Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Seemlar
Jun 17, 2002


A solid OP because it includes both truths that the Odd/Even theory is a fraud and RLM have really bad opinions on Star Trek

I love The Motion Picture most of all, but I couldn't personally say any of the first six movies are ones I could totally do without - even at their lower points like Final Frontier they all tell their own stand alone stories while contributing to a greater ongoing narrative (more character based really) without feeling like franchise episodes stringing you along to keep seeing more the way current blockbuster series and universe movies do.

That's the one thing more than anything else that the Next Generation and alternate universe movies both failed to replicate entirely.

piratepilates posted:

Did anyone earnestly enjoy Into Darkness? I havenít seen it since release, but I canít remember anything particularly noteworthy about it. Looking back, it seemed to be the worst parts of J. Jabramsí tendency to take existing material, shift around parts, and then zig where the original zagged (Kirk dies instead of Spock [but he lives anyway!], Khan is good instead of bad, etc.).

Iíve barely seen people discuss it since it came out, Iíve read plenty of discourse about the 09, about Beyond, about the TNG movies and the TOS movies, but ID is the one that seems to have sank like a dead mobster in the open waters of collective consciousness.

For all it's numerous faults, I would watch Into Darkness in a heartbeat over 2009 - since they both tread exactly the same ground character wise AND Beyond would be completely unchanged if either 09 or ID didn't exist, it's actually easy to pick just one of the two and stick with it, whichever your preference. I just find it generally entertaining and everything wonky about it already existed in 09 so it's more of a lateral move compared to it rather than some step backwards. Cumberbatch actually turning out to be Khan was a misstep but I'd still rather watch him than Bana's Nero. Peter Weller too.

I think it's also overlooked that the idea that Into Darkness is some widely reviled disaster isn't really that much of a thing in the real world - that movie was well received by pretty much everyone outside of the hyper-specific Star Trek fandom.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply