RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 147,043
Posts: 5,803,037
Members: 26,061
Currently online: 437
Newest member: Ulvirfaust

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Learning Curve
By: Michelle on Jul 31

Star Trek: The Exhibition In Washington State
By: T'Bonz on Jul 31

August-September 2015 Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Jul 31

Shatner To Pen Book On Nimoy
By: T'Bonz on Jul 31

Star Trek Beyond Building Continues
By: T'Bonz on Jul 31

Trinneer In Western Horror
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Beam Me Up Scotty Figurines
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

UK Auction To Feature Spock Costume
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Pine To Star In Wonder Woman
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Pegg Teases Elba Character
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29


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+ 147 18.82%
A 163 20.87%
A- 102 13.06%
B+ 87 11.14%
B 63 8.07%
B- 32 4.10%
C+ 42 5.38%
C 39 4.99%
C- 28 3.59%
D+ 12 1.54%
D 13 1.66%
D- 10 1.28%
F 43 5.51%
Voters: 781. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 30 2013, 09:08 PM   #3916
Lonemagpie
Writer
 
Lonemagpie's Avatar
 
Location: Yorkshire
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I'd love to grade it but...
Fuck cunt arse bastard motherfucker - I just discovered this fucking minute that our local fleapit had Into Darkness this week, without having advertised in advance, and the last fucking showing finishes in 20 minutes. Cunt fuck motherfucker. And from tomorrow it's back to pish for the blue-rinse crowd with The Great fucking Gatsby. Cunt.
__________________
"I got two modes with people- Bite, and Avoid"
Reading: ()

Blog- http://lonemagpie.livejournal.com
Lonemagpie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 30 2013, 09:10 PM   #3917
Squiggy
King of Kings
 
Squiggy's Avatar
 
Location: In flux
View Squiggy's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

At least you're handling the news like an adult.
__________________
ENOUGH OF THIS TURGID BASH WANKERY!
Squiggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 30 2013, 09:18 PM   #3918
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
TWOK clearly explains everything you need to know. Enterprise found the Botany Bay, Khan tried to steal the ship and kill Kirk, Kirk exiled them on a green planet, and the green planet turned into a desert.

Seriously, it's not that hard.
Precisely. I always introduce people to Trek with TWOK and that's never been a problem.
__________________
And that's my opinion.

Last edited by Belz...; May 30 2013 at 11:01 PM.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 30 2013, 10:05 PM   #3919
throwback
Captain
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I was thinking about how Khan might be used as a villain. As I don't understand the word "skiffy", the criticism falls short of convincing me that the issues I raised weren't fit for an action-adventure. Then I looked at the box office results for "Gattaca", and that convinced me.

About people's experiences, how many people have been directly impacted by a drone strike? And, of those people, how many would have seen this film? I would think the number would be small.

If you are speaking about people's experiences, how about a film about a society that is increasingly becoming aware of your activities and the loss of anonymity and privacy in that society? There is an active debate about the XBOX 1, because some of the features associated with this machine are raising concerns about privacy. Or is that too intellectual?
throwback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 30 2013, 10:49 PM   #3920
Mr. Laser Beam
Fleet Admiral
 
Mr. Laser Beam's Avatar
 
Location: The visitor's bullpen
View Mr. Laser Beam's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
In TWOK, Kirk and Khan never even meet in person, even though Kirk is the hero and Khan is the villain. That left the audience totally confused. Bad film.
Who the hell would be confused by that? Khan and Kirk DO speak to each other on viewscreens. (And besides, there's other films - like The Fifth Element - where the hero and the villain never communicate AT ALL, and I'm not aware of any mass confusion over that issue...)

And there was a practical reason Kirk and Khan were never together in TWOK - the same set was used for both the Enterprise and Reliant bridges.
__________________
"But here you are, in the ninth
Two men out and three men on
Nowhere to look but inside
Where we all respond to PRESSURE!" - Billy Joel
Mr. Laser Beam is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 30 2013, 11:23 PM   #3921
Lonemagpie
Writer
 
Lonemagpie's Avatar
 
Location: Yorkshire
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Squiggy wrote: View Post
At least you're handling the news like an adult.
Indeed, I didn't say goat-felching clit-snorters once, so that's definitely me being polite and mature about it.
__________________
"I got two modes with people- Bite, and Avoid"
Reading: ()

Blog- http://lonemagpie.livejournal.com
Lonemagpie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2013, 12:37 AM   #3922
CorporalClegg
Admiral
 
CorporalClegg's Avatar
 
Location: Land of Enchantment
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I think I'm going to add "goat-felching clit-snorters" to my stock lexicon.
__________________
If you can read this signature, you're dying.
CorporalClegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2013, 12:51 AM   #3923
Cryogenic
Lieutenant Commander
 
Cryogenic's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

J. Allen wrote: View Post
Cryogenic wrote: View Post
Thanks for respectfully disagreeing.
Hey, thanks for not considering me a mindless automaton for simply enjoying the movie. I've been seeing that on movie sites when I mention that I like STiD. It gets depressing.
No, you're not. And that is something I seriously wish to address:

Last time I was on this board, discussing the 2009 film and "The Motion Picture", I got a little supercilious in my manner toward people with an opposing opinion. That was wrong of me.

People are free to enjoy the movies they will -- without condescension, without animosity. Of course, I may still get a little strident in expressing myself, and I don't so much apologize for that. But I'd hate for anyone to feel insulted or demeaned when I'm simply giving the measure of my own feelings.

We're cool, J. Allen.

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.
Oh, you mean world class ham. In that case, Montalban has Cumberbatch beat. No one hammed it up like he did when playing Khan in TWOK, and I do mean that as a compliment.

Cumberbatch definitely played Khan as a cold calculator, one who really has no care whether you live or die, as long as you suit his purposes. Montalban's Khan was much more over the top in terms of villainy.

Two totally different styles from two totally different actors. Each has their strengths and weaknesses, I feel.
Montalban was more OTT, but that was a lot more fitting and enjoyable, to me.

Trek used to be theatrical and introspective in a pretty balanced way, in my opinion -- it was one of the delights of watching it. Now, under J.J. Abrams, it's more lively, but less engaging; more energetic, but less animating. If that makes any sense. It doesn't have the same push-pull tension; the same dynamic, the same texture. They've tried to appeal to the zeitgeist with the last two movies, and in the process much has been sacrificed. Again, IMO.

We can go the "NOMA" (Non Overlapping MAgisteria) route if you like, but I don't think the two performances are equally different or non-interfering. This movie's depiction was a very "blunt force" approach to Khan; and that seems to be J.J. Abrams' approach to, well, everything. It's less artistic, to me, and more simply matter-of-fact and throw-away: fast-food theatrics. I think a lot more could have been done to distance Cumberbatch's Khan and make him arresting and alluring in his own right; but, to me, it wasn't, and it doesn't seem to be part of Abrams' vocabulary to even try.

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.
If you can, please do. I've seen dozens of Sherlock Holmes iterations, and this one is my favorite of them all. Benedict Cumberbatch's Holmes is a rather eccentric, genius, self described "consulting detective," and is ably played to the hilt. It also helps that Martin Freeman is a very versatile actor and does a splendid job playing the role of Dr. John Watson.
I saw some clips yesterday. I have to say that he seems pretty glib in "Sherlock" in a way that he isn't in STID. The writing in the BBC series seems sharper, funnier. There, Cumberbatch's portrayal is ably backed by solid screenplays that allow his character to fan his misanthropic feathers in some pretty colourful and amusing ways (it also helps that he has Martin Freeman as Watson to play off against). In STID, however, he seems divested of his acid cynicism, and merely comes across as po-faced, rigid, and cold: a morose antagonist spewing dialogue. His black humour peters out at "No ship should go down without her captain", which hardly sets my world on fire -- compare the way, say, Christopher Lee brought a refined, wheels-within-wheels elocution to George Lucas' dialogue in "Attack Of The Clones" (and the two or three minutes he appeared in "Revenge Of The Sith"), and here, Benedict Cumberbatch seems so lacking. I think Abrams and his writers were hoping to transplant what Cumberbatch has brought to the "Sherlock" role; but, in my eyes, they failed.
Cryogenic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2013, 12:52 AM   #3924
beamMe
Commodore
 
beamMe's Avatar
 
Location: Europa
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

throwback wrote: View Post
About people's experiences, how many people have been directly impacted by a drone strike? And, of those people, how many would have seen this film? I would think the number would be small.
The film is not about that.
It questions the morality of using drones to kill people without trail.
beamMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2013, 01:10 AM   #3925
The Old Mixer
Vice Admiral
 
The Old Mixer's Avatar
 
Location: Connecticut
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Cryogenic wrote: View Post
Montalban was more OTT, but that was a lot more fitting and enjoyable, to me.
He kinda had to be, he was playing against The Shat....

compare the way, say, Christopher Lee brought a refined, wheels-within-wheels elocution to George Lucas' dialogue in "Attack Of The Clones" (and the two or three minutes he appeared in "Revenge Of The Sith")
That's what this series needs--More Christopher Lee! He's still working, bring him on!
The Old Mixer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2013, 02:48 AM   #3926
AnnLouise
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Wisconsin
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

beamMe wrote: View Post
throwback wrote: View Post
About people's experiences, how many people have been directly impacted by a drone strike? And, of those people, how many would have seen this film? I would think the number would be small.
The film is not about that.
It questions the morality of using drones to kill people without trail.
As Spock was making the argument to Kirk over the immorality of killing Khan, I flashed to the recent murder of the soldier in London. I did not think Spock was wrong, but I kept seeing footage of the attackers, standing in the street with red hands displayed for the smartphone cameras.
So for better or worse, this is actually one of the most topical of the ST movies wrapped inside a popcorn summer flick.
__________________
(it is) in the denial of moral choices that we commit our worst offences.
Matthew Scully
AnnLouise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2013, 02:58 AM   #3927
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

beamMe wrote: View Post
The film is not about that.
It questions the morality of using drones to kill people without trail.
Really ? I thought it was about Kirk seeking revenge for the death of his mentor and learning a vital lesson in command, temperence and sacrifice.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2013, 03:06 AM   #3928
Talosian
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Belz... wrote: View Post
beamMe wrote: View Post
The film is not about that.
It questions the morality of using drones to kill people without trail.
Really ? I thought it was about Kirk seeking revenge for the death of his mentor and learning a vital lesson in command, temperence and sacrifice.
It's about both. Part of Kirk's maturation is his decision to not act as judge, jury, and executioner despite his own urge for avenging the murder of his mentor and father figure and contrary to Admiral Marcus' orders.

The difference between how Kirk and Spock handled Nero versus Khan is no accident.
Talosian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2013, 03:06 AM   #3929
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

throwback wrote: View Post
About people's experiences, how many people have been directly impacted by a drone strike?
As others have already made clear, that's beside the point.

The short answer, though is: a whole lot more than have been directly impacted by genetic engineering to produce superhuman dictators.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2013, 03:31 AM   #3930
RPJOB
Commander
 
RPJOB's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

beamMe wrote: View Post
throwback wrote: View Post
About people's experiences, how many people have been directly impacted by a drone strike? And, of those people, how many would have seen this film? I would think the number would be small.
The film is not about that.
It questions the morality of using drones to kill people without trail.
As opposed to simply blowing them away when they've been defeated and are no longer a threat like Spock advocated in the last movie.

It's not about the morality of killing people without trial. It's about killing people who belong to your political union without trial. They didn't seem too worried about giving Nero a fair trial.

The only people that appear to deserve a fair trail are those that are Federation citizens. Everyone else is fair game.
__________________
We can admit that we're killers ... but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes! Knowing that we're not going to kill - today! - Kirk - A Taste of Armageddon
RPJOB 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 06:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.