Star Trek Beyond (2016) (1 Viewer)

[Colin Jacobson]

Not only that, it didn't even have villain.

Like hell it didn't!

 

[Bryan^H]

The near $200 mil production budgets are always a huge gamble. The movie REALLY has to do great to make a profit. I think back to the Serenity film from 2005. Yes it was over 10 years ago, but was made for $39 mil. It was the story that made it one of the best sci-fi films I have watched in a lot of years...not the FX.


I liked 'Beyond' a whole lot, but it was mainly because of the core characters, one new one(love Jayla), and look of the film.
the bad guy/revenge thing was to be expected, and that is exactly what I got. I'm thinking if it had gone outside the box a bit I would have liked it a whole lot better.

 

[Joel Fontenot]

Like hell it didn't!

I would say the villain was Bob... the guy who let the whales go early.

 

[Osato]

Is it time to start a Star Trek 4 thread???

http://trekcore.com/blog/2017/01/hemsworth-abrams-has-an-amazing-pitch-for-star-trek-4/

 

[Jeff Cooper]

Like hell it didn't!

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I would say the villain was Bob... the guy who let the whales go early.

Nah, it's Gillian. I never hated a "Trek" character more than I hated her!

 

[BobO'Link]

I no longer bother to see Star Trek films in the theater as I've been utterly disappointed with almost all of them since the TNG films started coming out. This one was no exception. I purchased the Target SE on BF (Why? Don't know as I rarely bother with "extras" or "bonus" items) and watched it last weekend for the first time.

Horrible villain, bad dialog, a open that looked more Galaxy Quest 2 than Star Trek, the wholly laughable ending segment (to save the station), a procession of set pieces that served no purpose other than to get us to the next brief and bad dialog segment/homage to "real" Trek, and more. The *best* thing I can say is it didn't offer a recycled script/villain from a TOS episode. For that one reason I rank it slightly better than the other nuTrek films - and that's not saying much.

I fully believe it you removed the Trek names/references you would have a rather bland, and generic, SF action film. Heck, it'd have made a very good Galaxy Quest 2 had they made a few *minor* changes.

I truly long for a "intelligent" Star Trek film again.

 

[Sam Favate]

Most franchise films are rather generic with a name-brand slapped on them. It's happened to the Bond series since the late 80s. I liked Beyond more than you did, but I am forced to agree the last three films have been more than a bit generic.

 

[benbess]

Last night I watched with my kids (now ages 20 and 15) the Star Trek Voyager TV movie "Scorpion." To us, it all seemed like a really good Trek movie, unlike Beyond....

 

[ChromeJob]

Last night I watched with my kids (now ages 20 and 15) the Star Trek Voyager TV movie "Scorpion." To us, it all seemed like a really good Trek movie, unlike Beyond....

As I recall it was a two-parter.

I agree with most, I finally watched Into Darkness last year and was utterly disappointed and bored (and stuff didnt even make sense). I probably wont see Beyond until it's free on streaming too. Hell, I may not watch it. It looks like more of the New Coke Trek nonsense, with a lot of fan service and self-conscious winks to Old Trek. Into Darkness pillaged TWOK, and here's Beyond replaying the destruction of the Enterprise and then getting a new one. Gee, never saw that coming.... O_o

 

[Sam Favate]

This is not good news for Star Trek (or Paramount):

Sources: Paramount's Chinese Partners Haven't Paid a Penny of Promised $1 Billion

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...havent-paid-a-penny-promised-1-billion-984679

 

[Osato]

This is not good news for Star Trek (or Paramount):

Sources: Paramount's Chinese Partners Haven't Paid a Penny of Promised $1 Billion

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...havent-paid-a-penny-promised-1-billion-984679

Ouch!!!