• grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I hated the 2009 movie and Into Darkness, but Beyond was okay-ish.

    (Apparently unlike you, I care about ridiculous plot holes so big they destroy the entire premise of Star Trek – after all, (a) how is Starfleet anything but a farce if a mutinous cadet can be promoted straight to captain, (b) what’s the point of starships if you can just beam between star systems, and (c) what’s the point of any dramatic conflict if you can fuckin’ cure death?!)

    • MelodiousFunk@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      (a) how is Starfleet anything but a farce if a mutinous cadet can be promoted straight to captain

      Pike tagging Kirk like that jolted me right out of the first movie. Just… no. I still found it enjoyable overall, but the contrivances really detracted from the experience.

    • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      what’s the point of any dramatic conflict if you can fuckin’ cure death?!)

      To be fair, Into Darkness isn’t the only Trek thing to have that problem. Lower Decks even makes the relative ease with which main characters return from the dead a plot point.

    • accideath@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      I agree the films aren’t good trek but they’re still a fun watch, imo, if you keep them in context. If start trek was an action franchise, they’d be presentable outings.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        They’re fairly good Star Wars movies wearing Star Trek cosplay. If they weren’t called Star Trek then people wouldn’t have an issue with them. The problem is they are attached to a series about asking questions and looking into humanity, not action.