STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

My six- and sixteen-year old sons are both excited to go see Into Darkness on the 18th. They both liked Star Trek 2009 and Star Trek: The Video Game. The six-year old laid on the foot of my bed last night and watched "Arena" and "Yesteryear" before drifting off. The night before we were watching The Next Generation season three on Blu-ray.

The funny thing is, I don't think younger crowds are having as much trouble as some of the old timers enjoying all versions of Trek.

 

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

You probably should before you get even more emotional and embarrass yourself even further.

 

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

Wow. First, Abrams rapes our childhoods in ST09. Now he's apparently put out a movie that's perverted? At this rate, the next Trek movie will contain S&M.

As the great review of the movie in the British GQ said in its last lines, when it comes to making the Trek franchise accessible again, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

 

I'm not sure how venting how much one dislikes or hates AbramsTrek will have any affect on anything he or Paramount does with Star Trek. Maybe it'll make you feel a little better to get it off your chest but it accomplishes little else. It certainly wont make the next movie into your vision of Star Trek. But what ever floats your boat and all that,

 

http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/entertainment/articles/2013-05/02/star-trek-into-darkness-film-review

But JJ Abrams knows that great sci-fi isn't simply about space ships - it's about great characters. When the IMAX camera isn't taking in a planet-sized action scene, it's cut close to the actor's faces - for a film about strange new worlds, Into Darkness is remarkably intimate. The Enterprise crew are excellent again, from Simon Pegg's wisecracking Scotty to Zoe Saldana's Uhura, but it's Kirk and Spock's on-screen chemistry that steals the show. And while there's plenty of nods to the series keep Star Trek fans happy, Abrams has once again managed to make the franchise accessible for those new to the series. As Spock says, "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" - a tip to blockbuster directors everywhere.

 

Another good thing for STID: Great Gatsby is not scoring well on RT.com.

 

I wanted to see that too.

 

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

 

I am so looking forward to this movie. i waited four years for this and i'm going to the enjoy it regardless of what you naysayers say. only 9 more days for the sneak peek here in the US and 11 days until it's released for reals

 

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

Then you're not a true Star Trek fan.

 

Amen, brother! My youngest daughter was six when ST09 came out. She was ambivalent about it because Daddy (who dresses like Captain Kirk on Halloween) liked it. But she went around saying, "I like this ship, you know, it's exciting!" for about a year after the movie. And my oldest, who's 13 now, has a crush on Chris Pine going back to "The Princess Diaries". She saw ST09, and she won't admit it, but she's not saying, "Dad, I'm waaaay old enough to stay home alone," when I say, "Let's all go see STID," either. They want to like it. (My wife? She's a lost cause. Liked TVH, thought ST09 was "fine." That's about it.)

You're post reminded me of what the late great Orioles announcer Chuck Thompson used to shout into the microphone in the first inning of every opening day of the baseball season: "AIN'T THE BEER COLD!" Hell yeah. Get excited. It's either going to fun at worst and REAL fun at best, I think.

You other folk (you know who you are): Haters gonna hate.

 

If you all will indulge me for a few minutes...
No I have not seen the movie yet. I have my tickets for IMAX 3D waiting for Friday the 17th (I couldn't do the fan sneak peeks on the 15th/16th), so I am seeing this movie and probably twice, I plan to go a second time a few weeks later in a standard theater too. I am looking forward to enjoying STiD for what it is and in the context of it being an approachable summer blockbuster, just like ST '09 was.

However, since it's become quite clear that most of the fan speculation has turned out to be true I hardly find myself worry about spoilers at this point. No I don't want to know everything about the movie, but really didn't we all know it was going to turn out to be Khan? And fans have been guessing that Marcus started up or is involved with Section 31 when the first descriptions of his character started trickling out. So I don't really find these to be major spoilers to me. It's the how and why all these threads come together that I think would be spoilers for me.

Anyway, so for a mild rant if you will all indulge me. I am concerned that this movie is basically some kind of Michael Bay meets a big melting pot of Trek fanfic. I mean Section 31 is a TNG-era invention (DS9 specifically), Khan was the obvious fan bait (which even in-and-of-itself isn't necessarily a bad thing, just sort of annoying that's who it is since we all knew it), and the hands on each side of the transparent glass imagery and other clear homages (or direct copies depending on how you look at it), etc. tell you what they're going after.

I'm also annoyed that Spock Prime is even seen again, it really seems like this Spock has thrown his temporal common sense out the window. Shouldn't he be picking an out of the way place with the new Vulcan population and keeping out of history's way? It appears he is not doing this.

While it would be another spoiler for me at this point I'd like to know what his role in Into Darkness is. Since it seems he may have tipped people off to the existence of Khan, either said or unsaid on screen, it seems like that's the only way they would know (aside from a pure random chance encounter with the Botany Bay).

It sure seems like this version of Spock just started a total brain dump of what he knows from the late-24th century of the Prime universe to give a leg up to the new universe's 23rd century Starfleet. This supposition (that people have thought since ST '09) seems to help explain why things are more advanced in the JJ 'verse. For example I gather that we're supposed to assume Harrison uses (the Spock Prime provided) transwarp beaming tech to get himself off the attack ship in Starfleet HQ on Earth all the way to Qo'noS?
But more to the point, why is Spock Prime around at all? He shouldn't even be seen, I always thought the point to ST '09 was to effectively reboot things while trying quell the angry reboot cries from fans by the Spock Prime cutesiness that pats us all on the back and tells us what we knew is still intact elsewhere, and then move on with new adventures in this new parallel universe, right? I would think reminding us of Spock Prime would just make for an awkward reminder that this all has been done before in some shape or form, instead of letting it all just stand on its own.

 

I guess my big question is: do they alter Khan's backstory?

 

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

People who are presented with all these versions as already existing are a lot less likely to perceive the earlier versions being of better quality than later ones. For the most part, it's only folks who've invested themselves emotionally in an older version who have trouble with the newer ones.

Lots of younger people prefer TNG to TOS, for example.

 

yeah i can't wait to see it with my pop. i may be 23 years old but i still love going to the movies with my dad. makes me feel like a kid again.

 

Speaking of younger crowds... A young lad I work with is looking forward to catching STID this week. Loved the trailer. Reckons he'll have to watch "the first Star Trek movie" beforehand.

'The first Star Trek movie' to my ears brought to mind The Motion Picture and VGer. No! Don't start with Vger! Of course he meant the 2009 reboot. He knew I was a fan and told me he hadn't seen any of the others. I asked if he liked any of the series - Nope. Not no, he didn't like them, but no, he had no real clue about them. I rattled off all the names to no avail. He had a vague awareness of Star Trek and that there had been more than one television series over the years. But he's 17, and for him, Star Trek IS the reboot.

I was also speaking with another co-worker (a young girl, this time) about what was on at the movies and mentioned STID. She blew me away when she said she was going with her friends. This 18 year old chick who seems a run of the mill sort for her age wants to go see a Star Trek movie? Well, evidently one of the 'lead guys' is really hot and they love him in something else. She couldn't name him, but methinks it's Pine or Cumberbatch.

Point being, this girl and her friends wouldn't have been caught dead going to say... Nemesis. As a fan of Trek for the better part of two decades, this is the first time I've found my niche interest shared with ... shall we say, more *normal* people. It's refreshing.

48 hours and counting ...

 

Yep, that's how I look at it too.

This isn't the Trek I really want, but it's quite entertaining and it gets all kind of people to pay attention to the name Star Trek again (or for the first time). I love that my little 9-year old brother in-law (my wife's father remarried and had more kids) was psyched about the 2009 film and is psyched about this one. He was raised on The Clone Wars cartoons and SW in general, so he wasn't all that interested, or exposed to, Trek before it was rebooted and became a big thing again.

I was at the gym the other day and Into Darkness was heavily featured during TNT's basketball coverage. It's quite satisfying to see what used to be a very geeky thing that would never be targeted to that demographic, suddenly targeted to them. I even noticed people lookup from their workouts to watch it.

 

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

The Next Generation is almost 30 years old, and started in the 1980s, so while I agree it might be preferred by some younger people to TOS, it still looks very "dated" in terms of the effects and story pacing, compared to the new Abrams version of Trek - TNG is the choice of their dads' generation - it's "old school", I think... :-)