Jump to content

Samlingstråd för Star Trek-recensioner


Recommended Posts

I den här tråden kan vi lägga in alla både utländska och svenska recensioner som har börjat komma in.

Och de första är mycket positiva :)

The Australian kallar filmen för "an intelligent triumph". Inget betyg och inga spoilers, men recensionen ligger ändå i en spoilerbox, eftersom den är ganska lång.

First review: New Star Trek is an intelligent triumph

Ian Cuthbertson | April 08, 2009

Article from: The Australian

ASKED by Paramount to revive the film franchise of Star Trek, which had been dormant, some might say moribund, since the feature Nemesis tanked artistically and critically in 2002, hotshot director JJ Abrams put his best minds to work.

Some of his conspirators were Trekkies, some had never seen a single episode. The point was that they all had to be satisfied with the film, from their various perspectives.

The result is a triumph, certain to be regarded as not just one Trek's better moments, but one of the finest films made in the sci-fi genre.

Special effects in films grow daily more complex and believable. Abrams will make you believe in a crisp future full of green women, bug-eyed aliens serving on the bridge of the Enterprise, and space conflicts that make most previous Trek films look like Saturday morning cartoons.

Abrams neatly sidesteps the the groaning Trek universe, and its attendant obsessive hordes by taking us back to the beginning, to where no TV series or Trek film has gone before: to Kirk's birth, in fact. Who was he? Where did his drive to explore new worlds come from? Where did he get his sexy mojo? The film reveals all.

But as much as we are present from the beginning of Kirk's story, and it is satisfying indeed to see him get his arrogant early spots knocked off in a brutal bar fight, in some ways this is even more about Spock. We meet him bullied at school for being half-human, before he developed his emotionless Vulcan ways, which were always a bit of a patina in any case.

The film is heavy on action and conflict and it drives along like the best Bond films. Performances from the young cast who are depicted for the first time as a cohort are uniformly sensational, as are the characterisations. It can't have been easy re-inventing the wheel and some of the best known characters in popular culture.

Star Trek is young again. It is sexy, but it also has a rich emotional depth among the jaw dropping effects. The film is a cracking yarn about the beginning of something even non-Trekkies know a bit about. Perhaps best of all, it is genuinely funny without trashing its subject, as, 1999's Galaxy Quest did. Abrams's triumph is that he will expand the fan base without alientating the faithful.




Videorecension Sydney Morning Herald. "Star Trek är fenomenal... inte bara ett av Treks bästa ögonblick, utan en av de bästa filmerna som gjorts i sci-fi-genren. ´

Om man absolut inte vill veta något bör man inte se den.


Sci-fi-tidningen SFX ger filmen 5/5!

"There’s a reason why JJ Abrams’s reboot succeeds, and it’s embodied in a figure who bestrides this franchise like a ripped-shirted colossus: James Tiberius Kirk. The Star Trek universe desperately needs Kirk, and everything that he represents. It needs his wild abandon, his reckless dynamism, his pulsing virility. Without him, and his kind, it became moribund, and fell out of favour. By resurrecting him, JJ Abrams has not only revived and revitalised Star Trek, he’s given it a dose of Viagra."

Resten av recensionen i spoilerboxen. Innehåller småspoilers.

There’s a reason why JJ Abrams’s reboot succeeds, and it’s embodied in a figure who bestrides this franchise like a ripped-shirted colossus: James Tiberius Kirk. The Star Trek universe desperately needs Kirk, and everything that he represents. It needs his wild abandon, his reckless dynamism, his pulsing virility. Without him, and his kind, it became moribund, and fell out of favour. By resurrecting him, JJ Abrams has not only revived and revitalised Star Trek, he’s given it a dose of Viagra.

When it was announced that the new movie would feature the original crew, played by new actors, some of us had our doubts. We were wrong - and looking back, it’s so obvious that we were wrong. The triumvirate of Kirk, Spock and McCoy were the cornerstone of this universe and while we grew fond of the likes of Picard, Data and even Trip Tucker, no-one ever truly eclipsed them. Why would you choose to make a Trek movie without those three, if you could? You can’t recast classic characters? Nonsense. It happens all the time, from Sherlock Holmes and James Bond to the Doctor. All you have to do is cast the right people.

Abrams has done exactly that. Chris Pine brings intensity and energy to his hothead portrayal of Kirk, but he’s outshone by Zachary Quinto as Spock and Karl Urban as McCoy - both nail it so perfectly that it’s downright eerie. And a special mention for our very own Simon Pegg as Scotty, who steals entire scenes simply by standing in the background wearing a bemused expression.

Guardians of the continuity, sharpening their Bat’leths and preparing their fatwas, will want to know this: does it violate the sacred canon? Well, initially it’s as faithful as you could reasonably expect, respecting the broad strokes of the established lore. They haven’t done anything outrageous, like making Kirk the first captain of the Enterprise: that chair belongs (to begin with), to Christopher Pike. It ticks off everything on the fan wishlist (and a few more things besides): Spock’s arched eyebrow, a Tribble, an Orion Slave Girl, the Kobayashi Maru test, redshirt death, the Picard manoeuvre, Archer’s beagle... - everything, in fact, but those bloody nose ridges. But then - and spoilerphobes might wish to warp over the next paragraph - seemingly possessed by the spirit of punk rock, JJ Abrams boldly goes and does something breathtakingly audacious.

He rewrites history. In Hitchcockian terms, he lets the bomb explode. Thanks to the machinations of time-travelling Romulan villain Nero (the nature of whose plan suggests that the screenwriters watched Enterprise’s Xindi arc, furiously scribbling notes...) an alternate timeline is created, irrevocably changing our heroes’ destinies. Year zero. Clean slate. And seeing those accumulated centuries of established continuity crumble into dust doesn’t feel like a betrayal - it feels like a liberation. Like someone just unlocked the door of the cage. From now on, we really are boldly going where no man has gone before. Anything could happen - and sometimes does (you won’t believe what Spock and Uhura get up to...).

There’s another reason this film is a triumph. It’s not the epic scale or the very palpable sense of danger. It’s not the ingenious production design, which manages to be both scrupulously faithful and utterly up-to-date (the new Steve Jobs-style bridge is a real thing of beauty). It’s not the adrenalising action setpieces - although there are so many of those, of such punishing intensity, that after two hours you’ll feel like you’ve been pummelled by experts.

It’s this: passion. This is a film full of people who hurt, and it’s capable of hurting you - there are emotional sucker punches with the impact of a full spread of photon torpedoes. Gene Roddenberry’s big mistake was deciding that, in the far-future, humanity would have evolved, become more perfect, more harmonious. But a bunch of stuffed-shirt paragons do not make for gripping human drama. Abrams knows that: his Enterprise crew disagree with one another. They fight. They say “bullshit!” They scream their heads off when chased by CGI monsters, and when confronted by a visitor from the future, they enquire, “Do they still have sandwiches there?” They’re vital and funny and gloriously alive and we recognise them as people, real people, just like us.

True, there will be those who wrinkle their noses and accuse this movie of vapidity, of being too action-orientated, too teen-targeted, of abrogating Star Trek’s responsibility to tackle weighty social issues - the only themes tackled here are grief and vengeance. To them, we say firstly: come on, let’s be honest. Star Trek’s intellectual credentials have been massively overstated. Look at the original series: the likes of “The Doomsday Machine” and “Operation: Annihilate!” far outnumber episodes like “A Taste Of Armageddon” and “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield”. Secondly, this new beginning isn’t necessarily the time or place for deep thought or big ideas: there’ll be ample time for that in future instalments.

Here’s what matters. This summer, after Abrams’s explosive epic has nerve-pinched all the opposition, back gardens and parks will ring with the sound of young boys zapping imaginary phasers as they play Kirk and Spock, thanks to a reinvention as certain to conquer all before it as Russell T Davies’s revival of Doctor Who. JJ’s bravery has ensured that Star Trek will live long and prosper. For that, we owe him a massive debt of thanks.


Total Film ger filmen 4/5.

"...make no mistake: this really is Star Trek: The Movie, the biggest, boldest cinematic outing the franchise has yet seen. Hardcore fans may suggest it’s “not as good as Khan” but the rest of us (and the box office) will tell a different story."

Total Films recension:

To reboot an age-old but dilapidated franchise, JJ Abrams had to please three distinct groups: the hard-core fans (forum dwellers, Klingon speakers, Trekkies/Trekkers/whatever); the general public (“Sci-fi schmi-fi, is it any good?”) and, yes, a studio with dollars in its eyes in search of a bankable franchise (“How broad can this play? Could the sequel be a Spider-Man 2, or even, gulp, a Dark Knight?”).

Boy, did Paramount pick the right director for the job. The nothing if not reliable Abrams has hit it out of the park, through the clouds and somewhere into hyperspace, delivering the first genuine blockbuster of the year and setting the benchmark for what’s to come.

An exhilarating, breathless, lavishly mounted adventure, it will appease all three pertinent parties (No mean feat – just ask Joss Whedon…).

Phasers are set to stunning in the pre-credit sequence, as we witness the birth of James Tiberius Kirk in the most dramatic of circumstances.

It’s a strikingly powerful opening and leaves you in no doubt: ass is going to be kicked. In quick succession, we see the young Kirk, all rebel without a cause; the student Spock, an angsty mix of conflicting human and Vulcan values; the Starfleet Academy; the Enterprise crew coming together; the Kobayashi Maru test and the first mission… and we’re not even a third in.

The warp-drive pace never lets up, but the excitement is always resolutely accessible. For the first time on the big screen, Trek has some of that original-trilogy Star Wars sparkle.

Like the ’60s TV show, the relationship between Kirk and Spock is pivotal. Spock’s the meatier of the two roles and Zachary Quinto is perfect, his youth perhaps offering a degree or two less gravitas than Leonard Nimoy (along for the ride in a time-bending twist) but his energy brings something new and compelling to the table – you feel the human/Vulcan, emotion/logic battle that rages within him more vividly than ever before.

Pine is also good in a pleasingly un-PC turn. He has the heavy-drinking, skirt-chasing hothead charm down to a tee, plus a young Shatner-esque (in a good way) comic charisma. If Quinto is the soul, Pine is the motor of the movie, his unabashed brashness propelling the story forward.

Again, his youthful demeanour may make him a tad more Luke than Han, but by sequel time, he should be just right. The dynamic between the two leads ebbs and flows precisely where it should: credit where it’s due to writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman (who seem to be having even more fun with Gene Roddenberry’s characters than they did with their Transformers script).

All the main crew get their turns. Zoe Saldana is a pleasingly-fleshed out Uhura (with maybe a touch of the Sydney Bristows about her) while Karl Urban is an instantly likeable, reassuringly grouchy Bones.

John Cho’s blade-wielding Sulu and Anton Yelchin’s thickly-accented Chekov are given brief moments to shine while Simon Pegg’s Scotty is knowingly calibrated to please the fanboys and offer comic relief.

Though he’s not the only one bringing the funny, Spock (both incarnations), McCoy, Uhura and co all dispensing decent quips that help warm up the sci-fi palette for a broader popcorn-munching audience.

Compare this with, say, the recent Bond and Trek’s light touch is particularly welcome. Again, not since Star Wars IV-VI has a sci-fi flick had such a, well, likeable tone.

Visually the film has a flair (and indeed flares) that give a hitherto unseen sheen to the Trek universe. When it needs to hit warp speed, it does, with an almost balletic Enterprise pirouetting through battle debris in one scene and plenty of firepower in the space skirmishes.

In general, the design is slick but on the right side of flashy, and Abrams wisely keeps geek-pleasing elements in the frame, but never in the foreground.

Stylistically, short skirts are a few inches less short than their ’60s counterparts, phasers not as clunky, teleportation a tad less synthy. All minor but telling adjustments in this measured, confident reboot.

If there are flaws, they are relatively minor. The young, vibrant cast generate a lot of heat but perhaps not a great deal of smarts (Quinto excepted). Eric Bana’s nefarious Nero – a time-hopper out for bitter revenge – gets the job done but hardly looms as large as a Vader or Khan, depriving the drama of the heft and emotional wrench a more compelling ‘big bad’ could provide.

You could also argue that the overarching reach and soulful optimism of Gene Roddenberry’s vision is not quite there (although with sequels, it should come), leaving the ‘message’ of the film a slightly garbled one about seizing your destiny and fulfilling your potential.

Nonetheless, make no mistake: this really is Star Trek: The Movie, the biggest, boldest cinematic outing the franchise has yet seen. Hardcore fans may suggest it’s “not as good as Khan” but the rest of us (and the box office) will tell a different story.

Aubrey Day


A revamp everyone can get on board with, from die-hards to those who wouldn’t be seen dead at a sci-fi convention. Buoyant, buffed and with the promise of even better to come, this is the freshest Trek in decades.


Edited by Aike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Låter ju positivt, fast jag skulle vilja se en recension från en riktig trekkie...

Jag tror några eller tom alla är det. De har ganska gott om kunskap om Star Trek om man läser hela.

Så det som man kan vara lite försiktig med är om verkligen icke-fans gillar filmen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Här är en seriös recension från ett fan som Trekweb har publicerat: "Detta är rymdäventyret George Lucas inte kunde leverera med de nya Star Wars-filmerna."

Inga direkta spoilers i recensionen.


Review By Matthew Pejkovic

J.J. Abram's Star Trek is a refreshingly entertaining space adventurer, reinvigorating a well worn out franchise while paying homage to past labours.

In the midst of its spectacular outer space ventures, Abram's successfully chronicles the gathering of the original Star Trek crew, with the main focus placed on the evolving friendship and parallel destinies of Captain James Kirk (Chris Pine), a cocky Iowa farm boy destined to be a great leader; and first in command Spock (Zachary Quinto), a half human/half Vulcan hybrid, whose sternly logical personality constantly clashes with his need to express himself emotionally.

Following on from Pike and Quinto, who both provide new dimensions to their iconic characters (the former a cheeky rebellion; the latter a soulful restraint), are the likes of Karl Urban as medical officer Leonard "Bones" McCoy; modern comedic genius Simon Pegg as engineer Scotty; and Zoe Saldana as the ultra sexy Uhura, who all pay homage to their predecessors, while also making these beloved characters their own.

The instigator of their assemblage is a time traveller from the planet Romulan named Nero, played with heart thumping intensity by Eric Bana. Seeking revenge for the destruction of his planet, Nero instigates the annihilation of Spook's home planet Vulcan, bringing on the attention of Starfleet, a federation of peacekeepers who explore and police the universe.

With both the good and bad guys set, so comes several awe inspiring action sequences, the most notable a pre-opening credits battle between warring spec crafts (which sets the films mind blowing aural and visual tone to devastating effect); and a stomach curling deep space sky dive.

Also of note is its surprising amount of comedy, with the highlight a sequence involving Kirk's allergic reaction to McCoy's medical treatment.

The films effects are simply astonishing, as old school design magnificently blends with new school technologies, with any trace of CGI non-existent. This is coupled nicely with its 1960s inspired costume and hair design.

Anchoring all of it is a wonderful script by genre veterans Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, who successfully blends a healthy dose of Stephen Hawking inspired science with their highly entertaining brand of fiction.

Due to director/producer Abram's meticulous attention to detail and unrelenting -yet thankfully never overwhelming- passion for the Star Trek mythology, a modern sci-fi classic has been created. Abram's has managed to pull off the impossible, given the Trekkies (or Trekkers) a film which they can happily claim with open arms, while also leaving enough breathing room for the Trek virgin to enjoy, without being overwhelmed by the density of its history.

This is the space adventure which George Lucas could not deliver with his Star Wars prequels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Här är en positiv men mer kritisk recension från Dark Horizons. Filmen kallas en av sommarens bästa och den visuellt snyggaste Star Trek-filmen. Men historien är för lättviktig och rollfigurerna alltför självmedvetna för att kalla det för en rollmodell för reboots som Batman Begins och Casino Royal. Recensenten tycker Star Trek 2 är bättre och att Star Trek First Contact har bättre skurkar samt att sexans berättelse är starkare. Men ser ändå framemot vad som kommer hända i uppföljarna eftersom Spindelmannen och X-men blev bättre.

Successfully relaunching the long-declining franchise, rising director JJ Abrams delivers a less cerebral, more adrenalin-fueled take on the voyages of the USS Enterprise. In the process he reintroduces critical elements the franchise has not seen in years - cultural relevance, suspense, and a fresh sense of wonder missing from a mythology so heavily explored and exploited over the years.

The story is too generic and lightweight, the performances too self-conscious, and the humor too pithy to cite this as a role model of rebooting ala "Batman Begins" and "Casino Royale." Yet like those films, full credit has to be given to the filmmakers for successfully striking the right balance of reverence and renewal. Hardcore fans may not like the change of tone which ditches the deeper exploration of themes in favor of a sensory thrill ride, yet the film very much retains the feel of Gene Roddenberry's universe albeit trimmed of some of the moral shadings and political allegories.

Armed with a cash flow at least three to four times that of the average previous Trek film, the new "Star Trek" looks every bit its sizable new budget. The new production design is fascinating - the comparisons of the new look bridge to a 'hi-tech Apple store' are fair, though the engineering decks unfortunately resemble a modern gasworks albeit with some funky redressing. The ships themselves retain the Trek signature design but add a lot more detail, while visits to the red-toned rocks of Vulcan, the ice moon Delta Vega, future San Francisco and the grimy interiors of a massive Romulan mining vessel are all beautifully realized.

Notably improving on the job he did with the well-filmed but bland "M:I-3", 'Trek' really gets to show off Abrams' superb directorial proficiency. For most of its runtime the film sets a slick pace that Michael Bay or Paul Greengrass would be proud of. Unlike them however, the camera operators and editors here have normal attention spans so jittery close-ups are kept to a minimum while cutting is fast but never confusing. Several sequences, notably a lengthy one involving three officers trying to land on, sabotage and then escape an atmospheric drill platform are thrillingly executed.

The space battles do lack some of the majesty and suspenseful setup of those in previous films and shows, but replace it with intensity, scale and speed - if the Trek battles of old were very submarine-inspired, the ones here play out much more like aerial dogfights. One of the franchise's greatest assets is the sheer beauty of these ship designs and so we get some very epic shots of the various vessels from all sorts of inventive angles. From a visual effects standpoint, the film cannot be faulted and the space combat scenes are amongst the most convincingly real ever to be committed to celluloid.

The sound design is truly extraordinary throughout and makes great uses of silence on two occasions to convey the noiseless vacuum of space. "Lost" composer Michael Giacchino's score sadly lacks the epic-quality of the Vangelis-esque music used in the film's promotional trailers, but it is otherwise a very impressive if overly repetitive music that fits in with both the film's tone and the franchise as a whole. Jerry Goldsmith's classic Trek film theme music comfortably slots into the climax, unlike an early scene where a Beastie Boys song and a bit of Nokia product placement is jarringly inserted.

The few problems here not unexpectedly lie with the script. Projects like these are an utterly daunting job for even the best screenwriters as they have to setup a franchise, respect the various shows and films that came before both thematically and logistically, and face the inherent difficulties of telling not just an origin story but one of which little is known about. To their credit, scribes Alex Kurtzmann and Roberto Orci deliver their best script yet and show an obvious love of Trek lore which gives everything a solid level of authenticity while fitting it all into the modern breathless blockbuster mold.

Yet they can not overcome the inherent problems of most origin stories; a few of the lingering problems of the Trek film formula in general; and their own signature weakness of lifting elements from key films of the genre and fusing them into a generic, rather fragmented thriller narrative abound with convenient coincidences and credibility gaps. Like the first films in various superhero franchises, the film has to wade through an awkward and copious amount of exposition, jokes that rely too much on either pratfalls or insider knowledge, and a banal antagonist with an underwhelming scheme.

Eric Bana as the villain, a rogue Romulan miner named Nero, is yet another revenge-fueled alien villain who serves as a pale imitation of Ricardo Montalbahn's Khan from the one true cinematic classic of the previous films - "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan." Many of the subsequent Trek sequels have tried to remake it with limited success and this one is no different on that score, even as so many of the other elements have been improved on. Bana does what he can with the part, but his limited screen time and lack of development stand as the film's most obvious flaw.

The over-reliance on both time travel and technobabble drag down the pace in parts of the second half, but the scribes thankfully avoid the reset button syndrome and definitively establish this film as the first in an 'alternate history' of this universe. This allows newcomers not to be daunted by the Trek backlog, and yet it reintroduces Trek's various alien races and events in new ways (ala "Doctor Who," Nolan's Batman-verse) which should excite fans. None of the films have ever reached the dramatic heights of the best Original Series, Next Generation and Deep Space Nine episodes, but this new emphasis on light fast-paced thrills should ensure that this and subsequent sequels will be amongst the most entertaining entries.

The young actors face a daunting challenge with their roles, not just slipping into characters beloved by millions but ones which are so identified with the specific actors that have played them for decades. Of the crew its Chris Pine who comes off the best, helped by his sheer amount of screen time. Though he lacks William Shatner's humility and signature delivery, Pine manages to invest the character with a cocky and somewhat arrogant bravado and yet still manages to make him likable. Spending much of the film with his face covered in blood or bruises, guys will empathize with this self-assured yet ultimately good-hearted rebel who spends most of his time either swaggering or brawling.

"Heroes" star Zachary Quinto delivers a solid Spock, never really capturing either the quirky humor or condescension of the character that Leonard Nimoy perfected so well. He does however have an excellent grasp of the logical Vulcan routine down while his chemistry with Pine is a fiery dynamic that shows promise for future adventures together. So much of the character elements are focused on these two and their early friendship that many of the other actors are reduced to either imitating their predecessors or doing what they feel comfortable with.

Of said imitators it is Karl Urban who comes the closest to stepping out on his own, the New Zealand actor gets the character's inherent technophobia, skill, mannerisms and stubbornness just right. Simon Pegg as Scotty and Anton Yelchin as Chekov are heavily-accented comic relief for the most part, Pegg in particular obviously having a blast throughout. Zoe Saldana as Uhura and John Cho as Sulu just play themselves, Saldana making Uhura a strong and dynamic personality despite limited screen time.

Supporting performances are great with Bruce Greenwood lending a real sense of honor and gravitas to original Enterprise Captain Pike. Aussie hunk Chris Hemsworth does well with his short role as Kirk's father in the film's opening scenes, Ben Cross as Sarek however plays Spock's dad as more of a grump than Mark Leonard who could so beautifully convey annoyance and disappointment purely through stance and body language.

A notably aged Leonard Nimoy is just stellar as always, and his scenes talking about his friendship with Kirk over the years will bring a tear to the eyes of most Trekkers. Celebrity cameos from Winona Ryder and Tyler Perry do not subtract from the film but add very little, while no other stars or characters from any of the previous series or films appear. Make-up is mixed - some jobs like Scotty's alien assistant are superb, Uhura's Orion roommate on the other hand seems amateur.

Easily set to be amongst the best films of the Summer, where it stands in the scheme of things a few years from now will be interesting to contemplate. 'Wrath of Khan' remains the definitive 'Trek' film, while 'Undiscovered Country' and 'First Contact' had a stronger narrative and antagonist respectively than what's seen here. Yet much like the first "Spider-Man" or "X-Men" which were ultimately eclipsed by their sequels, what is setup here shows such great potential that if Abrams direction and the current cast & mythology were to combine with a stronger story - it could be an achievement of "Spider-Man 2" or "The Dark Knight" caliber.

Most of the issues here are nitpicks and it simply can not be stated enough how effectively Abrams and his crew have revived and repositioned not just the franchise but the 'space opera' genre itself. After the painfully stilted "Star Wars" prequels and the last few lackluster 'Trek' films, this 'Trek' at last brings back a sense of fun adventure to the space epic which has not really been seen since the 80's. By the end of this film when the crew is in place, the cast has settled into their roles, and this once familiar universe now feels wide open and new - you can not help but be aching to go on another Trek - a feeling many of us Trekkers haven't felt in a long time.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Här är Trekmovies grundare Anthony Pascales recension. Den är mycket positiv och han anser att det är den bästa eller i alla fall en av de bästa Trek-filmerna hittills. Han fick se den själv i en bio Paramounts område, vilket han är värd med tanke på hur mycket han har lagt ner på att få fram nyheter kring filmen sedan 2006.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Här är två brittiska recensioner. Bägge är överlag positiva. The Telegraph skriver att det bästa med filmen är Kirk och Spocks samspel, medan The Mirror är lite mindre positiv och säger att filmen "entertains, but does not electrify" och ger den 3,5 av 5.

Varning dock för en del spoilers!



Link to comment
Share on other sites

^Daily Mail gav den 5/5.

Positiv recension från en "Star Trek virgin".:

"So here is my verdict: This movie is awesome."


Videorecension från Three Men and A Movie. Alla gillar den, även surpuppan längst till vänster som klagar på att det finns treksnack i den ;)


Edited by Aike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

De skrev också på sin hemsida att här kan du se klipp från filmen som alla pratar om! Låter som att detta kan bli en riktigt härlig ST sommar!

Kanske det, men glöm inte att andra filmer som X-MEN's Wolverine film och den nya Terminator filmen har också snart premiär. Jag tror nog att dessa filmer kommer att attrahera en stor publik, frågan är om Star Trek filmen kommer att lyckas att hålla sig i top när de har premiär?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Notera dock att X men är i ropet redan nu precis lika mycket eller mer än Star trek. Så blir filmen en snackis film nu så har vi gott hopp senare med. Det kanske rentav känns för många som att star trek är nytt och fräscht och att X men och Terminator är invant och lite tjatigt? Eller rentav "revolt" filmen om man tröttnat på de andra?

Nåja, står sig star trek bra bland den trion filmer så är jag inte missnöjd med en tredje plats. Det är inga duvungar vi pratar om. J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Broadcast Film Critics Association (BSFA) listar de bästa filmerna som har släppts i år på en skala 20-100.

Men först några kända filmer:

  • Fast and Furious 57
  • Wolverine 72
  • Watchmen 75

Topp 5

5. Earth 81

5. Tyson 81

3. I Love You, Man 82

2. Every Little Step 85


Star Trek 93

Vem som sa att kritiker endast gillar djupa Östeuropeiska filmer har fel. :yes:

Källa: http://www.bfca.org/movie/

Edited by Aike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...