The Force Awakens vs Star Trek Into The Darkness

I'm one of those star trek fans that loved Star Trek the motion picture. Just the awe of dealing with the unknown alone got my blood pumping. I would love to see a Star trek film where they are exploring in deep space and they find an alien race that is like a prometheus/V'ger/Reapers hybrid or something like that. If they wanted to do a shoot em up movie they could do a Klingon-Federation war movie. My point is there are so many other things they could have done then bastardize the Wrath of Khan.

I would also like it if they moved back to the prime timeline and stopped making jj verse movies.

 

Thank you for stating that, it is basically what i stated and i have stated that JJ basically bastardized Startrek the Wraith of Khan as you state it. People just dont understand that. Alot of the TOS/TNG movies are a hit and miss, i wasn't that big of a TOS fan to begin with but over time i became more appreciated of them.

I dont see that happening with going back to the prime timeline, only the TV show that is allegedly coming out in Jan of 2017 will NOT follow JJ Universe.

Then we see the new Trailer for Startrek Beyond, OMG

 

Ridley Scott's work has been getting progressively worse these past 15 years, with a few exceptions...

And no, Into Darkness was more a "remake" than a "reboot." They're not the same.

 

Why did you bother to see the film? You seem to have been down on it eve

You don't "reboot" a single film, you reboot a series/saga/etc... You remake, rip off, copy, etc a single film.

 

So true.

But Into Darkness vs TFA... ID feels a bit like Fast Food- it was fun to watch, entertaining but still I let me unsatisfied. The Characters were fun but there was no depth! I wasn' t moved by their story. JJ always said he is no Star Trek Fanboy- and it totally shows! I loved Alias, JJ was able to make you roote and care for every single character, something Star Trek Into Darkness did not deliver.

 

I think there's quite a lot of people who went to TFA and forgot about it soon after and went to see any ST film and immediately after wanted to watch it again. I don't get this SW-ST war. Why so many people want to "prove" that one movie is better than the other (suprisingly - the better is of course this he likes more ;] )? I definately like SW more, but I enjoy ST too (I'm actually not hyped at all at newest ST film, but two previous were quite fun and TNG and Voyager were great too).

 

You missed it. Like the OT it works on many levels. The PT had so much they were trying to do that everyone knew they were trying to make it work on so many levels. This was a great fun movie that has a tremendous amount of meaning and depth to its symbolism and storytelling.

One of the few real flaws that I felt in the film is I knew there was more to the story to come. It felt like there was more needed for the story to tell. In the OT and even in the PT the movies were part of a Saga but they were self contained. This felt like a set up.

 

I loved Star Trek ITD and came out of it really pumped while I came out bummed and bothered by TFA so for me Trek won this round. This is really a bummer for me though cause it really hurts me that JJ can make such cool Trek movies but he just gave us fan service and eye candy when it came to SW. If JJ would have just let his imagination gone wild in SW and would have given us bold new things instead of just a rehash, I'm pretty sure that his SW movie would have been really awesome.

 

They purposely played it safe .

 

I would also like to ask a question to many of you fans that think that TFA is much better than ST ITD and this is a real question without any intent of bashing TFA. My question is, how do you guys base your standards when you rate TFA and compare it to other movies? As I said, this has nothing to do with my dislike of TFA but with the fact that I find it hard to rate TFA as it was just a rehash of ANH. If the movie had been an original movie then I could gladly rate it against the other six SW movies but how can many of you see it as an incredibly awesome movie when it's almost an exact duplicate of something we already saw? How then can you compare it to a movie like Blade Runner for example and pic which one was the best when that choice would seem a bit unfair as one is an original movie and the other is copied from another movie?

Suppose Episode 8 is a carbon copy of TESB, can fans then really rate this movie as the best SW movie ever? Mostly every fan tends to think that TESB is the best of the OT movies so if this new movie is just a copy, is it fair to say that it is way better than ANH and ROTJ? How can you go wrong on a movie when you copy one of the greats? Avatar is the most highest grossing movie of all time and so many people loved it so if a director comes and carbon copies said movie and instead of the Na'vi he uses the Twi'Leks and instead of planet Pandora he uses Felucia, is this enough to say that this movie rocks so hard that it's better than all 7 SW movies together? How can we rate this movie this way when it only stole a plot from a previous movie and only added some cool new effects?

It is because of this that I really find it hard to rate TFA against other movies. As I said before, it has nothing to do if I liked the movie or not but the fact that many people rate this movie so high on their list when the movie really didn't have anything new to offer.

 

Oh man you clearly were not there to watch a great movie. Star Trek played it's part but the 2009 reboot was better.

 

Yeah it felt more original than most sci fi movies even though it already had a past history .

 

Don't get me wrong the new cast was great.

 

Its hard for people to separate their love for the saga's films and judging a film on its own by just 'filmmaking' standards. For example, I agree ROTS is the best of the prequels, but I also find it the most disappointing because of how bad Anakin's turn to the dark side was handled - which should be the lynchpin of the PT. But I also have trouble putting TPM above ROTS because while it works on a basic level (as a children's space opera) it is the most useless to the saga. And although I fully agree with ROTJ having some of the greatest moments in the OT, I can't rate it ahead of TFA - especially the Special Edition.

Originality is overrated. We criticize Cameron for Avatar being Dances With Wolves mixed with Ferngully, but we ignore that ANH is Hidden Fortress mixed with Flash Gordon/Buck Rogers/Forbidden Planet. It's not wholly 'original', and its not really meant to be - its a typical hero's journey like Braveheart, Gladiator, Iron Man, Man of Steel, etc. ROTJ isn't that original - start off on a sand planet, escape from the bad guy, meet up with the Rebellion, evade Imperial forces in a chase scene (ANH's TIE attack on the Falcon = Speederbike chase on Endor), and attack a Death Star.

Blade Runner is decently original as far as its sci-fi premise, but its also a noir like any other film with Humphrey Bogart. Blade Runner is also, IMO, overrated, but that's an interesting conversation because of its visual presentation, which set a nice precedent for other films to work off of (but SW did too).

The only big mistake of TFA is another Big Round Destructive Laser Thing - because it was already re-used by Lucas once, then referenced visually again in TPM with the Trade Federation Control Ship (but George did add a land assault and a bit of a droid-control sci-fi trope). But once you really reference TPM, its similar to ANH as well, but added some political intrigue and the Jedi Council's uselessness to the saga. TFA did what it needed to do - add new characters, maybe missing another layer to the Force or galactic state of affairs (although there's almost enough there, needed another scene to better explain - like the Imperial roundtable scene in ANH).

 

Both movies are good but I have to say that I liked Star Trek better as TFA was just to close to ANH for my tastes.

 

Troll thread is trolling.