Quote:
Originally Posted by Gillianren
According to Richard Roeper and the critic from the Village Voice, it's not even interesting. The first twenty minutes or so are very pretty. The movie itself is very boring.
|
Yeah, some have liked it, and some haven't.
Entertainment Weekly's Lisa Schwarzbaum liked it and gave it a B+. Rotten Tomatoes gave it a 74% 'certified fresh' rating. Roger Ebert (
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/...VIEWS/70702003) gave it a decent review saying:
Quote:
|
So, anyway, younger girls won't like this movie, unless they know what happens under an automobile hood. Younger boys won't like it because the only thing that's possibly going to blow up real good is the sun. But science-fiction fans will like it, and also brainiacs, and those who sometimes look at the sky and think, man, there's a lot going on up there, and we can't even define precisely what a soliton is.
|
Others didn't, either complaining that it was derivative, or saying that the third part seemed tacked on and sucked.
We'll see. I'm planning to see it the 27th and will give my honest (I swear!
) feedback on the BAUT afterwards. I have been looking forward to this movie for
months, so I may not be the most objective of reviewers, however.
__________________
The dose makes the poison--Paracelsus (1493-1541)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paracelsus
I don't know. That's why I'm asking--
Noclevername
Intelligence may not be clearly defined, but you know stupid when you see it--
Noclevername
Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge--Carl Sagan (1934-1996)