RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,349
Posts: 5,354,375
Members: 24,619
Currently online: 613
Newest member: StarTrekSteve

TrekToday headlines

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

Ships Of The Line Design Contest
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Next Weekend: Shore Leave 36!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

True Trek History To Be Penned
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.

View Poll Results: Grade the movie...
A+ 143 19.32%
A 160 21.62%
A- 99 13.38%
B+ 82 11.08%
B 58 7.84%
B- 27 3.65%
C+ 40 5.41%
C 38 5.14%
C- 24 3.24%
D+ 11 1.49%
D 13 1.76%
D- 10 1.35%
F 35 4.73%
Voters: 740. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 29 2013, 07:12 AM   #3841
Cryogenic
Lieutenant Commander
 
Cryogenic's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

^^

In my review above (or on the previous page), I didn't even touch on Khan, for one. Commenting on him, sadly, seemed surplus to requirements. Suffice it to say, Benedict Cumberbatch, saddled with a monotone script, does little with the character, and largely plays him like a block of wood. There's none of Ricardo Montalban's rich bravado or self-satisfied posing here. It seems impossible -- to me -- that Cumberbatch's Khan could lead a fly to shit, much less rule over one-quarter of the Earth's population, or keep control of fellow genetically-engineered supermen and women in a biological oligarchy in which he is top dog and even something of a patriarch/god to his compatriots.

That's something else I wish to take the film to task for; or rather, the people responsible for conceiving it and bringing it to the screen. The trailer material, in my view, promised something closer to an epic battle of wits ("Shall we begin?"), but this never materializes in a film which is too busy delivering a thin allegory for a post-9/11 America, mainly in the form of action vignettes every fifteen minutes. Khan is more like Data -- or Lore -- menacing Kirk with slicked-back hair, a lean, somewhat toned, body, neat, confident stance, and pale, chalky face. Here and there, he allows a little emotion to slip out (well, in one villainous "backstory" monologue, mainly; one of hundreds of z-grade cliches carried over from the former movie), then sets about enacting an explosive vengeance more reminiscent of Nero, who bunged up the last film with his banal threats and deadly black supership that wasted almost everything in its path. Khan is like a wounded animal still privately licking his wounds. He doesn't ignite or command the screen. He simply delivers the prerequisite plot stuff, like some talking information kiosk, and then it's onto the next scene. Abrams and his writers wasted one of Trek's iconic villains; and they did it without blinking.

That's my opinion, anyway.
Cryogenic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2013, 07:19 AM   #3842
J. Allen
Has All New Cheap Moves
 
J. Allen's Avatar
 
Location: United States
Send a message via ICQ to J. Allen Send a message via AIM to J. Allen Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to J. Allen Send a message via Yahoo to J. Allen
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Cryogenic wrote: View Post
^^

In my review above (or on the previous page), I didn't even touch on Khan, for one. Commenting on him, sadly, seemed surplus to requirements. Suffice it to say, Benedict Cumberbatch, saddled with a monotone script, does little with the character, and largely plays him like a block of wood. There's none of Ricardo Montalban's rich bravado or self-satisfied posing here. It seems impossible -- to me -- that Cumberbatch's Khan could lead a fly to shit, much less rule over one-quarter of the Earth's population, or keep control of fellow genetically-engineered supermen and women in a biological oligarchy in which he is top dog and even something of a patriarch/god to his compatriots.

That's something else I wish to take the film to task for; or rather, the people responsible for conceiving it and bringing it to the screen. The trailer material, in my view, promised something closer to an epic battle of wits ("Shall we begin?"), but this never materializes in a film which is too busy delivering a thin allegory for a post-9/11 America, mainly in the form of action vignettes every fifteen minutes. Khan is more like Data -- or Lore -- menacing Kirk with slicked-back hair, a lean, somewhat toned, body, neat, confident stance, and pale, chalky face. Here and there, he allows a little emotion to slip out (well, in one villainous "backstory" monologue, mainly; one of hundreds of z-grade cliches carried over from the former movie), then sets about enacting an explosive vengeance more reminiscent of Nero, who bunged up the last film with his banal threats and deadly black supership that wasted almost everything in its path. Khan is like a wounded animal still privately licking his wounds. He doesn't ignite or command the screen. He simply delivers the prerequisite plot stuff, like some talking information kiosk, and then it's onto the next scene. Abrams and his writers wasted one of Trek's iconic villains; and they did it without blinking.

That's my opinion, anyway.
I respectfully disagree with your assessment of Cumberbatch's Khan. I felt him both menacing, and capable of empathy, unlike Montalban's original portrayal of the character. To each their own, however. It may come down to taste.

I will say, though, that it was Cumberbatch's Khan which drew me to his role as Sherlock Holmes in the new BBC series. I find his acting style both enigmatic, and charismatic.
__________________
:: :: ::
Visit Brony Kingdom! Don't ask why, just do it.
:: :: ::
-=- I still wish upon stars -=-
J. Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2013, 07:52 AM   #3843
Cryogenic
Lieutenant Commander
 
Cryogenic's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

J. Allen wrote: View Post
Cryogenic wrote: View Post
^^

In my review above (or on the previous page), I didn't even touch on Khan, for one. Commenting on him, sadly, seemed surplus to requirements. Suffice it to say, Benedict Cumberbatch, saddled with a monotone script, does little with the character, and largely plays him like a block of wood. There's none of Ricardo Montalban's rich bravado or self-satisfied posing here. It seems impossible -- to me -- that Cumberbatch's Khan could lead a fly to shit, much less rule over one-quarter of the Earth's population, or keep control of fellow genetically-engineered supermen and women in a biological oligarchy in which he is top dog and even something of a patriarch/god to his compatriots.

That's something else I wish to take the film to task for; or rather, the people responsible for conceiving it and bringing it to the screen. The trailer material, in my view, promised something closer to an epic battle of wits ("Shall we begin?"), but this never materializes in a film which is too busy delivering a thin allegory for a post-9/11 America, mainly in the form of action vignettes every fifteen minutes. Khan is more like Data -- or Lore -- menacing Kirk with slicked-back hair, a lean, somewhat toned, body, neat, confident stance, and pale, chalky face. Here and there, he allows a little emotion to slip out (well, in one villainous "backstory" monologue, mainly; one of hundreds of z-grade cliches carried over from the former movie), then sets about enacting an explosive vengeance more reminiscent of Nero, who bunged up the last film with his banal threats and deadly black supership that wasted almost everything in its path. Khan is like a wounded animal still privately licking his wounds. He doesn't ignite or command the screen. He simply delivers the prerequisite plot stuff, like some talking information kiosk, and then it's onto the next scene. Abrams and his writers wasted one of Trek's iconic villains; and they did it without blinking.

That's my opinion, anyway.
I respectfully disagree with your assessment of Cumberbatch's Khan. I felt him both menacing, and capable of empathy, unlike Montalban's original portrayal of the character. To each their own, however. It may come down to taste.

I will say, though, that it was Cumberbatch's Khan which drew me to his role as Sherlock Holmes in the new BBC series. I find his acting style both enigmatic, and charismatic.
Thanks for respectfully disagreeing.

BC didn't do a terrible job with what he had, in my opinion. There was a cool, cold, and yes, somewhat enigmatic quality, that I think he conveyed well.

But Khan, to me, is much more than just that. BC's Khan wasn't hugely menacing, in my view, and I found that Montalban could be empathetic, even when he was turned into more of a B-movie heavy in TWOK.

I'll have to check "Sherlock" out. I've been meaning to see what all the fuss is about for a while. But in that sense, I had no preconceptions about BC's performance. I took it for what it was; and it didn't really do a lot for me.
Cryogenic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2013, 08:02 AM   #3844
CorporalClegg
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalClegg's Avatar
 
Location: Where my heart is.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Cryogenic wrote: View Post
But Khan, to me, is much more than just that. BC's Khan wasn't hugely menacing
He crushed a guy's skull with his bare hands.
__________________
Konnichi wa!
CorporalClegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2013, 10:17 AM   #3845
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

AnnLouise wrote: View Post
Since it WAS filmed, partially, at the brewery
sigh. As a resident of a state with MANY fine breweries, I see NO reason why films of any genre shouldn't use them as settings. Along with our many, many taverns....
I was simply stating facts, not commenting on them. I like the new look of engineering.
__________________
And that's my opinion.

The Onmyouza Theatre: an unofficial international fanclub dedicated to the Japanese heavy metal band Onmyo-Za.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2013, 10:39 AM   #3846
teacake
Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I have to know the answer!!

What did they mean by they stunned their ride in the beginning of the movie, were they actually going to RIDE ON that creature?

Do you think it was domesticated by the natives?
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2013, 11:21 AM   #3847
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

That was my understanding.
__________________
And that's my opinion.

The Onmyouza Theatre: an unofficial international fanclub dedicated to the Japanese heavy metal band Onmyo-Za.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2013, 11:58 AM   #3848
teacake
Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Was it tethered? It must have been tethered. And big enough for two.They must have already tested it out to know it would let them ride it. Since they would smell totally different than anything the animal had smellled before.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2013, 12:03 PM   #3849
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Not tested much. Look at its reaction to Kirk.
__________________
And that's my opinion.

The Onmyouza Theatre: an unofficial international fanclub dedicated to the Japanese heavy metal band Onmyo-Za.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2013, 12:28 PM   #3850
teacake
Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Maybe they just startle easily..
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2013, 01:10 PM   #3851
Cryogenic
Lieutenant Commander
 
Cryogenic's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

CorporalClegg wrote: View Post
Cryogenic wrote: View Post
But Khan, to me, is much more than just that. BC's Khan wasn't hugely menacing
He crushed a guy's skull with his bare hands.
With Evil Villain Rage or just some good ol' superhuman adrenaline. Neither makes Khan particularly menacing, in my view.

In fact, at the moment of crushing Admiral Robocop's skull, Khan revealed himself to be a petty emo kid, and rendered himself momentarily vulnerable to attack. His urge for simplistic recrimination saps the scene of intrigue and power. It's more like Ru'afo killing Admiral Dougherty in ST:Insurrection.

This same kind of vengeful killing method was done far better, in my opinion, in Ridley Scott's "Blade Runner" (a stunning sci-fi tone poem of a film, it must be noted, that predates STID by three decades). There, Roy Batty was truly menacing, with his slow-burn intimidation of Tyrell, and both the lighting and the music conveyed a feeling of raw horror utterly absent from STID's boorish, run-and-gun histrionics.

Last edited by Cryogenic; May 29 2013 at 01:32 PM.
Cryogenic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2013, 01:50 PM   #3852
teacake
Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Didn't Roy Batty also crush someone's skull? Or.. something?
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2013, 01:56 PM   #3853
Mad Jack Wolfe
Lieutenant Commander
 
Mad Jack Wolfe's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

teacake wrote: View Post
I have to know the answer!!

What did they mean by they stunned their ride in the beginning of the movie, were they actually going to RIDE ON that creature?

Do you think it was domesticated by the natives?
Their Tauntaun was in the shop. The Nibiru critter was a rental.
__________________
Life is full of disappointments. For instance, I really hoped "Chariots of Fire" would be a remake of "Ben Hur" with flame throwers.
Mad Jack Wolfe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2013, 01:59 PM   #3854
teacake
Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Mad Jack Wolfe wrote: View Post
teacake wrote: View Post
I have to know the answer!!

What did they mean by they stunned their ride in the beginning of the movie, were they actually going to RIDE ON that creature?

Do you think it was domesticated by the natives?
Their Tauntaun was in the shop. The Nibiru critter was a rental.


I like it when people talk about tauntauns.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2013, 02:20 PM   #3855
Zeppster
Commodore
 
Zeppster's Avatar
 
Location: Oklahoma
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I didn't really like Cumberbatch as Khan. I think he was a much better villain than in the last one. So was Adm Marcus.

The last 30-40 minutes which became a reverse TWOK was much weaker than the first 2 hours which set up a good story between the crew vs Adm Marcus. That was a much more dramatic, and much better story. When Khan killed Adm Marcus he turned from an interesting character to a cartoon villain. And the story kinda fell apart from there. Not saying it was bad. I quite like the movie. But you had more cartoon elements than you did actual elements that were built over the film.

Cumberbatch was a good augment. I think if they just went with him as a counterpart to Khan this story works better because Cumberbatch just didn't have the presence t hat role deserves. He was really good and gave some solid moments though and was a far better villain than in ST09 and probably overall one of the best villains in Star Trek movie history. The only reason that they made his character Khan in this film was to have the scene where Spock yells his name to re-enact TWOK. But even that was flat compared to this one because of how much drama was built into that moment in TWOK.

The stuff between the Enterprise Crew and Adm. Marcus was much more interesting overall. It was all set up over the course of the movie. It was much better framed. The last 30-40 minutes Khan pretty much became a cartoon villain and little more. You didn't see any real motives for doing what he was doing for the most part. Which is pretty much all you got in TWOK.
__________________
"And in all of the universe, three million million galaxies like this. And in all of that... and perhaps more, only one of each of us. Don't destroy the one named Kirk"
Zeppster 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 02:57 PM.

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