Why doesn't /tv/ like JJ's Star Trek movies?
Is it the lens flare?
I liked the first one. Was iffy on the second one cuz it felt like it was rehashing the same "Kirk learns muh leadership" angle from the first one, I have understood Spock and Zoe Saldana, and I think they ruined Khan's character by turning him into basically a Vulcan in terms of personality.
As soon as the movie started blatantly ripping off Wrath of Khan butruined the impact of Kirk's death by giving him a get out of jail free cardI gave up.
>>63324278
*I never understood Spock and Zoe
>>63324313
Zoe???
Oh, shit you mean Uhura
>>63324438
Uhura. didn't feel like remembering how to spell that shit
Official 100% correct opinion on JJ Trek movies coming through.
> Star Trek 2009
There is literally nothing wrong with this film. Every single ST fan in 2009 would have told you that Star Trek was in the shitter. The movie turned it into something fun and exciting that normies could get into, which revives interest in it in general, even if it is full of memes.
> Star Trek: Into Darkness
This film managed to single-handedly destroy any hype or excitement that the first film built up and put ST right back where it was before the reboots. Into Darkness is a lazy, unoriginal, horrible piece of shit that shamelessly apes Wrath of Khan and turns it into a hollow, vacuous experience.
The reason it meant something when Spock sacrificed himself in Khan was because there was an entire television show with him in it. For Christ's sake, the backstory to Khan was even built up in the show. Into Darkness has nothing. When Benedict Cumbersnatch says "I am Khan", Kirk's first reaction should have been "....who?".
Nothing in Into Darkness carries any meaning whatsoever because they hit the reset button in the end, and instead of boldly going we're instead still stuck in the same goddamn solar system we live in for another movie.
also some of the space logic stuff annoys me with how dumb it is
>star blowing up can destroy a galaxy
>black holes = time travel when the plot feels like it
>spock seeing vulcan getting sucked up from another planet even tho planets usually look like small dots on other planets
>cold fusion turns lava into rocks
i'm not saying i want hard sci-fi but c'mon man
>>63324587
Trying to hide Khan's identity was a huge mistake too.
>>63324589
> star blowing up can destroy a galaxy
I don't think they ever said it would destroy a galaxy. They only said it was threatening Romulus. If a star anywhere near us in our sector of the Milky Way went off we'd be totally fucked from the radiation.
> black holes = time travel when the plot feels like it
This one I'm fine with since we have no idea what happens inside a black hole. People give Intersteller a pass and that black hole logic was way worse
The other ones are just "it's a movie", not a big deal. The worst was red matter, that was some dumb bullshit. But hey, what are you gonna do? I'd take Star Trek 2009 over Nemesis or Insurrection any day, wouldn't you?
>>63325269
IIRC the first thing spock told kirk when he mind melded was "a star will explode, and threaten to destroy the galaxy"
>we have no idea what happens inside a black hole
doesn't matter get crushed and only after that we don't know?
>People give Intersteller a pass and that black hole logic was way worse
that , among other things, made me dislike interstellar.
>The other ones are just "it's a movie", not a big deal. The worst was red matter, that was some dumb bullshit.
i was alright with red matter because the logic stayed consistent. with the black hole = time travel thing then where did Nero go after he gets sucked up in the end? i guess it doesn't matter but idk.
>I'd take Star Trek 2009 over Nemesis or Insurrection any day, wouldn't you?
DEFINITELY. i liked Star Trek 09, just those minor things stuck out to me. the TNG movies make me feel like taking anti-depressants
