Star Trek Beyond (2016)

Phazael

Phazael

Confirmed Beta Shitlord, Fat Bastard
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
14,110
30,206
Yeah its definitely an edgelord's paradise for picking apart. But for people who grew up on the original series and a lot of the late 60s sci fi genre (think Asimov's stuff), this hit all the right notes. The younger haters probably won't like it, but for my money Pegg nailed it with his writing choices. I hope he gets to do more writing in the future.
 
Frenzied Wombat

Frenzied Wombat

Potato del Grande
14,730
31,802
Phazael_sl said:
Yeah its definitely an edgelord's paradise for picking apart. But for people who grew up on the original series and a lot of the late 60s sci fi genre (think Asimov's stuff), this hit all the right notes. The younger haters probably won't like it, but for my money Pegg nailed it with his writing choices. I hope he gets to do more writing in the future.
Click to expand...
Well, considering I think TOS is the best of the lot, now you have me intrigued.. I just can't reconcile how it's a tribute to the 60's sci-fi genre while simultaneously being referred to as "Fast and Furious in Space" and "Michael Bay would be envious" by reviewers.
 
Frenzied Wombat

Frenzied Wombat

Potato del Grande
14,730
31,802
Phazael_sl said:
Yeah its definitely an edgelord's paradise for picking apart. But for people who grew up on the original series and a lot of the late 60s sci fi genre (think Asimov's stuff), this hit all the right notes. The younger haters probably won't like it, but for my money Pegg nailed it with his writing choices. I hope he gets to do more writing in the future.
Click to expand...
Well, considering I think TOS is the best of the lot, now you have me intrigued.. I just can't reconcile how it's a tribute to the 60's sci-fi genre while simultaneously being referred to as "Fast and Furious in Space" and "Michael Bay would be envious" by reviewers.
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,853
137,951
Frenzied Wombat_sl said:
Except the action was watchable-- plodding, tactical, tense combat, done with models and a resounding musical score. Not capital ships dogfighting tie-fighter style with every color of the rainbow exploding on screen in an unwatchable mess.
Click to expand...
Sauce for the goose Mr Savik.
 
Phazael

Phazael

Confirmed Beta Shitlord, Fat Bastard
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
14,110
30,206
Edgelords checking in right on schedule, I see.....

@Frenzied-
FWIW, while I liked all three reboot movies, this one clearly felt like the best in retrospect. I would place Wrath and Undiscovered above it, maybe put it on the level with First Contact or Voyage Home. A lot comes down to personal taste. The action was abundant, but there was a lot of great character interaction in it. Also, there was actual problem solving going on, rather than people reacting to shit blowing up like Into Darkness. Its also pure sci-fi, for the most part. Not the spy thriller disguised as sci-fi that Into Darkness ended up.
 
Deathwing

Deathwing

<Bronze Donator>
16,389
7,391
Well, this movie wasn't written by Orci and Kurtzman(Star Trek and Into Darkness) nor Lindelof(Into Darkness), instead Pegg and some other guy named Jung. So that might explain the jump in quality.

First Contact was a very bad movie, Phazael.
 
Rezz

Rezz

Mr. Poopybutthole
4,486
3,531
First Contact was easily the most enjoyable film out of the Next Generation era movies. People thinking that the Star Trek movies were ever "good" movies instead of "decent Star Trek movies" outside of Wrath and Voyage (and First Contact out of that batch) apparently don't remember how shlocky the original series and TNG were, or how randomly painful DS9 or Voyager were. Never watched Enterprise but I hear it got better. Anyway! There's always been a hefty chunk of bad writing, overacting, and sketchy action sequences in Star Trek, it's just more Trek-Hipster to edge it up since Roddenberry's death.
 
H

Hootie

Silver Knight of the Realm
216
60
Rezz_sl said:
First Contact was easily the most enjoyable film out of the Next Generation era movies. People thinking that the Star Trek movies were ever "good" movies instead of "decent Star Trek movies" outside of Wrath and Voyage (and First Contact out of that batch) apparently don't remember how shlocky the original series and TNG were, or how randomly painful DS9 or Voyager were. Never watched Enterprise but I hear it got better. Anyway! There's always been a hefty chunk of bad writing, overacting, and sketchy action sequences in Star Trek, it's just more Trek-Hipster to edge it up since Roddenberry's death.
Click to expand...
Gonna have to agree with Rezz. I enjoyed this movie but for the same reason i enjoyed the last two. They absolutely nailed the casting and characters. Filming is high quality and the make-up and sets, outstanding!. The writing and plot leave a little bit to be desired, in fact the story is awful. It's funny, for all the hate i like the plot of In To Darkness the best.
Either way its worth the money.
I'm a little pissed that they implied that the antagonist might be a character from one of the shows. Instead, just a generic villain.
 
Brahma

Brahma

Obi-Bro Kenobi-X
11,949
42,281
Was good 8/10. The big three nailed it, especially Urban. Plot was meh. Action was good. Makeup and special effects were great.
 
Xevy

Xevy

Log Wizard
8,603
3,816
Acting was fine, Bones was pretty great except the gruff was turnt to 11. Less Spock than we could've used, but the Spock/Bones tandem was great. Overall movie doesn't come close to deserving 90%. It's like a 7-8 out of 10 at best. Plotholes abound and the story was weak.

Here's some major plot holes:

Only Enterprise can traverse that Nebula! Is best ship!---- Meteroid belt completely absent or expertly navigated by the Franklin immediately after?!?!?!"
Teleporter Krall off the air thing. There's fucking teleporters everywhere. They showed a fucking civilian using one on the Yorktown during it's introduction.
Krall eats the crew of people he steals for health. Cool. But where did his army come from? He said 3 crew members remained on his logs which accounts for Krall, Mannis, and chick Saboteur. Are the rest robots or something?
Motherfucker just names himself Krall instead of Balthazar Eddison? Cool.
I GUESS the mining drones would be pretty resistant to heat and stuff but their super laser defense system on the Yorktown should've shredded a good amount of them.
Also if you told some one "Yeah, they defeated the evil army with Beastie Boys" before they saw this, they probably wouldn't see it. Where are these nerd movie reviewers that so many of you revere now?

Overall I don't remember the first one, honestly. I remember the second one and liked it best because the story was the best out of the three and Cumberbatch was pretty cool. This one is easily forgettable. Not terrible, but nothing compelling.
 
meStevo

meStevo

I think your wife's a bigfoot gus.
<Silver Donator>
6,375
4,651
Really enjoyed it, only thing that jumped out at me -

did I have a long blink and miss how he got to the top of the building at the end?
 
Skylancer81

Skylancer81

Molten Core Raider
695
779
I feel like it was a good movie, but a horrible Star Trek movie.

As others have said the acting and actors were great, but it felt like generic X Space Movie. Take the Star Trek references out and I probably would have liked it more. Really felt like they want to kill the Franchise and reboot again.

6/10 as a Star Trek movie, 8/10 if generic space movie.
 
E

etchazz

Trakanon Raider
2,707
1,056
Rezz_sl said:
First Contact was easily the most enjoyable film out of the Next Generation era movies. People thinking that the Star Trek movies were ever "good" movies instead of "decent Star Trek movies" outside of Wrath and Voyage (and First Contact out of that batch) apparently don't remember how shlocky the original series and TNG were, or how randomly painful DS9 or Voyager were. Never watched Enterprise but I hear it got better. Anyway! There's always been a hefty chunk of bad writing, overacting, and sketchy action sequences in Star Trek, it's just more Trek-Hipster to edge it up since Roddenberry's death.
Click to expand...
Outside of Khan, I thought all of the Star Trek movies were pretty fucking awful. It's a shame, cause I liked the TNG crew the most, but all of their movies were just terrible. The reboots have been just as bad, just Star Trek for the Adderall generation. I don't plan on seeing this one until it's on TV, and from what I've read, I'm not missing anything vital.
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,853
137,951
I'm a weirdo I like the original motion picture because it's a type of movie you'll probably never see again like an 80's adventure game.
 
Gavinmad

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
42,370
50,412
Palum_sl said:
I agree and Yelchin absolutely crushed it.
Click to expand...
rrr_img_137020.jpg
 
Xalara

Xalara

Golden Squire
826
81
Star Trek Beyond felt like a Star Trek episode that deserved to be a movie, unlike Star Trek Insurrection which was a movie that should have been a TV episode. The villain could have been better explained, but the movie focused on the crew so it didn't matter too much. I was also completely fine with how they defeated Krall because the shows regularly had solutions to problems just as ridiculous as that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.