Looks totally new and original i.e. not a remake/rehash of previous movies/shows.
This will be the first movie with Star Trek in the title that I will never see. :(
Yeah, that trailer was complete rubbish. Not even remotely interested.
Doesn't look that bad. Are those Space Elves or Albino Vulcans? :idiot2:
Killing the Enterprise in the third movie, are we? Stranding the crew on a cheap looking junk heap of a planet?
YEAH, ROCK OUT Y'ALL, THIS IS SOME REAL-ASS STAR TRAK NOWWWWwwww!
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fold.wargamer.com%2Fforums%2Fsmiley%2Fintrepidphasers.gif&hash=3e10e664f2086b63d51ab388e302f9f916428548) (https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fold.wargamer.com%2Fforums%2Fsmiley%2Fummno.gif&hash=ade39386fe2ae6475022055e1bfcbda9477dbd88)
I will however grant that being stranded on a cheap looking cargo cult of a planet with secret high-tech mystery-threats, is quite classic Trek.
Had they thought of something else other than killing the Enterprise to generate plot tension, and found almost anything other than grunge scatter-rock for the trailer, I might be in. As many problems as the first two movies had (and my God did they have problems), they felt properly epic (to me) and looked and sounded good with plenty of characterization touches. They were combat Star Trek instead of Star Trekking Star Trek, and I agree it's time to get past that, but this... man... this is some Trek 5 levels of dubiousness, except more trivial. :crazy2: So much more trivial they have to amp the stakes and get rid of the home team advantage by killing off the Enterprise.
So, opinions: Guardians of the Galaxy stab attempt? I say yes, with a wild miss.
If the planet they're stranded on is full of walking trees and raccoons that build phasers, then I think you have a point.
Totally unimpressed. Three movies and jumped the shark already :-[
Quote from: Sir Slash on December 16, 2015, 07:44:55 PM
If the planet they're stranded on is full of walking trees and raccoons that build phasers, then I think you have a point.
I was thinking more about the attempt at a tone.
Quote from: Steelgrave on December 16, 2015, 07:54:41 PM
Totally unimpressed. Three movies and jumped the shark already :-[
That already happened back in the 2009 film when Vulcan was destroyed by excessive lense flare.
Seems like it might be good to me. At least one of those guys is a Cardassian which means this is a link to Star Trek Deep Space 9 series. Most probably it has bad guys coming through that wormhole thing the DS9 space station was supposed to be close to. Or Enterprise goes through the wormhole and runs into something it can't handle.
Wait, so handing directorial duties off to the Fast and the Furious guy wasn't a good idea? ::)
Man, you guys are determined not to like this movie.
Just ignore them. They bring too much baggage to each movie they see. ;)
I think it looks interesting as well, and am looking forward to seeing it.
Nah, I might go see it. I enjoyed the two JJ Star Trek flicks. I just think it was a weird directorial choice...and I'm kinda tired of the Enterprise being blown up. :)
Don't worry. Plenty of movies before we get to the Enterprise Z.
Which brings up a new plot device...
good! I approve of destroying that shit ass Enterprise design!
(https://memecrunch.com/meme/KDFS/grumpy-cat-approves/image.jpg?w=400&c=1)
^ Amen to that! ;D
http://www.cracked.com/blog/why-star-trek-reboot-hates-idea-being-star-trek/ (http://www.cracked.com/blog/why-star-trek-reboot-hates-idea-being-star-trek/)
Star Trek is in a tough spot. To stay true to the original series, they would have to do a TV series. Movie goers want action, they're not going to sit though the first Star Trek movie from the early 80's.
Perhaps they need to partner with SyFy and try to bring ST back like they did with Battlestar Galactica.
Star Treknado?
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on December 20, 2015, 04:08:12 PM
http://www.cracked.com/blog/why-star-trek-reboot-hates-idea-being-star-trek/ (http://www.cracked.com/blog/why-star-trek-reboot-hates-idea-being-star-trek/)
Well now I'm (more) depressed.
Quote from: Martok on December 20, 2015, 06:56:55 PM
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on December 20, 2015, 04:08:12 PM
http://www.cracked.com/blog/why-star-trek-reboot-hates-idea-being-star-trek/ (http://www.cracked.com/blog/why-star-trek-reboot-hates-idea-being-star-trek/)
Well now I'm (more) depressed.
Why is that?
Quote from: Martok on December 20, 2015, 06:56:55 PM
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on December 20, 2015, 04:08:12 PM
http://www.cracked.com/blog/why-star-trek-reboot-hates-idea-being-star-trek/ (http://www.cracked.com/blog/why-star-trek-reboot-hates-idea-being-star-trek/)
Well now I'm (more) depressed.
There's always Axanar to give us hope. (When it finally gets made)
@bbmike: Because reading that article drained me of hope.
...However, Pinetree's reminder helped shore it up some. (Please, please let Axanar be good!)
Quote from: Martok on December 21, 2015, 12:01:44 AM
@bbmike: Because reading that article drained me of hope.
...However, Pinetree's reminder helped shore it up some. (Please, please let Axanar be good!)
Ok, that I agree with. :)
Quote from: SirAndrewD on December 19, 2015, 08:38:37 PM
Enough said.
"Let's pretend we're in Stalin's Russia and erase it from our collective memory. Can we do that?" :2funny:
Cracked immediately picked up on the (failed) GotGalaxy tone attempt.
For better or worse, this thing will be here in a couple weeks.
That twin-nacelle ship flying through the plasma at the end of the clip- was that an NX-series? There was an earlier shot of a circular hull in the distance that looks like it had been planet-bound for a quite while. Maybe the marooned crew finds it still serviceable and rebuilds it, Flight of the Phoenix-style.
NM- Just watched the clip again. Looks more like they just patched up the saucer-section and cobbled on some engines. There is no structure between the two nacelles as there is on the NXs.
I'm starting to like this emoticon:
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aarcentral.com%2Fpics%2Fvomit.gif&hash=f8c0cec79f834c3558ced52ccf681c80fdf7c2e4)
Five Start Trek movies that didn't get made:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/five-abandoned-star-trek-movies-youll-never-get-141036268.html
Written by Simon Pegg!?! :o :D
This will make the film a smash hit and some of you here very happy.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/in-a-nod-to-george-takei-john-cho%E2%80%99s-sulu-is-gay-in-star-trek-beyond/ar-BBu3htX?li=AA2qN5v&ocid=spartanntp
Oh my. ::)
But I've been expecting them to do this for two movies now. And I like Sulu's character anyway (here and OG). So whatever, can't really blame them, it honors the actor, and it isn't breaking anything established in the character per se.
It's an alternate timeline. They can do whatever the hell they want with any of the characters.
They should make one of the crew a Horta, like Diane Duane did in her Star Trek novels.
Quote from: JasonPratt on July 07, 2016, 11:14:08 AM
Oh my. ::)
But I've been expecting them to do this for two movies now. And I like Sulu's character anyway (here and OG). So whatever, can't really blame them, it honors the actor, and it isn't breaking anything established in the character per se.
Didn't Kirk meet Sulu's daughter in the movie Generations. Not that it means he was heterosexual, just it was implied.
A Trans-Sexual Horta of course. I've been expecting a whole planet of Gay-lings any film now. I bet their ships will be well decorated--- that's a complement, not a sexist knock. I wonder if the Klingons will be as excepting?
Quote from: mirth on July 07, 2016, 11:16:29 AM
It's an alternate timeline. They can do whatever the hell they want with any of the characters.
They should make one of the crew a Horta, like Diane Duane did in her Star Trek novels.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aarcentral.com%2Fpics%2Fvomit.gif&hash=f8c0cec79f834c3558ced52ccf681c80fdf7c2e4)(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aarcentral.com%2Fpics%2Fvomit.gif&hash=f8c0cec79f834c3558ced52ccf681c80fdf7c2e4)(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aarcentral.com%2Fpics%2Fvomit.gif&hash=f8c0cec79f834c3558ced52ccf681c80fdf7c2e4)
Quote from: bbmike on July 07, 2016, 01:48:46 PM
Quote from: mirth on July 07, 2016, 11:16:29 AM
It's an alternate timeline. They can do whatever the hell they want with any of the characters.
They should make one of the crew a Horta, like Diane Duane did in her Star Trek novels.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aarcentral.com%2Fpics%2Fvomit.gif&hash=f8c0cec79f834c3558ced52ccf681c80fdf7c2e4)(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aarcentral.com%2Fpics%2Fvomit.gif&hash=f8c0cec79f834c3558ced52ccf681c80fdf7c2e4)(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aarcentral.com%2Fpics%2Fvomit.gif&hash=f8c0cec79f834c3558ced52ccf681c80fdf7c2e4)
That emoticon is serving you well!
Im just glad that stupid friking Enterprise design is dead.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on July 07, 2016, 06:57:54 PM
Im just glad that stupid friking Enterprise design is dead.
This is what they're replacing it with
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/90/Phase_II_Enterprise.jpg)
Fascinating....
http://io9.gizmodo.com/george-takei-tried-to-convince-the-team-behind-star-tre-1783306619
I don't get at all why they feel the need to make Sulu's character gay. The original actor is, of course, but he's an actor, not the character. I suppose they think that's some kind of nod to Takei, but it seems rather silly and heavy handed.
I blame Kirk. Sulu NEVER got to beam down to the planets with the rest of the team. Him and Chekov were the only two on the whole damned ship that never got laid.
Hell, even Wesley Crusher got laid on occasion.
But nobody ran around bare-chested, swinging around a rapier, sweaty as hell from those solar flare 60s TV studio lights, and still seem straight.
That was only when he was drunk from the alien goo that got on everybody. Which is why Kirk never let him drink again in the show. But now Scotty.....
Kirk tended to get goo on alien women.
To boldly go where no man has gone before.
Kirk really lived up to that part of the mission.
Quote from: mirth on July 07, 2016, 07:35:35 PM
Fascinating....
http://io9.gizmodo.com/george-takei-tried-to-convince-the-team-behind-star-tre-1783306619
Interesting read. I like Mr. Takei even more now (if that's even possible). Show's you how the people running Trek Wars have no clue. Why reboot what didn't need rebooting? Pick another ship in that period and have whatever kind characters you want. Even (God forbid) a horta if you actually think that makes any sense in
any universe. ::)
Ensign Horta was a good minor character!
Quote from: mirth on July 08, 2016, 04:16:02 PM
Ensign Horta was a good minor character!
Wait...where is it...it's around here somewhere...
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aarcentral.com%2Fpics%2Fvomit.gif&hash=f8c0cec79f834c3558ced52ccf681c80fdf7c2e4)
Yes. That's what he looked like.
PAAAINNN! PAAAAAAAAIIINNN!!
(For all I know the character was great; I seem to recall some good stories from that writer.)
Main review guy: "I
LOVED IT!"
Reviewers guest girl: "I thought it was meh. I didn't
not like it. I'm not a super-fan [but] I have high expectations for Star Trek."
Review guy: "I thought it was a small movie in a big movie's body."
Both agreed it felt more like classic Trek than the Starwarsian previous two movies.
Another early review:
Surprisingly good!?
I haven't seen it and won't but I'll go ahead and post my review now:
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aarcentral.com%2Fpics%2Fvomit.gif&hash=f8c0cec79f834c3558ced52ccf681c80fdf7c2e4)
Meh
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/22/movies/review-star-trek-beyond.html
Aunty Beeb gives it 3 stars. (http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20160721-film-review-does-star-trek-beyond-boldly-go-nowhere)It sounds like it's better than the trailer would make it.
Quote from: Pinetree on July 21, 2016, 08:09:52 PM
Aunty Beeb gives it 3 stars. (http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20160721-film-review-does-star-trek-beyond-boldly-go-nowhere)It sounds like it's better than the trailer would make it.
This says it all:
QuoteKirk and his crew might as well be office managers on a paintballing away-day
Easy to see why they want to stop Star Trek Axanar and Star Trek Continues if this is the garbage they are going to feed us.
Quote from: bbmike on July 22, 2016, 07:55:20 AM
Easy to see why they want to stop Star Trek Axanar and Star Trek Continues if this is the garbage they are going to feed us.
That's the ONLY stuff they want you to see!
Plus pay for an online subscription for their new series.
:P
Quote from: Nefaro on July 22, 2016, 04:02:21 PM
Plus pay for an online subscription for their new series.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aarcentral.com%2Fpics%2Fvomit.gif&hash=f8c0cec79f834c3558ced52ccf681c80fdf7c2e4)
^ That little emoticon guy really gets the point across.
I'm not a big lover of Space Hippy Trek, having lost some interest after the Kirk era was gone, long ago. Therefore I enjoyed the first JJ "reboot" movie.
I'll likely go see this one in the theater. Eventually. Considering some of the very few reviewers, with similar tastes, have enjoyed it. Despite expecting it to be bad due to the poor trailer.
I just got back from seeing it and I found it pretty disjointed and lacking in storyline information.
I just saw it tonight and it was better than I expected. The star base blew my mind.
I am now sad I let Bro talk me out of seeing this movie (he hadn't seen Into Darkness yet although from all I've heard this film basically ignores it), and watching Now You See Me 2 instead. (Which was okay, but man did it fall apart bad on any consideration. I can't think of any film offhand I had a higher opinion of while I was watching it that has tanked so low in my head afterward. But we did enjoy it while we were there.)
Angry Joe thinks STB is awesome meanwhile. And I watched that other thing instead. Sigh.
^ Look three posts above yours, JP. Lolz
Saw this Saturday with my boys and we all really liked it. If you liked the first reboot, you definitely want to see this.
Quote from: Banzai_Cat on July 25, 2016, 08:29:15 PM
^ Look three posts above yours, JP. Lolz
S'okay.
I'm used to my posts being skipped. :))
Saw it today, and it was significantly better than the trailers made it out to be.
Still more an action film than old school Trek, but it was better than Into Darkness, and at least on par if not better than the first reboot.
Biggest issue I had with it was the direction, Lin had a lot of really jarring, fast pans and too many quick cuts. He also way overdid it on cutting back on JJ Abrams overlighting. I was very happy to see the end of lens flare the movie, but he actually made it too dark at times in overcompensation.
Lots of nods to the Star Trek Enterprise series as well, which may or may not be a good thing depending on how you felt about that show.
Quote from: SirAndrewD on July 26, 2016, 09:21:35 PM
Lots of nods to the Star Trek Enterprise series as well, which may or may not be a good thing depending on how you felt about that show.
I liked ST:E. Now I can look forward a bit more to seeing Beyond.
Quote from: Nefaro on July 26, 2016, 12:23:59 PM
Quote from: Banzai_Cat on July 25, 2016, 08:29:15 PM
^ Look three posts above yours, JP. Lolz
S'okay.
I'm used to my posts being skipped. :))
Your code was blank to me, and you didn't mention what you were linking to in your text (which makes sense, because it must have looked obvious!) So I didn't know you had posted it already. :-[
My wife and I went on Saturday and both enjoyed it. It was much like one of the exploration TV episodes.
The only big problem was the very weak villain. Why can't movies come up with good villains? Can it really be that hard?
Quote from: airboy on August 15, 2016, 09:02:26 AM
My wife and I went on Saturday and both enjoyed it. It was much like one of the exploration TV episodes.
The only big problem was the very weak villain. Why can't movies come up with good villains? Can it really be that hard?
Having a good villain is essential for any great, not just good, action/adventure movie.
The actor also needs to play it up well, too.
Two minutes ago, I learned that the term "Ferengi" wasn't invented for Star Trek.
Rather, it's a Saracen adjective for the Franks.
...I couldn't find anywhere more appropriate to announce my increase of geekiness this morning.
That is all. 8)
Another interesting item is that Jar Jar Abrams is 100% full blooded Ferengi.
Quote from: bbmike on October 27, 2016, 08:23:35 AM
Another interesting item is that Jar Jar Abrams is 100% full blooded Ferengi.
As a child, Jar Jar's ears were caught in a mechanical rice picker :coolsmiley:
Mesa thinks that would no-sa feel so good-sa.
I like the movie. Very action centered but there was several hooks to the original series--especially Nimoy's recent passing. As others have mentioned the bad guy was bit underwhelming and the most interesting character by far is was Jaylah. Most have signed on for a fourth picture so looks like we're have another one coming.
Finally watched this. They saved the galaxy with a Beastie Boys song. Beyond stupid.
Quote from: mirth on November 14, 2016, 10:09:18 PM
Finally watched this. They saved the galaxy with a Beastie Boys song. Beyond stupid.
Still haven't seen it. Does it turn out to be an NX-class ship that they resurect?
Quote from: Staggerwing on November 14, 2016, 10:12:11 PM
Quote from: mirth on November 14, 2016, 10:09:18 PM
Finally watched this. They saved the galaxy with a Beastie Boys song. Beyond stupid.
Still haven't seen it. Does it turn out to be an NX-class ship that they resurect?
Yep, the Franklin if I recall (though I have zero idea of the line of ships in the ST canon from that era).
It was pretty dumb, because it was meant for a mass audience of lower common denominators, but I checked my brain in at the door before seeing it. I'd heard some bad reviews about it before we went and didn't have high expectations. The entire music angle was kind of dumb and ham-fisted throughout. Didn't they play Fight The Power at some point, too? ::)
Quote from: Staggerwing on November 14, 2016, 10:12:11 PM
Quote from: mirth on November 14, 2016, 10:09:18 PM
Finally watched this. They saved the galaxy with a Beastie Boys song. Beyond stupid.
Still haven't seen it. Does it turn out to be an NX-class ship that they resurect?
It's an NX-class ship or the Abramsverse equivalent.
I'd seen ST: Enterprise last year (all five seasons in a binge watching event) and I was kind of surprised how the NX ship wasn't Abramized at all...but again I'm no Star Trek neo-maxi-zoom-dweebie.
Maybe just zoom-dweebie. But not neo-maxi. :nerd:
Quote from: Banzai_Cat on November 14, 2016, 10:16:55 PM
Quote from: Staggerwing on November 14, 2016, 10:12:11 PM
Quote from: mirth on November 14, 2016, 10:09:18 PM
Finally watched this. They saved the galaxy with a Beastie Boys song. Beyond stupid.
Still haven't seen it. Does it turn out to be an NX-class ship that they resurect?
Yep, the Franklin if I recall (though I have zero idea of the line of ships in the ST canon from that era).
It was pretty dumb, because it was meant for a mass audience of lower common denominators, but I checked my brain in at the door before seeing it. I'd heard some bad reviews about it before we went and didn't have high expectations. The entire music angle was kind of dumb and ham-fisted throughout. Didn't they play Fight The Power at some point, too? ::)
I'm surprised they didn't throw in Intergalactic.
Quote from: Banzai_Cat on November 14, 2016, 10:23:56 PM
I'd seen ST: Enterprise last year (all five seasons in a binge watching event) and I was kind of surprised how the NX ship wasn't Abramized at all...but again I'm no Star Trek neo-maxi-zoom-dweebie.
Maybe just zoom-dweebie. But not neo-maxi. :nerd:
It's not exactly the same model as the NX-01 Enterprise. The Franklin supposedly predates the NX-01.
There's a whole backstory for it:
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/USS_Franklin
The fourth Star Trek film is in the works, but that was announced just before ST: Beyond came out.
http://variety.com/2016/film/news/paramount-fourth-star-trek-chris-pine-chris-hemsworth-1201816258/
Variety's website sucks - I'm surprised it can run at all with all the ad scripts they have going. So:
QuoteParamount Pictures, Skydance and Bad Robot have announced a fourth film in the rebooted "Star Trek" series, starring Chris Pine and Chris Hemsworth.
The studio made the announcement Monday, four days before it launches "Star Trek Beyond," disclosing that Pine's Captain Kirk will cross paths with his father, described as "a man he never had a chance to meet, but whose legacy has haunted him since the day he was born."
Hemsworth, who appeared in 2009's "Star Trek," will return to the space saga in the father role as George Kirk. The remaining cast — which includes Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, Karl Urban, John Cho and Simon Pegg — is expected to return.
The late Anton Yelchin, who died June 19, had played the Chekov character in the three reboots.
J.D. Payne and Patrick McKay will write the screenplay. J.J. Abrams and Lindsey Weber will produce through Bad Robot Productions. David Ellison and Dana Goldberg of Skydance will executive produce.
The announcement did not indicate who will direct. Justin Lin directed "Star Trek Beyond" from a script by Doug Jung and Simon Pegg.
"Star Trek" grossed $380 million worldwide in 2009 and "Star Trek: Into Darkness" earned $460 million worldwide. "Star Trek Beyond" — the 13th film in the series dating back to 1979's "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" — will make its premiere at Comic-Con on Wednesday in San Diego.
Hemsworth is currently starring in "Ghostbusters" alongside Melissa McCarthy, Kristin Wiig and Kate McKinnon, and filming "Thor: Ragnorak" and "Avengers: Infinity War – Part 1" back to back. He is repped by CAA and ROAR.
I still think what a terrible thing it was for Yelchin to die so young and in such a dumb way...poor guy. Inevitably though I gotta wonder if they're doing a fourth movie if they're just going to write the character out or bring in another actor.
Quote from: mirth on November 14, 2016, 10:29:44 PM
It's not exactly the same model as the NX-01 Enterprise. The Franklin supposedly predates the NX-01.
There's a whole backstory for it:
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/USS_Franklin
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fskreened.com%2Frender-product%2Fy%2Fy%2Fu%2Fyyuaotwspewkcoemucok%2Fimage.skreened-t-shirt.heathered-kelly-green.w460h520b3z1.jpg&hash=df81e7d574aa03860db82e85b396bca0d9c8a60c)
Memory Alpha is a cool site, but damn, those nerds have waaaay too much time on their hands.
(Says the guy writing silly AARs.)
Quote from: Banzai_Cat on November 14, 2016, 10:31:42 PM
Quote from: mirth on November 14, 2016, 10:29:44 PM
It's not exactly the same model as the NX-01 Enterprise. The Franklin supposedly predates the NX-01.
There's a whole backstory for it:
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/USS_Franklin
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fskreened.com%2Frender-product%2Fy%2Fy%2Fu%2Fyyuaotwspewkcoemucok%2Fimage.skreened-t-shirt.heathered-kelly-green.w460h520b3z1.jpg&hash=df81e7d574aa03860db82e85b396bca0d9c8a60c)
Memory Alpha is a cool site, but damn, those nerds have waaaay too much time on their hands.
(Says the guy writing silly AARs.)
I have to admit, I was curious about the differences/similarities between the Franklin and the NX-01 designs. The movie had a couple of cool nods to the Enterprise show time period. That's about all the good I can say about it though.
Quote from: mirth on November 14, 2016, 10:35:35 PM
I have to admit, I was curious about the differences/similarities between the Franklin and the NX-01 designs. The movie had a couple of cool nods to the Enterprise show time period. That's about all the good I can say about it though.
Not having seen the movie, the only thing I can say about it is (https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aarcentral.com%2Fpics%2Fvomit.gif&hash=f8c0cec79f834c3558ced52ccf681c80fdf7c2e4)
Quote from: bbmike on November 15, 2016, 06:28:40 AM
Quote from: mirth on November 14, 2016, 10:35:35 PM
I have to admit, I was curious about the differences/similarities between the Franklin and the NX-01 designs. The movie had a couple of cool nods to the Enterprise show time period. That's about all the good I can say about it though.
Not having seen the movie, the only thing I can say about it is (https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aarcentral.com%2Fpics%2Fvomit.gif&hash=f8c0cec79f834c3558ced52ccf681c80fdf7c2e4)
Having seen it, I cannot disagree. I enjoyed Into Darkness more and that was not a great movie.
Karl Urban was still awesome as McCoy. He's been the bright spot of the Abrams movies.
So I finally caught this one tonight and I can sum-up the film in 4 words. "Really, really, REALLY terrible". It fails at every attempt to be either funny, dramatic, sad or shocking. A silly plot and.... (SPOILER ALERT) the Enterprise gets destroyed! Who thought THAT was a good idea? I agree Urban's 'Mc Coy' was likeable but the rest were just asleep. Worst scene was the 'Alien Head' girl scene. She needed to be hit with a phaser and not set on stun. Damn. Take me back to saving the whales will you?
I watched some of it a few weeks back (it's free for me on Amazon Prime). I made it to the part where "Kirk" finds a dirt bike. A DIRT BIKE. That was more than enough. (https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aarcentral.com%2Fpics%2Fshakehead.gif&hash=d6326b4159f7e626ec4cddc26ebf21b107565a04)
I never, ever thought I'd wish we could go back to this
If only. :(