• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Star Trek: Beyond - Review Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Matt

Member
It wasn't well made at all, it was a bad movie that looked nice. J.J. Abrams' movies tend to be like that given that he is a brilliant filmmaker who knows how the camera works.

The movie from the start is already a pretty goofy conspiracy plot. Given Trek's penchant for the goofy and dopey, that was probably an alright story to want to tell. But then they add Khan and turn him into a generic villain. Even if you have never watched ST: II and don't realize how much they've watered down the character, anyone with even the remotest understanding of character development should be able to see what an empty character he is. The flick just goes off the rails once he appears.

Into Darkness is a movie with such poorly written characters that it requires phoning in Leonard Nimoy to deliver a speech explaining what a threat Khan is. And that's not unique to Kirk. Pike has to speechify to Kirk to tell him what he needs to learn. Khan himself speechifies about how bad he is. And that's just one figure.

I remember the Film Crit Hulk article about the film talked about the rise of "convoluted" blockbusters. And that's what Into Darkness was.

It also isn't among the better entries. It's at the bottom of the barrel next to Final Frontier, Insurrection and Nemesis. Where you order Into Darkness among those other three is a debate, but otherwise, it belongs right next to them.

I'm really excited to see what they do with Beyond. Hopefully those problems don't crop back up again.
Yeah, the script was bad, but like you said a lot of the scripts are bad, and it has everything else going for it, unlike TMP, V, Generations, Insurrection, and Nemesis. And lets not kid ourselves, III and FC aren't exactly great films either.
 

Sanjuro

Member
Not sure how you define "reception", but adjusted for inflation ST4 is still the highest grossing Star Trek movie domestically.

General consensus in speaking with people, cinemascore, box office really isn't the best barometer.

My point is the film series really doesn't have a clear cut standout. It's a few fun films, then a bunch which are YMMV.
 
Don't know what to tell you. Critically and reception wise it is among the top films in the franchise.

Which is still shocking to me.

But it was a movie that was great on a first viewing, so I guess that makes sense. I enjoyed it very much the first time I saw it with my girlfriend at the time because the movie hurtles along at a relentless pace. But after seeing it again in the theater afterwards, and in home release, it just fell apart.

It's summer blockbuster, J. J. Abrams shlock. If that's what you're looking for, yeah, it's a great flick.
I don't think that's true.
It's not true.

Adjusted, the top five order goes something like Star Trek '09, The Motion Picture, IV, Into Darkness, II.
 

Zabka

Member
I'm still baffled by the positive reviews STID received because that movie was totally fucking braindead. Reminded me a lot of Skyfall.
 

Zabka

Member
Skyfall is also considered one of the best entries in the Bond series.

Lots of dumb things are popular and well-received. Skyfall is a "ride" movie just like STID that relies on an impossibly clever, TDK Joker-esque villain leading the heroes on a merry chase that doesn't make a lick of sense.

But they both looked real pretty and moved along quickly and that's all some people need.
 

Sanjuro

Member
Lots of dumb things are popular and well-received. Skyfall is a "ride" movie just like STID that relies on an impossibly clever, TDK Joker-esque villain leading the heroes on a merry chase that doesn't make a lick of sense.

But they both looked real pretty and moved along quickly and that's all some people need.

So, Skyfall and Star Trek: Into Darkness are considered the worst entries in their respective series?

I mean it either is or it isn't.
 

Nudull

Banned
So, Skyfall and Star Trek: Into Darkness are considered the worst entries in their respective series?

I mean it either is or it isn't.

For Into Darkness, a lot of Trek fans I know feel it pales in comparison to a lot of the other entries, even if you treat the Kelvin universe as a separate series.
 

Sanjuro

Member
For Into Darkness, a lot of Trek fans I know feel it pales in comparison to a lot of the other entries, even if you treat the Kelvin universe as a separate series.

That isn't a very realistic outlook though. I also have no clue what a "Kelvin" is.

Unless they have just some random rankings. Most Star Trek fans I know hate the most popular characters like Kirk and Spock, I just kind of make the point with them and move on.
 

Zabka

Member
So, Skyfall and Star Trek: Into Darkness are considered the worst entries in their respective series?

I mean it either is or it isn't.

To Star Trek fans (and me) STID is right at the bottom. No idea what Bond fans think, just my personal opinion. Skyfall's biggest problem to me is dumbing down its characters to keep the plot moving.
 
That isn't a very realistic outlook though. I also have no clue what a "Kelvin" is.

Unless they have just some random rankings. Most Star Trek fans I know hate the most popular characters like Kirk and Spock, I just kind of make the point with them and move on.

No... most Trek fans hate shoot shoot bang bang violence and action for violence and action's sake. Which is what the reboots have been and what a lot of TOS was due to the context of its production.
 

Sanjuro

Member
To Star Trek fans (and me) STID is right at the bottom. No idea what Bond fans think, just my personal opinion. Skyfall's biggest problem to me is dumbing down its characters to keep the plot moving.

The characters are arguably dumb in most entries though. I don't have a problem with it, but the new film didn't break some kind of mold at failing to connect with audiences.
 

Matt

Member
No... most Trek fans hate shoot shoot bang bang violence and action for violence and action's sake. Which is what the reboots have been and what a lot of TOS was due to the context of its production.
But most of films are just bad on pretty much every level. At least ID succeeds in some ways.
 

Figboy79

Aftershock LA
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only diehard Star Trek fan that absolutely loved both Trek '09 and Into Darkness...


I'm really looking forward to Beyond, when before I wasn't so sure. I don't follow reviews, but I figured, "Well, I enjoyed the first two, might as well finish the trilogy." Once I learned that Pegg was penning the script, though, I got more interested.

It's going to be bittersweet seeing Anton Yelchin's Chekov in the movie though. Me and my wife are bummed by his loss. She's also a huge Trek fan (probably more than me, actually) and she was also initially skeptical about this one. We probably won't see it opening weekend, as usual, but perhaps the following week.
 

Zabka

Member
The Star Trek film series.

The only one I kind of separate is the first entry which kind of has it's own vibe.

I'd argue that STID reaches new lows with almost every character. I really enjoyed ST09, which already had a similar villain to WoK, so STID rolling back Kirk's character development from the first movie, doing almost nothing with the rest of the crew, having a twist that is simultaneously meaningless to non-fans and a dud with fans, and then just picking up the story beats from the original because Khan is EVIL AS FUCK was really disappointing.

I think upon reflection lots of people have turned on STID. JJ Abrams said it best himself
At the end of the day, while I agree with Damon Lindelof that withholding the Khan thing ended up seeming like we were lying to people, I was trying to preserve the fun for the audience, and not just tell them something that the characters don’t learn for 45 minutes into the movie, so the audience wouldn’t be so ahead of it. I felt like, in a weird way, it was a little bit of a collection of scenes that were written by my friends — brilliantly talented writers — who I somehow misled in trying to do certain things. And yet, I found myself frustrated by my choices, and unable to hang my hat on an undeniable thread of the main story. So then I found myself on that movie basically tap-dancing as well as I could to try and make the sequences as entertaining as possible. Thank god I had the cast that we have, who are so unbelievably fun to watch. And an incredible new villain in Benedict Cumberbatch… I would never say that I don’t think that the movie ended up working. But I feel like it didn’t work as well as it could have had I made some better decisions before we started shooting.
 

DeathyBoy

Banned
It's true. That is the only film in recent memory I can think of where you can surely say the editing ruined the entire film.

To this day I'm still baffled because I'm sure there's a quick cut where it looks like M gets shot in the face, then you don't see her for ages and when you do she's fine and it's never brought up again.
 
LoL! The hate for Into Darkness is absolutely ridiculous. It is a sold trek film. Easily up there with the best.

Anyway, I'm happy this installment turned out good.
Into Darkness was so bad I walked out of it for 20 minutes and made some phone calls, and came back. The only other movie I ever walked out of was the Cable Guy
 

Matt

Member
I'd argue that STID reaches new lows with almost every character. I really enjoyed ST09, which already had a similar villain to WoK, so STID rolling back Kirk's character development from the first movie, doing almost nothing with the rest of the crew, having a twist that is simultaneously meaningless to non-fans and a dud with fans, and then just picking up the story beats from the original because Khan is EVIL AS FUCK was really disappointing.

I think upon reflection lots of people have turned on STID. JJ Abrams said it best himself
No way ID treats its characters worse than V, Insurrection, Generations, and Nemesis did. Or hell, even First Contact.

Again I'm not saying ID is great, or doesn't have massive flaws, but Star Trek has produced a lot worse.
 

Kathian

Banned
No way ID treats its characters worse than V, Insurrection, Genesis, and Nemesis did. Or hell, even First Contact.

Again I'm not saying ID is great, or doesn't have massive flaws, but Star Trek has produced a lot worse.

Which is why Star Trek is reduced from the 90s era of multiple shows and films to a film every few years that's basically trying to apologise.
 
Why didn't you just fill it with Into Darkness dvds? Same thing.

So your grave was filled with copies of ID's script?

h0ukKoRm8Clsk.gif
 

Figboy79

Aftershock LA
Reading this thread, it must really fucking suck to not be able to enjoy good movies.

What I mean is, viewing movies in categories of only "GOAT," and "Dogshit." Not being able to consider tha there are varying degrees of quality, and not liking something doesn't automatically equate it to shit tier. There are genuinely bad movies out there: The Last Airbender(that one still stings), Transformers sequels, Fant4stic, etc. Movies that are poorly written, directed, acted, what have you.

And then there are movies like the three recent Star Trek films. They aren't GOAT. They aren't Dogshit. They coast along the spectrum of "entertaining" to "very entertaining." They have stupid plot contrivances and sometimes wonky character motivation, but they are fun films to watch. Good films, just not great. As balls deep into geek culture as we are, we want the products based off of our geekdom to be more than just "good," I get that. We want "The Godfather 2" of geekdom, when the best we've gotten so far is The Usual Suspects.

Good films, but nothing that will have the outsiders see our geekdom any differently than they have in the past. They'll walk away with a "that Star Trek movie was fun!" But they aren't about to start brushing up on their Klingon.

I'm okay with just having fun, entertaining, and sometimes dumb movies based around franchises I adore. The recent Treks are hardly bad movies. That's hyperbolic to the extreme in my opinion. It's okay to not like them, but saying they're shit tier films? Sorry, I can't agree.
 
There are genuinely bad movies out there: The Last Airbender(that one still stings), Transformers sequels, Fant4stic, etc. Movies that are poorly written, directed, acted, what have you.

And then there are movies like the three recent Star Trek films. They aren't GOAT. They aren't Dogshit. They coast along the spectrum of "entertaining" to "very entertaining." They have stupid plot contrivances and sometimes wonky character motivation, but they are fun films to watch. Good films, just not great.

Yeah, but that's not dramatic enough for people. So safe and boring! You're all in or you're all out, baby.
 

Zabka

Member
Reading this thread, it must really fucking suck to not be able to enjoy good movies.

What I mean is, viewing movies in categories of only "GOAT," and "Dogshit." Not being able to consider tha there are varying degrees of quality, and not liking something doesn't automatically equate it to shit tier. There are genuinely bad movies out there: The Last Airbender(that one still stings), Transformers sequels, Fant4stic, etc. Movies that are poorly written, directed, acted, what have you.

And then there are movies like the three recent Star Trek films. They aren't GOAT. They aren't Dogshit. They coast along the spectrum of "entertaining" to "very entertaining." They have stupid plot contrivances and sometimes wonky character motivation, but they are fun films to watch. Good films, just not great. As balls deep into geek culture as we are, we want the products based off of our geekdom to be more than just "good," I get that. We want "The Godfather 2" of geekdom, when the best we've gotten so far is The Usual Suspects.

Good films, but nothing that will have the outsiders see our geekdom any differently than they have in the past. They'll walk away with a "that Star Trek movie was fun!" But they aren't about to start brushing up on their Klingon.

I'm okay with just having fun, entertaining, and sometimes dumb movies based around franchises I adore. The recent Treks are hardly bad movies. That's hyperbolic to the extreme in my opinion. It's okay to not like them, but saying their shit tier films? Sorry, I can't agree.

I thought Star Trek 09 was a good movie. I thought Into Darkness was a bad movie. AM I BLOWING YOUR MIND?!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom