Search
Cookie Usage Statistics Colour Key Sudden Death Monthly Poll Caption Comp eMail Author Shops
Ships Fleets Weaponry Species People Timelines Calculators Photo Galleries
Stations Design Lineage Size Charts Battles Science / Tech Temporal Styling Maps / Politics
Articles Reviews Lists Recreation Search Site Guide What's New Forum
Constitution Class Klingon Battlecruiser Klingon Bird of Prey Magazine Capacity NX Class Phase Cannon Sovereign Changes Star Trek : Discovery The Defiant The USS Franklin Borg History Money Monoculture Religion in Trek Technology Levels The Ba'Ku Land Grab Trills / Dax Abrams Speed! Antimatter Phasers Romulan Warp Drive The Holodeck Torpedo Yields Transwarp Theories Tri-cobalt device Warp in a Solar System Warp Speed Anomalies D'Deridex Class Weapons Galaxy Class Shields Galaxy Class Total Output Galaxy Class Weapon Output Genesis Weapon Power Husnock Weapons Intrepid Class Total Output TOS Type 2 Phaser Power Trilithium Torpedo Power Dangling Threads Enterprise Ramblings Eugenics War Dates Franz Joseph's Star Trek Here be Remans? Live fast... Write Badly Maps Materials Nemesis Script Random Musings Scaling Issues Size of the Federation Stardates The Ceti Alpha Conundrum The Size of Starfleet Trek XI Issues

Episode Guest Reviews

Reviewer : Romanul
Ave Rating : 3.0000 for 2 reviews
Title : Star Trek Into Darkness Rating : 3
Writers : Alex Kurtzman, Damon Lindelof, Roberto Orci Year : 2259
Review : An average SF movie and a poor ST movie. Why a poor ST movie? Because it seems to disrespect much of what ST is (for good or bad). Why an SF average movie? The action is good, the special effects are great but the whole story is really hard to believe( yes, even for a SF movie). A 20 some year old immature youth leading the greatest ship in the federation despite breaking all the rules? THe chief engineer (Checov) is only 17 years old. It's like the whole ship is run by kids and it makes it so hard to take the universe seriously. At times you get the feeling it's a parody. It's a shame really. On the bright side, I am so happy that this is a BO hit. It means ST is not going to die(yet) and maybe, just maybe we will get a movie/ TV show with the old school ST. I can dream, right?!
Title : Star Trek Rating : 3
Writers : Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci Year : 2258
Review : An average SF movie and a poor ST movie. Why a poor ST movie? Because it seems to disrespect much of what ST is (for good or bad). Why an SF average movie? The action is good, the special effects are great but the whole story is really hard to believe( yes, even for a SF movie). A 20 some year old immature youth leading the greatest ship in the federation despite breaking all the rules? THe chief engineer (Checov) is only 17 years old. It's like the whole ship is run by kids and it makes it so hard to take the universe seriously. At times you get the feeling it's a parody. It's a shame really. On the bright side, I am so happy that this is a BO hit. It means ST is not going to die(yet) and maybe, just maybe we will get a movie/ TV show with the old school ST. I can dream, right?!

© Graham & Ian Kennedy Page views : 6,574 Last updated : 20 Jun 2024