The STAR TREK Movies, As Ranked By STAR TREK Con-Goers

[wjaspers]

Apparently this is their list of best ST films


1. The Wrath of Khan
2. First Contact
3. The Undiscovered Country
4. The Voyage Home
5. The Search for Spock
6. Star Trek (2009)
7. Galaxy Quest (!!!)
8. Generations
9. The Motion Picture
10. Nemesis
11. Insurrection
12. The Final Frontier
13. Into Darkness

In my opinion nr.6 Star Trek (2009) should be nr.12

Not a JJ hater, this man makes the best movies, except for SW, sorry mean ST movies.

 

[BillJ]

Many will harp on homages and inconsistencies anyways. The Wrath of Khan wasn't exactly welcomed with open arms if fanzines of the time are to be believed.

I'd like to see a breakdown of the vote. But I surmise that this was entirely fabricated by someone with an ax to grind.

 

[Greg Cox]

Many will harp on homages and inconsistencies anyways. The Wrath of Khan wasn't exactly welcomed with open arms if fanzines of the time are to be believed.

I'd like to see a breakdown of the vote. But I surmise that this was entirely fabricated by someone with an ax to grind.

Or to gin up controversy.

True story. Not long ago, a reporter contacted me regarding an article he was working on about how all us old-school Trekkies hate the new movies. To his surprise and disappointment, I refused to play along. I spent over thirty minutes on the phone to this guy, patiently explaining that his premise was incorrect, that only a vocal minority of purists objected to the Abrams films, but this wasn't what he wanted to hear. (He told me upfront that his editor had already dictated the slant of the article.)

When I wouldn't give him the sound-byte he wanted, he asked me to point him toward another Trek author who would go along with the idea that all true Trekkies were universally opposed to the movies. Again, I declined.

Sure enough, when the article saw print, guess what the gist of it was?

So, yeah, I'm justly skeptical of these kind of headlines.

 

[Melakon]

Sure enough, when the article saw print, guess what the gist of it was?

So, yeah, I'm justly skeptical of these kind of headlines.

He was probably threatened with having to write the lonelyhearts column if he didn't deliver the story they wanted.

 

[thumbtack]

I enjoy Star Trek I, II, III, IV & VI equally.

Well, that's just cheating. You have to rank them so we can judge your rankings.

I surmise that this was entirely fabricated by someone with an ax to grind.

It's already got out that Feraci was "coaching" the audience.

I refused to play along.

And, apparently, if you want to be in a documentary about Star Trek fans, you have to agree to be extra weird for the cameras.

 

[M'Sharak]

I surmise that this was entirely fabricated by someone with an ax to grind.

It's already got out that Feraci was "coaching" the audience.

Color me surprised.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Many will harp on homages and inconsistencies anyways. The Wrath of Khan wasn't exactly welcomed with open arms if fanzines of the time are to be believed.

I'd like to see a breakdown of the vote. But I surmise that this was entirely fabricated by someone with an ax to grind.

Or to gin up controversy.

True story. Not long ago, a reporter contacted me regarding an article he was working on about how all us old-school Trekkies hate the new movies. To his surprise and disappointment, I refused to play along. I spent over thirty minutes on the phone to this guy, patiently explaining that his premise was incorrect, that only a vocal minority of purists objected to the Abrams films, but this wasn't what he wanted to hear. (He told me upfront that his editor had already dictated the slant of the article.)

When I wouldn't give him the sound-byte he wanted, he asked me to point him toward another Trek author who would go along with the idea that all true Trekkies were universally opposed to the movies. Again, I declined.

Sure enough, when the article saw print, guess what the gist of it was?

So, yeah, I'm justly skeptical of these kind of headlines.

This is really a shame. I know in the grand scheme of things, an article about Star Trek movies is of zero significance, but this tabloid, "If you can't find a source, make one up" mentality is becoming more and more mainstream.

It's common practice now--especially with online "journalism"--to make the facts match the article and not make the article match the facts.

 

[CaptainDonovin]

It was a poll of one hundred fans at a convention and they included Galaxy Quest. Of course, being somewhat embarrasing it's been spammed across the internet by sites like Trekweb.com.

True, but it was a vote by only about 400 that got Pluto axed as a planet.

What the poll really shows is something that has been said before: what happens in Vegas REALLY should stay there.

 

[Dukhat]

Many will harp on homages and inconsistencies anyways. The Wrath of Khan wasn't exactly welcomed with open arms if fanzines of the time are to be believed.

I'd like to see a breakdown of the vote. But I surmise that this was entirely fabricated by someone with an ax to grind.

Or to gin up controversy.

True story. Not long ago, a reporter contacted me regarding an article he was working on about how all us old-school Trekkies hate the new movies. To his surprise and disappointment, I refused to play along. I spent over thirty minutes on the phone to this guy, patiently explaining that his premise was incorrect, that only a vocal minority of purists objected to the Abrams films, but this wasn't what he wanted to hear. (He told me upfront that his editor had already dictated the slant of the article.)

When I wouldn't give him the sound-byte he wanted, he asked me to point him toward another Trek author who would go along with the idea that all true Trekkies were universally opposed to the movies. Again, I declined.

Sure enough, when the article saw print, guess what the gist of it was?

So, yeah, I'm justly skeptical of these kind of headlines.

This is exactly why I don't give a crap what anyone else thinks. All that matters is what I think.

 

[M'Sharak]

It was a poll of one hundred fans at a convention and they included Galaxy Quest. Of course, being somewhat embarrasing it's been spammed across the internet by sites like Trekweb.com.

True, but it was a vote by only about 400 that got Pluto axed as a planet.

If I'm not mistaken, total National and Individual membership in the IAU numbers just over 450. That's a rather more exclusive club than "self-professed hardcore Trekkies who attend VegasCon every August".

 

[JarodRussell]

So this week we found out that people at cons dislike Star Trek Into Darkness and sexually harass other people. It's like Sodom and Gomorrah out there!

It was a poll of one hundred fans at a convention and they included Galaxy Quest. Of course, being somewhat embarrasing it's been spammed across the internet by sites like Trekweb.com.

Let's face it, had they voted it #1, you wouldn't say that. Instead you'd probably say how this shows that the fanbase loves it.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I don't know what you're talking about


Also: Sexual harassment at conventions??

 

[GameOn]

My current list but the bottom 4 could be in any order really. Into Darkness might change when I get to see it again on blu-ray.

1. The Wrath of Khan
2. The Undiscovered Country
3. First Contact
4. The Voyage Home
5. The Search for Spock
6. Into Darkness
7. Star Trek (2009)
8. The Motion Picture
9. Nemesis
10. Insurrection
11. Generations
12. The Final Frontier

 

[Lucky]

My current rankings:

1. The Voyage Home
2. The Wrath of Khan
3. First Contact
4. Into Darkness
5. The Undiscovered Country
6. Star Trek (2009)
7. The Search for Spock
8. Nemesis
9. Generations
10. The Motion Picture
11. The Final Frontier
12. Insurrection

 

[Shazam!]

Rating STiD so low reeks of that "get off my lawn" mentality as it relates to having Khan in this movie, and probably the immensely false perception that this is somehow a rip off of TWOK when approximately 5-8 minutes of this two hour film really focuses on anything from TWOK.

The whole 3rd act is a trainwreck regardless of whether the movie is 'ripping off' another or not.

To suggest that the sole reason people dislike this movie is the Khan angle is disingenious at best and insulting at worst.

 

[northstar]

I pretty much agree with the Con-List. Very hard to decide wether STID or TFF is the worst Star Trek movie.

1. TWOK
2. TMP
3. TSFS
4. TVH
5. TUC
6. First Contact
7. Star Trek (2009)
8. Nemesis
9. Generations
10. Insurrection
11. STID
12. TFF

 

[PIKER]

After much reflection, I've drawn up my personal list.

Above average films - strengths:
1. TUC - characterization/plot (c/p)
2. TWOK - c/p
3. TMP - starship porn/music/science!
4. TSFS - c/p
5. TVH - c/p
6. First Contact - c/p

Below average films - weaknesses:
7. TFF - bad fx/science/humor but major bonus pts for soundtrack & "pain" scene
8. Generations - plot/Kirk's death
9. Insurrection - plot
10. Star Trek (2009) - bad science/Vulcan destruction/Kirk's leapfrog promotion
11. Nemesis - characterization/plot
12. STID - characterization/plot/bad science/Khan?!?

Honorable Mention (not ranked):
Galaxy Quest

Note: I am not a JJ hater, it just so happens that I find massive flaws in his films as well as the TNG films with the exception of First Contact. I truly hope he can turn the page with next film and produce something more original, thought-provoking, and entertaining.

 

[RAMA]

It's kind of surprising that with several large scale grading and review polls on STID that this small news item has been a story over the web. The much larger sample polls show STID to be a viewer favorite and major critical success. It's still the best reviewed, best graded major release of the year. A couple of hundred con goers making the news really doesn't change that.

My opinion:

1. Star Trek: Into Darkness *****
2. Star Trek 09*****
3. Wrath of Khan*****
4. First Contact****
5. Voyage Home****
6. Nemesis****
7. STMMP-DE***1/2
8. Search for Spock***1/2
9. Undiscovered Country***
10. Insurrection***
11. Generations**
12. Final frontier1/2

My capsule thoughts on the movies:

STID-Bad Robot expands on the mythos, develops the characters and tells a more relevant story, with the biggest scale ST movie yet. The FX are tangibly real, the action kinetic and it feels like ST as an adventure series it started out to be.

1. Star Trek 09-Credit due for a new producer who made ST feel like STagain. Adventure, scale, cachet, all missing from previous Trek movies. If all that's not enough, it's writing brought some small development to characters that basically didn't change much in the original series, executed well enough to be nominated for a Hugo, Nebula, Writers Guild Award, a trifecta not accomplished by any other Trek movie.

A home run, a bullseye, direct hit!! A smashing blockbuster success! The most cinematic, the most dense, most energetic, fully realized, rich, fun, rousing, professionally made MOVIE of all of ST. Rewatchable with almost every sequence creating a lasting impression. The best "teaser", best beginning credit sequences, the best Special FX, the best sound, best ending credits! Grade: ***** of 5 stars

2. Wrath of Khan-The best movie for 27 years until 2009! Good characterization, and a movie that makes up for an underwritten villain role with terrific performances by everyone concerned. Themes about aging, family, new life-hope, with a good dose of action. Still contains SF movie's best battle scene. *****

3. First Contact-Admittedly, not a perfect film, and not the best Borg story by a long shot but it also offered a multi-leveled formula for success: ST history, time-travel, almost elemental enemies, and something rarely seen..a personal vendetta for Picard. ****

4. Voyage Home-Not completely logical but a fun movie with no significant strikes against it. Expanded the ST universe a bit, with a look at Starfleet and the UFP. Did I mention fun? ****

5. Nemesis-Again, not a perfect movie, one I'd have re-written myself somewhat, but it's a major improvement in scale and pace over the previous STNG movie as well as the latter TOS ones. ****

6. STMMP-DE-Ok here is where I change my mind occasionally..sometimes STIII feels more statisfying as a movie, but the new DE is an improvement over the original...its a tighter movie. Hard to beat for FX and music (both nominated for Oscars)the story feels slim, but the philosophy behind it wins the day. ***1/2

7. STIII-So STTMP improves upon TOS with a story that takes AI seriously, and tried to include Spock in that as a personal link...STIII again uses Spock but in a story whose philosophy is bizarre and very un-Treklike...postulating souls that come back to life...must have had theists as well as non-theists perplexed in it's day (I was 14 and just knew I liked Spock being alive). There are good moments and ILM does a great job on a small budget (one that used fewer FX than many made-for-tv movies, as well as STNG 3 yrs later). Ultimately it can't compete with some of the better Trek movies. ***1/2

8. Undiscovered Country-Marginally better than #9 on my list. Not a movie that withstands the test of time well both in production and format. ***

9. Insurrection-Underrated, certainly not a terrible movie. Lacks scale and a sense of urgency. Gains points for a plot that's still debated amongst fans today. ***

10. Generations-A complete mess of a script. The most inconsistent internal logic of all stories. It's few pluses can't make up for a scattershot mis-fire of a movie. **

11. Final frontier-The movie that shall not be named! Though I am naming it embarrassingly bad. Problems begin at the start of a poor concept, terrible dialogue, dumb humor, horrible FX, old actors looking tired. This is what happens when the studio doesn't throw out a clearly terrible script...possibly because of the success of STIV and STNG. 1/2

RAMA

 

[BillJ]

10. Star Trek (2009) - bad science/Vulcan destruction/Kirk's leapfrog promotion
12. STID - characterization/plot/bad science/Khan?!?

So you're saying the other ten Star Trek films have good science?

 

[Greg Cox]

Here's the thing. "Trekkies United Against the New Star Trek!" makes a much better headline than "Wide Range of Opinions Exist Regarding Latest Trek Film," so naturally the media is jumping all over it. They're just trying to gin up controversy and make it sound like there's some huge backlash or uprising . . . because that makes a sexier story.

There are currently 374 Trekkies online on this board right now. That's over three times more than voted in that silly poll. So why is anyone paying attention to it?