Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

21.3k Excellent

1 Follower

  1. Kromm

    S02.E10: The Red Angel

    Honestly, this episode REALLY sucked. Sucked hard. Star Trek is built on contrivance, but this was definitely taking it too far. Honestly, building a torture chair to kill Burnham temporarily, in one of the most painful ways possible was NECESSARY? It builds on a bunch of stupid premises. First that if they HAD been assuming it was Burnham in the future that she'd be fooled by the scenario IN HER OWN PAST. You know. That she'd REMEMBER. Second, that a painless less elaborate scenario, even if still supposedly lethal, wouldn't still suffice. Instead we got the show having a lame excuse for Torture Porn. What the actual fuck? Third, it's not at all clear why the Red Angel, no matter WHO it was, would NEED to be fooled. The scenario clearly illustrates the Angel as on the same side as them, other than the fact that she'd followed into the past by this opposing force. Is the logic supposed to be that the Angel is smart enough to time travel but not smart enough to know she's being tagged along with/followed? Onto the rest of the episode. Again it's just weird and contrived that the Admiral happens to be a Councilor/Shrink/Whatever they call it before Next Gen. I'm not saying those people can't be promoted to high rank, but on a Command Track for general operations or command of a quadrant, or whatever her actual job is, it makes little sense. Her being in command of all Starfleet Shrinks might make sense. But that's not what happened here. It's just a strange choice just to set up that scene with the Doctor. There are other scenes of emotional reconciliation in this episode, like Burnham and Whathername with the breathing thing and their scene, which are perhaps... not contrived... but which do feel a little self indulgent. This bizarro version of Spock, as entertaining as he is, again makes less and less sense each episode. People who don't understand the classic character might see him as always having been a dick. But he wasn't. The point of McCoy constantly harping on his cold logic and lack of humanity is that MCCOY WAS WRONG! McCoy's purpose was indeed to coax more humanity out of Spock, but not by making him more sensitive. It was by going overboard in his reactions and creating comedy, or on rare occasions pathos, around those interactions. Other than in the Pilot, where he spoke like a robot, Spock was portrayed as understanding basic concepts like empathy, at least in the overall sense that being a dick is illogical because it's inefficient, whereas empathy is at least somewhat logical when dealing with illogical beings because motivation and cooperation are efficient. He may not have processed empathy as an emotive response in himself, but he followed the forms of it, the outlines, to fit in. Because it was logical to be polite, at the very least. To not be... a dick. This Spock? Just can't seem to HELP being a dick. It's totally a different character. While these past two episodes in particular wanted to make a point that at least SOME of his previous portrayed dickishness was an attempt to burst Burnham's illusion that she's responsible for all bad things, by pissing her off enough to project the blame outward instead of upon herself, really the idea that he'd use that tactic is really weird. It's a tactic that's simultaneously both too clumsy for Spock, but in a way also too on the nose in terms of understanding emotions to really make sense with the Spock we always knew. Who was shown as being confused by emotions, at the best of times. I don't mind the twist we saw with who the Angel was... in theory. But I fear we're going to get some elaborate total bullshit to explain it. Just like whatever happened with the Section 31 boss is going to get eye rolly too, for other reasons.
  2. Kromm

    S02.E10: The Red Angel

    What a bizarre thing if that's the case. Recast the character, just to kill the character, just to have the original actor take the same position--and it all happening in the same season? WTF?
  3. Kromm

    Captain Marvel (2019)

    All movies need to prove their quality. The debate is over how they do that.
  4. Kromm

    God Friended Me

    They're not claiming rights to the God account. They're saying that he can't discuss the God account through any other outlet. They have exclusive rights to him talking publicly about it.
  5. Kromm

    TMZ On TV

    Remember that Harvey is basically a conservative in many ways (despite being gay and working with/employing a fairly diverse crew).
  6. Kromm

    Which Podcasts Fuel Your Listening Pleasure?

    You'll find searching this topic that My Dad Wrote A Porno is an old favorite here. We all love it! I agree that Conan O'Brien Needs a Friend is great. It's Conan playing with the format in a interesting way. The format is fairly constant, but there are shades to it which differ each time, because he's had to adjust between people who actually ARE his real friends and people where he's applying this faux-filter of "could they be my friends". And I love the way he does ads. This isn't something we are used to him doing on TV, so it's new to him and he clearly has fun with them. David Tennant Does A Podcast is also on my list, like you, and he's been getting interesting people, but aside from that it's not that ambitious. He's a reasonably smart man, which helps, but there are definitely boring parts of it. I'll cautiously recommend at least trying Jonathan Ross' I like Films podcast. Why cautiously? Because I think Ross has slipped a few times and blurted out some dickish things. For example, this week his guest was Jordan Peele, and Ross took the time to keep hammering on the thought that he felt the original Twilight Zone "was mostly rubbish" even after it became clear that Peele not only felt uncomfortable acknowledging that as the host of the new version, but also that Peele actually clearly loved the classic show. And Ross was totally tone deaf to that. But... he's been getting good guests. So it IS worth listening to because of who he's interviewing. Like Conan, here's another traditional media person doing a podcast which involves a lot of playing around with the format. The Ron Burgandy Podcast: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/the-ron-burgundy-podcast-30270227/ I was so shocked to find how much I enjoy this. Why? Because I'm not really a fan of Anchorman. I like Will Ferrell well enough when he's a straightman, like when he did Alex Trebek in the Celebrity Jeopardy sketches on SNL. But when he's the silly one, I tend to dislike those movies. But the Burgandy podcast is GREAT. Again it's because like Conan he's actually playing with the format. He does different things in different episodes. In the February 28, 2019 episode, for example, he does a combination of a Top 10 list and a celebrity interview with Ru Paul. In the March 7, 2019 episode, he totally flips things and does a prolonged skit about being trapped in an elevator, where the pretense of this being a podcast instead of a weird incident in the life of Ron Burgandy is barely adhered to. Then on March 13, 2019 he spends the whole episode singing possible theme songs for his podcast. In other words, he's leveraging being silly in unique ways rather than just endlessly repeating what he did in the Anchorman movies, OR a cliched fake interview format (which is what you'd assume he'd do).
  7. Kromm

    Captain Marvel (2019)

    There's only one Tesseract. Every instance of it we've seen in any Marvel movie is the same one. Then Thanos crushed it and revealed it was just a cube shaped disguise for the blue infinity stone.
  8. We do have to swallow the big pill though that Spock is enough of a petty little bitch that he never even MENTIONS the existence of a sister in decades of Prime continuity. There are plot holes too. of course, between this and "original prime", but Burnham goes far beyond a mere hole.
  9. Kromm

    S02.E06: The Sounds of Thunder

    It's a nice thought, but the main message of that story is that time is very sensitive. That story is LITERALLY the genesis of the phrase "the Butterfly Effect", and I think that's infused enough in our culture that we all know what that means. Star Trek, in contrast, has typically shown time as fairly robust. We see a ridiculous amount of survival of manipulation. True, we know at least one case where it results in a total alternate universe, but that just helps prove that it takes a lot for that to happen, since at least in the way the show has portrayed time travel, we get lots of dire warnings, but not any evidence of infinite amounts of timeline and universe splitting.
  10. Kromm

    S02.E07: Light and Shadows

    ST:E made it clear that Vulcan females can have sex any time they want. And I suppose the relevant parts of The Search For Spock could be interpreted that way too. But the other way around? We've seen Spock have romantic feelings outside of Pon Farr, but that could be explained easily by him being half human. I dunno though. Maybe there's a Vulcan equivalent to Viagra, But another explanation--again supported by Search for Spock--is that the physical aspect is totally separate from the mental bonding. That's clearly a big part of what has to happen between Spock and Saavik in that film. Remember, Saavik is very clear that usually Vulcans don't survive it if they ignore it, and frankly that sounds like a weird result if it's just an exchange of fluids. Maybe the physical part is always possible and the other mentions of Pon Farr are just mischaracterized by Vulcans... who aren't lying, but could very well be deliberately obscuring what it's about.
  11. Kromm

    S02.E08: If Memory Serves

    Or at the very least a version of him who's a petty dick.
  12. Kromm

    Captain Marvel (2019)

    I'm thinking that Howard Stark was part of the founding of Project Pegasus. Mar-Vell, in her disguised identity worked for Project Pegasus. If that's true, it would explain very well how the Tesseract went from Stark to her. Yup.
  13. Kromm

    Captain Marvel (2019)

    Honestly? It sounds weird to say it, but I think its a race thing. Jackson's skin is fairly dark. And I bet they've discovered this process works better with darker skin. You speak of texture and color variation. I bet it's easier to get those things right with his skin color. It would wind up being a hilarious serving of just deserts/irony for the long held issue that film stock, exposure and light levels, has usually been tailored more towards photographing white people if digital technology winds up being easier to work with darker skin,
  14. Kromm

    Captain Marvel (2019)

    I challenge the idea that this is a "feminist" vehicle, although frankly it wouldn't be a big deal if it was. Like any complicated thing, Feminism is a spectrum, and frankly MOST of the spectrum is positive. With some people who claim the label doing negative things, but most not. The culture war deliberately promoting misunderstanding about that is part of the current disaster we are in politically and socially. We've allowed (mostly) positive things to be co-opted by the enemies of those things so that they're soiled. I've seen whining about the film and the actress raised to a fever pitch, often with super-political hard-right-wing undertones, critizing the film, or more properly the actress and/or pre-release impressions of the film, but I don't for a moment think that means ALL criticism of the film from men shares those agendas or is problematic. It's part of these disgusting people's agendas that they've successfully steered a narrative where the idea that Brie Larson, or ANYONE else of importance is "hating on men", "being SJW", or being automatically unfair when someone who happens to be male critiques the film. These a-holes, these monsters, who started all of this based off a badly worded but mostly harmless statement by the actress and turned this into a culture war thing, are victimizing everyone: Brie Larson, genuine fans who are buying the narrative based on the pure volume of negativity they've seen, Marvel, women offended in reaction to the idea that "feminism" is somehow bad (answer: it's NOT). Anyone who feels AFRAID to criticize the film is also a victim of what these evil fck-heads have done. This is not a culture war. It's just a goddamn film. Criticize it all you want. Just be fair and be wary of accepting the baggage they're trying to load on. If the film is marketing somewhat to women? SO WHAT? If the film narrative has girl power chords to it and that seems a bit cliche? Go ahead and say it's cliche. That's different from the screams of "SJW!" and "Feminist" (as a pejorative) following Larson and the film based merely on it being representational and hitting a few cliches (in an overall work which also breaks other cliches, so honestly the average is not that bad). Oh, as to why Carol didn't age? I don't think we need to attribute that to "Kree Powers" because the film makes it clear that the source of her powers is not what what is portrayed in the commercials as the source. I'd say the actual source of her powers explains her (potentially) being long lived or immortal quite well. Although clearly the Kree ARE longer lived than humans anyway, since Ronan looks much the same. But that's a side issue. I really loved that the commercials and trailers had some foilers, and the source of her powers wasn't the only one. Think about the scene in the commercial where she's bleeding. Total Foiler! What we saw in the commercial is NOT how it played out in the film.
  15. Kromm

    Captain Marvel (2019)

    I saw this today and I (mostly) loved it. It wasn't perfect. The mistakes were the kind of problems that a pair of independent film directors would make being put in charge of a big budget FX film. Nothing unforgivable or film ruining. The things that the pre-release butthurt "critics" harped on were NOT those problems. Brie Larson was far better in the role that I thought she'd be, and so of course infinitely better than the army of politically motivated a-holes tossing phrases like "SJW" around the internet connected with her name, for daring to suggest she should be speaking to more women and people of color on her press tour. Or even better than those people with more subtle (but ultimately still sexist) critiques about how she needed to smile more. Hilariously, it was obvious they did some last minute reshoots/pickups to add in a few jokes/potshots addressing stuff like the "smile more" controversy. I laughed extra hard at those. Anyway, while it could be argued that Brie Larson is not a very physical/athletic presence, I did get convinced by the film that she didn't have to be in order to be a hero who shoots blasts out of her hands. What I did buy is every part of the portrayal centering around "Carol" (versus the "Vers" or "Captain Marvel" parts). Those were nimbly and excellently done. The acting AROUND those scenes, by not just Larson, but her co-stars was extraordinary too. Lashana Lynch better get tons of work after this film, she did such a wonderful job. And Akira Akbar slam dunked Monica Rambeau SO hard that whoever plays the grown up version of her is going to face a real challenge. She was the very opposite of an irritating kid actor, and she'd better get dozens of good roles in the next few years too, or there's no justice. Getting back to Brie Larson herself, the Vers parts, which is mainly what we saw in the advertising campaign, was okay for what it was supposed to be. The problems there are writing and directing issues, not acting ones. And the Captain Marvel parts mostly fell prey to ILM doing one of the shittiest jobs I've seen from them in years. The effects on Hala were great. The ships were great. But the Cap herself, in action? Horrible. Ben Mendelsohn, who I've strongly disliked in a lot of his work (mainly for it being super repetitive) wins here. The movie is acted well all around, but he totally wins. If I ever see him do a two dimensional baddie in another film after this I might puke, because he's so totally the opposite of that here. I won't even spoil the big payoff for that in the film near the end. Even the earlier parts of the portrayal were interesting. Here's my hope, nay my DEMAND for Sam Jackson, if we get to see Fury in Endgame. I want to see a sequence where Fury totally acts like the Fury we see in this film when he encounters Carol Danvers. I want other Avengers to witness that and be equal parts mystified and alarmed. It would be hilarious and effective in pushing back on the one dimensionality Fury got to have in the MCU films, the predictability. The plot twist which led into the third act of the movie is one I won't spoil (to keep this spoiler free) but I will say that it's one that changes things from the comics BIG TIME, and I already hear people whining about it online... but I am of the total opposite opinion. It may shut down a few major storylines people expected to get ported over from the comics, but I'm okay with that, since I think it opens some nice new original ones instead. I've also seen a ton of criticism that the early part of the movie is "disjointed". It is, but there's a valid story reason for it, as well as an artistic one. Many of the big film rookie mistakes I mentioned connect to this, but over-all I think the criticisms are wrong--if not in that its disjointed, but in a total misunderstanding or mischaracterization of WHY and how hard or easy it is to watch. I followed it fine. I could have suggested a dozen ways to improve it, but the way it was wasn't so bad I think it ruined anything. There were other pacing mistakes elsewhere in the film too. Again, nothing film ruining but definitely rookie mistakes from ported over Independent film folks. One of my few big ughh reactions had to deal with us learning how Fury actually lost his eye. I did NOT like how they chose to do this. I'm going to come awfully close to spoiling here saying this. I expected Fury's loss of the eye to either be SUPER exotic OR SUPER mundane. Either of those could have been played out interestingly and created a great narrative about Fury. What actually happened was the weird mix of BOTH mundane AND exotic at the same time. I won't say how such a contradictory thing could be, but I bet most who saw it would agree once they think about it. So it frustrated me, because I think they want to play it as mundane and exploit a narrative about that and how his eye loss was so built up as dramatic in the other films... when its not. But the exotic elements of that ruin it for me. There's a weirdness to it that doesn't set up the contrast you'd really need to play up Fury acting mysterious about a perfectly mundane loss. By the way, there's a tribute to Stan Lee at the very beginning of the film that's almost worth the price of admission by itself. I admit it. I cried. The Post credit scenes were pretty much what I expected. One sets up Carol's role going forward in Endgame, and one sews up some plot holes in past films. You won't be surprised by either, once you've seen the rest of the film, assuming you've seen Infinity War, Captain America: The First Avenger, the Thor films, and Guardians of the Galaxy. Anyway, my main advice is to NOT listen to what anyone else says and go into viewing this without pre judgements.