Reviews are Mostly Positive, According to Collider

[Joel_Kirk]

The article (http://collider.com/star-trek-beyond-reviews/) makes a point that the junket press where the film screened thought "Beyond" was a vast improvement over "Darkness." I personally think it's because Abrams is producing the film rather than directing. For example, if Abrams was directing the Star Wars sequel, I don't think it would bode well for that particular franchise.

I'm looking forward to the new film. It's on my list next to The Neon Demon (Elle Fanning fan) and The Shallows of movies 'To see.'

 

[RAMA]

Considering that most of the Collider intro article is BS, and that the JJ movies are closer to TOS already than any other Trek movies, as well as Into Darkness being a very well reviewed and monstrously successful trek film (in fact the most successful one), then these good reviews about it being the best of the 3 are very good.

RAMA

The article (http://collider.com/star-trek-beyond-reviews/) makes a point that the junket press where the film screened thought "Beyond" was a vast improvement over "Darkness." I personally think it's because Abrams is producing the film rather than directing. For example, if Abrams was directing the Star Wars sequel, I don't think it would bode well for that particular franchise.

I'm looking forward to the new film. It's on my list next to The Neon Demon (Elle Fanning fan) and The Shallows of movies 'To see.'

 

[eyeresist]

Was STID really the most successful one? I thought it saw a drop-off from ST09.

I think that after this initial positive response there will be an inevitable backlash, hopefully not too big or nasty.

 

[TheFlutteringHorde]

Was STID really the most successful one? I thought it saw a drop-off from ST09

IIRC it did worse domestically, but better internationally which put it over the top.

 

[mswood]

Star Trek
US box office 257 million
Overseas box Office 128 million (which just passed on percentage of sales is one of the better ratio of for TOS, which outside of the Motion Picture did terrible overseas).
Total 385 million World Wide

Star Trek Into Darkness
US box office 229 million
Overseas Box Office 239 million (Only Trek film to have over 50% earned overseas).
Total 468 million World Wide (In fairness budget was higher so certainly possible that less profit was made)

On Beyond
I expect to see even lower numbers in the US (though hopefully not dramatic declines), but i truly expect to see some more growth overseas.

And here the budget has been reduced, so if this film performs anywhere near where I expect it should be the most profitable of the 3 reboot films.

 

[Morpheus 02]

I wonder if a growing international movie audience, coupled with many more choices for Americans on what and how to watch affects our numbers?

 

[RAMA]

Things to remember about reviews..

1) 100% of people don't like anything

2) ST has several small vocal factions and some of them actively campaign against new Trek.

3) Lots of people "grade" in black or white..in other words, something is either bad or good, so grades might be on the high end but tend towards a low end because people are geared towards a stronger reaction to a negative. These tend to be rather unimaginative, unthinking people. I tend to look at movie grades on a "curve" knowing this, revising them upward 5-10% to reality in my head.

I already saw people on twitter actively campaigning against Beyond, saying: "don't go see it".

RAMA

 

[RAMA]

Was STID really the most successful one? I thought it saw a drop-off from ST09.

I think that after this initial positive response there will be an inevitable backlash, hopefully not too big or nasty.

Why do people say this?? There's a drop off if you count home media sales(which are trending downwards anyway), but STID made more at the box office. I must have posted that 1000 times. Shows people will believe what they want you to believe or what is repeated often enough.

 

[slappy]

I'm looking forward to the new film. It's on my list next to The Neon Demon (Elle Fanning fan) and The Shallows of movies 'To see.'

Neon Demon pissed me off. That ending wasn't just non-sense, it made me feel like I wasted my time and money.

 

[Csalem]

Den of Geek have published their review of Beyond:
http://www.denofgeek.com/uk/movies/star-trek-beyond/42251/star-trek-beyond-review

 

[wayoung]

Rotten tomatoes is at 93%. Good sign, but still early you could have some big fluctuation yet.

Keep in mind: 93% means 93% of the critics had a positive review, not that the movie is rated 9/10. People sometimes forget this, which is why there was a backlash against Rotten Tomatoes for BvS which was down to about 20% at one point, with fans attacking the site thinking that meant they were rating it a 2/10 movie, not that 80% of critics at the time thought it was about a 6/10 movie or lower, which was the actual case. Rotten tomatoes is not an average of critical scores, but a binary average of how many said the movie was fine vs. how many said it was bad.

That said, a high RT is indicative of a quality movie, and vice versa.

I'm sure most people here know this, but some may not.

 

[Smellmet]

Den of Geek have published their review of Beyond:
http://www.denofgeek.com/uk/movies/star-trek-beyond/42251/star-trek-beyond-review

I would say this is the least positive review I've read so far out of maybe 10 I've come across so far and it's still okay.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I still think its binary pass/fail approach makes for a better indicator than MC. The problem with MC is it tries to quantify something that's so arbitrary and inconsistent.

There's so many times of "grades" movie reviews use. Some use four stars, some five. Some use letter grades and others numbers out of 10 or 100.

And, on top of that, there's no constancy on what merits a grade. Some reviewers do their best to objectify a film solely on itself. Others grade on a curve with. Others might compare every single movie to Kane.

OTOH, RT just says "X number of reviews were positive. Use your best judgement."

 

[wayoung]

I still think its binary pass/fail approach makes for a better indicator than MC. The problem with MC is it tries to quantify something that's so arbitrary and inconsistent.

There's so many times of "grades" movie reviews use. Some use four stars, some five. Some use letter grades and others numbers out of 10 or 100.

And, on top of that, there's no constancy on what merits a grade. Some reviewers do their best to objectify a film solely on itself. Others grade on a curve with. Others might compare every single movie to Kane.

OTOH, RT just says "X number of reviews were positive. Use your best judgement."

Completely agree. RT is my goto for evaluating critical consensus, I'm worried what route it will take now that Fandango owns it with their famous " NO movie gets less than a B- rating" policy (since they sell tickets they rate every movie high in order to co Vince more people to by tickets).

I'm the case of Beyond its still to early to take much note of the RT number though. One negative review came in between my posts and it dropped 6%. It'll take a few days before it starts to even out. Even then numbers can change weeks/months later.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

I don't always agree with John Campea, who works with the Collider folks. However, his thoughts on the upcoming Trek film is interesting.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

​

Neon Demon pissed me off. That ending wasn't just non-sense, it made me feel like I wasted my time and money.

Yeah, the film seems to be an acquired taste.

 

[eyeresist]

Rotten tomatoes is at 93%. Good sign, but still early you could have some big fluctuation yet.

Keep in mind: 93% means 93% of the critics had a positive review, not that the movie is rated 9/10. People sometimes forget this, which is why there was a backlash against Rotten Tomatoes for BvS which was down to about 20% at one point, with fans attacking the site thinking that meant they were rating it a 2/10 movie, not that 80% of critics at the time thought it was about a 6/10 movie or lower

That is the big problem with RT, no-one understanding what the scores mean. That's why I wish MC was the general reference. Their methods of standardising scores may be debatable, but the end result is perfectly easy to understand - it's an average score.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

No, I'm not going to post each and every review for this film....but I would like to post some channels I do follow. Schmoesknow actually work with Collider as well...lol....and a channel I've followed for several months.

(This may be obvious information for some).

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

​

My feeling is: I want Star Trek to catch up to Star Wars. Yeah, Trek is more about the 'human condition' (whatever that means). So what if the 'human condition' is geared towards action mixed with drama? I know mine is.

A movie should be able to make you think, feel for the characters, and keep you wanting more. No matter the genre.This particular review is somewhat mixed, but I think (at this point) I'll have to see it in the theaters.