re: Star Trek Into Darkness 81% -- 21 Critics have spoken

quote:

---

It may be entertaining for you youngsters, but it isn't Star Trek.

---

I'm 50. Watched the original series on network television.

You couldn't be more wrong.

Again, it was the perfect Star Trek and it's great to hear the sequel is surpassing it.

quote:

---

Again, it was the perfect Star Trek and it's great to hear the sequel is surpassing it.

---

I watched the originals, too. I agree. And I'm just a little older than you.

quote:

---

The same here, I have no problems with the new edition. I love it.

---

Meh.

quote:

---

Here comes the Star Trek fanboys, who aren't as cool as us Star Wars fans

---

quote:

---

Meh.

---

So I take it you aren't a huge fan because it drops the diplomacy and mysterious wondering for military style run-and-gun action?

wow....your ego sure has you in la-la land doesnt it!

quote:

---

Congratulations - you're Abrams' target market.

---

Sweet, glad he made a movie just for me. Sucks for you.

quote:

---

Yeah, it's pretty obvious that the Star Trek purists who made those movies don't know how to make entertaining movies.

---

quote:

---

Ace "Star Trek Snob" Midnight can bitch all he wants, but the 2009 Trek was good for what it was; an entertaining space action flick. Much better than the shite shows that were Insurrection and Nemesis.

---

It just kills ya'll that I don't like these movies, doesn't it?

Let's look at the "post" TOS cast movies -
(Generations is what it is - hybridization of the TOS and TNG cast, combined with a somewhat weak script and lackluster performance by McDowell as the villain - classic example of good ingredients don't always make good stew).

First Contact was FANTASTIC. The best of the TNG movies, by far. Directed by Frakes (a "Star Trek" purist, I guess, by your definition), with a script by Brandon Braga and Ronald Moore - ditto. Nothing indecipherable, either - it was all within the Star Trek ethos.

Insurrection? Sure it was a TNG script pumped up to a two hours. I found it entertaining, although underwhelming. Piller's script was decent, just underweight. It had all the makings of the cast just phoning it in, too. Not a great movie, but would have made a very good two-part TNG episode.

Nemesis? Yeah, Stuart Baird should stick with editing, rather than directing. And where did they get that script? From some Star Trek nerd? NO. John Logan. Doesn't ring a bell? All he's done is write the story or script for:

Any Given Sunday

Gladiator

The Aviator

The Last Samurai

Sweeney Todd

Hugo


and

Skyfall

Again, the directing choice was questionable, but the other elements of Star Trek were there, just not in an overly entertaining way.


2009 was just schlock. Pure Hollywood crap and the worst sort, too. Playing off a brand's name but going completely against the spirit of the original to be "different" or "edgy".

Nothing "Star Trek" about 2009 - except the names of the characters.

quote:

---

Ace Midnight

---

I don't think you understand what the new Star Trek was trying to and ultimately accomplished. They weren't trying to be the same as the show from the 60's. The studio and everyone involved outright said that's not what they were looking to do with that movie.

I distinctly remember an tv spot that showed off some of the intense action sequences that proclaimed "This is not your father's Star Trek". I'll try to find that tv spot for you, but they bluntly said in the advertising that they weren't just continuing a story that had already been told.

Also, your biggest gripe seems to be that none of the characters were the same as their TOS counterparts. Well no shite Scotty. The first scene in the movie completely changes the timeline in which the film's universe is set. They weren't giving you the same Star Trek universe that all of the others were set in. They were telling a whole new story with new beginnings. It was more or less a clean slate for this series which is great because most of the audience (like myself) didn't know a single thing about the Star Trek universe.

Some of your other gripes I've read are you bitching about the character development. They had 120 minutes. The Original Series had well over 100 45 minute episodes to develop the characters (who largely reset after every episode or two). There is only so much character development you can do in 120 minutes when you have a cast as big as this movie had.

Also, you complain about how the social commentary that the old shows brought and how the new movie didn't have that element. I'm glad it didn't. There were a lot of changes going on in the culture in our country and on our planet when Star Trek came out. Hell our species had never set foot on another planet when TOS premiered. Civil Rights for minorities were still being put into place. It was a far different time and culture then.

Nowadays, especially in popular movies, people don't want to be preached to about our culture, especially not from some Hollywood writer. Most people just want a sound plot, interesting characters, engaging dialogue, and some memorable action sequences. That's what the public wants from its blockbusters and Star Trek 2009 delivered just that.