IMDb > Star Trek Beyond (2016) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Star Trek Beyond
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Star Trek Beyond More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 66:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 654 reviews in total 

389 out of 608 people found the following review useful:

Not really Star Trek. To JJ: Your audience is smarter than action and explosions.

Author: aiqbal66 from United States
25 July 2016

Disappointed with this entry in the series. Star Trek to me isn't about motorcycles and loud music, it's more about exploring science fiction concepts and themes through great storytelling (which this film has very little of). The "twist" at the end is figured out about a 1/3 of the way in. Lazy storytelling where props are laid for action scenes for no apparent reason (why is there a motorcycle aboard a starship?).

On the plus side, the cast is magnificent and the charm they bring to their roles makes this enterprise watchable. It's too bad the script and direction don't give them much to do. Mr. Lin, while a good action director, isn't a good storyteller. While that's good for the Fast & Furious franchise, Star Trek deserves better.

Was the above review useful to you?

392 out of 616 people found the following review useful:

Gene Roddenberry rolling over in his grave.

Author: ardast
27 July 2016

Where do I begin? As a lifelong Star Trek fan I had an uneasy feeling while watching this movie. I could not shake the sense that I was just looking at another mediocre summer popcorn flick; an experience that would evaporate from my brain just hours after I leave the theater.

I remember sitting in the cinema with my head low embarrassed by the movie, although I wanted it to prove me wrong ever since I saw the "Beastie Boys" trailer back in 2015. Instead, it dragged along with that "proven" Hollywood formula of what a summer hit should look like. Constricted by its own creative limitations I was looking at a product that was not a science fiction in its core, but a creation that had only one intention since its birth: to milk as much money as possible.

Star Trek Beyond was so devoid of the primordial concepts set up by Mr. Gene Roddenberry that it contributed to the confused identity of the picture. The plot of the movie is so "light" in its essence that it lacks the moral dilemmas, the exploration (inner and outer) and the development usually present in the Star Trek universe. There was neither message nor any character evolution and we did not learn more about anything really. Instead of Kirk, Spock and Scotty you could stick just any name over the protagonists and nobody would have noticed. The story was atrocious and full with plot holes patched up by unnecessary although flashy looking CGI.

Star Trek Beyond also has one of the weakest villains in its history. It was definitely not the actors fault and such a shame to waste the opportunity of having a strong artist like Idris Elba. It was the fault of the writer and the director who missed the opportunity to take Star Trek back on its track. Instead they created a cute flick full with needless CGI scenes, explosions and dialogue written for "dumb" audiences. Everything had to be explained to the viewers, nothing was left to the imagination. There was nothing to debate with your friends after the movie or something to stir your imagination or to push you to prod its meaning. Nothing like that at all, everything was given on a run-of-the-mill plate for the audience to consume in a shortest possible time frame.

The movie had its moments, so not everything was complete rubbish. I liked the character of Jaylah and some of the humor, but that was it. Some of the scenes were of course visually impressive though sometimes things would fly around too much and contaminate the image. Of course this movie was done by people, who know their job, but I am not pondering the execution and the skill of the artists, I am merely concerned about the soul of this thing we love so much.

This thing we used to know of as Star Trek.

Was the above review useful to you?

352 out of 585 people found the following review useful:

Just garbage

Author: magnuselm from Sweden
22 July 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

How is it possible to spend so much cash making a movie so utterly meaningless and bad? 185 million USD?

This is 2 hours of your life that you will never get back.

So, where to start? First off the story is so thin and seems like a child wrote it. It has no depth and right from the beginning you feel basically nothing for the bad guys or the good guys, and there are so many holes in the story.

There happens to be a huge base far out in space where the Enterprise is going to restock? Isen't the Enterprise supposed to be out in deep space exploring?

Next to this large space base there is a nebula and apparently a planet with perfect conditions for human survival. It seems to be right next to the large space base, which would seem very very unlikely considering the vastness of space. And the crew happen to land on the same small area of this huge planet so they can all meet up.

Then they meet a character that seems to be a bad mix of Rey from Star Wars and Neytiri from Avatar who happen to have found an old federation ship (that of course they can get to work after 150 years on a deserted planet), very unoriginal.

So the reason for the bad guy Krall to lure the Enterprise to his planet and destroy it seems to be a device that Kirk has that will help Krall kill people. But in the end of the movie it is very clear that using his ships alone he could have easily destroyed the base - so what was the purpose of this relic device in the first place?

There is quite bad CGI during the whole movie. In every action packed scene especially the fighting the camera moves around so much it is hard to grasp what is happening. But even with this shaky camera trick it's impossible to miss how utterly bad these scenes are. The fighting scene between Manas and our Rey character is one of the worst Iv seen in a long time.

The only thing decent with this movie are some of the actors and their dialog. Everything else, from story to script to CGI is just garbage.

Im sorry I like Star Trek I really do, but this movie is not worth seeing in the cinema.

Was the above review useful to you?

138 out of 213 people found the following review useful:

Fast and Furious in Space

Author: amaskedman from United States
25 July 2016

I was worried when Justin Lin was signed on to direct. I am not a fan of the mindless Fast and Furious franchise with its ridiculous stunts and silly plots. I gave him a chance, because after all, its Star Trek.

What we got was Fast and Furious in space. Just running, fighting, explosions, one frantic scene after another with no time to develop characters, motivations, or even plausible Sci-Fi. It feels shallow, a promising plot sacrificed to the alter of YA expectations.

Another Star Trek movie where the enterprise is destroyed, again? Is this sci-fi disaster porn now?

The dialogue is forced, the banter off tempo, and in the end, the actors talents and IP were wasted on what feels like a B movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

174 out of 304 people found the following review useful:

Uninspired popcorn flick.

Author: Jan-Vissers-40-71213 from Neeroeteren Belgium
30 August 2016

The Gene Roddenberry's legacy is nowhere to find in this film. This Star Trek movie feels more as a Marvel Comics flick than a Star Trek movie. One- dimensional characters, a whirlwind of imagery, a meager story and over the top villains and hero's.

A true Star Trek movie for me is one with a nice story, sound science, a spec of humor, real characters, and last but not least; always in search of the human condition. Star trek is more than the sum of episodes and movies, its a way of thinking, and inspired millions of people -personal and professional- to make the world a better place. The brightest people off all humanity, like Stephen Hawking, NASA scientists, all love Star Trek.

If Director Justin Lin had seen all of the Star Trek series and movies, he would never made such a terrible -for me- horrible movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

107 out of 194 people found the following review useful:

Tries to be more "Star Trek"-ish then previous reboot films, but turn actually less so

Author: srdjan_veljkovic
28 July 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Being less "Star Trek"-ish isn't bad per se. What's wrong with this (motion) picture is that it fails in trying the exact opposite.

This feels like your "regular blockbuster" within Star Trek (reboot) universe. It's interesting because things keep happening, thus it keeps your attention, the time passes by quickly. But, at the end, you don't feel much, if anything. Nothing really interesting actually happened.

It's somewhat unfortunate. It starts of good. There a few funny lines/situations. The story is Star Trek-ish, yet a little different. But, about the time that the rebooted JT Kirk mutters that his "life feels episodic", it starts to feel forced. Everything. The story, the visuals, the "funny". Take "gay Sulu", for example. Sulu's sexual orientation has no bearing on this story what so ever. So, the only reason to show it is to be able to say "we're good with LGBT". Thus, it's forced, plain and simple.

All of it screams "we want to make a blockbuster". But, that shouldn't be the point, really. They should be wanting to make a good movie. If it were really good, given the extent of Star Trek fandom, you can bet it would have been a blockbuster.

So, what we have gotten is watchable, but, oh-so-forgettable. Let me put it this way: for all it's many flaws, I actually prefer "Into Darkness" to this movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

121 out of 225 people found the following review useful:

This is not Star Trek

Author: samuelglockta
9 September 2016

I stopped watching this movie after half an hour. This is not Star Trek. Not even close. If you want to make a fun movie about space and lasers and people jumping around like bunnies on LSD just make another Guardians of the galaxy movie. (Wich was a greate movie by the way)

Star Trek is about interesting SF concepts and space phenomena, interstellar politics, social interaction with alien races and now and then a space battle.

This whole new series of parallel universe Star Trek movies is just a cheap ripoff of one of the best franchises ever made. They cannibalized it for fast profit and killed their long term profit.

Even if you would have wanted to bring a bit more action to a new series of Star Trek movies there would have been a more enjoyable way to do this. What people are waiting for decades is the untold story of the Klingon wars. A new series about the Klingon wars would have been the most profitable thing that would have been ever created and all fans would have loved it.

Instead they just made a remake of Captain Kirks Star Trek and killed his character. RIP Captain Kirk and RIP Star Trek franchise.

Was the above review useful to you?

22 out of 34 people found the following review useful:

One of the Very Best Star Treks ever made!

Author: perkypub from United States
19 October 2016

I'm not sure what people are looking for that gave it such poor reviews. Maybe an old dry character study with out-of-date effects, focused more on people than space substance and action.

This cast has excellent rapport, I can't say anything bad about them at all. They have chemistry and bring so much of what made the original Star Trek great and groundbreaking.

I like action movies. If you're not looking for action then maybe you should go watch a soap opera :) I'm pretty disappointed to see the bad reviews of a good movie. Some people can't enjoy a movie for what it is.

I thought it was great, I rarely post reviews but felt like I had to. No, I'm not gonna write a book explaining the star trek universe or try to "figure it out," I just think the movie was great fun and downvoted all those lengthy book writing people with bad opinions, and I think they were just movie critics who couldn't maybe find the SWEET in ice cream! I've seen every Star Trek anything at least 5 or 6 times, and this rated close to the top. I didn't need some intelligent heady deep movie like some seem to, and I think the characters in the new Star Treks fit perfectly together. Casting is everything and they do extremely well holding to the personalities of the characters we all know and love.

I guess some people try to read too much into a good action movie and that's what this is. Thoroughly enjoyable action and entertainment, best flic I've seen in a long time.

Was the above review useful to you?

116 out of 223 people found the following review useful:

Not the Sort of Star Trek That Made Star Trek Great

Author: Dan_L from River Forest, Illinois
24 July 2016

This ain't your daddy's Star Trek (and the 3D is so unnecessary that it is NOT worth the extra cost):

(1) The plot is close to incomprehensible (2) The directing is mediocre (okay, that is a characteristic in common with the original series) (3) The audience manipulation is palpable (4) The action is overblown (5) And did I mention the plot is close to incomprehensible?

Don't get me wrong. The film is generally fun. But it lacked the heart and soul present in all five television series (ain't counting no cartoons). The "Spock Prime" character is about as confusing as it gets. And while the homages to Leonard Nimoy were touching, they were a bit heavy handed.

But worst of all was the loss of any subtlety and heart. This reboot increasing seems to be solely about the money.

And the negative reaction to Zulu being gay -- which was handled with taste and, unlike the rest of the film, subtlety -- was just plain crazy. I would think that fans would have been a lot more upset about the Uhura-Spock romantic relationship given the nature of Vulcans, even half-human, half-Vulcan ones -- now that's moving away from the Roddenberry playbook far more than making Zulu gay.

All in all, Star Trek Beyond is a pleasant, but not very satisfying addition to the Star Trek compendium.

Was the above review useful to you?

20 out of 34 people found the following review useful:

A very good stand-alone Star Trek episode, rather than part 3 of a movie trilogy

Author: Dragonsouls from New York, NY
21 July 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I'm a 39 year old die-hard Star Trek fan. I've seen every episode of every series. I loved The Motion Picture. I loved Final Frontier. Heck, I even loved Nemesis. Star Trek Beyond was a very good entry in the Star Trek film universe. I would compare it to Nemesis, in that it felt like something you'd get in the midst of a season of a Star Trek series rather than something written for the big screen. Don't get me wrong, the film was epic, but budget aside, the script was small-screen material.

And that's not a bad thing! After all, Star Trek was made on the small screen. Star Trek Beyond almost felt like a love letter to the Original Series at times, filmed on rocky sets made of Styrofoam, and it just felt smaller than the other two films due to these B-movie sets, and smaller cast. But I loved that about this film. Star Trek is supposed to be filmed on Styrofoam sets and it added a certain charm to the film that the modernity of CGI cannot match.

Speaking of CGI. There were some amazing action scenes, and the best one was bittersweet, during the scene where the Enterprise breaks apart. Wow. Beautiful, yet sad to see such marvelous technology get obliterated. I was also surprised by the fight choreography in this film, especially the fight scenes that involved Jaylah, an alien that joins Kirk and crew in the fight against Krall, a rather one-dimensional, but menacing villain portrayed very passionately by Idris Elba. This will surely rack up another Oscar for best make-up and possibly costume design. Oh my goodness, those uniforms looked amazing! Even the pajama shirts looked expensive!

But back to the script, I give Simon Pegg credit. He's clearly a Star Trek fan and he knows the characters. The chemistry was there, just like the previous two films, and the acting was fantastic all around. Justin Lin did a fine job at establishing a good mix of campy and serious tones and isn't that what Star Trek was always about? Trek was always both fun and enlightening. I laughed a lot during this film, it was definitely lighter than Into Darkness, not as preachy, but it had 2 or 3 good philosophical scenes, albeit, no where near as deep or esoteric as many of the old Trek films and series.

One thing that surprised me was just how shallow Spock was written. There was no emotional conflict that you get with Vulcans, and no battle between his logical reasoning and human side. In this movie he cries, laughs, and showed no hatred for emotion. But hey, it's a different Spock. I think Scotty was absolutely hilarious in this film, and Pegg had more scenes in this once, which makes sense, given that the script was written by Simon Pegg. I really felt that Spock took a back-seat in this one, but 2 particular scenes of his really got me teary-eyed even though they were not so much about him, but the "other Spock."

But then again, this wasn't a character driven film. Kirk had a scene that mentioned him breaking out of his father's shadow, and there was some love dove stuff between Spock and Uhura, but overall, Star Trek Beyond was a very plot driven film, with an unique, innovative Villain named Krall, despite being a bit one-dimensional. Krall had some good philosophical lines and he reminded me of a psychic vampire. But there was no reason to hate this villain other than the sheer fact that he destroyed the Enterprise and many other Federation ships due to his vendetta against Star Fleet. The shocking twist at the end finally revealed why, and it was unexpected too, which made the villain a bit more sympathetic, but just a bit.

Final rating is an 8 out of 10. Not as good as the the best Trek films, but better than some others and the quality acting, action, jokes, and philosophy will surely leave both the new and old Star Trek fans satisfied after leaving the theater.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 66:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history