Trek series from TNG on always start out being about exploration and idealism, but viewers hate that stuff and from the 2nd or 3rd season on the producers give up and dutifully dish out the violence and war. Yes I am generalizing, yes there are exceptions, but search your feelings, you know it to be true. Wrath of…

Oh man, I’ve forgotten a lot of the Trek-related drama from back in the day, but Ron Moore definitely got his share of fan hate for DS9, because as I recall it wasn’t “Star Trek” enough — too much war stuff, not enough exploration. This is what drives me crazy about Trek fans, they’re constantly griping about the…

Exactly. Star Trek under Rick Berman was mostly terrible. TNG had maybe a handful of really good episodes per season. DS9 was pretty awesome once the Dominion War got going, but still uneven to the end. Voyager was mostly ugh. I think Star Trek has mostly survived over the years because of its compelling premise and…

This was awesome.

Yeah, whatever moral quandary the game attempts to pose to the player is invalidated by the fact that you are not allowed to make rational choices. The airport scenario is ultimately a cheat, because you are still just on rails the whole time. You have no real agency and no influence on events.

Haha yeah, when this mission started the first thing I did was try to shoot Makarov. When of course that didn’t work, that’s when I disengaged from the whole thing, because ultimately whatever moral dilemma they’re trying to pose is bullshit. You’re not a genuine presence in the mission because ultimately you’re still…

This is best answer

Yup, I’m late to the table with that one. I was responding to a much earlier comment. I’ll see myself out.

Good point. I’d have to agree that a major problem with Star Trek was that Abrams just kept turning everything to 11 as if hoping frenetic visuals would distract from the lack of real urgency.

NO!

I’ve always wondered why you call yourself Angrier Geek, when you are clearly the Angriest Geek!*

Gotta say, I would take two straight hours of lens flare if it could burn out the image of Patrick Stewart in that ridiculous dune buggy in Nemesis.

But what about the themes in the reboot about Kirk’s emotional trauma over his father’s death, and Spock coming to terms with his emotional side? I mean even if it didn’t outweigh the negatives for you, it’s simply untrue that the film had nothing beyond action.

My view of Trek fans has always been that most of them are confused about what they actually want. It’s always this “Star Trek is about exploration!” complaint, but what are the fan favorite films? Wrath of Khan, First Contact — the ones that are just straight up warfare. Fans loved the Borg war episodes of TNG and…

Please make a serious case that Insurrection and Nemesis were better films than Star Trek (2009). I’ve had a rather dreary day and could use some giggles.

You guys are bad and should feel bad.

I guess I would argue that Star Trek (2009) stands up pretty well when you hold it up against the previous couple of Trek flicks. I never bought the “NuTrek desecrated the franchise!” complaint, because the fact is that Insurrection and Nemesis had already done a pretty thorough job of that. Kind of like with Star…

Well, Star Trek: Insurrection and Nemesis were so spectacularly awesome, it’s easy to see why Trek fans were so spoiled.

My regret about Old Star Trek is that the opportunities for good Trek films during that time were kind of squandered. Based on the cast members’ memoirs, it’s clear that the studio didn’t take the franchise seriously and weren’t really committed to making great films.

Personally, I loved the first Star Trek, but I see what you mean. It felt like J.J. Abrams really wanted to make a Star Wars movie, so he basically just made Star Wars with a Star Trek skin. Kirk suddenly became Luke Skywalker...the plot was more space opera than science fiction. So yeah, it’s probably better for Star…