Re: J.J. Abrams' Star Trek
Kirk was supposed to be a "pretty boy", though William Shatner was more handsome than pretty. As for the ages, they are actually just alittle younger, which is okay. The casting is pretty good for this movie, at least what I've seen, though the part of Sulu could'be been better. I'll give it a chance though. I don't think they'll be any true ST fan that won't see this.
The only thing so far that I don't like at all is the women wearing the skirts. I don't think they're practical at all.
I loved Cloverfield except for the ending, but since there's going to be a sequel, then I understand why it ended the way it did.
I just read the new EW mag with the Star trek pics, I thought Spock & Kirk were actors for some MTV OC type of show. Kirk is too much of a pretty boy. Spock isn't as "rea"l as Nimoy was. They look too "gay", (sorry in advance) and too young. I'm not a trekkie, but can't wait for the old movies on Blu Ray. As far as this movie, pass. Plus JJ Abrams was behind Cloverfield which was the worst movie I ever seen.
Kirk was supposed to be a "pretty boy", though William Shatner was more handsome than pretty. As for the ages, they are actually just alittle younger, which is okay. The casting is pretty good for this movie, at least what I've seen, though the part of Sulu could'be been better. I'll give it a chance though. I don't think they'll be any true ST fan that won't see this.
The only thing so far that I don't like at all is the women wearing the skirts. I don't think they're practical at all.
I loved Cloverfield except for the ending, but since there's going to be a sequel, then I understand why it ended the way it did.