Star Trek (2009) vs Star Wars:The Force Awakens (2015)

[Beaddle]

Which JJ Abrams Reboot or resurrect dead franchise movie did you find better?

Honestly I was not going to put a poll in this thread because I have been on cbr long enough to know some by default will automatically vote force awakens because they want to support Disney as Disney owns many franchises they also like but whatever in the conflict of interest. The poll is for fun. I will be more interested in reading replies on how both movies measures up artistically especially from hard core science fiction and fantasy fans

For me its a no brainer, as a fan of both Star Wars and Star Trek, its Star Trek 2009, not only is it a better made film regardless of the lens flares, the story is a lot more original, the new alternate young cast all nailed their roles playing this iconic characters of Kirk, Spock, Pike, McCoy, Chekov, Scotty , Sulu and Uhura, the visual effects and make up were more ground breaking, it had some good science fiction with black holes and time travel, it was a movie that took a lot of rissk that paid off. Although the villain's (Nero) arc could was a little dense, I still liked the originally take of him to Snoke, who was a Palpatine rip off. Also who can forget. ''Hi Christopher, Am Nero''. That was gold.

I found the Force Awakens to be blah, still don't like Rey, Harrison Ford phones in his performance compared to Leonard Nimoy. Luke is wasted. I found the story boring before even discovering it was a new hope redone. Overall Force awakens is too soaked in manufactured cooperate film grease, its a soulless movie that cashed in on the most legendary movie franchise.

Lastly this scene from Star Trek 2009, when the Enterprise drops out of wrap to fire at the Narada is the greatest space battle moment of the last two decades ever put on film. nothing in the star wars ST trilogy comes closes.



Can I also say, Force Awakens made it a lot more difficult to have a good sequel because the story did not have much to build on,Since it already wasted Luke and set up rey as a mini Mary Sue force God. Rian Johnson just had to do his own thing unlike Star trek 2009 that just made the unfortunate mistake of rehashing Khan in the sequel.

[lowfyr]

"because I have been on cbr long enough to know some by default will automatically vote force awakens because they want to support Disney as Disney owns many franchises they also like but whatever in the conflict of interest."

And I could say the same About you because you would vote Star Trek, because of your proven again and again Anti-Disney Bias.

[the illustrious mr. kenway]

Honestly i preferred Force Awakens but I'm a bigger Star Wars fan. I thought the time travel aspect was a neat way of doing fanservice/rebooting but not really necessary. I would have just preferred a new cast, a new ship etc.

[TriggerWarning]

I liked both. Both each have one clunker movie as well: Last of the Jedi and Beyond.

I thought Force Awakens and Rise of Skywalker were great and loved the new characters of Rey and Finn.

Star Trek was good too with a great cast. My biggest complaint was they were too loose with the science liking transporters being used across light years of space. It was done for plot convenience which is how a lot of bad story telling decisions happen.

[AnakinFlair]

Honestly, I liked them both. But I voted for The Force Awakens because it had much better villains. You had Kylo Ren, the mystery of Snoke, and even Hux was enjoyable for a one-note villain.

Meanwhile on Star Trek, you had Nero, who just came off as flat. You barely got any real backstory for him, other than Romulus was destroyed and he blames Spock, and you had to dig into ancillary material to find out any more. Plus, the movie felt more like Star Wars than Star Trek.

Outside of that, both movies had great casts with great acting for the most part, and the visual FX were top notch.

[Pinsir]

I dislike both.