john-4399

I am writing this review after viewing just the pilot - so it is early days! I felt it necessary to contribute for the sake of perspective as most of the early scribes are quite bizarre - representing love or hate and very little in between. The truth simply has to be somewhere in the middle! It's too early for me to give an IMDb score after just one episode but I suspect it will probably turn out to be around "6". Possibly I will go higher or lower as I see how things progress. Nonethess, I think it was a solid start and before the haters accuse me of working on the show - I don't. Heck, I don't even live in the USA (or Canada)! Why the haters seem to imagine the reboot would be a carbon copy of the original baffles me - why would it be? Conversely, how can it be such an injustice to the orginal when both series were created by the same guy? Doesn't make sense! I liked the original but thought it lost its way towards the end. I was less impressed with "Pearson" despite being a fan of Gina Torres. This latest incarnation, to me, has had a little more time and thought spent on it. The production and cinematography were top notch and Stephen Amell is a great actor and well chosen for the part he plays which is substantially different from his time as the "Green Arrow". A lot is packed into the pilot that offers potential. I shall certainly be investing some time in the series as it might just be another hit. For my part, I am glad it is not a Carbon Copy - that would have been incredibly tedious.

As a lieflong fan of the Trek universe, I was really looking forward to this "made for TV" movie and had high hopes for it. Sadly it has left me very disappointed. It does not have the splendour of the motion pictures and neither does it have the charm of any of the TV series. The only thing that holds it together at all is Michelle Yeoh. Without her, this would barely be any better than some of the Fan Films. There is no other "star" power to help pull this movie along or even the odd appearance of the occasional recognisable Trek star. As such, the vibe was more of a Star Wars one than a Trek one with considerably worse CGI that felt like a throwback to the 80s. The story was weak and predictable and not even up to the standard of "Discovery" (not one of favourite series anyway) despite being penned by three of the writers from the first series of that show. Overall, it felt low budget. I have reluctantly scored this as a "6" but would have given it "5.5" if I could. It is better than a "5" purely based on Michelle Yeoh's performance (nobody else had an ounce of her acting chops). This is from someone who gave TNG "9" to give you an idea of the scale of my disillusionment. I sincerely hope this is not an indication of the direction the franchise is going to take. Because, if it is, it will surely die . . .

I don't understand why there is such venom hurled at this film. Is it just because there is some kind of malaise with Comic Book Hero / Marvel content at the moment? Sure, it is not the best of its type but it is certainly nowhere near as bad as many have suggested. In my book it is no worse than Morbius and not as banal as The Marvels. According to IMDb box office info, the movie grossed close on $100M (2024) and turned in a small profit - so enough people went to see it. This says to me that it is not as much a "lemon" as many would have us believe. While The Marvels was bigger budget, at time of writing, it has still not returned a profit. On the other hand, there is no doubt super hero films seem to be going through a lacklustre period. Having read many of the poor reviews before I saw it, I was expecting to hate it - but I didn't. The 2 hours passed quite painlessly for me and I was sufficiently engrossed to see it through to the conclusion. Dakota Johnson turned in a good performance with the material she had and the supporting cast were quite plausible. It is by no means the best super hero movie I have ever seen and I probably won't ever watch it again but it is not atrocious.