Star trek Into Darkness rates higher than Beyond in audience scores.

[wayne39]

I was comparing the audience score of star trek into darkness and beyond and it seems as if audience prefer star trek into darkness.


IMDB
Into Darkness : 7.8
Beyond: 7.3

on rotten tomatoes
Into Darkness: 90% audience rating
Beyond: 82% audience rating

Metacritic user score
Into Dakrness:7.8/10
Beyond: 6.8/10

I think into darkness could still be considered as the better movie by a majority if the film did not have any link to wrath of khan. I think the only reason why some people are so negative about into darkness was the wrath of khan call backs, but once you take that away, Into darkness is a better film than beyond according to the mass audience. Into darkness has beaten beyond in every users ratings.

 

[fireproof78]

Wasn't this film voted "Worst Star Trek film ever!"?

How the times have changed.

 

[wayne39]

Wasn't this film voted "Worst Star Trek film ever!"?

How the times have changed.

who voted the film the worst ever? over final frontier?

 

[BillJ]

who voted the film the worst ever? over final frontier?

Convention in Vegas. Voted on by 100 people. The media ran with it and really damaged the reputation of Into Darkness.

While I understand some of the complaints folks have, I think Into Darkness is the very best of the Abrams films and I consider it the 3rd best Trek film. I just watched the Blu-ray, and it is a visually spectacular movie.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I loved every second of Into Darkness, bar about 30 after Spock yelled "Khaaaaaan!" and I facepalmed so hard it was virtually a palm-strike. Then I looked up and Spock was chasing Khan through San Francisco and I was back in...

I loved Beyond too. As much? Too early to tell, yet. I definitely prefer Khan to Krall, but prefer Krall to Marcus. I related to Khan's need to protect his loved ones, and Krall's feelings of betrayal better than Marcus' paranoid warmongering.

 

[Ovation]

I was comparing the audience score of star trek into darkness and beyond and it seems as if audience prefer star trek into darkness.


IMDB
Into Darkness : 7.8
Beyond: 7.3

on rotten tomatoes
Into Darkness: 90% audience rating
Beyond: 82% audience rating

Metacritic user score
Into Dakrness:7.8/10
Beyond: 6.8/10

I think into darkness could still be considered as the better movie by a majority if the film did not have any link to wrath of khan. I think the only reason why some people are so negative about into darkness was the wrath of khan call backs, but once you take that away, Into darkness is a better film than beyond according to the mass audience. Into darkness has beaten beyond in every users ratings.

I don't think the "Khan callback" has ANY effect on surveys of general audiences like this one. Only Trek fans cared (and, even then, not all of them cared--I certainly didn't. In fact, I prefer the "callback" to the original in terms of the infamous "yell").

General viewers express their views on the films as stand alone experiences, not on how well they adhere (or not) to "canon".

 

[fireproof78]

I don't think the "Khan callback" has ANY effect on surveys of general audiences like this one. Only Trek fans cared (and, even then, not all of them cared--I certainly didn't. In fact, I prefer the "callback" to the original in terms of the infamous "yell").

General viewers express their views on the films as stand alone experiences, not on how well they adhere (or not) to "canon".

Agree on this point. The "Khan callback" isn't universally reviled as is often portrayed. I actually think Carol Marcus' underwear shot gets more pushback than that.

As stated above, the negative reception was played up far too much, and impacted the overall reception of the film. I think it will be more positive reception as the years wane on. But, I think, overall, the Kelvin films will age very well and become more timeless than appreciated right now.

 

[drt]

Agree on this point. The "Khan callback" isn't universally reviled as is often portrayed.

Trekkies hate it for touching the holiest of holies, the general audience didn't care because most have them have either never even seen The Wrath of Khan or only barely remember it from that time they watched it on cable as a kid.

 

[fireproof78]

Trekkies hate it for touching the holiest of holies, the general audience didn't care because most have them have either never even seen The Wrath of Khan or only barely remember it from that time they watched it on cable as a kid.

It still doesn't "ruin" the movie, because of two minutes of referencing another film. Otherwise, TWOK, TUC, and FC should all get dinged for quoting Shakespeare.

It's an attitude that not only do I not get, but frustrates me because it feels that that attitude is a barrier to genuine enjoyment of ST ID as a stand alone film. Maybe I'm wrong, and that's ok. I can admit when I'm wrong. But, that's my feeling on that attitude.

 

[Tosk]

I much preferred Beyond over Into Darkness. I also prefer Final Frontier over Into Darkness. But to be fair to STID, I generally prefer Final Frontier to all four TNG movies too.

 

[Malaika]

regardless what is my opinion (of the 3, the first movie remains my favorite) into darkness is a perfect example of how a vocal minority of fans can skew the perception of everything. Because at this point, there seems to be this sort of urban legend about the movie being a failure and, at times, it seems even the people behind the movie 'apologize' for it. But facts tell a different story: the movie was still critically praised and successful in terms of general audience, more than Beyond that on the other hand is being passed by some as the best and most successful trek movie of the 3, in spite of the truth being the opposite.

It's fun to observe these things, but it also is concerning when you think that new movies (see Beyond) are being "tailored' on that vocal minority of fans ...with possible disastrous counterproductive results.

anyone behind this franchise should either ignore what fans say online, or at least try to get the bigger picture instead of stopping at random comments online, or biased articles in some sites that have a history of negativity when it comes to trek or the reboot specifically. Being in the fandom, truly following what people say, requires time that the people behind these movies don't have.
But when there is such an obvious disconnect between what some say on the internet and the facts, you gotta ask yourself why and if it's that wise to let that minority of fans affect people's perception of your product, or even your own perception of it.

 

[wayne39]

regardless what is my opinion (of the 3, the first movie remains my favorite) into darkness is a perfect example of how a vocal minority of fans can skew the perception of everything. Because at this point, there seems to be this sort of urban legend about the movie being a failure and, at times, it seems even the people behind the movie 'apologize' for it. But facts tell a different story: the movie was still critically praised and successful in terms of general audience, more than Beyond that on the other hand is being passed by some as the best and most successful trek movie of the 3, in spite of the truth being the opposite.

It's fun to observe these things, but it also is concerning when you think that new movies (see Beyond) are being "tailored' on that vocal minority of fans ...with possible disastrous counterproductive results.

anyone behind this franchise should either ignore what fans say online, or at least try to get the bigger picture instead of stopping at random comments online, or biased articles in some sites that have a history of negativity when it comes to trek or the reboot specifically. Being in the fandom, truly following what people say, requires time that the people behind these movies don't have.
But when there is such an obvious disconnect between what some say on the internet and the facts, you gotta ask yourself why and if it's that wise to let that minority of fans affect people's perception of your product, or even your own perception of it.

what was it about Into darkness that the vocal minority as you call them wanted and got or didn't get.

the only complain I hear about into darkness was the wrath of khan call backs which like someone has said was less than 3 minutes of the film.

Beyond tried to step away from any call backs to the oringal trek and people seem to have loved it.

 

[Khan 2.0]

regardless what is my opinion (of the 3, the first movie remains my favorite) into darkness is a perfect example of how a vocal minority of fans can skew the perception of everything. Because at this point, there seems to be this sort of urban legend about the movie being a failure and, at times, it seems even the people behind the movie 'apologize' for it. But facts tell a different story: the movie was still critically praised and successful in terms of general audience, more than Beyond that on the other hand is being passed by some as the best and most successful trek movie of the 3, in spite of the truth being the opposite.

It's fun to observe these things, but it also is concerning when you think that new movies (see Beyond) are being "tailored' on that vocal minority of fans ...with possible disastrous counterproductive results.

anyone behind this franchise should either ignore what fans say online, or at least try to get the bigger picture instead of stopping at random comments online, or biased articles in some sites that have a history of negativity when it comes to trek or the reboot specifically. Being in the fandom, truly following what people say, requires time that the people behind these movies don't have.
But when there is such an obvious disconnect between what some say on the internet and the facts, you gotta ask yourself why and if it's that wise to let that minority of fans affect people's perception of your product, or even your own perception of it.

yes and Into Darkness is (and prob always will be) the biggest grossing Trek worldwide. not domestic (ST09, and it looks like both TMP and IV beat it when adjusted) and maybe TMP made slightly more ww when adjusted.. but its still there on BOMojo - #1 = STID. the one bonefide worldwide blockbuster Trek movie

 

[JamesRye]

I think Into Darkness was better than Beyond. It was about something - the morality of drone strikes and American identity post 911. It felt like an epic and JJ shot the hell out of some of those scenes. Beyond felt much smaller scale and another poster called KGator sums it up best with this comment:
"The movie clearly did not resonate with the general audience. Despite the good reviews the movie never received "must see" word of mouth. It was "fun" but "forgettable" flick and without any real hook"

 

[Balok's Decoy]

I think Into Darkness was better than Beyond. It was about something - the morality of drone strikes and American identity post 911. It felt like an epic and JJ shot the hell out of some of those scenes. Beyond felt much smaller scale and another poster called KGator sums it up best with this comment:
"The movie clearly did not resonate with the general audience. Despite the good reviews the movie never received "must see" word of mouth. It was "fun" but "forgettable" flick and without any real hook"

I prefer Beyond, but the description of STID you gave is exactly why I love it and why I'm such a STID apologist.

 

[Khan 2.0]

I think Into Darkness was better than Beyond. It was about something - the morality of drone strikes and American identity post 911. It felt like an epic and JJ shot the hell out of some of those scenes. Beyond felt much smaller scale and another poster called KGator sums it up best with this comment:
"The movie clearly did not resonate with the general audience. Despite the good reviews the movie never received "must see" word of mouth. It was "fun" but "forgettable" flick and without any real hook"

yes, plus It had so much going on for fans and non fans..Khan, Cumberbatch in his first big movie role, nu Klingons/the Klingon homeworld, Admiral Robocop, Pike dies, volcano planet, spacebabe Carol Marcus, Nimoy cameo, the Enterprise vs a TNG style ship space battle, Kirk dies, epic future city fight.. and the building up to it in trailers etc had the 2 massive tantalizing hooks of the mystery of the central villain (yes wed heard the rumours of khan but didn't know for absolute certain)and whos hand is behind the glass?? (plus the Vengeance was pretty intriguing) The only real hooks STB had was that the ENT gets it (again..wed already almost seen that at end of STID) and Kirk goes fing crazy on a motorbike (and maybe the NX style ship was something of a hook for fans?)

 

[Balok's Decoy]

yes, plus It had so much going on for fans and non fans..Khan, Cumberbatch in his first big movie role, nu Klingons/the Klingon homeworld, Admiral Robocop, Pike dies, spacebabe Carol Marcus, Nimoy cameo, the Enterprise vs a TNG style ship space battle, Kirk dies, epic future city fight..and building up to it in trailers etc had the 2 massive tantalizing hooks of the mystery of the central villain (yes wed heard the rumours of khan but didn't know for absolute certain)and whos hand is behind the glass?? The only real hooks STB had was that the ENT gets it (again..wed already almost seen that at end of STID) and Kirk goes fing crazy on a motorbike (and maybe the NX style ship was something of a hook for fans?)

STB was more than that for me. There were plenty of hooks and little fan service-y moments that felt sincere, like the script was written by someone who really loves Star Trek (as it was). The Captain's Log at the beginning had me grinning from ear to ear. The reference to Who Mourns for Adonais in the movie and later in the credits was a nice touch. As was the "I ripped my shirt again" line, which almost put me on the floor. More seriously though, the scene in the bar with Bones and Kirk -- that's a powerful scene and a great moment of characterization. I also connected to the overall theme of the film, which is an important one -- about how soldiers are treated (or not treated) after they return from war, the psychological effects of war, and the challenge of letting go of resentment and fear with a former enemy. That's good Trek stuff.

 

[Smellmet]

STID definitely seemed like more of an event movie in the summer of 2013, standing large and proud amongst the other blockbusters of the season, with talk of $100 million dollar opening weekends being bandied about. Beyond just didn't seem to have the same buzz at all, obviously there was Anton's passing which threw the spotlight on the film a little and the gay Sulu thing, but it just didn't stand out enough. We can argue all day about the marketing being this or that, but the story just wasn't big or important enough for me, and despite the stunning visuals, felt too small in scale for this type of film. I've only seen it once at the theatre so I can't really judge it on a level playing field with the other two but I enjoyed it just as much I think. There's aspects of all three that I like and dislike, at the moment I'm struggling to separate them.

 

[Khan 2.0]

STID definitely seemed like more of an event movie in the summer of 2013, standing large and proud amongst the other blockbusters of the season, with talk of $100 million dollar opening weekends being bandied about. Beyond just didn't seem to have the same buzz at all, obviously there was Anton's passing which threw the spotlight on the film a little and the gay Sulu thing, but it just didn't stand out enough. We can argue all day about the marketing being this or that, but the story just wasn't big or important enough for me, and despite the stunning visuals, felt too small in scale for this type of film. I've only seen it once at the theatre so I can't really judge it on a level playing field with the other two but I enjoyed it just as much I think. There's aspects of all three that I like and dislike, at the moment I'm struggling to separate them.

STID looked/felt like that fabled 200m Star Trek movie you thought would never ever happen (ok ST09 obviously felt like that too but STID even more so)

 

[Jax]

STID seems to have garnered more mild ratings/reviews over time but at launch it was given a much more happy ride from the Trek community. I gave STID the same grade as I did ST09 after seeing the movie at the cinema (A-) but over time I dropped that grade to a B though it easily could end up B+ if you asked me the same question several years from now.

STID was good no doubt but it doesn't hold up IMO as well as ST09 and I felt Beyond was simply a more enjoyable movie, which I gave a B+