Do you agree with these scores?
Is RT as flawed as people claim?
>>67615158
The motion picture way too low, first contact and the reboot too high, into darkness way too high.
>>67615237
the "reboot" movies have come out in the age of paid reviewers which is why they're so high
>>67615237
>motion picture too low
>he didn't walk out during the 10 minute drydock scene
It was shit.
>>67615508
The Motion Picture is pure kino m8
>tfw Klingon bastards killed my son
I did not expect that to shake me up as much as it did.
>>67615508
Fuck off.
6 > 1 > 2 > 4 > 11 > 8 > 3 > 7 > 10 > 5 > 9 > 12
>>67615158
Agree for the most part. The two reboot movies are well made, just not amazing. I can understand the high scores even if I might not agree they are as good as some of the older ones.
First Contact was good but god damn does every faggot in the world overrate it. B-but muh lore. Fuck off.
>>67615158
The negative reception the first one gets is definitive proof that nerds are, and have always been, utter plebs.
Motion Picture > Voyage Home > Khan > First Contact > Search for Spock > Undiscovered Country > Nemesis > Generations > Insurrection > Final Frontier
>>67616571each of the movies have their share of unique qualities and flaws and I enjoy them equally
TMP was pure kįńœ but took low ratings because it was too artsy and existential.
So yes, I'd say RT is flawed
I won't let this general die.
>>67617198
Shut up, nerd.
>>67615158
TMP is criminally low, and I've always had a soft spot for Nemesis despite its flaws, but otherwise this is fairly accurate.
Insurrection is so forgettable. I barely even remember what it is about.
>>67619342
It's basically Avatar done by Star Trek 10 years before ol' Jimmy
>>67615158
I've only seen the OT movies and the reboots.
>The Motion Picture
it's the second weakest of the OT movies but not that bad
>Wrath of Khan
of course it's going to be the highest of the OT movies
>Search for Spock
acceptable rating
>Voyage Home
best Star Trek movie ever, should be 100% for both
>Final Frontier
lol William Shatner forcing Nimoy and DeKelley to sing "row, row, row your boat"
>Undiscovered Country
great send off
>Star Trek 2009
It was great, but better than Wrath of Khan and Voyage Home? What the fuck?
>Into Darkness
definitely doesn't deserve to be that high, should be around the score Search for Spock got
>>67619501
>Voyage Home
>best Star Trek movie ever, should be 100% for both
It's barely even a Star Trek movie. It's a generic time travel movie featuring Trek characters. It's vastly overrated.
>>67619342
It's god-awful, be happy you can't remember it.
I'm surprised III is so high, it usually gets trashed by people (though I like it).
>>67619574
Agreed, and it's aged horribly.
"Commander, tell me about your sexual organs."
If the producers made a DS9 or VOY movie during the middle of each show's run, what would people have liked to see in them?
They never shied from 2 or 3 part episodes in the first place, but think of a much bigger budget than anything in the series
>>67619574
>barely even a Star Trek movie
You're forgetting that TOS was a campy, silly show that occasionally delved into profound topics, instead of the other way around. Leonard Nimoy understood that.
>>67615508
>didn't walk out
the movie came out in 1979 nigger
>>67615158
>tomatometer
fairly accurate, outside into darkness being absolute shit
>average rating
a bit more messed up
also
6>2>8>4>>>
11>3>7>10>>>
1>9>5>12in my opinion, family
tmp is a mess even if the visuals and tone are stellar
into darkness is irredeemable garbage
>>67619735
That was one of the shittiest episodes
>>67619724
Why is it the captains from the best shows still look fantastic, while everyone else got JUSTed?
>>67619574
>It's a generic time travel movie
According to Roberto Orci, there was no time travel in that movie.
Instead they traveled to a parallel universe where Earth was still stuck in the eighties.
Thanks Bob.
>>67615508
Probably the same guy who didn't like BvS
>>67619724
Forget getting their own movie, I'm still mad that O'Brien didn't even get a cameo in First Contact.
Am I the only one who really liked the two new movies?
>>67620127
Yes Jew Jew
>>67620127
They really sure did inject some Magic Blood into a dead franchise.
>>67620127
I liked the first one. Into Darkness was a huge pile of shit.
>>67615158
RT is not flawed. Many critics are flawed, sure, but RT is not flawed. It gives you the average critic rating, the average top critic rating, the average audience rating, and then it even makes a point to tell you what percentage of each of those groups recommends paying to see the movie. It's a totally fine system.
You don't "agree with the scores" - it is literally a collation of the critics' telling you whether or not they recommend the film.
You can agree or disagree with the ratings, however.
I'd personally arrange the Star Trek films as follows:
>9/10
1. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
>8/10
2. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
3. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
>7/10
4. Star Trek
5. Star Trek: First Contact
>6/10
6. Star Trek: The Motion Picture
>5/10
7. Star Trek: Nemesis
>4/10
8. Star Tre III: The Search for Spock
9. Star Trek: Generations
10. Star Trek Into Darkness
>3/10
11. Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
12. Star Trek: Insurrection
>>67620397
fuck off RT shill, I've seen this same copypasta in 10 threads already
>>67620760
You haven't, because this is the first and only time I've written it.
Nice try, though.
Generations is underrated.
>>67620789
You just don't get it, do you? It's not linear
>>67621597
10/10 post
