>someone allowed William Shatner to direct a movie
>>66802606
Is this supposed to be ironic? Because Mike explains exactly why in his ST:V commentary track.
Star Trek V is pretty goat tbf
>>66802666
i didn't know that existed
>>66802700
when contrarianism goes too far
Why does that guy only shave his moustache?
>>66802740
hes a dumb polack
it's a bad movie but it's not terrible. parts of it are very good, oddly. could have been a great movie with 2 or 3 rewrites and a special effects company that was actually trying.
>tfw "I NEED MY PAIN"
>>66802781
Anon is talking about Jay. Mike is Polish. Jay is the one who used to shavbe his mustache.
>>66802739
>i didn't know that existed
you're missing out senpai
>>66802700
agreed
>>66802824
uh, no it is pretty terrible
what the fuck is your basis of comparison if you think it isn't terrible?
>>66802824
The entire scene where he displays the main trio's pain is fantastic. Sybok is not a bad character and the big idea isn't awful, but the execution is embarrassing.
>>66802851
>it's a plinkett video
thank
you
based
god
>>66802851
you got my hopes up, i thought plinkett did a commentary for every star trek movie.
>>66802851
>all the floor numbers
>>66803070
I really don't like Star Trek but that is impressive. Those special effects look fairly comparable to what we have today - minus the bright orange explosions and exploding blue laser beams.
>>66803497
the numbers repeat and are all messed up
>>66803598
>the numbers repeat
>>66803598
Oh... I mistook that for the gif repeating. Never mind then!
>>66802866
literally what this guy said.
>>66802891
it's a 4/10 movie with a 10/10 scene, a few 7-8/10s, and a lot of 3-4/10 with a few 0-1/10s
parts of it are great and to deny this makes you the ultimate retard contrarian. the real issue is that the movie actually is terrible and one of the worst ever made if you pull those few great parts out, and they're outnumbered like 5:1. generations has similar problems. the idea and premise is actually sound, it's just too much garbage for it to coalesce properly and most of the remainder is either poorly/lazily/under-written or blandly executed, and the entire movie looks like shit.
>>66802851
I still believe this was intentional sabotage by the production crew because of the widespread hate of Shatner.
>>66803725
what exactly do you consider 7, 8 or 10 out of 10 scenes?
>someone allowed Mike Stoklasa to autistically talk about Star Trek in all 104 Half in the Bag episodes
