Star Trek Beyond - Part 4

I found Beyond dull. I take Darkness over it. Still love Abrams 2009.
 
I can't stand any of the Kelvin films, but at least Into Darkness had Cumberbatch who was great in the role, even if they did butcher the character. I can recognize that '09 has a better balance of screen time for the actors, and gives most if them something to do, but unfortunately most of what they do is nonsense. And Beyond felt like an empty, soulless cash grab. There's literally nothing about that film that I like (does the Rihanna song count?).

Into Darkness also had the best score of the three films, to me.
 
Beyond was trash. Forgettable. It was about NOTHING.

tumblr_md9u7wwGRD1qj0kuho1_250.gif

tumblr_md9u7wwGRD1qj0kuho2_250.gif
 
I know they said they wouldn’t recast Checkov but if they do... anyone else think Jack O’Connell looks a lot like Anton Yelchin?
 
I liked BEYOND a lot. I know a lot of people give it a hard time, but I thought it was fun and had a lot of wild action. I hear some people say "But....STAR TREK isn't about action."....I wonder why Kirk got into a fight every week where he showed off his Kirk-Fu then. STAR TREK is about adventures in space.
 
I liked BEYOND a lot. I know a lot of people give it a hard time, but I thought it was fun and had a lot of wild action. I hear some people say "But....STAR TREK isn't about action."....I wonder why Kirk got into a fight every week where he showed off his Kirk-Fu then. STAR TREK is about adventures in space.

Maybe they confuse the spirit of TOS with TNG, because i always have that type of adventure fun watching Kirk and the gang.
 
I can't stand any of the Kelvin films, but at least Into Darkness had Cumberbatch who was great in the role, even if they did butcher the character. I can recognize that '09 has a better balance of screen time for the actors, and gives most if them something to do, but unfortunately most of what they do is nonsense. And Beyond felt like an empty, soulless cash grab. There's literally nothing about that film that I like (does the Rihanna song count?).

Into Darkness also had the best score of the three films, to me.

Realy? Found it much less hollow than Abrams's entries since it in least had a theme and an obvious affection for the original series and crew. bad place, even the villain had a better motivation by being an old hero of the Federation who wants to bring back the militarization of that institution instead of looking at how it has progressed past that. The script was also much better than the one of the previous 2 films. The only real problem was the directing not being all that good. Had it been Directed by J. J. Abrams, it would probably have more of a visual flair and be considered the best of his ST films.
 
I liked BEYOND a lot. I know a lot of people give it a hard time, but I thought it was fun and had a lot of wild action. I hear some people say "But....STAR TREK isn't about action."....I wonder why Kirk got into a fight every week where he showed off his Kirk-Fu then. STAR TREK is about adventures in space.
Supposedly Star Trek is A Wagon Train to the stars, Those old westerns had a lot of action in them, just saying.
 
"EXCLUSIVE: Paramount Pictures has set Mark L. Smith to write the script for the R-rated Star Trek movie that was hatched from an idea by Quentin Tarantino. Tarantino wants to direct the film, which he’ll produce with JJ Abrams. That means that a writer whose breakthrough came on one of the most celebrated spare dialogue films of recent years will team with Tarantino, a writer/director whose own scripts have run run 165 pages or more, full of dialogue. Smith became a favorite of both Paramount and Abrams after he scripted Overlord, the Julius Avery-directed Bad Robot-produced WWII thriller about two American soldiers caught behind enemy lines on D-Day."

https://deadline.com/2017/12/quentin-tarantino-star-trek-mark-l-smith-jj-abrams-the-revenant-paramount-pictures-1202231379/
 
I wonder if he'll follow the continuity set by Abrams or just make a new story with original characters. He seems to be a fan of the original characters and the new films do have great actors in the roles.
 
I wonder if he'll follow the continuity set by Abrams or just make a new story with original characters. He seems to be a fan of the original characters and the new films do have great actors in the roles.

I'm up for either. Beyond was great enough as its own standalone thing.
 
The Tarrantino-Trek should probably get its own thread and this does not appear to be a direct sequel in any way to Beyond.
 
I want to see what Tarantino can do with this, but it will be a shame if we lose this great new cast.
 
Yeah this cast has been too perfect to recast. I can't imagine another roster being as good. :(
 
A reboot would be a waste. They have a great cast and the series isn't suffering enough to require a reboot. Beyond was really good.
 
A reboot would be a waste. They have a great cast and the series isn't suffering enough to require a reboot. Beyond was really good.
I agree it was good, but it didn't do well enough for Paramount.
 
The cast is so good, a reboot would be super disappointing. This group of actors with Tarantino could be mind-blowing!
 
I fail to see how the current cast couldn't handle anything Tarantino wrote. I'm sure they'd be fabulous. :)
 
They should just do whatever they want with this current cast. Just make it like a "what if?" film, separated from the trilogy. Like a weird special edition issue. If the film is GOOD, people just won't care if it doesn't follow what has been established before. (See example: Logan).
 
People won't care because it's Star Trek. Can't exactly deviate it any further than this movie franchise nor the current tv series has.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"