RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,172
Posts: 5,344,925
Members: 24,601
Currently online: 609
Newest member: Capt_n_Admiral

TrekToday headlines

Klingon Beer Arrives In The US
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22

Star Trek: Prelude To Axanar
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22

Abrams Announces Star Wars: Force For Change Sweepstakes
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22

New Funko Trek Figure
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21

Saldana As A Role Model
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21

San Diego Comic-Con Trek Fan Guide
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21

Cumberbatch As Turing
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21

Retro Review: In the Pale Moonlight
By: Michelle on Jul 19

Trek Beach Towel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 18

Two New Starships Collection Releases
By: T'Bonz on Jul 17


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 19.11%
A 160 21.68%
A- 99 13.41%
B+ 82 11.11%
B 58 7.86%
B- 27 3.66%
C+ 40 5.42%
C 38 5.15%
C- 24 3.25%
D+ 11 1.49%
D 13 1.76%
D- 10 1.36%
F 35 4.74%
Voters: 738. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 16 2013, 07:26 PM   #2326
hamudm
Rear Admiral
 
hamudm's Avatar
 
Location: Langley, B.C., Canada
View hamudm's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Carcazoid wrote: View Post
STAR TREK IS: Space opera, action and adventure, playing fast and loose with real science to make it fit whatever serves the plot. Character chemistry, interaction, making the story play well onscreen. Characters are the focus. It's fun, memorable (or not), and fun. Talky, unless budget allows a good shoot em up. Total make believe, escapism.

STAR TREK IS NOT: The history of the future, a plan for the course of humanity through the next few hundred years, a serious study of what can be accomplished if we are only intelligent enough to pursue it. Sorry to inform some folks, but it's not theology, not a religion.

People get way too serious about this stuff. Star Trek was very nearly dead more than once in the last 45 years. We've had more chances than a lot of fans get with their favorites.

Sit back and enjoy the ride.
10 years ago, members of this BBS would have lynched people for saying something like this.

I'm not entirely disagreeing with you, but relevant, intelligent, rational and focussed storytelling and fun/action/adventure do not have to be mutually exclusive concepts.
__________________
hamudm's DVD's
hamudm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 07:27 PM   #2327
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

hamudm wrote: View Post

I'm just going to leave now.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 07:30 PM   #2328
hamudm
Rear Admiral
 
hamudm's Avatar
 
Location: Langley, B.C., Canada
View hamudm's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Admiral Buzzkill wrote: View Post
hamudm wrote: View Post

I'm just going to leave now.
Ya... it's hard... keeps sucking me back.

Starting NOW!
__________________
hamudm's DVD's
hamudm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 07:31 PM   #2329
flemm
Fleet Captain
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

hamudm wrote: View Post
EDIT: People are creaming their pants over this movie for the same reasons that people heaved dung at Nemesis... this whole thing really has me baffled. I'm questioning my own sanity right now... am I even awake?
Well, I'm certainly not "creaming my pants," but there is a pretty massive difference in quality between this movie and Nemesis imo.

Just in terms of raw entertainment and action, firstly.

I can't get too excited about the film personally because I didn't like the heavy reliance on "quoting" (sometimes literally) earlier movies, the script is a bit unfocused, and it didn't really "hook" me emotionally.

But I'd love this incarnation of Trek to get a really awesome script at some point. It could happen.

hamudm wrote: View Post
I'm not entirely disagreeing with you, but relevant, intelligent, rational and focused storytelling and fun/action/adventure do not have to be mutually exclusive concepts.
That's true.

But one just has to accept that these threads will have a certain amount of "you should like this/you shouldn't like this/you should think this/you should think that, etc., etc."
flemm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 07:31 PM   #2330
SSOASS
Ensign
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Dave Scarpa wrote: View Post
hamudm wrote: View Post
Matchstick wrote: View Post

But... we don't get it. Instead, we get a I-can't-believe-they're-going-there tensionless riff on the other iconic part of "Wrath"'s climax. (To paraphrase Sisko in "Paradise Lost," "You're stealing the WRONG PARTS, Admiral!")
It's interesting you mention Paradise Lost. The story to STID had the foundations of a great Paradise Lost-esque story r.e. conspiracy within the Federation. To me, it felt more like a story like this and that the Khan angle was just shoehorned in there for the sake of having a visible villain. I swear, take Khan out of the story, make a few minor changes and we would have had a much better movie along the lines of Paradise Lost and ST: TUC.

Did anyone else get a
Absolutely agree there was no reason to make Harrison Khan. Make him one of Section 31's operatives pissed at being hosed by Marcus for some reason, but then they'd have to write a real ending to the movie. Same reason they did not have to use an Alt-timeline in the first film. Use Spock as a framing Device, telling the story of their first meeting, Had they done that this Khan story would have never happened
Beyond wanting to bring Kahn back, there are plenty of reasons to make him Kahn ... explain his "super powers", have a good bad guy, and he generally fits in to where they are in the timeline verus the prime universe.
SSOASS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 07:33 PM   #2331
J. Allen
Best Pony™
 
J. Allen's Avatar
 
Location: United States
Send a message via ICQ to J. Allen Send a message via AIM to J. Allen Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to J. Allen Send a message via Yahoo to J. Allen
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Agent Richard07 wrote: View Post
- Gotta re-watch "Space Seed" before I see the movie again.

- The Vengeance construction site looked like a Borg cube.

- Hope you enjoyed Alice Eve in 3D, J. Allen.
Actually, I saw her in all of her 2D glory, but she was still glorious.
__________________
:: :: ::
Visit Brony Kingdom, where all of your wildest dreams will come true.
:: :: ::
-=- My Patron Saint is Twilight Sparkle -=-
J. Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 07:41 PM   #2332
marksound
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Planet Carcazed
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

hamudm wrote: View Post
Carcazoid wrote: View Post
STAR TREK IS: Space opera, action and adventure, playing fast and loose with real science to make it fit whatever serves the plot. Character chemistry, interaction, making the story play well onscreen. Characters are the focus. It's fun, memorable (or not), and fun. Talky, unless budget allows a good shoot em up. Total make believe, escapism.

STAR TREK IS NOT: The history of the future, a plan for the course of humanity through the next few hundred years, a serious study of what can be accomplished if we are only intelligent enough to pursue it. Sorry to inform some folks, but it's not theology, not a religion.

People get way too serious about this stuff. Star Trek was very nearly dead more than once in the last 45 years. We've had more chances than a lot of fans get with their favorites.

Sit back and enjoy the ride.
10 years ago, members of this BBS would have lynched people for saying something like this.

I'm not entirely disagreeing with you, but relevant, intelligent, rational and focussed storytelling and fun/action/adventure do not have to be mutually exclusive concepts.
I've never been the traditional Trek(ker, kor, noid). I don't have collectibles, I don't have uniforms, I don't go to cons. I watch the series on tv when I can, and the movies on DVD or my Zune as often as I have time for. I've been in arguments like these many times, and have been consistent in my positions.

I am a lifelong fan, but that's as far as it goes. I understand what Trek is, and what it isn't. If that makes me a pariah, then so be it. It's worked for 40 years, so why change now?
marksound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 07:42 PM   #2333
Lord Garth, FOI
Lieutenant Commander
 
Lord Garth, FOI's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Ok saw it
Liked it a great deal but there are a few things that I could nitpick to death that irritated the shit out of me. Won't do that now but here are a few points no one else seems to be talking about that I took note of:

1. There is no way the Enterprise isn't utterly destroyed with the damage inflicted on it. No fleet could or would bother repairing her unless you were to take a huuuuuuuuge artistic license leap of faith.
- deflector deck and dish destroyed
- warp engines destroyed
- warp pylons shredded
- primary hull twisted, burning huge chunks missing
- stress cracks apparently (galactica style) under bridge deck and all over hull
- hangar bay twisted ravaged and destroyed
- brewery section of engineering twisted shattered and destroyed
- huge chunks missing from secondary hull

I know we take even greater leaps of story faith in this universe and that doesn't bother me but there is no navy in all of sci fi that wouldn't scrap the ship in the condition shown and rebuild her. Maybe that is implied at the end when it is revealed a year has passed and she is rechristened. New impulse engines looked like. Wish imax had pause

Peter Weller is magnificent but his few good men riff before his demise was laughable. He had me up to that point and deflated me with that direct lifting from a few good men. Very corny
McCoy in short sleeve Bones medi tunic - worth the price of admission. Urban is perfect
Spocks Khan howl was bad just bad , spoiled a perfect tender moment that tore my guts out. A lot like Weller being perfect the doing a Jack Nicholson impersonation, why??
- new warp core very cool but the warp engines still apparently don't have warp tubes connecting to it?

- if in the first film the big aluminum beer silos were all warp cores and now she has one proper warp core why does she still have the beer silo warp cores
- if she still has beer silo backup warp cores why couldn't they be activated when the new primary core failed??

- now i know what happens when an imperial star destroyer plows into the heart of a major city.any doubts about the vengeance size are put to bed
Sad to see pike go would rather have seen him f-cked up to the point where he had to beep away in a chair
Lord Garth, FOI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 07:49 PM   #2334
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

You're grossly exaggerting her damage. One portion of the aft starboard quarter of the saucer was opened up, one breach to the starboard side of engineering, the outer casing of the starboard nacelle, parts of the casing of the port, damage to the impulse deck and a misalignment of the warp core.

The hull breaches were only so deep, and the critical components of her were intact throughout. The black hole in the last film caused shipwide stress fractures and the loss of all 6 dilithium chambers, not to mention nearly burning the nacelles out.

As we see at the end of the movie, they've only had to work maybe a month, two at most, to repair her and even fully replace the impulse drive. Obviously they not only work fast, but can patch up that kind of damage with little effort.

Losing an entire nacelle, half the saucer, maybe the deflector assembly or a massive burnout of the entire warp drive might prompt another think about reactivating her, but apparently her repair was a breeze for them.

And the line about "nearly a year ago" is Kirk referencing him taking command of her for the first time, the epilouge in the hospital is two weeks later, the start of the 5 year mission only a month or two.
Chemahkuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 07:52 PM   #2335
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
trevanian's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
Richard III wrote: View Post
gornsky wrote: View Post
You really did quite spectacularly miss most of the movie.
But luckily I have you to explain it all to me, gornsky.

Pray tell, oh Prince of Doucheness, what nuggets of wisdom you have to bequeath the rest of us mere mortals.
Infraction for flaming. Comments to PM. Let's leave the personal remarks at the door, please.
Does this mean GORNSKY shouldn't have to elaborate on his evaluation of the other guy's moviegoing skills?

Y'know, to prove it is somehow in accordance with all those, 'it's about the movie not the poster' posting guidelines.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 07:57 PM   #2336
T'Cal
Commodore
 
T'Cal's Avatar
 
Location: Chicago
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Loved it! Solid A. Better than the last one, which had too many holes in the plots. In this one the plot is great, the motivations are reasonable, the action is terrific, the humor is natural (a real problem in TNG films), and the ending makes sense while setting up the next movie.
__________________
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably." -- Judge Aaron Satie
T'Cal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 08:02 PM   #2337
T'Cal
Commodore
 
T'Cal's Avatar
 
Location: Chicago
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

__________________
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably." -- Judge Aaron Satie
T'Cal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 08:02 PM   #2338
Lord Garth, FOI
Lieutenant Commander
 
Lord Garth, FOI's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
You're grossly exaggerting her damage. One portion of the aft starboard quarter of the saucer was opened up, one breach to the starboard side of engineering, the outer casing of the starboard nacelle, parts of the casing of the port, damage to the impulse deck and a misalignment of the warp core.

The hull breaches were only so deep, and the critical components of her were intact throughout. The black hole in the last film caused shipwide stress fractures and the loss of all 6 dilithium chambers, not to mention nearly burning the nacelles out.

As we see at the end of the movie, they've only had to work maybe a month, two at most, to repair her and even fully replace the impulse drive. Obviously they not only work fast, but can patch up that kind of damage with little effort.

Losing an entire nacelle, half the saucer, maybe the deflector assembly or a massive burnout of the entire warp drive might prompt another think about reactivating her, but apparently her repair was a breeze for them.

And the line about "nearly a year ago" is Kirk referencing him taking command of her for the first time, the epilouge in the hospital is two weeks later, the start of the 5 year mission only a month or two.
No the structural damage to her bones is actually in reality faaar worse. The amount of torque on her in upper atmosphere with no power is bad brother
And how am I exaggerating the entire front third of the primary hull on fire and twisting as she fell into The atmosphere.fire damage is a bitch
So you are saying they fixed all that in more in a couple months? Ha ha ha
Lord Garth, FOI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 08:06 PM   #2339
J. Allen
Best Pony™
 
J. Allen's Avatar
 
Location: United States
Send a message via ICQ to J. Allen Send a message via AIM to J. Allen Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to J. Allen Send a message via Yahoo to J. Allen
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Lord Garth, FOI wrote: View Post
Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
You're grossly exaggerting her damage. One portion of the aft starboard quarter of the saucer was opened up, one breach to the starboard side of engineering, the outer casing of the starboard nacelle, parts of the casing of the port, damage to the impulse deck and a misalignment of the warp core.

The hull breaches were only so deep, and the critical components of her were intact throughout. The black hole in the last film caused shipwide stress fractures and the loss of all 6 dilithium chambers, not to mention nearly burning the nacelles out.

As we see at the end of the movie, they've only had to work maybe a month, two at most, to repair her and even fully replace the impulse drive. Obviously they not only work fast, but can patch up that kind of damage with little effort.

Losing an entire nacelle, half the saucer, maybe the deflector assembly or a massive burnout of the entire warp drive might prompt another think about reactivating her, but apparently her repair was a breeze for them.

And the line about "nearly a year ago" is Kirk referencing him taking command of her for the first time, the epilouge in the hospital is two weeks later, the start of the 5 year mission only a month or two.
No the structural damage to her bones is actually in reality faaar worse. The amount of torque on her in upper atmosphere with no power is bad brother
And how am I exaggerating the entire front third of the primary hull on fire and twisting as she fell into The atmosphere.fire damage is a bitch
So you are saying they fixed all that in more in a couple months? Ha ha ha
The ship, while falling through the atmosphere, managed to right herself with her thrusters. That is an ENORMOUS amount of lift and strain on the hull, and yet it survived. So I doubt the damage was as bad as it seemed.
__________________
:: :: ::
Visit Brony Kingdom, where all of your wildest dreams will come true.
:: :: ::
-=- My Patron Saint is Twilight Sparkle -=-
J. Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 08:07 PM   #2340
Titus Andronicus
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Augusta, GA
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I think the ending is supposed to be a year from Pike's death, if memory serves.
__________________
Kurt Vonnegut: 1922-2007
Titus Andronicus 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 07:26 AM.

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