krameriffic
Member
Whether the Plinkett character makes a good point or not, its pretty inane to try to cite the (comedy) review as some kind of law instead of coming up with a single original thought. Particularly given that the Generations review in question is pretty nitpicky ("why does the glass shatter, the show said its transparent metal"). It's hard to argue in favor of the Star Wars prequels, but the Star Trek one is a lot more debatable.
The thing in Generations that always bugged me the most is when he leaves the Nexus at the end. Plinkett points out how it makes no sense at all to go to Viridian 3 with Kirk just to punch Sauron. It really doesn't make any sense though not to just go back and stop him long before he's even close to succeeding in his goal. Plus, if he can pull Kirk out, why not do that in such a way that it doesn't result in Kirk dying for no good reason?
About TASM, I agree with everything they said about the tonal inconsistencies and especially the horrible weakness of Peter in the movie. He's stupid, many of his stammering scenes with Gwen are just unbearable to watch, and he's just generally poorly characterized in every way. However, I don't blame this on Garfield. He's a good actor, and he has some really good moments while in the Spidey suit and while he's learning his powers, so I blame it more on the writer/director's vision of what Peter is supposed to be like in certain situations. The only time in the whole movie I actually liked Peter was when he grabbed Gwen for the kiss after she was walking away. That was smooth and well executed. Otherwise, he was cringe-inducing, boring, and schizophrenic as a character.