It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
So, let's talk about the new Trek movie, shall we? Take care, spoilers may follow.

I was rarther concerned about Beyond. A Fast & Furious director, first script reportedly rejected for being too "treky" and the studio wanting something more like Guardians of the Galaxy all seemed to spell disaster, and the first trailer seemed to confirm that.

To my great relief, it's actually good, fun and "treky" enough. It's not a masterpiece of cinema, nor among the very best of the franchise, but it's still fun and well acted, and gets a "treky" adventure right. I think Pegg's script really nailed the "voices" of the main characters, striking a nice balance between the "traditional" versions and the way we've seen them in the previous two movies. Pretty much every second with McCoy and Spock together is gold. Unsurprisingly Scotty is probably the character that benefitted most from Pegg's writing, funny and likeable and very "Scotty", even if Pegg never tries to mimc Doohan. Interestingly, I felt pine was somewhat closer to Shatner's Kirk in this movie. In the scene of his conversation with the admiral at the end I thought he even looked a little more like him. Maybe it's just me seeing things.

The villain initially seems rather uninteresting anda waste of Elba's time, however the twist at the end, which I really did not see coming, and that in itself is a rare thing in movies today, gives him an interesting parallel to Kirk from the movies begininng. Unfortunately it's never explored for all it's worth, not nearly, but still- it's good that it's there. The whole movie is a little like that, only skimming matters that I would like to see explored deeper (and I imagine in the first draft they might have been), but it's a fun ride and even unexplored depth is better than none.

There's a number of nice nostalgic nods, and original Spock's death playsa surprisingly important part in the movie, but it never feels forced. In fact most of it is played nicely subtle, and the photograph at the end, even if one might question the "how" and "why" of it feels a fitting tribute to the original cast for the 50th anniversary.

It's not a perfect movie- sometimes the editing feels a little choppy, sometimes it seems a scene or two are missing, probably left on the cutting room floor, which makes some action sequences a little hard to follow. Also, sometimes the movie is way to dark- and I don't mean "serious" I mean it's literally too dark to see things. As consolation, the Yorktown starbase is probably the most impressive construction we've yet seen on Star Trek, except for maybe V'Ger way back in The Motion Picture, and the "swarm" is a new kind of enemy to battle in space for sure, even if the way it's defeated is a bit too close to a parody for it's own good.

Despite these problems, it's hard not to feel happy, as a longtime fan, as we see the Enterprise-A launch and continue the mission, as the crew delivers the famous "These are the voyages...". It may not be the best Trek has to offer, but it's still good and has it's heart in the right place. With the next movie already announced (hopefully this one will do well enough not to make the studio rethink that) and a new series coming, it's a good time to be a Trek fan.

Now if only we could get more Trek games here on GOG...
avatar
Breja: So, let's talk about the new Trek movie, shall we? Take care, spoilers may follow.

I was rarther concerned about Beyond. A Fast & Furious director, first script reportedly rejected for being too "treky" and the studio wanting something more like Guardians of the Galaxy all seemed to spell disaster, and the first trailer seemed to confirm that.

To my great relief, it's actually good, fun and "treky" enough. It's not a masterpiece of cinema, nor among the very best of the franchise, but it's still fun and well acted, and gets a "treky" adventure right. I think Pegg's script really nailed the "voices" of the main characters, striking a nice balance between the "traditional" versions and the way we've seen them in the previous two movies. Pretty much every second with McCoy and Spock together is gold. Unsurprisingly Scotty is probably the character that benefitted most from Pegg's writing, funny and likeable and very "Scotty", even if Pegg never tries to mimc Doohan. Interestingly, I felt pine was somewhat closer to Shatner's Kirk in this movie. In the scene of his conversation with the admiral at the end I thought he even looked a little more like him. Maybe it's just me seeing things.

The villain initially seems rather uninteresting anda waste of Elba's time, however the twist at the end, which I really did not see coming, and that in itself is a rare thing in movies today, gives him an interesting parallel to Kirk from the movies begininng. Unfortunately it's never explored for all it's worth, not nearly, but still- it's good that it's there. The whole movie is a little like that, only skimming matters that I would like to see explored deeper (and I imagine in the first draft they might have been), but it's a fun ride and even unexplored depth is better than none.

There's a number of nice nostalgic nods, and original Spock's death playsa surprisingly important part in the movie, but it never feels forced. In fact most of it is played nicely subtle, and the photograph at the end, even if one might question the "how" and "why" of it feels a fitting tribute to the original cast for the 50th anniversary.

It's not a perfect movie- sometimes the editing feels a little choppy, sometimes it seems a scene or two are missing, probably left on the cutting room floor, which makes some action sequences a little hard to follow. Also, sometimes the movie is way to dark- and I don't mean "serious" I mean it's literally too dark to see things. As consolation, the Yorktown starbase is probably the most impressive construction we've yet seen on Star Trek, except for maybe V'Ger way back in The Motion Picture, and the "swarm" is a new kind of enemy to battle in space for sure, even if the way it's defeated is a bit too close to a parody for it's own good.

Despite these problems, it's hard not to feel happy, as a longtime fan, as we see the Enterprise-A launch and continue the mission, as the crew delivers the famous "These are the voyages...". It may not be the best Trek has to offer, but it's still good and has it's heart in the right place. With the next movie already announced (hopefully this one will do well enough not to make the studio rethink that) and a new series coming, it's a good time to be a Trek fan.

Now if only we could get more Trek games here on GOG...
Enterprise A already? Look anything like the prime timelines A?
avatar
pimpmonkey2382.313: Enterprise A already? Look anything like the prime timelines A?
We get a rather short glimpse of the completed ship. I think it looks a tad more like the "prime" Enterprise A (especially the saucer section) but not quite as close as I expected.
avatar
pimpmonkey2382.313: Enterprise A already? Look anything like the prime timelines A?
avatar
Breja: We get a rather short glimpse of the completed ship. I think it looks a tad more like the "prime" Enterprise A (especially the saucer section) but not quite as close as I expected.
I could be wrong as I haven't seen this trek yet, but an Ent- A seems a little rushed in this movie. In prime we were used to it being "20 years old" or so whatever trek 3 said. This one third movie in with no other series, etc and got a new one?
avatar
pimpmonkey2382.313: Enterprise A already? Look anything like the prime timelines A?
avatar
Breja: We get a rather short glimpse of the completed ship. I think it looks a tad more like the "prime" Enterprise A (especially the saucer section) but not quite as close as I expected.
Would have liked the nacelles to be more Ent- A like too.
Post edited July 22, 2016 by pimpmonkey2382.313
avatar
Breja: We get a rather short glimpse of the completed ship. I think it looks a tad more like the "prime" Enterprise A (especially the saucer section) but not quite as close as I expected.
avatar
pimpmonkey2382.313: I could be wrong as I haven't seen this trek yet, but an Ent- A seems a little rushed in this movie. In prime we were used to it being "20 years old" or so whatever trek 3 said. This one third movie in with no other series, etc and got a new one?
Well if they didn't get a new one there would be no sequel, cause the first one gets literally torn to shreds in the first act.
avatar
pimpmonkey2382.313: I could be wrong as I haven't seen this trek yet, but an Ent- A seems a little rushed in this movie. In prime we were used to it being "20 years old" or so whatever trek 3 said. This one third movie in with no other series, etc and got a new one?
avatar
Breja: Well if they didn't get a new one there would be no sequel, cause the first one gets literally torn to shreds in the first act.
Well I did say I hadn't seen it yet. :P Since it's spoilers, what's the twist?
avatar
Breja: Well if they didn't get a new one there would be no sequel, cause the first one gets literally torn to shreds in the first act.
avatar
pimpmonkey2382.313: Well I did say I hadn't seen it yet. :P Since it's spoilers, what's the twist?
BIG SPOILER (warning for others)

"Krall" is actually the captain of the old USS Franklin, the ship Kirk and others find on the planet they crash onto. It was the first Warp 4 ship, missing since some 100 years later. Krall used some life-proloning machinery he found on the planet, and using it changes his appearance (presumably makes him look more like the lifeforms he uses for "fuel").
avatar
pimpmonkey2382.313: Well I did say I hadn't seen it yet. :P Since it's spoilers, what's the twist?
avatar
Breja: BIG SPOILER (warning for others)

"Krall" is actually the captain of the old USS Franklin, the ship Kirk and others find on the planet they crash onto. It was the first Warp 4 ship, missing since some 100 years later. Krall used some life-proloning machinery he found on the planet, and using it changes his appearance (presumably makes him look more like the lifeforms he uses for "fuel").
Huh, interesting. Probably a better twist than Khan from into darkness. That felt like it was shoehorned in so people would quit whining about wanting Khan in a movie.
I don't know why it wouldn't be good. Everyone seems to have it in for Abrams which puzzles me. He did an amazing job with Star Wars and was the first to jump up and admit he totally fucked up "Into the Darkness", and that lessons would be learned from it to both make a better third film and to apologize to all the people he feels he let down with the second one.
Post edited July 22, 2016 by tinyE
i forgot this was thing too
i only recently as in yesterday saw into dorkness err darkness
avatar
tinyE: I don't know why it wouldn't be good. Everyone seems to have it in for Abrams which puzzles me. He did an amazing job with Star Wars and was the first to jump up and admit he totally fucked up "Into the Darkness", and that lessons would be learned from it to both make a better third film and to apologize to all the people he feels he let down with the second one.
For one thing, this was not directed by Abrams, but Justing Lin, of Fast & Furious fame.

Also, I liked Abrams' Star Trek movies, even Into Darkness. Both were way better than Force Awakens. Even miscast Khan was lightyears ahead of Kylo "The Whiner" Ren.
avatar
pimpmonkey2382.313: Huh, interesting. Probably a better twist than Khan from into darkness. That felt like it was shoehorned in so people would quit whining about wanting Khan in a movie.
Yeah, I actually liked Into Darkness (mostly), but Cumberbatch as Khan was just miscast. This works better I think, his story as revealed at the end parallels nicely some of Kirks doubts from the movie's beginning. Still, I wish they'd dig deeper into it. I'm surprised there doesn't seem to be a comics book prequel about that, the way there were for the other two movies.
Post edited July 22, 2016 by Breja
avatar
tinyE: I don't know why it wouldn't be good. Everyone seems to have it in for Abrams which puzzles me. He did an amazing job with Star Wars and was the first to jump up and admit he totally fucked up "Into the Darkness", and that lessons would be learned from it to both make a better third film and to apologize to all the people he feels he let down with the second one.
avatar
Breja: For one thing, this was not directed by Abrams, but Justing Lin, of Fast & Furious fame.

Also, I liked Abrams' Star Trek movies, even Into Darkness. Both were way better than Force Awakens. Even miscast Khan was lightyears ahead of Kylo "The Whiner" Ren.
I wish they didn't go into khan at all. Maybe a reference to eugenics wars here or there, hell maybe even another set of superhumans. But khan should have been left in space seed and wrath of khan.
avatar
tinyE: I don't know why it wouldn't be good. Everyone seems to have it in for Abrams which puzzles me. He did an amazing job with Star Wars and was the first to jump up and admit he totally fucked up "Into the Darkness", and that lessons would be learned from it to both make a better third film and to apologize to all the people he feels he let down with the second one.
avatar
Breja: For one thing, this was not directed by Abrams, but Justing Lin, of Fast & Furious fame.

Also, I liked Abrams' Star Trek movies, even Into Darkness. Both were way better than Force Awakens.
avatar
pimpmonkey2382.313: Huh, interesting. Probably a better twist than Khan from into darkness. That felt like it was shoehorned in so people would quit whining about wanting Khan in a movie.
avatar
Breja: Yeah, I actually liked Into Darkness (mostly), but Cumberbatch as Khan was just miscast. This works better I think, his story as revealed at the end parallels nicely some of Kirks doubts from the movie's beginning. Still, I wish they'd dig deeper into it. I'm surprised there doesn't seem to be a comics book prequel about that, the way there were for the other two movies.
I know he didn't direct it Einstein, but he produced it! :P Producers do have something to say about the finished product you know. :P

Don't make me sic Bradley on you!
Post edited July 22, 2016 by tinyE
avatar
Breja: For one thing, this was not directed by Abrams, but Justing Lin, of Fast & Furious fame.

Also, I liked Abrams' Star Trek movies, even Into Darkness. Both were way better than Force Awakens. Even miscast Khan was lightyears ahead of Kylo "The Whiner" Ren.
avatar
pimpmonkey2382.313: I wish they didn't go into khan at all. Maybe a reference to eugenics wars here or there, hell maybe even another set of superhumans. But khan should have been left in space seed and wrath of khan.
nobody is better as khan then montalban
nobody
avatar
pimpmonkey2382.313: I wish they didn't go into khan at all. Maybe a reference to eugenics wars here or there, hell maybe even another set of superhumans. But khan should have been left in space seed and wrath of khan.
avatar
snowkatt: nobody is better as khan then montalban
nobody
Damned right.