If you won't recognize the Kirk reference when a character uses unnecessary tumbling to evade a phaser blast, the Riker reference when a character cockily puts one foot up on a rock and leans forward in a way that screams ego, or the Scotty reference when a character says the job is going to take 4 hours when he knows it will only take two then you're probably going to find this show stupid, lame and pointless.
If you've watched and rewatched multiple Star Trek series and laugh at memes that your non-trekker friends don't understand then you should love this show. Every episode is filled with Easter eggs and in-jokes. We even have Star Trek the Animated Series references.
Reviews
5 Reviews
Star Trek: Lower Decks
(2020–2024)
You'll love this show unless you don't know enough Trek to get the in-jokes.
18 September 2020
What was I thinking even bothering to watch Jet Li in another U.S. film?
1 August 2008
So, for some reason I had moderately high hopes for this installment of The Mummy. For one thing, I was sort of expecting it to be mostly "Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" that was just using the hype of The Mummy franchise to market it... oh how wrong I was. This movie is such a complete waste of Asian talent, it is like buying an imported, antique, Chinese dinner table, setting some Ikea chairs around it, throwing on a Martha Stewart K-Mart table cloth and topping the whole thing off with place settings made by Chinette and Dixie. I'm sure no one needs any convincing that Jet Li and Michelle Yeoh can do action scenes without the use of elaborate editing and camera angle tricks. I get the impression, however, that Rob Cohen has never seen Hero or Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon like the other 90% of American movie goers. Even in fight sequences involving only Li and Yeoh we see nothing but the same short-cut editing and extreme closeups used to make Brendan Frasier look like he can fight. Wait, no, I take that back. The Frasier fight scenes were actually better edited. Apparently the team knows how to film bar-brawl choreography. In other complaints: When did George Lucas become the role-model for script writing? When you have poor dialogue there is only so much that can be done to salvage your performance. Natalie Portman could do little to compensate for it in Revenge of the Sith and Yeoh and Li can do little with it here. As for Frasier, well, his goofy expressions were about all I expected of him anyway. As for Isabella Leong in her U.S. debut - sorry sister, I hope you get another opportunity to show us what you can do, because from this audition we're not getting much. Besides the dialogue we still have nothing. What little chemistry we got from Frasier and Weisz in the original installments is completely missing here. With the role of Mrs. O'Connell picked up by Maria Bello (who actually can act, check her out in History of Violence for one of the... well, for a memorable sex scene) we have absolutely zero chemistry between the couple, despite the middle school idea of romance they attempt to portray. Also consider the evil villain we have wasted. We start with probably one of the most documented evil dudes in history and we reduce him to a less dimensional monster than what we find in rubber suits. So much more can be said about the complete banality of this movie. CGI that belonged in Ice Age with a dragon that is way too reminiscent of King Ghidorrah, and a plot that is just.. nothing, it's the plot of the second movie, but less inspired. I was actually bored. Even with all the ways you expect and allow for a movie such as The Mummy: whatever to fail, you at least expect to be "entertained." This movie does not. My advice: If you are looking for something to watch when your showing of The Dark Knight is sold out, just go see Step Brothers, at least that movie is funny.
The Warlords
(2007)
In Chinese, Jet Li can act.
20 May 2008
In "The Warlords," another rendition of the classic Chinese tale of loyalty and betrayal of three brothers, we see evidence of something many may not realize: when not hampered by his horrible accent, Jet Li can act, in fact, for this role he received an Asian Film Award nomination for Best Actor. He may not be a Deniro or a Denzel, but he's at least got that certain intensity that makes Clint Eastwood. We do not, however, get to see what American audiences know Li for, his martial arts prowess. As winner of the Hong Kong Film Awards both for best film and best director, Peter Chan ("The Eye," 1 through infinity it seems), we see here an exemplary piece of cinema which demonstrates the high quality of movies coming from China today. The cinematography is well done, costumes are excellent, epic battle sequences are choreographed beautifully and the characters and complex character relationships are well developed, sincere and sympathetic. In addition to Li, we see moving performances by Andy Lau, a winner of numerous Asian film awards, and Takeshi Kaneshiro, both who Americans may know from "The House of Flying Daggers." If you are looking for a "Jet Li movie" you may likely find yourself bored. Despite the war background of this movie it is, at heart, a drama, and a very good one at that.
http://zombiehor.de/
http://zombiehor.de/
Pretty, but lacking substance
20 May 2008
No complaints can be made about the technical aspects of this second installment to C. S. Lewis's The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian. The animation was good to excellent, costumes were well done (if uninspired), sets were good and cinematography was done well. Little complaints can be made about the acting; many of the supporting cast were excellent, including the despicable Miraz (veteran Italian actor Sergio Castellitto in his English debut) and the-grump-with-a-heart-of-gold, Trumpkin (Peter Dinklage of 2007's "Death at a Funeral"). Prince Caspian (relative newcomer Ben Barnes of 2007's "Stardust") performed well and even managed a sufficiently convincing Castilian accent. The only notable weak point in the cast was Lucy (what can I say, Georgie Henley is no Dakota Fanning). However, this movie just leaves the viewer uninspired. Even with almost 2.5 hours at his disposal this Oscar-Nominated writer/director fails to manage sufficient character development, many motivations were unclear and in the end you just didn't feel for the characters what they obviously wanted you to. On the other hand, my hunch is that if you're between the ages of 10 and 15, and especially if you're also a girl (Prince Caspian is pretty easy on the eyes), you'll love it so much that you'll see it multiple times, dragging your friends along with you, and come this fall you'll even buy the licensed trapper keeper.
http://zombiehor.de/
http://zombiehor.de/
Pathfinder
(2007)
The Worst Movie I've Ever Been Dumb Enough to Pay to See
14 April 2007
If for any crazy reason you saw a trailer for Pathfinder and thought, "hey, cool, a viking movie!" stop right there. This movie totally blew; it blew long and hard and I got no satisfaction from it at all. I actually found myself thinking, "hmm.... should we just leave?" I've never walked out of a movie theater, I still haven't, but that was the closest I've ever come.
The good parts- There was a scene where a guy got his face slashed and the eyeball fell out onto the ground and stared up at him... that was kinda cool. The viking costumes were kinda cool too. There was some good cinematography though- which leads me to the bad parts.
The bad parts- The editing was absolutely abysmal. My 6 year old niece could've done better with some safety shears and a roll of scotch tape. There were these massive avalanche scenes and some nice panoramic shots that quite obviously did not come from the same stock as the rest of the movie (picture Ed Wood's stampeding buffalo) Most of the fight scenes were so badly edited you weren't sure who was slashing whom and if a hit was palpable or not. In one Ramboesque sequence I wasn't sure if there were 3 guys or 21 guys that all looked like the same three guys. The score, while not technically horrible in its own rite, did absolutely nothing to convey the story. Character development was mediocre when it wasn't null. Acting- bad to horrible- though in some cases I wasn't sure if it was the fault of the actors so much as the Lucas quality script. Did I mention the horrible washed out filters they used? For a while I thought maybe I was watching a cam of the movie. I can see why they used the filters they used, to a point, all the snow scenes could have gotten overwhelmingly bright; that's why you add some color though- or at least you should. Even some face paint or blood or something.
Anyway, that's my rant.
The good parts- There was a scene where a guy got his face slashed and the eyeball fell out onto the ground and stared up at him... that was kinda cool. The viking costumes were kinda cool too. There was some good cinematography though- which leads me to the bad parts.
The bad parts- The editing was absolutely abysmal. My 6 year old niece could've done better with some safety shears and a roll of scotch tape. There were these massive avalanche scenes and some nice panoramic shots that quite obviously did not come from the same stock as the rest of the movie (picture Ed Wood's stampeding buffalo) Most of the fight scenes were so badly edited you weren't sure who was slashing whom and if a hit was palpable or not. In one Ramboesque sequence I wasn't sure if there were 3 guys or 21 guys that all looked like the same three guys. The score, while not technically horrible in its own rite, did absolutely nothing to convey the story. Character development was mediocre when it wasn't null. Acting- bad to horrible- though in some cases I wasn't sure if it was the fault of the actors so much as the Lucas quality script. Did I mention the horrible washed out filters they used? For a while I thought maybe I was watching a cam of the movie. I can see why they used the filters they used, to a point, all the snow scenes could have gotten overwhelmingly bright; that's why you add some color though- or at least you should. Even some face paint or blood or something.
Anyway, that's my rant.
Tell Your Friends