That's worrisome, 'cause I had pretty high expectations for First Man.

While the "conveying an experience" thing usually works for me in Kubrick movies, I didn't like Dunkirk very much. It's impressive on some levels (especially considering the moderate budget), but it was hard to connect with it. Nolan tried way too hard to be Kubrick and I like Nolan when he's Nolan.

Speaking of fanvids... Honest Trailers did a video that helped me to get a better idea of what "classic" Who was.

The "Unix system" in Jurassic Park (widely ridiculed as "unrealistic") is an actual Unix system ("IRIX") running an actual user interface ("fsn").

I'm starting to really like The Orville; the show is having a lot of fun with Star Trek tropes while delivering some interesting social satire.

It's still a little too early to pass definite judgment on Discovery. The "darker and edgier" tone and other similarities to Stargate Universe can be the show's downfall. Discovery can work if the writers have a plan for the whole season (or even the whole series). If they're making it up as they go along, I don't see much chance of success.

A new trailer for The Last Jedi.

EDIT: I think it's quite promising (except for that Pikachu creature on the Falcon, which may turn out to be another misguided attempt at Ewok-esque cuteness).

Deus Ex. A lot of potential there (although, as Ghost In The Shell proved, it's possible to totally screw these things up; hopefully Blade Runner 2049 will explore some of this territory better).

But the more important question is: who should do it? Existing video game movies leave much to be desired (even Duncan Jones blew his shot).

I watched this shit so that you don't have to.

The DiF commentary for the first one mentions a Shakespeare quote: "A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing". The Last Knight isn't even a tale, it's incoherent rambling.

The plot is an unfocused mess that makes Dark Of The Moon look like Shawshank.

Even Stanley Tucci and John Turturro aren't very fun to watch this time. Anthony Hopkins does the best he can, but the script gives him no help (I hope that at least he got paid well for this). The robot characters don't fare any better (John Goodman's talents are totally wasted) and the few transformation sequences we get seem less impressive than the ones made a decade ago.

To add insult to injury, the aspect ratio changes at almost every shot transition. It must be an IMAX thing, but I can't figure out why was it carried over to home video releases; it can be very distracting. Some movies (like Scott Pilgrim) use this gimmick for a reason; here it makes no sense whatsoever.

There's a silver lining to all this, however: box office suggests that many moviegoers don't fall for this crap anymore (even China generated significantly less profit this time).

Easily the worst one yet.

I was expecting a disaster; it turned out to be watchable. The real thing premieres in two days

Doesn't hold a candle to Doom - an awesomely rich story with complex characters, subtle acting, accurate science...

Plinkett's review of the 2016 remake:

Anyone who's listened to the DiF commentary knows her as "British Felicia Day" 

(Welcome back, Jimmy.)