Bear with me, you may enjoy some of this post even if you're not a fan of Star Trek.
Yeah, I know I haven't been posting on my blog much lately. Part of that comes from work related craziness, but most of it comes from personal and creative issues that have occurred. I'll just leave it at that for now.
Most of that is behind me, now. I've got a few reviews I need to post, and some ruminations on writing (under the "Way of the Writer" subtitle) . . . but for today, I've got something important to talk about:
Star Trek.
I'm going to see it tomorrow at 7:00 in IMAX. Seeing Dark Knight in IMAX was an amazing experience. So amazing, in fact, that I have not rewatched the movie since. Yeah, it was a great movie. Amazing. Near genius. But . . . I'm afraid to watch it on my little living room TV, with the possiblity that I'd sully the IMAX experience.
With Star Trek, I'll be seeing it again regardless. In three weeks, I'm getting together with some friends from high school for a special reunion: seeing the new Star Trek movie. I'm not sure if I'm the only one from the group jumping the gun to see it early . . . but, it's only in IMAX for two weeks.
Anyway, to get ready for Star Trek here's some fun Trek related videos. Enjoy!
(BTW, I've decided I'm a Trekster, not a Trekkie or a Trekker. Why? I just think that Trekster sounds, at the same time, both COOLER and GEEKIER than Trekkie or Trekker.Why else? I just rewatched the movie Trekkies, where they debate the two terms and frankly, I think it's all a bit silly.)
First, some context -- an awesome preview of the new Trek movie:
So, next, a video from The Onion that sharply parodies the actual reactions some Trekkies and Trekkers have about this new Star Trek movie:
Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable'
Sadly, I've read and heard some people saying things just like that. I'm just hoping for a fun filled, optimistic sci-fi action movie.
Next, we have a re-enactment of a classic scene from the best (second best, depending on my mood) Star Trek movie, the Wrath of Kahn, as performed by a Kindle and an iPod Shuffle:
Talking Gadget Theater has more scenes from other movies. I find it pretty fun and funny.
Finally, we have the Burger King "When Kingons Attack" website, which I found funny and disturbing (everything with the Burger King guy is just plain disturbing). It's college humor, and took me back to the days of purple nurples, atomic wedgies, and such . . .
The Kingon Defense Academy.
So anyway, last night I curled up for a nice episode of Fringe (created by J.J. Abrams), tonight I'll curl up fur a nice episode of Lost (created by J.J. Abrams), and tomorrow I'll not be curling up (unless I have a row to myself) for the Star Trek movie (directed by J.J. Abrams). When did this Abrams guy become the gatekeeper for stuff I like?
~ Ben
Showing posts with label science fiction. Show all posts
Showing posts with label science fiction. Show all posts
May 22, 2008
Nano Film Review #12 -- Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Lost Skull
Hm.
Yes.
So I went to the midnight show. For Narnia, I felt old. I did not go to the MIDNIGHT show, I went to the NOON show. Weak!
This time I powered through. I'd never seen Indy on the big screen. This was my chance.
My thoughts on the film? It was good. It was a good Indiana Jones movie. Lots of action. Funny one liners. A few references to George Lucas movies (American Graffiti and Star Wars both come to mind -- watch for a classic Harrison Ford line). Absurd getaways. Classic cliffhanger serial style. Fun. It was by the numbers. If I were to rate all the Indiana Jones movies (like a good geek does), this would come third.
Shia Lebeouf wasn't bad. His character actually had some genuine emotional moments, and while he wasn't a buffoon he was impulsive and caused problems. That worked for me. It was fun to see Karen Allen return as Indy's old flame from the first movie, and it seemed like she had more to do in this one. Marcus Brody gets in a good shot at stopping the bad guys without even really being in the film. And Harrison Ford, well, I've never not liked him in a movie.
But overall, the movie felt flat. And I can't place my finger on why. I don't think it was the climax (for those haters of the climax, remember that a 500 year old knight showed up at the end of the third movie). It might have been the exposition that was horribly spelled out at the end (really, that was the best you could do to explain things to the audience that they'd mostly figured out already?). It just felt like they were going through the motions.
So . . . overall, a fun movie. But little more than that.
Ah, but . . . the denouement got me worried for a moment. It was a nice moment, and then something happened that you just about cringe for, but in true Indiana Jones fashion, at the last second Indy swoops in and saves the day. Or moment. Or whatever.
~ Ben
SPOILER (although if you know anything about the movie, you already know about this):
Indiana Jones and Han Solo are now part of the same universe. My theory about the movie linking the two was correct.
Kingdom of the lost Skull features aliens who look like the aliens in Close Encounters of the Third Kind.
Close Encounters of the Third Kind was followed by a "sort of" sequel in E.T. (To me, E.T. was the sequel to Close Encounters, if not literally than "spiritually".)
E.T.-like creatures were in Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace.
And Han Solo is in the Star Wars universe.
A stretch? Heck yeah! But a little fun, if lame.
Yes.
So I went to the midnight show. For Narnia, I felt old. I did not go to the MIDNIGHT show, I went to the NOON show. Weak!
This time I powered through. I'd never seen Indy on the big screen. This was my chance.
My thoughts on the film? It was good. It was a good Indiana Jones movie. Lots of action. Funny one liners. A few references to George Lucas movies (American Graffiti and Star Wars both come to mind -- watch for a classic Harrison Ford line). Absurd getaways. Classic cliffhanger serial style. Fun. It was by the numbers. If I were to rate all the Indiana Jones movies (like a good geek does), this would come third.
Shia Lebeouf wasn't bad. His character actually had some genuine emotional moments, and while he wasn't a buffoon he was impulsive and caused problems. That worked for me. It was fun to see Karen Allen return as Indy's old flame from the first movie, and it seemed like she had more to do in this one. Marcus Brody gets in a good shot at stopping the bad guys without even really being in the film. And Harrison Ford, well, I've never not liked him in a movie.
But overall, the movie felt flat. And I can't place my finger on why. I don't think it was the climax (for those haters of the climax, remember that a 500 year old knight showed up at the end of the third movie). It might have been the exposition that was horribly spelled out at the end (really, that was the best you could do to explain things to the audience that they'd mostly figured out already?). It just felt like they were going through the motions.
So . . . overall, a fun movie. But little more than that.
Ah, but . . . the denouement got me worried for a moment. It was a nice moment, and then something happened that you just about cringe for, but in true Indiana Jones fashion, at the last second Indy swoops in and saves the day. Or moment. Or whatever.
~ Ben
SPOILER (although if you know anything about the movie, you already know about this):
Indiana Jones and Han Solo are now part of the same universe. My theory about the movie linking the two was correct.
Kingdom of the lost Skull features aliens who look like the aliens in Close Encounters of the Third Kind.
Close Encounters of the Third Kind was followed by a "sort of" sequel in E.T. (To me, E.T. was the sequel to Close Encounters, if not literally than "spiritually".)
E.T.-like creatures were in Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace.
And Han Solo is in the Star Wars universe.
A stretch? Heck yeah! But a little fun, if lame.
May 13, 2008
Are We Alone?
Interestingly, just yesterday (I think -- may have been this morning) I heard a kindly yet authoritative voice on the radio saying that, essentially, there can be no life on any planet other than earth because the Bible says God created life on earth and earth only.
Sigh.
Just cut off a bunch of science fiction at the knees, there, guys . . .
Yes, the Bible does not mention alien life from other planets. And that's supposed to mean it doesn't exist? I mean, the Bible also doesn't mention that Jesus smiled, so does that mean he never did? (Actually . . . some people have said this.)
I know, I know . . . they aren't just coming from the words on the page, they are also saying that earth is created to be a unique place in our universe -- the home of humanity and, therefore, the home of Christ: God in flesh.
And I do believe that God created earth to be unique. And it is a special place.
But to say, definitively and authoritatively that he created this ginormous universe and did not create any other life at all in it is, well, a little like putting God in a box.
Ironically, today I found this article from the Associated Press, which states that the Vatican has said that it's okay to believe in aliens and that you can believe in God and aliens.
Now, I don't know what's true or not. I don't know how many aliens can dance on a pinhead.
But I do know that God has created an amazing universe. A beautiful universe. A universe with more secrets than we will ever know. A universe he wants us to learn about and explore and observe. A universe populated with fleshy beings and spiritual beings and fleshy spiritual beings (to put in a nutshell the classifications of the Classical thinkers).
And there just might be some little green men out there who are worshipping God in their own, strange way, discussing the possibility (or impossibility) of life on other planets.
~ Ben
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)