RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,227
Posts: 5,438,184
Members: 24,957
Currently online: 566
Newest member: zanejc

TrekToday headlines

Cumberbatch In Wax
By: T'Bonz on Oct 24

Trek Screenwriter Washington D.C. Appearance
By: T'Bonz on Oct 23

Two Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Oct 22

Pine In New Skit
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

Stewart In Holiday Film
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

The Red Shirt Diaries #8
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

IDW Publishing January Comics
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

Retro Review: Chrysalis
By: Michelle on Oct 18

The Next Generation Season Seven Blu-ray Details
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

CBS Launches Streaming Service
By: T'Bonz on Oct 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+ 144 19.23%
A 161 21.50%
A- 101 13.48%
B+ 83 11.08%
B 59 7.88%
B- 27 3.60%
C+ 40 5.34%
C 38 5.07%
C- 25 3.34%
D+ 11 1.47%
D 13 1.74%
D- 10 1.34%
F 37 4.94%
Voters: 749. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 20 2013, 08:31 AM   #3226
lawman
Commander
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I give the movie a C-. I liked STID better than ST09, but to put that in context I absolutely loathed ST09.

Background here: I've been a Trek fan since I first discovered TOS in syndication as a kid. A lot of this thread has batted around the question of "what does it mean to say something is 'real' Star Trek?" Aside from the obvious but trivial intellectual property sense (i.e., if Paramount brands it as Trek, it's Trek), that's an unavoidably subjective question. To me, real Trek is the original series and the TOS movies. Everything else is a spin-off, and although I've enjoyed some of those spin-offs to various degrees, the TOS characters and concepts are the heart and soul of Star Trek.

So when JJA gave us a dumbed-down, hyperkinetic knock-off of those characters and concepts in ST09, well, suffice it to say I was disappointed. Some of the acting was good (Karl Urban in particular really evoked his antecedent, as everyone seems to agree), and the effects were good (but that's par for the course with a big Hollywood budget and CGI), but everything else about it aggressively insulted my intelligence.

By comparison, when I left STID, my main impression was "that felt almost like a real Star Trek story, except stupider."

In the discussions here I've read some really thoughtful criticisms, from Lapis Exilis and ConRefit79 among others; and I've also seen some surprisingly stubborn resistance to criticism and a lot of defenses along the lines of "this is what Trek is now, this is what it takes to make a movie succeed, so if you don't like it you're just out of step." I don't buy that.

I went in with pretty low expectations, and from the start the picture lived down to them, with the whole Nibiru sequence that piled aggressive stupidities and unanswered questions one atop another. (Why did the ship need to be underwater? How did they get it there without being seen in the first place, and how were they planning to leave? Why did any crewmembers need to infiltrate the locals in person? If someone had to do that, why the captain and doctor? If the nuEnterprise is as huge as it's purportedly supposed to be, how the heck did Kirk and McCoy swim down to that entry hatch unassisted, given the depths involved? How can a single volcano possibly pose a threat to an entire planet? [Instantly evoking: a single supernova threatening the galaxy. ] If such a threat does exist, in what way, shape, or form could a suitcase-sized "cold fusion device" possibly do anything to mitigate it? Since when have the transporters ever required line-of-sight access to work? Why are we still saddled with the philosophically indefensible TNG-era interpretation of the Prime Directive? And so forth.)

The picture gradually improved after that, though. I still found myself questioning several creative choices (modern military-style brimmed hats on Starfleet uniforms? Really?), and some plot elements seemed to be there just to provide excuses for "yet another action sequence" (e.g., why would protocol specify the exact meeting room Starfleet brass would use? Why would that room be in an exposed skyscraper with, apparently, no shields or security systems nor any emergency beam-out capacity? Why would Harrison, after operating behind the scenes, put himself at risk by perpetrating a personal attack in a one-man vessel?). And I thought Pike's death was handled rather cheaply.

*But* OTOH I liked the political allegory that was set up in terms of Marcus's plan to take out Harrison without due process, and moreover to do so from a distance using drones (excuse me, torpedoes) in blithe disregard for the sovereignty of another nation (excuse me, planet). This is the kind of thing that real Trek always did well. And when Kirk finally got his head out of his ass, in the wake of his very out-of-character confrontation with Scotty, and made the command decision to go in and apprehend Harrison alive rather than nuking him from a distance (and risking a war to boot), that was the first time I got a glimpse of Pine's character maturing into the real Kirk, the Kirk we once knew, as opposed to an immature and impulsive jerk who relies on luck, as he was throughout ST09 and as Pike had accurately accused him of being.

After that it had its ups and downs for a while, but at least kept things relatively interesting. The brig confrontation with Harrison was a high point, not just because it was a relatively rare scene that made time for actual extended conversation but especially thanks to Cumberbatch's acting, even if the revelation of him as Khan fell somewhat flat — as others have noted, if he doesn't resemble the original Khan in either appearance or temperament, and doesn't share the same motivating backstory, or indeed much of one at all, then there was really no reason to make him Khan as opposed to, say, Joachim or even Garth of Izar. (Even the "familiar name to general audiences" rationale doesn't make sense, since the PTB went to such lengths *not* to publicize the character's identity.) I also liked the prospect of Kirk and Khan working together, and I really wish that had played out longer, rather than having Khan revert to stereotypical wild-eyed maniacal villain mode. However, the intership action sequence involving them getting aboard the Vengeance was interminable, and really seemed like something written just to provide an excuse for 3D effects, or perhaps a video game.

It was downhill after that, unfortunately, as the film degenerated into standard "Hollywood action movie" tropes. Outer-space chase sequence and shootout... yawn. Falling from moon to Earth... yawn (and as others have noted, there's no way it could happen remotely as fast as depicted under the influence of gravity alone; and moreover if the ship's autogravity was off as it tumbled, the crew on board should have been in freefall, not falling this way and that between decks). And then the TWOK-evoking death sequence... excruciating, with no emotional effect except to forcibly remind me of how the same scene had been done better before. And apparently Earth (including Starfleet HQ) still has no air defenses of its own, despite the Narada attack the previous year. Big city-destroying crash... totally gratuitous. Spock deciding to chase down Khan one-on-one... totally stupid (and apparently Earth has no law-enforcement authorities on the ground, either). The fistfight aboard the flying what-were-those-things-anyway-that-looked-like-they-belonged-in-Star-Wars was (yet again) clichéd and interminable. And while it was nice to at least have a denouement (I'm always surprised how many movies today just dispense with that entirely and end right after the climax), it felt both predictable and tacked-on.

Other general criticisms? The transporters were once again useless whenever they were actually needed, for the flimsiest of reasons (yet somehow Marcus was able to use them right through the Enterprise's shields). Warp travel is still being treated as instantaneous, even more so than in ST09; being only minutes away from the Klingon homeworld makes no sense whatsoever. It was annoying to see the Enterprise interiors festooned with bridges and catwalks that seem to serve no purpose except to give people something to fall off of during a crisis. The blood-based life-restoring serum joins "transwarp beaming" as a miracle technology that fundamentally alters and undermines the whole foundation of the Trek universe, or would if it were taken seriously. And the story outline in its broadest terms has way too many elements (Enterprise is ambushed and outgunned by much larger enemy ship, limps back to Earth, saves planet by defeating the villain with his own superweapon) that seem like a rehash of ST09.

Another poster summed it up best, I think, by calling it "a Star Trek-flavored action movie." But it doesn't measure up to the best Star Trek, not by a long shot, nor does it measure up to the best action movies. Regardless of how much money it makes, regardless of whether or not it creates new fans, what this franchise desperately needs in order to work creatively is smarter writing, nothing more and nothing less.
__________________
Blogging on pop culture and politics at SmartRemarks
lawman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 08:47 AM   #3227
teacock
Admiral
 
teacock's Avatar
 
Location: teacake
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Maurice wrote: View Post
Just an observation on some of the comments I've read: I don't know where people keep coming up with this idea of superman Khan wanting to wipe out less perfect humans...
I think Kirk says it.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 08:50 AM   #3228
Gep Malakai
Vice Admiral
 
Gep Malakai's Avatar
 
Send a message via AIM to Gep Malakai Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Gep Malakai
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

^Spock says it, actually. He refers to Khan's goals as "the mass genocide of any being [he] find[s] to be less than superior."
__________________
"From the darkness you must fall, failed and weak, to darkness all."
-Kataris
Gep Malakai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 08:55 AM   #3229
teacock
Admiral
 
teacock's Avatar
 
Location: teacake
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Right, thanks!!

And you know the augments in ENT set about doing that as well. I think they are bred to see non augmented beings as obstacles and useless clutter.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 09:21 AM   #3230
gornsky
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Sydney, Australia
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Maurice wrote: View Post
Just an observation on some of the comments I've read: I don't know where people keep coming up with this idea of superman Khan wanting to wipe out less perfect humans...the whole eliminate that which is imperfect is Nomad's bailiwick, after all. Khan just was super ambitious and thought his superiority meant his kind was meant to rule.
It's from the movie itself. Before NuSpock beams over Khan's crew, he asks Khan what he'll do with them. Khan says he'll continue his "work" and Spock says, that as he understands it, his work is the mass genocide of any beings he finds to be less than superior (which is, apparently, the information he got from Spock Prime).

OldSpock showing up was my big eye-roll moment of the movie. He didn't tell Spock anything that helped.
You'll remember that the audience's view on that exchange was cut off mid conversation.
gornsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 10:04 AM   #3231
Mutoid
Fleet Captain
 
Mutoid's Avatar
 
Location: CommishSleer
View Mutoid's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

gornsky wrote: View Post

OldSpock showing up was my big eye-roll moment of the movie. He didn't tell Spock anything that helped.
You'll remember that the audience's view on that exchange was cut off mid conversation.
Also it prompted nuSpock to take the human popsicles out of the torpedoes and assume Khan would show no mercy to them. PrimeSpock reinforced to nuSpock the calibre of his enemy.

Admittedly he was suspicious already and that prompted the call

Last edited by Mutoid; May 20 2013 at 11:09 AM.
Mutoid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 11:29 AM   #3232
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Admiral Buzzkill wrote: View Post
No one's interested in salvaging stuff from a twenty five year-old bomb.
Obviously some people are. Does that mean that anything that's too old shouldn't be discussed and critiqued ?

teacake wrote: View Post
And you know the augments in ENT set about doing that as well. I think they are bred to see non augmented beings as obstacles and useless clutter.
I was under the impression that Power is what Khan wanted in the original timeline.

And... I really don't like using "NuSomething" to describe the new timeline. It's so inelegant.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 12:07 PM   #3233
teacock
Admiral
 
teacock's Avatar
 
Location: teacake
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Belz... wrote: View Post
teacake wrote: View Post
And you know the augments in ENT set about doing that as well. I think they are bred to see non augmented beings as obstacles and useless clutter.
I was under the impression that Power is what Khan wanted in the original timeline.

And... I really don't like using "NuSomething" to describe the new timeline. It's so inelegant.
Yes the Khan of Space Seed certainly wanted power. It is distracting that now he wants to kill everyone but maybe he just intends to kill everyone not useful. So if you're going to make a nice mule in his brave new world of super beings you get to stay. The augments in ENT are lashing out, they're young and their leaders reaction to not getting the power he wants is to kill people.. he was no Khan, but he was barely an adult.

As to the Nu, I think it followed on from the term NuBSG. I think it's cute myself.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 12:40 PM   #3234
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

gornsky wrote: View Post
Maurice wrote: View Post
Just an observation on some of the comments I've read: I don't know where people keep coming up with this idea of superman Khan wanting to wipe out less perfect humans...the whole eliminate that which is imperfect is Nomad's bailiwick, after all. Khan just was super ambitious and thought his superiority meant his kind was meant to rule.
It's from the movie itself. Before NuSpock beams over Khan's crew, he asks Khan what he'll do with them. Khan says he'll continue his "work" and Spock says, that as he understands it, his work is the mass genocide of any beings he finds to be less than superior (which is, apparently, the information he got from Spock Prime).
nuKhan has been dumbed down as well. Khan's plans were a lot more complex than just committing mass genocide, he's not Hitler.

In the new timeline, apparently every villains seeks vengeance and wants to kill everyone else.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 01:14 PM   #3235
Dave Scarpa
Lieutenant Commander
 
Dave Scarpa's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

lawman wrote: View Post
I give the movie a C-. I liked STID better than ST09, but to put that in context I absolutely loathed ST09.


Another poster summed it up best, I think, by calling it "a Star Trek-flavored action movie." But it doesn't measure up to the best Star Trek, not by a long shot, nor does it measure up to the best action movies. Regardless of how much money it makes, regardless of whether or not it creates new fans, what this franchise desperately needs in order to work creatively is smarter writing, nothing more and nothing less.
Nailed it, exactly. A Better story with the same cast, effects , and even director would have made a big difference. The problem also is you have to at least respect what has come before, but give us exciting new stories, not retreads. And please bring back the optimism of old trek, Fans all of a sudden say that notion is quaint, I say that notion is what kept Trek Going for 50 years, and it is needed as much today, if not more, than it was needed 50 years ago.
Dave Scarpa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 01:20 PM   #3236
Dave Scarpa
Lieutenant Commander
 
Dave Scarpa's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Everybody is so quick to Dismiss Star Trek V, but I would go back and watch that before watching into Darkness. At Least in Trek V they got the Trio of Kirk, Spock and Mccoy Right. The Feeling of Family was right on in that film. That movie had it's problems, the effect were stilted by a non -existant budget, the story was also gimped by the budget, There was still too much insistance on Humor and especially Scotty suffered in the film by using his as Comic Relief, fans bitched about that then and now are alright that Simon Pegg's Scotty is suffering the same fate.
Dave Scarpa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 01:35 PM   #3237
beamMe
Fleet Captain
 
beamMe's Avatar
 
Location: Europa
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
gornsky wrote: View Post
Maurice wrote: View Post
Just an observation on some of the comments I've read: I don't know where people keep coming up with this idea of superman Khan wanting to wipe out less perfect humans...the whole eliminate that which is imperfect is Nomad's bailiwick, after all. Khan just was super ambitious and thought his superiority meant his kind was meant to rule.
It's from the movie itself. Before NuSpock beams over Khan's crew, he asks Khan what he'll do with them. Khan says he'll continue his "work" and Spock says, that as he understands it, his work is the mass genocide of any beings he finds to be less than superior (which is, apparently, the information he got from Spock Prime).
nuKhan has been dumbed down as well. Khan's plans were a lot more complex than just committing mass genocide, he's not Hitler.

In the new timeline, apparently every villains seeks vengeance and wants to kill everyone else.
This Khan did not want to kill everyone else.
I suggest you watch the movie again.
beamMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 01:35 PM   #3238
Kirby
Rear Admiral
 
Kirby's Avatar
 
Location: Alt: 5280
View Kirby's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I gave it a B as a movie in general. I was entertained for 2 hours, and left the theater in a good mood.
If I were to rank all of the Trek movies, it was probably somewhere in the middle of the pack.
__________________
Give each other $10, put it on Underhill.
Kirby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 01:56 PM   #3239
cabby
Lieutenant
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
teacake wrote: View Post
So when Khan says in the trailers, "I will have.. my.. vengeance." He's talking about the ship, right?
Basically. All he did since getting out of the freezer was whining to Admiral Marcus. "I shall have my own Vengeance! Damnit!"


The next film will be called: STAR TREK into THE VENGEANCE OF KHAN. A two hour tour of Khan's Vengeance.





While we're at it. Where exactly did this film REALLY go "into darkness"? It's not darker than any of the previous Trek films.
Its referring to death. Spock prepares for the experience when he is in the volcano in a dispassionate manner. Then later experiences death with Pike, who goes "into darkness". Finally, Kirk makes the journey but is saved by god mode blood.
cabby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 02:03 PM   #3240
gornsky
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Sydney, Australia
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Dave Scarpa wrote: View Post
give us exciting new stories, not retreads.
I'm curious. Do you have this same complaint about The Motion Picture or The Wrath of Khan.

And please bring back the optimism of old trek, Fans all of a sudden say that notion is quaint, I say that notion is what kept Trek Going for 50 years, and it is needed as much today, if not more, than it was needed 50 years ago.
That's funny, because walking out of this movie was the most optimistic I have felt about Trek since Wrath of Khan.

Last edited by gornsky; May 20 2013 at 03:19 PM.
gornsky 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 06:59 PM.

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