RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,232
Posts: 5,405,966
Members: 24,762
Currently online: 680
Newest member: PaulHicks

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Time’s Orphan
By: Michelle on Aug 30

September-October Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Lee Passes
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

View Poll Results: Grade the movie...
A+ 144 19.35%
A 161 21.64%
A- 100 13.44%
B+ 82 11.02%
B 58 7.80%
B- 27 3.63%
C+ 40 5.38%
C 38 5.11%
C- 24 3.23%
D+ 11 1.48%
D 13 1.75%
D- 10 1.34%
F 36 4.84%
Voters: 744. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 10 2013, 12:33 AM   #1321
Deck 1 - Bridge
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Torbay
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Xaios wrote: View Post
Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post
a blatant rip-off of an earlier Star Trek film that even now stands the test of time in terms of story and spectacle
I had to stop reading here. Story, I'll give you that one. But spectacle? Please. Roger Ebert panned the space battles in Wrath of Khan when it first came out in 1982. Sure, some of the movies had beautiful visuals, but that's a far cry from being a spectacle. Before ST09, the only Star Trek movie that had really succeeded with the "spectacle" side of things was First Contact.
The uniforms, the bridge, the military and naval overtones, the music, the pacing, the human drama, the cinematography of the film generally, the 1700's style of 2 starships running alongside each other while firing, I could go on and on! I saw TWOK at the age of 12 and went out and bought the soundtrack album the following day, won't be doing that with this, can't say I'll even rent the DVD at this stage TBH.

The fact that a couple of crappy effect shots don't ruin the film is a significant factor in my opinion of this.
Deck 1 - Bridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 12:35 AM   #1322
beamMe
Fleet Captain
 
beamMe's Avatar
 
Location: Europa
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post
Go and see it, if you aren't a fan you'll find it perfectly entertaining but if you are a Star Trek fan you may just find yourself sat there getting increasingly angry at the arrogance of JJ Abrams who assumes he can reimagine a particular piece of Star Trek folklore and make it better.
As a Trek-fan I found this movie perfectly entertaining.

Oh, I guess that means I'm not a real fan, right?
beamMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 12:37 AM   #1323
Phily B
Fleet Captain
 
Phily B's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
View Phily B's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

He isn't really reimaging it, it's not a remake of TWOK by any stretch of the imagination..
Phily B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 12:38 AM   #1324
Fenric
Lieutenant
 
Fenric's Avatar
 
Location: London
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I watched this film a few hours ago with my friend whos more of a casual fan, he seemed to enjoy it but said it didnt have any of the uniqueness of previous star trek films.

I thought the first hour of the film started off quite slowly in build up did disappoint me slightly and some of the logic such as making Kirk go back to the academy then first officer then captain within about 20 minutes all felt.

There was also to many god dam lens flares in this film i seemed to notice it a lot more this time. however I lied a look of the other things in this film.

I liked the inclusion of Section 31 as someone who enjoyed there run in DS9 it was good for me to see them appear in this and i liked the interplay with them and Kahn, I just wish it was used a lot more and built upon.

I'm not to sure on the Kirk ''death scene'' as i kind of like the similarities with the wrath of Kahn but to me as a fan i found it a little to Over the top especially with Spocks ' KAHNNNNN' I was half expecting spock to host the funeral mentioning how he found kirks choice to save the many of the ship the most Vulcan decision he had ever seen.

I found the acting to be of a good standard and I liked the new actors in Cummberbatch as Kahn and Alice eve as Dr Marcus
Fenric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 12:41 AM   #1325
Deck 1 - Bridge
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Torbay
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

beamMe wrote: View Post
Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post
Go and see it, if you aren't a fan you'll find it perfectly entertaining but if you are a Star Trek fan you may just find yourself sat there getting increasingly angry at the arrogance of JJ Abrams who assumes he can reimagine a particular piece of Star Trek folklore and make it better.
As a Trek-fan I found this movie perfectly entertaining.

Oh, I guess that means I'm not a real fan, right?


If you'd read what I wrote instead of getting your knickers in a twist, you'll see I wrote - 'you may find yourself sat there getting increasingly angry.'

'May' is subjective, I can't tell you what you are, don't you know yourself?
Deck 1 - Bridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 12:42 AM   #1326
beamMe
Fleet Captain
 
beamMe's Avatar
 
Location: Europa
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post
The uniforms, the bridge, the military and naval overtones, the music, the pacing, the human drama, the cinematography of the film generally, the 1700's style of 2 starships running alongside each other while firing, I could go on and on! I saw TWOK at the age of 12 and went out and bought the soundtrack album the following day, won't be doing that with this, can't say I'll even rent the DVD at this stage TBH.
Neither would I.
But I'll pre-order the BluRay as soon as it is available.
beamMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 12:47 AM   #1327
Deck 1 - Bridge
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Torbay
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

beamMe wrote: View Post
Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post
The uniforms, the bridge, the military and naval overtones, the music, the pacing, the human drama, the cinematography of the film generally, the 1700's style of 2 starships running alongside each other while firing, I could go on and on! I saw TWOK at the age of 12 and went out and bought the soundtrack album the following day, won't be doing that with this, can't say I'll even rent the DVD at this stage TBH.
Neither would I.
But I'll pre-order the BluRay as soon as it is available.
Cool, good luck to you Sheldon in the technology oneupmanship challenge.
Deck 1 - Bridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 12:50 AM   #1328
anotherdemon
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
anotherdemon's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I liked it.

I liked the duality of Starfleet depicted -- it's always had a military role attached, no matter how much they call themselves explorers, and with the serious threats that were shown in the last film that came out of nowhere and were only stopped by unreliable variables, you can see why there'd be people in the organization who see the need to increase its ability to defend itself from the known threats (the Klingons are almost assumed to be a coming war), and those unknown (which are even more frightening, as Narada showed).

With this, it's hard to see the "bad guys" as the bad guys, they just have different goals.

The militarization of Starfleet could very well save the Federation itself, but by doing so could actually destroy it. The duality continues. Heroes aren't a variable to rely on, neither are supermen.

Enterprise and Vengeance are the movie.
anotherdemon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 12:53 AM   #1329
beamMe
Fleet Captain
 
beamMe's Avatar
 
Location: Europa
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post
beamMe wrote: View Post
Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post
Go and see it, if you aren't a fan you'll find it perfectly entertaining but if you are a Star Trek fan you may just find yourself sat there getting increasingly angry at the arrogance of JJ Abrams who assumes he can reimagine a particular piece of Star Trek folklore and make it better.
As a Trek-fan I found this movie perfectly entertaining.

Oh, I guess that means I'm not a real fan, right?


If you'd read what I wrote instead of getting your knickers in a twist, you'll see I wrote - 'you may find yourself sat there getting increasingly angry.'

'May' is subjective, I can't tell you what you are, don't you know yourself?


What do you make of those fans who not only find this film perfectly entertaining but also don't see any arrogance in Abrams ability to make such good movies.
beamMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 12:59 AM   #1330
Deck 1 - Bridge
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Torbay
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

beamMe wrote: View Post
Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post
beamMe wrote: View Post

As a Trek-fan I found this movie perfectly entertaining.

Oh, I guess that means I'm not a real fan, right?


If you'd read what I wrote instead of getting your knickers in a twist, you'll see I wrote - 'you may find yourself sat there getting increasingly angry.'

'May' is subjective, I can't tell you what you are, don't you know yourself?


What do you make of those fans who not only find this film perfectly entertaining but also don't see any arrogance in Abrams ability to make such good movies.
If that's the opinion they hold then that's fine. Why would I see it any other way, it's just a film, why are you looking for consensus on something that people will all see differently?

You seem a bit narky mate, may I ask why? I've already explained that 'may' was used in a subjective context and you're still banging on, get it off your chest and share it.
Deck 1 - Bridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 01:11 AM   #1331
beamMe
Fleet Captain
 
beamMe's Avatar
 
Location: Europa
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post
beamMe wrote: View Post
Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post



If you'd read what I wrote instead of getting your knickers in a twist, you'll see I wrote - 'you may find yourself sat there getting increasingly angry.'

'May' is subjective, I can't tell you what you are, don't you know yourself?


What do you make of those fans who not only find this film perfectly entertaining but also don't see any arrogance in Abrams ability to make such good movies.
If that's the opinion they hold then that's fine. Why would I see it any other way,
Because you do.

You see arrogance where I just see a desire to make a very good and entertaining film.
beamMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 01:39 AM   #1332
Tiberius
Commodore
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

In terms of story telling, I thought it was pretty weak. I'll probably end up having a bit of a rant, so long post ahead. Also, spoilers.

First of all, we've got that black guy with the sick daughter. What was the point of that? What did that entire sequence accomplish? The only things it did was to establish that Khan's blood could (somehow, it was never properly explained) cure illnesses, and that there was a bombing. None of this needed that family that we never saw again. The "Khan's blood is a magical cure" bit was better explained by the tribble sequence. And as for the bombing? Why did Khan go to all the trouble of having this guy plant the bomb if Khan was going to actually be there in the aftermath (as Kirk saw in the meeting)? Instead of going to all this pointless storytelling, just have Khan sneak in, showing how clever he is. Get's caught, has to fight a few guards (showing how strong he is). Plants the bomb, blows the place up. Establishes his character, shows his intelligence and strength. Sure, it doesn't do the "blood is a cure to whatever disease you might have" thing, but that was explained later in the movie anyway.

The first bit was good. Show Kirk saying, "Fuck you" to the rules, and then BAM he gets demoted. Force him to live with the consequences of his arrogance. That was a lot like Kirk from TOS. Making him a commander was also good. But then, as soon as Pike is killed, Starfleet says, "Oh well, we'll just make you a captain again and give you back the Enterprise." WTF is this? What was the point of demoting him in the first place? It would have been far better to have Kirk as Pike's XO (with Spock staying as Enterprise science officer), and then have Pike killed later. That way, Kirk has to EARN his command back instead of Starfleet telling him he might as well just have it back. Maybe have Pike die trying to fix the reactor. That would give Kirk a HUGE motivation to go after Khan.

Or, have Admiral Marcus take command of the Enterprise. He wants Khan dead, so why is he sending out Kirk to do it? Marcus takes command, goes after Khan, and then sends Kirk on the away mission to kill him. Marcus tells Kirk to kill Khan, but Kirk refuses, thus getting Marcus to turn on Kirk and revealing Marcus to be the bad guy.

And seriously, that scene with kirk fixing the reactor in the bit that they cut 'n' pasted from tWoK was just pissing on it. You actually telling me that something which KILLS a Vulcan in a horrific manner just makes a much weaker Human "just a little dead"? Seriously, WTF is this? And then, Khan's blood cures him. Did they stop off at Miracle Max's? "To BLAVE!"

This is so cheap. It's like when they are fighting the neural parasites in TOS and blind Spock - But Spock has a magical inner eyelid so everything's okay! Or when they try to give Worf a new backbone and he dies on the table - But Klingons have redundant body systems, so everything's okay! Last time someone died this way, they had to spend a whole movie trying to get him back, at great cost. Now they fix it in five minutes.

Which brings me to that whole big fight thing. It's Kirk's movie. He's the one who gets demoted. He's the one in command. and yet, in the big finale, Kirk's on his back and Spock's the one solving the problem. Why? I mentioned before that you could have had Pike die in the reactor (and stay dead). Then you could have had Kirk fighting Khan instead of Spock, and no need for that crappy, "We need him alive" stuff either. It's a movie, Kill the bloody villain.

A few final thoughts...

Why was Khan using a fake name anyway?

How does Kirk, sitting in Klingon space, talk to Scotty, in the Terran system on a freaking communicator? Seriously, what is the range on these things?

And that big ship, Vengeance or whatever... That was the biggest fanwank I;ve ever seen.

All in all, I was quite disappointed.

Last edited by Tiberius; May 10 2013 at 02:00 AM.
Tiberius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 02:11 AM   #1333
beamMe
Fleet Captain
 
beamMe's Avatar
 
Location: Europa
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Tiberius wrote: View Post
In terms of story telling, I thought it was pretty weak. I'll probably end up having a bit of a rant, so long post ahead. Also, spoilers.

First of all, we've got that black guy with the sick daughter. What was the point of that? What did that entire sequence accomplish? The only things it did was to establish that Khan's blood could (somehow, it was never properly explained) cure illnesses, and that there was a bombing. None of this needed that family that we never saw again. The "Khan's blood is a magical cure" bit was better explained by the tribble sequence. And as for the bombing? Why did Khan go to all the trouble of having this guy plant the bomb if Khan was going to actually be there in the aftermath (as Kirk saw in the meeting)? Instead of going to all this pointless storytelling, just have Khan sneak in, showing how clever he is. Get's caught, has to fight a few guards (showing how strong he is). Plants the bomb, blows the place up. Establishes his character, shows his intelligence and strength. Sure, it doesn't do the "blood is a cure to whatever disease you might have" thing, but that was explained later in the movie anyway.
If you'd paid attention you'd have noticed that all this ties in with the theme "what would you do for your family".

Tiberius wrote: View Post
The first bit was good. Show Kirk saying, "Fuck you" to the rules, and then BAM he gets demoted. Force him to live with the consequences of his arrogance. That was a lot like Kirk from TOS. Making him a commander was also good. But then, as soon as Pike is killed, Starfleet says, "Oh well, we'll just make you a captain again and give you back the Enterprise." WTF is this? What was the point of demoting him in the first place? It would have been far better to have Kirk as Pike's XO (with Spock staying as Enterprise science officer), and then have Pike killed later. That way, Kirk has to EARN his command back instead of Starfleet telling him he might as well just have it back. Maybe have Pike die trying to fix the reactor. That would give Kirk a HUGE motivation to go after Khan.
Again you weren't paying attention. Marcus gave Kirk the Enterprise back, because he thought he could use the hot-head youngster as the perfect fall-guy for his war-plans.

Tiberius wrote: View Post
Or, have Admiral Marcus take command of the Enterprise. He wants Khan dead, so why is he sending out Kirk to do it? Marcus takes command, goes after Khan, and then sends Kirk on the away mission to kill him. Marcus tells Kirk to kill Khan, but Kirk refuses, thus getting Marcus to turn on Kirk and revealing Marcus to be the bad guy.
This wouldn't make much sense.
Marcus operates from a position of strength. Why would he sacrifice that position by placing himself in the centre of things?
He tries to use Kirk and the Enterprise to instigate his war with the Klingons.

Tiberius wrote: View Post
Which brings me to that whole big fight thing. It's Kirk's movie. He's the one who gets demoted. He's the one in command. and yet, in the big finale, Kirk's on his back and Spock's the one solving the problem. Why? I mentioned before that you could have had Pike die in the reactor (and stay dead). Then you could have had Kirk fighting Khan instead of Spock, and no need for that crappy, "We need him alive" stuff either. It's a movie, Kill the bloody villain.
Who says this is Kirk's movie alone?
Besides, they killed the villain last time, and people where complaining.
Now the keep Khan alive, and people start complaining about that.


Tiberius wrote: View Post
And that big ship, Vengeance or whatever... That was the biggest fanwank I;ve ever seen.
It's a warship built for Marcus' planned war against the Klingons. What's so fanwank-y about it?
beamMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 02:14 AM   #1334
Phily B
Fleet Captain
 
Phily B's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
View Phily B's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I thought it was really tight and fairly solid plot wise actually, especially for a Trek movie.
Phily B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 02:37 AM   #1335
Tiberius
Commodore
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

beamMe wrote: View Post
Tiberius wrote: View Post
In terms of story telling, I thought it was pretty weak. I'll probably end up having a bit of a rant, so long post ahead. Also, spoilers.

First of all, we've got that black guy with the sick daughter. What was the point of that? What did that entire sequence accomplish? The only things it did was to establish that Khan's blood could (somehow, it was never properly explained) cure illnesses, and that there was a bombing. None of this needed that family that we never saw again. The "Khan's blood is a magical cure" bit was better explained by the tribble sequence. And as for the bombing? Why did Khan go to all the trouble of having this guy plant the bomb if Khan was going to actually be there in the aftermath (as Kirk saw in the meeting)? Instead of going to all this pointless storytelling, just have Khan sneak in, showing how clever he is. Get's caught, has to fight a few guards (showing how strong he is). Plants the bomb, blows the place up. Establishes his character, shows his intelligence and strength. Sure, it doesn't do the "blood is a cure to whatever disease you might have" thing, but that was explained later in the movie anyway.
If you'd paid attention you'd have noticed that all this ties in with the theme "what would you do for your family".
So what? It's completely unrealistic. Are you telling me that Khan, instead of acting in a way that was more likely to succeed, instead chose a complicated plan because he was doing something for his family and wanted everyone involved in that needlessly complicated plan was also involved in a similar moral dilemma?

Tiberius wrote: View Post
The first bit was good. Show Kirk saying, "Fuck you" to the rules, and then BAM he gets demoted. Force him to live with the consequences of his arrogance. That was a lot like Kirk from TOS. Making him a commander was also good. But then, as soon as Pike is killed, Starfleet says, "Oh well, we'll just make you a captain again and give you back the Enterprise." WTF is this? What was the point of demoting him in the first place? It would have been far better to have Kirk as Pike's XO (with Spock staying as Enterprise science officer), and then have Pike killed later. That way, Kirk has to EARN his command back instead of Starfleet telling him he might as well just have it back. Maybe have Pike die trying to fix the reactor. That would give Kirk a HUGE motivation to go after Khan.
Again you weren't paying attention. Marcus gave Kirk the Enterprise back, because he thought he could use the hot-head youngster as the perfect fall-guy for his war-plans.
So? The same would have been accomplished with my idea. Marcus was saying that they were going to kill Khan. Kirk was in charge of the mission sent to do it. Whether it's Marcus in the meeting and Kirk sent out on the Enterprise, or Marcus on the Enterprise and Kirk in the stolen ship, it's still all the same thing. Just put in different places.

This wouldn't make much sense.
Marcus operates from a position of strength. Why would he sacrifice that position by placing himself in the centre of things?
He tries to use Kirk and the Enterprise to instigate his war with the Klingons.
Honestly, that whole part of the movie was tacked on. Nothing came of it. You never saw the Klingons again. You could have had Khan hiding on a completed uninhabited planet, removed the war with the Klingons thing and it would have been the same movie. If you need a justification for Marcus to want to develop weapons, then just say that the Klingons are getting more and more aggressive after Nero escaped from Rura Penthe. The way they did it was to turn marcus into just another warmonger. Give him a legitimate cause for concern and you make him much more sympathetic. As it is, it's just a prick who wants a war so he can play with his toy guns.

Tiberius wrote: View Post
Which brings me to that whole big fight thing. It's Kirk's movie. He's the one who gets demoted. He's the one in command. and yet, in the big finale, Kirk's on his back and Spock's the one solving the problem. Why? I mentioned before that you could have had Pike die in the reactor (and stay dead). Then you could have had Kirk fighting Khan instead of Spock, and no need for that crappy, "We need him alive" stuff either. It's a movie, Kill the bloody villain.
Who says this is Kirk's movie alone?
Besides, they killed the villain last time, and people where complaining.
Now the keep Khan alive, and people start complaining about that.
Sure, it's not just about Kirk, but he's the hero, and yet he's completely absent from the big finale.

Tiberius wrote: View Post
And that big ship, Vengeance or whatever... That was the biggest fanwank I;ve ever seen.
It's a warship built for Marcus' planned war against the Klingons. What's so fanwank-y about it?
[/QUOTE]

It's an uber ship. It's no different to a teenage fan who designs a starship ten kilometers long with a zillion phaser banks and a zillion heavily armed fighter shuttles.
Tiberius is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
benedict cumberbatch, grading & discussion, jj abrams

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:28 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.