4 ms·

They were fine action films, but they totally lacked the heart and soul of the tv series, particularly the tv series' focus on exploration and diplomacy and res

They were fine action films, but they totally lacked the heart and soul of the tv series, particularly the tv series' focus on exploration and diplomacy and resolving conflicts without violence. Granted, this has often been the case with Star Trek films (First Contact was sort of an action movie for example).

Someone1234 11y ago
> Granted, this has often been the case with Star Trek films (First Contact was sort of an action movie for example). This is a point Trek fans rarely acknowledge. Star Trek the TV show is often more thoughtful and deals with social commentary well. However Star Trek movies rarely are. Let's look at the classic Star Trek movies: Wrath of Khan, Search for Spock, and The Undiscovered Country are all action films. The Voyage Home is a comedy. Which leaves just two: The Motion Picture and The Final Frontier which both reviewers and audience alike pan for being some of the worst classic Trek films. Next Gen isn't much better: Generations, First Contact, and Nemesis are all action films and Insurrection is extremely borderline. So when people say "JJ Abrams ruins Star Trek by producing an action-adventure" they're really ignoring the history of Star Trek films which are full of only that.
- ConceptJunkie 11y ago
  I thought "First Contact" was not a very good Trek movie. It always struck me as a movie that was made from a non-Star Trek script that was retroactively made into a Star Trek script. I also thought Captain Picard's behavior was wildly inconsistent with how he was portrayed in the show... not where he went all "Goodfellas" on the Borg in the holodeck, that was a fine character moment, but when he "mercy killed" one of his crew. This was something the TV Picard would never have done. He would have risked his life and the whole ship to save that one crewman and not just given up so early one... after all, he was dragged off and assimilated himself, but he was rescued and recovered. "First Contact" also played fast and loose with established canon a lot more than any other movie had done. I didn't care for the portrayal of Cochrane as a drunk loser (although this has no bearing on James Cromwell's performance... he is always great). There's nothing wrong with action in Trek... it's built into the concept, but the action was always less important than the Big Ideas... at least until some of the movies, and especially the vapid JJTrek reboots came along.
serge2k 11y ago
First contact was a story people wanted to see and was well done. Into darkness was a shallow action movie that tries to bludgeon the audience with its themes about the military then devolves into a shitty ripoff of a classic moment from a different movie. I don't actually hate into darkness, but tossing it and first contact into the same bucket as action movies is ridiculous.

Someone1234 11y ago

> Granted, this has often been the case with Star Trek films (First Contact was sort of an action movie for example). This is a point Trek fans rarely acknowledge. Star Trek the TV show is often more thoughtful and deals with social commentary well. However Star Trek movies rarely are. Let's look at the classic Star Trek movies: Wrath of Khan, Search for Spock, and The Undiscovered Country are all action films. The Voyage Home is a comedy. Which leaves just two: The Motion Picture and The Final Frontier which both reviewers and audience alike pan for being some of the worst classic Trek films. Next Gen isn't much better: Generations, First Contact, and Nemesis are all action films and Insurrection is extremely borderline. So when people say "JJ Abrams ruins Star Trek by producing an action-adventure" they're really ignoring the history of Star Trek films which are full of only that.

ConceptJunkie 11y ago
I thought "First Contact" was not a very good Trek movie. It always struck me as a movie that was made from a non-Star Trek script that was retroactively made into a Star Trek script. I also thought Captain Picard's behavior was wildly inconsistent with how he was portrayed in the show... not where he went all "Goodfellas" on the Borg in the holodeck, that was a fine character moment, but when he "mercy killed" one of his crew. This was something the TV Picard would never have done. He would have risked his life and the whole ship to save that one crewman and not just given up so early one... after all, he was dragged off and assimilated himself, but he was rescued and recovered. "First Contact" also played fast and loose with established canon a lot more than any other movie had done. I didn't care for the portrayal of Cochrane as a drunk loser (although this has no bearing on James Cromwell's performance... he is always great). There's nothing wrong with action in Trek... it's built into the concept, but the action was always less important than the Big Ideas... at least until some of the movies, and especially the vapid JJTrek reboots came along.

serge2k 11y ago

First contact was a story people wanted to see and was well done. Into darkness was a shallow action movie that tries to bludgeon the audience with its themes about the military then devolves into a shitty ripoff of a classic moment from a different movie. I don't actually hate into darkness, but tossing it and first contact into the same bucket as action movies is ridiculous.