STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies XI+' 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. BillJ

    BillJ Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
    This is just utter bullshit. Lots of people in here have had no issue articulating why they like the two Abrams films.

    When all you do is come in and scream that Abrams raped your childhood, don't be surprised when someone asks you why you dislike (hate) the movie. Also, don't be surprised when you answer "poor science" that people laugh at you as that is as common a staple of Star Trek as outer space or the transporters.
     
  2. M'Sharak

    M'Sharak Definitely Herbert. Maybe. Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Location:
    Terra Inlandia
    Well, no, they don't usually go that way, and you know it. Buuut you got your agreements from all-too-predictable quarters, so score yourself a point, give yourself a smug pat on the back, and sit down. I'd really like to not see you needling for a while, Jarod.

    Now everyone can please get back to making the discussion about about the movie instead of about other fan groups.
     
  3. Flake

    Flake Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2001
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    I noticed that before the Space Jump from ship to ship Scotty says: They will have full weapons in 3 minutes.

    More like 15-20 minutes until they finally take the ship !

    Only when Kirk gets to the bridge do the weapons come online.

    So... I guess Scotty got it wrong, but it is a line that should have been excised from the final cut or changed !
     
  4. Noname Given

    Noname Given Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 22, 2001
    Location:
    None Given
    No it's usually:


    Person 4: I hated it because to me, it 'Not Trek'. (Usually followed by - Now <insert earlier Star Trek film that Person 4 loved here> was Star Trek at it's best...

    Person 1: But <insert earlier Star Trek film that Person 4 loved here> did exactly what you're nitpicking STID for; so why is <insert earlier Star Trek film that Person 4 loved here> Trek and STID 'Not Trek'?...
    ....

    And then the discussion continues...
     
  5. SeerSGB

    SeerSGB Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2003
    Location:
    RIP Leonard Nimoy
    It's New Coke versus Coke Classic is what it is. Tastes about the same, but you'll never get some people to admit to it. :lol:
     
  6. Hober Mallow

    Hober Mallow Commodore Commodore

    New Coke tasted nothing like Coke classic. New Coke tasted like Pepsi.
     
  7. Opus

    Opus Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2003
    Location:
    Bloom County
    You know what I hate?

    Of course you don't, because I don't waste my time complaining days, weeks, months and years at a time about things I don't like, including specific incarnations of Trek!

    And I hated New Coke!
     
  8. suarezguy

    suarezguy Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM, USA
    How is occasionally (hardly continuously) talking about what you disliked about something weeks or months (years is probably excessive) after you watched it more of a waste than praising aspects weeks, month or years afterwards?
     
  9. Saul

    Saul Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    東京
    I found it to be a very entertaining movie. Predictable though. I think as a sequel the 2009 film which I was disappointed by they did a good job and they chucked in a lot of stuff I can Trekgeek out over. But that Vengeance ship looks crap and that's mostly because of it's humongous size.
     
  10. RAMA

    RAMA Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 1999
    Location:
    NJ, USA

    What a silly statement. It was designed to to exactly what is states in the movie, to be overpowered and fight threats like Nero and Klingons. Its over-armored, brutish and less aesthetically pleasing than other UFP ships but it has it's own charm. It's a challenge coming up with something similar but different.
     
  11. AUbricklogic

    AUbricklogic Ensign Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2013
    Location:
    North Hollywood, CA
    I still like them as entertainment pieces but when I watch the 2009 and STID movies, I feel exactly like Guinan did in "Yesterday's Enterprise" when everything went all dark and military.
     
  12. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    Location:
    Land of Enchantment
    You mean like this?

    [​IMG]
     
  13. mlk

    mlk Ensign Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    I saw this movie today, I like to think I have an open mind and I really think it's a good movie, it's definately Star Trek.

    So why do I have this 'feeling' that I simply don't really care.. Why don't I care when Kirk 'dies' ?

    I think the simple answer is the fact that we don't really know these characters.. Sure they are 'kirk' and 'spock' but in reality they aren't the Spock and Kirk we grew up with, and the problem the reboot have is that it doesn't have a tv-show in its back where we have come to learn, to know and to care about these people. Without that tv-show it's simply not as dramatic as it could be.

    I gave the movie a A- but Star Trek's backbone is the TV-show I realize that now.
     
  14. SeerSGB

    SeerSGB Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2003
    Location:
    RIP Leonard Nimoy
    Into Darkness is Rotten Tomatoes #7 Summer Movie Of 2013

    Not bad, not bad at all. A little surprised, thought it;d be a little lower down
     
  15. BillJ

    BillJ Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
    I'm still surprised Into Darkness didn't do better at the box office. The only films that ranked higher on that list were independent, non-action films.
     
  16. Shazam!

    Shazam! Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2006
    I like how all the praise Saul gave the movie is ignored whereas a subjctive opinion on the look of a spaceship is merciless jumped on and torn to shreds.

    Kinda lends credence to this...

     
  17. M'Sharak

    M'Sharak Definitely Herbert. Maybe. Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Location:
    Terra Inlandia
    Nope.

    It might, if Saul was in any way obligated to defend his opinion, or if one more drive-by dose of the Same Old Smug™ from RAMA was in any way equivalent to being "merciless jumped on and torn to shreds" by "those other people".

    But he's not, it's not, and you've got naught but more of the Same Old Drive-by Shazam™. You may sit down now, and thank you for your contribution. :)

    (And if, in the future, you have any actual problems to report, please do so by making use of the Notify Moderator button [ [​IMG] ] on the pertinent post. - M')
     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2013
  18. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    Location:
    Land of Enchantment
    I'm pretty sure it all comes down to the marketing and the release schedule.

    Funny thing, I've noticed over the last few days that a couple of websites Amazon and Best Buy I think, have "Khan" right in the item description for the DVD/Bluray I wonder if Paramount has realized its mistake?
     
  19. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    #istandwithcbs
    ^They do name Khan on the back of the DVD box. No mention of "John Harrison"
     
  20. Shazam!

    Shazam! Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2006
    I highly doubt it ALL came down to marketing and release schedule.
     

Share This Page