I am puzzled by the commotion that this review at AICN has caused. I've looked over the review and found that 90 percent of it is concerned with aethetics. The reviewer did not like the look of the battle scences, he/she did not like the VR fighting mechanism, He/She did not like hyperspace and jumpgate effect. It goes on and on about the visuals and FX. There is no detailed critique of the story/plot. There is a comment about the acting being uneven and G'kar being unneccessary for the plot, however that is about as close to real criticism that we get.
I find it interesting that another reviewer at AICN who saw the movie without effects gave it a very good review (about 2 months ago).
As an SF fan my primary concern is and always will be STORY. I'd watch Old Trek over Voyager any day (even though Voyager had the better effects). The review at AICN told me very little about the quality of the story.
I'm also surprised by the reaction of some of the cast to this review. In the face of some very shallow criticism they have backed of the claim of how wonderful Rangers is. As a lurker to this group I am puzzled by this.
------------------
I find it interesting that another reviewer at AICN who saw the movie without effects gave it a very good review (about 2 months ago).
As an SF fan my primary concern is and always will be STORY. I'd watch Old Trek over Voyager any day (even though Voyager had the better effects). The review at AICN told me very little about the quality of the story.
I'm also surprised by the reaction of some of the cast to this review. In the face of some very shallow criticism they have backed of the claim of how wonderful Rangers is. As a lurker to this group I am puzzled by this.
------------------