What's the consensus on J.J. Abrams' STAR TREK movies?
Shill as fuck desu. Not even star trek senpai.
>>64009115
Better than TFA
I liked 2009 but don't care much for the other ones.
Are you a Star Wars fans? Do you like the Star Wars prequels?
I am a Star Trek fan and I don't like Star Trek prequels.
>>64009115
The first is okay, not super memorable but fun.
The second is dogshit (nah the script kinda sucks but there are some cool scenes I guess)
I like them but for some reason I forget everything about them 5 mins after the credits roll.
>>64009212
This. The reboot was decent summer blockbuster. I understand it's not quite "Star Trek", but I'm not a die-hard Trekkie, so I wasn't that concerned.
Into Darkness had a talented actor for a villain and produced a stinky, original mess that did nothing other that continue to dip its bedora at Wrath of Khan
>>64009115
not enough bones
>>64009115
2009 is OK.
2013 is awful.
What went wrong with "Into Darkness"? The first one was great fun.
>>64009544
benedick cumbeerbutch
>>64009618
He wasn't the problem, it was the script.
>>64009544
Trekkies had all seen wrath of khan already. Ive still only seen into darkness, and it ok as a popcorn movie much like TFA. As a SW fan however I hate TFA, so I can see where the trek fans are coming from.
>>64009115
I liked the first
I really disliked the second except for some things
Also i'm not a trekkie, in this context i might represent the casual viewer
>>64009544
It had the same problem as Voyager: Good actors who were let down by weak writing.
>>64009115
>>64009115
Mediocre but they'll seem like masterpieces once Justin Lin's shitty new Trek drops next summer.
never watched anything star trek before and I watched into darkness
it was alright, dont intend on watching anything star trek again because its too much to watch and i dont want to become absorbed into something which would make me too late to the party anyway
The 4th one they will time travel back to 21st century Earth
You KNOW that shit is happening.
Forgettable
Star Trek (09) is probably the best movie Abrams will ever make, and one of the few projects Lindelof didn't manage to fuck up.
it was a little watered down but it actually worked on multiple levels and had an energy.. almost magical quality that was really nice. the narrative and story were not great by any means but better than the Abrams alternatives for sure, and they did a pretty good job with the characterization/development too, again far better than these guys usually do.
Into Darkness was fucking horrible and the 3rd act was offensively bad. with the first one you could say they maybe took elements and shuffled them around, not quite as pure blender status as TFA.. but with this one it was pure cut and paste with some white out. a truly shameful script
>>64009115
Good movies, bad star treks.
>>64009115
Plebs: Yay Star Treck is fun now xD
Nerds: muh continuity & world-building ;_;
Patricians: Pure shit desu :|
Forgettable action schlock.
JJ is a truly terrible director. That shacky cam gotta go fast always bullshit is hard to watch.
>>64009822
What is this liberal faggot satirizing?
"accept the new, stop sucking this dead guy's dick, he wasn't that great boohoo muh nimoy"
Such a weird thing
>>64009115
Epic shit
>not muh trek!
Oh, boo hoo, Star Trek movies are exciting and fun now.
If you want Sci-Fi where half the screen-time is people sitting around and talking, go watch The Phantom Menace again.
>>64009857
>Mediocre but they'll seem like masterpieces once Justin Lin's shitty new Trek drops next summer.
Enjoyed 2009 film and Into Darkness thoroughly. However, I reviewed the trailer for Lin's next ST film and have to agree. Looks like super shit.
>>64009115
lensflare/10
I don't remember anything that happened in them besides Alice Eve in panties and Scotty in some snow place
is 2009 considered good just because into darkness was so terrible in comparison?
>>64009803
>Good actors who were let down by weak writing
>"I am expressing multiple attitudes simultaneously, to which are you referring"?
Ok fatso
>>64010619
I think '09 is simply considered an acceptable blockbuster. My views of it is unrelated to the shite that was Into Darkness.
pretty good movies
shame the next one looks like dogshit
>>64010619
no, a big percentage of both trekkies and casuals liked 09, albeit not necessarily for the same reasons and with some concerns.
those concerns seemed very valid when they boiled over in into darkness, which was so bad that it kind of underscores the parts of 09 that were problematic.. and if anything makes 09 seem worse now than it was then
>>64010619
Nope, we loved 2009 before into darkness.
good, not great.
>>64009115
'09 was a necessary evil for the franchise and a very good movie in it's own right. Into Darkness was everything that could have gone wrong with '09 and was absolute dogshit.
Complete garbage. Turned Star Trek into just "space ships shooting colorful lasers at each other" the movie.
Pretty average action movies with pretty visuals but flat as fuck writing. Good for passing time but nothing more 5/10.
Thankfully his Star Wars movie was much better.
Trekkies generally dislike them for not being like "trek" and more like "wars"
>>64009859
It only took me a year to get through the original series, the next generation, all the movies, and part of ds9. It seems like a lot but you can blow through it if you just watch the good stuff. (You can unusually tell by the episode description if it's going to be good or boring)
The casting is perfect
Like the cast except for Spocklar, but would it fucking kill them to put a morality tale in their action movies?
I liked the first one but found the second one kind of dull. I've got high hopes for that new online series tho. If they invest in it like Netflix does their shows it could be the best Trek period.
>>64010619
The bar was also a lot lower for 2009 because it's mostly meant to reintroduce the characters and setting.
>>64011160
someone on /tv/ has a watch list as well. You only need to watch Tos, Tng, Ds9 and some of the movies. The rest of the franchise generally sucks
Speaking as a trekkie, I didn't like the new movies because there are no scenes where people calm down and say "wait a second, is this a good idea or a bad idea?" I liked in old Star Treks how they did their best to act rationally and ethically. I guess people find that boring?
>>64011615
But there are a bunch of "planning stuff out" scenes. Kirk even tries to end the conflict diplomatically in the first one.
>>64009678
He was pathetic in some parts tobehonest
summer blockbuster style star trek. fix your expectations, and enjoy the 2 hour brainless roller coaster.
>>64009115
Better than TFA
BOTH OF THEM, that's right even Into Darkness is better than TFA. Much better.
>>64012047
as a film i don"t even know, but as of how they relate to the franchise... ST:ID just does not feel nor respects star trek as a whole, TFA is okay with the star wars spirit...
>>64009115
Generic action flicks with a Star Trek skin
>>64013104
Nah. TFA pretty much exists just to shit on star wars and start a new series called star wars but with very minor relation to past entries.
>>64009115
>cast 10/10 demi god as Kirk and a pretty cool looking, special guy as Spok
>cast literally physically retarded potatoes as Star Wars characters
Was this his plan?
>>64013329
It really should have just been a movie about this guy having badass space adventures vs the first order, maybe working in either Rey or Finn but not both.
>>64009115
He is a better Star Wars director than a Star Trek director.
I thought Into Darkness was pretty good up until the final climax
