Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]
My "Star Trek: Transformers" comment is actually completely accurate, as both are action/explosion/CGI-focused messes written by Orci and Kurtzman.
I'd rather see Patrick Stewart play a flute or read every part in the script by himself than these last two movies.
J.J. is the director, that's true, so I should have said, "J.J.'s writing team."
I'll absolutely compare 7 years of episodes to 2 films because those 2 films are what has replaced the legacy of Star Trek on TV for the time being, at least.
Kirk chopping wood was hardly even integral to the story, let alone the resolution of the story, as the magic Khan blood is. It's terrible writing and there's no way around that.
Of course Star Trek isn't real, that was obviously not my meaning. However, sticking a "Star Trek" label on something doesn't make it Star Trek, which is my main point here. If you put a Star Trek label on Fast and the Furious 6, does that make it Star Trek? Of course not, which is basically what has happened to this franchise.
You seem to completely miss that there is a hell of a difference between television and film.
And if you want to watch Picard wax philosophical or play a flute, there's 178 episodes of TNG and four movies.
"Just give me two seconds, alright, you mad bastard!" - Montgomery Scott, Star Trek Into Darkness