn't change my opinion of it. The FOX goes and makes 20 of these every season. Remember Murder in Small town X or ever it was called? Cancelled after what, 2 episodes. Point is, the reality show is over done, specially the reality game show.

This said, I liked Hell's Kitchen. For once the contestants are involved with something that the viewers can relate to, working in a hot kitchen with a boss yelling down at us every chance he gets. The "we can relate" factor is very high in this show.

And Ramsey may be an jerk in the kitchen, but i get a little smile every time a customer is yelled at by him. It can warm the heart of anyone one that has had to deal with customers in a restaurant or retail job.

I liked this version. Sutherland and Hurt were good in this. In the beginning the acting seemed kind of bad but Alex Newman did a great job in this. For me, he really saved the beginning. I never saw the DeNero version so I can't say anything about it but I did see the Boris version and I did read the book and I have to say that it did impress me.Hurt was good, Goss was good, Sutherland was good,but Newman really made this movie I think. As for people saying that the dialog was annoying, it was annoying in the book too. Slow scenes were the same in the book. All in all, it was a good screening of the book. I liked having an articulate creature, it was how I pictured in while reading it. If the other actors had better acting in it, It would have raised the 'out of 10' rating for me.