I hated Spielberg’s War of the Worlds… I mean, what was the point of the Tim Robbins scene? Really. Dreary, awful film.
Meryl Yourish on December 14, 2007

I fell asleep about 30 minutes in and woke up briefly to see the Tim Robbins “war of occupation” speech before I was out again. It was an action movie consisting of the so-called hero running away from the action in between lingering shots of America’s favorite toothy midget slapping his tiny hand over America’s favorite precocious moppet’s emoting eyes or screaming mouth.

Some called it a “suspense” movie. Well, the suspense of waiting for something to happen in that movie wasn’t enough to keep me awake…

The new Star Trek crew (well, recast original series crew), brought to you by one J.J. Abrams.

spec_ops_mateo on December 14, 2007 at 6:12 PM

The studio wanted Gary Sinse (the star of a hugely successful TV show on a network with the same corporate parent as the movie studio) cast as McCoy, but Abrams pushed back. Sinse is not in every scene of CSI:NY and wouldn’t be in every scene of the new ST movie so the excuse is not because of time commitments or because Sinse is not a bankable star… Let’s not kid ourselves about Abrams’ politics influencing his entertainment productions.

And if John Cho doesn’t have the balls to do a George Takei impression in this new ST movie (with a creepy “oh my” thrown in for good measure), he should expect a boycott of Harold and Kumar 2.

I don’t get it…
Nonfactor on December 14, 2007 at 2:31 PM

We’ve noticed.
Jim Treacher on December 14, 2007 at 6:34 PM

Treacher Wins.
Fatality.

Everytime I see an meteor in a movie hit New York I think “wow, that has to be the smartest meteor ever”. It not like it just landed in the oceans, which cover 2/3′s of the Earth, or hit desolate areas like Siberia, Sahara desert, the middle Australia or just some cornfield in Ohio. Nooooo, it found it’s way straight to tiny lower Manhattan…;-)

On a serious note though:
I guess Hollywood decided that enough time has past since 9/11 that now they exploit it….errrr….I mean go back to making coincidental, exploding disaster movies there with falling skyscrapers, walls of smoke billowing down streets and people running in fear through the city streets without any public backlash from it. I guess the only thing that surprises me is Hollywood didn’t make a movie like this within months of 9/11 to try to cash in. I guess they have heart afterall in La-La Land. Maybe for JJ Abram’s sequel he could fly to Hiroshima or Nagasaki and make a film about aliens who drop atomic devices on their cities too. About the same thing he’s doing here, but he would even be more justified because the real event there happened over 60 year ago, not six years ago like New York, right?

I want to see a monster movie set in Edinburgh.

see-dubya on December 14, 2007 at 2:21 PM

So does Smeato.

Why does JJ Abrams continue to get credit for the LOST masterpiece when he hasn’t had anything to do with the show since the first season?

Patriot33 on December 14, 2007 at 4:52 PM

The first season was by far the best season.

Season 2 was horrible, and season 3 was good but didn’t quite redeem the show.

I’m willing to give Abrams the benefit of doubt here, but I won’t be rushing to see this movie before reviews have been written.

Anyone else sick and tired of these movies depicting New York getting the shit kicked out of it? Come on, now.

Its Tommy on December 14, 2007 at 4:34 PM

Not really, and I’m not saying that because I dislike New York. The city is freakin huge. It’s larger than some other states, and the people are bunched up so close together.

When a disaster hits New York, so much is at stake that it makes the event more dramatic automatically.

I grew up in Houston. It’s the fourth largest city in the nation, but it’s still less than a fourth the size of New York. On top of that, the city is very spread out. Shut down one part of Houston, and the rest will be able to keep on moving.

Benetton ad

Lame people, lame acting, lame wooden dialogue. Game Over, Man!

Some people just aren’t sensitive to that kind of thing, and good for y’all. I just have Hollywood Overload, I guess.

2) 90% of sequels and remakes are crap. AVP actually started out okay, but fell into several really pathetic genre conventions. The new one sounds like it IS a really pathetic genre convention. (The hyper-advanced aliens can detect alien parasites, they just don’t bother when it comes to protecting their ship… pull the other one.)

Mazztek on December 14, 2007 at 7:46 PM

And the book was more about vampires and the movie is more about zombies. So? We’re talking about Cloverfield, not a poor adaptation of I Am Legend.

I’m seeing a giant monster movie where JJ Abrams is trying to do something just a teensy bit different than other giant monster movies. Maybe it’ll work and maybe it won’t. But I”m not seeing big anti-Bush conspiracy here.

Nonfactor on December 14, 2007 at 2:31 PM

Well, I Am Legend was originally set in Compton/South Centeral LA, and starred a german/irish whitey.

Now, it’s in New York, starring a black guy.

Either way, no one wants to see nasty people on the big screen. And, they aren’t really heroes, either.

I don’t get it…

Nonfactor on December 14, 2007 at 2:31 PM

We’ve noticed.

The new Star Trek crew (well, recast original series crew), brought to you by one J.J. Abrams.

spec_ops_mateo on December 14, 2007 at 6:12 PM

Given the relative ages at the time of the Original Series, shouldn’t Chekov be a little younger? Like, still in junior high? And shouldn’t Spock’s mother be a little older?

I can’t remember the last good monster/disaster type film. What has there been since Aliens and T2? Not a whole lot.

I’m hoping the new Terminator miniseries on Fox next month is decent.

Maybe it’ll get me to exercise again. Linda Hamilton got me off my butt and into the gym after I saw that movie. I never looked like her, but I did get a kick out of training with weights.

WOTW was an abomination. Really, really bad movie. Relentlessly unpleasant all the way through, and I didn’t like any of the characters.

Patriot33 on December 14, 2007 at 4:52 PM

Mainly because there wouldn’t be Lost without him, considering he created it. Plus he directed what is arguably the 2 best hours of t.v. ever shown (the pilot episodes).

BTW, I’m sorely disappointed we’re not having a full season (well, not that we were anyway.)

I’m a Lost fanboy, so I trust JJ Abrams enough

Why does JJ Abrams continue to get credit for the LOST masterpiece when he hasn’t had anything to do with the show since the first season? Just a pet peeve of mine…

Btw, we’re just a month and a half out of season 4 w00t! 8 eppies is better than nothing…

see-dubya on December 14, 2007 at 2:40 PM

Answer: the monster.

Jesus, people. Just enjoy what appears to be a well-made kaiju / giant monster film. Or don’t enjoy it. But EVERYTHING Hollywood puts out doesn’t have some sort of stupid “Lions for Lambs” message to it.

Abrams has stated why he made the film. He was in Japan with his kid, they saw a Godzilla toy, he decided that America deserved it’s own giant monster, in its own giant monster film. That’s all. It’s not Cthulhu, and it’s not some big allegory for American imperialism or any such nonsense.

While we ran as fast as we could away from the fireworks exploding on the ground, dozens of morons were running closer. They impeded the emergency services and ambulances, who needed to get there fast to help anyone who might be getting, say, burned by fireworks exploding on ground level instead of hundreds of feet up in the air.

As it turned out, only one fireman was lightly burned, but still–people are idiots. Idiots. I was not surprised to see that scene in the movie. It’s perfectly realistic.

Is panic your subject or just seeing how the young and pouty rise above the inconvenience of the end of civilization?

Oh, and back to the original post. I think the trailer indicates that the main characters of the movie won’t survive seeing as how their camera was found in ‘the site formerly known as Central Park.’