Really didn't like the new Star Trek movie

[TheyCallMePro]

Wow. I watched this movie the other day and I couldn't believe how bad it was. The actors...were just terrible. Seriously, the only noteworthy performance came from Spock, and even that was mostly from his comic composure stemming from his absolute seriousness in all situations, no matter how trivial. Really, he wasn't even that funny. And that was the only bright spot in the entire movie.

But damn guys. This movie was CHEESY. I mean the lines were just so lame. I'm not a Star Trek fan or anything, but...those actors, those lines...were just SO corny. I was bored to death the whole movie. The movie failed to build a compelling story. The lines were empty. The passion was all fake, and it felt like the whole movie was fake. The star ship battles were relatively uneventful. Stuff happened way too fast. There was absolutely nothing in the entire course of the movie that would really hook you.

Rotten Tomatoes is ridiculous. If you're not a Star Trek fan, don't see this movie. Chances are you won't like it. That is, unless you could care a less about bad acting, a poor story, and below average CGI effects.

What really bothers me is that Star Wars was made what, 40 years ago? And you would think with all the new technology, better actors, more money, etc, that they could make a better movie or franchise nowadays. But comparing this and Star Wars...or any other great Sci-fi flick is just criminal.

I give this movie a 3/10. I'm probably in the minority. I'm sure a lot of people will go see it and say that they loved, Spock, ignore the poor performances of the other actors and say that I just don't "understand" the story. Whatever. 3/10. It was bad.

[Fabbs]

Wow. I watched this movie the other day and I couldn't believe how bad it was. The actors...were just terrible.
What really bothers me is that Star Wars was made what, 40 years ago? And you would think with all the new technology, better actors,

I give this movie a 3/10. I'm probably in the minority. I'm sure a lot of people will go see it and say that they loved, Spock, ignore the poor performances of the other actors and say that I just don't "understand" the story. Whatever. 3/10. It was bad.

I also don't know why they cast the babyfaced __ genners for this new Trek.
Bones tries so hard to sound and look exactly like the original bones that he comes off as talking as tho he is recovering from a stroke.
Kirk is just too babyfaced/punk to pull off "Captain" Kirk.
Aohura meh shes okay but thats about it.
Scotty also tries soo hard to sound exactly like the old Scott. We get it, you have a Scottish accent. Cut the Groundskeeper Willie bull . Overdone.
Same with Checkofv.
The guy playing Sulu was good. He passes iimo.

[jeebus]

I haven't seen it yet but will probably watch it this weekend. My mom is a trekkie and wants to see it so I promised to go with her. I've sat through some pretty bad Star Treks(most of the odd numbered ones) so I don't think this one will be as bad as those.

[illusioNtEk]

dang i hope what you say is not true... I really loved the first one

[MannyIsGod]

It was bad ass.

[Jacob1983]

Were you hoping it was going to be Forrest Gump, The King's Speech, or Argo or something? People that have high hopes and unrealistic expectations for summer sci-fi movies are annoying. It's like when people ed about how ty the Bay Transformers were. Were you expecting an Oscar winning worth movie or something?

[HI-FI]

Were you hoping it was going to be Forrest Gump, The King's Speech, or Argo or something? People that have high hopes and unrealistic expectations for summer sci-fi movies are annoying. It's like when people ed about how ty the Bay Transformers were. Were you expecting an Oscar winning worth movie or something?

sorry Jacob but i gotta disagree with you. i actually hate most Oscar bait movies, yet am serious about cinema. there's nothing wrong with loving ty B movies or pure genre films. tbh, I grew up on Golan Globus movies and still love them. but people should expect more from popcorn flicks.

the Michael Bay Transformers are horrible because they are just bad cinema. lots of pointless noise, epileptic inducing editing, plotholes, moronic performances etc....basically just typical Bay trash for audiences that are approaching Idiocracy levels. Transformers could be so much better, even as a kid's movie, and yet Bay totally misses the point, but that's per par because he's probably the most tone deaf director I can remember.

I heard this new Star Trek is worse than the previous one. the first one was alright, but i sort of hate that they are trying to model them after Star wars when ST was always a different thing. Star Trek is more about exploring, yet they want to turn this into a hero's journey with Kirk. I hear this film even features a hilarious Khannnnnn moment from Spock.

I'm actually rewatching the original Motion Picture on BluRay. it's a very flawed movie, with way too many shots of actors reacting to things, but I still like the 2001esque tone to it.

fwiw, I saw Iron Man 3 and thought it was very good. I'm sure it could've been better, but enjoyed it and I am also a Shane Black fan.

[Durant82]

This movie seemed more interested in trying to piece together a series of clever homages with twists than actually being clever on it's own. And as good as Benedict berbatch is, casting him as *SPOILER* you know who just seemed completely pointless, other than to generate buzz for the movie. Should have just made him an original villain, or cast an indian or mexican for the role of *SPOILER* oh spoilers everyone knows it's Khan.

overall the movie is decent, but nowhere near as good as the first movie in this new series.

[HI-FI]

does the Enterprise get ed up in this movie? i sort of hate how it seems the Enterprise gets tore up, and the next film it's all patched back together and ready to take another reaming. It feels like some GM made bull tbh. I loved how the Enterprise was so spotless in part 1 (1979), then in part 2 it got ed up and by 3 they totally wrecked it. Having it get totally ed up, then rebuilt for the sequel, rinsed and repeated, is kind of ridiculous tbh. This isn't even a JJ Abrams complaint, they were doing this with the Rick berman produced movies as well. I guess they figure audiences want to see explosions.

I actually think that ST works better as a TV series than as films.

[Fabbs]

I guess they figure audiences want to see explosions.

ad nauseum

[Latarian Milton]

im kinda with my jacob on this one tbh. sci-fi movies don't often appeal to critiques, they're made to entertain the 90% of population who just watch movies for fun and to win popularity, with shallow plots and eye-shocking scenes. those movies can achieve massive box-office successes but will never be the favorites for hollywood awards imho.

[TheyCallMePro]

Well I see some of you disagree with me. The movie was just a big let down IMO. I keep waiting for the next great sci-fi flick, like Star Wars, The Matrix, Jurassic Park, etc, and this movie, like many before it, failed miserably to reach that status.

I mean like one poster said. Captain Kirk is a baby-faced kid who was only cast because of his good looks and his blue eyes. He says his lines, and you just don't believe him. A lot of the other characters are the same. Combine that with a story that's a mess and a lot of overrated action sequences...and you're left with a pretty bad movie.

But I probably shouldn't have bashed it as much as I did in my initial post. It's not that terrible. Just frustratingly mediocre and cheesy. And it bothers me when movies get great reviews as if they're the next great sci-fi flick and you go see them and they're like this.

[Jacob1983]

I like Star Trek but I prefer The Next Generation over all of them. First Contact and Generations were badass 1990s Star Trek movies. I stand by what I said about sci-fi movies especially summer sci-fi movies. You can't go in expecting a near flawless or flawless movie on them. If you are like that, you are just setting yourself up for disappointment. Sci-fi movies are there to appeal to sci-fi fans and not the American Idol crowd.

[BobaFett1]

[RandomGuy]

Wow. I watched this movie the other day and I couldn't believe how bad it was. The actors...were just terrible. Seriously, the only noteworthy performance came from Spock, and even that was mostly from his comic composure stemming from his absolute seriousness in all situations, no matter how trivial. Really, he wasn't even that funny. And that was the only bright spot in the entire movie.

But damn guys. This movie was CHEESY. I mean the lines were just so lame. I'm not a Star Trek fan or anything, but...those actors, those lines...were just SO corny. I was bored to death the whole movie. The movie failed to build a compelling story. The lines were empty. The passion was all fake, and it felt like the whole movie was fake. The star ship battles were relatively uneventful. Stuff happened way too fast. There was absolutely nothing in the entire course of the movie that would really hook you.

Rotten Tomatoes is ridiculous. If you're not a Star Trek fan, don't see this movie. Chances are you won't like it. That is, unless you could care a less about bad acting, a poor story, and below average CGI effects.

What really bothers me is that Star Wars was made what, 40 years ago? And you would think with all the new technology, better actors, more money, etc, that they could make a better movie or franchise nowadays. But comparing this and Star Wars...or any other great Sci-fi flick is just criminal.

I give this movie a 3/10. I'm probably in the minority. I'm sure a lot of people will go see it and say that they loved, Spock, ignore the poor performances of the other actors and say that I just don't "understand" the story. Whatever. 3/10. It was bad.

It was OK. I wouldn't say it was bad, but it wasn't great.

I really liked the use of the realworld fusion lab as the engine core for the Enterprise, though. I got a kick out of that.

[CuckingFunt]

I thought it was thoroughly enjoyable. Didn't work for me quite as well as the first one did, which I continue to defend as an actual good film beyond just entertaining 'splosions, but there really wasn't much of the 2+ hours that didn't entertain me. And I loved Benedict berbatch, who was a far more engaging and interesting baddie than the personality black hole that is Eric Bana.

[TheyCallMePro]

I will say that I watched the first one (the 2009 one) last night and it wasn't nearly as bad. Still thought it was a bit cheesy, and most of the actors were the same, but I thought they did an overall better job on the movie.

Still though...nothing great about it either. And it got a 97/100 on Rotten Tomatoes. I just can't understand that.

[LnGrrrR]

I thought it was thoroughly enjoyable. Didn't work for me quite as well as the first one did, which I continue to defend as an actual good film beyond just entertaining 'splosions, but there really wasn't much of the 2+ hours that didn't entertain me. And I loved Benedict berbatch, who was a far more engaging and interesting baddie than the personality black hole that is Eric Bana.

Has Eric Bana been good in anything?

I seem to remember he was ok in the Time Traveller's Wife...

[Trainwreck2100]

My only disappointment was shoving uhura into roles she was never in, in the series. Cause she's the only main skirt, and the other skirt looks 10x better.

[CuckingFunt]

Has Eric Bana been good in anything?

I seem to remember he was ok in the Time Traveller's Wife...

He was decent in Munich. And he wasn't horrible in Star Trek. Or really any other film I've seen him in. My bigger problem with him is that he is an utterly boring screen presence.

[Jacob1983]

Erica Bana was alright in Deadfall even though he's an Aussie and was trying to play a hillbilly criminal in the movie. I thought he was pretty good as Nero in Star Trek. I loved how Nero accepted defeat in that movie. He took his defeat quite well and didn't fight it kinda like Gerard Butler in Law Abiding Citizen. The Time Traveler's Wife is a sad downer movie. When you watch that, it makes you ask what was the point of it.

[lefty]

Both ST movies were absolute

[Cyrano]

OK, I admit it. I've been a Trek fan since 1966. I've seen every episode of every incarnation of the series, including the Saturday morning cartoon. I've read hundreds of novels. Attended conventions. (although I draw the line at wearing costumes).
I enjoyed the movie, but many, many things bothered me about it. (WARNING: SPOILERS)

First, WTF is up with the new uniforms? They look like grey burlap, and they're wearing HATS! Really, really stupid looking hats.

Then, Scotty quits, and Kirk makes the 17-year-old Chekov tha chief engineer. He must REALLY hate Chekov, since he orders him to change into a red shirt, even though in the next scene he advises the security detail to change OUT of the red shirts "unless you want to be a target".

Next, McCoy takes a blood sample from Khan, and very scientifically injects it into a DEAD TRIBBLE. Wait....does he have a lot of dead tribbles around, or does he just keep one in a drawer to freak out the younger female crew members ("dead tribble....I'm gonna put it ON you.."). When the tribble starts moving around, he suddenly realizes that he might be able to revive Kirk, and begins screaming that Spock better not kill Khan, because they need Khan to save Kirk. Wait just a second, doc....don't you have seventy-two more genetic supermen in the frozen food section? He even removes one of them from his cryo-tube so he can freeze Kirk....why the hasn't he checked any of the others?

Another thing.....why does the warp core need to be online in order to fire the thrusters? , they used to be able to eject the entire warp core and escape on impulse engines.

Also, Starfleet seems to have a pretty lax rank structure. Kirk goes from cadet to captain in the first movie without ever holding an intermediate rank. THen, in the second movie, he pisses off starfleet commmand and gets busted back to cadet, then promoted to commander and first officer, then reinstated as captain, all without a court martial or hearing of any kind.

[TheMACHINE]

I never watched an episode of star trek in my life and I watched part 1 last night and part2 a few hours ago. I enjoyed both movies and Into Darkness just made Ironman 3 look like The Notebook.

[jeebus]

felt like it was missing something. maybe it's because about halfway through the movie, I started comparing it a bit to Wrath of Khan and was hoping for an epic space battle(s) full of awesome quotes like in that one. Instead we got Admiral Buckaroo Banzai kicking the out of the Enterprise while the Enterprise didn't even fire a shot. I don't think they fired a shot in the whole movie, which is odd for a ST movie. the end there showed promise of a sequel but since they're starting their 5 year mission...meh.