|
|
Post by Douay-Rheims-Challoner on Jul 15, 2016 9:52:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Douay-Rheims-Challoner on Jul 15, 2016 14:45:10 GMT -5
Okay reviews are out. I like that TrekCore's review none-too-subtly uses the tagline from the new show's teaser as its subject headings, even when it doesn't work (Beyond, obviously, is not about 'New Crews' by any definition.) Den of Geek's review suggests the film is fun yet light, lacking the dramatic weight of a Wrath of Khan or Search for Spock. Want something far less dorky, here's Variety's review, which also sees it as fun and anchored by strong personalities, but kind of a placeholder film. This sense of it being a bit empty is also reflected in Indiewire referring to it as the 'Seinfeld' of Star Trek movies - funny, but about nothing. I really should get around to booking my ticket, anyway. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2016 23:25:41 GMT -5
Fun yet light, so star trek IV but more actiony fun and less comedic? I'm game, sounds miles better than into darkness.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2016 12:58:49 GMT -5
Quite a few of the reviews specifically say how much better Beyond balances the "modern day action blockbuster" stuff with some real Trek heart than either of the Abrams films, which is exactly what I was hoping to hear.
I'm legit excited at this point.
|
|
|
|
Post by Douay-Rheims-Challoner on Jul 16, 2016 14:38:05 GMT -5
NicoNicoRose They're also not just sure they'll have a sequel, they already announced a castmember for it, Chris Hemsworth - reprising George Kirk. This is to my knowledge the first time casting information about a future Star Trek film came out when the other one was still in theatres (and not yet released in most areas.) Perhaps with Abrams off as a director - his procrastination about making a sequel is one reason it took a couple of years for it to happen - Paramount intends this film franchise to be a tad more, ah, frequent.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Lemur on Jul 16, 2016 15:25:20 GMT -5
It sounds like I’ll like this best of all NuTrek, but I do wonder what TrekCore’s star-rating floor is if this gets 4.5/5.
|
|
|
|
Post by Desert Dweller on Jul 16, 2016 15:33:56 GMT -5
It sounds like I’ll like this best of all NuTrek, but I do wonder what TrekCore’s star-rating floor is if this gets 4.5/5. Yep. I don't even know what to make of their review. I was hoping hardcore Trekkies would give me a review I can relate to. Doesn't appear to be the case, there. |
|
|
|
Post by Douay-Rheims-Challoner on Jul 16, 2016 15:36:40 GMT -5
It sounds like I’ll like this best of all NuTrek, but I do wonder what TrekCore’s star-rating floor is if this gets 4.5/5. TrekCore is the best at just one thing, and it's an exhaustive library of Star Trek screencaps. Their best actual article remains the one about that time Worf appeared on the Webster series finale. |
|
|
|
Post by Douay-Rheims-Challoner on Jul 21, 2016 8:54:28 GMT -5
Now there's a review of Star Trek Beyond from Bernd Schneider himself, the Ex Astris Scientia guy; one of the big Go-To guys of 1990s Star Trek websites about highly specific details about starship design (and the formatting of the website has barely changed since those competing-with-GeoCities-days.) He gives it 8/10 (he didn't much care for the Abrams films, which he gave 6 and 4, respectively). I've only skimmed this, but there's likely a lot of spoilers as he goes into nitpicking. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2016 10:25:52 GMT -5
Now there's a review of Star Trek Beyond from Bernd Schneider himself, the Ex Astris Scientia guy; one of the big Go-To guys of 1990s Star Trek websites about highly specific details about starship design (and the formatting of the website has barely changed since those competing-with-GeoCities-days.) He gives it 8/10 (he didn't much care for the Abrams films, which he gave 6 and 4, respectively). I've only skimmed this, but there's likely a lot of spoilers as he goes into nitpicking. Being very familiar with his previous Abrams reviews and general thoughts on the reboot series thus far, I am legit surprised. This gives me a good feeling if even Bernd enjoys it for the most part. |
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Lemur on Jul 22, 2016 9:20:25 GMT -5
So 4.5/5 is about right.  |
|
|
|
Post by Douay-Rheims-Challoner on Jul 23, 2016 16:42:16 GMT -5
So 4.5/5 is about right. I was impressed how the use of the Beastie Boys was justified in the most Star Trekkian manner possible. |
|
|
|
Post by Desert Dweller on Jul 23, 2016 18:00:27 GMT -5
I saw the movie this morning.
Yeah, it is better than Into Darkness. The plot makes marginally more sense. Likely because there really isn't much of a plot. What little they have still managed to distract me at least twice with how little sense it made.
The characters in the film are MUCH better than the previous one. Did Simon Pegg write those scenes with McCoy? If so, THANK YOU, Simon. McCoy finally feels like the, erm, real McCoy. (Sorry, I did not intend to make that joke.) The McCoy/Spock and McCoy/Kirk scenes were all very good.
I liked Jaylah. She also brought some cool tech to Star Trek that didn't seem as insane as some of the other tech ideas that the JJ films have introduced.
The villain is a total disaster. He doesn't make any sense at all. I almost regret complaining about the villain in the first JJ Trek movie. He makes a lot more sense than Krall. Disaster.
The climax was kind of lame. It feels like they blew their great action idea in the first 20 minutes, and had nothing left here. I also don't like how the threat driving the climax is something that could be resolved by someone asking "Why can't we just beam it/him into space?" That is a deadly plot hole in Star Trek.
Sigh. I've come to the conclusion that Trek doesn't work as a modern film blockbuster. The plot contrivances make it all seem nonsensical. Bernd's nitpicks are right on. Why is this station here? Why is it designed that way? Why'd they send the Enterprise on this mission without knowing anything or asking the alien any questions?
The plot just felt too big. Arbitrarily big. I mean, the scope felt too big for the story.
The film also gives off a whiff of "We had these cool visual effects, so we wrote a plot around them".
|
|
|
|
Post by Lt. Broccoli on Jul 24, 2016 5:47:36 GMT -5
I'm not sure I can judge it properly as a regular movie, but I thought it was a great Star Trek movie. It was especially great if you're a big Star Trek nerd who likes references to other films and series...Into Darkness was full of that as well, of course, but in a way that seemed to be making fun of it, or as if the writers didn't understand or care about what they were referring to. The nitpicks mentioned above crossed my mind as well, but I didn't mind so much because Pegg's writing is a vast improvement.
Hopefully without spoiling anything, I never imagined ST: Enterprise canon would actually be relevant.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2016 12:22:02 GMT -5
Mrs. Tomorrowville and I finally saw it this morning, and... ...we LOVED it. This is the first time that the reboot series has really felt like Star Trek to me. The characters act so much more like, well, those characters - everybody's more grown-up and behave like proper Starfleet officers. Lin gives them so many more quiet, personal moments than Abrams ever did - without the constant, relentless Abrams hyperactivity, Lin lets them breathe so much more and it makes such a big difference. And Pegg/Jung's script feels steeped in genuine Star Trek in so much more genuine a way than Orci & Co.'s did - everything seemed so surface-level in their scripts, but Pegg & Jung feel like they get the real meaning behind the world so much better. Urban & Quinto, as remarked upon in other reviews, really knock it out of the park in all the McCoy/Spock scenes, but I'm particularly impressed with Chris Pine - he feels SO MUCH MORE like Kirk proper than he ever has. He's gone from a generic Bad Boy to feeling like a real Starfleet captain. I'm really impressed by his performance. Also, Jaylah is a ridiculously charming character and I hope she becomes a permanent fixture. She's great, Boutella is great as her, and I want more of that character in the future. Yorktown was eye-popping, like some kind of crazy concept from a '70s sci-fi novel brought to life. All the design work and effects work in this movie is spectacular, IMHO. Krall isn't as developed as I'd like, but I definitely think he's a better villain than Nero or the mess of Into Darkness. All of the little references to Trek feel so much more organic & natural than Orci & Co. ever managed in their films. So many little touches that made the movie feel alive with Star Trek-ness compared to the Abrams films. I had a ridiculous grin on my face catching things like the quick "Who Mourns For Adonais?" reference and hearing so much ENT canon pop up - phase cannons! spatial torpedoes! hull polarization! the Xindi! etc. - was unexpectedly delightful. Paramount: if you're gonna keep doing the "big Trek action franchise" thing, MORE LIKE THIS ONE PLEASE. This is the only one of the reboot films I am excited to watch again. |
|
|
|
Post by Ben Grimm on Jul 24, 2016 14:40:59 GMT -5
We just got back. Best Star Trek movie in twenty years, though I don't mean to damn it with faint praise. We both really enjoyed it, thought it felt like a real Star Trek movie, made by people who knew and liked Star Trek, and that it just worked in a way we kind of needed one of these to at some point.
Early on, though, I was feeling the same sinking feeling the first two gave me, especially during the big early space battle. It didn't feel "right," and - more to the point - didn't feel necessary (and still doesn't, really). But once they got on the planet it was golden. Dividing the characters in twos was a great idea and worked really well, even if some of the pairings were a bit random. And the uniforms looked better this time than in the first two.
|
|
|
|
Post by Douay-Rheims-Challoner on Jul 24, 2016 14:53:29 GMT -5
Just remember you can throw your spoilers behind the handy [spoiler][/spoiler] tag. We just got back. Best Star Trek movie in twenty years, though I don't mean to damn it with faint praise. I don't know, better than First Contact is not nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by Ben Grimm on Jul 24, 2016 15:29:06 GMT -5
We just got back. Best Star Trek movie in twenty years, though I don't mean to damn it with faint praise. I don't know, better than First Contact is not nothing. That was twenty years ago, and I don't think I'd call it better than that. |
|
|
|
Post by Douay-Rheims-Challoner on Jul 24, 2016 16:24:47 GMT -5
I don't know, better than First Contact is not nothing. That was twenty years ago, and I don't think I'd call it better than that. Well, turns twenty this November. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2016 17:28:58 GMT -5
Just got back. Completely agree that this is the best new Trek movie since First Contact.
I was laughing out loud like an idiot during the big setpiece. Thankfully everyone else was laughing with me for most of the rest of the funny scenes.
This is what Trek should be - action AND fun AND emotions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ben Grimm on Jul 24, 2016 17:39:43 GMT -5
I hadn't realized, but Danny Pudi played an alien in super-heavy makeup.
|
|
|
|
Post by Desert Dweller on Jul 24, 2016 19:47:05 GMT -5
Urban & Quinto, as remarked upon in other reviews, really knock it out of the park in all the McCoy/Spock scenes, but I'm particularly impressed with Chris Pine - he feels SO MUCH MORE like Kirk proper than he ever has. He's gone from a generic Bad Boy to feeling like a real Starfleet captain. I'm really impressed by his performance. Also, Jaylah is a ridiculously charming character and I hope she becomes a permanent fixture. She's great, Boutella is great as her, and I want more of that character in the future. Yes, Chris Pine is really good in this movie! I thought it was his best performance out of the three films. The character felt more like Kirk to me. That is probably partially because the interaction between Spock/McCoy/Kirk felt much more like Original Trek. Scotty also felt more like Scotty, too. Jaylah seems a big hit amongst everyone I've talked to. Yeah, I really liked her. She had some great character scenes. Loved her whole vibe. Nice performance by Boutella. I just wish the story had been tweaked a bit to remove some of the nonsensical parts. Basically, I didn't like anything to do with the space station. Lop that off entirely, and then I would have liked the film. Enterprise flies into a mysterious uncharted nebula in response to a distress call? Get attacked by an unknown planet, crash, crew scattered, have to fend for themselves.... All that stuff I like. But, I don't think the film should have had the "villain has a superweapon and wants to destroy the Federation" angle. It didn't really fit the rest of the story. The superweapon was dumb. The climax was dumb. I still don't even understand the villain's motivation or backstory. Not even sure what the thematic thrust of the film is supposed to be. This still makes it better than Into Darkness. That was just godawful terrible. There was basically nothing in that which I liked. This one had fun characters - the REAL Trek characters, and at least half of a fun story. |
|
|
|
Post by starforge on Jul 25, 2016 3:53:21 GMT -5
Star Trek Beyond is a wondrous return to form for the franchise. I haven't seen anything embody the universe and characters Trek was established upon so well since DS9. The same rollicking action from 09 with a better, more interesting narrative, more excellent character interaction, and worlds I didn't know I needed to see.
After Star Treks 2, 4, and 6, this is my 4th favorite Trek film, with 09 being 5th. Well done Justin Lin. Please do the next one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lt. Broccoli on Jul 25, 2016 6:32:20 GMT -5
But, I don't think the film should have had the "villain has a superweapon and wants to destroy the Federation" angle. It didn't really fit the rest of the story. The superweapon was dumb. The climax was dumb. I still don't even understand the villain's motivation or backstory. Not even sure what the thematic thrust of the film is supposed to be. At first I assumed it was going for a "not all worlds think the Federation is a great idea" story, maybe with some allegory about our own world where terrorists fight against a hegemon that thinks it's the good guy... It didn't really go there, it was just an old captain who was pissed off because the Federation didn't rescue him. But it was also established with his connection the ST: Enterprise era (or before, even) that the Federation didn't even exist when he crashed on that planet. So, I don't know who exactly he was supposed to be pissed off at. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2016 8:18:17 GMT -5
It was stated that he was a soldier in some military unit who saw combat in the Xindi War, and saw the end of that and the beginning of the Federation. He was given a starship command as a reward for his service, which might not have been the best idea, because he was still very militaristic. Assuming the timelines line up, he then crash landed in the nebula. There might be issues with all of that (I stopped watching Enterprise after the "Hoshi in the Transporter Buffer" episode), but otherwise it makes some sense. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2016 9:39:51 GMT -5
That's exactly how I read it, too: Edison was a MACO officer (another piece of ENT canon I was surprised to hear spoken in a Kelvin Timeline movie) who fought the Xindi and in the Romulan War, making his way up to being a commanding officer in the MACOs. Upon the founding of the Federation and the establishment of Starfleet, the MACOs were disbanded, and Edison was rewarded for his military achievements by being given command of the USS Franklin and sent on an exploration mission. He still clung to his very militaristic background, though, and viewed being given an explorer's job as being put out to pasture. After the Franklin was marooned on Altamid and Starfleet was unable to find them, Edison took it as being abandoned by the organization for being a relic of a militaristic time, which drove his loathing of the Federation. |
|
|
|
Post by Douay-Rheims-Challoner on Jul 25, 2016 10:07:49 GMT -5
I just wish the story had been tweaked a bit to remove some of the nonsensical parts. Basically, I didn't like anything to do with the space station. Lop that off entirely, and then I would have liked the film. Enterprise flies into a mysterious uncharted nebula in response to a distress call? Get attacked by an unknown planet, crash, crew scattered, have to fend for themselves.... All that stuff I like. The smart thing about the Yorktown is it took the role held by Earth in the last three Star Trek films: It's the place the bad guy wants to threaten and must be stopped from destroying it. But the movie benefited from also showing us what that place was like, first, making the issue less abstract than threatening Veridian IV in Generations - and the station was a microcosm of the Federation itself, a big multicultural facility that symbolises what the Federation means better than any hanging around Earth would. I thought it was one of the best elements in the movie. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2016 10:10:22 GMT -5
I agree. I liked Yorktown as well, though I do have to admit that maybe building your best, brightest massive station right near uncharted space with no idea what potential dangers could exist like two hours away was kind of poor design.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2016 10:15:04 GMT -5
I agree. I liked Yorktown as well, though I do have to admit that maybe building your best, brightest massive station right near uncharted space with no idea what potential dangers could exist like two hours away was kind of poor design. That element of Yorktown called to my mind the "Star Trek: Vanguard" novel series that I read not long ago, which similarly dealt with a massive starbase on the edge of charted space (in that book series, it's an unexplored region, the Taurus Reach, that's bordered by Federation, Klingon, and Tholian space). |
|
|
|
Post by Lt. Broccoli on Jul 25, 2016 10:43:34 GMT -5
Oh yeah... They mentioned the Romulan war, but that is also pre-Federation. Also the Franklin was the first ship capable of warp 4, so that's definitely pre-Federation, but the NX-01 Enterprise could go warp 5...so I don't know, the timeline is a little wonky. Also did they restart the numbering with the NX-01 Enterprise? There was also an NX-02, Columbia, but the Franklin was NX-326. |
|
