RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,570
Posts: 5,514,358
Members: 25,150
Currently online: 498
Newest member: kingkane

TrekToday headlines

Two New Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Dec 26

Captain Kirk’s Boldest Missions
By: T'Bonz on Dec 25

Trek Paper Clips
By: T'Bonz on Dec 24

Sargent Passes
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

QMx Trek Insignia Badges
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18


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 19.20%
A 161 21.47%
A- 101 13.47%
B+ 83 11.07%
B 59 7.87%
B- 27 3.60%
C+ 40 5.33%
C 38 5.07%
C- 25 3.33%
D+ 11 1.47%
D 13 1.73%
D- 10 1.33%
F 38 5.07%
Voters: 750. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 15 2013, 08:15 AM   #1951
Xavier_Storma
Lieutenant Commander
 
Xavier_Storma's Avatar
 
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

BillJ wrote: View Post
Xavier_Storma wrote: View Post
Chemahkuu wrote: View Post

Two hours of aging actors smugly reciting poor dialogue if I remember the first ten of them correctly.
The Hollywood obsession with youth...

Not every hero needs to be in his 30ies...
How does that make for a bad movie? Plus, Pike wasn't in his thirties.
That's why he died.
__________________
Star Trek - A Final Unity
http://www.st-afu.com
Xavier_Storma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2013, 08:18 AM   #1952
Xavier_Storma
Lieutenant Commander
 
Xavier_Storma's Avatar
 
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Xaios wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Xaios wrote: View Post
For all the bad writing in Nemesis, its biggest sin was that it was BORING AS F***.
Yup. Though I do find that it's aging the best out of the four TNG movie outings.
First Contact is still my favorite of the TNG films, but the one that I've personally found has aged the most gracefully is actually Generations.

Crazy, I know.
NEMESIS and GENERATIONS. Yup. And here is why: Cinematography. NEMESIS and GENERATIONS looked awesome.
__________________
Star Trek - A Final Unity
http://www.st-afu.com
Xavier_Storma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2013, 08:38 AM   #1953
Devon
Fleet Captain
 
Devon's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

dulcimer47 wrote: View Post
Once again, if our barometer for success is going to be box office results and "mainstream critics", then J.J.'s "Star Trek: Transformers" will always be out ahead.
Swing and a miss with the insult.

However, as long as the franchise is on this path, we'll never see another "Measure of a Man" or "Inner Light" or "Far Beyond the Stars" again.
Not in a two hour movie, no. People don't want to spend $40 or $50.00 at the movies to see Patrick Stewart play a little flute (oh, but if it's in 3D they might....)

For that matter, even something like "Time's Arrow" is probably beyond J.J.'s capabilities...
J.J. is the director, not the writer, so.....

And when it comes to getting "mainstream" popularity - make good stories and that will come - you need to look no further than 1994, when TNG was one of the most popular shows on television, had already spun-off DS9, and was about to spin-off Voyager, and would be in the theaters in the fall with Generations.
Ironically, many felt that the fall began with Generations.

TNG didn't need lens flares and explosions, and to me, their successes went far beyond J.J.'s movies.
So you're comparing 7 years worth of episodes to 2 films? Really?

J.J.'s movies will be lucky to get 4 made, probably 3.
And that has to do with what?

TNG's movie franchise, for being a "failure" made 4, and that was after spending 7 years as a critically acclaimed series that spawned an additional 18 years of episodes after it's conclusion.
TNG's film series has performed the worst for Paramount, and it was due to the TNG films that we got the reboot, so it's ironic how you want to attribute the TNG film's supposed success but don't realize it was their failures that caused Paramount to want to start over!

"Real" Star Trek is character development and social commentary told through a sci-fi prism, not explosions, CGI, and magic Khan blood.
That was pretty weak. You cherry picked the credentials for supposed "real" Star Trek. I could easily say "'Real' Star Trek is character development and social commentary told through a sci-fi prism, not explosions, CGI and Kirk chopping wood."

So based on your credentials, about 80% of Star Trek is not "real." Hell, what am I talking about, none it is "real." Which makes the "Real Star Trek" thing even more ridiculous to say.
__________________
Follow my Star Trek Model builds, music, art and more at Devon's Corner.
Devon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2013, 08:41 AM   #1954
GameOn
Lieutenant Commander
 
GameOn's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Phily B wrote: View Post
It's also because it was a nonsensical and terrible script that only two other TOS cast members came back. Generations is terrible on every single level and it doesn't have the excuse of being a light reboot. Imagine the rage on this forum if the plot was Generations level and they destroyed a beloved ship cause they wanted a movie ship
I've always thought that Generations was a complete mess of a movie that almost rivals Star Trek 5 in its awfulness.
GameOn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2013, 08:47 AM   #1955
Pauln6
Rear Admiral
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Phily B wrote: View Post
Kirk's problem is that he promoted an ensign to chief engineer so they're all off doing something else... evacuating the ship maybe? And it really isn't clear why they have magical glass and inspired transporters but no radiation suits or robotic drones - technologies that we have in the 21st century already, along with greater equality of the sexes.
If there were radiation suits, he probably didn't have time to suit up. I doubt a radiation suit would've helped, even in TWOK Spock didn't bother with one did he? Everyone in engineering appeared to have one on, as far as I'm aware there has never been such a suit in Trek.

The Enterprise crew refused to evacuate, this was made clear when Spock gave the order to abandon ship. I'm not sure on your first point either, he had Scotty and the acting engineering officer at his disposal, would he have ordered them into the warp core to die?
I hope you don't take offense but you are making my point for me. Of course I do accept that as shown on screen Kirk's choices were limited and the writers painted him into that corner deliberately. Kirk is within his rights to order all the engineers out and go in himself but that isn't the most logical choice and, once again, he succeeds purely on the basis of luck.

1. When are engineers ever going to have time to suit up in a radiation leak emergency? That's why from TMP they started to put their engineers IN the suits when the staff are on duty (just need to put a helmet on). They stopped doing it in TNG because they sanitised the engineering section but it was an incredibly sensible design choice alongside giving security guards phaser resistance body armour.

2. If TNG is anything to go by, a commander has to be prepared to order somebody more qualified to their death in order to save the ship - and never mind the ship, to protect civilians on the planet they about to crash into. Much like in ST09 when he stayed too long next to an expanding black hole in order to blow up a ship, his decision, while successful, is not well reasoned. If Kirk arrives with no tools, and limited engineering ability and discovers that he can't kick the ship better? He succeed because of luck - thus showing he learned nothing from the dressing down he took earlier in the movie. This isn't Kirk's fault - it's the writers wanted to make him a very traditional hero. imagine how many 12 year olds who would be in tears if he'd ordered Scotty to his death. In fact, they should both have gone - the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. They aren't just words.

3. I was being a bit facetious about the missing crew. If they were not evacuating then a dozen engineers should have been onsite. The ship has 400+ crew - enough for 3 shifts - and during a red alert they take action stations. showing a deserted engineering. I hate this kind of cheesy plot device where the hero is the only one onsite. The movie 2012 did it worse where an unqualified character ran all the way through the ship past multiple qualified characters despite time being of the essence just so the hero could steal the limelight. It's really poor storytelling.

4. I am also aware that it is traditional Trek to have Kirk Spock and McCoy doing things that they aren't really best qualified to do. It's always annoying.

I am surprised that people are still criticising the movie for Uhura stealing McCoy's screen time. I thought she had less of a screen presence than he did, all her scenes were relevant to her (although they should probably have used a volcanologist or geophysicist on the shuttle - I couldn't see why uhura was there) and McCoy got loads to do.

I would have used Chekov for the missile scene personally - He's a maths genius, has tactical training, has very precise manual dexterity (as shown by his transporter use in the last movie) and he becomes the tactical officer in TMP. I thought the use of Chekov was probably the worst in the film. He just delivered dialogue and his personality didn't come though at all. Assigning him to engineering was a mistake. Making Carol an engineer could have made more sense.
__________________
Star Trek/Babylon 5/Alien crossover www.youtube.com/user/pauln6

Other Worlds Role Playing Game
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produc...ducts_id=97631
Pauln6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2013, 09:01 AM   #1956
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

ConRefit79 wrote: View Post
King Daniel wrote: View Post
In the novel The Valiant, the Stargazer's captain and first officer were killed, and Picard took command. He kept it.

Ditto Dax on the USS Aventine in the post-series novels.
But... But.... But.... Enterprise's Captain, Captain Pike, was not killed. And Enterprise returned to Earth after the mission. Kirk was a cadet about to be reprimanded for cheating. Not to mention being a stowaway. But as long as he ends up Captain, it doesn't matter how he gets there.

He gave his life for his crew without a second thought. He did not save Earth, he didn't even stop Khan, but he saved those important to him.

He did not do it for shits and giggles.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2013, 09:06 AM   #1957
Orac Zen
Mischief Manager
 
Orac Zen's Avatar
 
Location: Missing him ^
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

BillJ wrote: View Post
I think some people are desperate to hate this movie.
I can only speak for myself, of course, but this ridiculous generalisation certainly doesn't work for me. I enjoyed the hell out of '09 and hoped to enjoy this movie just as much. The fact I didn't has nothing whatever to do with me being "desperate to hate" it; it has to do with it being one of the more vacuous excuses for a movie I've seen. If you see it differently, that's great, but you'd be best to avoid assuming that people who didn't like it all had preconceived notions that it would be garbage.

BillJ wrote: View Post
It just grates on me when someone acts like Trek was this model series for enlightened people and that J.J. Abrams films are just fluff that shit on Roddenberry's vision.
I've never had much time for the Trek's-a-masterpiece, Roddenberry's-vision-rules viewpoint myself. Roddeneberry, with the help of a great many other people whose input seems to be overlooked as often as not, made a TV show so he could make a living. The rose-tinted glasses view of it as some work of genius that's ascended to holy writ and must go unchallenged has always struck me as absurd. So once again, my lack of enthusiasm for this movie has nothing to do with me being one of those clichéd TOS-uber-alles types.

doylem1 wrote: View Post
[Abrams and co] created an alt timeline ripe for new stories and new adventures so stick with it.
Bingo. This is one of my biggest issues with this movie: '09 did away with so much of the baggage that had weighed Trek down...and the first thing they did with their baggage-free timeline was to make some sort of TWoK-lite pseudo-remake. Among other things, this movie is a wasted opportunity.

This movie isn't for me (this review linked to above, while harsher than I'd be about it, nonetheless covers several of the reasons I didn't care for it), but if it works for others that's great. As in all things, to each their own.
__________________
Max 2008 - 2013
Orac Zen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2013, 09:35 AM   #1958
SantaSpock
Fleet Captain
 
SantaSpock's Avatar
 
Location: CommishSleer
View SantaSpock's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Phily B wrote: View Post
Is this Generations that was so bad that Nimoy didn't want anything to do with it? If STID had half the plot holes that Generations had then this thread would be unbearable.
dulcimer47 wrote: View Post
"Real" Star Trek is character development and social commentary told through a sci-fi prism, not explosions, CGI, and magic Khan blood.

True, I should have specified new episodes of a show like TNG and/or DS9.

Who was it recently who said that Star Trek is a TV show and best done in that format? Ron Moore I believe.
So the real Star trek is just TV episodes or DS9 and TNG. No TOS, TAS, VOY, ENT or any movies.
As for magic blood, there were plenty of 'magical' non-scientific things through all the series including TNG


dulcimer47 wrote: View Post
Phily B wrote: View Post
Is this Generations that was so bad that Nimoy didn't want anything to do with it? If STID had half the plot holes that Generations had then this thread would be unbearable.
Nimoy didn't want anything to do with Generations because there wasn't enough for Spock to do, as it was a TNG movie.

I've seen Nimoy at a convention and he basically said to Shatner that he was stupid to be in GEN. And what a really stupid way to die. He said if he Spock was in it Kirk wouldn't have died. He said it again and again.
Not that there wasn't enough to do - that the Kirk/TOS part of it was stupid. Thats the reason he says he didn't want to be in it.
SantaSpock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2013, 10:03 AM   #1959
Xavier_Storma
Lieutenant Commander
 
Xavier_Storma's Avatar
 
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

GameOn wrote: View Post
Phily B wrote: View Post
It's also because it was a nonsensical and terrible script that only two other TOS cast members came back. Generations is terrible on every single level and it doesn't have the excuse of being a light reboot. Imagine the rage on this forum if the plot was Generations level and they destroyed a beloved ship cause they wanted a movie ship
I've always thought that Generations was a complete mess of a movie that almost rivals Star Trek 5 in its awfulness.
Not quite as much as XI's mess... and the characters and their story were much more credible. Central themes like coping with Death, chosing a life went through the film. It felt epic in scope... condamn me... it is still my favorite TREK film to date.
__________________
Star Trek - A Final Unity
http://www.st-afu.com
Xavier_Storma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2013, 10:07 AM   #1960
Xavier_Storma
Lieutenant Commander
 
Xavier_Storma's Avatar
 
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

The point is not the magic blood... it is the whole setup.

Why do they need to capture Khan to get that blood sample, if they have 72 (!!! ) other augements waiting ON BOARD there.

Plus... this magic blood leads to something, they have created with that transwarp transporter.
Essentially you do not need starships in this reality anymore. Every single person, who watches the movie (as is capable of logical thinking) will ask him/herself the essential question: why didn't Starfleet use the transwarp transporter to follow Khan to Kronos?
The same problem occurs when you think the return from the dead through to the end: You now have the magic blood... death is history.

So, in essence TREK 3 doesn't need starships, nor doctors. The heroes cannot die anymore. That's loss of impact, loss of drama, although I am sure, that Orci and Kurtzman will simply forget that ridiculous plotpoint in the sequel.

Just lay back and enjoy the SFX, action ride, and do not pay to close attention to logic.
New TREK is like TRANSFORMERS and G.I. JOE. Simple, absolutely dumb, loud entertainment which is in essence about nothing but nice visuals and SFX.
Enjoy it as such, or leave it alone.
__________________
Star Trek - A Final Unity
http://www.st-afu.com
Xavier_Storma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2013, 10:10 AM   #1961
SalvorHardin
Rear Admiral
 
SalvorHardin's Avatar
 
Location: Star's End
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

dulcimer47 wrote: View Post
Once again, if our barometer for success is going to be box office results and "mainstream critics", then J.J.'s "Star Trek: Transformers" will always be out ahead.
Ok. How about the opinions of TrekBBS members then? Or are they also not good enough a success barometer for you?

So far
A+,A,A- -->77/136
B+,B,B- -->35/136
C+,C,C- -->13/136
D to F -->11/136
__________________

SalvorHardin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2013, 10:19 AM   #1962
Xavier_Storma
Lieutenant Commander
 
Xavier_Storma's Avatar
 
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

SalvorHardin wrote: View Post
dulcimer47 wrote: View Post
Once again, if our barometer for success is going to be box office results and "mainstream critics", then J.J.'s "Star Trek: Transformers" will always be out ahead.
Ok. How about the opinions of TrekBBS members then? Or are they also not good enough a success barometer for you?

So far
A+,A,A- -->77/136
B+,B,B- -->35/136
C+,C,C- -->13/136
D to F -->11/136
The internet... it's not representative. Neither are polls etc.
You will have the box office as one of the few really objective parameters to level the success of the film.

This again does not lead to a film being good or bad.

Example:

X-MEN THE LAST STAND. Hated among the internet community.
Yet the most successful of the X-MEN films to date.

Sometimes the internet simply falsifies the whole picture.

But in the end, it does not matter... as long as you are able to enjoy it... why do you care what other people think?

Example: I love X-MEN ORIGINS WOLVERINE. That film is considered the worst of the X-MEN films... I don't care.

I love NEMESIS. This film is considered as one of the worst TREK films... I don't care.
__________________
Star Trek - A Final Unity
http://www.st-afu.com
Xavier_Storma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2013, 10:23 AM   #1963
Therin of Andor
Admiral
 
Therin of Andor's Avatar
 
Location: New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
View Therin of Andor's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Xavier_Storma wrote: View Post
Why do they need to capture Khan to get that blood sample, if they have 72 (!!! ) other augements waiting ON BOARD there.
They have absolutely no way of knowing if their blood has the same qualities. Harrison may have undergone changes thanks to Section 31.

why didn't Starfleet use the transwarp transporter to follow Khan to Kronos?
Didn't the film mention that it was a one-use prototype?
__________________
Thiptho lapth! Ian (Entire post is personal opinion)
The Andor Files @ http://andorfiles.blogspot.com/
http://therinofandor.blogspot.com/
Therin of Andor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2013, 10:32 AM   #1964
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

The other Augments were frozen and couldn't be revived without the proper somethingorother sequence, as McCoy said. To try to do so would kill them. Thus they couldn't be used to harvest blood.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2013, 10:32 AM   #1965
SalvorHardin
Rear Admiral
 
SalvorHardin's Avatar
 
Location: Star's End
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Xavier_Storma wrote: View Post
But in the end, it does not matter... as long as you are able to enjoy it... why do you care what other people think?
I don't really seriously care or lose sleep over it.
But while we're here killing some time we have to discuss this stuff.

Xavier_Storma wrote: View Post
The internet... it's not representative. Neither are polls etc.
Generally true. However, we're all here in a little Trek community. What its members think about the movie we're discussing is very relevant. Polls are relevant.
You can't just count on the most vocal members' discussion to see what the deal is.


Xavier_Storma wrote: View Post
You will have the box office as one of the few really objective parameters to level the success of the film.

This again does not lead to a film being good or bad.
True,also. Box office success is not always an indicator of quality.
But other than our personal taste & opinions, box office, critics and BBS polls are all we have. And if they all tend to agree, then there's probably something a moviemaker did right.
__________________

SalvorHardin 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 02:54 PM.

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