Rate the last film you watched

1161719212230

Comments

  • Triangle (2009): 8/10
    I've seen this a couple of times before, and it never fails to grip me entirely.  I watched it again last night and it's still as great as it ever was.  To say very much about it would be giving it away, but here's the gist: a group of friends who go sailing on a small yacht are caught up in some nasty weather that ruins the boat, and then shortly after, they come across a large ship that they're able to board.  The ship is mysteriously empty, except for the one person aboard who is trying to kill them.
    Here are some minor spoilers that may or may not ruin it for you, so read at your own risk:
    Turns out the ship is caught up in some kind of time loop, and these friends have been boarding the ship, and being killed, over and over again.  The rest of the film is one character attempting to end the loop, with mixed results.

    It's a really engaging, sometimes very creepy, most times mind-bending thriller.  Definitely worth a watch (or three) if you're into that kind of thing.
  • SimonKJonesSimonKJones Moderator
    edited August 2013
    DREDD 10/10
    OK OK, it probably doesn't really deserve a 10. But I'm giving it a 10 as a reward for obliterating all memory of Stallone's awful Judge Dredd movie.
    Passion and glorious intent bursts out of this film. The filmmakers know exactly what kind of Dredd movie they want to make, and they go and do it. This is Dredd from the 1970s and filmmaking from the 1970s. Gritty, dirty, nasty, glitchy. Raw. Uncensored.Tight, compact, targeted, efficient. There's no waste in this film. No flab or unnecessary scenes.
    Combine that with a stunning performance from Karl Urban - restrained, masked throughout, yet still managing to get inside Dredd's head. Each line delivery is perfection.
    The trainee judge is also played to perfection - nicely avoiding the usual cliches of female sidekicks.
    I love that Dredd never had to rescue her. In fact, she rescues Dredd.
    I love that she challenges Dredd's authoritarian, black and white reading of the law, and forces him to see things with more nuance, but that they don't make it into a big deal. As a theme it's there, but they never pause to have a tedious sermon or moral debate.

    So, so good.
  • Completely agree, was my first Blu-Ray 3D buy, and worth every penny.  Apparently there's a petition running to get things moving on a sequel, whether it happens or not I don't know but the DVD/Blu-Ray market has picked up steam on this.  Was such a shame this didn't do better at the box office.  I was aware and looking forward to this film originally but then never knew it had been release, another casualty of shoddy marketing here.
     


    DREDD 10/10
    OK OK, it probably doesn't really deserve a 10. But I'm giving it a 10 as a reward for obliterating all memory of Stallone's awful Judge Dredd movie.
    Passion and glorious intent bursts out of this film. The filmmakers know exactly what kind of Dredd movie they want to make, and they go and do it. This is Dredd from the 1970s and filmmaking from the 1970s. Gritty, dirty, nasty, glitchy. Raw. Uncensored.Tight, compact, targeted, efficient. There's no waste in this film. No flab or unnecessary scenes.
    Combine that with a stunning performance from Karl Urban - restrained, masked throughout, yet still managing to get inside Dredd's head. Each line delivery is perfection.
    The trainee judge is also played to perfection - nicely avoiding the usual cliches of female sidekicks.
    I love that Dredd never had to rescue her. In fact, she rescues Dredd.
    I love that she challenges Dredd's authoritarian, black and white reading of the law, and forces him to see things with more nuance, but that they don't make it into a big deal. As a theme it's there, but they never pause to have a tedious sermon or moral debate.

    So, so good.
  • DREDD 10/10
    OK OK, it probably doesn't really deserve a 10. But I'm giving it a 10 as a reward for obliterating all memory of Stallone's awful Judge Dredd movie.
     

    That alone should be worth watching.... Dredd to me, was fantastic!
    GI Joe Retalliation 4/10
    Outside of some cool action sequences, it's pretty forgettable.  I can't even remember what happened in Rise of Cobra.
    Oblivion 7/10
    I love science fiction and some of the scenes and ideas (like the tower and bubble ship) but I kind of got lost in the story and what happened.  Maybe I was too sleepy while watching it but there was a couple of times I said; "Huh?"  But if you like sci-fi, this is worth watching.
  • edited August 2013
    The Conjuring: 8/10
    Okay, James Wan, you've won me over.  I really wanted to like Insidious, but it never clicked for me, and got downright corny at times (though after seeing this, I want to go back and try it again), but The Conjuring really shines.  The only other film of his I've seen was Saw, which was good, but the endless, terrible sequels soured me on it.
    The Conjuring, on the other hand, is a properly great horror film.  There are still some cheesy jump scares (made worse for me by an audience of people who are incredibly easily scared, apparently.  I've never heard so many people screaming at such insignificant things before), but Wan really brought the dread in full force.  That's what makes a good horror film for me.  This also has beautiful and inventive cinematography, and really outstanding performances from everyone in the cast.  
    Highly recommended to horror fans.  This is one of the best I've seen in a long time.
  • Elysium - 8.5/10
    This is a solid movie.  Its not rewriting the play books by way of story.. Its simple there are the haves and the have nots in the movie.  They show a what its like to be a have and what its like to be a have not.  They came up with a good way to thrust the main hero into needing to quickly go from being a have not to being a have.  That makes you care about the character and his struggle.  The VFX in this movie are great because things were good but relegated the background.  You are not focused on looking at the impressive vfx and so it makes them more subtle.  Oh the flying ship in the background with its thrusters giving off their blue flame near the center of the screen do not take draw attention away.  I was looking at this stuff because I am trying to improve and you gotta admire how its done.  I like the characters and the ending was predictable if you know the directors work.
  • Pacific Rim 9/10
    I took my daughter to see the matinee showing and we had an incredible time.  I think the last time I felt this overwhelemed by the spectacle of it was when I saw the Original Star Wars Trilogy in the 70s as a kid.
    There was something about it that was just a solid imaginary film that felt almost exausting after watching it.
    What was really exciting to me was the sound design.  The impacts of the Jaeger's fists were solid and the heavy sound of the clunky feet and gears were spot on.
    What I liked soooo much about the Jaeger designs were that the body parts all made sense.  Simon and I discussed this before on the FXHome forums, but with Transformers, I never understood how they all worked in a believeable way.  In robot form, they all looked nothing like their comic book counterparts and outside of Optimus Megatron and Bumblebee, you had no idea who was who.  Where as with the Jaegers, all of them had unique looks.
    The only takeaway I saw was there were a number of r scenes that just were not necessary and could have been cut - and not because the movie felt long, it was just not necessary.
  • Triem23Triem23 Moderator
    Pacific Rim 9/10
    I took my daughter to see the matinee showing and we had an incredible time.  I think the last time I felt this overwhelemed by the spectacle of it was when I saw the Original Star Wars Trilogy in the 70s as a kid.
    There was something about it that was just a solid imaginary film that felt almost exausting after watching it.
    What was really exciting to me was the sound design.  The impacts of the Jaeger's fists were solid and the heavy sound of the clunky feet and gears were spot on.
    What I liked soooo much about the Jaeger designs were that the body parts all made sense.  Simon and I discussed this before on the FXHome forums, but with Transformers, I never understood how they all worked in a believeable way.  In robot form, they all looked nothing like their comic book counterparts and outside of Optimus Megatron and Bumblebee, you had no idea who was who.  Where as with the Jaegers, all of them had unique looks.
    The only takeaway I saw was there were a number of r scenes that just were not necessary and could have been cut - and not because the movie felt long, it was just not necessary.


    Boy, do I agree with you on Transformers. There'd be fight sequences where I had no idea which robot was beating up which other robot, and, frankly, I didn't really care much. (Then I'd just go watch the 1980's movie again, because it's pretty damn epic--and Orson Wells!)
    One thing about Pacific Rim--according to an interview with Gullermo del Toro, he would have ILM set up virtual camera rigs for the CGI shots--say, four to six per scene--in locations where the camera could actually have been, then effectively had ILM "Cut" between those cameras during fight scenes. Since the camera wasn't doing that stupid/annoying "HEY, LOOK IT'S A CGI CAMERA AND IT CAN MOVE ANYWHERE, SO LET'S DO A 1080 DEGREE ROTATION WITH TWO AXES OF TRANSLATION IN A 10 SECOND SHOT!" crap, and the cameras themselves were grounded in the scene, it just added to the verisimilitude of the fx shots. Smart.

  • edited August 2013
    Act of Valor 2/10
     
    Not entirely sure where to start. Its bland, predictable and fairly dull. There are is only one action scene I felt really had any weight to it. And the acting is horrible. The "real life Navy SEALs" did a good job when it came to the action. But overall its not even a decent action movie, let alone a war movie. That directors of this movie should be ashamed of the script, which borderline abuses the real Navy SEALs who are literally giving their lives in the name of freedom.
  • Elysium - 7/10
    Entertaining, yet a bit predictable; had some awesome sequences and a certain effects shot that was rather incredible, it's also great to see Sharlto Copley as an antagonist.
    Alan Partridge: Alpha Papa - 8/10
    Huge Partridge fan and the film didn't disappoint, funniest film i've seen in a cinema in a long time, although I think people who don't know the character and Norwich very well may not 'get it'.
    The Worlds End - 5.5/10
    Rather disappointed by this one, very few big laughs and ultimately forgettable. Edgar Wright's visual style is excellent as always though. May have to give this one a second try later as it was watched on a pub crawl, which we though would be appropriate... Maybe it wasn't.
  • edited September 2013
    World War Z:  3/10
    Have you ever seen a zombie movie before?  Yes?  Well, there's nothing new here.  Take a wild guess about how the plot works out, and you're most likely right.  Brad Pitt is chased by zombies, then has a serious conversation with someone, then gets chased by more zombies, then takes a trip to another country.  Repeat that a few times and throw in some contrived "We know how to stop this now" plot, and there you have it.  Oh, Brad Pitt's character has a family that have no relevance to the plot whatsoever?  O...kay... Cool.  That must mean something really dramatic happens where the outcome is uncertain, right?  Nah, not really.  You already know how this movie ends.  It's incredibly safe.  Nothing of consequence ever happens, and even if it does, it's something that can be undone immediately and with little fanfare.  There is never any sense that things are going to go wrong for our heroes, because we've already seen this plot a millions times.  I really wish they had tried harder to make the film engaging, and spend less time trying to think of cool ways for the zombies to twitch.
    The acting is... fine.  Nothing spectacular or even really engaging.  The CGI is terrible.  I know it's much cheaper to use CGI than to hire thousands of extras and military vehicles, but sometimes it's worth going that little extra mile.  Thankfully, this isn't one of those times, so the middling compositing and models and animation don't really take much away.  They're just bad effects on top of a bad movie.  No big deal.  And as I've hopefully already made clear, it just isn't interesting at all.  If you've seen any zombie fiction, you have a good idea of what to expect, and it never even tries to do anything very different.  It's just another zombie movie pumped out for zombies to pay ten bucks to see and think "WHOA THAT ZOMBIE PILE WAS SO COOL" and then forget about forever.
    World War ZZZZZZZZZZ.
  • edited September 2013
    Oh man, do I so massively disagree. I thought World War Z was one of the most adeptly-directed, smart, thoughtful, and well-acted blockbusters of the summer. A huge miscalculation on my part, blindsided by how surprisingly good it was. What's best, I felt like the focus wasn't on trying to reinvent (or even stick to the tired conventions) of zombies, but more to how the human aspect reacts. From the virologist student's speech on the airplane about the nature of disease and cures, to the small moments of stillness in the W.H.O. facility- I was really baffled at how elegantly small and simple lots of such a seemingly-bloated movie were. And they were the best parts, too. That along with, despite it being spoiled in the trailers, the plane crash element. Mostly by the sheer ballsiness of that whole prospect, and killing tons of non-zombie people to do it.
    Also I saw Blue Jasmine, The Spectacular Now, The World's End, Riddick, and Drinking Buddies the past 2 weeks. Should write something about a couple of those, soon. Here's what I had to say about Kick-Ass 2 on the Atomic page, for anyone interested:
    Kick-Ass 2.
    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/kick_ass_2_2013/
    Not going to lie, this was pretty shocking. Just got out of Kick-Ass 2 and never would have expected such a low Tomatometer rating.
    While the trailers and promotional materials leave much to be desired, Kick-Ass 2 proves to be an adequately dark, crass follow-up to the first film, and reminded us of what we loved about it: The brutal, uniquely-grim streak the film paints that somehow manages to also tip-toe the line of being completely silly and ludicrously-fun and do so pretty effortlessly.
    Add to that potent combination a series of excellent set pieces, higher stakes, and genre-blending tonal shifts that work, and you've got a rock-solid sequel.
    Then there's the fact that Aaron Johnson and Chloe Moretz, two of the best up-and-coming actors of their respective ages, are never better in their roles; and Jim Carrey offers a supremely scene-chewing, thoroughly-memorable replacement as 'Colonel Stars And Stripes' to Nicolas Cage's inspired turn as 'Big Daddy' in the first film.
    It may not look it, and many may not say it. But Kick-Ass 2 is so much more than the poorly-greenscreened, lukewarm follow-up the trailers make it seem.
    It's a gritty, well-balanced, well-directed, and cleverly-written blockbuster with hard-R comedy and pulpy violence that takes advantage of the unique vision and tone Matthew Vaughn.
    It's thematically-strong and relevant, fun and funny, vile and violent. And totally worth checking out.

  • Not something I can admit happens very often but I agree with Andrew on this one, WWZ took me a little by surprise at how good I thought it was. I was never distracted by the CGI and thought it worked quite well. I really liked the zombies in this too. There were some well done 'intense' scenes scattered throughout the film and it was all gelled together well and never really let up. I thought it was a solid 8.
    There was 1 single point where I was shaking my head.....
    where the youngest daughter disappears in the hallway before they're let in to that familys apartment. All I could think was we're going down that annoying child route, but was pleasantly surprise when it stopped right there and didn't happen again. In fact I think taking the family out of the bulk of the film was probably the best thing they did and helped avoid those annoying children moments... War of the Worlds has scarred me for life in regards to children in sci-fi/horror films.
  • Looper - 9/10
    Oh yes. I'm really, really loving the resurgence in proper sci-fi, courtesy of Duncan Jones and, now, Rian Johnson. Looper is one of the tightest films I've seen in a long time, perfectly paced and delivering idea upon idea so that you're never left to think too much about what's going on. It sets up its own rules and goes for it.
    Brilliantly, the narrative structure of the film is tailored directly to a time travel story. The storytelling bounces back and forth just as much as the story iteslf, which is a genius move.
    Aolso, JGL's performance...wowsers. Amazingly subtle work to merge with Willis' work.
    Can all sci-fi movie funding go to Duncan Jones and Rian Johnson from now on, please?
  • World War Z...
    Movie was ok... it was interesting to read later where the new third act kicked in and what the original ending was. This was better than that.
    My biggest problem was the fact it doesn't resemble, in any way, shape or form, the book!
    I know that movies differ from books all the time, but the only thing these had in common was the title.
    I didn't think the book was so well known it was worth purchasing the rights just for the name. So why call it World War Z??? Why not just Brad vs Zombies or something? (I'm not entirely kidding)
  • If it had been called Brad Vs Zombies, and Pitt played himself, then I would definitely have gone to see it.
    The third act is from the original screenplay written by Straczynski. He was taken off the project and it was rewritten a million times and shot, then they realised the ending wasn't working and brought back some bits and pieces from his original draft to form the new third act. A fairly mental production/post-production example.
  • Elysium - 8/10
    Great, but not as great as District 9.
    World War Z - 7/10
    Fun action/zombie movie. Nothing like the book of course. 3rd act in the lab, all I could think the whole time is: Jurassic Park 3rd act, raptors in the kitchen with the kids.
  • Oh man, do I so massively disagree.

    Well, that's not too surprising, is it? ;)  Really, I wish I had your talent for finding things to love in nearly every film you see.  I seem to hate more films than I enjoy these days, and it's getting old.  Being hyped up about a movie and then being massively disappointed by it like I was with WWZ is a very disheartening experience.
    But to balance out my scathing review of what I thought was a dismally dull film, here are a couple I enjoyed!
    Stoker: 8/10
    Chan-wook Park directs a screenplay by Wentworth Miller?  Kinda sounds like a crazy idea, but it works.  Most of the time.  This film is remarkable in it's visual beauty, and in the performances from its three leads, which are phenomenal. Matthew Goode wears his best Norman Bates shoes, and is sublimely creepy.  Definitely the standout performance.
    I found this to be extremely engaging up until the third act, when, despite keeping everything together and making fine sense, it just felt a little less well thought out than the rest of the film.  Something of an anti-climax that left me wanting something a bit more.  Still a fine ending to a great film, but I thought it could have been a little more suspenseful, I guess.
    The cinematography is perfect, as well as the sort of timeless, or out-of-time, art design and costuming.  You get the feeling that this house and its residents are stuck decades in the past, while modernity surrounds them.  It's very interestingly done, and that atmosphere really helps make the story feel fresh, even though it's something that we've all seen before.

    Pain & Gain: 6/10
    I honestly expected to hate this entirely, but it was very enjoyable.  Mark Wahlberg is excellent in pretty much everything, and actually, so is Dwayne Johnson.  The two of them together is a bit of a masterstroke, and makes for a really fun, and funny black comedy.  Not really too much to say about this, I guess.  It was entertaining and nothing really upset me that much.  Not high art or anything, but worthwhile.

  • edited September 2013
    I don't read much fiction so I am seldom faced with a story being different in a movie. With that-
    WWZ:  8/10
    I'm not one who usually goes for zombie movies. I've seen quite a few over the years, including the original Dawn of the Dead (and it's remake), but none have ever creeped me out as much as WWZ. I like the onset of the problem as it sweeps through the city and things get wierder and wierder. There were a few times I could tell the zombies weren't real but overall I thought the FX were above average as there were more times I couldn't tell they were CG zombies. What I really enjoyed was the lack of gore and more left to the imagination in that respect. Neither was it predictable as previous zombie movies I've seen have been. Glad the family was ditched after the first half hour. Can't wait to watch it again with friends next week. :)
  • Cloverfield: 7/10
    It was a really good idea, but it was hard to tell what was going on at points.
  • The World's End: 9/10
    The third installment of the so-named "Blood and Ice Cream/Three Flavors Cornetto trilogy might be the best film of the three. It's not as laugh out loud funny as "Shaun of the Dead," or "Hot Fuzz," but it doesn't have to be.
    It's a bit of a slow burner, focusing most of the first half on building up the character relationships between Gary King (Simon Pegg) and his old mates Peter (Eddie Marsan), Oliver (Martin Freeman), Steven (Paddy Considine) and Andy (Nick Frost) as Gary rounds up the old gang to finish an aborted pub crawl from 20-odd years before. The larger plotline of alien subversion, while hinted at and subtly built up, doesn't even get going until about the midpoint of the film. Still, my girlfriend wasn't aware of the alien plotline (I teased her about not paying attention to the trailers), and the initial revelation that all is not what it seems in the town of Newton Haven was very effectively done, bringing her to the edge of her seat with an audible gasp. From there the events spiral up, raising the stakes nicely, and bringing the plot to a conclusion that I doubt the audience will see coming--a suitable and interesting way of resolving the plot.
    Wright has worked with this ensemble before and does his usual excellent job of wringing subtle nuance and depth out of the cast. DP Bob Pope gives Wright and his editors beautifully shot footage to play with, and the effects work and color grade make this film look like it cost a lot more than it did.
    Every film in the "Cornetto Trilogy" shares a common theme of an iconoclastic, immature protagonist being forced my circumstance to take stock of himself and his place in society. "World's End," however is showing the aging of it's writers. And I mean that in a good way. The Gary King character, who, frankly, for all his initial manic energy and false bonhomie is rather unlikeable, has hidden depths and despair that are slowly and subtly revealed over the course of the movie, and the rest of the posse as well have their own issues and problems doled out over the course of the narrative. Overall, "World's End" shows increasing skill from Pegg and Wright at generating well-rounded characters without relying on clunky exposition. And despite the far-fetched nature of the core plotline, "World's End" feel more grounded in reality than the other two films of the trilogy.
    Also, the redhead is really hot.
  • edited October 2013
    Gravity: 10/10
    A largely effects driven movie about survival in space. Great vid and sound effects, music, acting, and in 3D, truly spectacular.
    With director Alfonso Cuaron's  long, smooth camera shots it is difficult to tell where any edits were made even when the camera gets inside the helmet of Dr. Ryan Stone as she floats helplessly in the vast expanse of space.
    Must see in 3D!
  • Rush - Beyond The Lighted Stage: 10/10

     

    Yeah, I know -  "what the heck is THAT doing on this thread? There's no cool effects!!"  :))
     

    But the thing is: since I've been slowly but surely getting my head around all things VFX, grading, etc since I started working with Hitfilm...I now find myself noticing things in movies like this that tie in with the various things I've learned here, that I really wouldn't have paid attention to beforehand.
    For example, their apparent use of old 2D photos of the band to create subtle psuedo-parallax 3D effects in the same way as shown in Simon's tutorial "Convert 2D photos into 3D scenes" - watching this now suddenly creates many "Aha!" moments. And this is starting to work its way into almost everything I watch anymore, sci-fi-FX-filled or not.  :)

     

    As for the 10/10 rating: well, what can I say...I'm a huge Rush fan and loved the way they put the whole story together. The subtle but nice use of effects like those with the old photos was just the nice icing on the cake for a movie/documentary that wasn't an effects-fest at all or meant to be.  ;)

  • Gravity: 10/10
    A largely effects driven movie about survival in space. Great vid and sound effects, music, acting, and in 3D, truly spectacular.
    With director Alfonso Cuaron's  long, smooth camera shots it is difficult to tell where any edits were made even when the camera gets inside the helmet of Dr. Ryan Stone as she floats helplessly in the vast expanse of space.
    Must see in 3D!

    I just saw it with my daughter.  We absolutley loved the beauty of the film - It's what the big screen was made for.  100 minutes is a perfect running time.
    It's probably the closest thing I'll ever experience to actual space.

  • edited October 2013
    Escape From Tomorrow: 6/10
    Don't let a less-than-amazing score scare you away from watching this.  I think it should be required viewing for filmmakers, in fact.  It's probably the most fascinating film I've seen in a long time.
    It was shot almost entirely on-location at Walt Disney World without permission.  They removed the music from rides, and do various other things to bring it into fair use territory, but it's never shy about the fact that it takes place at Disney World.  It's a fairly remarkable feat, actually.  You can imagine how it was pulled off, but it's just so surreal.  The fact that they have entire scripted sequences that take place on rides with the general public surrounding them, presumably ignorant to the fact that they're in a movie is just amazing to me.  So I would call this a brilliant film, even though at times it is very amateurish.
    It's also hilarious, by the way.  Look into it.
  • edited October 2013
    Gravity: 10/10
    I don't even know what to say.  Alfonso Cuarón has created his masterpiece, and the greatest space film of all time, and what is probably the most important film of the year.  I know it took a lot for him to get it made the way he wanted it made, and it was absolutely worth every effort.  It is unbelievably intense, horrifying, heartbreaking, and sublimely beautiful.  It is my favorite film of 2013 without question, and probably in my top five favorites of all time.  I would not hesitate to call this a perfect film, and it doesn't matter if the physics don't add up, or if trajectories are inaccurate, blah blah blah.  Anyone who lets something like that hamper their enjoyment of this film is missing the point of watching movies in general.
    Absolutely see it in 3D, IMAX if you can.  Gravity is an experience that is not to be missed.  It's not a film that you stop watching, it's a film that releases you.
  • So did you like it or not?
  • edited October 2013
    I liked it about as much as one can like a Sandra Bullock movie, I suppose.
  • Gravity: 10/10
    I don't even know what to say.  Alfonso Cuarón has created his masterpiece, and the greatest space film of all time, and what is probably the most important film of the year.  I know it took a lot for him to get it made the way he wanted it made, and it was absolutely worth every effort.  It is unbelievably intense, horrifying, heartbreaking, and sublimely beautiful.  It is my favorite film of 2013 without question, and probably in my top five favorites of all time.  I would not hesitate to call this a perfect film, and it doesn't matter if the physics don't add up, or if trajectories are inaccurate, blah blah blah.  Anyone who lets something like that hamper their enjoyment of this film is missing the point of watching movies in general.
    Absolutely see it in 3D, IMAX if you can.  Gravity is an experience that is not to be missed.  It's not a film that you stop watching, it's a film that releases you.

    Who has time to add up the physics when they're watching a movie? You'd have to be like.....a super-nerd or something.
    I bet Sheldon Cooper wouldn't even care being caught up in the spellbinding, flawless camera panning, special effects all the while wondering if Dr. Stone is going to make it or not.
    You can't help but be mesmerized by it; if you aren't, you're in the wrong theatre!

  • edited October 2013
    Who has time to add up the physics when they're watching a movie? You'd have to be like.....a super-nerd or something.

    You just answered your own question.  Look around the internet and you'll find plenty of people criticising the fact that the orbits are incorrect and whatever else.  I'm sure there are a lot of people who went to see it specifically to see if it's 100% accurate or not, just so they'd have something to write about on their blog.  But like I said, that misses the point entirely.


Sign In or Register to comment.