308
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2025
308 points (98.7% liked)
Asklemmy
48759 readers
491 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
I disagree. This both looked and was awesome.
Exactly. It was one of my top three ST movies, and by all accounts. Ebert reviewed it positively, as one of the best of the franchise.
I wonder why they put it in the "looks like it'd suck" category?
Haters gonna find a way to hate? ๐คทโโ๏ธ
Well, by including it they imply they liked it, so I'm guessing not a hater. Just curious why they said it "looked like it would be bad".
I was assuming they were knee-jerk reacting like "It's Star Trek, so it must be terrible," and then found out otherwise. I could be wrong though.
As a Trekkie it looked awesome to me but to my civilian friends it looked like made for TV garbage, then they saw it and loved it