RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,167
Posts: 5,435,031
Members: 24,937
Currently online: 501
Newest member: bryanb2014

TrekToday headlines

Two Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Oct 22

Pine In New Skit
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

Stewart In Holiday Film
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

The Red Shirt Diaries #8
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

IDW Publishing January Comics
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

Retro Review: Chrysalis
By: Michelle on Oct 18

The Next Generation Season Seven Blu-ray Details
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

CBS Launches Streaming Service
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Yelchin In New Indie Thriller
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Saldana In The Book of Life
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17


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 20 2013, 06:21 PM   #1
Shaka Zulu
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Bulawayo Military Krral
Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

Well, not really. But Wil Wheaton has some things to say about the new movie:

I could have done without the whole beginning, which felt gratuitous and largely disconnected from the rest of the film to me, but I suppose they needed a way to set up Spock putting the needs of the many ahead of the needs of the one, or the few. I had a very hard time accepting that the Enterprise could sit underwater, but Iím willing to accept it and get over it. The makeup on those aliens was awesome, though.
Iíve read a lot of online criticism that Uhura didnít do anything useful and was just there to weep and be weak around Spock. I honestly didnít get that at all. She bravely faces down the fucking Klingons, knowing that sheís risking her life, and then is a badass during the climax when Spock and the ship need her the most. I suppose you can make an argument that she had no business bringing up relationship stuff with Spock in the middle of an important mission, but in a high stress situation maybe things bubbling beneath the surface just come up.
So on the other end of the writing-for-women spectrum is the profound failure to do awesome stuff with Doctor Marcus. I was disappointed, and I imagine that there must be deleted scenes that make her much more interesting (I have no problem with Alice Eveís performance. I thought she did a fine job with what they wrote for her). Sheís so goddamn smart, and we know that she ends up inventing the goddamn Genesis device, so itís a huge waste to make her little more than eye candy for Kirk. Putting her in her underwear was embarrassing to me as a member of the Star Trek Family, and served absolutely no purpose other than to make teenage boys feel weird, like when they climb the rope in gym class.
My review of Star Trek Into Darkness

Interesting take on it, although I'm still not getting the outrage over seeing Marcus in her undies.
Shaka Zulu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20 2013, 07:30 PM   #2
Sindatur
Vice Admiral
 
Sindatur's Avatar
 
Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post
Well, not really. But Wil Wheaton has some things to say about the new movie:

I could have done without the whole beginning, which felt gratuitous and largely disconnected from the rest of the film to me, but I suppose they needed a way to set up Spock putting the needs of the many ahead of the needs of the one, or the few. I had a very hard time accepting that the Enterprise could sit underwater, but Iím willing to accept it and get over it. The makeup on those aliens was awesome, though.
Iíve read a lot of online criticism that Uhura didnít do anything useful and was just there to weep and be weak around Spock. I honestly didnít get that at all. She bravely faces down the fucking Klingons, knowing that sheís risking her life, and then is a badass during the climax when Spock and the ship need her the most. I suppose you can make an argument that she had no business bringing up relationship stuff with Spock in the middle of an important mission, but in a high stress situation maybe things bubbling beneath the surface just come up.
So on the other end of the writing-for-women spectrum is the profound failure to do awesome stuff with Doctor Marcus. I was disappointed, and I imagine that there must be deleted scenes that make her much more interesting (I have no problem with Alice Eveís performance. I thought she did a fine job with what they wrote for her). Sheís so goddamn smart, and we know that she ends up inventing the goddamn Genesis device, so itís a huge waste to make her little more than eye candy for Kirk. Putting her in her underwear was embarrassing to me as a member of the Star Trek Family, and served absolutely no purpose other than to make teenage boys feel weird, like when they climb the rope in gym class.
My review of Star Trek Into Darkness

Interesting take on it, although I'm still not getting the outrage over seeing Marcus in her undies.
Agreed. I see absolutely no difference between the Catsuits Troi, Kira, Seven, and T'Pol wore comapred to Doctor Marcus in her underwear, except Doctor Marcus was in her underwear for only a minute, whreas the rest of them live in their cat suits. Additionally, the cat suits often showed shining headlights and were so snug around the lady parts, you could see outlines, I don't recall either of these being true with Doctor Marcus' underwear (Though, Kira's is definitely the least offensive of the Cat Suits). oh, and yes, Doctor Marcus you could see her navel, but, I recall a time or two the catsuits were so snug, they outlined a navel.
__________________
One Day I hope to be the Man my Cat thinks I am

Where are we going? And why are we in this Handbasket?
Sindatur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20 2013, 07:54 PM   #3
JamesRye
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

I like Wil Wheaton, I think his review is pretty spot on. The local independent cinema here in Exeter UK is going to be screening Stand By Me this weekend and I plan to get all nostalgic and pay a trip to see it.

I'm pleased that he articulates why Gene would be proud of this new movie. I'd like Mr Burton to better articulate his gripes - maybe he was in a bad mood or something when he complained that it lacked .... Gene Roddenberry's touch.

My ST:ID review:

http://ryesofthegeek.wordpress.com/2...s-film-review/
JamesRye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20 2013, 08:02 PM   #4
Jax
Admiral
 
Jax's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

I had a very hard time accepting that the Enterprise could sit underwater
Its a mobile AIRTIGHT ship, I don't understand the reaction to the water bit from some sections.
__________________
If Fidelity to freedom and democracy is the code of our civic religion then surely the code of our humanity is faithful service to that unwritten commandment that says we shall give our children better than we ourselves received
Jax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20 2013, 10:03 PM   #5
Enterprise is Great
Rear Admiral
 
Enterprise is Great's Avatar
 
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

If it can survive in space why not underwater? I just don't get this objection other than people just do not like seeing the ship underwater for whatever reason.
__________________
JJverse Star Trek...ROCKED on May 17, 2013 and beyond!
Enterprise is Great is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20 2013, 10:36 PM   #6
JamesRye
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

Yup- and there is a precedent. Voyager went through fluidic space!

I don't get why people had a problem with the big-E under water either. They couldn't beam through the atmosphere, so they went through the atmosphere to the middle of the ocean (where no one would see them) and then moved a bit closer to the land masses.

simples
JamesRye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20 2013, 10:41 PM   #7
Kevman7987
Commander
 
Kevman7987's Avatar
 
Location: Erie, PA, USA
View Kevman7987's Twitter Profile
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

Enterprise is Great wrote: View Post
If it can survive in space why not underwater? I just don't get this objection other than people just do not like seeing the ship underwater for whatever reason.
JamesRye wrote: View Post
Yup- and there is a precedent. Voyager went through fluidic space!

I don't get why people had a problem with the big-E under water either. They couldn't beam through the atmosphere, so they went through the atmosphere to the middle of the ocean (where no one would see them) and then moved a bit closer to the land masses.

simples
I don't understand this either. My Star Trek Micro Machines survived many a mission in the bathtub without any sort of damage.
__________________
"Don't do it, Meat!"
"Don't do it, Cheese!"
Kevman7987 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 01:06 AM   #8
Third Nacelle
Captain
 
Third Nacelle's Avatar
 
Location: The Denorios Belt
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

I have to disagree with Mr. Wheaton on the beginning of the movie. To me, the mission to Niburu felt more like Star Trek than any other part of either of the new films.

Maybe hiding the ship underwater is a bit silly, but so was hiding a holoship underwater, or taking the Delta Flyer into that ocean planet. In general, I would not think that something designed to hold in a lot of internal pressure in a vacuum would do very well with a lot of external pressure, but I'm not going to judge 23rd-century tech.
Third Nacelle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 04:17 AM   #9
OpenMaw
Commander
 
OpenMaw's Avatar
 
Location: Everett, Washington
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

Sindatur wrote: View Post
Agreed. I see absolutely no difference between the Catsuits Troi, Kira, Seven, and T'Pol wore comapred to Doctor Marcus in her underwear, except Doctor Marcus was in her underwear for only a minute, whreas the rest of them live in their cat suits. Additionally, the cat suits often showed shining headlights and were so snug around the lady parts, you could see outlines, I don't recall either of these being true with Doctor Marcus' underwear (Though, Kira's is definitely the least offensive of the Cat Suits). oh, and yes, Doctor Marcus you could see her navel, but, I recall a time or two the catsuits were so snug, they outlined a navel.
Yes, but, who honestly liked the catsuits? I honestly found it disconcerting that a show which enjoyed patting itself on the back for being progressive kept reusing the same hook to get the young boys drooling.

As such, i'll take Saavik with her hair down any day.
__________________
"Paradise protests too much." SFDebris
OpenMaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 04:38 AM   #10
Opus
Commodore
 
Opus's Avatar
 
Location: Bloom County
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

OpenMaw wrote: View Post
Yes, but, who honestly liked the catsuits?
Brannon Braga
__________________
Now that I've seen it, and have also had time to mellow, to really think about it, I now find it absolutely, unbearably repulsive in every way except for some of the acting. - about The Wrath of Khan. Interstat, Issue 62: 1982
Opus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 05:08 AM   #11
Spock/Uhura Fan
Captain
 
Spock/Uhura Fan's Avatar
 
Location: Where It's At.
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

He "read a lot of online criticism that Uhura didn’t do anything useful and was just there to weep and be weak around Spock" because it's true. And that's the milder criticism of how poorly her character was portrayed and the S/U relationship in general which was so great in the first film.

Aside from the underwear scene, Marcus was treated better than Uhura was in my opinion, but neither got great treatment from my view.
__________________
MA'AM. Hot damn, I can dig it.

ďThe history of men's opposition to women's emancipation is more interesting perhaps than the story of that emancipation itself.Ē - Virginia Woolf
Spock/Uhura Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 05:11 AM   #12
General_Phoenix
Commander
 
General_Phoenix's Avatar
 
Location: Bespin
Send a message via ICQ to General_Phoenix Send a message via AIM to General_Phoenix Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to General_Phoenix Send a message via Yahoo to General_Phoenix
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

The problem with the Enterprise being under water (for me..anyway) is it's never really explained why it is there, we just have to accept that it's just..well..under water. Why not simply be in orbit like any other mission? Why risk exposing a primitive society to an advanced technological achievement like the Enterprise? There are tons of questions, but I guess in the end we just have to accept the fact is was there for a cool shot of the Enterprise coming out from an ocean.
__________________
Atomic batteries to power, turbines to speed.
General_Phoenix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 01:15 PM   #13
CaptainDave1701
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

So why are we giving credit to the opinion of Sheldon Cooper's mortal enemy here....

As for what he thought was wrong with the film perhaps he should he should dissect his own body of work in The Next Generation. He is somewhat the Jar Jar Binks of that era.
CaptainDave1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 01:30 PM   #14
M.A.C.O.
Fleet Captain
 
M.A.C.O.'s Avatar
 
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

Spock/Uhura Fan wrote: View Post
Aside from the underwear scene, Marcus was treated better than Uhura was in my opinion, but neither got great treatment from my view.
Remember Uhura had an underwear scene with Kirk in ST09. I suppose in the Abramsverse strong women characters must first be degraded to being seen in their undercloths. Le sigh
M.A.C.O. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 01:50 PM   #15
Mutoid
Fleet Captain
 
Mutoid's Avatar
 
Location: CommishSleer
View Mutoid's Twitter Profile
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

I hope Wil Wheaton was embarressed by the 'firm boob' scene in INS.

That was his 'mother'

Still I think he does have a point about Marcus' intelligence. She was Spock's scientific peer in TWOK. I hope she has more scientific things to do in the next movie.
Mutoid is offline   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 03:04 AM.

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