The STAR TREK films ranked from Best to Worst
The even=good/odd=bad theory is a myth with not a shred of truth. I encourage people to think for themselves and resist the herd mentality.
You could shuffle the first six movies (on this list) around in any order and I wouldn't mind a bit.
You could shuffle the first six movies (on this list) around in any order and I wouldn't mind a bit.
List activity
329 views
• 1 this weekCreate a new list
List your movie, TV & celebrity picks.
13 titles
- DirectorLeonard NimoyStarsWilliam ShatnerLeonard NimoyDeForest KelleyTo save Earth from an alien probe, Admiral James T. Kirk and his fugitive crew go back in time to San Francisco in 1986 to retrieve the only beings who can communicate with it: humpback whales.Everything magically comes together on this fourth film outing to give us a tale every bit as good as the best TV episodes. In fact, it’s better because it’s a feature film and looks so good (unlike the cheap sets of the original three-year TV run). I gotta hand it to Leonard Nimoy for coming up with such an intriguingly bizarre and original tale involving humpback whales that communicate with aliens. If I didn’t know better, I’d think he was influenced by some trippy foreign substance.
At the end of the day, The Voyage Home is great fun and grand entertainment of the highest order—even if you’re not a Trek fan; in other words, this is the most accessible of the feature films for non-Trekkers. Without a doubt, the best of the film series (at least up to the reboots)—the most entertaining, the most creative, the most popular and the most profitable. It's marred only by the dull tie-everything-up climax. - DirectorRobert WiseStarsWilliam ShatnerLeonard NimoyDeForest KelleyWhen an alien spacecraft of enormous power is spotted approaching Earth, Admiral James T. Kirk resumes command of the overhauled USS Enterprise in order to intercept it.Like the episodes “The Corbomite Maneuver” and “Metamorphosis” (#31), The Motion Picture is a mature, cerebral, sci-fi story with very little action. Most kids and young adults won’t like it or grasp it. Its depth is evidenced by the emotional whollop experienced when Spock grasps Kirk’s hand in Sickbay (truly revealing emotion) or when Spock weeps for V’ger and comments on its personal dilemma, not to mention Decker’s self-sacrificial fusion with the machine so that it may evolve to the next level of awareness. The fact that the film inspires such a profound reaction proves that it’s not just a bad film that apologists try to make excuses for as critics claim, e.g. “It’s deep and awe-inspiring; you just don’t understand it.” I’m not making excuses; it’s simply the truth. If you are unable to accept this then perhaps it’s because YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH (um, just kidding, sort of).
Some may argue that the picture can’t be good because its production was so troubled, but just as sometimes the most beautiful & talented people are birthed from the most harrowing deliveries, so some of the greatest cinematic pieces are created from very troubled productions. Apocalypse Now is Exhibit A.
My conclusion on the film runs parallel to that of film critic Roger Ebert, who pointed out that some were too hasty to pigeonhole the picture; he suggested that viewers should relax and let the movie give them a good time, as he did. In other words, just accept the film as is, and you’ll be entertained — put on a pot of coffee (you’re gonna need it, lol), kick back and relish the movie magic.
Let me add that The Motion Picture was one of the most expensive films of its time, but it did well at the box office and thus made a decent profit — a testimony to how hungry the public was for Star Trek after ten long years. In fact, aside from Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, ST:TMP is still the most profitable of all the Star Trek movies featuring the original cast, making four times its expense worldwide; it even set a record of almost $12 million during its opening weekend at the U.S. box office. It therefore can’t very well be the cinematic turd that many critics claim. Also, consider the fact that The Motion Picture made more at the box office than the acclaimed films Alien and Apocalypse Now, both released the same year.
Lastly, although this film is definitely an “A” level picture as far as epic, awe-inspiring pieces of cinematic art go, I can understand why some would rate it lower. In such cases I suggest making the necessary mental adjustments and watching it again.
Say what you will, but The Motion Picture towers alone, utterly unique in the feature film series — a profoundly spiritual TRIUMPH. - DirectorJ.J. AbramsStarsChris PineZachary QuintoZoe SaldanaAfter the crew of the Enterprise find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one-man weapon of mass destruction.Abrams and his writing team had the monumental task of following up a tremendously successful film. They had to build on the predecessor while attracting new fans. As such, the movie had to stand on its own without relying too much on the 2009 film. Well, they succeeded in spades! As great as Star Trek (the movie) was as a reboot of the series and an introduction of a new cast playing the original characters in their younger days, I like Into Darkness even more.
Being made by the same creative team that produced Star Trek it has the same feel, except that the viewer is now used to the new cast (assuming they’ve seen the first film). These actors ARE the characters and, without exception, they own their roles. Plus the introductions are out of the way so we’re freed-up to enjoy a whole new story set on the solid foundation already set. Like the previous film, Into Darkness expertly meshes elements of numerous genres into a cohesive whole. It’s a sci-fi space adventure with doses of drama, action, suspense, war and romance. In a sense, it tries to be all things to all people and somehow miraculously succeeds. Whatever you’re in the mood for, it’s here.
The idea of introducing a younger Khan at a much earlier date than in “Space Seed” (#24) was brilliant. Not only do we get Khan as the antagonist, we also get Klingons and a rogue Starfleet officer to boot. Furthermore, the continuity with the Original Series and films is great. With the presence of Khan there are obvious parallels to Star Trek II, but in my humble opinion it’s leagues better. It just has more drive and pizzazz, not to mention a more interesting story. With the phenomenal success of Abrams’ two films — and I don’t just mean financially, but all-around success, including the monumental task of getting young actors to play characters that the public’s known for almost half a century — we can look forward to many more adventures of the original crew, the first and best version of Star Trek. - DirectorDavid CarsonStarsPatrick StewartWilliam ShatnerMalcolm McDowellWith the help of long presumed dead Captain Kirk, Captain Picard must stop a deranged scientist willing to murder on a planetary scale in order to enter a space matrix.I wasn’t too fond of the concept of having the two captains from separate generations meet. Why? It just seemed like a quaint idea that I didn’t think could be realistically pulled off. Also, I heard highly contrasting reports on the film; some claimed that it was one of the best Star Trek films while others, like Trekspert Mark Altman, lambasted it as a soporific dud. I also heard it referred to as “merely passable.” Because of these factors I didn’t see the film for ten years (!); not that I went out of my way to avoid it; I just didn’t have any desire to see it. Well, I’ve seen the film six times now and my respect has grown with each viewing. I can certainly see why some don’t like it or don’t “get” it: The story is just plain convoluted and some things aren’t explained very well (So what? Doesn’t mystery intrinsically “come with the territory” of space adventure?).
Regardless, I feel Generations is ambitious, high-concept sci-fi of the highest order; it leaves the viewer with many interesting questions to ponder long afterwards. Although the Nexus has been criticized as a mere gimmick to get Kirk and Picard together, I find the concept fascinating: No matter how much we want it, an illusory paradise is just that — an illusion. As far as I’m concerned, the concept of the Nexus and its implementation into the storyline is nothing short of brilliant. Who created the Nexus? Who else but the Talosians, the 'antagonists' of Trek's very first episode, "The Cage"! (And repeated in the Original Series’ only two-parter “The Menagerie”). Think about it.
Furthermore, the film has numerous highlights: The usual Trek humor, Data’s amusing experiences with the emotion chip, Malcolm McDowell’s outstanding performance as the mad Soran, his believable obsession and justifications, B’Etor & Lursa and the renegade Klingons, the startling obliteration of them and their vessel, the thrilling crash-landing of the Enterprise-D, the meeting of Kirk and Picard in the Nexus, the final showdown with Soran and Kirk’s death.
Needless to say, Generations does far more than offer mere juvenile space battles. This “passing-of-the-torch” installment requires an attention span and an appreciation for high-concept sci-fi; it will bore to tears those for whom Star Trek means only neato spacecrafts and superficial space dogfights (not that there's anything wrong with that, lol). In addition, Generations has the gonads to make bold changes — killing off a major iconic character, and fairly prominent support characters as well, not to mention destroying the Enterprise-D.
Conclusion: Generations is science-fiction for grown-ups and youth with advanced cerebral development. All others should stick with juvenile space fantasy. - DirectorLeonard NimoyStarsWilliam ShatnerLeonard NimoyDeForest KelleyAdmiral Kirk and his bridge crew risk their careers stealing the decommissioned U.S.S. Enterprise to return to the restricted Genesis Planet to recover Spock's body.The Search for Spock is a great Star Trek picture embellished by the welcome return of Trek’s quirky brand of humor. The story expertly meshes comedic touches with dead-serious tragedy. It’s also enjoyable and compelling to witness Kirk & crew in the wry and unexpected role of Starfleet rebels, risking everything to honor their fallen comrade. Another highlight is the return of the Klingons as major villains, with upgraded make-up no less. The only problem with this pic is revealed in the title—there’s no Spock. At least not until the very end; but the film does a fabulous job of instilling a sense of the Vulcan’s lingering presence throughout. At the same time, this proves that Star Trek is greater than any one character: Just as Spock’s absence in this film doesn’t prevent it from being great, so Kirk’s absence from the main storyline in “The Galileo Seven” doesn’t keep that episode from greatness.
The Search for Spock climaxes with the powerful image of Spock’s mates gathered around the freshly-resurrected Vulcan. This scene is well worth the wait; all Spock has to do is raise an eyebrow to fill the viewer with incredible warmth and joy (not to mention the shedding of a few tears).
Lastly, I gotta hand it to the creators for coming up with an inspired and (seemingly) credible way to resurrect Spock; the Genesis device was, by happenstance, the perfect catalyst. Sadly, Star Trek III is inexplicably condemned by fundamentalist Trekkers as a failure or, at best, mediocre.
They’re wrong. - DirectorJ.J. AbramsStarsChris PineZachary QuintoSimon PeggThe brash James T. Kirk tries to live up to his father's legacy with Mr. Spock keeping him in check as a vengeful Romulan from the future creates black holes to destroy the Federation one planet at a time.With the lukewarm performance of the last Next Generation film — 2002’s Star Trek: Nemesis — producer & director J.J. Abrams knew he had to do more than simply go back to the Academy years of the original characters. By the time this film was conceived, Star Trek was over four decades old and had accumulated more than 40 years of lore. As such, the universe of Star Trek was bogged down by its own elaborate tenets and had become somewhat sterile and predictable. Personally, I felt Nemesis was a solid installment in the series, but I agree that Star Trek was too mired in orthodoxy for its own good. Something needed to shake things up and that’s exactly what Abrams and his writers did with this film — not only do they place young Kirk & crew in an alternate timeline, they throw in drastic changes, like destroying Vulcan and allowing only 10,000 survivors. This, of course, offended fundamentalist trekkers to no end. They, in essence, responded the same way Charleton Heston did at the end of the renowned Planet of the Apes: “You Maniacs! You blew it up! Damn you! God damn you all to hell!” Although I initially felt blowing up Vulcan was a bit much, Abrams’ changes accomplished his goal — they shook everything up, big time. More importantly, the film is entertaining and was massively poplular at the box office. It was a huge gamble, but it paid off.
Despite this, there were some things that held me back from fully embracing this installment the first couple of times I saw it, even though I was entertained. For one, like everyone else I had to get used to the new cast in the roles of the original characters, which I did by the time 2013’s Into Darkness rolled around. Secondly, the story is somewhat convoluted and it wasn’t until the third time I watched it that I fully grasped the major plot points (aduh). But this really isn’t a bad thing. It’s like certain songs you hear for the first time and you don’t wholly appreciate them, yet something keeps you coming back and they become lasting favorites.
What really turned me off was the sequence where Kirk is literally ejected from the Enterprise by Spock, lands on the closest planet to Vulcan and is randomly chased by an alien predator, and then another one — much bigger — which leads him to seek shelter in a random cave where —voilà— he meets old Spock! This series of coincidences was just too much for my logical brain to accept and it took me right out of the story. But a Trekspert explained to me that destiny is an important theme in the film. Although it’s an alternate reality, Kirk and Spock are DESTINED to hook up and become comrades and best friends. As such, events work in their favor to bring this about. I was able to see this on my third viewing, not to mention the fascinating irony of young Spock rejecting Kirk and old Spock saving him.
Bottom line: Star Trek is entertaining on so many levels. It has science-fiction, drama, comedy, romance, action and horror, not to mention the labyrinthian plot, and yet it all somehow gels together into a cohesive, entertaining whole and has re-watch appeal. Lastly, it’s just great seeing the original crew back in action, albeit younger versions of themselves, and with their original uniforms. Star Trek successfully introduces the original characters to a whole new generation and does it expertly. What more could you ask for? - DirectorStuart BairdStarsPatrick StewartJonathan FrakesBrent SpinerThe Enterprise is diverted to the Romulan homeworld Romulus, supposedly because they want to negotiate a peace treaty. Captain Picard and his crew discover a serious threat to the Federation once Praetor Shinzon plans to attack Earth.So many people inexplicably love to hate Star Trek: Nemesis, but it's actually a solid Trek film featuring the Next Generation cast.
The lengthy space battle in the final act is second to none in the Star Trek franchise. But that's not the main reason I like it.
I like the whole exploration of the conflict of flesh (Shinzon) and spirit (Picard) and the debate over nature (Picard) vs. nurture (Shinzon), or is it nature (Shinzon) vs. nurture (Picard)? Like Star Trek VII: Generations, it entertains while delving into deeper themes, although Generations is better (a near masterpiece, in fact).
Data's course of action at the end is way more compelling and moving than a similar scene in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Think about it, Data becomes the Christ figure by making the ultimate gesture of love and loyalty; an android, no less.
Speaking of TWOK, Nemesis is often said to be a quasi-remake of that film, but it's not. It shares some plot elements of the trilogy (TWOK, TSFS and TVH), but that's it (the space stand-off, Data's sacrifice and the "resurrection" of a blank-version of himself). It's an homage, not a remake, and better than the overrated TWOK.
I don't think NEMESIS ranks with the greatest of Trek films -- like TMP, TSFS, TVH and Generations -- but it's certainly a solid Trek movie, along the lines of The Undiscovered Country.
Concerning the incredible ire the dunebuggy sequence has provoked, I'm at a loss. The landing party had to cover a lot of terrain, how else would they do it without something to travel in? Why walk miles on end when you don't have to? Besides, it's a fun scene and gives the austere proceedings a much-needed jolt at that particular point.
Be sure to check out the deleted scenes; there are a couple that shouldn't have been cut, like the one involving Riker's joke on Picard's new First Officer and an amusing one involving Picard and Data having a discussion over wine.
Anyway, those who keep shoveling hate on "Nemesis" are full of you know what. - DirectorNicholas MeyerStarsWilliam ShatnerLeonard NimoyDeForest KelleyOn the eve of retirement, Kirk and McCoy are charged with assassinating the Klingon High Chancellor and imprisoned. The Enterprise crew must help them escape to thwart a conspiracy aimed at sabotaging the last best hope for peace.This is the last film in which the entire original cast appears together and it’s a more-than-solid outing verging on greatness, a fabulous chronicling of the events leading up to the Klingon-Federation alliance as depicted in The Next Generation TV series.
Although The Undiscovered Country lacks the profundities of, say, The Final Frontier or The Motion Picture, it’s a superb sci-fi romp. The story is very involving and fun, highlighted by a nice whodunit scenario. What more could a Trek fan ask for?
It’s very close to an “A” level outing, in fact, I wouldn’t argue one bit with those who deem it such. Needless to say, a fine and fitting way to end the series with the (entire) original cast.
"Cry havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War!" - DirectorWilliam ShatnerStarsWilliam ShatnerLeonard NimoyDeForest KelleyCaptain Kirk and his crew must deal with Mr. Spock's long-lost half-brother who hijacks the Enterprise for an obsessive search for God at the center of the galaxy.This is an earnest and noble effort by William Shatner to tackle a subject worthy of Star Trek. Unfortunately it’s become law in Trekkerdom to pick it apart as a turkey of astronomical proportions; consequently a sort of bandwagon phenomenon has developed amongst the cookie-cutter fundamentalist Trekkers who have failed to evolve to the level of independent thought. (They’re no doubt still mad at Shatner for telling them to “get a life” ). It’s become such a cliché to revile Star Trek V that it has become the “Spock’s Brain” of the feature films, only worse.
I strongly disagree. The Final Frontier has some obvious flaws: The story goes over the edge into camp at times and the climax fizzles out because Shatner didn’t have the funds to give us what he intended (producers unexpectedly cut the budget DURING production). Others complain that the special effects aren’t up to snuff, but Star Trek was never about great F/X (with the exception of The Motion Picture). It’s about PEOPLE, their joy of living, and their grand spirit of exploration; this is what The Final Frontier is all about and it scores high marks in these areas. No other Trek film showcases the character interplay of the Kirk/Spock/McCoy troika to the level of intimacy shown in this film, and only The Voyage Home compares to (and exceeds) the joyful energy of the characters displayed here. As far as the spirit of exploration goes, Star Trek V surpasses all other Trek adventures. After all, what exploration is greater than the quest for ultimate reality and the Creator of all? In fact, this picture touches on many potent themes: personal pain, healing, faith, family, love, fanaticism, terrorism, the desire to know ultimate reality (absolute truth), God, false beliefs, loyalty, repentance and forgiveness; name another film in the series that successfully addresses so many weighty elements and yet remains entertaining. I prefer deeper subtexts like this mixed with space adventure, which is why The Motion Picture and Generations are two of my favorites of the film series; The Voyage Home is too in light of its two-pronged subtext (ecology and the characters figuratively coming home). Combining thought-provoking themes with space adventure is a cornerstone of Star Trek.
Unfortunately, The Final Frontier was doomed with critics and Trek fundamentalists the moment it was disclosed that Shatner would direct it; the knives hit the sharpening stones well before it was ever released and once the buzz got out that it was a bad film a feeding frenzy ensued. It goes without saying that The Final Frontier is the hands-down winner for Most Underrated Trek Movie. It would’ve been better received if Shatner had directed it anonymously and if it were released after Star Trek III; as it was, it came out on the heels of Star Trek IV, the pinnacle of the feature films. If The Wrath of Khan came out after The Voyage Home, it would have been deemed a mediocre affair.
The bottom line is that Star Trek V is a solid installment in the series; it possesses a wealth of great scenes. For those who don’t share my appreciation, you at least have to admit that it’s a good romp. I’ll be honest with you, I’d view The Final Frontier any day before I’d watch The Wrath of Khan. By all means, watch it again for the first time. - DirectorJonathan FrakesStarsPatrick StewartJonathan FrakesBrent SpinerThe Borg travel back in time intent on preventing Earth's first contact with an alien species. Captain Picard and his crew pursue them to ensure that Zefram Cochrane makes his maiden flight reaching warp speed.The Borg are an excellent villain and one of the greatest contributions of The Next Generation TV series, along with all the elaboration on Klingon culture. Here the Borg are augmented by the introduction of a Queen (Alice Krige), which some feel detracted from the impersonal and eerie race while others think enhanced them; it makes no difference to me.
There are some gems to mine from the proceedings, like Cochrane's revelation of his carnal motivations for developing warp drive and Picard's hell-bent desire to annihilate the Borg. Speaking of Picard, Patrick Stewart carries the film with his unique star power, which is very different than Shatner, but just as effective. Interestingly, The Next Generation TV series never developed a prominent triumvirate like Kirk/Spock/McCoy, but rather a dyad, Picard and Data. Whereas this duo was core to the previous TNG film, Generations, and the last one, Nemesis, it's not as evident here until the last act when Picard attempts to rescue the charismatic android, but that's only because they get separated early on and Data ends up hanging out with the Borg Queen. By the way, Picard's self-sacrificial desire to save Data reveals a weakness in the script: After the Enterprise is set to self-destruct, Picard only has 15 MINUTES to rescue Data and escape the ship, but Picard is shown having a meaningful discussion with Lily (Woodard). Why sure! Another gem of the film is the revelation of the alien race at the end, which prompts a "Wow" reaction to fans of Star Trek (although erudite Trekkies undoubtedly knew it was coming).
There are other flaws, like the jarring and somewhat unconvincing excuse for going back in time and the questionable fiery confrontation between Picard and Lily. I say "questionable" because something about the sequence makes it shaky; it may be the acting, the writing or some combination, but they needed to work out the kinks. Still, that scene has some good aspects, like Picard's line: "The line must be drawn HERE!" and the build-up to it.
While I favor 1994's Generations to First Contact because of the fascinating story elements, e.g. the Nexus, and the potent subtext and even marginally prefer the underrated Nemesis, this doesn't take away from the fact that First Contact is a quality installment in the series, which gets better with repeat viewings despite its weaknesses. - DirectorJonathan FrakesStarsPatrick StewartJonathan FrakesBrent SpinerWhen the crew of the Enterprise learn of a Federation conspiracy against the inhabitants of a unique planet, Captain Picard begins an open rebellion.The plot is good with some interesting ideas, like the paradisal planet where immortality is nigh reality and the innate desire for regeneration and eternal life. I like the new black Federation uniforms and the cast is as likable as ever.
Unfortunately, something prevents the movie from soaring. It's decent and sometimes thought-provoking; it's just underwhelming with some bits falling flat. I like it but, for me, it’s the least of the four TNG films.
Here's something interesting to reflect on: The entire first half of the film builds to this conversation between the top two Starfleet officers present (SPOILER ALERT):
Picard: "We are betraying the principles upon which the Federation was founded. It's an attack upon its very soul."
Admiral Dougherty: "We're only moving six-hundred people."
Picard: "How many people does it take, Admiral, before it becomes wrong -- a thousand? Fifty Thousand? A million?"
But Dougherty points out something that many viewers miss: He & his Federation colleagues weren't really violating the Prime Directive because the Ba'ku (1.) weren't native to the planet, (2.) had only been there for about 350 years, (3.) already had advanced space-travelling capability despite their willful rejection of technologies, and (4.) by removing them from the planet, Dougherty argues, "We'll simply be restoring them to their natural evolution."
I'm not saying it's necessarily right, but it's an arguably legitimate justification for his position and those of the Federation who backed the secret operation. In short, they can hardly be viewed as villains. - DirectorJustin LinStarsChris PineZachary QuintoKarl UrbanThe crew of the USS Enterprise explores the furthest reaches of uncharted space, where they encounter a new ruthless enemy, who puts them, and everything the Federation stands for, to the test."Beyond" is easily the least of the three reboot films.
In reviewing movies, I primarily go by story and characters: If the story and the characters are engaging I'll favor the movie; if not, I won't. In this regard, Beyond is a mixed bag. The plot's great because it basically involves the characters splitting up into groups on an alien planet after crash-landing; and there are some good character bits interspersed throughout. Unfortunately, the semi-convoluted story failed to fully engage me and the characterizations were sometimes forced. Moreover, the villain, Krall (Idris Elba), came across as a stock ee-vil villain reminiscent of Shinzon's lackeys from 2002's Star Trek Nemesis. The big revelation about him in the third act is curiously unmoving. As for Jaylah (Sofia Boutella), she's an interesting new character, but the filmmakers fail to capitalize on her presence.
Nevertheless, there are some good parts here and there, which make Beyond worth catching for Star Trek fans. But it's strangely pedestrian and uninspiring as a whole despite all the 'exciting' things going on. The script and the corresponding characterizations needed polishing or something. I'd watch Nemesis any day over Beyond. - DirectorNicholas MeyerStarsWilliam ShatnerLeonard NimoyDeForest KelleyWith the assistance of the Enterprise crew, Admiral Kirk must stop an old nemesis, Khan Noonien Singh, from using the life-generating Genesis Device as the ultimate weapon.The logical errors contained in this story abound: Why is it necessary for so many senior officers to appear in a mere cadet simulation (the Kobayashi Maru)? Why use live explosives in a simulator? Are these officers actors in their spare time (it certainly looks like it; Spock in particular hams it up)? How could Starfleet and their cartographers not realize that an entire planet is missing in the Ceti Alpha system? How could Chekov not realize this since he’s a trained navigator? Why didn’t Chekov realize that the Ceti Alpha system was the system in which Khan and his clan were marooned by his former captain (even assuming he wasn’t aboard the Enterprise during the 1st Season of the Original Series, he would have certainly gotten word from the rest of the crew, in particular from his Helmsman buddy Sulu)? How did the multi-ethnic supermen of “Space Seed” turn into a bunch of blond Aryans? Why would Scotty melodramatically bring his wounded nephew to the Bridge instead of Sickbay (which is one of the lamest scenes in Trek history)? Why does the ear slug simply leave Chekov instead of killing him as the creatures did to twenty of Khan’s people? How could Kirk not notice that Spock, his right-hand man, had left the Bridge? Why doesn’t Spock just put on an environmental suit before entering the radioactive chamber? I could go on but I’ll have mercy. As great as these errors are, they could be ignored if the story itself was compelling.
I really don’t understand why Trek fans in general rate this one so highly, many going so far as to suggest that it’s the best of the series featuring the original cast. This evaluation is a reality check because, as far as I’m concerned, it’s the least of 'em. I give it a grade of “C” because the film looks good and lacks camp; also because I love Star Trek and the character of Khan so much. Yes, there are some inspired elements that make it worth viewing and the second half finally gets interesting (up to Spock’s boring and cringe-inducing sacrifice anyway), but on a whole it’s a missed opportunity and near-soporific dud. Believe me, I wanted to savor this movie; it had such great potential.
Trek fundamentalists will no doubt gnash their teeth at the heresy of this commentary but, hey, it’s how I honestly see it. You might see it differently, and that’s wonderful (for you) — may the Great Bird of the Galaxy bless you!