Now that the dust has settled

>>84175337
Star Wars with a Star Trek skin

First movie is really fun, the deleted scenes really should have been kept in there though

The second is one of the very worst recent blockbusters, the third one was mediocre. The second one is bad enough that it casts a shadow over my ability to enjoy the first one.

File: well?.jpg (312KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 1440x1080px

>>84175405
The second one was better than the third in my opinion. The third looked like a made for tv movie and the script and plot holes matched that.

I still really like the casting. I was very surprised they pulled that off.

I enjoyed the second, but I've never watched to Khan movie so I wasn't triggered by a reference

>>84175337
getting it wrong

>>84175337
They're fun, but don't live up to the Trek legacy. It will forever be a shame that Benicio Del Toro pulled out of Into Darkness, to be replaced by Benevolent Cumbersnickle. The menace of Del Toro as Khan would have saved that film.

As far as a modern sci-fi franchise goes, Guardians of the Galaxy is better. Hopefully they resist shitting it up with Marvel baggage.

File: Star Trek Beyond.webm (3MB, 1912x800px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1912x800px

the best one was the on JJ didn't direct

>>84175337
I remember thinking the first one was fun. I forget the second and I didnt go to anything after that.

I love sci fi movies and the cinema but im going to the cinema less and less. Oh well.

>>84177273
I actually found the fact that 3 looked like a tv episode kind of charming. It felt more Star Treky to me than the previous two attempts at rote blockbuster bombast & scale.

>>84177273
>>84177298
This. Into Darkness gets way too much hate considering how good the pacing, action and directing was. Head and shoulders above any of the TNG movies except First Contact.

>>84177345
To be fair, most of the post-TOS movies didn't live up to the Trek legacy.

>>84177350
Into Darkness was great because of how "great" it wasn't. Just a solid plot that didn't take any missteps until the ending

the first is still the best though, undoubtedly

I've not seen the last one, but I thought it was funny it was a black guy who blew up London in Into Darkness. Also having all the super killing machines survive is just begging for sequel to use them.

Also I don't get what old Spock is doing. How did he get there again? I thought he died in one of the films? Did he time travel or some shit that avoids that or is he some other kind of Spock? Who knows. Also, surely Old Spock told Spock to fucking kill Khan to prevent this shit from getting worse.

>>84177345

>Benevolent Cumbersnickle

Top kek

>>84177486
>Into Darkness was great
Uh huh. A real rollercoaster.
Every 60 seconds, it was another "Oh shit we're all going to die!!! Wait nevermind, we got saved by a one-in-a-million shot again."
You got completely desensitized to any sense of thrill or action. The movie was fucking terrible

>>84177582
No it wasn't.

Anything Star Trek I've watched as a kid was a cartoon on a VHS tape, so the JJ Abrams Star Trek was like a revelation to me, it was very enjoyable.

>>84177582
In this vein, when did you realise Into Darkness was shit?

For me, it was when a squad made up of a dozen warriors from the 'fierce warrior race' was defeated by a lanky 120-pound guy standing still on a raised platform.

Normie shit.

>>84177804
This. Star Trek is supposed to be comfy hot chocolate & blanket space drama goodness. Not a science-fictiony action flick for chads. These movies have no redeeming qualities other than their ability to make money.

the Khan reveal DUN DUN DUUUUN *ominous music swells* in Darkness was really stupid, it's supposed to be a dramatic moment but unless you watched older Trek is literally meaningless.

like when people tell you X thing in a movie is great, if you've read the companion novel/comic, no, you can't rely on an audience having prior knowledge of something outwith your main franchise, it's bad movie making.

>>84177922
Sorry, nerd. The world belongs to Chads now. ;^)

>>84178126
You'd have to be living under a rock to not know about Khan through cultural osmosis.

>>84177442
All they had to do was make the villain anybody else BUT Khan (Gary Seven, Gary Mitchell, etc) and it would have been a GOAT movie that people had zero problems with whatsoever.

>>84177345
Actually, fuck Del Toro. He's to likeable and charming to be coldly, psychotically intimidating the way a good Khan would be. He also comes off as way too much of a schlub to play a convincing genetic superman.

Now Javier Bardem as Khan would be utterly GOAT. He's got the menace, as well as the imposing physicality to actually look convincing in the role.

He would probably end up being to Montalban what Heath Ledger was to Jack Nicholson's joker if given that role.

>>84178126
>it's supposed to be a dramatic moment but unless you watched older Trek is literally meaningless.
What are you talking about? Why would it be meaningless if you haven't watched older Trek?

Better than original shit.

Beyond > Star Trek > Into Darkness

>>84179652
in the context of this movie he could have been anyone, calling him Khan only gives it weight if you have prior knowledge of who Khan is.

it was fanservice, basically.

File: stid-t2-34[1].jpg (272KB, 1920x800px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 1920x800px

>>84175337
They reused that top-right shot of the woman screaming stiffly like a thousands times, in every trailer, sneak peak, and piece of media leading up to the movie. It's been burned into my brain, and strangely, burned into my libido. I want her to scream at my dick without moving her body or the rest of her head. I would cum all over her wooden face.

>>84178866
>You'd have to be living under a rock to not know about Khan

But in the context of the movie it doesn't matter.

They even had a chance at redeeming it if Kirk went "that's supposed to mean something to me" after the dramatic music. Because it doesn't. He doesn't know Khan.

>>84175337

first one was good, the second and third were trash

>>84175337
The first movie was okay.
>surprisingly good casting overall
>decent music
>good way to reboot the series without fucking with the main timeline
>too much lens flare
>characters were way too young
>should have been set at least 15 years later than it was
Second movie was almost good, a couple terrible ideas and the very end made it bad.
>magic space blood
>transporting directly from Earth to Qo'noS
>reviving Kirk ten seconds after he died
>sending Uhura down to help Spock fight Khan
>writing the script so Khan is literally the good guy
The third movie had tons of plot holes and was the worst in that regard, but if the special effects had been twenty years older it would have felt just like Insurrection or Nemesis.

JJ NuTrek is shit and somehow makes most TNG movies look decent, but if the writers had been better the NuTrek movies could have been really great.