• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Grade the movie...


  • Total voters
    796
So, are we saying that Nemesis and Insurrection were more evolved Trek? Or Enterprise? Really? Was First Contact the cutoff or did the devolution begin earlier?

uJUtFZ4.jpg

"They reboot the franchise, and we fall back. They destroy Vulcan, and we fall back. They change the trinity to Kirk, Spock, and Uhura, and we fall back. Not again. Not this time. The line must be drawn HERE, this far and no further!"

And I will make them pay $8.50 per ticket for what they have done!

:guffaw: And that's just for a matinee where I am!
 
There is something to this. But I think it has to do with devolving Star Trek for mass consumption.

So, are we saying that Nemesis and Insurrection were more evolved Trek? Or Enterprise? Really? Was First Contact the cutoff or did the devolution begin earlier?

uJUtFZ4.jpg

I said before, initially I enjoyed ST 2009. But it wore off fast. They did not write a story with characters I could care about. Other movies have been able to that.
 
I said before, initially I enjoyed ST 2009. But it wore off fast. They did not write a story with characters I could care about. Other movies have been able to that.
It wore off fast because you initially have monkeys in your back that prevent you from enjoying it fully. [sybok]That's why...you need to let go of your pain [/sybok]
 
The Guardian, 4 out of 5:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2013/may/01/star-trek-into-darkness

There's consequently a palpable air of world-weariness about this Star Trek; it's as if Abrams and his writers concluded they couldn't replicate the cockiness and bounce of the first film, and opted instead to allow their characters to grow up a little.

Everyone is a little more battered, a little less dewy-eyed. People are unlikely to charge out of the cinema with quite the same level of glee as they did in 2009; but this is certainly an astute, exhilarating concoction.
 
Well, James is entitled to his opinion regardless of any favors that Abrams may have done him. We don't buy people's approval.

Didn't say anyone did.

But some fans showed a lack of respect for James' efforts, people defended those efforts and his right to interpret Star Trek in his own vision - and then he demonstrated a similar/louder lack of respect for JJ's efforts.

Not so IDIC, eh?
 
How about we let the people who've already seen it contradict or expand on what the actors are saying, rather than attacking someone pointing out what they said.

I hate relentless, dumb, action movies with little character development.

I enjoyed "Star Trek (2009)" and "Star Trek Into Darkness".

I am on Tumblr where every day, I see the excited ramblings of 16-18 year old newly minted Trekkers who saw the '09 film, and now are watching up all of the original series on Netflix.

It's pretty cool. Can't argue with that.

Definitely.

When I found TMP at 21, it became my mission to explore TOS. And TAS.

Interestingly, some TNG fans didn't feel the need to explore everything that had gone before. A strange phenomenon that hit that young sector of fandom was when "Doctor Who" went into hiatus. A lot of those displaced fans jumped to TNG, as demonstrated by the renaming of "Doctor Who Bulletin", to "DWB", to "Dream Watch Bulletin", and its widening in scope from "Doctor Who" articles to general SF media articles (and a huge amount of TNG coverage).

There is something to this. But I think it has to do with devolving Star Trek for mass consumption.

So, are we saying that Nemesis and Insurrection were more evolved Trek?

As I mentioned before, our ST club lost a lot of original members (from the early 70s) when ST IV came out in 1986 and they dismissed it angrily/sadly as what they called "the dumbing down of 'Star Trek' for the masses." For others, it was their favourite ST movie, and its financial and critical success greenlit TNG.
 
Last edited:
I still haven't had anyone convince me Star Trek devolved with these films...

Cadet Kirk promoted to captain?

Such as a not-even-one term US Senator elected as POTUS?
That analogy is bad, and you should feel bad.


A three year cadet of the naval academy becoming commanding officer of an aircraft carrier after one mission, that's the better analogy.


There's a crisis in Japan, but the entire fleet is in the Mediterranean Sea. So they equip several cruisers and aircraft carriers with a bunch of cadets to rush to the emergency in Japan. A rogue cadet who has been suspended illegally boards one of the aircraft carriers, makes his way to the bridge and confronts the commanding officer. He gets promoted to first officer and leads a mission to stop a terrorist weapon. The commanding officer gets captured by the terrorists, the rescue fleet is completely destroyed, and Tokyo is nuked. The second in command exiles the rogue cadet on a deserted island just because they have a difference in opinion. The cadet meets an engineer who got exiled as well. They steal a helicopter and get back on the aircraft carrier. They are brought to the bridge, where the cadet annoys the XO so much that he suffers a major nervous breakdown. After that, everyone is totally perplexed, and the CADET has to take command.
They then proceed to stop the terrorists to nuke San Francisco. The cadet and the XO board the terrorist ship and destroy it.
And then, the cadet gets promoted to commanding officer of the aircraft carrier. Because in that one mission he proved his capability to manage an entire aircraft carrier, and because the fleet apparently ran out of ships and officers.


The story is beyond stupid.


What makes it even funnier is that Kirk gets demoted again after Pike realizes how stupid it was to put him into the Captain's chair so soon.
 
Last edited:
The story is beyond stupid.

What makes it even funnier is that Kirk gets demoted again after Pike realizes how stupid it was to put him into the Captain's chair so soon.

What's sad is this sends the wrong message to young people. We're already seeing people leaving college who think it's an automatic ticket into their career. Only they learn the hard way that,with very few exceptions, everyone starts at the bottom.
 
What's sad is this sends the wrong message to young people.

Heaven forbid. :rolleyes:

We're already seeing people leaving college who think it's an automatic ticket into their career.

Gates, Jobs, Zuckerberg, Turner, Lauren, Ellison, Geffen...

Yeah, yeah, all famous exceptions. Well, the most successful woman I know personally has a GED.

America, at least, has put such an exaggerated emphasis on educational credentialing that it's become counterproductive.

What's the "right message to send to young people:" spend four years piling up $100,000 worth of non-dischargable debt in exchange for an entry-level ticket to a desk in a cube farm?

It's a movie. IDIC.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top