Re: Who (in character,actor) would you like being the 2nd film's villa
There needs to be a villain team-up.
There needs to be a villain team-up.

(The actor who voiced Eeyore also voiced Megatron.)
A similar feeling here. We've had too many singular bad-guys, almost all of them bent on planetary destruction, in many of the latter Trek films. Soran, Shinzon, Rualfo, Nero. FC stands out with a different villian, but again, planetary destruction.I kind of like the idea of a mission more than a specific villain, but I'm not sure the average audience member would go for that.
Yeah, I checked, and you're right. Both Cullen and Welker do a LOT of different voices.(The actor who voiced Eeyore also voiced Megatron.)
Actually, wasn't it Peter Cullen/Prime who voiced Eeyore?
They probably are.Or maybe the target audience for the X-Men franchise is smarter and deeper than the target audience for the Star Trek franchise?![]()
Yet using Kirk and Spock is somehow okay?^^^
I agree. Instead of rehashing/revisiting stories and people we already know, the new movies are a chance to explore new and different plots and places. This chance should be taken advantage of.
So how did X-Men movies do so well in the "Generic Summer Action Flicks" field, what with Magneto not being your typical eeeevil psycho villain type and all?Why not have an antagonist who is not a villain in the usual sense of the word - someone with a legitimate stance which might be different from our heroes', but is not downright evil or crazy, and someone the audience might actually be tempted to agree with on occasions?
Also, why not have an antagonist or one of the antagonists be someone from the Federation?
Far too complex for Generic Summer Action Flick that Trek XII is sure to be. Stick with Klingons as villains, crazy ass starship battles with pretty splosions, a lead Klingon who spews some semi-philosophical sounding dialogue to make it sound like he's about something, and a Nokia ad. #1 at the weekend box office.
Or maybe the target audience for the X-Men franchise is smarter and deeper than the target audience for the Star Trek franchise?![]()
Movies with complexities are still appreciated. I don't think the cinematic landscape has changed that much in the last 5-10 years as we still had daft summer blockbusters back then.X-Men was a different time, a time when movies with some complexities were appreciated
Not since TUC have we had a Trek film without a planetary destruction plot. I loved Undiscovered Country because the plot was more of a political assassination/mystery nature.
Generations-Soran (He had a motivation, but it was certainly about preventing a planet's destruction)
FC- Borg Queen (Preventing Earth's assimilation)
Insurrection- Ru'afo (Great actor. Lame villain)
Nemesis- Shinzon (Another psycho wanting to destroy a planet. Yawn)
XI- Nero (Yet another one!)
I really want something different in the next one.
I kind of like the idea of a mission more than a specific villain, but I'm not sure the average audience member would go for that.
I don't know about that. Keep in mind that TVH was the second highest grossing Trek film behind TMP until STAR TREK came out last summer.
Well, okay... maybe not "villain", but definitely "antagonist".Although TVH was very successful and didn't have a villain per se (was the Probe really a villain?)
No, instead it was full of pointless 10-minute long space porn sequences.Plus TMP was not full of pointles battless and explosions. While that idea does not fly with films these days, but I'm not a typical film goer, and do have an attention span much longer than that of a goldfish. If I want pointless battles and explosions, I'll go watch Star Wars. ~dodges yet another wine bottle being tossed~![]()
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.