I am a big fan of TOS and TNG, but didn't care for DS9, Voyager, or Enterprise. I have enjoyed the JJ Abrams movies. The first one he did is hands down my favorite of all Star Trek movies. I wish the second hadn't tried to recreate Wrath of Khan, but I thought the production value was fantastic.

[Edited on May 23, 2016 at 2:31 AM. Reason : -]

5/23/2016 2:27:52 AM

I think by Star Trek 5 they'll end up tying in with the Marvel universe.

5/23/2016 7:48:33 AM

I enjoyed this

7/26/2016 9:36:04 PM

Beyond > Star Trek > Into Darkness

The visuals made me dizzy at a few points (thank goodness I didn't see it in 3D), but other than that I enjoyed every piece of this movie.

7/27/2016 10:40:21 AM

I think it was a better Star Trek movie than 2009, but I liked 2009 more as a movie. (if that makes sense)

7/27/2016 10:48:05 AM

Yeah, I understand what you mean. 2009 had a lot more exposition and characters discovering themselves and each other. But this one was way better as a Star Trek story. Chris Pine did a great job maturing his character and the 2nd-string officers (Uhura, Bones, Chekov, Sulu, Scotty) all had more opportunities to shine than the previous two movies which focused too much on just Kirk and Spock.

7/27/2016 10:56:49 AM

Star Trek > Into Darkness 1st half > Beyond > Into Darkness 2nd half

7/27/2016 11:30:09 AM

Did anyone think the villain was pretty half-baked?

On the bright side, think the movie had far more character exposition and talk between them compared to the first two reboot movies. Scotty it seemed like had double the lines in this one compared to the first two put together. Spock and Bones had a lot of together time to show their different views of life.

8/1/2016 10:40:04 PM

Star Trek -> Beyond -> Into Darkness

8/2/2016 7:39:02 AM

^^As soon as they found the other ship and were asking what happened to the crew it became pretty obvious who the villain was. In a way it was a stolen plot point from Insurrection. However, after they raised the stakes to Khan in only the 2nd movie, I was relieved to see a new villain concept.

The big plot hole I can't figure out is how did the stolen artifact, for which Krall had been looking for so many years, give Krall access to the Enterprise database? If the artifact was sending intel back to the home world, wouldn't he have tracked it down much sooner?

8/3/2016 2:38:08 AM

^ That was your only one?

1. The planet had no way of keeping that many "bees" that were seen in the space battles based on what of the planet we saw.
2. Where did all the people that crash landed on the planet come from and Krall sucked the life out of them come from, where were their ships? For him to stay alive that long would require a steady supply.

[Edited on August 3, 2016 at 8:19 AM. Reason : /]

8/3/2016 8:18:22 AM

Quote :

" The big plot hole I can't figure out is how did the stolen artifact, for which Krall had been looking for so many years, give Krall access to the Enterprise database? If the artifact was sending intel back to the home world, wouldn't he have tracked it down much sooner?"

That's not what happened. Krall was using a star fleet probe that had been used to map the nebula. He was pigging backing on its signal to hack Star Fleet. The Enterprise had gotten the artificial and uploaded it to Star Fleet's databanks.

Quote :

"1. The planet had no way of keeping that many "bees" that were seen in the space battles based on what of the planet we saw."

I'm assuming there were shit loads of drone spires elsewhere

Quote :

"2. Where did all the people that crash landed on the planet come from and Krall sucked the life out of them come from, where were their ships? For him to stay alive that long would require a steady supply."

Krall destroyed their ships and took their crews. The Franklin was only on the planet because it crashed

8/3/2016 8:48:39 AM

Quote :

"I'm assuming there were shit loads of drone spires elsewhere"

We saw maybe 40 on one spire, there were thousands upon thousands in space. Plus maintenance? Manufacturing capability to build new? What did you ever see that showed you the planet was capable of having such a technologically advanced navy, and keeping a regular supply of those ships and robots coming considering their kamikaze tactics?

[Edited on August 3, 2016 at 3:11 PM. Reason : /]

8/3/2016 3:07:17 PM

von neumann machines?

8/3/2016 4:35:49 PM

Quote :

" That's not what happened. Krall was using a star fleet probe that had been used to map the nebula. He was pigging backing on its signal to hack Star Fleet. The Enterprise had gotten the artificial and uploaded it to Star Fleet's databanks. "

I may be remembering it wrong, but as soon as the artifact was put into storage was when the Enterprise system got hacked.

8/4/2016 7:37:47 PM

One other thing. Whenever I heard Shohreh Aghdashloo talk (the admiral at Yorktown), I heard Avasarala from The Expanse.

8/4/2016 9:00:32 PM

Is the guy that got squished by a mailbox in this one

8/4/2016 11:15:32 PM

Greg Grunberg lowers the quality of everything he's in. And now he's been in both a Star Wars and a Star Trek movie.

8/5/2016 1:26:57 AM

^ Jesus yes, he's distracting and not a good actor. I wish they'd stop throwing him roles as favors.

8/5/2016 8:38:47 AM

I just looked up his film list and he was also in the first Star Trek movie as the voice of Kirk's stepfather on the phone. Thank goodness we didn't have to see his face. Is he blackmailing/sleeping with JJ Abrams for all these parts?

[Edited on August 5, 2016 at 2:03 PM. Reason : -]

8/5/2016 2:02:49 PM

This movie was horrible. Watched it tonight. Not a "Trek" movie by any means, and just overall bad. How anyone can say this was better than the reboot or into darkness is crazy. Stringer bell at the end got acceptable though.

10/1/2016 9:54:40 PM

Because it's the first of the new movie series that actually felt like Star Trek.

10/2/2016 1:15:42 AM

I enjoyed the Yorktown. Pretty neat.

I did feel however that the motivation for the villain was pretty weak. So he was what, a captain and war hero during the war with the Romulans, then got tired of peacetime activities? Then when he crashed he was pissed because nobody saved his crew, and now he wants to destroy the Federation?

10/3/2016 11:46:10 AM

Quote :

"This movie was horrible. Watched it tonight. Not a "Trek" movie by any means, and just overall bad. How anyone can say this was better than the reboot or into darkness is crazy."

This was my experience as well. The ending of this movie was a massive

10/10/2016 9:46:17 AM

I am in the minority I guess, because I enjoyed the movie. The villain was a bit of a reach, but I enjoyed how they portrayed it.



III

10/10/2016 12:39:33 PM

I think fans of the original series would like this movie better than Into Darkness but people who like flashy action movies would feel the opposite. Just depends on taste. No Star Trek villain has ever been a deep character.

10/10/2016 2:27:34 PM

Quote :

" No Star Trek villain has ever been a deep character."

Khan and the whole cast of characters from Star Trek VI disagree.

10/10/2016 2:44:28 PM

I was more referring to the original series TV villains, how very few had motive beyond "damn the Federation!" and "REVENGE!!!!!"

But let's put the movie villains out there and think about how deep they actually were (I had to look up a few of these as they were completely unmemorable).

1 - Vger - not really a villain, just a curious artificial intelligence
2 - Khan - REVENGE! (On the original series was just a confused super-man out of time).
3 - Kruge - steal some technology (he didn't even know what it did)
4 - Space whales - don't let the earth whales die
5 - Sybok - find God?
6 - Chang - A war general who doesn't want peace
7 - Soran - wants to get back to fake-paradise
8 - The Borg/Borg Queen - stop human contact with space? conquer earth? find a mate? (It got weird)
9 - The Son'a - REVENGE!
10 - Shinzon - REVENGE!
11 - Nero - REVENGE!
12 - Khan - REVENGE!
13 - Krall - REVENGE!

The deepest character in that list is Vger by a long shot. It was driven by curiosity in humanity, a desire to reunite with its maker, and had a designed purpose.

VI was the deepest movie as far as plot and characters as a whole. It had several turns and moving pieces, but ultimately what was Chang's actual motive? Not wanting to retire? On some levels you can say Klingon pride but Gorkon and others were able to get past that for the survival of the empire.

Star Trek villains usually only operate as plot devices, and the depth comes from the crew and the decisions the officers have to make which put lives at risk or tread the line with the prime directive. So I don't see Krall as any weaker of an antagonist than most.

[Edited on October 11, 2016 at 1:38 AM. Reason : -]

10/11/2016 1:38:04 AM

I mean, you can take any movie villain and boil them down to one line. I will agree that most of the TOS villains were campy without any real motivations, but that's really because they didn't do story arcs back then and you could only do so much in an hour.

10/11/2016 8:43:05 AM

Although how anyone can say this movie was than 'Into Darkness' is beyond me, that was a lazy reboot of Wrath of Khan with stupid plot elements like magic blood, infinite range transporters, etc

10/11/2016 8:44:49 AM

Yeah, Into Darkness was pretty terrible.

10/11/2016 1:54:06 PM