RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,227
Posts: 5,438,214
Members: 24,957
Currently online: 587
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.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 20 2013, 06:43 PM   #76
Psion
Commodore
 
Psion's Avatar
 
Location: Lat: 40.1630936 Lon: -75.1183777
View Psion's Twitter Profile
Re: What did you like/dislike about Into Darkness (Spoilers)

sj4iy wrote: View Post

Well, you're arguing against established canon- I didn't make up that Khan's blood has regenerative properties, that's how it is in Star Trek. I don't know what the properties of his blood are anymore than you do, that's just how it is in the Star Trek universe. I simply made the argument that IF McCoy had a way to repair the damaged cells in Kirk's body and if Kirk wasn't entirely brain-dead at that point, then freezing Kirk the way he did was a great way to buy time.
Only in this movie does Khan's blood have the power demonstrated. It was never mentioned in "Space Seed" or Star Trek II, and he couldn't use it to save his beloved wife before Wrath of Khan.
__________________
Twinkies are back. I knew they couldn't stay away from me for long.
Psion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 06:48 PM   #77
SpookyCat
Captain
 
SpookyCat's Avatar
 
Location: Rhaven in Boston
Re: What did you like/dislike about Into Darkness (Spoilers)

imranbecks wrote: View Post
malchya wrote: View Post
The battered but triumphant Enterprise rising from the clouds. Brought a lump to my throat and I may have had a speck of sentiment in my eye.
That moment gave me goosebumps!
Same here!
__________________
I'm not a geek, I'm an aficionado.
SpookyCat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 06:53 PM   #78
sj4iy
Commander
 
sj4iy's Avatar
 
Location: US
Re: What did you like/dislike about Into Darkness (Spoilers)

Psion wrote: View Post
sj4iy wrote: View Post

Well, you're arguing against established canon- I didn't make up that Khan's blood has regenerative properties, that's how it is in Star Trek. I don't know what the properties of his blood are anymore than you do, that's just how it is in the Star Trek universe. I simply made the argument that IF McCoy had a way to repair the damaged cells in Kirk's body and if Kirk wasn't entirely brain-dead at that point, then freezing Kirk the way he did was a great way to buy time.
Only in this movie does Khan's blood have the power demonstrated. It was never mentioned in "Space Seed" or Star Trek II, and he couldn't use it to save his beloved wife before Wrath of Khan.
She was killed by a parasite that ate her brain. Big difference there.
sj4iy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 07:47 PM   #79
Crazyewok
Commander
 
Re: What did you like/dislike about Into Darkness (Spoilers)

Psion wrote: View Post
sj4iy wrote: View Post

Well, you're arguing against established canon- I didn't make up that Khan's blood has regenerative properties, that's how it is in Star Trek. I don't know what the properties of his blood are anymore than you do, that's just how it is in the Star Trek universe. I simply made the argument that IF McCoy had a way to repair the damaged cells in Kirk's body and if Kirk wasn't entirely brain-dead at that point, then freezing Kirk the way he did was a great way to buy time.
Only in this movie does Khan's blood have the power demonstrated. It was never mentioned in "Space Seed" or Star Trek II, and he couldn't use it to save his beloved wife before Wrath of Khan.
But augment DNA was used in Enterprise and had Augment style treatment in DS9.

They say blood in Into darkness but im guessing its just a simple way of saying stem cells. Remember JJ Abrahams thinks the audiance stupid.
Crazyewok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 07:55 PM   #80
sj4iy
Commander
 
sj4iy's Avatar
 
Location: US
Re: What did you like/dislike about Into Darkness (Spoilers)

Crazyewok wrote: View Post
Psion wrote: View Post
sj4iy wrote: View Post

Well, you're arguing against established canon- I didn't make up that Khan's blood has regenerative properties, that's how it is in Star Trek. I don't know what the properties of his blood are anymore than you do, that's just how it is in the Star Trek universe. I simply made the argument that IF McCoy had a way to repair the damaged cells in Kirk's body and if Kirk wasn't entirely brain-dead at that point, then freezing Kirk the way he did was a great way to buy time.
Only in this movie does Khan's blood have the power demonstrated. It was never mentioned in "Space Seed" or Star Trek II, and he couldn't use it to save his beloved wife before Wrath of Khan.
But augment DNA was used in Enterprise and had Augment style treatment in DS9.

They say blood in Into darkness but im guessing its just a simple way of saying stem cells. Remember JJ Abrahams thinks the audiance stupid.
Thanks, I knew I remembered it from somewhere but I couldn't find it when I looked.
sj4iy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 08:14 PM   #81
CorporalClegg
Admiral
 
CorporalClegg's Avatar
 
Location: Land of Enchantment
Re: What did you like/dislike about Into Darkness (Spoilers)

There were a couple of things I did find a bit disappointing:
For one, the film never really found its nadir, at least not like the first one did. It nudged our emotions a few times, but there was never really a true "Oh no!" moment for me.

Even the radiation scene wasn't all it could've been, I thought. While certainly a touching scene, as others of said, Kirk's fate had already been telegraphed by the tribble. So the emotional impact just wasn't what it could have been. And, while I did love the homages, they did kind of pull me out of it enough that I couldn't decide if I should smile or weep.

I also think the dialog could have been better. One thing I've noticed about Bad Robot, going all the way back to Alias, really, is they seem to like use the dialog to push the action instead of the other way around. It's like they're always content on using "just enough."

Tom Petty has a saying "Don't bore us; get to the chorus." I think that kind of applies to Abrams & Co. However, The Heartbreakers have also given us some of the most familiar licks and melodies in all of popular music, and a few of Campbell's guitar solos are the some of the most recognizable ever.

I can't say the same about Orci and Kurtzman's writing. Most of the dialog in STiD (as with ST09) is really average.

Dare I say it, but I think Cumby is a better actor than the other guy. However, most of his chewing was just a few good lines sprinkled over a lot of generic bad guy stuff.

Even the classic literature Montalban quoted half the time, added an extra spice of panache that accentuated the allure of his gravitas.

Cumby just didn't have that.

And as a whole, I just think their could have been a bit more "talking" to help flesh out both the theme and the drama. The brig scene, for example, could have been a little longer.

I get that is meant to be a "popcorn flick" and all that (and graded appropriately), I just think it's the one thing that sets both Trek films apart from the great genre films of the modern era.

There just aren't those same kind of memorable conversation exchanges that leap right off the screen and immediately imprint themselves on your brain that some of those other films have.

I do believe there's true greatness in a Star Trek film somewhere. I'm still waiting for someone to find it.

sj4iy wrote: View Post
She was killed by a parasite that ate her brain. Big difference there.
Which brings up another interesting point: If the regenerative properties of Khan's blood are "nonsense," how come parasites who just happened to be the only creatures to survive a total cataclysm and possess extremely convenient magical abilities aren't?

The Real Star Trek™ double standard strikes again.
CorporalClegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 08:36 PM   #82
sj4iy
Commander
 
sj4iy's Avatar
 
Location: US
Re: What did you like/dislike about Into Darkness (Spoilers)

CorporalClegg wrote: View Post
sj4iy wrote: View Post
She was killed by a parasite that ate her brain. Big difference there.
Which brings up another interesting point: If the regenerative properties of Khan's blood are "nonsense," how come parasites who just happened to be the only creatures to survive a total cataclysm and possess extremely convenient magical abilities aren't?

The Real Star Trek™ double standard strikes again.
Not really. The immune system can be tricked by many parasites, and many of the parasites we are immune to were parasites that we evolved with. An alien parasite could be devastating, even to an augment.
sj4iy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 08:43 PM   #83
CorporalClegg
Admiral
 
CorporalClegg's Avatar
 
Location: Land of Enchantment
Re: What did you like/dislike about Into Darkness (Spoilers)

sj4iy wrote: View Post
The immune system can be tricked by many parasites, and many of the parasites we are immune to were parasites that we evolved with. An alien parasite could be devastating, even to an augment.
What do that have to do with my question?
CorporalClegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 08:51 PM   #84
sj4iy
Commander
 
sj4iy's Avatar
 
Location: US
Re: What did you like/dislike about Into Darkness (Spoilers)

CorporalClegg wrote: View Post
sj4iy wrote: View Post
The immune system can be tricked by many parasites, and many of the parasites we are immune to were parasites that we evolved with. An alien parasite could be devastating, even to an augment.
What do that have to do with my question?
Because your question makes no sense. It's Star Trek- it requires one to take certain things for granted because no one truly cares about the physiology of a parasite and how people with advanced immune systems react to said parasites. It's all a work of fiction where people make stuff up about aliens. And if you are going to call out this movie for it, you have to call out every other single series and every other movie, because they all make stuff up, too. Or, you could just say "well, that's how the story went so I guess this kind of fits with it", which is the point.
sj4iy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 08:51 PM   #85
throwback
Captain
 
Re: What did you like/dislike about Into Darkness (Spoilers)

For me, I hated the subplot involving the family. I have noticed that not many people, here or in the reviews, have discussed this, and I find that interesting. We are being asked to accept that a father will do anything to save his daughter, including blowing up a facility and killing 42 people. I know of three instances of when a person would do this act: (1.) they are doing this to see the world burn (ex. Joker); (2) they are doing this to communicate a statement (ex. the Boston Bombers) or (3.) they are doing this under duress.

What is conveyed in the film is that Khan offered his blood freely and he didn't force the man to do this criminal act. He did it, well, he did it because Khan convinced him.

The situation was confused. The man accepted Khan's offer without duress, yet he acted like a man on death row. I feel there needed to be more of an explanation. For instance, how did Khan convince this man to commit an act that many of us would be incapable of doing? At the end of the day, I feel that this shows that the writers don't have an understanding of why people become suicide bombers.
throwback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 08:55 PM   #86
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: What did you like/dislike about Into Darkness (Spoilers)

Khan likely told him he'd go in and crush his daughters skull if he was double-crossed. Just because the movie doesn't implicitly show the exchange doesn't mean we can't figure it out.
__________________
"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." - Admiral James T. Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 09:01 PM   #87
sj4iy
Commander
 
sj4iy's Avatar
 
Location: US
Re: What did you like/dislike about Into Darkness (Spoilers)

throwback wrote: View Post
For me, I hated the subplot involving the family. I have noticed that not many people, here or in the reviews, have discussed this, and I find that interesting. We are being asked to accept that a father will do anything to save his daughter, including blowing up a facility and killing 42 people. I know of three instances of when a person would do this act: (1.) they are doing this to see the world burn (ex. Joker); (2) they are doing this to communicate a statement (ex. the Boston Bombers) or (3.) they are doing this under duress.

What is conveyed in the film is that Khan offered his blood freely and he didn't force the man to do this criminal act. He did it, well, he did it because Khan convinced him.

The situation was confused. The man accepted Khan's offer without duress, yet he acted like a man on death row. I feel there needed to be more of an explanation. For instance, how did Khan convince this man to commit an act that many of us would be incapable of doing? At the end of the day, I feel that this shows that the writers don't have an understanding of why people become suicide bombers.
It's not confusing at all. People have committed the most heinous acts in the name of love. I'm sure you'd be able to find people willing to do something like that in order to save their only child. Most parents would give up their lives for their children's life without hesitation. People will come up with any justification for what they want, and he wasn't going to have to live with the guilt of what he did.
sj4iy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 09:14 PM   #88
CorporalClegg
Admiral
 
CorporalClegg's Avatar
 
Location: Land of Enchantment
Re: What did you like/dislike about Into Darkness (Spoilers)

sj4iy wrote: View Post
Because your question makes no sense.
It made fine sense. I was lamenting on the irony that magic slugs okay but magic blood is not okay.

And if you are going to call out this movie for it, you have to call out every other single series and every other movie
That was my point!

Star Trek, it's all:

CorporalClegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 09:25 PM   #89
Psion
Commodore
 
Psion's Avatar
 
Location: Lat: 40.1630936 Lon: -75.1183777
View Psion's Twitter Profile
Re: What did you like/dislike about Into Darkness (Spoilers)

Crazyewok wrote: View Post
Psion wrote: View Post
sj4iy wrote: View Post

Well, you're arguing against established canon- I didn't make up that Khan's blood has regenerative properties, that's how it is in Star Trek. I don't know what the properties of his blood are anymore than you do, that's just how it is in the Star Trek universe. I simply made the argument that IF McCoy had a way to repair the damaged cells in Kirk's body and if Kirk wasn't entirely brain-dead at that point, then freezing Kirk the way he did was a great way to buy time.
Only in this movie does Khan's blood have the power demonstrated. It was never mentioned in "Space Seed" or Star Trek II, and he couldn't use it to save his beloved wife before Wrath of Khan.
But augment DNA was used in Enterprise and had Augment style treatment in DS9.

They say blood in Into darkness but im guessing its just a simple way of saying stem cells. Remember JJ Abrahams thinks the audiance stupid.
And what amazing resurrection properties did augment DNA demonstrate in either Enterprise or DS9? And don't say stem cells in this context because we're talking about a technique unknown to Federation medicine. Remember, this cured a little girl of a terminal disease and brought both Kirk and a tribble back from the dead. Stem cells don't do that. Federation doctors can't do that. But the blood of a selective breeding subject from the mid 20th century can? That strains credulity ... we've strayed into vampire or comic book territory now.

CorporalClegg, the Ceti Alpha eels were a little convenient, but there was nothing magical about their survival ... Khan kept them alive, possibly to help ensure his control of the others, possibly as a morbid reminder of his dead wife. Perhaps he tormented his "pets" in retribution. But if you want magic in Wrath of Khan, then look no further than the ridiculous Genesis Device ... and guess what? I didn't like that thing either. So there's no double-standard.
__________________
Twinkies are back. I knew they couldn't stay away from me for long.
Psion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 20 2013, 09:31 PM   #90
Crazyewok
Commander
 
Re: What did you like/dislike about Into Darkness (Spoilers)

Psion wrote: View Post
Crazyewok wrote: View Post
Psion wrote: View Post

Only in this movie does Khan's blood have the power demonstrated. It was never mentioned in "Space Seed" or Star Trek II, and he couldn't use it to save his beloved wife before Wrath of Khan.
But augment DNA was used in Enterprise and had Augment style treatment in DS9.

They say blood in Into darkness but im guessing its just a simple way of saying stem cells. Remember JJ Abrahams thinks the audiance stupid.
And what amazing resurrection properties did augment DNA demonstrate in either Enterprise or DS9? And don't say stem cells in this context because we're talking about a technique unknown to Federation medicine. Remember, this cured a little girl of a terminal disease and brought both Kirk and a tribble back from the dead. Stem cells don't do that. Federation doctors can't do that. But the blood of a selective breeding subject from the mid 20th century can? That strains credulity ... we've strayed into vampire or comic book territory now.

CorporalClegg, the Ceti Alpha eels were a little convenient, but there was nothing magical about their survival ... Khan kept them alive, possibly to help ensure his control of the others, possibly as a morbid reminder of his dead wife. Perhaps he tormented his "pets" in retribution. But if you want magic in Wrath of Khan, then look no further than the ridiculous Genesis Device ... and guess what? I didn't like that thing either. So there's no double-standard.
And how many times did the orignal Mcoy or Crusher or Bashier or the Doctor come up with some cure to some diesese that no one else could find a cure in a matter of hours.

Hell the Doctor brought nelix back to life with seven of Nines nano probes.

Its startrek just go with the flow.
Crazyewok is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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 07:37 PM.

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