'Star Trek Beyond' - July 22, 2016

[i007spectre]

All I can hope is that since we are now on the five year mission the next film will take place completely on alien worlds. And this comes from a fan of Trek old and new.

[AmrlKJaneway]

Originally Posted by poke smot

i'm glad someone else will take over Trek. I want to keep star trek and star wars separate. could you imagine: Star Trek Wars.

Zap Brannigan - "You mean the vast migration of Star Wars fans?"
Nichelle Nichols - "No, that was the Star Wars Trek."

[AmrlKJaneway]

Originally Posted by i007spectre

All I can hope is that since we are now on the five year mission the next film will take place completely on alien worlds. And this comes from a fan of Trek old and new.

Sick of Earth? Me too...

In fiction and reality...

[psychomugs]

Originally Posted by wormraper

you just proved my point. just because something has a bulk of people liking it doesn't mean it's good. taste and quality aren't always synonomous. it just means that 78% of the critics and 82% of people will eat whatever slop is shoveled down their throats... again, my Justin Bieber example

90% of the people out there are ignorant and barely deserving of breath let alone know how to make a good movie decisions, after decades of being fed slop that's all they like

You can't disregard the correlation between the two; things become popular because a lot of people enjoy it, and creating something that entertains a large mass of other people is undeniably a figure of merit for many different kinds of 'art.'

[RyanPom]

Originally Posted by Shanderson88

Oh good, it's a "my opinion is better than your opinion because I am so smart" person. Awesome.

It's another person who thinks their opinions are facts.

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by RyanPom

It's another person who thinks their opinions are facts.

Backing up an argument with actual facts like critical reviews and audience reaction is actually weighting your argument.

That's better than insulting moviegoers and saying they don't deserve to breathe and that they're wrong for liking things, and that it's all garbage.

Which argument sounds thought out and level headed? Hard to argue with that, even if the same group keeps trying to say otherwise...

I'm not saying the movies are the best ever made, but they're also far from the train wrecks some users here are making them out to be. I don't know what's happened on this site lately, but the amount of negativity has been insane around here...

[RyanPom]

Originally Posted by Walts Ghost

Backing up an argument with actual facts like critical reviews and audience reaction is actually weighting your argument.

That's better than insulting moviegoers and saying they don't deserve to breathe and that they're wrong for liking things, and that it's all garbage.

Which argument sounds thought out and level headed? Hard to argue with that, even if the same group keeps trying to say otherwise...

I'm not saying the movies are the best ever made, but they're also far from the train wrecks some users here are making them out to be. I don't know what's happened on this site lately, but the amount of negativity has been insane lately...

Oh, I agree 100 percent. It reminds me of the Star Trek V days.

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by RyanPom

Oh, I agree 100 percent. It reminds me of the Star Trek V days.

Glad to see I'm not alone. Thanks, Ryan.

[poke smot]

don't get me wrong...I love both of the new treks. I just don't want star wars to have the same look. I have liked everything JJ has done. I hope abrams creates a bit of a different style for SW.

[Infernal King]

While wormraper is going hilariously overboard with his comments, I don't see much from the Abrams movies' fans in this thread except "those who didn't like them are in the minority so clearly these are objectively good movies", which is just as bad.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by Gate

While wormraper is going hilariously overboard with his comments, I don't see much from the Abrams movies' fans in this thread except "those who didn't like them are in the minority so clearly these are objectively good movies", which is just as bad.

lol, it was meant to be overboard on purpose. I didn't mind the movie so much. it was to prove a point that just because a lot of people LIKE something doesn't mean it's good. people can LIKE something, yet it still be horrible. Romans loved the gladitorial arena, but it doesn't mean it was a good form of entertainment, it only proved that people liked it. a movie can be torn apart on technical merits such as plot structure, creativity, continuity etc.... and unfortunately STID is just mediocre in that regards.

so the argument of "look how much it made!!!" or "look how many critics like it" is worthless for determining how good a movie was


remember, 40,000 frenchman can't be wrong

[psychomugs]

If you want to talk 'technical merit,' which sounds more like audio and visual presentation, both Star Trek movies are really good.

You can't use proof by contradiction to imply that a large portion of the general public enjoying something means that it's bad. Your Roman "example" is a ridiculous exaggeration of whatever you're trying to say, and your use of it as an example indicates your acknowledgement of a relationship between public favor and some measure of "good," yet you say that any attempts made by people with a view opposing yours are "worthless" You probably should have stuck to using Bieber as an exemplar than moving onto gladiatorial combat

[L-Rouge]

Originally Posted by wormraper

lol, it was meant to be overboard on purpose. I didn't mind the movie so much. it was to prove a point that just because a lot of people LIKE something doesn't mean it's good. people can LIKE something, yet it still be horrible. Romans loved the gladitorial arena, but it doesn't mean it was a good form of entertainment, it only proved that people liked it. a movie can be torn apart on technical merits such as plot structure, creativity, continuity etc.... and unfortunately STID is just mediocre in that regards.

so the argument of "look how much it made!!!" or "look how many critics like it" is worthless for determining how good a movie was


remember, 40,000 frenchman can't be wrong

there is an opposite of course, I loved Oblivion but RT has that on 54% haha. backing your statement in some respects.

[chillwill92]

Originally Posted by cinemaphile

Correction: they are THE two best Star Trek films out of the 12 that have been made. ... by a HUGE margin.

Eh, I'd probably put Wrath of Khan and Undiscovered Country over them, but among the Trek films released in the last two decades, they essentially own the top.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by L-Rouge

there is an opposite of course, I loved Oblivion but RT has that on 54% haha. backing your statement in some respects.

oh I agree. it's a matter of TASTE... not quality there.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by psychomugs

If you want to talk 'technical merit,' which sounds more like audio and visual presentation, both Star Trek movies are really good.

You can't use proof by contradiction to imply that a large portion of the general public enjoying something means that it's bad. Your Roman "example" is a ridiculous exaggeration of whatever you're trying to say, and your use of it as an example indicates your acknowledgement of a relationship between public favor and some measure of "good," yet you say that any attempts made by people with a view opposing yours are "worthless" You probably should have stuck to using Bieber as an exemplar than moving onto gladiatorial combat

good is measured empirically. with set criteria on writing, acting, directing etc.

what people like is TASTE. you can acquire a taste for bad things, or good things, or mediocre things. what you LIKE doesn't make something good. that is done with statistics and solid criteria to compare against.

[GC Riot]

Originally Posted by AmrlKJaneway

Zap Brannigan - "You mean the vast migration of Star Wars fans?"
Nichelle Nichols - "No, that was the Star Wars Trek."

Haha, speaking of Zapp, and mixing and matching between films, I find one of his quotes quite fitting here...

If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate. - YouTube

[JimShaw]

m

[psychomugs]

Originally Posted by wormraper

good is measured empirically. with set criteria on writing, acting, directing etc.

what people like is TASTE. you can acquire a taste for bad things, or good things, or mediocre things. what you LIKE doesn't make something good. that is done with statistics and solid criteria to compare against.

Whatever qualms people have with this movie are largely artistic. Technically, it's really well done. Acting is good, Abrams is one of the better directors right now (imo), and whatever else you want brought up is done well. Much of the derision comes from the writing.

[GreenGaijin]

Originally Posted by i007spectre

All I can hope is that since we are now on the five year mission the next film will take place completely on alien worlds. And this comes from a fan of Trek old and new.

I'm hoping for that as well. I think everybody (fans and the people working on the next one) is expecting and wanting to have a fresh original story. And yes, no Earth.

Whatever it is though, I bet my money that it will strongly involve Klingons.

Main villains in first movie - Romulans.
Main villians in second movie - Humans.
Possible main villains in third movie - Klingons.