re: Star Trek Beyond Tomato watch 84%

quote:

---

but let's not kid ourselves that the original films from Wrath of Khan to Nemesis weren't action-first, story second.

---

TWOK was literally classic trek, though - combining the plots (in a smart, accessible way) of Balance of Terror with The Space Seed. Yes, it had the advantage of building on the work of the entire original series, but the Abrams trek "could" have done that as well.

But, it didn't. Because with a reboot we have to have gritty, dysfunctional folks (instead of military professionals), damaged and so forth with what few non-action scenes we have devoted to hearing the first "Illogical" - "I'm a doctor, not a" - or "Captain, the ship kinna take anymore." - and so forth, instead of laying the ground work to then have a steady pace of action, analysis/exposition, action, revised analysis, and an action-packed 3rd act. They could have built on that from a first film to actually, you know, go out and explore strange new worlds, seek out new life and new civilizations, but, apparently ain't nobody got time for that.

It "could" have been done the right way, but it wasn't. And we have what we have. It is what it is. Just not for me.

quote:

---

laying the ground work to then have a steady pace of action, analysis/exposition, action, revised analysis, and an action-packed 3rd act.

---

Sounds like Star Trek: Beyond

quote:

---

Beyond is really good and really does a great "Star Trek". We have all acknowledged the problems with Into Darkness...this one gets it right.

---

Meh. Damage was done with me on the first one. I'm defending the concept, not the franchise. I trusted folks about the first one. Never again. I'm not saying you guys can't enjoy them - by all means, do so. I just have higher standards. Star Trek (the concept) is like a friend to me - and I don't have lots of friends.

quote:

---

It's why I have never been a big fan of TNG or the TNG movies.

---

It's funny that you say that. I remember - distinctly - when TNG was launched. I was a teenager and skeptical ( ). While I can tell you that the characters grew on me, the show never did. Does that make any sense?

I never liked Riker or either Crusher (or Pulaski, for that matter). I liked Data, Geordi, Worf and Picard.

The TNG movies were what they were. FC is outstanding, although it is pretty action-oriented. It built the "best" on the TNG ground work, specifically all the Borg episodes. The new element (The Borg Queen) was a nice twist.

Insurrection and Nemesis suffered from that universal feeling they were extended episodes of TNG, rather than a true feature (a common criticism of Star Trek: TMP).

TWOK, TSFS, TVH and TUC are all fantastic and built upon the best of the best of Star Trek. Yeah, they literally "saved the whales" in TVH, but I can overlook some of the hokeyness and silly SJW crap when the overall product is so good.

And the reverse happened with that terrible, godawful, 2009 film. It was all just so bad, so wrong, so misguided that the few bright spots were hard to enjoy (mainly Urban's McCoy, sometimes Quinto's Spock and Pegg's Scotty) - I mean, just awful.

This new Star Trek is near the bottom, and definitely the worst of the last three.

Good lord, the movie wasn't bad and defiantly not as bad as this thread makes it out to be.

quote:

---

It's funny that you say that. I remember - distinctly - when TNG was launched. I was a teenager and skeptical ( ). While I can tell you that the characters grew on me, the show never did. Does that make any sense?

---

Absolutely. I pretty much hated TNG from the git go, but it was all we had for new Star Trek so I kept plugging away watching it and it slowly grew on me after about 4 seasons.

I could not name more then a couple of episodes that I really liked of TNG...where with TOS...I could only name probably two I disliked.

DS9 was pretty terrible until it's final couple of years, Voyager was trash and while I am one of the very few I thought Enterprise was excellent (other then that stupid temporal cold war garbage).

We will never agree on 2009, but anyone who has seen Beyond and doesn't recognize how it masterfully captures the spirit of TOS is just being a contrarian.

I'd still say you should see it, even if you wait until it comes out on digital video. I really think you'd not mind it so much.

quote:

---

DS9 was pretty terrible until it's final couple of years

---

I disagree. While it was way different from what we had seen before from Star Trek, it had the production improvements from TNG, along with, frankly, a better overall cast from an acting standpoint, particularly the "civilians" who framed the show and gave it a persistent, "real world" vibe. Some of the esoteric nature of Bajoran and Cardassian politics probably turned off some folks, but the show was ahead of its time (as was Babylon 5, an extremely similar show in tone, theme and even setting). Plus the finest villain in Star Trek history (IMHO) - Gul Dukat, with all do respects to (real) Khan and Q.

quote:

---

Voyager was trash

---

Too strong. It was not as good as TNG or DS9 - that's for sure. There were bright moments, though. The Doctor (Robert Picardo) was fantastic.

quote:

---

I thought Enterprise was excellent

---

We're finally about halfway through it - we watch it in fits and starts. I can tell you know that it's unlikely to unseat DS9 as my second place, but it's certainly better than Voyager (the suspension of disbelief of a far more advanced ship - if only by appearance - than TOS notwithstanding).

quote:

---

We will never agree on 2009

---

Remember that whole thread I made about, "I know I'm in the minority, but..." - That wasn't a snap decision, I think I did that thread over a year after I watched 2009. No, we're never going to agree.

quote:

---

anyone who has seen Beyond and doesn't recognize how it masterfully captures the spirit of TOS is just being a contrarian.

---

My heart can stand anymore of this crap. Not worth the risk. Abrams or no, I'll have to wait for the next "reboot" and even then, I'll have to temper expectations.

quote:

---

I'd still say you should see it, even if you wait until it comes out on digital video. I really think you'd not mind it so much.

---

Well, if Chris Pine is still playing (fake) Captain Kirk, the chances of that are so low as to barely warrant mentioning.

1. The villain and his reasoning for being a villain were plain bad. A disgruntled startleet captain turned VAMPIRE????????? so bad, so very bad

2. He spent 400 years looking for a bio weapon when he had the swarm at his disposal? Really? He could have wiped out starfleet and earth and the space station without the weapon. Makes zero sense to wait 400 years to act.

3. Interactions between McCoy, Kirk and Spock all seemed forced especially the humor. Bad acting or bad writing/directing...you pick




Great special effects but the movie lacked a lot.



And I'm a certified Star Trek authority that waited hours in line in 1979 to see the original

quote:

---

1. The villain and his reasoning for being a villain were plain bad. A disgruntled startleet captain turned VAMPIRE????????? so bad, so very bad

---

I think most agree that the villian and his motivations were not well fleshed out. They did explain rather well how he was long lived.

quote:

---

2. He spent 400 years looking for a bio weapon when he had the swarm at his disposal? Really? He could have wiped out starfleet and earth and the space station without the weapon. Makes zero sense to wait 400 years to act.

---

Part of the not fleshing him out enough. I'm going to see it again today to see if it was something I missed the first time through (I saw it at comiccon and hadn't slept in 2 days so I missed a good bit of detail the first go through).

quote:

---

3. Interactions between McCoy, Kirk and Spock all seemed forced especially the humor. Bad acting or bad writing/directing...you pick

---

Disagree. The actors behind Kirk and Spock don't have much chemistry...they actually humorously highlighted this during the first act.

McCoy and Spock however, they are money. Karl Urban IS Leonard McCoy.