I’m kidding, I agree, but it really just depends on what JJ Abrams or the writers believe. If they have creative control, and they want to preach to us some hippy save the whales (oh wait, that’s already been done) message, then that’s what it’ll be. So who knows, we’ll see. I hope this year’s Star Trek is a sign of what is to come because this movie was pretty awesome.

Without a serious narrative, what kind of story can you tell? You say you want shootout at the OK corral but it can’t mean anything. Then wouldn’t you be happier to just play Asteroids, Pacman or something like that? This past summer’s “Star Trek was about as “Wrath of Khan” like as you could get, without just plain retelling the story. Which is what you suggest. How about they make a comedy?

Todd you shouldn’t waste your time at the movies. If your too young to do things like learn how to sky dive or hang out at the fire house, you should take up trick skating, wrestling, or boxing…

I want a big space battle, things blowing up, people fighting left and right and prime directive be damned!!! Trek in the past has been way to sterile and way too clean. It needs to get dirty and tell a real story. This is why Battlestar Galactica did so well under Moore and Eick.

No more social bull crap. Make something that real trekkies like A MOVIE!!! NOT A PSA. Please someone connected to JJ, read this and take it to heart. After wasting my money on the happening and the day the earth stood stupid, I am getting sick of preachy socially relevant garbage.

BTW if the Sequel is going to be about Khan? Cast Antonio Banderas!!!!! He would make an awesome Khan!!

As for MI4…personally, I think the MI series as gotten progressively better each go-around. MI3 has been my favorite thus far…the storyline was great, the cast was excellent and J.J.’s touch came through brilliantly. I certainly hope he directs the 4th one.

“But it’s BECAUSE of the politics that this movie was so bad.”

It should read “But it’s BECAUSE of the politics that this movie was written so poorly.”

Ultimately it was the plot holes and poor writing all around that made this movie bad in my opinion, and the cause of them making those mistakes is because they were making the movie for political reasons. Hope that sounds more clear than the way I explained it at first…

While watching Rendition, I wonder if you consider these issues. Did they EVER provide ANY explanation to WHY those “suspected terrorist” phone numbers was on his phone bill? They made a passing reference about how some cell numbers are recycled, yet if that was the case, why didn’t he look at the numbers and go “oh, that’s my uncle that lives in Saudi Arabia, his name is [insert name here] and them going “oh crap, the cell phone number used to belong to that guy before it was used in this terror ring or them simply not believing him, but he NEVER provides any reason why those numbers were called by him. Sounds to me like HE’S LYING and that they were right all along about him knowing suspected terrorists… Not to mention, they completely get the meaning of Rendition WRONG in the movie. And then if they had a guy with a marksman rifle to kill the bomber if he didn’t go through with it, and the target was SITTING OUTSIDE in that cafe, WHY DIDN’T THE MARKSMAN SIMPLY SHOOT THE TARGET instead of waiting for that guy to go bomb the cafe or shooting the bomber????? Hello? You’re a movie reviewer, and these retarded things didn’t jump out at you??

For me, I’m not bashing it just for the politics. It’s PART of the reason, but not all. The movie in itself from an objective point of view was like two separate movies. One was a love story; the other was an anti-torture story. The love story was fairly ok in my opinion, but the anti-torture story felt tacked on, thus all of the plot holes.

And in case you’re wondering why I say they misused Rendition, Rendition is a practice started by Bill Clinton of allowing for terror suspects that are captured outside of the USA to be questioned either on the spot or in a close by neighboring city/country instead of shipping the prisoner back to the USA, then going through the criminal justice system. It’s a TIME SAVING EFFORT since information gathering on matters regarding terrorism is time sensitive.

In the movie, they arrest this guy FROM THE USA, and then bring him out of the country to question him… Um… hello?? Besides getting the meaning of Rendition wrong, isn’t that simply counter-productive since questioning him in the USA where he was arrested would have been much faster than flying him overseas first??? I mean, seriously.

And I also hate when these conspiracy movies make it seem like the government makes decisions and everyone enforces these controversial or illegal things like puppets or pawns. These movie makers are lazy and don’t want to bother with the complexities in regard to the fact that the people working in the government agencies are human, the people working at that airport in the movie are human. It can be you or me. Let’s say you were working in that airport, and some guys in suits decide they want to illegally arrest this guy to ship him overseas to torture him. You see them yank him from the security checkpoint, then they tell you “erase all records of him arriving.” Are you telling me you’re just going to turn to the computer, erase the records, then go about your business?? Come on, that’s how it always happens in movies, but in real life, someone somewhere in that process of them getting the guy, someone will disagree with it and say something to the press or at the very least gossip it to his/her friends and word will get out. That’s why a lot of these super complicated conspiracy theories can never work; someone will say something, no matter what the risk.

Also, you think if the government was doing something so secretive that they wouldn’t have thought of covering their tracks better with the credit card records?? And that woman working for the government was soooo easy to crack and admit what the government was doing with that guy. I mean, it took that guy helping the wife, like, what, 2 questions to get her to give it away??? WOW, I thought they would have trained a high ranking government official better than that…

These are the reasons why I felt the movie Rendition was poorly written, poorly executed, and just bad all around. It’s not just for the political reasons. But it’s BECAUSE of the politics that this movie was so bad. They didn’t make the movie because it was a good script and then take the time to perfect it, they made the movie out of opportunity, another excuse to make a political statement, and that’s all it was, and that’s why it sucked. There are plenty of movies that happen to have political implications in them that were good, but they were good because they weren’t made for that reason and that reason alone.

@nowhereman

I don’t think movie industry labor unions have had an effect on the economy, but I will not back down from my statement because it is because of some of these uber powerful labor unions like the AFL-CIO, Teamsters, and those for the auto industries that have contributed a great amount to the downward spiral of American business. Much of the “outsourcing” (which has been a problem since the 70′s-80′s despite the media trying to make it seem like Bush started it, watch Michael Moore’s own documentary Roger and Me as proof, lol, yes, I’m using one of his own mockumentaries against him…) is due to labor unions. Businesses need to stay competitive, and in order to do so they have to keep costs down, and part of that is the cost to employ people. And while I sympathize that some jobs don’t pay that much, that’s part of the incentive for people to want to better themselves, get higher education and seek better employment. But when some of these more powerful, politician supported, labor unions want to milk more member dues, they make it so that hiring American workers is simply not profitable, and so they go elsewhere.

The auto industry is where you see the most drastic impact of labor unions. When you have a janitor in GM who sweeps the floor at a whopping $70 per hour thanks to the terms dictated by the union, or when they can’t lay people off, so the jobs replaced by robots, not only did they have to invest in the robots and maintain them, but they are required by the terms set by the union to keep paying those individuals. Yay for those individuals, and yay for the unions that get member dues from each one of them as long as they are getting paid, but what about GM that now has to pay people to clock in and sit in a lounge watching tv?? Then, to milk even more money, the union dictates that even IF someone is fired or laid off, they have to keep getting paid 80% of their salary even after their employment with them has ended… So GM has to pay current AND previous employees… Again, yay for the union that gets dues from each of them. And they wonder why GM LOSES about $300 or more for every car built and sold. They really have no reason to sell cars, and this “government bail out” is only a band-aid, they will continue to lose money for every car sold, all of that bail out money will run out, and guess what, it’s begging time again. Instead of doing the logical thing, which is to end that ridiculous rule of paying people you fired, fire those people sitting in the lounge doing nothing, and start paying the janitor what that job really deserves. Oh yah, sounds so insensitive and bad for the people right? Well, how bad do you think the rest of the employees who actually work there will have it when GM goes out of business and they are ALL out of a job? That’s what’s going to happen if the unions don’t change their terms. I’m all for supporting worker rights, but there’s a point when some of these unions are just too powerful and too corrupt.

But again, I haven’t heard anything about the IATSE and for all I know you guys are not corrupt in any way. There are many unions that do what they’re supposed to do, heck, even cops have a union, but those I talk about have gotten so powerful to the point where even the government will never touch them for any wrong-doing, they need to be stopped.

So sorry if it offended you, but of course I’m not saying all labor unions, but certain ones definitely have messed up our economy BIG TIME.

Alright, I’ve typed too much, lol.

As for MI:4, I’ll pass. I thought MI:3 was awful and I couldn’t even sit through the whole thing. Action movies should rarely be longer than 2 hours. I felt like a decade slipped away watching MI:3.

This guy says all one need know 3:39-4:05 .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWD991zZmSQ

Well said, indeed. Mankind’s essential nature is the same as it’s ever been both on an individual and group/government level. All that changes is the names of the groups.

Vic

Normally I find your comments fairly insightful, if not a tad too edgy, But as the Vice president of a Labor Union and a cardholder in IATSE (The very Labor Union you’ll see listed at the end of practically EVERY film you’ve ever seen…) I can’t help but feel sadened and insulted by your remark. We work very hard to help provide the entertainment that others get to opine, review, and hopefully enjoy while trying to make a living just like everyone else. We have technicians on film sets, television productions, and on location worldwide who take great pride in their trade and strive to provide our employers with a top notch, reliable, and skilled workforce to help them realise their visions from Broadway to Hollywood. Please consider this the next time you leave a theater having felt that you got your money’s worth and a small vacation from the current concerns of the economy. We’re part of it too. We worry for our jobs and families just like the rest of you, and as such I would respectfully request your support instaed of ridecule…

I really liked both Lions for Lambs and Rendition. I thought those two were unfairly shunned at the box office (particularly Lambs which, did that not cause the failure of American Artists that Tom Cruise had just become the head of?). I thought the way they played about with what happened when in Rendition was really clever. And both films, I thought, were very interesting, regardless if you agree with what they were saying or not. Excellent performances in both flicks, too.