Why wouldn't there be? It's an M class planet.

Well, even with food people don't just live to be over a 100 in good shape. And we don't really know too much about how it works, we can mostly guess from what is suggested as he uses it throughout the movie. It's possible there are "diminishing returns" so to speak, and every subsequent use prolongs his life less and less.

Thats the thing- by the point he got it all working for him, he didn't want to go home anymore. In a way he didn't think of it as "home" long before that. He was only going back once he had a plan and the means to destroy the Federation.

I don't think he hated "aliens". He hated the Federation ideal of making peace and embracing former enemies as friends once peace was established. I understood he was the kind of guy who was ok with Vulcans (for example) as they are our allies against Romulans, and Klingons and Xindi and whoever else. So if Manas, or any of the other of many aliens who apparently gravitated to him over the years, wanted to join him in fighting the Federation, he was ok with it. After all, he needed an army.

But yeah, I agree there is a lot of things that the movie does not delve into, things that are not exactly explained, and the bio-weapon mcguffin is a particularly poorly defined one born of sheer plot-convenience. Like I said, I'm letting all of that slide because I think the main characters work delightfully well, and the whole thing just feels like proper Star Trek fun, with it's heart in the right place. It's not Trek at it's best, ambitious and deep, but as long as it's done right I can't really fault it for that. There's plenty of Trek episodes and movies that are just that- good, solid entertainment with good characters.

Before the movie came out I read that it was being directed by Justin Lin. That made me skeptical and I was afraid it would be Mindless Action Flick 32. Actually it turned out to be pretty good. Yes, the focus was on action, not plot, characters, social issues, none of what makes Star Trek great. There were holes, like I didn't understand the weapon Krall was trying to unleash, but the characters were pretty well fleshed out and familiar. I do agree with George Takei that they shouldn't have made Sulu gay. They didn't make that a part of the story, just threw it in there because it's fashionable these days to add a gay angle to everything. Lame.
All in all, I still say that Trek movies 2, 3, and 4 were great and true to the spirit of Star Trek. This one doesn't rise to that level, but it's pretty good, and I appreciate being able to go see Star Trek reasonably well done. Thumbs up.

How am I getting salty? I simply don't give a shit what people think. I just like to remind those fan boys because I'm sick of fan boys.

fanboys? you're insulting people who like the original material? brilliant logic there sir.

But apparently being insulting and angry doesn't count as being insult and angry, because it's super important that we all know darthspudius' opinion. That overrides everything.

/sarcasm

Sadly, the movie does not seem to be doing well at the box office.

Despite strong reviews, and mostly positive reaction from fans, things look bad for Beyond. It launched well below the previous two movies, and it's falling fast. The only good news is that it will be opening in more countries in the coming weeks, and the last movie earned more outside US than domestic, so Beyond will likely not end up being a straight up flop. But it's not going to be a big hit either, that's for sure. I'm a little worried about the fourth movie. A good thing the new show is probably far enough into production already to not have the plug pulled. Hopefuly.

This year isn't good gor sequels in general. Pretty much all sequels/reboots did badly so far, except for Civil War. Really, in the context of how Independece Day, Alice Through the Looking Glass, Ghostbusters, and Huntsman: Winter's War did Batman V Superman has done way better than it's usually guiven credit, and London Has Fallen should be considered a huge success.

Heh, yeah, it looks like blockbusters in general aren't doing all that well right now, except if it's animation. >_> In retrospect, the $500+ for X-Men Apocalypse don't look that bad, either.

Pity for Beyond, though. IMO, it's the best out of the three new Trek movies, and I'd like to see more. I love the cast and the callbacks to earlier Trek material.

Still bad in that it's far less than the previous movie. It's not a disaster by any stretch, but I mentioned London and BvS because other than Civil War those are the only two big sequels this year to make more than their predecessors. And even Civil War is kinda cheating, as it's really more like Avengers 3, and it made less than Age of Ultron.

I get what you*re saying. I mean, the big-budget Apocalypse got upstaged by their own Deadpool, a movie which was way cheaper to make. That's got to have raised some eyebrows over at Fox, but they can say: well, at least this isn't Turtles: Out of the Shadows, or the new "Ghostbusters". Small victories, and all that. >_>

I have to wonder, though: why was "Beyond" so expensive?? The movie is decidedly on a smaller scale than either of the other two, IMO, but the budget is a mere $5 Mio. less than "Into Darkness". What the hell went wrong?

I'm not sure. The "smaller scale" may be deceiving, at least partially- new uniforms and costumes, new sets for the new ship (Franklin), maybe less green screen and more on location shooting for the planetside stuff was more expensive? Possible higher pay for the cast? Maybe the reshoots- there were quite substansive reshoots (Admiral Paris character wasn't even in the movie before those)? It's all speculation on my side though. Hollywood movies got ridiculously unwieldy with their budgets in recent years, and the end result is often in way fitting to how much it cost to make. The crappy looking Hobbit movies are probably the best example.

Just saw this one with the wife and youngest daughter. Agree completely with your assessment. A pretty solid movie and one that never had me wishing they'd just get on with it. Well done.

I loved "Star Trek: Beyond"! I've already seen it twice, planning on going again. I'm a Trekkie, so of course I already love the world and stuff. The thing I loved the best was that they made McCoy a main character again. He seemed to be such a bit character with few scenes in the previous two. One of my favorite things about the original series was the Spock/McCoy banter, so I was so happy to see it have such a front seat in the movie.

The plot was interesting, and I love the "Crew get separated, must find each other" trope. Each character was given screen time and it really was an ensemble movie more like the originals, and not just Kirk and Spock.

"You green blooded inhuman..."

*raises eyebrow*

"Fascinating."