King Daniel Into Darkness wrote:
So you really think your favourite Trek episode or movie would stand up to that kind of OCD scrutiny? Because if you do you're kidding yourself. I imagine you must hate Wrath of Khan for similar reasons you do Into Darkness?
Only if we assume that success means something containing no flaws. Otherwise, I'd consider WoK much better than STID.
There is one more aspect not discussed, and that's the proliferation of spectacular action scenes. One can see major comparisons between WoK and older films, such as my favorite example, Aliens
, where much of the action takes place a lot later in the movie, and several movies today, from STID to Transformers
, where almost every scene involves action.
The reason for this should involve the phenomenon of tent-pole movies coupled with large amounts of money at stake. Spielberg and Lucas discussed this issue in a talk several months ago, and they believe that there will come a point when the movie industry will collapse because of such. I believe that the problem is seen this way:
Movie studios have large amounts of money plus a marketing budget that is part of their overhead cost. That plus competition means that they have to release movies frequently that have very large budgets, and that must make more than enough to cover the marketing budget. They can make other movies that are cheaper but these "tent-pole movies" are the ones that will keep them afloat.
In order to make lots of money on them, studios have to show the movies an international audience, and given differences in culture the stories have to be simpler and must contain elements that are easy to translate across various regions. That means lots of action scenes. In order to make the movie look expensive (especially given the cost of ticket prices) lots of CGI has to be used.
That is why STID in many ways resembles the Transformers
franchise and several of the latest superhero and action movies.