Okay, the movie still rocks. But it's also not that great. But it's still fun.
Also, it's nice to see a 1980s movie that doesn't make me feel (ironically) old, since there's such an obvious 80s aesthetic that there's no question that it's from the distant past …
Embedded Link
Dave Hill’s ★★★½ review of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) on Letterboxd.com
On the plus side: – Direct ties to the original series (in terms of a recurring character, vs. a returning plotline). – Ricardo Montalban rocks. – Unlike the first movie, it is *not* a “Motionless Pic…
Google+: View post on Google+
28 view(s)
It does truly rock. I vacillate on whether I think Khan or the Whales one is the best of the movie series. Though I have to say having rewatched it recently, First Contact is only just a smidge below in entertainment value.
I would say that Khan has a more epic story, while Whales is much more of a character piece. FC is somewhere between.
I agree, and that is perhaps why it is difficult to evaluate them against each other — they are quite different in structure. They each have strengths that might diminish the thrust were they to be transplanted into the others. They all rely heavily on an audience's familiarity with backstory, but that common in franchise films; I doubt if any of them are strong enough on their own merits to expand from their core audience.
This is by far my favorite of the series. It’s so good, in fact, that they copied the story for a TNG film! The Voyage Home is good but too silly.