avclub-4b287f908bc71183ecd837b69d417c1a--disqus
Cattivo
avclub-4b287f908bc71183ecd837b69d417c1a--disqus

I think all but Generations had great titles.  The last two just didn't live up to them.

Yeah, it's primary problem is pacing (unlike FC, ironically enough).  While the transportation accident and wormhole/torpedo scenes had plot reasons (the need for spock as a new science officer/demonstrating that Decker knows more about the ship than Kirk now, respectively), they could have easily been cut entirely

Well, I think trek's popularity peaked in 96.

Opinions seem to vary on the movie.  Many old school trekkers are devoted to it.  The ending is very good, I just can't sit through the rest of the movie to get to it anymore.  I remember renting the director's cut to see if it was more tolerable and I ended up turning it off halfway through.  I might have even

While I liked the touch of zombie-ism, (especially because it makes the movie more accessible to non-trekkies) I don't think full out zombies as the villain would have worked for trek & its style in a movie.  After Khan, it seems the audience, or the prevailing consensus, expects a singular villain to personify the

It's definitely a useful solution to my tendency to write run-on sentences.

Strangely, while I know it is some stupid action film one-liner, I can't help myself from liking it.  Part of it was probably because I like Worf so much….and action fliks…

That post by me was a playful nod to your comments about me last week, Mark.

It doesn't have to do with what you predicted because I actually believe that most critiques of FC are valid, I just don't think they are enough to detract from it being a good, enjoyable film.  If you read any of my other comments this week, you will see how I say plotholes, retcons & continuity errors are forgivable

I still agree with your overall point JJ :)

I'm talking about you individually Mark, not FC-haters in general.  This stretches on beyond just this movie, but trek as a whole. It's a pattern of behavior Epon & I have noticed and are commenting on.

Don't worry Epon, I agree with you! ;)

Stuart Baird didn't have any knowledge of trek, though, and that's what the cast complained about afterward.  Do you mean the screenwriter, John Logan?  Because he was a huge fan and wrote that big mess of a script.

Yep, it certainly left me wanting more, which is a good thing.

Exactly.  Boring too.  We get the point after 10 seconds.  Since when is the point of trek visual stimulation?

I'm beginning to wonder why he even watches trek.  90% of the time here, all he does is put down the episodes/movies.

It would have been hard for them to rationalize not having a TNG borg movie to the fans.

A -

Exactly, it had to be adapted for the medium.  The Borg needed a face for the movie.

Same here.  All my grad papers were full of them as a result.