For some weird reasons I'm watching "Halo: The Fall of Reach" right now.

Geez, I don't think I've ever seen a SciFi movie with such and crappy
story -- even for a computer game adaptation. And the visual quality
doesn't help either.

Can someone tell me why I'm continuing to watch this?

Post a reply to this message

On 7/23/2016 6:40 PM, clipka wrote:
> For some weird reasons I'm watching "Halo: The Fall of Reach" right now.
>
> Geez, I don't think I've ever seen a SciFi movie with such and crappy
> story

Then you've not seen many SF Moves. They are all crap. Except for 
Forbidden Planet.

-- even for a computer game adaptation. And the visual quality
> doesn't help either.
>
> Can someone tell me why I'm continuing to watch this?
>

Not Too Bright? (NTB)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 23/07/16 19:17, Stephen wrote:
> On 7/23/2016 6:40 PM, clipka wrote:
>> For some weird reasons I'm watching "Halo: The Fall of Reach" right now.
>>
>> Geez, I don't think I've ever seen a SciFi movie with such and crappy
>> story
> 
> Then you've not seen many SF Moves. They are all crap. Except for
> Forbidden Planet.
> 
Oh, come on! How about (in no particular order):
Blade Runner
2001, A Space Odyssey
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Metropolis
Star Wars
Brazil
The Matrix

John
-- 
It's not about bravery.
It's about doing what I need to do to win

Post a reply to this message

Doctor John <j.g### [at] gmailcom> wrote:

> Oh, come on! ....

I do believe the good Doctor has failed to recognize a common case of
intrabuccal lingua.

Post a reply to this message

Am 23.07.2016 um 20:17 schrieb Stephen:
> On 7/23/2016 6:40 PM, clipka wrote:
>> For some weird reasons I'm watching "Halo: The Fall of Reach" right now.
>>
>> Geez, I don't think I've ever seen a SciFi movie with such and crappy
>> story
> 
> Then you've not seen many SF Moves. They are all crap. Except for
> Forbidden Planet.

I'd disagree. For instance, I'd say "I, Robot" had a quite good story,
thanks to Asimov's legacy. "The day the earth stood still" was also
good, and the story of "Metropolis" was pretty wild, but certainly a
work of genius for its time.

I think what you really want to say is that you simply don't dig Science
Fiction movies.

Besides, note that I used the comparative (well, I /tried/ to use it
anyway). Even among crap there's good solid crap, painfully hard crap,
grossly soft crap -- and amorphous plain bullshit.

> -- even for a computer game adaptation. And the visual quality
>> doesn't help either.
>>
>> Can someone tell me why I'm continuing to watch this?
> 
> Not Too Bright? (NTB)

Nah, I guess it was more the fascination of first encounter -- the first
encounter with a level of crappiness never experienced before.

Post a reply to this message

Am 24.07.2016 um 01:15 schrieb Doctor John:
> On 23/07/16 19:17, Stephen wrote:
>> On 7/23/2016 6:40 PM, clipka wrote:
>>> For some weird reasons I'm watching "Halo: The Fall of Reach" right now.
>>>
>>> Geez, I don't think I've ever seen a SciFi movie with such and crappy
>>> story
>>
>> Then you've not seen many SF Moves. They are all crap. Except for
>> Forbidden Planet.
>>
> Oh, come on! How about (in no particular order):
> Blade Runner
> 2001, A Space Odyssey
> Close Encounters of the Third Kind
> Metropolis
> Star Wars
> Brazil
> The Matrix

I guess we need to differentiate between "crappy movie" and "movie with
crappy story".

I think Stephen is right in that only few Science Fiction movies are
plausible enough in their storytelling to qualify as having a non-crappy
story. But that's an ailment of the entire Science Fiction genre, not
just the movies.

"2001 - A Space Odyssey", for instance, is an outstanding movie
/despite/ its story being rather simple, bordering on weak (except
wherever it touches the mystical, at which point story abruptly gives
way to the unexplained).

Post a reply to this message

Am 24.07.2016 um 04:40 schrieb clipka:

> Besides, note that I used the comparative (well, I /tried/ to use it
> anyway). Even among crap there's good solid crap, painfully hard crap,
> grossly soft crap -- and amorphous plain bullshit.

(I forgot to mention caustic bird poop and complete batshit -- but
that's probably ok, since movies of those types deserve to remain
unmentioned.)

Post a reply to this message

On 7/24/2016 1:15 AM, Bald Eagle wrote:
> Doctor John <j.g### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>
>> Oh, come on! ....
>
> I do believe the good Doctor has failed to recognize a common case of
> intrabuccal lingua.
>

That's easy for you to say. ;)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 7/24/2016 4:00 AM, clipka wrote:

>
> I guess we need to differentiate between "crappy movie" and "movie with
> crappy story".
>

I hadn't thought of that. How true.

But the truth is. I just don't like "the movies". I get bored and fight 
to stay awake. A bit like putting a cover over a budgerigar's cage. My 
eyelids go down with the lights.

> I think Stephen is right

I'll put this date in my diary. :)


> in that only few Science Fiction movies are
> plausible enough in their storytelling to qualify as having a non-crappy
> story. But that's an ailment of the entire Science Fiction genre, not
> just the movies.
>

A lot of them are cowboys in space. There is one I saw that could have 
been called. "The ray guns of the magnificent seven." Robert Vaughn was 
in it for continuity. :)

> "2001 - A Space Odyssey", for instance, is an outstanding movie
> /despite/ its story being rather simple, bordering on weak (except
> wherever it touches the mystical, at which point story abruptly gives
> way to the unexplained).
>

Yes, that was good, best in class. It was an art movie a wonderful 
adaptation of a short story.

On 7/24/2016 3:40 AM, clipka wrote:

 >>
 >> Then you've not seen many SF Moves. They are all crap. Except for
 >> Forbidden Planet.
 >
 > I'd disagree. For instance, I'd say "I, Robot" had a quite good story,
 > thanks to Asimov's legacy.

I've not seen it so I could not possibly comment. :)

I've just read a bit of its Wiki page and take your word for it being 
good. It does not refresh my memory of the stories very well.
But they took the idea and ran with it.




 > "The day the earth stood still" was also
 > good, and the story of "Metropolis" was pretty wild, but certainly a
 > work of genius for its time.
 >

Two cinema classics and Science Fiction-y too.

I liked the day of the Triffids. It is a bit dated now but still one to 
put on a list.

 > I think what you really want to say is that you simply don't dig Science
 > Fiction movies.
 >

Yes, they have mostly been a disappointment. My imagination is much 
better than whatever can be put on a screen.

 > Besides, note that I used the comparative (well, I /tried/ to use it
 > anyway). Even among crap there's good solid crap, painfully hard crap,
 > grossly soft crap -- and amorphous plain bullshit.
 >

I see that you are a scatologist of the highest order.


 >>
 >> Not Too Bright? (NTB)
 >
 > Nah, I guess it was more the fascination of first encounter -- the first
 > encounter with a level of crappiness never experienced before.
 >

You get some dreadfully bad moves that are a joy to watch.
If you're medicated. ;)


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 7/24/2016 12:15 AM, Doctor John wrote:
> On 23/07/16 19:17, Stephen wrote:
>> On 7/23/2016 6:40 PM, clipka wrote:
>>> For some weird reasons I'm watching "Halo: The Fall of Reach" right now.
>>>
>>> Geez, I don't think I've ever seen a SciFi movie with such and crappy
>>> story
>>
>> Then you've not seen many SF Moves. They are all crap. Except for
>> Forbidden Planet.
>>
> Oh, come on! How about (in no particular order):
> Blade Runner

I preferred the book.

> 2001, A Space Odyssey

I'll admit to liking the second film I saw in CinemaScope.

> Close Encounters of the Third Kind

I watched that at 4 times normal speed one Christmas.

> Metropolis

I have only seen clips. I don't know if the restoration has been 
released to the public.

> Star Wars

Grow up.

> Brazil

I've not seen it.

> The Matrix
The spoon has no egg.
>

I have seen Star Wars. It is one of the films that drive me non linear 
with their orbital mechanics.

I saw the Martian after reading the book, which is normally a mistake. I 
quite enjoyed that.


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message