a blu ray thats what i want

and i havent seen star wars 7 either
i care so little about it ill wait till i see it pass by used for less then a fiver
and even that is over chargin

err what? they're the two sides of the same coin. at least when it comes to recent shitty iterations of them.

opinions on how good star trek 13 is differ
http://arstechnica.com/the-multiverse/2016/07/star-trek-beyond-trek-by-numbers-is-no-trek-at-all/

I read somewhere.. next one has thor again like the first one in the beginning. it was almost the best thing in that movie.. well spok was pretty good too.

I'm not interested in JJ's mirrored universe Startrek. Ya I know he didn't direct this one. It just doesn't feel like a ST to me.

Yes, yes, you hate the new Star Trek movies. You already told us. Go have some of TinyE's borscht.

Still have to see the second one.. I was surprised at how much I enjoyed the first when it was on TV a few months back though.

I don't really go out of my way to watch movies, so I'll see it whenever it happens to be on TV at a time I'm watching...

Still have to see the new Star Wars movie too know that I think about it...

Yeah, well, there always are dissenting voices. Often enough I'm one of them :P But the overall reception is very positive. Den of Geek comments for example. 86% audience approval on Rotten and 85% in reviews.

It's actually the first movie this year that I liked and was well received by the critics.

and polygon dislikes it
im uninterested and ill pick up the blu ray cheap in 2018 or something

Just saying it's pretty silly when you call out people for The Force Awakens while giving this tripe two thumbs up.

Not as silly as you talking about a movie you have not even seen :P

Anyway, the new Trek movies are all vastly superior to Force Awakens, in cast, visuals, story and writing. However, your pointless trolling is greatly appreciated. It has contributed a lot.

right I forgot. In 2016 expressing a dissenting opinion is labeled as trolling by people who don't even know the proper meaning of that word. Well enjoy jerking off to this masterpiece of cinema in your echo chamber I guess.

Well, if there was any doubt that you're trolling, this post proves it, since not only did I never call it a masterpiece, but in fact stated in the OP that "It's not a masterpiece of cinema" :D

And yes, if you "expressing a dissenting opinion" means entering a thread about a movie you have not even seen and saying "all those movies suck", then yes- you're just trolling. It would be like me finding a thread about anime just to post "all anime is shit". Like I mentioned in a post above I'm often the one with dissenting opinion, but when I state it I actually try to give some detailed reasons for my opinion.

Sure I don't mind elaborating. ST 09/Into Darkness/TFA all suck for the same reason-script and director. You get scripts that only want to pander to fanboys by showing in as many meaningless references/callbacks/easter eggs as possible. The plots are so full of holes you can drive trucks into them.Ofc they also ripoff original material of ST and SW all in the guise of "soft rebooting/paying homage" to disguise utter lack of originality.The characters are painted with the broadest brush possible and everything is always spelled out in long,dull,insulting expostion.The tone is often very forced-it's either an outright comedy or a grimdark cataclysm that takes it self more seriously then many arthouse films do. The direction accompanies these scripts in that it's almost paced for people with ADD. It all moves with extreme frenziness with often no real motivation behind such pace. There's no real emotional or visceral impact to be gained neither from action nor the drama when JJ wants his films to be a nonstop 'highlight reel' in terms of spectacle and emotion...but he never invests time and effort into proper buildup and he doesn't have enough skill to pull off a real spectacle.Not to mention nuance and subtlety are words that don't exist to him.The movies do look kinda nice but the credit there goes fully towards his production designers and artists because the choices in framing are never interesting. The cast? ehh I guess I can't fault them for sticking to directors vision. He wants them all to act like they are on steroids when it comes to showing any basic emotion and so they do...

The cast is in my opinion excellent, and all of them manage surprisingly well to walk the line between playing established characters and making them their own, and they get better with it with every movie (Scotty for example is not very good in the first one, but is much better in Into Darkness and quite wonderful in Beyond).

The scripts have holes in them that is very true, especially the first two (Beyond is rather guilty of leaving many question unexplained or merely hinted at, for the sake of not having too much exposition dialogue). Still, they make up for it by being character driven. The first two movies deliver, in my opinion, a fine character arc for Kirk and Spock, and the third one is sort of a culmination of all that, with the eintre cast getting their time to shine and work as a team in proper Star Trek fashion, having become the crew we know. Also, the movies are never, despite some callbacks, rip-offs of the older movies, unlike Episode VII. Even Into Darkness only repeats a few scenes, and does it actually in a somewhat clever way as a means of telling the characters arc through action (having the famous scene reversed as Kirk and Spock finally understand one onether and learn from each other).

It's all entirely unlike the new cast of Star Wars, bland and boring, without any character traits, any arcs, forever whining about having to do anything. Likewise, the villains are much better than the Emo Ren, Admiral Whatshisname and Big Bad Hologram. Nero is a interestingly off-beat villain, furious and imposing but not exactly adept at beinga "villain", with his often casual manner. Cumberbatch was miscast as Khan, but if judged purely on Into Darkness, and not as a recast of Montalban his really not that bad, and he has Peter Weller as Admiral Marcus, who really works very well in my opinion. I've already spoken of Krall in this thread.

I have no complaints about the tone of the movies, and the pace might be a bit to frenetic at times, but the action is usually well anchored with story and performances to have dramatic weight (again, something entirely absent in Force Awakens). Quite a few scenes, especially the Kelvin/Narada battle in the first movie and the battles with the Swarm in Beyond and pretty much everything in Beyond that features the topsy-turvy architecture of Yorktown, look really great, and both in visual design and execution surpass anything in Force Awakens, and in my opinion deserve a place in sci-fi movie history (or at least an honorable mention).

By no means are the new Trek movies perfect (but neither are most of the older ones) and they are not masterpieces. But they are good movies, and definately way better and more interesting ones than Force Awakens.