NX-01 Chef's kiss!
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
My, Parents while I was growing up, were always looking for my off switch. I was something of a chatterbox. 
With mint frosting
almost the chobits method. almost.
Epsilon-Church: Crap. Instead of turning on my long-term memory, I think I just shut off my short-term memory.
Caboose: Oh… Is that bad?
Epsilon: Huh? Is what bad?
Caboose: Your memory thing getting shut off.
Epsilon: Who shut off my memory?
Caboose: You did.
Epsilon: I did what?
Caboose: Shut off your memory?
Epsilon: Why do you want me to shut off my memory?
Caboose: No, it’s already shut off.
Epsilon: What is?
Caboose: Your memory.
Epsilon: Yeah, what about it?
Tucker: Wow. Well, this is a drastic improvement. Hey, you!
Epsilon: Me?
Tucker: Yes! You! Don’t touch anything else or try to activate any computer stuff.
Epsilon: (pauses; turns to Caboose) Are you gonna answer him?
Here's an unpopular opinion for you:
Star Trek (2009) and Star Trek Into Darkness are just as good if not better Star Trek films than Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, and the two former only get compared unfavorably to the latter because of nostalgia glasses.
Star Trek (2009) is an excellent origin story for the series, and Into Darkness does TWOK better than TWOK itself. The creative team for the Kelvin timeline films weren't embarrassed by what Star Trek is (while TWOK seemingly was) and embraced the look and feel of the classic TOS series, unlike TWOK which dressed everyone in blood red marching band uniforms set against a militaristic backdrop which was a far cry from TOS. Scotty even says in Into Darkness, "Is that what we are now? A military operation? Because I thought we were explorers", whereas David Marcus in TWOK consistently refers to Starfleet as "The Military", which it isn't, really. All differences aside, the three films are all action adventure summer blockbusters, basically made specifically for two hours of watching at the theaters with a box of popcorn and a soda, to take one's mind off things for a while. None of these films are particularly thought provoking, and it is baffling to me that everyone loves TWOK so much more than 2009 or Into Darkness, as aside from TWOK's moodiness and poor attempt at depicting the future of Star Trek, the three films are all tonally the same. I just personally feel the Kelvinverse films got it right whereas TWOK didn't. Yet TWOK is beloved and the Kelvinverse films are largely panned.
To be fair, NONE of these films are as good philosophically or story wise IMO as The Motion Picture, which as I've said elsewhere nailed what Star Trek is on the head in spite of the utter lack of color (hey, it was the 70s, everything was pastel colored; it was just a phase sci fi went through LOL). But for a Star Trek MOVIE? 2009 and Into Darkness still take the cake, at least for me.
Star Trek (2009) and Star Trek Into Darkness are just as good if not better Star Trek films than Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, and the two former only get compared unfavorably to the latter because of nostalgia glasses.
Star Trek (2009) is an excellent origin story for the series, and Into Darkness does TWOK better than TWOK itself. The creative team for the Kelvin timeline films weren't embarrassed by what Star Trek is (while TWOK seemingly was) and embraced the look and feel of the classic TOS series, unlike TWOK which dressed everyone in blood red marching band uniforms set against a militaristic backdrop which was a far cry from TOS. Scotty even says in Into Darkness, "Is that what we are now? A military operation? Because I thought we were explorers", whereas David Marcus in TWOK consistently refers to Starfleet as "The Military", which it isn't, really. All differences aside, the three films are all action adventure summer blockbusters, basically made specifically for two hours of watching at the theaters with a box of popcorn and a soda, to take one's mind off things for a while. None of these films are particularly thought provoking, and it is baffling to me that everyone loves TWOK so much more than 2009 or Into Darkness, as aside from TWOK's moodiness and poor attempt at depicting the future of Star Trek, the three films are all tonally the same. I just personally feel the Kelvinverse films got it right whereas TWOK didn't. Yet TWOK is beloved and the Kelvinverse films are largely panned.
To be fair, NONE of these films are as good philosophically or story wise IMO as The Motion Picture, which as I've said elsewhere nailed what Star Trek is on the head in spite of the utter lack of color (hey, it was the 70s, everything was pastel colored; it was just a phase sci fi went through LOL). But for a Star Trek MOVIE? 2009 and Into Darkness still take the cake, at least for me.
Here's another "Controversial Opinion".
A "Realistic Portrayal" of Star Trek Space Battles could be done in the modern day and made to be enjoy-able w/o the bad tropes that old Trek Space Battles has had.
Babylon 5's "Battle of Gorash VII" & modern Sci-Fi Space Battles portrayed in "The Expanse" shows that Space Battles at "Realistic Distances" can be portrayed well and be exciting to watch.
A "Realistic Portrayal" of Star Trek Space Battles could be done in the modern day and made to be enjoy-able w/o the bad tropes that old Trek Space Battles has had.
Babylon 5's "Battle of Gorash VII" & modern Sci-Fi Space Battles portrayed in "The Expanse" shows that Space Battles at "Realistic Distances" can be portrayed well and be exciting to watch.
Last edited:
Considering them to be better than Star Trek II is certainly not a common opinion, at least among veteran fans, but I feel like people think they get more hate than they actually do. Last time we did a poll here Star Trek Into Darkness didn't do great, but it wasn't down at the bottom with Generations, Final Frontier and the rest, and Star Trek 09 was up in the top 5.
Both films also did really well with critics and users on Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic and IMDb. But then so did Wrath of Khan, unsurprisingly.
Well.... That's half right. Into Darkness is one of my least favorite films, Star Trek or otherwise. But I've seen that teaser dozens of times. It's awesome.
Imagine if Trek 09 did not have the leaps of "logic" and "I've never been outside of a movie set" mentality that makes Wrath of Khan seem like an airtight real world plot? It would have been The Greatest Movie Ever Made.
Oh dear. Are we back to this? I do kind of feel like someone said "Tallguy" three times.
First off "consistently" is... Once? In TWOK the Enterprise is on a training mission that turns into a rescue mission. The Reliant is actually on a research and exploration mission. The pew pew pew shows up because Khan is an aggressor.
Now Errand of Mercy? The Enterprise Incident? Balance of Terror? What kind of missions are those? Clearly the Kelvin Enterprise never had to do those kind of operations.
Oh, and Montgomery Scotty? The Federation (not Starfleet) is a "peace keeping armada". Captain Pike said so in the previous movie.
It's a military with a scientific application that explores when it's not shooting back at attackers. There. Debate ended.
Starfleet is the space squad, they do space things.
I think nostalgia for something old is pretty equivalent to hype for something new. And at least often enough nostalgia in itself doesn't make something hold up let alone be great, so when it does contribute that shows it's not just or primarily nostalgia making positive impact.
I agreed with most of what you said, but I'll disagree with this part of them not being thought provoking. I think the Kelvin Films, especially were Kirk is concerned, are as thought provoking as TWOK.
Agreed. I think the effort to hype up anything, either in the past, or something new, is looking purely surface level and not looking at the depth of how something works within the actual story. Something showing up just because I recognize it doesn't make it good. It being folded well in to the story, and contributing to the larger character growth will be the positive impact.
Largely, this is why I don't jump on hype trains. I'm not interested in the latest and great, the great of all time, nor am I in love with the past. I want things that actually speak depth. Sometimes that is utilizing nostalgia and sometimes that is a blending of the two, and sometimes that's something new.
Agreed on TMP. It's been my favorite Trek film since childhood.
TMP is a very good movie.
And the drive by scene with Kirk and Scotty viewing the Enterprise... didn't last long enough. We could, and should, have gotten double the time watching her like that.
And the drive by scene with Kirk and Scotty viewing the Enterprise... didn't last long enough. We could, and should, have gotten double the time watching her like that.
"Man, it takes them forever to show off the ship. The starship porn is ridiculous."
It was 1979. They spent $46 million on that movie in 1978 and 1979 dollars. They'd never had those kind of filmmaking resources to depict the Enterprise. We were getting starship porn.
It was 1979. They spent $46 million on that movie in 1978 and 1979 dollars. They'd never had those kind of filmmaking resources to depict the Enterprise. We were getting starship porn.
(singing)"Man, it takes them forever to show off the ship. The starship porn is ridiculous."
It was 1979. They spent $46 million on that movie in 1978 and 1979 dollars. They'd never had those kind of filmmaking resources to depict the Enterprise. We were getting starship porn.
The internet is great...
For starship porn.
Still ridiculous."Man, it takes them forever to show off the ship. The starship porn is ridiculous."
It was 1979. They spent $46 million on that movie in 1978 and 1979 dollars. They'd never had those kind of filmmaking resources to depict the Enterprise. We were getting starship porn.
We have this urgent mission; let's drive around the block.
What you don't realize is that they were directed by dockyard traffic to approach from the fore.
Traffic was backed up because the transporters were out.
The real question is why was Scott not on the ship and why was the Captain not coordinating preparation efforts but was hands on in engineering?
Similar threads
- Locked
