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. dulcimer47

    dulcimer47 Lieutenant Junior Grade Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    "Real" Star Trek is character development and social commentary told through a sci-fi prism, not explosions, CGI, and magic Khan blood.

    True, I should have specified new episodes of a show like TNG and/or DS9.

    Who was it recently who said that Star Trek is a TV show and best done in that format? Ron Moore I believe.
     
  2. dulcimer47

    dulcimer47 Lieutenant Junior Grade Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Nimoy didn't want anything to do with Generations because there wasn't enough for Spock to do, as it was a TNG movie.

    Also, let's remember the vast difference between 1994 and 2009/2013. Nimoy had wanted to distance himself from Spock since the late 70's, and unless there was a significant role for Spock, he wasn't going to do it. I don't fault him for that.

    Nimoy in 2009/2013 is whole different story, not to mention that Spock-prime plays a very minor part in J.J.'s movies, and Nimoy has a relationship with J.J. from Fringe.

    I don't think whether or not Nimoy is involved with a movie is any measure of that movie's quality.
     
  3. rahullak

    rahullak Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2009
    Location:
    India
    I agree with some of what you've said. Abrams Trek is better, but not only when it comes to box office results. Of course, any other sense of gauging its success would be subjective.

    Have you considered that Abrams Trek movies could probably be the best Trek movies ever made? The four TNG films, which I consider as being good, aren't nearly in the same league. And comparing a TV show to a movie doesn't work even if it is the same franchise. They're different mediums catering to different audiences. Who knows, if Abrams Trek spins off into a TV show, we could see another Measure of a Man type episode, but perhaps with some more pizzazz.

    I think Abrams Trek has struck a balance among wanting to have high box office results, having core Trek material for the long time fan, new ideas and visuals, half-decent plot, and character moments. And all in just 2 hours (or 4 if you take both movies), as opposed to hundreds of hours available in a TV show.

    YMMV.
     
  4. Phily B

    Phily B Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2001
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    It's also because it was a nonsensical and terrible script that only two other TOS cast members came back. Generations is terrible on every single level and it doesn't have the excuse of being a light reboot. Imagine the rage on this forum if the plot was Generations level and they destroyed a beloved ship cause they wanted a movie ship :lol:
     
  5. M'Sharak

    M'Sharak Definitely Herbert. Maybe. Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Location:
    Terra Inlandia
    I've asked you more than once before to refrain from making digs at other fans or groups of fans. Now knock it off.
     
  6. dulcimer47

    dulcimer47 Lieutenant Junior Grade Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Actually, when J.J. Trek was announced, I was ecstatic. I thought we were going to get "Star Trek: Lost". Instead, we got "Star Trek: Transformers".

    I'm all for more "pizzazz", as long as there is a good story and good characters behind it. Unfortunately, in my opinion, there isn't.

    I suppose it succeeded in making Trek a viable movie franchise again, at least according to what passes for viability in 2013, but I just lament the lack of any kind of substance.
     
  7. teacake

    teacake Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2007
    Location:
    inside teacake
    I saw ST:XII a second time today and I want to say.. ALL IS FORGIVEN.

    I'm ready for the love train.
     
  8. Therin of Andor

    Therin of Andor Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Location:
    New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
    Nothing new there, sadly. As I mentioned before, I entered Star Trek fandom in early 1980, with only ST:TMP below my belt - and hit the snobby fan demographic early on. That if only I were a "true fan", whatever that means, I would see their point that TMP was a terrible movie that threatened to kill Star Trek forever by letting in all these "newbies".

    By December 1983, I was the club's president, and we grew from 200 to over 1000 members over the next decade. The committee was then about one third original fans and two thirds "newbies" (usually the ones with fresh ideas on fundraising and meeting coordination). Many of the older fans just faded away, more were chased away by ST II "going all military" on us, and lots more ran screaming after ST IV, which was branded by some as "the dumbing down of the franchise". And any of us around in early 1987 should still recall the intense disdain for TNG from some fan quarters, before it even aired!

    So the films that polarized the membership would seem to be TMP, ST II, ST IV - and JJ's two films. Coincidentally, all were excellent money earners for Paramount. And those five movies all brought in lots of new fans to keep the franchise alive.

    TMP and JJ's films are still my favourite ST movies.

    I've always found the "substance" in Star Trek is often a deliberate series of little gaps that are meant to be filled in by the fans (and the tie-in novelists). The best chemistry between characters is often when no words are exchanged.

    Hahaha. Glad to say "I told you so."
     
  9. Borgminister

    Borgminister Admiral Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2001
    Location:
    California
    Had us worried there for a while...
     
  10. Therin of Andor

    Therin of Andor Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Location:
    New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
    Huh?

    The number of times the USS Voyager got duplicated, or someone from the ship got sent back in a time loop, in the first season drove me crazy! There are many VOY episodes that feel like remakes of previous episodes from other ST series, including the reverse-aging episode of TAS.
     
  11. Xavier_Storma

    Xavier_Storma Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Location:
    Duesseldorf, Germany
    That's why he died. :lol:
     
  12. Xavier_Storma

    Xavier_Storma Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Location:
    Duesseldorf, Germany
    NEMESIS and GENERATIONS. Yup. And here is why: Cinematography. NEMESIS and GENERATIONS looked awesome.
     
  13. Devon

    Devon Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Swing and a miss with the insult.

    Not in a two hour movie, no. People don't want to spend $40 or $50.00 at the movies to see Patrick Stewart play a little flute (oh, but if it's in 3D they might....)

    J.J. is the director, not the writer, so.....

    Ironically, many felt that the fall began with Generations.

    So you're comparing 7 years worth of episodes to 2 films? Really?

    And that has to do with what?

    TNG's film series has performed the worst for Paramount, and it was due to the TNG films that we got the reboot, so it's ironic how you want to attribute the TNG film's supposed success but don't realize it was their failures that caused Paramount to want to start over!

    That was pretty weak. You cherry picked the credentials for supposed "real" Star Trek. I could easily say "'Real' Star Trek is character development and social commentary told through a sci-fi prism, not explosions, CGI and Kirk chopping wood."

    So based on your credentials, about 80% of Star Trek is not "real." Hell, what am I talking about, none it is "real." Which makes the "Real Star Trek" thing even more ridiculous to say.
     
  14. GameOn

    GameOn Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2012
    I've always thought that Generations was a complete mess of a movie that almost rivals Star Trek 5 in its awfulness.
     
  15. Pauln6

    Pauln6 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Location:
    Bristol, United Kingdom
    I hope you don't take offense but you are making my point for me. Of course I do accept that as shown on screen Kirk's choices were limited and the writers painted him into that corner deliberately. Kirk is within his rights to order all the engineers out and go in himself but that isn't the most logical choice and, once again, he succeeds purely on the basis of luck.

    1. When are engineers ever going to have time to suit up in a radiation leak emergency? That's why from TMP they started to put their engineers IN the suits when the staff are on duty (just need to put a helmet on). They stopped doing it in TNG because they sanitised the engineering section but it was an incredibly sensible design choice alongside giving security guards phaser resistance body armour.

    2. If TNG is anything to go by, a commander has to be prepared to order somebody more qualified to their death in order to save the ship - and never mind the ship, to protect civilians on the planet they about to crash into. Much like in ST09 when he stayed too long next to an expanding black hole in order to blow up a ship, his decision, while successful, is not well reasoned. If Kirk arrives with no tools, and limited engineering ability and discovers that he can't kick the ship better? He succeed because of luck - thus showing he learned nothing from the dressing down he took earlier in the movie. This isn't Kirk's fault - it's the writers wanted to make him a very traditional hero. imagine how many 12 year olds who would be in tears if he'd ordered Scotty to his death. :devil: In fact, they should both have gone - the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. They aren't just words.

    3. I was being a bit facetious about the missing crew. If they were not evacuating then a dozen engineers should have been onsite. The ship has 400+ crew - enough for 3 shifts - and during a red alert they take action stations. showing a deserted engineering. I hate this kind of cheesy plot device where the hero is the only one onsite. The movie 2012 did it worse where an unqualified character ran all the way through the ship past multiple qualified characters despite time being of the essence just so the hero could steal the limelight. It's really poor storytelling.

    4. I am also aware that it is traditional Trek to have Kirk Spock and McCoy doing things that they aren't really best qualified to do. It's always annoying.

    I am surprised that people are still criticising the movie for Uhura stealing McCoy's screen time. I thought she had less of a screen presence than he did, all her scenes were relevant to her (although they should probably have used a volcanologist or geophysicist on the shuttle - I couldn't see why uhura was there) and McCoy got loads to do.

    I would have used Chekov for the missile scene personally - He's a maths genius, has tactical training, has very precise manual dexterity (as shown by his transporter use in the last movie) and he becomes the tactical officer in TMP. I thought the use of Chekov was probably the worst in the film. He just delivered dialogue and his personality didn't come though at all. Assigning him to engineering was a mistake. Making Carol an engineer could have made more sense.
     
  16. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    #istandwithcbs
    He gave his life for his crew without a second thought. He did not save Earth, he didn't even stop Khan, but he saved those important to him.

    He did not do it for shits and giggles.
     
  17. Orac Zen

    Orac Zen Mischief Manager Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Location:
    Godsown.
    I can only speak for myself, of course, but this ridiculous generalisation certainly doesn't work for me. I enjoyed the hell out of '09 and hoped to enjoy this movie just as much. The fact I didn't has nothing whatever to do with me being "desperate to hate" it; it has to do with it being one of the more vacuous excuses for a movie I've seen. If you see it differently, that's great, but you'd be best to avoid assuming that people who didn't like it all had preconceived notions that it would be garbage.

    I've never had much time for the Trek's-a-masterpiece, Roddenberry's-vision-rules viewpoint myself. Roddeneberry, with the help of a great many other people whose input seems to be overlooked as often as not, made a TV show so he could make a living. The rose-tinted glasses view of it as some work of genius that's ascended to holy writ and must go unchallenged has always struck me as absurd. So once again, my lack of enthusiasm for this movie has nothing to do with me being one of those clich├ęd TOS-uber-alles types.

    Bingo. This is one of my biggest issues with this movie: '09 did away with so much of the baggage that had weighed Trek down...and the first thing they did with their baggage-free timeline was to make some sort of TWoK-lite pseudo-remake. Among other things, this movie is a wasted opportunity.

    This movie isn't for me (this review linked to above, while harsher than I'd be about it, nonetheless covers several of the reasons I didn't care for it), but if it works for others that's great. As in all things, to each their own.
     
  18. Commishsleer

    Commishsleer Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Location:
    CommishSleer
    So the real Star trek is just TV episodes or DS9 and TNG. No TOS, TAS, VOY, ENT or any movies.
    As for magic blood, there were plenty of 'magical' non-scientific things through all the series including TNG


    I've seen Nimoy at a convention and he basically said to Shatner that he was stupid to be in GEN. And what a really stupid way to die. He said if he Spock was in it Kirk wouldn't have died. He said it again and again.
    Not that there wasn't enough to do - that the Kirk/TOS part of it was stupid. Thats the reason he says he didn't want to be in it.
     
  19. Xavier_Storma

    Xavier_Storma Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Location:
    Duesseldorf, Germany
    Not quite as much as XI's mess... and the characters and their story were much more credible. Central themes like coping with Death, chosing a life went through the film. It felt epic in scope... condamn me... it is still my favorite TREK film to date. :p
     
  20. Xavier_Storma

    Xavier_Storma Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Location:
    Duesseldorf, Germany
    The point is not the magic blood... it is the whole setup.

    Why do they need to capture Khan to get that blood sample, if they have 72 (!!! ) other augements waiting ON BOARD there.

    Plus... this magic blood leads to something, they have created with that transwarp transporter.
    Essentially you do not need starships in this reality anymore. Every single person, who watches the movie (as is capable of logical thinking) will ask him/herself the essential question: why didn't Starfleet use the transwarp transporter to follow Khan to Kronos?
    The same problem occurs when you think the return from the dead through to the end: You now have the magic blood... death is history.

    So, in essence TREK 3 doesn't need starships, nor doctors. The heroes cannot die anymore. That's loss of impact, loss of drama, although I am sure, that Orci and Kurtzman will simply forget that ridiculous plotpoint in the sequel.

    Just lay back and enjoy the SFX, action ride, and do not pay to close attention to logic.
    New TREK is like TRANSFORMERS and G.I. JOE. Simple, absolutely dumb, loud entertainment which is in essence about nothing but nice visuals and SFX.
    Enjoy it as such, or leave it alone.