RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,359
Posts: 5,355,581
Members: 24,626
Currently online: 507
Newest member: glmrkills

TrekToday headlines

Borg Cube Fridge
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Free Enterprise Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Siddig To Join Game Of Thrones
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Sci-Fried To Release New Album
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek into Darkness Soundtrack
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Horse 1, Shatner 0
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Drexler TV Alert
By: T'Bonz on Jul 26

Retro Review: His Way
By: Michelle on Jul 26

MicroWarriors Releases Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25


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 June 13 2013, 06:49 PM   #76
mos6507
Captain
 
mos6507's Avatar
 
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

newtontomato539 wrote: View Post
If Bad Robot Trek is dead, then there will be no more Star Trek.
For all time? I doubt it.
__________________
Fem Trekz on Facebook
mos6507 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 13 2013, 06:54 PM   #77
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

mos6507 wrote: View Post
newtontomato539 wrote: View Post
If Bad Robot Trek is dead, then there will be no more Star Trek.
For all time? I doubt it.
Just for a decade or so somebody else comes along and reboots it again, at which point the die hard loyal fanboys will be screaming even louder.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 13 2013, 06:56 PM   #78
mos6507
Captain
 
mos6507's Avatar
 
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
TOS was always known for strong characters, not strong storylines.
First off, citing Garth is cherry-picking. Whom Gods Destroy is a so-so 3rd season episode at a time when things were teetering on camp.

Also, anyone who looks back on the history of SF cites TOS as intelligent, certainly more intelligent than Irwin Allen's stuff or what came before like Rocky Jones Space Ranger. The writers that were brought in to work on it saw it as an attempt to finally do justice to science fiction, which had been seen as primarily "kiddie fare". That it doesn't measure up to the gravitas of, let's say, the BSG reboot, takes nothing away from what TOS successfully accomplished. And yes, it did that at the same time it allowed Kirk to bed aliens and get into fisticuffs.

It's the same way the Beatles could be seen as mindless bubblegum pop by looking at part of their catalog, or psychadelic trailblazers with another. Trek was not just one thing across those 79 episodes. It was a very broad concept and it adopted a wide range of styles. Too often in threads like this there is an attempt to kind of box TOS into this almost Belushi-SNL-skit satirical caricature, and it really just feels like a cheap attempt to bash TOS to make JJ Abrams look better in comparison.
__________________
Fem Trekz on Facebook
mos6507 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 13 2013, 07:02 PM   #79
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
 
Location: Hollywood, CA
Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to doubleohfive
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

My eyes are bleeding at the innate stupidity of this thread.
__________________
"You are the product. You feeling something. That's what sells. Not them. Not sex. They can't do what we do and they hate us for it."
--Don Draper
doubleohfive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 13 2013, 07:36 PM   #80
Squiggy
LORD SHIT SUPREME
 
Squiggy's Avatar
 
Location: Not on your life, my Hindu friend.
View Squiggy's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Squiggy
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

Jesus Neck Pinching Christ. 6675 words in your first post. Learn to self-edit.

Off topic, you're in Silver Spring too? Small world.
__________________
ENOUGH OF THIS TURGID BASH WANKERY!
Squiggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 13 2013, 08:43 PM   #81
solariabsg25
Captain
 
solariabsg25's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, UK
View solariabsg25's Twitter Profile
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

Kanenas wrote: View Post
ALL your points on spot on. The character development was pathetic at best. The meritocracy of the federation is gone and has been replaced by childish cronyism and whining.

The daring of kirk is condemned and the effetness of go along to get along is rewarded.

Just because this poorly written movie bears the name of star trek does not give it a free pass to criticism.
I loved this Trek film and all aspects of it.

But if someone wants to criticise the film then IMHO that's a GOOD thing.

It shows that as fans we can disagree, we can see things we like, or we don't like. Better for there to be discussion and disagreement than everyone bowing down in awe no matter the plot!

As to the daring of Kirk being punished, I think that Pike being the one to tear Kirk down a strip rather than some random Admiral was a great choice. I think it's possible Pike may have even secretly agreed with Kirk on the matter, but regs are regs. It also harkens back to Pikes comment in '09 that Starfleet has "lost something." Starfleet needs more Kirks in the chair, and less "yes sir!" officers.
__________________
"A perfect organism, unclouded by remorse, or human illusions of morality." - Ash, Alien
solariabsg25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 13 2013, 08:49 PM   #82
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

mos6507 wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
TOS was always known for strong characters, not strong storylines.
First off, citing Garth is cherry-picking. Whom Gods Destroy is a so-so 3rd season episode at a time when things were teetering on camp.
When was Star Trek ever NOT teetering on Camp?


"Shore Leave" and "This Side of Paradise" were both FIRST season episodes.

Also, anyone who looks back on the history of SF cites TOS as intelligent, certainly more intelligent than Irwin Allen's stuff or what came before like Rocky Jones Space Ranger.
Which is setting the bar stupendously low as it is, and a context that hasn't existed since Trek went off the air.

Put that another way: if ST09 was competing in theatres with, say, Lost in Space and Thunderbirds it would have blown both of them out of the water and would have been lauded as more thoughtful and more intelligent with far better characterization and story development. Unfortunately, it's now in a genre that includes movies like District 9, Total Recall, Avatar, The Avengers, Iron Man and War of the Worlds and is playing to an audience that grew up with Star Wars and the Matrix Trilogy on DVD.

Basically, Star Trek was never as smart as its original adopters 40 years ago thought it was, and those of us who didn't see it in the 60s never thought it was that clever to begin with. But again, even between the original fans and those who came later, the real appear of Star Trek is Kirk, Spock, McCoy...


and to an increasing extent, Uhura.

That it doesn't measure up to the gravitas of, let's say, the BSG reboot, takes nothing away from what TOS successfully accomplished...
That's kind of my point. TOS' notable accomplishment was being the first sci-fi show to take itself (relatively) seriously. That's not exactly an accomplishment today; EVERYONE does that.

It's the same dilemma faced by child actors. You can't really build a career that depends on you being cute and adorable; by the time you grow up, you need to be able to make it as an actor. Star Trek is the same way: TOS was "clever" at a time when nobody else was. Fortunately it was also pretty well characterized, and THAT'S something you can keep going for decades.

It's the same way the Beatles could be seen as mindless bubblegum pop by looking at part of their catalog, or psychadelic trailblazers with another.
You say that as if the surviving Beatles aren't still making music.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 13 2013, 09:13 PM   #83
Charles Phipps
Commander
 
Charles Phipps's Avatar
 
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

Star Trek was a progressive show and a brave one, but yeah it was also camp and silly and actioney just as often.

Anytime people argue it's cerebral, I say, "Nazi planet."
__________________
Check out the United Federation of Charles:
http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
Charles Phipps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 13 2013, 09:18 PM   #84
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

Charles Phipps wrote: View Post
Star Trek was a progressive show and a brave one, but yeah it was also camp and silly and actioney just as often.
When was it brave?
__________________
"I had no idea you were so... formidable. " - Anan 7 to James T. Kirk, A Taste of Armageddon
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 13 2013, 09:32 PM   #85
Ovation
Vice Admiral
 
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

mos6507 wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
TOS was always known for strong characters, not strong storylines.
First off, citing Garth is cherry-picking. Whom Gods Destroy is a so-so 3rd season episode at a time when things were teetering on camp.

Also, anyone who looks back on the history of SF cites TOS as intelligent, certainly more intelligent than Irwin Allen's stuff or what came before like Rocky Jones Space Ranger. The writers that were brought in to work on it saw it as an attempt to finally do justice to science fiction, which had been seen as primarily "kiddie fare". That it doesn't measure up to the gravitas of, let's say, the BSG reboot, takes nothing away from what TOS successfully accomplished. And yes, it did that at the same time it allowed Kirk to bed aliens and get into fisticuffs.

It's the same way the Beatles could be seen as mindless bubblegum pop by looking at part of their catalog, or psychadelic trailblazers with another. Trek was not just one thing across those 79 episodes. It was a very broad concept and it adopted a wide range of styles. Too often in threads like this there is an attempt to kind of box TOS into this almost Belushi-SNL-skit satirical caricature, and it really just feels like a cheap attempt to bash TOS to make JJ Abrams look better in comparison.
You defeat your own argument with the Beatles analogy. No one is saying that ALL of TOS is of a kind (in terms of themes and attitudes) with the Abrams films. But they are of a kind with a significant portion of TOS. As such, it becomes rather disingenuous to argue that Abrams Trek is "not real Trek" (as many do) just because it fails to be "of a kind" with the specific subset of characteristics that defined some, though not all, of TOS--particularly when it very much succeeds at being "of a kind" of another specific subset.
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 13 2013, 09:47 PM   #86
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

BillJ wrote: View Post
Charles Phipps wrote: View Post
Star Trek was a progressive show and a brave one, but yeah it was also camp and silly and actioney just as often.
When was it brave?
Plato's Stepchildren.

Ovation wrote: View Post
You defeat your own argument with the Beatles analogy. No one is saying that ALL of TOS is of a kind (in terms of themes and attitudes) with the Abrams films. But they are of a kind with a significant portion of TOS.
Well said. And IMO, it's of a kind with some of the more entertaining aspects of TOS, which weren't all that original or thought provoking even for their time.

Or am I the only one who remembers that "Balance of Terror", one of the better first season episodes, was a blatant ripoff of "The Enemy Below"? At least Into Darkness has the benefit of ripping off other Star Trek movies; if they'd gone "Starship Red October" with John Harrison commanding the Vengeance, I might have been slightly annoyed.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 02:48 AM   #87
throwback
Captain
 
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

Since seeing the film, I have had the time to read and research, and I have come to the conclusion that what I don't like about this movie is what I don't like about some of the blockbusters being released today.
throwback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 09:51 AM   #88
Khaaaaan
Ensign
 
Location: London, UK
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

Ovation wrote: View Post
Khaaaaan wrote: View Post
King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
I've heard this a couple of times and really don't get it. When you click with someone you care about them, whether you've known them one year or fifteen.
It is to do with the understanding/appreciation the audience have for the relationship.

In WoK, Kirk and Spock had previously been through a lot. We know and appreciate their strong friendship. As such, we can understand the devastation shown by Kirk for Spock's sacrifice.

In the new film, Kirk and Spock seem to be arguing all the time. I'd hardly call them 'friends' as they just about tolerate each other. After only two films of getting to know them, to mimic the famous warp core scene is forced and tbh lazy writing imo.

Is Hollywood so devoid of original stories?
Originality is overrated when it comes to entertainment. It can result in something great but it is hardly a guarantee of such.

As for the scene vs length of friendship issue, I didn't read Spock's anguish as forced. He's mourning the loss of what might have been, having had just enough of a taste of its potential. Add to that all the other things he's had to cope with in the two films (and the revealing statement he makes in the civilian ship) and it becomes clear that this Spock is facing emotional trauma on a scale unmatched by Nimoy's Spock--and at an earlier, less experienced and mature point in his life. His inability to reign in the emotions--more powerful than human versions--is thus quite understandable.
Overrated perhaps, but desirable.

For me, it was a fairly lazy ending. Kirk could have done all manner of other things as an act of self sacrifice to demonstrate his 'growing up'.

It seemed that the only reason they killed him was just to have the rebooted core/radiation scene. As mentioned previously, we all know Kirk (as the main protagonist) can't die. Why bother to do this? Just to watch Spock be upset? The solution to his death was sloppy and short sighted.

Don't get me wrong I thought it was a good action film. Looked and sounded great. I just get the feeling that if you are going to go to the trouble of a reboot, you might as well have new/original ideas.
Khaaaaan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 11:32 AM   #89
CommishSleer
Fleet Captain
 
CommishSleer's Avatar
 
Location: Way back of nowhere
View CommishSleer's Twitter Profile
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
TOS, in its day, was simplistic and shallow in an age where science fiction had a tendency to BE simplistic and shallow.
I really don't think you know much about TOS then IMO.
What's your definition of a sophisticated science fiction series or film. TOS had stories written by science fiction writers.
Certainly none of the subsequent Star Trek series were more cerebral. No science fiction series in general, then or now.
I think I've watched most science fiction series and movies since TOS until the last couple of years we're frankly is mostly magic and vampires
CommishSleer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 12:18 PM   #90
teacake
Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.
Re: My thoughts on and gripes with Star Trek Into Darkness

Kanenas wrote: View Post
newtontomato539 wrote: View Post
Bad Robot Trek is still being made. Live action Prime Trek is dead.

People enjoy Bad Robot and Prime Trek.

Should Bad Robot Trek be stopped just because it's not Prime Trek?
Yes, yes it should be stopped.
BEFORE IT RULES THE WORLD!
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is online now   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 06:20 AM.

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