STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I loved the character growth in this film for Kirk. I loved that they actually took a stand on some issues. I loved the effects. I loved the job Cumberbatch did. I loved the Klingons. I loved the action-sequences.

Does the story have some issues? Yes. Absolutely.

 

I actually agree with you on all these points. I really am having a hard time pointing out what bugged me about this film as compared to ST09, which I loved. Its like something was missing, but I can't put my finger on it. Maybe my second viewing will enlighten me.

 

I think it might have been stronger if they had dug a bit more in Marcus' plan and Khan's backstory. But doing either of those things would've simply opened them up to more criticism if it didn't exactly match what some people had in their heads.

So that is kind of a "damned if they do, damned if they don't" scenario.

 

Yep. Suppose they'd showed a couple of seconds of a Botany Bay that didn't resemble the TOS model enough to satisfy the hard core. Sacrilege!

 

Also true. I think the problem is that I didn't feel an emotional payoff from this film like I got from the first one. Kirk's "death" scene didn't do it for me, nor did the ensuing hospital room scene. I got a little charge from the beginning of the five year mission. That may be where I feel the movie fell a little short.

 

In 2010 Jasper had about 14,000 people. That is over twice the population of the little town I live in. There's no movie theater in my town, so it was a choice of driving to Jasper or Tupelo, MS. One of the theater employees told my friend that STID wasn't doing that well. I saw the 2009 film at the same theater, and there was a much larger crowd at the Saturday afternoon matinee I attended then.

 

Fortunately, the national numbers belie your experience in Jasper.

 

Someone mentioned above Mexico City (Tenochtitlan). This city would be typical of ancient cities where the center of the city was dominated by a temple.

http://godshisstory.blogspot.com/2009/04/three-cities-tenochtitlan-london-and.html
http://interamericaninstitute.org/Tenochtitlan_National_Palace_Diego_Rivera.JPG
http://www.trekbbs.com/http:/quinte...iles.wordpress.com/2012/05/tenochtitlan11.jpg
http://http://quintessentialruminations.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/tenochtitlan11.jpg

[Converted embedded images to links. Don't hotlink pics from websites which are not yours unless you have been given permission by the site owners to do so. - M']

 

Since we're dealing with an alien race, I'll cut Abrams, Orci & Kurtzman some slack.

 

Wait, you didn't like it much but gave it a B- ?

I never understood this lettre grading system. How would B- be on a 1-10 scale ? Because for me, 6 is good, and 7 is very good. 8 is excellent, 9 a masterpiece, and 10 perfect or damn well near.

 

For me, the character interactions overcame my misgivings over the use of Khan and other annoyances (Nimoy cameo, magic blood that eliminates death, the giggle-inducing KHaahhnnn!). Now that I'm used to the fact that this Kirk and Spock aren't exactly like "my" version, I'm enjoying seeing the friendship develop. (Though most of ST09, I kept thinking "Please stop fighting!!)

I enjoyed seeing Kirk face the no-win situation, and actually do what had to be done without any way to avoid the consequences. Well, other characters did that for him, but Kirk didn't know that when he made his choice at the end of the film.

 

I also agree: The PD (although a noble concept) is utterly ridiculous when it becomes dogma, if adhering to it means the obvious extinction of an alien race.

In principle: the PD is an ideal to strive for, but in reality (and in the situation Kirk and his crew were facing) the PD is not infalliable: as in the case being discussed, adhering to it would have resulted in the destruction of an alien race. What would be the point in sparing an alien race from being 'influenced' by external contact, only to watch them be destroyed anyway?

Contentious issue I realise, but in the case of Into Darkness, saving the planet from destruction was the right thing to do - and few would argue differently in that instance.

'Monstrous' would have been observing and doing nothing, IMHO.

 

This sums things up nicely in my case as well. It was a fun popcorn flick.

 

Right. The point of the Prime Directive is to prevent starfleet personel from doing the kind of crimes that we saw on TOS, not to watch civilizations die off.

I mean, what if the Enterprise was in orbit of a planet and someone with a primitive telescope managed to spot it and founded a religion based on it ? Would that be a violation ? Would Kirk have to go down and kill the guy before he spreads the word ? Of course not.

 

I don't give a shit about the Prime Directive. The original Star Trek TV series established this rule primarily as something to give a nod to as Kirk proceeded to violate it. nuTrek treats it very much in the spirit of TOS, as is appropriate.

 

It also served as an obstacle to keep them from just beaming away when a situation got out-of-hand planetside.

 

But... but.. it's the PRIME directive, Buzz !

 

Okay, let the Prime Universe keep it.