Star Trek Beyond

7

masamunerikuJul 28, 2016

Star Trek Beyond expands on its storytelling by making it less about space and more about planetary adventure. Rather than focusing the story around Kirk and Spock it makes an effort to bring other members of the crew into the spotlight. TheStar Trek Beyond expands on its storytelling by making it less about space and more about planetary adventure. Rather than focusing the story around Kirk and Spock it makes an effort to bring other members of the crew into the spotlight. The tone of the movie is also brighter compared to previous movies; even sometimes feeling similar to Guardians of the Galaxy.

The plot however is vague and a bit bland. The whole picture doesn't come into focus until late into the movie. The villain's motive and his development is ambiguous; I'd say the least interesting out of the three movies.

Also every found technology in the movie magically works to fit the protagonist's needs.
"Scotty can you make this work?"
"Of course! I'd just need to make some minor adjustments."
Interplanetary technology apparently is a simple matter.

Overall an enjoyable movie experience and a commendable change of direction compared to previous installments.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

7

TomxikeJul 28, 2016

I didn't know that another star trek was coming until I saw a trailer of it around 3 months ago. This one, just like what the others said, was definitely not good enough to outbeat its prequels. But there were still some good plots in it andI didn't know that another star trek was coming until I saw a trailer of it around 3 months ago. This one, just like what the others said, was definitely not good enough to outbeat its prequels. But there were still some good plots in it and so it deserved what it deserved. I was disappointed AND suprised that this sequel didn't have an emotional scene between the two Kirk/Spock unlike the first 2. These scenes was really what that hooked me into the series.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

7

dkminusJul 23, 2016

To begin with, just so you know where I'm coming from, I loved 2009's Star Trek. After seeing it, I was incredibly optimistic about the future of this franchise. Into Darkness nearly dashed that optimism. I've seen it a couple of times, and ITo begin with, just so you know where I'm coming from, I loved 2009's Star Trek. After seeing it, I was incredibly optimistic about the future of this franchise. Into Darkness nearly dashed that optimism. I've seen it a couple of times, and I just can't get into it. So, I was very reserved going into Star Trek Beyond. I'd seen only one of the trailers, and no other promotional material. I had no real expectations for it.

Star Trek Beyond is actually quite entertaining. The movie moves at a good pace, and I didn't feel like it got bogged down at any point. In fact, I wouldn't have minded if they slowed down and developed their new characters a bit. Krall never quite rises above "generic villain" status, and even Jayla, who plays well off the rest of the cast, isn't a very complex.

The returning cast are all very fun to watch. They have great on-screen chemistry, though they tend to blend together a bit. For most of the film, you could easily swap out one for another in a scene. They don't play as very unique individuals. Some of their individual arcs - where we see them struggle with who they are or what they want - are too briefly addressed to make an impact.

The action and effects were great. There were so many thrilling sequences. They didn't always make a ton of sense, but they were incredibly fun to watch. I will say, though, that there's one alien race which is entirely CG, and it's very jarring. Practical creature effects would have been better.

Overall, it was an enjoyable film. It didn't reach nearly the heights that it was capable of, but as summer blockbusters go, it was well worth seeing it in cinemas.… Expand

7 of 10 users found this helpful73

All this user's reviews

7

lucbevibrasilSep 3, 2016

Star Trek Beyond surprises. Justin Lin bears the burden left by J. J. Abrams, but it fulfills well his work, especially action scenes beautifully shot, but ends up leaving some early scenes very darkened, becoming difficult to understand whatStar Trek Beyond surprises. Justin Lin bears the burden left by J. J. Abrams, but it fulfills well his work, especially action scenes beautifully shot, but ends up leaving some early scenes very darkened, becoming difficult to understand what happens. Simon Pegg and Doug Jung's screenplay brings a simpler plot, compared to the previous films, which is an advantage. Also, the script can balance well comedy, action and drama, and avoid getting too run movie. Highlighting the excellent performances, the beautiful addition of the personage of Sofia Boutella and a convincing villain with a great performance of Idris Elba. But I don't understand why cast an actor in the level of Elba to live the character full of makeup, Which event was the highlight of the film.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

Muskrat147Aug 2, 2016

Even considering the fact that it may as well be the weakest of the Star Trek reboots (so far), Director Justin Lin uses his unique talents to turn Beyond into a wonderful mix of action, humor, and story.

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

7

JonZsuJul 22, 2016

Stunning visuals and a tight plot, with a few good funny moments; Star Trek Beyond is a well executed effort for a summertime blockbuster. The cast is as amazing as the audiences remembered. Compared to the first two installments of theStunning visuals and a tight plot, with a few good funny moments; Star Trek Beyond is a well executed effort for a summertime blockbuster. The cast is as amazing as the audiences remembered. Compared to the first two installments of the reboot series, Star Trek Beyond is somewhat flawed in its pace. Some emotions could not be effectively conveyed by the timing and pacing, but the film wins with the cool action scenes.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

7

GigabobJul 23, 2016

I was hoping for so much more - but instead got Fast and Furious in space. None of the introspection and prod to my intellect to think about the future. Even so I did have one major epiphany - In an era where we are on the cusp of generalI was hoping for so much more - but instead got Fast and Furious in space. None of the introspection and prod to my intellect to think about the future. Even so I did have one major epiphany - In an era where we are on the cusp of general availability of self driving cars - who would put a human in charge of "flying" a spaceship. What human could calculate thrust levels relative to structural integrity much less make the kind of microsecond adjustment needed to maneuver like a hot rod in atmosphere. Humans will interface with computers to drive cars in 30 years - they will not perform the actual maneuvering of a space ship in 300 years. In fact my question became - what will a deep space probe actually look like in 300 years. Will it be more machine and wet-ware in a form of cyber-synth without any legacy human element?

But for the early 21st Century it did provide 2 hours of mindless entertainment. So it gets a 7.… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

7

AshleyAshleyJul 25, 2016

It was so cheesy in the best way possible. The special effects were great, the costumes were great and the set design was great. It just felt a bit empty in some places. Like they had a lot of ideas and not enough time to execute them in the movie.

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

7

JyroJyroSep 2, 2017

A likeable continuation of the Star Trek reboot franchise. Nothing new on show here, but the ensemble characters (beyond Kirk & Spock) are developed further, even if the exploration side of things isn't. The script is well written with theA likeable continuation of the Star Trek reboot franchise. Nothing new on show here, but the ensemble characters (beyond Kirk & Spock) are developed further, even if the exploration side of things isn't. The script is well written with the cheeky quips continuing to amuse.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

SzkeptikAug 4, 2016

I wasn't sure what to expect from this movie. I have to say I was pleasantly surprised. The movie works because it knows exactly what it wants to be. This is a summer blockbuster through and through. They didn't overcomplicate anything andI wasn't sure what to expect from this movie. I have to say I was pleasantly surprised. The movie works because it knows exactly what it wants to be. This is a summer blockbuster through and through. They didn't overcomplicate anything and they didn't try to shoehorn some super genius villain into the plot. There's a LOT of action, explosions and a few chuckles, but it doesn't devolve into some cringy cheese fest. There are some stupid holes in the script (queue SW:TFA-like "randomly crash-land on a planet right next to major plot device"), but it's not that glaring and the pace and tone of the movie can hide it for the most part.

My biggest gripe with it is that there is actually a bit too much action and some of these scenes drag on for so long that the movie fails to keep up the tension throughout. Then, when we finally get some exposition and dialog at the end I actually felt like we could have used a bit more of this in the middle as well.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

josephtawfikAug 4, 2016

The movie is fun and exciting, the plot carries on a little bit, but overall it's a blast. The characters themselves are good and have terrific chemistry together but the direction sometimes stumbles and loses it's way. The action is fine andThe movie is fun and exciting, the plot carries on a little bit, but overall it's a blast. The characters themselves are good and have terrific chemistry together but the direction sometimes stumbles and loses it's way. The action is fine and the villain is given a backstory.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

ggjacobsenAug 15, 2016

Star Trek Beyond has flaws in the screenplay. Here are a couple that military men and women will spot right away:

1. Their spaceship is the U.S.S. Enterprise. Now guess what: the U.S.S. stands for "United States Ship" in nautical parlance.Star Trek Beyond has flaws in the screenplay. Here are a couple that military men and women will spot right away:

1. Their spaceship is the U.S.S. Enterprise. Now guess what: the U.S.S. stands for "United States Ship" in nautical parlance. But we are led to believe the Enterprise is merely part of the Federation Starfleet. If that is the case, the U.S.S. designation should be dropped.

2. The writers for Star Trek are (usually) careful when they assign rank designations to the characters in the movie. The commanding officer of a starship, for example is a captain (remember Captain Picard in the TV series?). A captain in the navy has four stripes on the cuff of his sleeve, and Picard had 4 buttons on his collar (close enough). The officer just below the captain has the rank of commander (remember Commander Riker in series 2 - 7?) A navy commander has three stripes on the cuff of his sleeve, and Riker had three buttons on his collar (again, close enough).

Now to Star Trek Beyond. Early in the movie Captain Kirk docks the Enterprise at a huge star base to consult with his superior about an upcoming mission. His superior--a woman--holds the rank of commodore. That is the equivalent of a one-star admiral, just one rank above captain. But now things start to get messy. The commodore says she will consult with "the council" to get Kirk promoted to vice admiral. Huh? A vice admiral has three stars and is senior to all commodores and rear admirals. How is it that Kirk can simply jump from captain to three-star admiral?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

shiftworkerAug 22, 2016

If you like Star Trek, here we go again. Hokum, but wholesome. Harmless visual entertainment with goodies, baddies, spaceships and special effects. If only life was like this, but you cannae change the laws of physics ... unless we reverseIf you like Star Trek, here we go again. Hokum, but wholesome. Harmless visual entertainment with goodies, baddies, spaceships and special effects. If only life was like this, but you cannae change the laws of physics ... unless we reverse the polarity of the dillithium crystals, Jim.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

7

TheArchetypesSep 9, 2016

A fun movie for a hot day. No it was not as good as many of the previous Star Trek films I’ve seen, but it was not terrible either. I did keep thinking, though, that many of these actors must have long term contracts, since they seemed just aA fun movie for a hot day. No it was not as good as many of the previous Star Trek films I’ve seen, but it was not terrible either. I did keep thinking, though, that many of these actors must have long term contracts, since they seemed just a little bored, especially Chris Pine. This comment does not apply to Simon Pegg, but he may have had a bigger stake in the game since he also worked on the script. Best of all, though, was Sofia Boutella as Jaylah, and I wondered why Krall had so much energy and was so interesting, until I realized it was the great Idris Elba. I pined for the old cast, none of whom were as lithe and slick as the younger generation, but all of whom had more humanity and personality. Still, there was plenty of action to keep me awake and I enjoyed myself.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

DaddyO3Feb 14, 2018

Pretty good flick. Saw it in the IMAX with my family. Had I known some joker would have his bright cell phone out for half of the movie and cause a distraction, I would have waited to watch this at home in my own theater setup.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

ErikTheCriticOct 14, 2018

It's not as entertaining as the previous two instalments, but it still manages to deliver thrilling action and fast-paced adventure.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

DawdlingPoetNov 25, 2021

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I thought this was quite an entertaining watch - some of the foreign accents (Russian and Scottish) made me smirk a little as they didn't sound entirely authentic, shall I say. However, the special effects are quite decent, I quite liked the wandering/free floating style of camerawork and the pace is relatively fast once the plot gets going. Its a fairly engrossing watch with some impressive landscapes/cinematography, some reasonably good dialogue and I did find myself feeling concerned for the characters, so overall I thought it was a good film thats worth a watch.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

Linuski92Nov 19, 2020

Absolutely the best in the trilogy, Beyond manages to capture a little bit of that classic Star Trek feel. A flawed, but ultimately good film.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

A7sus4Aug 4, 2016

Star Trek Beyond is another CGI action-fest that should've ended 25 minutes earlier if that's all it wanted to be. The callous way matters of the heart were weaved into it to make it seem like something of substance bordered pathetic.

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

DirigiblePulpNov 20, 2016

The story, plotting and villain feel so generic and slight; neither Roddenberry Trek nor even the writing touch of Pegg are noticeable. The cast is still spot on (new character Jaylah is a delight) and there's fun to be had but it's notThe story, plotting and villain feel so generic and slight; neither Roddenberry Trek nor even the writing touch of Pegg are noticeable. The cast is still spot on (new character Jaylah is a delight) and there's fun to be had but it's not anything that would feel unique or special outside the Trek fan service, homages and universe.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

RaygirlJul 25, 2016

Not as good as the first two, but if you're a trekkie like me, you're going to see it anyway. Not much new or interesting stuff going on between the characters, with more emphasis on the plot (which was good, but not great). It was a bitNot as good as the first two, but if you're a trekkie like me, you're going to see it anyway. Not much new or interesting stuff going on between the characters, with more emphasis on the plot (which was good, but not great). It was a bit boring I hate to say. . .The kick a** alien chick with the white and black face stole the show IMHO. Hopefully the next one will be better.… Expand

3 of 7 users found this helpful34

All this user's reviews

6

TokyochuchuDec 6, 2016

Star Trek Beyond is a decent entry into the series. It makes a lesser impact than the previous reboot films, though, as it is very inconsequential. It feels more like the later Next Generation Star Trek movies like Insurrection and NemesisStar Trek Beyond is a decent entry into the series. It makes a lesser impact than the previous reboot films, though, as it is very inconsequential. It feels more like the later Next Generation Star Trek movies like Insurrection and Nemesis than epic fare like First Contact or Wrath of Khan. Still an entertaining flick, however.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

TyranianApr 13, 2019

Definitely entertaining but a step backwards in terms of writing and inventiveness.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

bigjon1958Aug 6, 2016

I had high hopes for this third installment of the new Star Trek series and was somewhat disappointed in this movie. It is certainly the lessor of the three so far in this series. Prior to going to the movie I was surprised to see the movieI had high hopes for this third installment of the new Star Trek series and was somewhat disappointed in this movie. It is certainly the lessor of the three so far in this series. Prior to going to the movie I was surprised to see the movie scored less than 70 on Metacritic. And the movie started out great. After the first 30 minutes and the attack on the Starship Enterprise scene, I was on my way to rating this movie a 9. However, the middle of the movie was very average and I think the director missed out on opportunities to expand on the story line. Still, I was on my way to giving the movie a high rating. But the 'twist' they through in at the end of the movie makes no sense at all and to me really downgraded the overall movie. It got me and my wife both questioning how the overall movie really fit together as the 'twist' at the end really did not fit well at all with the rest of the movie. I know these types of movies are fantasy, just as with the Avenger series. But you at least need a story line that is plausible within the context of the movie. When you see the movie you'll know what I mean. So in the end, an average movie which is disappointing since I expected so much more.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

gracjanskiSep 17, 2019

50 kg women fighting against 90 kg men... yes sure.
Plot very basic and superficial without time to explain it, because there were so many action scenes.
Visually this movie was great.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

marcmyworksJul 24, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This film reads like an episode of the original series, except longer and with the bigger budget. Overall the acting is excellent though the story is quite weak and pandering to the lowest denominator. We have a series of scenes that build to an obvious and unoriginal ending. The tone of the film is also quite bland as Kirk opens the film saying he hates the episodic nature of the Enterprises missions, ironically this is what the movie becomes. The loss of Anton Yelchin also weighed on me while watching, such a bright young star. Overall the film is well made, but suffers from being nothing more than a predictable and obvious chapter in the franchise.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

6

TheWaffleJul 24, 2016

Slightly too goofy for my taste, at times this can feel more like Galaxy Quest than Star Trek. Good action, fairly boiler-plate plot, mediocre script. The most glaring issue was the awful editing, and I mean BvS bad. Lines that weren'tSlightly too goofy for my taste, at times this can feel more like Galaxy Quest than Star Trek. Good action, fairly boiler-plate plot, mediocre script. The most glaring issue was the awful editing, and I mean BvS bad. Lines that weren't audible or trampled over by a quick cut, unnecessary scenes spliced in that added nothing, or fast-paced cuts that obscure the action. Every major blockbuster of 2016 has featured this slap-dash editing, and it defies all reason. You've already shelled out hundreds of millions to get the stars and effects on screen, why not spend at least a little time making sure that the movie is watchable?… Expand

6 of 10 users found this helpful64

All this user's reviews

6

victoratorJul 25, 2016

Out of the 3 new ST movies this one was by far the worse. Even though the script was weak and predictable I would still recommend it to the fans of the franchise. My main problem with this movie was that it took bits from different episodesOut of the 3 new ST movies this one was by far the worse. Even though the script was weak and predictable I would still recommend it to the fans of the franchise. My main problem with this movie was that it took bits from different episodes and there wasn't enough that would make it different from all the other scifi movies. Not enough flying in space, plot too boring and predictable. Nice special effects.… Expand

3 of 7 users found this helpful34

All this user's reviews

6

BeeceeAug 8, 2016

This movie reverts to the old odd numbered/ even numbered theory of Star Trek films. As the 13th film, it is definitely not as good as the J.J. Abrams' first two reboots. Yes, the CGI is terrific, and the scenery of Dubai provides anThis movie reverts to the old odd numbered/ even numbered theory of Star Trek films. As the 13th film, it is definitely not as good as the J.J. Abrams' first two reboots. Yes, the CGI is terrific, and the scenery of Dubai provides an effective futuristic backdrop. There is an interesting female alien in this story, and the main Star Trek cast is a pleasure to see. Yet the plot doesn't really hold water. This seems more like a generic action movie, rather than a real Star Trek film. The best of Star Trek provided good characters with even the villains having realistic motivation, and maybe even a moral to the story. In this film, the rationale for the Enterprise to rescue the crew of the damsel in distress doesn't seem right. The motivation for the lead villain isn't revealed until the last 1/4 of the film, when it seems like too little too late.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

6

whipnetAug 13, 2016

As a long time ST fan who enjoyed the first two reboots well enough, all I can say about this one is I think we've tolerated these reboots long enough. It's time for a real Star Trek movie and not the cash grab reboot universe.

*

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

43in2014Aug 2, 2016

Background: I have seen all of the previous twelve films except for Nemesis, which was a dud, I read. I do not particularly try to watch the many TV series and I am not a Trekkie.

Pros: There are some nice visual effects of the attack onBackground: I have seen all of the previous twelve films except for Nemesis, which was a dud, I read. I do not particularly try to watch the many TV series and I am not a Trekkie.

Pros: There are some nice visual effects of the attack on the Enterprise.

Cons:
(1) The JJ Abrams-inspired new series of films have stunts that are getting less and less believable. Star Trek (2009) had some great stunts. Into Darkness had repeated some of the stunts and they felt a bit stale and less plausible. This film had gone in a slightly different direction, but its stunts had become too far-fetched.

(2) The plot, Jaylah, the villain and the doomsday device were poorly explained, the latter being a real MacGuffin.

(3) Two of the major locations in the film were, again, not believable, one being a planet that conveniently had breathable air and another being a space station that's so big that it would have cost an immeasurable amount of money to build. Think Death Star 2.

(4) Chris Pine actually looked bored in this film and pudgy, and I don't think it was acting. It was more likely due to an drinking problem, in real live.

Who would think the film is great? Young adults and kids.
Who would think the film is only so-so? Trekkies and older adults
Who would think the film is lousy? No one.

Rating: 3/5 (no half scores). Save your money and watch it on TV.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

revelcDec 7, 2016

I love the first Star Trek reboot. Star Trek Beyond is just beyond stupid. It's basically Fast and Furious in space. I give 6/10 just because of the cast.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

RvwFromUpHereAug 28, 2016

What: Star Trek: Beyond
Who: Chris Pine, Sean of the Dead, and Zachary Quinto as, not a serial murderer for a change
Where: Beyond When (Can I watch again): When you want to watch Star Trek but you also want to watch all of the thingsWhat: Star Trek: Beyond
Who: Chris Pine, Sean of the Dead, and Zachary Quinto as, not a serial murderer for a change
Where: Beyond
When (Can I watch again): When you want to watch Star Trek but you also want to watch all of the things that make a block buster terrible.
Why: If you want to watch Fast & Furious in space, and don't want to wait until Fast 9, when The Rock will naturally get there on his own, this movie is perfect for you.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

Rebecca31Jul 22, 2016

Well this certainly turned out to be the weakest of new Star Trek movies. You happy now J.J.Abrams? If you give a Star Trek movie to the Fast and Furious director you're gonna get a film that can only be described as "meh, it was alright."Well this certainly turned out to be the weakest of new Star Trek movies. You happy now J.J.Abrams? If you give a Star Trek movie to the Fast and Furious director you're gonna get a film that can only be described as "meh, it was alright." Buckle up for motorbikes, loud music and way too much use of the words "wee" and "lass." looking at you Simon Pegg. Also featuring a mediocre villain which just shouldn't happen if you get Idris Elba. Despite all this it's entertaining and recommended for the fans. But if that isn't enough, you wouldn't want to miss Anton Yelchin's last performance as Chekov.… Expand

5 of 13 users found this helpful58

All this user's reviews

6

SKDAug 4, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Thankfully, this movie was not as bad as Star Trek Into Darkness. It wasn't so obsessed with saluting an older, better movie (unlike the past two Abrams flicks) that it was able to branch out and create it's own story in the Star Trek universe. Still, some pitfalls remain.

First, what it did well:

This movie provided a solid, entertaining lazy summer flick. The special effects were good. The story was okay (minus the plot holes listed below). And the acting was adequate. It didn't knock things out of the park, but it checked all the boxes to provide a passable movie experience.

I thought the movie did a good job capturing the emotions of the main characters. Kirk is reflecting on the fact that he is now a year older than his dad ever was. Spock is confronting his mortality as his alternate reality self dies (a tribute to Leonard Nimoy). The tension in these short scenes is real, although unfortunately it is never tied together in a conclusion. They don't resolve the conflicts with their inner demons, so these moments end up being space fillers.

What it did bad:

Character development. Character development. Character development. I can't harp on this enough. Not for the Enterprise crew, we know them after three movies. For the new characters that were introduced. At the end of the movie, we still know absolutely nothing about them. "Lassie" for example (I don't even know her actual name, that's how weak the character development was). The only thing I know about her is that her father died getting her out of the prison, and yet she's popping corks with Kirk at the end of the movie like all the backstory on her is cemented.

The villain: character development was very weak on him as well. We never got a sense of what he wanted to achieve, or why he was doing what he was doing. Abrams also has this bad habit of trying to rush in a major surprise 15 mins before the credits roll, and he usually does it in a very sloppy way. Uhura walks past a monitor and realizes the bad guy alien is really a century old Federation Captain? Yeah right. So let me get this straight, he crash lands on this planet, somehow lives to the age of 150 and turns into an alien, creates a new crew of shock troops with alien techno-wank (everything from energy phasers to swarm ships capable of taking down the Enterprise) and he wants to destroy the federation base for...reasons. None of this is ever explained.

And then, at the climax of the battle with the alien swarm, we need to easy button to get our heroes out of the massive attack that the alien launches on the station. Solution: they just play the radio at full blast and the swarm dies. No really, that's what they did. VHF causes the networked drones to blow up? Maybe if they were playing Nickelback.

Also, that motorcycle. No way in hell it would run after sitting there for 150 years. The gas alone would have gone bad. The Jurrasic World jeeps had a better chance.… Expand

3 of 3 users found this helpful30

All this user's reviews

6

migdalorguyJul 23, 2016

Eh. Had a few nice moments that were nods to how the original characters might have been, how they conversed, etc. However, I had major issues with plotlines (highly stretches the willing suspension of disbelief factor) and especially scale.Eh. Had a few nice moments that were nods to how the original characters might have been, how they conversed, etc. However, I had major issues with plotlines (highly stretches the willing suspension of disbelief factor) and especially scale. Someone did not do their homework when it came to scaling gigantic starships and even more giant dyson-sphere-like settings with each other, with human beings, etc. A starship that would be huge in outer space was reduced to a ridiculously smaller scale when planet bound, inside a space station, or crashed on a planet. Just plain sloppy.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

SrPepeJan 5, 2018

Tiene buen diseño y eso pero no le llega ni a los talones a las dos anteriores.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

thoodeeAug 6, 2016

Loved the aspect of the crew actually in another world and space which is what made the film fun. However, the Beastie Boys scene completely took me out of the movie and allowed for a lame excuse to escape the conflict and force feed a "NOW!Loved the aspect of the crew actually in another world and space which is what made the film fun. However, the Beastie Boys scene completely took me out of the movie and allowed for a lame excuse to escape the conflict and force feed a "NOW! THAT'S WHAT I CALL MUSIC" track down our throats.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

AngusBarbudezAug 26, 2016

En general la sensación ha sido...Meh, un film demasiado irregular, demasiado Star Trek tanto en lo bueno, como en lo malo. Comprendo que J.J Abrams dejó el listón muy alto con las anteriores, que son para mí 2 putos peliculones porque entreEn general la sensación ha sido...Meh, un film demasiado irregular, demasiado Star Trek tanto en lo bueno, como en lo malo. Comprendo que J.J Abrams dejó el listón muy alto con las anteriores, que son para mí 2 putos peliculones porque entre otras cosas Abrams sacrifica la mitología y trasfondo endogámico de esta franquicia, para hacerla mas cercana al espectador medio, lo cual es algo positivo porque Star Trek tiene cosas que molan, pero esta...es un paso atrás.

Esta nueva pelicula, es mas un episodio de 2 horas de Star Trek la nueva generación o un remake de aquel truño low cost que fue...Star Trek Insurrección.

Una pelicula muy telefilmera, un ritmo muy irregular todo muy, muy descafeinado poca épica y poco space opera, da la sensación que han hecho esta pelicula para intentar contentar a los Trekkies mas radicales incluso metiendo guiños a Sulu y su condición sexual o el homenaje a Nimo. Y al final, solo despega un poco al final que se hace en ciertos momentos intenso y muy bien llevado y sin lens flares. El reparto me gusta, me parece que tiene un plantel de lujo y lo bordan, chirría el villano que lleva escrito el cliché "villano de opereta" tatuado en la frente.

En general, agridulce y decepción. Me esperaba mas de una saga reiniciada y con libertad de hacer mas y no caer en la misma endogamia de siempre.

JJ deja Star Wars y vuelve a Star Trek, que lo haces mejor aquí.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Aaron_WassermanJul 24, 2016

Not as strong as its predecessors, but an entertaining movie none the less. The best way to describe Beyond is it feels like a tv movie as oppose to a big motion picture like the previous two. But, this movie is fairly well done, it has aNot as strong as its predecessors, but an entertaining movie none the less. The best way to describe Beyond is it feels like a tv movie as oppose to a big motion picture like the previous two. But, this movie is fairly well done, it has a decent script, decent score, great actors, decent visuals, and it isn't too overlong. There is a lot of flaws in this one, but what the movie does right, it does do right. The best stuff Beyond has to offer is a decently fun movie that does entertain.… Expand

7 of 10 users found this helpful73

All this user's reviews

6

KrissTolliday14Nov 27, 2016

This new incarnation of the Star Trek franchise has brought the series into the 21st Century and has done it very well indeed. The first film in 2009 was one of the year's best pictures and Benedict Cumberbatch was a breath if fresh air inThis new incarnation of the Star Trek franchise has brought the series into the 21st Century and has done it very well indeed. The first film in 2009 was one of the year's best pictures and Benedict Cumberbatch was a breath if fresh air in the not as good sequel Into Darkness. With Beyond we perhaps have the weakest entry in the new trilogy but that isn't to say it isn't still a decent film. It brings back all the old characters and teams them with the member of the crew they haven't quite spent a lot of screen time with. The film does this well and despite spending a lot of time apart, the crew still fizzle when they get their moments together. Idris Elba is the next actor in the line of villains and he plays Krall well beneath the heavy prosthetics. The only downside with this character is that his pan is rather bleak and contrived. Justin Lin directs well but it does miss the Abrams blueprint. Simon Pegg and Doug Jung bring a decent enough script to the table but some of the dialogue could have been sharpened or even delivered better. This isn't as dark as the previous entries but it is a solid addition. Let's just see if these actors continue on the Enterprise's adventures or if this trilogy is enough. As long as the filmmakers don't make a film weaker than this one then all should be ok. Enjoyable if not the greatest Enterprise outing.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

KKell83Jul 23, 2016

Star Trek Beyond was exactly what I expected; it had humor, action, and suspense. What I liked about the film was it kept the original cast, but that's basically it. Unfortunately, this film failed in my eyes. I wasn't excited by how directorStar Trek Beyond was exactly what I expected; it had humor, action, and suspense. What I liked about the film was it kept the original cast, but that's basically it. Unfortunately, this film failed in my eyes. I wasn't excited by how director Justin Lin did all his video touches (he enjoys inverting his video - filming upside down first then coming back around), it was very annoying to say the least.

Furthermore, the main issue I had with this film is it never left you at the edge of your seat. Yes, they had large battles (a bit much if you ask me) and some neat special effects, but it was just 'dry' and predictable. Less effects, more story, please. The battles went super quick - rapid scenes every second vs just watching the devastation unfold made me dazed and sometimes confused. Not to mention, I never had the true sense that Krall (main villain) was actually evil, it didn't feel genuine like the previous films.

All in all, the film was mediocre, but nothing like the first two as far as action, humor, storyline. I feel this has to do with the Justin Lins vision vs the original director - too many variations between the films, but still something to watch. Hopefully Justin Lin sticks to the Fast and Furious franchise.… Expand

7 of 12 users found this helpful75

All this user's reviews

6

ValloryJul 25, 2016

When looked at as simply a fun take on the original "Star Trek" series, "Star Trek Beyond" was somewhat fun, but when compared to TOS, it is nowhere near "beyond"; at best, it is merely so-so. That's why my posse and I have taken to referringWhen looked at as simply a fun take on the original "Star Trek" series, "Star Trek Beyond" was somewhat fun, but when compared to TOS, it is nowhere near "beyond"; at best, it is merely so-so. That's why my posse and I have taken to referring to it as "Star Trek So-So."

Standouts: Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

AV_STYLEZJul 29, 2016

It certainly had it's moments but unfortunately seemed to scramble from one action seen to another. By the end, you got this empty sense that the film had to hurry to address a lot of interpersonal plot development that it just never got to.It certainly had it's moments but unfortunately seemed to scramble from one action seen to another. By the end, you got this empty sense that the film had to hurry to address a lot of interpersonal plot development that it just never got to. Spock and Uhura spent 90% of the movie apart but we were supposed to feel some rich development in their relationship/break up. The villain appeared out of nowhere with technology that was given to explanation and monologued like every other villain in Abbrams' Trek films. I did love the chase scenes but the fact that they broadcast a song and their whole enemy fleet got taken out was ridiculous and wreaked of desperate "we gotta find a way for the good guys to win" logic. There was seemingly little rhyme or reason for the villain to become deranged and for his crew to unquestioningly follow. Finally, I couldn't understand how the woman who tricked the Enterprise into going to that planet to begin with pulled it off. If she was really part of Krall's crew, should there not have been traces that she has a human genome in there? Or do they just not run any scans on a strange species they've never seen and take her at her word that she needs help. "Let's send our flagship, unquestioningly into a dangerous nebula on a goose chase mission to save a small science ship from another species because this pink chick tells us to"... I dunno, they lost me there.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

6

wholenessAug 3, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie was kind of meh, it has spectacular special effect and lots of action but is completely lacking in an interesting story-line or any character development whatsoever. I am a huge fan of all the Star Trek TV series (Enterprise excepted) and this movie really does not have the feel of a Star Trek movie at all. This movie feels a lot more like Star Wars somewhere from Episode I-III or Post Episode VII since the character. Really, it's like they took any old action space movie and just threw a few of the Star Trek characters in just so they could ride on the Star Trek franchise name, this could have been any sci-fi action movie and maybe I'd like it more if it wasn't pretending to be a Star Trek movie. Therefore I give it an average rating, I didn't feel like I wasted my time but I didn't feel like I saw a Star Trek movie either.

Spoilers:

The initial battle scene where the Enterprise is utterly destroyed against a force which is so overpowering that fighting back is futile (no borg pun intended) is so over-the-top that it is really not believable that anyone could survive that sort of attack.

The parts where Spock is crying out in pain and especially the one where he is crying is an insult to the pre-reboot TV series and movies.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

BITESCREENJun 21, 2017

Für Star Trek – Beyond reicht J.J. Abrams das Regiezepter an The Fast and the Furious-Regisseur Justin Lin weiter – und das merkt man. Teil 2 nach dem Reboot bietet reichlich Action – mal sehr imposant, mal voll von der Stange – während derFür Star Trek – Beyond reicht J.J. Abrams das Regiezepter an The Fast and the Furious-Regisseur Justin Lin weiter – und das merkt man. Teil 2 nach dem Reboot bietet reichlich Action – mal sehr imposant, mal voll von der Stange – während der Plot eher einfach gestrickt ist: Enterprise folgt Notruf, Enterprise strandet, Enterprise rettet. Zudem nervt die lange Filmmitte mit einem unsäglich trostlosen wie hässlichen Felsplanetensetting – Billo-Plastikfelsen inklusive. Dafür erkennen Fans die Handschrift von Comedian und Scotty-Darsteller Simon-Pegg, dessen Drehbuch zwar keine gute Geschichte, dafür aber massig Gags und charmante Dialoge liefert. Sowieso stimmt die Chemie zwischen den mittlerweile eingespielten Darstellern, während ein langsam alternder Chris Pine Original-Kirk William Shatner immer ähnlicher wird. Ein schicker Showdown nebst Twist machen Star Trek – Beyond schließlich zu einem immerhin grundsoliden Sci-Fi-Blockbuster.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

dramaticwordsAug 16, 2020

Of all the newer films produced by Bad Robot, this felt most like Star Trek. Still, none of them match the thoughtful storytelling of the Roddenberry era.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

MacsMusicDec 29, 2017

First off, visually, this movie is really great. Over and over again, it just looks amazing. The plot, however, is less impressive. It feels unoriginal, forgettable, and just not quite interesting enough to be called a really solid plot. TheFirst off, visually, this movie is really great. Over and over again, it just looks amazing. The plot, however, is less impressive. It feels unoriginal, forgettable, and just not quite interesting enough to be called a really solid plot. The characters in this movie are colorful and interesting, but seem to lack real depth. The main villain is okay, but once again unoriginal and not really anything classic or really special. All in all, a movie that excels visually, but is fairly meh in every other way.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

FilipeNetoAug 22, 2018

This is the third movie in the "new Star Trek" saga, with new story and reinvented characters. If I can say that I really enjoyed the two previous films, this time I was a bit disappointed. The actors' work remains impeccable as well as theThis is the third movie in the "new Star Trek" saga, with new story and reinvented characters. If I can say that I really enjoyed the two previous films, this time I was a bit disappointed. The actors' work remains impeccable as well as the way the plot takes advantage of all the central characters, giving each one the right moments to shine instead of giving almost all focus to three/four characters, as happened in earlier movies. The way they interact and dialogue its also positive. So what made me so disappointed? Two things. The first is the powerful and obvious CGI, so evident that loses realism and credibility. It looks fantastic but is so clearly false that it doesn't impressed us. And worse than that: it dominates to the point the movie itself forgets the plot. That's the second thing that blew me away. The plot is something so basic and so poorly developed that it makes me wonder if it would have been better to remake one of the older movies. There are points in the film that are clearly unexplained, such as the nature of the bio-weapon that Krall sought so hard, or the reason he seems so unhuman for most of the time, to give only two examples.

Either way, it's a movie that entertains the audience well and provides two hours of quality time. And its the first film made after the death of Leonard Nimoy, a very present absence during the film in that its abundantly mentioned and honored throughout the action, especially by young Spock (Zachary Quinto). No one, surely, doubts he deserved it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

namelessAug 3, 2016

The plot flows, the actors can act but the action is a mass of retreads. How many fist fights do I have to see in space movies? Is it studios executives, directors... can they think of nothing else? Captain America, Star Trek, Superman... itThe plot flows, the actors can act but the action is a mass of retreads. How many fist fights do I have to see in space movies? Is it studios executives, directors... can they think of nothing else? Captain America, Star Trek, Superman... it is ridiculous. They make this pitch about it is great that we actually came out to the movie theater but I'm just about to stop going because I want to be able to fast forward past the monotonous fist fights that accomplish nothing. There are 3 fist fights in this movie. No point to any one of them.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

5

gfnyJul 22, 2016

More Star Wars than Star Trek and this was a big disappointment. First rate production, good acting, convoluted storyline that is difficult to follow. Close up camera shots with shaky camera and scenes flashing by in a blur. A lot ofMore Star Wars than Star Trek and this was a big disappointment. First rate production, good acting, convoluted storyline that is difficult to follow. Close up camera shots with shaky camera and scenes flashing by in a blur. A lot of shootem up and explosions.… Expand

4 of 11 users found this helpful47

All this user's reviews

5

choppyAug 11, 2016

All of my meh. I can see why it's performing slowly in theaters. It's absolutely nothing you haven't seen before - crazy individualistic megalomaniac w/ superweapon attempts to destroy civilization; crew must show virtue of TEAMWORK! toAll of my meh. I can see why it's performing slowly in theaters. It's absolutely nothing you haven't seen before - crazy individualistic megalomaniac w/ superweapon attempts to destroy civilization; crew must show virtue of TEAMWORK! to defeat him (how can that possibly be a spoiler if it's the plot of almost every group action movie out there?)
Some nice graphics/special effects, but would be in bottom 50% of TNGS episodes, plot-wise. Plus mediocre pacing. Yawn.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

5

NikolayGJul 24, 2016

By comparison the 2009 reboot is a classic. So much more thought went into Abrams' effort. Also, whoever wrote that 'Beyond' is like TOS hasn't seen TOS. The positive reviews MUST be bought and paid for.

The good: Sofia Boutella, the guestBy comparison the 2009 reboot is a classic. So much more thought went into Abrams' effort. Also, whoever wrote that 'Beyond' is like TOS hasn't seen TOS. The positive reviews MUST be bought and paid for.

The good: Sofia Boutella, the guest actress, was one of the few good things about this movie consistently and, even better, it appears they are setting her up to become a member of the crew, which would be great as she has more attitude and life in her than most of the other actors. Another good thing: the opening few minutes, which were funny and well done; and the final scene, Kirk's birthday party, where the characters finally showed their personality and had some dialogue beyond yelling for help or saying 'hang on!' or 'over there! behind you!' Ok, I don't know if they said those things in the movie exactly but almost the entire film used only short choppy action scene dialogue about where to go and what to do next in order to escape trouble or get the bad guy. But in the last scene the actors showed a lot more color and personality, finally, for a few minutes before the credits.

The bad: the plot. In the next few sentences I reveal minor plot basics, probably no more than professional reviews. A bad guy once again wants to destroy the Federation for vague reasons he cannot quite articulate - something about having been a soldier and now feeling useless because there is peace in the galaxy (it's news to me that there's peace in the Star Trek universe but whatever), and also feeling abandoned when he was left behind by people in Star Fleet a hundred years earlier (he's discovered the secret to some sort of life extension, you see, which was vaguely explained in five seconds). He has also changed his form completely, which is also unexplained but I suspect he did it by putting on an alien costume left over from the show Star Trek Enterprise, and he is going to take out as much of Starfleet as he can with a super weapon he can now use thanks to the fact that he has found some alien artifact he needs to make it work. You can't really give a spoiler because there's nothing to spoil. What I just told you is about the level of detail the movie gives. He sets this stone artifact in place like Indiana Jones, but instead of opening a door to treasure it powers up a weapon. No explanation as to why this weapon exists or its origins is even attempted. It's just some bs they threw together so they could trigger nonstop action which continues uninterrupted for almost the entire movie. Without room to breathe the movie just goes from one set piece to another, using closeups almost exclusively, so that often you don't know exactly where people are; and when they show one person running then cut to another, you don't know where those two are in relation to each other and if one is chasing the other and if so, which one; and when people are running through exploding ships I sometimes had no idea what was going on the visuals were such a busy mess. Whoever is in charge of maintaining the clarity of what is happening physically on screen utterly failed with this movie. Perhaps most importantly, the way they finally defeated the bad guys made no sense at all. I would tell you so you can understand how ridiculous it was, but I don't want to spoil it. Though it's crap so I'm not sure that you'd care anyway.

Zachary Quinto gained a little weight in the face so he no longer has the angular Spock look. He looks puffy like the face of Darth Vader when Luke finally removed the mask (OK that's an exaggeration but he was puffy). Chris Pine starts off a little heavy in the face but quickly loses it. He apparently lost several pounds during filming. I'm sorry but I paid $12 to see Bruce Springsteen perform for 3 and half hours in 1978, an incredible classic performance. So if I'm going to pay over twice that much merely to see a 2 hour movie (3D iMax), then the script better be great, the visuals better be great, the acting better be great, and the actors better be fit and trim and look their best. If the actors can't get in shape for all the millions they are paid, then they have an entitlement problem. Zachary wasn't ready to shoot. Chris wasn't but he fixed it fast during filming. Zoe Saldana, who I love and think is beautiful, looks so severe throughout almost the entire movie (until the Kirk birthday scene when finally she looks like herself again) that she was unpleasant to watch. Mostly she just stared at things severely. They gave her little to do. Maybe she was still channeling Nina Simone and hadn't broken out of that character fully. The best of the regular cast this time around was Bones, who was great. Though there vulgar dialogue that was a bit jarring to hear in Star Trek, jokes about horse sh!t. Like a Farley brothers movie briefly invading a couple of times. It was weird. Overall, a paint-by-numbers action movie, vague and poorly shot or maybe just poorly edited action. Not much spirit of Star Trek to be found.… Expand

17 of 21 users found this helpful174

All this user's reviews

5

Apotheosis34Aug 20, 2016

The third Star Trek in the rebooted franchise is consistently mediocre. Several characters, important environments, and other significant portions of the plot are largely insignificant, and the action plays the biggest role out of all. ThereThe third Star Trek in the rebooted franchise is consistently mediocre. Several characters, important environments, and other significant portions of the plot are largely insignificant, and the action plays the biggest role out of all. There is little sense of wonder, dread, or satisfaction throughout the journey and at the conclusion of the film.

Chris Pine is yet again fantastic as James T. Kirk; he brings so much to his role and to the film as a whole. The remaining characters are static placeholders of their character descriptions and the representations in earlier movies. The villain is par for the course, and even though there is a fantastic actor behind the mask he has only the one role to fill.

The CGI is top-notch, but the action can be quite eye-rolling at times. The score is copy-paste of the previous two films; this isn't a negative, but nothing has been added to increase emotional impact.

I found myself in the third act without noticing or caring, and the penultimate scenes did not make me feel that I needed to watch the first two acts to notice new aspects or care more about how the film finished.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

FranzHcriticAug 5, 2016

It isn't anything spectacular. The plot is thin at some points, and the action scenes are unnecessary in some points. For a summer blockbuster, it holds some merit, but not enough for me to give this movie anything above a simplistic 'meh.' IIt isn't anything spectacular. The plot is thin at some points, and the action scenes are unnecessary in some points. For a summer blockbuster, it holds some merit, but not enough for me to give this movie anything above a simplistic 'meh.' I give my condolences to Anton Yelchin. We'll miss him all. But that doesn't change my outlook on this formulaic film that should serve as a warning not to stretch this franchise too far.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

Brent_MarchantJul 24, 2016

A disappointing effort from a storied franchise that has long placed its emphasis on, well, story -- something that's sorely lacking here. The film's overreliance on over-the-top action sequences to the detriment of meaningful substance andA disappointing effort from a storied franchise that has long placed its emphasis on, well, story -- something that's sorely lacking here. The film's overreliance on over-the-top action sequences to the detriment of meaningful substance and profound character development leaves one feeling terribly unsatisfied, longing for more from this mythic sci-fi series. Even though "Star Trek" has been going in a somewhat more adventure-oriented direction in its latest offerings, it's gone too far this time, scrapping what has traditionally made it work so effectively in favor of cheap pyrotechnic theatrics and fight scenes. Wait for the DVD.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

5

darkbloodshed13Aug 3, 2016

Star Trek Beyond is good movie, It has good action, good characters and plot. However it is not good Star Trek movie. Meaning it's missing the philosophy that Star trek was known for. Instead trying to make it more action packed than itStar Trek Beyond is good movie, It has good action, good characters and plot. However it is not good Star Trek movie. Meaning it's missing the philosophy that Star trek was known for. Instead trying to make it more action packed than it needed to be.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

Inheritance92Jul 25, 2016

Too many rubberheads. Too little physics. Too cheap props. Too much pathos. Too much phony acting. Too much goofiness. Too weak an opponent. Too weird a(n almost) final battle. Too lame a plot.

Why half of the cast is never called by name?Too many rubberheads. Too little physics. Too cheap props. Too much pathos. Too much phony acting. Too much goofiness. Too weak an opponent. Too weird a(n almost) final battle. Too lame a plot.

Why half of the cast is never called by name? Why 'lieutenant' has no insignia? Why was that movie made at all? Who can tell...… Expand

10 of 12 users found this helpful102

All this user's reviews

5

Moo-viesDec 17, 2016

Star-trek's sheer repetitions of fast speaking scenes, cliches situations, quips and characters made it a personally painful experience to watch.

In the end you can not hide the fact that Star-Trek baseline is 50 years old, based upon aStar-trek's sheer repetitions of fast speaking scenes, cliches situations, quips and characters made it a personally painful experience to watch.

In the end you can not hide the fact that Star-Trek baseline is 50 years old, based upon a captain's hierarchical crew and a sadistic will to sacrifice every member of his crew in gratuitous scenes of violence but for 5 caricatural characters stuck in their assigned pre-defined personality.

Sure, the modern declination is full of good ideas and impressive CGI.
This latest iteration brings lots of ideas from Avatar, Game of Thrones, science fiction tropes like the grey goo and funny situational one liners.

But all of it is still stuck in the Star-Trek dogma, where nothing changes and hundreds of dead crews are forgotten in the blink of an eye, where any scientific materiality is drowned into ad nauseam speeches of mumbo jumbo to justify any scenaristic whim.

Star Trek Beyond is an impressive fast paced action movie that is sadly boringly conservative in the storytelling it offers.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

5

TBallAug 1, 2016

Why is the Federation so militarily inept? I realize they are primarily on a science mission or so they say but in this case it's a rescue mission. A young captain takes a gazillion dollar star ship into unknown location. No scouts,no combatWhy is the Federation so militarily inept? I realize they are primarily on a science mission or so they say but in this case it's a rescue mission. A young captain takes a gazillion dollar star ship into unknown location. No scouts,no combat air patrol? The space city Yorktown apparently has neither, as well, and is unaware of an attack until it's upon them. Other than that, pretty entertaining, I suppose. Neither great nor terrible.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

sandbornAug 30, 2016

Great visuals can't hide a weak story and a nonsensical villain! Yeah, it looks fantastic. The director did a great job with the visuals and special effects, but still couldn't save this movie from a poor script. Star Trek Beyond has all theGreat visuals can't hide a weak story and a nonsensical villain! Yeah, it looks fantastic. The director did a great job with the visuals and special effects, but still couldn't save this movie from a poor script. Star Trek Beyond has all the action but none of the heart or intelligence of the TV series.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

TodOrcimJul 22, 2016

This is truly the first time I have disliked Star Trek. At every turn it seemed that the movie contradicted itself. The plot followed basic movie tropes and most of the biggest scenes were completely phoned in.

4 of 13 users found this helpful49

All this user's reviews

5

INFXJul 27, 2016

Comic Con meets Thrill Ride. Clunky, preachy, predictable dialogue/direction. '09 and '13 had great back stories, - the beginnings of the crew and Khan - clever dialogue and action not aimed to be the next Six Flags attraction. StoryComic Con meets Thrill Ride. Clunky, preachy, predictable dialogue/direction. '09 and '13 had great back stories, - the beginnings of the crew and Khan - clever dialogue and action not aimed to be the next Six Flags attraction. Story holes ? Lots and that's ok to some extent being it's sf. But....to get to the 'nebula' planet it was warp speed. So how did the bad guys all get to the Yorktown colony ?Kirk has a few drinks before hitting the bridge...not my kind of pilot. Motorcycle ? Enough Fast and Furious already. Among others. Cliche direction - Jayla actually 'pointedly points' when she explains where the bad guys are as if the crew could see where or what she was talking about...and they didn't look. Telegraphed set ups for quips took the punch out.
Simon Pegg is funny for sure with the right dialogue and timing - ie watch 'Paul' - hilarious- but as screenwriter it's a thumbs down. Doug Jung is the 'veteran' screenwriter and gets thumbs down.
Beyond gets nods for fx and a late but clever unfolding story line. The movie needed a deft touch and that's not Justin Lin. For all the action sequences Beyond weighed down by poor directing and dialogue.
Kept checking the time to see when we were getting to the end.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

5

BiasOct 8, 2016

Like eating cotton candy in the middle of the week when it would probably be better to have a decent meal. Not a big Star Trek fan, and that didn't change because of this movie. Kirk cowboys it up and Spock all rationalizes stuff andLike eating cotton candy in the middle of the week when it would probably be better to have a decent meal. Not a big Star Trek fan, and that didn't change because of this movie. Kirk cowboys it up and Spock all rationalizes stuff and whatever. Still, aliens mostly have humanoid bodies, but with different colors and oddly shaped heads. Humans too this time.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

SoapNuggetApr 26, 2021

At best Star Trek: Beyond basically comes down to, "I saw it, it was fine."

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

fantasyAug 11, 2016

Love Star Trek always have. This is a by the numbers shoot em up Western disguised as sci fi for kids with ADD that like to watch video games. The story line is just ridiculous as is the ending. Very disappointing!

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

4

greggaJul 25, 2016

When you get home from a movie like this and realise an hour later that you haven't even thought about it...well, that's how I sum up this film. Boringly predictable plot, no edge of your seat stuff. Something not working? Well, just talkWhen you get home from a movie like this and realise an hour later that you haven't even thought about it...well, that's how I sum up this film. Boringly predictable plot, no edge of your seat stuff. Something not working? Well, just talk some technobabble and hey presto, everything back online! There's nothing intellectually stimulating about this, I thought the first film with the new cast was good, but it seems to be going downhill fast.… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

4

AlphaRebelAug 9, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. So the great stuff: It's big, bold, action packed and filmed with some great cinematography, just what was needed for a cinemas blockbuster.
Now the bad: It's big, bold, action packed and very loud, not really what made the core of TREK (although it seems the reboot is moving more and more to a full on action franchise)

The movie has clearly been written by someone with a lot of love for the original material as it's jammed packed with jokes and easter eggs that point back to the original.
They line up some really great ideas and emperral the various members of the crew into their own little story arcs aaaaaaaaand then seem to hit creative bankruptcy, the final twist in the antagonists origin story and motivation is both rush and utterly nonsensical, and also leaves more questions then answers.

Also can't figure out why they even needed the "super weapon" that needs to be delivered by air vents (on space stations / ships that are supposed to be able to cope with decompression issues when they already had access to an unlimited swarm of drones and ships that were made on the planet that can rip through anything and everything kind of makes the clandestine efforts to trap the E and capture the other half of the super weapon utterly redundant. (also what about the first half of the weapon as they ancients sent both halves into space?)… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

4

EludiumQ36Feb 11, 2017

The perpetually flippant and cavalier attitudes exhibited in the face of overwhelming odds makes this more of a pre-teen comicfest than a serious film. Yes, it's got hundreds of millions in technical cinematics but it's all undone by theThe perpetually flippant and cavalier attitudes exhibited in the face of overwhelming odds makes this more of a pre-teen comicfest than a serious film. Yes, it's got hundreds of millions in technical cinematics but it's all undone by the juvenile nature of the imperative: Captain Kirk et al must always prevail in the end, no matter how implausible or just plain stupid. These can never be outstanding/classic films because of that - there's no element of genuine surprise. Star Trek follows the same plot formula every single time, the only thing that changes is the superficial layers of plot and nods to all facets of diversity. This type of entertainment can only appeal to the pre-teen/teen brain that hasn't developed sufficient capacity to critique. It's a shameless yet surefire money grab for that demographic's money - it never fails, but it never advances the art either. Yet, the writers ultimately know this. Near the end, Kirk even utters, "We change, we have to, or we spend the rest of our lives fighting the same battles." Amazing, hopefully that realization informs subsequent Trek films.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

AngusJul 23, 2016

Abbramsverse is just an action flick, will not call it the Kelvin Timeline to help Paramount distance themselves from the train wreck that is Abrams reputation after his last couple reboots. Not Star Trek unfortunately as they keep removingAbbramsverse is just an action flick, will not call it the Kelvin Timeline to help Paramount distance themselves from the train wreck that is Abrams reputation after his last couple reboots. Not Star Trek unfortunately as they keep removing the parts that make Star Trek unique.

Its basically Star Wars with phasers now and add in the latest ideological talking point from the San Francisco hipster religion.… Expand

8 of 17 users found this helpful89

All this user's reviews

4

MeritCobaMar 10, 2018

For a moment I felt myself dropped into the Mass Effect Andromeda game when confronted by what must be one of the most boring, generic adversary I have seen for a decade. Whereas in Andromeda they at least try to flesh out to enemy leaderFor a moment I felt myself dropped into the Mass Effect Andromeda game when confronted by what must be one of the most boring, generic adversary I have seen for a decade. Whereas in Andromeda they at least try to flesh out to enemy leader more, here we get you run-of-the mill generic reptilian looking baddy with a slavish following wanting to destroy the federation for reasons. He also seems to have the control a large fleet of ships and seems totally unaccountable to anyone. Excruciating boring are the few exchanges he has with Kirk and Uhura. Yes, yes, being the top dog is all that counts in our amoral universe.

I dare say that star trek heads the opposite of star wars as it denudes itself from anything that makes sense or makes you feel connected to the people. There are some attempts at this, but as someone said elsewhere. They nod at it and then continues with the relentless frantic action scenes that seem to topple over each-other. No pause is given as the movie goes from chase scene, to fight scene, to blow up scene. It is written large: there will be no moment to ponder. Of course there are a few moments in which pondering happens, but they are at the beginning, just to get them over with. Star Trek beyond baffles mostly by the outrageous: the sheer outrageous stupidity of the cast making one idiotic decision after the other, the sheer outrageous luck that gets them out of their predicament that those idiotic decisions put them into, the sheer idiocy of the writing that offers the outrageous funniest and outrageous ridiculous moments, such as the one where they blow up the enemies swarms of ship with an old rock song.

The biggest problem is that the cast of well established characters are in fact outrageous boring, with the exception of Uhura and some newcomers.

It would be better if Star Trek rebooted again and then introduced us with some new characters so that they can be fleshed out and explored. Give the whole movie some more depth and people motivation that make sense.

Just having a uninteresting star trek crew take on a generic baddy is.. (here it comes) beyond boring.

That all been said, if you like a relentless series of action scenes that does not pause for anything substantial, you will probably find that here. But to be honest: you get the same with Guardians of the Galaxy, but that has better characters, slightly more depth and more humor definitely. So if you have to face that choice, you know what you are getting into.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

hnielsenJul 27, 2016

I didn't like the film. Let's get that out of the way. Usually with metacritic user scores that means that you are expected to give whatever your are reviewing a zero, but in the interest of fairness I'll rate it a four. It was mediocre. TheI didn't like the film. Let's get that out of the way. Usually with metacritic user scores that means that you are expected to give whatever your are reviewing a zero, but in the interest of fairness I'll rate it a four. It was mediocre. The action sequences, cinematography and choreography were all fine. Simon Pegg and co. did their best to continue channeling the characters which Nemoy, Shatner, Kelley et al. birthed back in the day. Whenever I watch one of these Kelvin Timeline films, though, I always feel like there is something missing ... like I am watching a film made by people who have never actually seen Star Trek. Think the prisoners in Plato's allegory of the cave, except in this case, director Justin Lin never managed to escape and view the reality that was behind those shadows dancing across the walls. I know some people enjoyed the scene with Beastie Boys blaring in the background, but when I compare this with an episode of TNG like The Inner Light, I'm forced to shed nerd tears.… Expand

7 of 10 users found this helpful73

All this user's reviews

4

leaveitJul 29, 2016

It has a bald girl piloting a probe, a guy with a vendetta against the Federation, the Enterprise crashing and blowing up, a super weapon, and a warrior race as the enemies. In other words you've seen it all before.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

AvodeskormJul 23, 2016

Better then the other Jar Jar Abrams films. The biggest strength in this film, is that there is no one 'true' hero. It feels as if any one in the main cast could stand on their own as the main character. Though in the end, it's bogged down byBetter then the other Jar Jar Abrams films. The biggest strength in this film, is that there is no one 'true' hero. It feels as if any one in the main cast could stand on their own as the main character. Though in the end, it's bogged down by feeling like just another conventional action flick. Not much memorable about it, boring villain, dull story/plot, etc. etc. Basically, it just plays it too safe.… Expand

4 of 10 users found this helpful46

All this user's reviews

4

bdykstraJul 23, 2016

I wonder if J.J. Abrams got Lin to have this movie be so awful, folks would forget about their complaints about the last movie. "Oh you wanna see bad Star Trek? I'll show you bad Star Trek!"

10 of 18 users found this helpful108

All this user's reviews

4

ScienceAdvisorJul 24, 2016

Beware the shills on this one, they were mobilized en force (or is that en farce). This is far from a great Star Trek movie, when there is so very little Star Trek in it. They promised to get back to the roots, but all they did was take theBeware the shills on this one, they were mobilized en force (or is that en farce). This is far from a great Star Trek movie, when there is so very little Star Trek in it. They promised to get back to the roots, but all they did was take the merest thread of a story and give it the M. Bay treatment, with CG filler and over the top action, to make up the rest. They boldly went where everyone has been before, just like last time (just without the magic blood).… Expand

5 of 11 users found this helpful56

All this user's reviews

4

donaldistAug 2, 2016

38/100, or C
Say what you will about the J.J. Abrams films, but at least they have the ability to keep it up. This is just ridiculously boring, what with the cookie cutter Macguffin plot and incomprehensible action. There are a few grace38/100, or C
Say what you will about the J.J. Abrams films, but at least they have the ability to keep it up. This is just ridiculously boring, what with the cookie cutter Macguffin plot and incomprehensible action. There are a few grace notes here that in the past would have caused me to be more generous with my rating, but this has been a dire blockbuster year, I miss stuff like Edge of Tomorrow, Ghost Protocol, and John Wick, and this film gives Zoe Saldana nothing to do. Generic just doesn't merit a mixed review at this point.
Oh, and RIP Anton Yelchin. I'll miss his marked competence in diverse roles, and his adorable Russian accent.… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

4

sayyyywhatttJul 22, 2016

So let me first say, I'm not a trekkie so the formula for a great star trek movie may be lost on me. I will say I loved the first two movies in this series, which is why I was stoked to see this one. To my surprise I was very disappointed.So let me first say, I'm not a trekkie so the formula for a great star trek movie may be lost on me. I will say I loved the first two movies in this series, which is why I was stoked to see this one. To my surprise I was very disappointed. There were a few things that stood out to me as flaws, first was the shotty CGI. I feel like there were so many spots in this movie where I was like, oh thats a green screen, and there..... and there. I like to be taken on a journey while i'm watching a movie like star trek, or star wars (sorry if mentioning those two movies in the same sentence is taboo) and noticing bad cgi subtracts from that experience for me. Second, the set design, a good part of the movie I felt like they had some sets that were as if a 10 year old created. They looked really cheap, and made me think that they had a much lower budget. There were some instances where I was like... is that styrofoam. Third, a lot of acting seemed forced to me. Now again I'm not a trekkie so maybe that is how the original characters act, but for me a lot of the comedic timing was cringe worthy. I was not a fan of the doc at all, which is strange because, I feel like he was fine in the other movies. Again I haven't watched those for a while so maybe he was always like that. But I would say most of lines seemed like they we're trying to act if you know what i'm saying, just not a natural flow to them. Last thing I am going to talk about is the villian. For me especially following khan... this one just pales in comparison. I feel like there wasn't one moment were I was like, "this guy is evil, or shoot hes a mastermind." I felt that he was shallow and just super uninteresting. Guys I really wanted to like this movie I did! However I found myself looking at my phone and wanting the movie to just end. I will say the last quarter of the movie a lot of the problems I had seemed to be addressed and it got better. However by then its too late.… Expand

4 of 9 users found this helpful45

All this user's reviews

4

DrakePreatoriusJul 24, 2016

Star Trek Beyond (Spoiler Alert)
Drake Preatorius, writer for IDiSF.com
I waited in anticipation for this film. I was the first person in the theater on Friday morning. As a fanfiction writer, I was looking to see how closely the plots ofStar Trek Beyond (Spoiler Alert)
Drake Preatorius, writer for IDiSF.com

I waited in anticipation for this film. I was the first person in the theater on Friday morning. As a fanfiction writer, I was looking to see how closely the plots of my Krall stories measured up to actual plot of the film. I was surprised by the outcome. Mine are much better.
J.J. Abrams, creator of Fringe, director of Star Trek Beyond and Star Wars decided to step aside for this film. Instead, they selected Justin Lin as the director. As you all probably know, Lin has directed the Fast and Furious franchise for several years. Therein lies the first problem with this film. It is no longer a science fiction franchise. It is now an action film franchise, replete with motorcycle chases, fighting scenes and a constant barrage of phaser fire.
Without revealing the plot, which was threadbare, it would be sufficient to say it was like eating a bowl of stone soup. Kirk is bored with his role of captain and after only three years as a captain, with no Starfleet degree, he applies for a job as a vice-admiral. He seemed to feel that the job was unchallenging, yet throughout the film he constantly announces that he would be nothing without Spock. This leads us to the next shortcoming of the film, the triad.
Star Trek fanboys whined like babies who had been pulled from their momma’s teets when Uhura replaced McCoy as one of the lead characters in the first two films. The Star Trek powers finally relented and attempted to recreate the “bromance” between these fellas, but they failed. The truth is, it cannot be done on film. The relationship between Kirk, Bones and Spock developed over three seasons as the actors worked closely together. The relationships between these three characters in the film seemed inauthentic. Kirk is in love with Kirk, which is not too far from case in the television version and although there is banter between Spock and McCoy throughout the film, the chemistry that existed in the television show just doesn’t exist between Karl Urban and Zachary Quinto.
This leads us to the third misfire in the film. It is a rehash of the Star Trek 2009. We get to see the same stunts, over again and this time there are no surprises, falling ships rising, Kirk floating in space, fancy transporter tricks and most disappointing, the amber effect from the Abram’s TV series Fringe. I found myself falling asleep halfway through the film.
What they did right was add a bit more content about the female characters. Uhura and Jayla kick butt and take names. There is also a low level female villain and the last minute addition of Shohreh Aghdashloo as Commodore Paris which contributes little to the plot. It comes across as tokenism. One is left wondering if she was related to Lieutenant Tom Paris and his father Admiral Paris from the Voyager show, or if Pegg just couldn’t think of any other names.
I hear that there is another Star Trek in the works. The best thing Paramount can do is wrench this franchise from the hands of J.J. Abrams and Roberto Orci and hire some DS9 and Voyager writers. They, at least, are familiar with the Star Trek canon. The other thing they can do to save the franchise is to stop courting the video game crowd, who prefer Star Wars anyway, and put the science fiction back into the Star trek franchise.… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

4

jonsnow13Jul 25, 2016

For an action flick, I would give it a 6 out of 10. It had good action scenes at times, but mostly the type of stunts you'd see in fast and furious not in a star trek movie. This is the problem with this... I am a Star Trek fan and youFor an action flick, I would give it a 6 out of 10. It had good action scenes at times, but mostly the type of stunts you'd see in fast and furious not in a star trek movie. This is the problem with this... I am a Star Trek fan and you know what? I watched those shows to satisfy my interest in the unknown - the galaxy. Every episode was a new experience, they had to discover it and figure out what was going on and why and really break down how to fix the problem. This movie - "We're sliding down the ship weeeeee! Yes it's half exploding! Yes there's jagged metal things everywhere and a normal human would die when landing after this but weeeeee!"
This is not Star Trek. Star Trek is coming across the unknown, or trying investigate what a potential hostile species is up to. It's about the crew, working together, to discover information that might help them solve the problem ahead. It's slow, methodical. This is fast, furious, and cars in space.

*SPOILERS* When they show his video of him talking about how he's going to get revenge, he says he only has a couple crew members left.... then where did he get this army of 10,000 flying space marines who's helmets never come off? If he can make 10,000 ships then why is his infrastructure looking like a homeless person on a mountain? It's one of those self-fullfilling stories where everything is convenient and in place so the story moves along regardless of how absurd it is that they are so PERFECT at everything they do. Star Trek was methodical, slow and thought provoking. None of this was in this film.

Hasn't A Game of Thrones taught anyone about movies/shows/entertainment?! Ground your show in a bit of reality, make the people human not gods, and you'll get a better involvement from the audience.… Expand

7 of 10 users found this helpful73

All this user's reviews

4

dergigglerAug 3, 2016

Don't get me wrong, this is one of the coolest-looking movies of all time and the sound design is great, but the story is garbage and the characters have no motivation to do anything. The only reason anything happens is because the scriptDon't get me wrong, this is one of the coolest-looking movies of all time and the sound design is great, but the story is garbage and the characters have no motivation to do anything. The only reason anything happens is because the script says so. The writing is weird and the acting isn't very good. It reuses the same elements of drama-additions that the first two movies use, and even if the movie was great it would still feel like a drag. The action is okay but since that and the visuals are what Lin focused on it feels like the action should be much better than it is. A lot of the action is visual but not actual fighting. There is, however, a lack of lens-flares, but I would have doubled the Abrams amount of them if it meant I'd get a good movie.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

teebowAug 5, 2016

been a fan for a long time but i found this film a bit contrived it spent so long paying tribute to the past the story or lack of story slipped through without notice the story was like store brand coffee thin and weak and without much flavorbeen a fan for a long time but i found this film a bit contrived it spent so long paying tribute to the past the story or lack of story slipped through without notice the story was like store brand coffee thin and weak and without much flavor and easy to forget it was the 50th anniversary and it sucked i think a quote general chang would have liked with slight update first sack all the writers sorry but that's how i feel on another note i hope the re cast Chekov maybe make him a cousin saying pavel chekov is a common name in russia in the 23rd century and has a tribute to actor Anton Yelchin, make his middle name Anton… Expand

5 of 8 users found this helpful53

All this user's reviews

4

EuripidesAug 11, 2016

This was not a Star Trek movie to be honest. Just a fast paced action movie with a sci-fi skin. The tempo doesn't stop for 5mins to take in any of the Star Trek universe in the slightest. So disappointing. I'd say a lot had to do with cuttingThis was not a Star Trek movie to be honest. Just a fast paced action movie with a sci-fi skin. The tempo doesn't stop for 5mins to take in any of the Star Trek universe in the slightest. So disappointing. I'd say a lot had to do with cutting and editing, but it's nonsense. I feel bad for Simon Pegg who's a fan :(… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

gioasjSep 11, 2016

From the generic taste of the movie to the generic motivations of the villain everything in this movie feels completely casual and never serious, it just does not flow.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

JcondicNov 21, 2016

Whenever I think of Star Trek now I always think of Roger Ebert’s Review of the 2009 film. “The Gene Roddenberry years, when stories might play with questions of science, ideals or philosophy, have been replaced by stories reduced to loud andWhenever I think of Star Trek now I always think of Roger Ebert’s Review of the 2009 film. “The Gene Roddenberry years, when stories might play with questions of science, ideals or philosophy, have been replaced by stories reduced to loud and colorful action. Like so many franchises, it’s more concerned with repeating a successful formula than going boldly where no “Star Trek” has gone before.” Star trek should be more than a spectacle yet it’s not, and though this film is better than the second one in the rebooted series it is still a film you can turn your brain off and watch. I wish the film would have been more about science and discovery, learning about new civilizations, merging peace amongst races etc. instead we get another film where one race wants to destroy everyone else with limited reasoning. Peace isn’t created without completely destroying the enemy. Roger ended his review with the following “The new movie essentially intends to reboot the franchise with younger characters and carry on as before. The movie deals with narrative housekeeping. Perhaps the next one will engage these characters in a more challenging and devious story, one more about testing their personalities than re-establishing them.” I got to say the film is entertaining to a point but the characters are the same through three films now. http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/star-trek-2009… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

EggpainJul 30, 2017

A brain dead action flick in a faint shell of Star Trek. Almost felt insulted as a long time fan watching this.The story is simple and straight forward enough yet it still has major holes in both logic and character motives, especially forA brain dead action flick in a faint shell of Star Trek. Almost felt insulted as a long time fan watching this.The story is simple and straight forward enough yet it still has major holes in both logic and character motives, especially for the villian part. The movie do carefully pays tributes to the the original series and late Nimoy, but aside from that, it's everything a Star Trek movie shouldn't be, which, makes this whole mess feels even more sad.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

CoreGamer1408Dec 9, 2018

Reminds me of some high budget bad pop song video. Classic Star Trek is officially dead now and now just a noisy and empty pop song mess in a movie format. Devoid of classic Star Trek heart and soul.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

wiiy71Dec 30, 2017

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

xortimFeb 20, 2019

This is just Fast and Furious in space. Bad plot, poorly written dialog, too many vehicle based action scenes. Let this version of Trek die on the vine.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

LamontRaymondAug 3, 2016

I don't do this often, but I walked out before the movie ended. Bored to death by it. Sure, there were some funny moments, but it got severely tedious. The first 2 "new" Star Trek films are vastly superior.

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

3

Ivan665Mar 14, 2017

Very stupid movie, nerer make the mistake of watching it. The plot is moronic and predictible, the characters are bland, the action is lackluster, the effects are just decent. Its barely a sci fi movie.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

NathonasAug 17, 2016

Star Trek Beyond has the flashy cinematography and visuals you'd come to expect from a blockbuster sci fi film, but that's about the only good thing.

The plot is poorly-written plot with silly, meaningless dialogue. Scene after scene thatStar Trek Beyond has the flashy cinematography and visuals you'd come to expect from a blockbuster sci fi film, but that's about the only good thing.

The plot is poorly-written plot with silly, meaningless dialogue. Scene after scene that make little to no sense, and many instances that should've ended with everyone dying.

Confusing character motivations. For example why did they decide to go into the nebula on the word of a character they just met, and with the Federation's best ship and full crew?

Cliche upon cliche - characters explaining things for no reason, good guy letting bad guy deliver a speech in a key moment, etc.

Completely wasted villain who looked menacing but was 100% one-dimensional and barely made any sense after his motivation was explained.

The first re-imagined Star Trek was actually pretty good - a decent mix of sci-fi and action, but this film is absolute garbage.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

3

SpiRoOct 21, 2016

I really wanted to write long review explaining everything wrong in this movie. But then i realized that would consume too much time and i already wasted my life watching this movie. So without any further adieu..

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

AxeTJul 24, 2016

Whether you are a longtime fan who has seen it all before or a newcomer to the Star Trek series, how you could not be bored out of your mind sitting through this is unfathomable. On the one hand it's recycled rehash with no spark ofWhether you are a longtime fan who has seen it all before or a newcomer to the Star Trek series, how you could not be bored out of your mind sitting through this is unfathomable. On the one hand it's recycled rehash with no spark of originality much less intelligence. On the other, if you haven't seen it all before you would be baffled by this insider reboot-sequel. Either way, it's very thin. The only thing it's beyond is boring!
Put it this way, I might even take the very first Star Trek movie from 1979 over this, because as dreadfully boring as that non-eventful debut was, it at least had a true sci-fi gothic space opera realism to it. This thing is wall to walk cartoon action, and as I've warned so many times - non-stop over-the-top action is every bit as boring as no action!
The visual effects are the best part, but at this stage in cinematic history great VFX is a given. That said, there are some clunky shots in this!
The director is a mechanic for hire veteran of the laughably awful, silly "Fast and Furious" series. Obviously he can manage a set and technically understands "moviemaking", however he is not a gifted storyteller nor what a real director is, or at least used to be since the studio monkeys hire a lot of these types to helm their tent poles and otherwise now. We don't need more dime a dozen technicians Hollywood, we need those better at story craft!
The previous two JJ Abrams directed entries were good (both 8 ratings here), with the first being a true origin story prequel, and the second being a sequel/remake with twist which turned off most and infuriated some old fans. For some reason I went with it. Without really giving anything away, we can expect whales in the next entry because it's clear they are remaking the original movie series film by film while spinning it to something they are selling as new. Yeah, right. Well the house of mirrors aspect isn't the problem, it's the lack of involving story here that is. JJ the executive producer now gets sloppy with the property. Besides the weak story he stupidly goes without the anamorphic flare aesthetic established in the previous two. Why? Your wife told you to lose them? Put on a pair of pants pc leftist p---y! Criticisms in general of the flares being overdone? So maybe scale it back a bit, but don't lose that aesthetic altogether! Now this one doesn't match! Besides, the flares were fine and a great new visual motif that fit this futuristic content perfectly. If he had done it for "Star Wars" too, that would have been a terrible mistake of course. Here it's fine. Stand your ground wimpy nerd!
Lastly, a word on the cast. All three principles are doing impersonations. That's not good acting! Imagine if Daniel Craig or his predecessors did impressions of Sean Connery? Chris Pine is a solid actor with a look for sure, but he is no Bill Shatner and he never will be. Not even close, because one thing true stars have is personality. Say what you will about Shatner, but he became a big star because he's a true original and has personality galore. He also has proven to be a very fine actor many times out, granted not always. What sets Pine apart from dozens of good looking capable young Hollywood actors who could just as easily slip into this role? Not much.… Expand

9 of 16 users found this helpful97

All this user's reviews

3

SH1Sep 24, 2016

While this film had a good premise, it was hamstrung by the new style adopted by the Star Trek franchise. It is sad that an average episode of Deep Space Nine or Voyager is better than a massive blockbuster.

I have decided to not watch anyWhile this film had a good premise, it was hamstrung by the new style adopted by the Star Trek franchise. It is sad that an average episode of Deep Space Nine or Voyager is better than a massive blockbuster.

I have decided to not watch any “newer” Star Trek as part of my boycott of the Remake Industry. In my opinion this is a cash grabbing effort rather than a work of creativity.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

twall3Dec 7, 2017

Forgettable, overly frantic waste of time and money. No charm, no wisdom, no visual restraint or actual suspense. I guess that's why I have 0 interest in the fast and furious movies. The director infused his nothingness into the brillianceForgettable, overly frantic waste of time and money. No charm, no wisdom, no visual restraint or actual suspense. I guess that's why I have 0 interest in the fast and furious movies. The director infused his nothingness into the brilliance that J.J. Abrams established. Unless they dump this director, I will not be watching future Star Trek movies.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

3

megacritic321Jul 23, 2016

Man this was one boring badly written script. No substance don't understand how so many people gave it positive reviews. The story line was as typical as you can get with no substance. It was like many start trek movies stitched into one crapMan this was one boring badly written script. No substance don't understand how so many people gave it positive reviews. The story line was as typical as you can get with no substance. It was like many start trek movies stitched into one crap movie.When the jokes came through the film so bad they weren't funny anymore,seriously ! The previous movie was way better than this.
Watchable on DVD only, very disappointed.… Expand

20 of 28 users found this helpful208

All this user's reviews

3

ComandanteCobraJul 29, 2016

For me it was a missing opportunity, I liked the other two reboots but not this one.
The movie has a predictable screenplay, you will foresee what will happen in every scene and what the dialogues will be.
Both main villain andFor me it was a missing opportunity, I liked the other two reboots but not this one.
The movie has a predictable screenplay, you will foresee what will happen in every scene and what the dialogues will be.
Both main villain and co-protagonist have two dimensional personality, clichéd appearance and speaks only platitudes sentences.....consequently they both fail to inspire menace or sympathy.
If you are looking for an action movie you will be disappointed because the action is there (plenty of it) but is a little silly and not good enough to be the film's main course.
Sadly It's an unsatisfying film also if you want "Star Trek franchise" to be something more than a outer space action flick, with familiar characters tossed into a standard mix of pew pew, punches, jokes, bad language and scenes of cities going boom.
Special effect are of mixed quality: ships,planets are really great but aliens, suits and some weapons seems too fake.
A little part of the plot remind me of wing commander iv....in that game it worked really well but here not so much.… Expand

6 of 10 users found this helpful64

All this user's reviews

3

ishadowAug 4, 2016

I've seen this movie week ago and still can't believe how bad it is. Although new Star Trek movies were more of blockbusters than sci-fi old Star Trek series were, but this one is just simply bad. Transformers bad. Plot is nonexistent, it'sI've seen this movie week ago and still can't believe how bad it is. Although new Star Trek movies were more of blockbusters than sci-fi old Star Trek series were, but this one is just simply bad. Transformers bad. Plot is nonexistent, it's just do something to show huge explosions and some over the top actions sequences.
Change characters and ship name and look, and there will be nothing else reminding you that this is Star Trek universe.
If you watched some of the series and you are familiar with Star Trek lore, you will be just furious at the end for how stupid everything went.

Previous movies were also action filled, but they maintained a lot of Star Trek feel. This movie is just action, explosions, stupid dialogs that are trying to be funny, and more explosions.

Furthermore 3D effects are very weak, and CGI is unimaginative, Just simulate explosions with huge amount of particles.

Everything feels just cheap. There are only few sets used over and over again. You can also fill some basic plot developing techniques like showing early some objects or places that will be used, destroyed or burned to the ground.

I can't believe that this movie was even brought to existence. There are so many good stories in the lore that could be reused, and they used something so basic and primitive.

Overall:
+ original cast,
+ Leonard Nimoy tribute,
+ few first minutes, when you still hope it will be a good movie,

- plot,
- everything else.… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

3

aequatisJul 27, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. What (according to the second trailer and the beginning of the movie) promised to be an unusual incisive character developing story and a movie with a dark feeling set in a vast Star Trek universe, turned out to be blunt and unthoughtfully action packed without any character depth.
Scotty said "lets hope this doesn't get messy". However, it did.

-----
-- Antagonist has no (clear) motives
-- Hardly any character development of crew members to last an entire (or another) movie
-- Hard to oversee action scenes (flipping of the saucer disk)
-- Another enterprise destroyed: death of countless crewmembers and destruction of the entire ship has totally no emotional resemblance anymore
-- messy, unclear and unconvincing storyline
-----

+++++
++ Producer JJ Abrams keeps inventing new visual effects, like the visually attracting warp bubble and the peculiar but interesting onboard camera looking at the Enterprise while it is shot away.
++ Architecture of the Yorktown starbase
+++++… Expand

13 of 18 users found this helpful135

All this user's reviews

Star Trek Beyond

User Reviews