Didn't see one on the catalog. Too many Star Wars threads.
So was the new trailer shit? Discuss.
>>63987832
>Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Khan we see Spock tragically die, saving the ship, while his fate hangs in question.
>Star Trek Into Darkness Kirk trivially dies, saving the ship, and his fate is resolved by the end of the film.
>Star Trek 3: The Search for Spock we see the original Enterprise destroyed. The crew barely escaping on a Bird of Prey.
>Star Trek Beyond we see the new Enterprise destroyed. Aaand?
I wish these people could find their footing and do their own thing instead of taking heart breaking moments from the original films and turning them into trite garbage.
It's like they don't know those moments work because we had been with the original characters for so long.
>>63987832
I don't see why everyone is so riled up about it, the other two were also big dumb action movies. Did they seriously expect this to be anything else?
its sad but the reboot trek is becoming more like galaxy quest with every installment
HOLD BACK THE TEARS, SI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2f4aAwa5wdg
>>63987832
I like the new uniforms, they look cool
Beyond will probably be a perfectly acceptable scifi action movie. Probably a bit better than Into Darkness. Probably not as good as 2009.
I have no idea about the new show. I really hope it's good.
>>63988840
Simon is a hack, fuck him.
Awful trailer. Every single line was just the same shit from the first two movies made as cliched as possible. I found that stuff enjoyable in the first two movies but didn't smile one bit in the new trailer.
>>63988866
>I have no idea about the new show. I really hope it's good.
Me too. I actually think it being online only is a good thing. Traditional Trek could never happen on tv today, it would be all darkly lit sets and edginess line SGU or Dark Matter. Online though? Maybe.
>“They had a script for Star Trek that wasn’t really working for them. I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little bit too Star Trek-y,” he said of the original draft.
>“Avengers Assemble, which is a pretty nerdy, comic-book, supposedly niche thing, made $1.5bn dollars. Star Trek: Into Darkness made half a billion, which is still brilliant.
>“But it means that, according to the studio, there’s still $1bn worth of box office that don’t go and see Star Trek. And they want to know why.”
>He added: “People don’t see it being a fun, brightly coloured, Saturday night entertainment like the Avengers,” adding that the solution was to “make a western or a thriller or a heist movie, then populate that with Star Trek characters so it’s more inclusive to an audience that might be a little bit reticent”.
It has no chance.
>>63987832
>tfw you will always be Sylar and never be Spock
>>63988798
>Did they seriously expect this to be anything else?
Its directed by someone who has done some half-decent action movies, not a hack like JJ Abrams
>>63989056
>corporate input is just rehashan
happens with everything. video games, movies, gadgets
anything that people consume is just rehashan
>>63987832
>>63988866
New uniforms a shit
>>63989139
back to bed aristotle
>>63988966
my money is on them just making it weekly doses of what we get in the new reboot movies, which makes me sad. We'll never have TOS/TNG tier episodes when it's all about muh action comedy.
>>63989343
I agree, the new unis look like they should be in a gay parade.
What the hell was wrong with the classic TOS style they got so right in the first two movies? Why does every new director in a franchise have to "make his mark" by fucking up the things that were RIGHT about the preceding movies?
Cutie Pie Ezri >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>shitlord Jackzia
>>63990848
The fact that you can only express this opinion while shitposting is a pretty big clue that even you know that you're wrong.
