View Single Post
Old June 7 2013, 04:16 PM   #29
Vice Admiral
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

solariabsg25 wrote: View Post

Going back to point 16 - I think Khan really had no plan at all to keep any bargain with Kirk, he was simply going along with my "oh, woe is me" sob story until it was time to act. I suspect his superior intellect allowed him to realise he hadn't completely swayed Kirk to his side, so he was ready for Kirk's move.
Just saw it again last night. I viewed it this way the first time. Second viewing makes it even clearer.

The fact that, thanks to Admiral Marcus, Khan was actually the aggrieved party helped his story along, but as to his turning at the end, I think that Khan really couldn't be anything else. He was conditioned during the Eugenics War, whether by his own desires or by design, to rule.
Pretty much.

Khan in this movie is one of the best villains in Trek as he isn't a maniacal madman, he is at all points, up until he believes his comrades have actually been killed, in complete and total control. His manipulation of Kirk from the moment they have their discussion in the brig is testimony to this. And this harks back to his appearance in Space Seed, rather than TWOK when his brilliance is clouded by the losses he suffered over the years and his rage and thirst for vengeance.
Well said.

Cinema Geekly wrote: View Post
I didn't find the movie the least bit complicated or convoluted. I mean I followed it as it was happening and it all made sense on the surface. That is what a good story does. Real life stories are usually flawlessly told, but they are also boring 99% of the time, that is why we enjoy the fake stuff.

Take any good or even great movie or TV show and look at it with a critical eye and you are going to poke giant holes in any story.

Star Trek itself is absolutely riddled with plot holes, inconsistent history, and bad science. I mean I guess its fun to discuss them from time to time because there is literally nothing else do with such big gaps between productions but I'd rather see someone not complain about a Star Trek movie for doing things done in other incarnations of Star Trek on a regular basis while still talking about how great those movies are.

I would say a criticism of acting and pace, and cgi is fine. But more often than not I am seeing a ton of complaints about things other Trek's have been doing for 50 years.
Also well said.
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote