Forbes: How ‘Star Trek’ Became Obsolete Thanks To ‘Guardians,’ Fast & Furious’ And ‘Star Wars’

[fireproof78]

Probably because he was 36 and only now the age that Captain Kirk should be BECOMING a Captain.

But that's not the reason why he became a captain. He was living in the shadow of someone considered a great captain and he felt like he couldn't measure up to that standard.

 

[dupersuper]

Well, as long as Nemesis exists, Into Darkness isn't my LEAST favourite Star Trek movie...

Probably because he was 36 and only now the age that Captain Kirk should be BECOMING a Captain.

It's not the years, it's the mileage.

 

[Charles Phipps]

Well, as long as Nemesis exists, Into Darkness isn't my LEAST favourite Star Trek movie...

I think it's also better than FF and Insurrection.

 

[dupersuper]

I think it's also better than FF and Insurrection.

Insurrection is my third least fave, and it is close. The "I need my pain" scene totally saves Final Frontier for me.

 

[fireproof78]

I think it's also better than FF and Insurrection.

Insurrection, Nemesis, FF, Generations, for certain for me. For actual rewatch value they are right below TUC and TVH.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Aside from the "Khaaaaaaan!" scream, I love Star Trek Into Darkness.

 

[yotsuya]

That some find a disparity between 09 and Into Darkness compared to Beyond, is no surprise. Beyond is what Star Trek is supposed to be. It had all the elements and was well written. But then I am a fan of Simon Pegg's work. He nailed it where Abrams and Orcii failed. And I honestly haven't seen the TNG movies enough times to honestly compare them now, but I didn't hate any of them when I saw it. But Into Darkness is the single worst written Star Trek story ever. Why they bothered to steal from TWOK is beyond me. That plagiarism just made the move worse. And some other band of Eugenics survivors would have been good, or someone like Garth of Izar who had been genetically mutated would have been better and fit their plot better. The Admiral Marcus part was okay, but not outstanding. And back when it first came out I though nothing could be worse then Generations, but that is a generally okay movie that got stupider as the movie progressed where Into Darkness has issues from the outset and just derailed when they started stealing from TWOK. I watched it once and that was enough to keep me from watching it ever again. Horrible waste of film and time. And it is no surprise that they couldn't get people back for the next one after that. Especially with so many franchises offering what movie goers really wanted.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

And some other band of Eugenics survivors would have been good, or someone like Garth of Izar who had been genetically mutated would have been better and fit their plot better.

I think it would have been simpler if it just turned out that Section 31 had been secretly dabbling in genetically augmented humans, perhaps continuing off from Aurik Soong's research.

It's hard for me to pick out a least favorite movie.
Into Darkness annoys me the most but it's got enough moments that work for me that I can still rewatch it.
The Motionless Picture is the one that I watch the least.
The Final Frontier is underrated. It does the best job of taking advantage of the immense chemistry between Kirk, Spock, & McCoy. Most movies either give us Kirk & Spock or Kirk & McCoy but rarely do we get so much of all 3 at once.
Insurrection & Nemesis are lame but I have such affection for that cast and that era of the franchise.
Generations is actually one of the better films. It hits a few sour notes here & there but I think Soran is one of the better villains. At least he's motivated by something other than revenge.

 

[fireproof78]

Beyond is what Star Trek is supposed to be

*looks at all the TOS and TNG films* Seriously? What is a Trek film "supposed" to be? There is so much variety to be had in the Trek story universe that declaring something is not "supposed" to be Star Trek is still one of those things that confuses me to no end.

But Into Darkness is the single worst written Star Trek story ever.

Hahaha...oh, wait, you're serious?

Yeah, I'm sorry, as long as "Spock's Brain," "Profit and Lace," "Rascals" among a long list exist Into Darkness doesn't cracked the top 50 for me.

Why they bothered to steal from TWOK is beyond me.

Seriously? Star Trek films have been stealing from TWOK since First Contact. This is not new with Trek films. TWOK is considered the greatest Trek film of all time and Khan the greatest villain. The writers wanted Khan back as soon as possible.

Now, the reactor scene will be mixed for everybody, but I had no issues right up until the Khan scream. Which, is like 2 seconds so I give it a pass.

But, TWOK's shadow is quite long and people insist on comparing it and keeping wanting to capture their "Khan" moment in the Star Trek world. So, yeah, why bother stealing from TWOK? Because its been lauded by fandom for the last several decades and treated as a god amongst Trek fandom.

 

[yotsuya]

I think it would have been simpler if it just turned out that Section 31 had been secretly dabbling in genetically augmented humans, perhaps continuing off from Aurik Soong's research.

It's hard for me to pick out a least favorite movie.
Into Darkness annoys me the most but it's got enough moments that work for me that I can still rewatch it.
The Motionless Picture is the one that I watch the least.
The Final Frontier is underrated. It does the best job of taking advantage of the immense chemistry between Kirk, Spock, & McCoy. Most movies either give us Kirk & Spock or Kirk & McCoy but rarely to we get so much of all 3 at once.
Insurrection & Nemesis are lame but I have such affection for that cast and that era of the franchise.
Generations is actually one of the better films. It hits a few sour notes here & there but I think Soran is one of the better villains. At least he's motivated by something other than revenge.

Soran was a good villain, but his villainy is ruined by Lursa and B'Etor. They were okay TV villains, but they just derailed the film for me. When they enter the picture the film turns to crap. I just can't watch it. At least not very often.

 

[yotsuya]

*looks at all the TOS and TNG films* Seriously? What is a Trek film "supposed" to be? There is so much variety to be had in the Trek story universe that declaring something is not "supposed" to be Star Trek is still one of those things that confuses me to no end.

Hahaha...oh, wait, you're serious?

Yeah, I'm sorry, as long as "Spock's Brain," "Profit and Lace," "Rascals" among a long list exist Into Darkness doesn't cracked the top 50 for me.

Seriously? Star Trek films have been stealing from TWOK since First Contact. This is not new with Trek films. TWOK is considered the greatest Trek film of all time and Khan the greatest villain. The writers wanted Khan back as soon as possible.

Now, the reactor scene will be mixed for everybody, but I had no issues right up until the Khan scream. Which, is like 2 seconds so I give it a pass.

But, TWOK's shadow is quite long and people insist on comparing it and keeping wanting to capture their "Khan" moment in the Star Trek world. So, yeah, why bother stealing from TWOK? Because its been lauded by fandom for the last several decades and treated as a god amongst Trek fandom.

I consider every episode and film of TOS and TNG to be better than Into Darkness. Even the Animated Series. Yes, I hate it that much. Worst Star Trek production I've ever seen and the 2009 film isn't a whole lot better. Those guys can't write, especially for Trek. It was fine as a Hollywood SF action film, but it just wasn't up to Star Trek quality, even the bad side. Give me Spock's Brain any day over Into Darkness. It is at least enjoyable to watch. I didn't enjoy ID at all. I never intend to watch it again, same with the 2009 film. Both left out the Star Trek part from the story. ID left out any semblance of quality writing. Sure it was filled with great cinematography and action, but not much else. Even the Bond films have better writing and they are almost pure action with very little substance.

 

[fireproof78]

I consider every episode and film of TOS and TNG to be better than Into Darkness. Even the Animated Series. Yes, I hate it that much. Worst Star Trek production I've ever seen and the 2009 film isn't a whole lot better. Those guys can't write, especially for Trek. It was fine as a Hollywood SF action film, but it just wasn't up to Star Trek quality, even the bad side. Give me Spock's Brain any day over Into Darkness. It is at least enjoyable to watch. I didn't enjoy ID at all. I never intend to watch it again, same with the 2009 film. Both left out the Star Trek part from the story. ID left out any semblance of quality writing. Sure it was filled with great cinematography and action, but not much else. Even the Bond films have better writing and they are almost pure action with very little substance.

Wow, that's some deep hate. Well, I wish I could get it but I simply cannot. Give me Kirk's journey in ID over many episodes.

 

[publiusr]

I liked —Into Darkness better than many.
FF was the worst

Beyond had a 1950s-ish feel to it planetside what with the spiral spires of the bees

 

[Khan 2.0]

imo ID was like the T2 of the Trek movies .. bigger, louder, and kind of retred of the previous film (another khan like villain..literally, Pike in peril, space suit sequence, Enterprise rises, attack on earth finale) .. ultimately a big 200m grandiose space action movie for the mass Transformer/Marvel/Fast loving audience who most likely hadn't seen TWOK (which is now like the original Shakespearean version)

Then Beyond maybe felt abit like the T3 of the 3 films (falling into that 3rd movie trap that has befell many a franchise - Alien, Mad Max, Superman, Star Wars, Spiderman, Xmen etc)

 

[yotsuya]

imo ID was like the T2 of the Trek movies .. bigger, louder, and kind of retred of the previous film (another khan like villain..literally, Pike in peril, space suit sequence, Enterprise rises, attack on earth finale) .. ultimately a big 200m grandiose space action movie for the mass Transformer/Marvel/Fast loving audience who most likely hadn't seen TWOK (which is now like the original Shakespearean version)

Then Beyond maybe felt abit like the T3 of the 3 films (falling into that 3rd movie trap that has befell many a franchise - Alien, Mad Max, Superman, Star Wars, Spiderman, Xmen etc)

I kind of agree. I think that the 2009 movie and ID were off formula, more geared to a different audience and Beyond was back to formula (for me making it much better movie), but not quite up to the great Trek films of the past.

 

[Maurice]

Beyond was a nothingburger, hold the everything.

 

[Isaac Lawrence]

...I think that the 2009 movie and ID were off formula, more geared to a different audience and Beyond was back to formula (for me making it much better movie)...

I would agree with this.

I really enjoyed Star Trek '09 and Into Darkness because they felt like cool ass Star Trek movies, and unlike any Star Trek movie before them. Of course, I assume that's what they were going for and they achieved it. Beyond felt too much like the Star Trek movies of the past that I had no desire to see. And again with this I assume that was the goal that they were after and they achieved this as well.

I wonder does Paramount want to make Star Trek movies that make $700 million, $800 million, one billion dollars? I imagine they do because: money. Of course, it's going to be a few years before anyone does that again, I say maybe around 2023 or 2024.

Anyway, assuming they do want Star Trek to do billion dollar box office numbers I'm not sure you can do it without rebooting everything. Of which I'm perfectly fine with, naturally, otherwise I wouldn't have mentioned it. Some no doubt wouldn't want to go that route.

If they want to go with movies with smaller budgets, as I've seen people mention before, budgets of $100 to $150 million dollars, then I would think it would be better to just put that into a TV series and get a 10 or 12 $10-million dollar per-episode TV show going. Which it seems like that's kind of what they're doing now.

 

[johnjm22]

Into Darkness is one of the few movies I've ever walked out of the theater on. I absolutely HATED everything about it.

I often hear people say it was good minus the "Khaaaaaaan" stuff towards the end, but I walked out on the film half way through. Couldn't stand it.

In fact, the reason I'm on TrekBBS at all is because of STID. After I saw the film I wanted to bitch about it somewhere. Imagine my horror when I found out people around here actually liked the movie.

 

[fireproof78]

In fact, the reason I'm on TrekBBS at all is because of STID. After I saw the film I wanted to bitch about it somewhere. Imagine my horror when I found out people around here actually liked the movie.

While I can't imagine the horror I have to laugh because I'm here because of ST ID as well. I was on another Trek board and after 09 and ID came out the environment became so toxic that the films couldn't be discussed without insult. I get that not everyone is going to like all Trek but it was disgusting the way people interacted with one another.

I came here to at least have a more civil discussion regarding Trek. So far, it's OK.

IDIC: not just for selling merchandise anymore.

 

[yotsuya]

I prefer to keep things civil. With any item, some will love it and some will hate it. We can disagree and not make it personal. But I truly feel that 2009 and ID are the worst Star Trek films ever. I know some like them but I can never agree. I feel that some of the aspects are just very off brand. I feel that a good Star Trek movie can be made and make money. After Star Trek II, I think trek fell into a trap. They weren't invested in growing the audience. The studio was, but the writers weren't. There has to be a way to be true to Star Trek AND tell a multi movie story where each one is complete and builds on the previous ones. There has to be a way to reach out and grab the interest of the general movie going audience. Something about the 2009 film was right. It was off brand but it wasn't totally horrible. I think Simon Pegg fixed the issues, but Beyond needed something else. It was good Star Trek, but it was missing something epic. Films should not be like TV epsidodes. They should be epic, and that aspect was missing. But that is about all the 2009 and ID did have. Someone needs to sit down and watch all 79 original episodes and the previous movies and see what worked and what didn't and what the brand is supposed to be and how to use that brand to tell summer or winter blockbuster stories. I think Pegg could do it with the right writing partner and director.