By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Veknoid_Outcast on 19 July 2016
Edit Thread
Wright said:
Veknoid_Outcast said:

My problem with the new Trek movies are that they move away from the legacy of the shows AND they're not very good. For me it's the worst possible outcome. 

 

J.J. purposedly created the time-travel rift at the first movie to basically not mess up with the established canon and at the same time do his own thing. Looking at J.J.'s Star Trek movies trying to adhere them to the franchise's legacy is a mistake. Those are movies that are meant to be seen by themselves.

As a trekkie myself, I do love them, and I don't really agree about them not being very good. I've enjoyed them, and I don't find them to be poor quality or badly scripted movies.

The 2009 movie was OK. Into Darkness was poor, I thought. Beyond looks to be the weakest of the three.

Why couldn't Abrams create a new sci-fi property if he wanted to make a space opera? Or just wait for Star Wars, a series more tailored to his skills as a director? Why turn Star Trek upside down?

As for Abrams trying to respect the origins and identity of Star Trek, I see no sign of that, time travel mechanic included. Not only are the characters strange - Spock, a half Vulcan, flies off the handle at any perceived slight - but the story doesn't make sense. A Starfleet dropout promoted to captain the Federation flagship? And if Abrams just wanted to do his own thing why did he essentially remake Wrath of Khan in Into Darkness?