STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by Agent Richard07, Apr 18, 2013.

?

Grade the movie...

  1. A+

    18.7%
  2. A

    20.7%
  3. A-

    13.1%
  4. B+

    11.1%
  5. B

    8.0%
  6. B-

    4.2%
  7. C+

    5.4%
  8. C

    5.1%
  9. C-

    3.5%
  10. D+

    1.5%
  11. D

    1.6%
  12. D-

    1.3%
  13. F

    5.7%
  1. Ryan8bit

    Ryan8bit Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Location:
    St. Paul, MN
    Red Letter Media isn't so much a review as it is its own type of, well, media. It's more of a commentary on movies similar to MST3K than it is any kind of actual review, and they're always done in jest. If you've never watched the reviews of the Star Wars prequels or the Star Trek Next Generation movies, you should at least give it a shot. But yeah, they're not for everybody.
     
  2. beamMe

    beamMe Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2011
    Location:
    Europa
    If I'd wanted to see slightly overweight guys in their thirties, I'd look in the mirror.

    I'd rather watch attractive people do interesting things - going to see STID again tomorrow.
     
  3. Belz...

    Belz... Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Location:
    In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
    This is my favourite post of the day. :)
     
  4. indranee

    indranee Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    Location:
    Warrrrrrrrrshington, DC
    ^seconded :D
     
  5. Therin of Andor

    Therin of Andor Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Location:
    New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
    You wanted him to drop silver glitter down a tube of light?

    The transporter effect changed radically from "The Cage" to TOS to TMP to the later movies. And you complain about one more change?
     
  6. Therin of Andor

    Therin of Andor Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Location:
    New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
  7. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    I like the new transporter effect, I like most of the older transporter effects. The only one that really didn't work for me was the TMP effect.
     
  8. Ovation

    Ovation Vice Admiral Admiral

    Well, it wasn't always up to snuff in terms of de-scrambling all them molecules and stuff. I can see where you might be disappointed.
     
  9. Tommunist

    Tommunist Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2012
    Location:
    Otisburg
    I love the Harry Plinket "reviews" on Red Letter Media, but their regular "Half In The Bag" series of reviews is like a demented Siskel and Ebert in that they are actual reviews in the more traditional sense, along with an ongoing subplot of "wackiness"...
     
  10. pymfan2000

    pymfan2000 Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Location:
    Nashville Tennessee
    I thought the "half in the Bag" review pretty much covered alot of the same problems I had with the film.

    I wish the film hadn't been so dumb and lowest-common denominator.
     
  11. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    Maybe somewhere down the road they'll remake The Motion Picture and drive a stake through the heart of the franchise. Then everyone can be happy... :rolleyes:
     
  12. Devon

    Devon Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    How else would it live up to being a Star Trek film? :lol:
     
  13. pymfan2000

    pymfan2000 Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Location:
    Nashville Tennessee
    I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.
     
  14. ConRefit79

    ConRefit79 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    I agree with many of their points. But we're in the minority here. The best we can hope for are better writers next time.
     
  15. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    I'm sure Red Letter Media can explain it to you. :techman:
     
  16. Tommunist

    Tommunist Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2012
    Location:
    Otisburg
    After watching the Red Letter Media review, I enjoyed their discussion. I still greatly enjoyed the movie though, and somehow enjoyed their review. Unlike the bickering that is going on in their comments section for that review.

    I enjoy that things are a lot more civil here than elsewhere about these subjects (comics, sci-fi, super hero movies, etc).

    As far as their discussions on "needless" fan service: I enjoy the nods. To the casual movie-goer, they don't register as such. But if you are a long time fan, they are there for our "enjoyment". Section 31? That's fun to hear, didn't mean a damn to the people I went with who didn't know it's history, they just went along with "secret organization". Such references did not take them out of the story. Tribbles and old starship models and mentions of "Mudd' are fine.

    Now, is the inclusion of Harrison "fan service"? That is a debatable point. In this case, does the weight of his identity carry over if you don't know the history? I say no, but if a casual Trek fan is going to know any bad guy, Khan would be the one. However, for younger and/or less informed people watching this movie, I don't think enough background was given on what Khan was or what he and his crew represented. In this case, JJ was wrong, you did need to know Trek to fully "appreciate" the inclusion.
     
  17. throwback

    throwback Captain Captain

    Joined:
    May 27, 2011
    I think it would have been better for JJ Abrams and his staff to write a story with an original villain in the Star Trek mythos. This "fan service" backfired: most people wouldn't catch the references who weren't familiar with the mythos and, for some of those who were familiar, these references reminded them, what was for them, of a better film.

    And, I keep harping on this. This is the third film in a row with a revenge seeking character. I think it would have been better if there was a different type of character.
     
  18. ryng12345

    ryng12345 Ensign Newbie

    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Thank you for your detailed rebuttal to my review. I am honored that someone would not only take the time to read it but to put more effort into the reply than my original review. You kinda convinced me to your way of thinking and that maybe I remembered the movie wrong.

    But I still say --

    The colors are mostly all unnatural.

    The score was forgettable (everyone can hum starwars, raiders and even the star trek tv shows music).

    The new Enterprise set looks too clinical.

    The Kirk/Spock goodbye scene was way way too corny.

    McCoy said, "I'm a doctor not an Engineer" too many times. I thought he said it three times in the movie. If not then maybe the way it was used made it feel that it was too much.

    And the new transporter effect was too drasticly changed. The changes seen in the other movies were okay because technology advanced. This movie is still in the days of young Kirk and Spock.
     
  19. Commishsleer

    Commishsleer Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Location:
    CommishSleer
    I agree with you.
    My husband who knows a little bit about TOS couldn't remember who Khan was from TWOK. I don't think he'd match up Montalban with Cumberbatch. He asked me why he was so powerful. How come he could beat up Spock? Was he alien or something?
    Like your friends he was OK with everything else.

    And my family were humming the 'forgetable' theme after the movie waiting for the car
     
  20. Phily B

    Phily B Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2001
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Honestly, I'm only 15 minutes in and it's an unusually flawed review.

    Mike is unusually quiet and Rich kinda defends it, but Rich just seems to be ripping into it but gave a pass on a bunch of other shit movies.

    Finished.

    What an awful review, seriously. You can sum it up with "It's not Star Trek TNG".
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2013