h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I agree with you on all three films, Silicon Dioxide. Whether Jude law can act or not, surely he has something to add as a method actor in a film about men who sleep around? I rather liked him in "Cold Mountain," except that his hair color got inexplicably darker at the end. And he looked the part in "Anna Karenina." We can't overlook the effect of appearance.

Any film at all with Jim Carey in it.

PP.

Jude Law was good in "Shakespeare in Love".



"what did you find annoying about the [Star Trek] remakes? Their very existence, or more?"

The most egregious, unforgivable error was throwing out 40-years of Star Trek canon, thus spitting in its face.

Everything was fine until a "mining ship" wiped out two successive fleets of ships. Even a hundred and fifty years of technological advancement isn't going to make them invincible, any more than a modern oil tanker could fight Britain's Royal Navy from 1850.

It only got worse from there. But I have better things to do at the moment than spend two hours going on about it again.

Whatever Mr Law was good in I can't shake the appalling scene as Alfie in which he attempts to convince the audience that he is upset about something while sitting in a car. Mr Caine portrayed more emotion solely with his left eye and without moving it in any way, as was his style.

The Star Trek reboots were almost forgivable in their massive distance from the originals. I found that using actors as caricatures of the original cast was much more entertaining than the the attempt at a different command configuration in STNG for example.

I didn't find the capabilities of the mining vessel too extreme. It was designed to tear planets apart and it used a swarming attack to overcome the defences of Starfleet.

Oh, and Jim Carey. Yes. But, The Truman Show. There will always be an exception to these sweepingly critical rules. I'm rather fond of Mad Max II.

Jim carrey was tolerable at best in The Truman Show. He didn't ruin it. I'd say the same for him in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.

He absolutely ruined most of the films he was in. For example, The Cable Guy should have been an entertaining black comedy, but his cartoonish portrayal of the title character ruined the darkness of the script.


That said, he did exceedingly well portraying Andy Kaufman in Man on the Moon.






On a side note regarding various versions of works, I'd argue that Stanley Kubrick's film version of The Shining was an improvement over the original story. Stephen King hated it and backed a miniseries remake focusing on Jack's alcoholism and bringing back the animated topiary and the wasps, but as much as I love Stephen King's writing, that Kubrick film was just... better.

I agree about Jim Carey most of the time, but Bruce Almighty is awesome.

Could be... I haven't seen it.

At his worst, Jim Carrey was pretty awful. Adam Sandler was, too. But I enjoyed Sandler's voice in "Hotel Transylvania." And somehow the chemistry between Sandler and Drew Barrymore made "50 First dates" fun.

Actors I normally loathe, but occasionally overcome my bias and deliver excellent performances.

Jim Carrey,
Adam Sandler,
Ben Stiller,
Tom Cruise...

The Last Samurai is also very good.

OK, so I have some expertise in genetic cloning- it is partly what I do for a living.

That done in Jurassic Park and sequels is pure science fiction (more or less fantasy, born from a kernel of truth) - it just cannot be done - DNA cannot remotely remain intact for that long. Sometimes you really *do* have to suspend disbelief. If they were to follow what can actually be done - then there would be no film at all.

That said, I actually read the book of Jurassic Park before I saw the film and what *really* grated there was that he stated in the book that DNA was made from four amino acids.
C'mooooon Michael, you had medical training or somesuch no? You should know that DNA is made from nucleotides, it is protein that is made from amino acids - and there are 20 of them!
(well 20 coded for by DNA at least). Now *that* annoyed me - do you research properly dude.

I often have to watch around science portrayal in TV and films or I would explode. Do not get me started on CSI...

"To form a strand of DNA, nucleotides are linked into chains, with the phosphate and sugar groups alternating. The four types of nitrogen bases found in nucleotides are: adenine (A), thymine (T), guanine (G) and cytosine"
https://www.genome.gov/25520880/deoxyribonucleic-acid-dna-fact-sheet/

So the author was talking about the four bases, not the actually amino acids.

In The Expendables franchise, the expendables by-and-large survive.

I've not seen the end of The World's End, but what I did see was an exact repeat of Shaun of the Dead.

Along with _Hot Fuzz_ they make a loose trilogy of sorts.

I somehow managed to see all three of them, but not in the original order.

The Cornetto Trilogy.

I was able to see World's End in a cinema used as one of the scenes and have a beer afterwards in one of the pubs featured.

PP.

Cornetto moments from the 3 films.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PNPaA02alg

PP.

In 'Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home' Scotty calls Aluminium 'Aloominum'.
If James Doohan played a character called Americany or Canadiany then fair enough, but Scotty's supposed to be Scottish.

<BB<

Even then it wouldn't be ok.

Let me just check the spelling again?





Ah. Yes. Aluminium.

PP.

There is a very common failure in many films and TV shows.
The is almost a total disregard of recoil!

If you fire a handgun it will lift violently in your hand. Field artillery will be thrown back up to 3 meters. That's really annoying,