RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,885
Posts: 5,329,610
Members: 24,557
Currently online: 557
Newest member: Mgroup Video

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Inquisition
By: Michelle on Jul 12

Cubify Star Trek 3DMe Mini Figurines
By: T'Bonz on Jul 11

Latest Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Jul 10

Seven of Nine Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

Pegg The Prankster
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

More Trek Stars Join Unbelievable!!!!!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

Star Trek #35 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

New ThinkGeek Trek Apparel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Star Trek Movie Prop Auction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Drexler: NX Engineering Room Construction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7


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+ 141 19.13%
A 159 21.57%
A- 99 13.43%
B+ 82 11.13%
B 58 7.87%
B- 27 3.66%
C+ 40 5.43%
C 38 5.16%
C- 24 3.26%
D+ 11 1.49%
D 13 1.76%
D- 10 1.36%
F 35 4.75%
Voters: 737. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 10 2013, 02:43 AM   #1336
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

beamMe wrote: View Post
Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post
beamMe wrote: View Post
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.
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, the "guess I'm not a real fan" response was unnecessary—that's bait you didn't need to take. Deck 1 - Bridge, you could also have let it drop, and yet didn't.

Now, I don't need to see this sort of thing going on here, and neither does anyone else. Knock it off - both of you.


Edited to add:

beamMe wrote: View Post
Tiberius wrote: View Post
...
If you'd paid attention you'd have noticed that...
Why "If you'd paid attention," when "Yes, but remember that... " would have worked just as well?

beamMe wrote: View Post
Tiberius wrote: View Post
...
Again you weren't paying attention.
Again, unnecessary - just rebut the content without making a point of throwing it in the person's face.
__________________
Dinosaurs are just really, really big chickens.

Last edited by M'Sharak; May 10 2013 at 04:13 AM. Reason: editing to edit
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 03:07 AM   #1337
Arianna
Ensign
 
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.
Why couldn't they just have built some robot to plant and detonate the bomb? I didn't get the bit with the father sacrificing his life like that.

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.
See this is where the plot is at its weakest and least original. It's like "lets kill off someone senior to make Kirk captain AGAIN as he was kicked out/suspended/demoted AGAIN. All in the space of about 5 minutes.

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!"
Would have been better if clever Spock or Scotty find some way to beam Kirk out of there and while he may be very ill, Khan's blood could save him? I don't know just a thought.


Why was Khan using a fake name anyway?
So fans couldn't moan that it was very unoriginal.

However the special effects are great but I just kept thinking - it took them 3-4 years to come up with this?
Arianna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 03:12 AM   #1338
throwback
Captain
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Starfleet was militarized in Kirk's era. This point is raised in several episodes of the original series. There was a major conflict in the mid-23rd century which led to a peace mission to Axanar. It irks me that people talk about this era who show their ignorance. "Starfleet needed to militarize". Really? Starfleet is identified as the military in the original series and in ST II.
throwback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 03:34 AM   #1339
anotherdemon
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
anotherdemon's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Starfleet was militarized (one of its roles), but not to the extent that Marcus envisioned in the film. They don't operate dedicated warships at the time the movie takes place, rather multi-role ships that aren't made for the one sole mission of killing as best as possible. As written and stated, Vengeance is only there to kill the enemy in war, and all the effort and technology put into it was for that reason, whereas Enterprise could do such (nowhere near as good), but it's not its intent; it was built to explore the galaxy and beyond with a tertiary ability of defending itself and others.

I'm sure Marcus would want the majority of Starfleet's shipbuilding and doctrine to switch over from multi-role vessels and scientific exploration to dedicated warships and fighting skills.

The difference between the two is astounding.
anotherdemon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 03:50 AM   #1340
throwback
Captain
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Well, to my ears, for someone to say that Starfleet has to militarized it sounds wrong. Starfleet is already the military. For me, it's like going from zero to ten, when Starfleet is already a ten, so to speak.

Without a script of the film handy, I can't say for sure what Marcus wants. However, from what I have read in your reply, I am reminded of a situation that arose during the Cuban Missile Crisis. President Kennedy and Chief of Staff Curtis LeMay had differing views on how to resolve this crisis. The president was in favor of a blockade, and the chief of staff was in favor of bombing the missile sites. Curtis would later say the peaceful resolution of this crisis was the greatest defeat faced by our nation.
throwback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 04:54 AM   #1341
Deck 1 - Bridge
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Torbay
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".

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.



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?
I've just seen the moderation intervention directed at me, in addition to you, for the narky tone you took with my review and someone else's post.

Another moderation tour de force!!
Deck 1 - Bridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 05:17 AM   #1342
Tiberius
Commodore
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Oops.
Tiberius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 05:29 AM   #1343
ConRefit79
Captain
 
ConRefit79's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post
This is Die Hard in space and a blatant rip-off of an earlier Star Trek film that even now stands the test of time in terms of story and spectacle - for this reason alone I cannot forgive this film. It's fanwank from production people who aren't fans but thought they knew what fans wanted but who also know that 95% of the target audience won't know anything about the film this is ripped off from.
This is what I thought would happen.
And its not the first time.They tried to rip off ST:TWOK in Nemesis. Only it came off like Generations.

The best I can hope for is it will lead new fans to watch TWOK. Maybe then they will demand better quality stories in the future and not mindless action and FX.
ConRefit79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 06:04 AM   #1344
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
trevanian's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

throwback wrote: View Post
Well, to my ears, for someone to say that Starfleet has to militarized it sounds wrong. Starfleet is already the military. For me, it's like going from zero to ten, when Starfleet is already a ten, so to speak.
Yeah, and even going back to the original TWOK, Carol sez Starfleet has kept the peace for a century. So that would indicate they kept the peace in the LensFlareUniverse at least up until Kirk's birth, right? To do that, they HAD to be military, as talking tough and waving rolled up pieces of paper would not have sufficed.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 06:09 AM   #1345
anotherdemon
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
anotherdemon's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I don't see it as a ripoff from a previous film -- some bits of TWoK are there (some even scene for scene, but they're small scenes from the whole), but they aren't important to the overall story. In fact, Khan isn't even that important other than being a vessel to be used [and abused] for the main protagonists.

It's far closer to the story of Wing Commander 4 (which isn't a bad story to be like), i.e., certain elements in Starfleet want to change it into something that will be better served in a violent galaxy [and beyond].
anotherdemon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 06:14 AM   #1346
anotherdemon
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
anotherdemon's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Starfleet can defend itself and its holdings for the most part, but what of the next Narada that shows up? Picard and Kirk pull off flukes via circumstance, and you don't want to rely on that. A whole planet just got wiped out in the previous film, and Starfleet couldn't do a thing to stop it. Enter Section 31 and its new designs for Starfleet.
anotherdemon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 06:20 AM   #1347
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
trevanian's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

donners22 wrote: View Post
Franklin wrote: View Post
To me, Spock yelling it seems like it would be one of the most emotionally poignant parts of the movie. It doesn't deserve comparison to the cheesy version, even if the writers invited it. There's far more gravitas this time. It's sincere. It conveys true pain and loathing.
The problem is that there's no real gravitas to the scene at all. The whole thing comes off as either bad fanfic or a parody IMO, and there's just not the same level of attachment to the characters. It's undercut further by the blatently telegraphed cheat out of the situation.

I rewatched WoK a few days ago and, even having seen it many times, Spock's demise still got to me. This scene just made me want to laugh all the way through out of the sheer audacious ridiculousness of it all.
I just rewatched SFS and TWOK recently (in that order, so as to feel like I was going somewhere) and Spock's death does still work for me too. Probably better than it did when there was such hype and baggage attached to it. And you know what really shows me how right they got it the first time? It is what I call being Python-proof.

If you watch LIFE OF BRIAN and then see LAST TEMPTATION, you find yourself laughing at 'blessed are the ... ' because you're thinking 'cheesemakers' not 'peacemakers.' Certain bit of knowledge or spin can ruin a movie moment forever.

By way of comparison, when I first read about the idea of Spock bleeding green on the glass at the end of TWOK and why it wasn't used, it made me think I'd never be able to see the scene again without howling with laughter. But it doesn't take me out of the scene, which means it must be pretty damn near bulletproof.

(in case you didn't know, they were really concerned about green blood on his hand on the glass might be corny, and everybody was tense about doing the scene anyway. So they're ready, and Nimoy has the glove off so the green blood can be applied ... and up comes the makeup guy. PLOOMF! He uses a PANCAKE of makeup on Nimoy, leaving his entire hand green, then walks off. Obviously didn't get it, and at that point they abandoned the idea. And Nimoy points out that the guy had been working THE INCREDIBLE HULK for years, so you can kind of understand his goof. But when you freeze frame on Spock w/ his hand on the glass, the story makes you picture a photoshop job with a trickle of green - which WOULD have worked -- or the big green hulk hand, and the latter makes you think you could never watch the scene with a straight face again. And you'd be as wrong as I was.)
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 06:22 AM   #1348
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post
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".



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.



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.



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?
I've just seen the moderation intervention directed at me, in addition to you, for the narky tone you took with my review and someone else's post.
After you were asked to desist from disrupting the thread with bickering and sniping, this continuation earns you a warning for trolling. Comments to PM, if you please.
__________________
Dinosaurs are just really, really big chickens.
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 06:37 AM   #1349
Jon1701
Rear Admiral
 
Jon1701's Avatar
 
Location: Manchester, UK
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Just watched it last night.

Is it possible to enjoy a film and yet not like it at the same time?

It was right on the edge of what you would expect of a Star Trek film. It was still a Star Trek film. Just.

This really is the Summer-movie blockbuster version of Star Trek. There is a lot to like about this movie - they really took it to another level and they almost got away with it. I can forgive them playing loose with canon, treknology and the odd co-incidence and gap in logic as the movie was pretty enjoyable.

But...

The "death sequence" was right on the line of acceptability (I like the idea of a role reversal and I don't mind them riffing on the original scene if done right) but "that line" from Spock stepped right over it.

Really?????

That was too much. That was a mistake. Didn't know whether to laugh or cry. I mean, the entire sequence is supposed to tap into the emotional notes that the first movie hit but it just left me cold. I'm not sure how I'm supposed to feel emotional about a scene that plays almost word-for-word like the original. Not in a million trillion years are they going to kill off Kirk. The "magic blood" was so obvious it was running through my head as Kirk drew his last breath.

I liked the dude on the bridge with a hole in his head and I liked that the gold skinned chick got a line of dialogue. Pine and Quinto were good. Eve showed promise. Cumberbatch was incredible.

Overall - I liked it as a film, but not as a Star Trek one. Maybe. I dunno. Trust me, this film will leave a lot of people scratching their heads.

Also - something was changed in the edit at the end of the film. One year later? What the hell was that all about - it doesn't feel like one year later on the bridge. All that "nice of you to join the crew" business with Marcus. It feels like originally it was going to be 6 weeks later or something and then they changed it to a year to give them time to rebuild the Enterprise.

Thats a minor niggle. The major ones hurt more. More than ever this films convinced me that trek needs to come back to TV.
__________________
www.moviebreadbin.com
Movie reviews sponsored by that toupee that Patrick Stewart had sent over from London that time.
Jon1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 06:41 AM   #1350
Deck 1 - Bridge
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Torbay
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

M'Sharak wrote: View Post
Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post
beamMe wrote: View Post

If you'd paid attention you'd have noticed that all this ties in with the theme "what would you do for your family".



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.



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.



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.




It's a warship built for Marcus' planned war against the Klingons. What's so fanwank-y about it?
I've just seen the moderation intervention directed at me, in addition to you, for the narky tone you took with my review and someone else's post.
After you were asked to desist from disrupting the thread with bickering and sniping, this continuation earns you a warning for trolling. Comments to PM, if you please.
LOL!!
Deck 1 - Bridge 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 01:22 AM.

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