Star Trek infinitely better than all three "Star Wars" prequels.
- Thread starter Danoz
- Start date
Apart from the fact that I think the amount of aliens were very low in this film, it beats any Star Wars movie hands down, even if they would be made with today's technologies.
A fairly grumpy friend of mine made the following comparison before he had even seen the film:
"New Trek is to Star Wars as New Coke is to Pepsi. I would rather just drink Pepsi."
To which I replied:
"Yes, but Old Star Wars is to New Star Wars as Pepsi is to bong water."
"New Trek is to Star Wars as New Coke is to Pepsi. I would rather just drink Pepsi."
To which I replied:
"Yes, but Old Star Wars is to New Star Wars as Pepsi is to bong water."
word.
It's not better than the original, but far better than the first two prequels... on the level with Revenge of the Sith, probably Star Trek is a little better.
I don't get how people can like Star Trek and hate Star Wars. Specifically, I don't get how people can hate THIS Star Trek and hate Star Wars altogether. This Star Trek is about as close to Star Wars as it is ToS.
I don't get how people can like Star Trek and hate Star Wars. Specifically, I don't get how people can hate THIS Star Trek and hate Star Wars altogether. This Star Trek is about as close to Star Wars as it is ToS.
ANYTHING would be better than the SW prequels... well... ok... anything except for Cloverfield.
Trek will do great, until Terminator comes in, and steals its thunder. And then, Transformers will come along, and steal Terminator's thunder.
Trek will do great, until Terminator comes in, and steals its thunder. And then, Transformers will come along, and steal Terminator's thunder.
If the prequels are so bad, why did Star Trek steal that "bigger fish" scene from Episode 1?
If Megan Fox had been cast as Captain Kirk I think that ST would have done much better.
I don't hate Star Wars. I was bored by the prequels, which are barely live-action films. I loved Star Wars itself and the sequel The Empire Strikes Back, and liked Return Of The Jedi.
Good point. Plus this new Trek had CGI(which was a big complaint by many here and elsewhere about the Prequels) that was no better than the SW prequels and people are eating it up.
Star Trek was good, but I think you're jumping the gun to say it was better than all the prequels. Was it better than TPM? Perhaps, but Nero wasn't as badass as Maul (even in his too brief scenes), nor was he as sly as Palpatine. Trek also didn't have the epic backdrops of TPM or the other movies. The fight scenes weren't as good as any of the major lightsaber duels (Maul v. Obi Wan and Qui Gonn), (Dooku v. Anakin and Obi), (Dooku v. Yoda), (Dooku v. Obi and Anakin II), (Palpatine v. Mace), (Anakin v. Obi-The Duel), or (Palpatine v. Yoda). And there was no comparison in the music scores. Star Trek's was largely forgettable, but what genre fan could ever forget the Duel of the Fates or the Battle of the Heroes?
If anything, Keenser looked more like he belonged in the SW prequels than on Trek, same with the aliens on Delta Vega. The new warp effect owes something to SW as well, though it also sort of reminds me of BSG's lightspeed effect too.
If anything, Keenser looked more like he belonged in the SW prequels than on Trek, same with the aliens on Delta Vega. The new warp effect owes something to SW as well, though it also sort of reminds me of BSG's lightspeed effect too.
I thought Indy 4 was better than nuTrek and ROTS was superior in all ways. I do think that NuTrek is better than the first two SW prequels though.
Well at least Nero had a reason for being the way he was, not "I follow a philosophy of hatred, mwahaha". What's the point of the Sith anyway? And don't give me that "abolute poweeeeeer" crap.
I actually like the prequels just fine, they're okay. But Star Trek just makes more sense to me. I never got the motivation of evil being evil because it's evil.
What bugged me about RotS was Anakin: how can anyone be so thick? He was stupid beyond belief. "I have ended the war?" Please. The Sith were the ones who started the fucking war in the first place, and Anakin knew that. He was an idiot. He was a self-absorbed, stupid little boy.
I actually like the prequels just fine, they're okay. But Star Trek just makes more sense to me. I never got the motivation of evil being evil because it's evil.
What bugged me about RotS was Anakin: how can anyone be so thick? He was stupid beyond belief. "I have ended the war?" Please. The Sith were the ones who started the fucking war in the first place, and Anakin knew that. He was an idiot. He was a self-absorbed, stupid little boy.
john titor
Captain
Yes it is better than the prequels. First prequel sucked, second one had a lame title and c3p0 being camp during serious battle scene, stilted romance dialogue, "oh hahaha let us frolick on the lawn, haha" and was generally action scenes strung together with po faced seriousness. Third one wasn't bad but Anakin turned incredibly evil in the blink of an eye and in general it was just more stilted dialogue, bad philosophizing etc. They weren't bad films overall except for the travesty of the first, but they were very mediocre. The new star trek film works because its tighter and doesn't take itself too seriously but has some very effective scenes, for example the openining, the introduction of the characters and so on. It has the bright sheen of Starship Troopers combined with the flamboyance of the Fifth Element distilled through the unique filter of the Trek universe. Ergo its just way better.
I always felt that SW suffered from numerous plot holes. The entire clone war is a plot hole. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever. I never got the war, or Anakin's betrayal. It wasn't the tragic fall of a hero, but just someone being as thick as anyone's ever been. Honestly, how could Amidala marry that guy?
