STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

[Franklin]

Kirk's KHAAAAN in TWOK made no sense. he knew he was just buying time for Spock to repair the enterprise and beam them out in 2 hours. Was that just theatrics to fool khan into thinking he didnt have that ace up his sleave?

Yes. Kirk's shout was pure theatrics. He wasn't aware they'd get to hang out in the area Marcus created, but he knew Spock and the Enterprise would be back, soon.

Is it possible that the present filmmakers didn't catch on to that? Admittedly it's possible to miss it when first seeing TWoK, at least if you first saw it with a boisterous audience during premier weekend in 1982. Maybe if Shatner had winked at the camera after doing it...

I think they would have known Kirk was selling it to Khan. The thing is, over time, it's become considered a rather humorous moment in the movie because of Kirk's emoting. It's also become a bit of a meme over time. What I'd like to know if the writers of STID actually talked about the potential baggage associated with using the line, or if it was put in without question.

It was a risk because undoubtedly, it will take some movie-goers out of the moment (*SNICKER* "KHAAAAAAN!" SHATNER *SNICKER*) at a time when they should be feeling as agonized as Spock is. But what else is Spock supposed to do? He's going off like a volcano. It's a powerful moment, and if fans and others can't stay in the moment and separate it from the more cheesy use it pays a certain homage to, then too bad for them.

Maybe if they hadn't been so faithful to TWOK death scene, so by the time he lets out the yell everyone is thinking about TWOK, fewer would make the immediate association, too.

 

[Phily B]

I loved the first film ST09 despite some significant plot holes. I was more a TNG fan and liked those films (well the one with the Borg anyway) but was never really a TOS fan. Only film I like in the series was the 4th one.

Anyway I had no expectations for ST09 like a lot of people and it was really good. I hadn't been following any news about it on the internet.

Maybe some true trek fans couldn't get used to seeing new faces as their favourite character but not being a dedicated TOS fan, this was not an issue for me. I have seen the other movies though so know the plots.

Which is why this was was disappointing. There is no originality. Why couldn't they come up with a new villain? A guy I used work with is a huge Star Trek fan and has been trying to avoid spoilers so the identity of the villain was a surprise to him and he thought exactly the same thing I did. I don't mind seeing characters like Khan even in a minor role but not the main villain again please.

Special effects great but the story could have been a bit more cerebral - or a lot more and you could still have plenty of action.

Plus as I've said before I was hoping Pike didn't die. I wouldn't even have minded so much if it was essential to the plot but I think Kirk getting into trouble, demoted, Pike saving/choosing him again was like the first film all over again. Plus I think the plot was forced to get Kirk to be captain just like in ST09.

Again maybe because my expectations were so high I was a bit disappointed. A friend who doesn't like Star Trek at all even knew who Khan was so was wondering why he was in it 30 odd years later? She asked was the actor not too old!?

Plus bringing Kirk back?

I thought Abrahms said there was no poing in re-hashing old Star Trek films or words to that effect?

It's a good film but I don't think it will be in anybody's top ten

My favourite movies are the ones where they're using characters from the series they originated from - FC and TWOK. I have no problem with a nuverse prequel to TWOK.

 

[Oso Blanco]

Science Officer 0718, played by Joseph Gatt.

He reminded me of a Borg, somehow ...

 

[F. King Daniel]

Science Officer 0718, played by Joseph Gatt.

Wormhole will be thrilled - leading zeroes on eerie cyborg crewmen!

 

[Franklin]

Great Gatsby: 38% fresh
Iron Man 77% fresh
Oblivion: 56% fresh
The Croods: 69% fresh

STID after 44 reviews: 89% fresh

Obviously a good thing. Although it does bear mentioning that, after about the same number of reviews, Iron Man 3 had been sitting at about 93%. It took a bit of a tumble, as you can see.

Still though, very much looking forward to it opening here.

If it gets 180 reviews by opening (IM3 has 189 right now), it has 132 to go the last time I checked Rotten Tomatoes (48 reviews, 43 fresh -- 90 percent). That means a lot of reviews pouring in, soon.
For it to be 78 percent fresh (IM3) in 180 reviews, the remaining 132 reviews would be only 73 percent fresh. If it did IM3 numbers (78%) with those remaining reviews, it would finish at 81% fresh. I'm still thinking around 85%. You never know, though.

 

[StarMan]

This sounds like a mocking of TWOK rather than a homage to it.

(also the scene where Kirk is dying and they put their hands up on the glass, he doesn't say 'because I'd miss you' like StarMan mentioned, they actually say 'because I'm your friend' - obviously recalling back to WoK.

Ah. Cheers. I didn't think I had it quite right. Thanks stargirl (great username, BTW).

I don't want to sound like I hated it... I just have sad feelings as someone that has looked forward to this for years, and has loved trek for my whole life :/ But it's good! and fun! honestly

I feel much the same. I know it's a dangerous thing to build anticipation to dizzying heights, but I really was expecting something with more depth and more... guts, for want of a better word. The emotional resonance wasn't there, and attempts to elicit it felt artificial.

I'm sorry, but I'm rather disappointed by this. All the preview material let me think I would like this.

Welcome to the Meh-sayer's Club, est. Summer 2009. There's not many of us, but we're glad to have you all the same. Pull up a chair.

Yeah, feels weird to be on the other side now.

Indeed. I'm thinking to myself: What did I do wrong? Did I not *watch* the movie the right way? Long day at the office to blame?

 

[donners22]

To me, Spock yelling it seems like it would be one of the most emotionally poignant parts of the movie. It doesn't deserve comparison to the cheesy version, even if the writers invited it. There's far more gravitas this time. It's sincere. It conveys true pain and loathing.

The problem is that there's no real gravitas to the scene at all. The whole thing comes off as either bad fanfic or a parody IMO, and there's just not the same level of attachment to the characters. It's undercut further by the blatently telegraphed cheat out of the situation.

I rewatched WoK a few days ago and, even having seen it many times, Spock's demise still got to me. This scene just made me want to laugh all the way through out of the sheer audacious ridiculousness of it all.

 

[empty]

Logging in for the first time since 2011...(!)

Great movie, I'm very happy right now!

Having avoided all trailers and most pre-release info, and having had no expectations regarding something Star Trek for the first time since forever, I was really pleasantly surprised by the story, pacing and especially all the callbacks to classic Trek (except for the Tribble and original Spock, both of which had me groaning).

The story, to me, was still quite predictable, especially the Khan reveal and the warp core sequence, but I didn't really mind, especially considering that they switched up a lot of the references in fun ways. Actually, that's probably the most appropriate way for me to describe the movie: fun. The dialogue was amusing throughout, emotionally involving where necessary, and generally appropriate to the characters.

The more I think about the movie right now, the more problems I do realize - the over-usage of two people talking at the same time, or the unnecessarily shoehorned in Uhura-Spock romance subplot.

Instead of overthinking, though, I'm going to relish in the great escapism this movie offered me for two hours and the inventive, respectful and skillful re-imagining of a world of characters and events which will always remain very close to my heart.

A+!

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

I saw it. I'm still buzzing far too much to form coherent sentences about it.

Here's what I didn't like:
Spock's "KHAAAAAN!" which was unbelievably awful. The reverse Wrath of Khan was a nice idea, but Kirk's miraculous revival right afterward made it feel cheap.

What I did like: EVERYTHING ELSE. Bring on the next one!

Ugh. I knew that was a bad idea.

I'm hoping on a rewatch I can get to the point of liking everything else. It was fun to watch, but I did not expect the most cringeworthy scene in Star Trek to occur in this movie. I was quite shocked.

When Harrison said his name it was thrilling, I had quite bought into the idea by then that he wasn't Khan. It was said so simply and it worked so well that though Kirk and co did not have any association with that name we knew exactly who it was.

I think Khan didn't have as much power and build up in this in part because he had no followers to command. That's a big part of him in Space Seed and TWOK, we see his charisma in how people believe in him and follow him. As a rogue agent he doesn't have that.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Indeed. I'm thinking to myself: What did I do wrong? Did I not *watch* the movie the right way? Long day at the office to blame?

That's so hilarious because the same thoughts were going through my head!

 

[gottacook]

Sorry, but I don't care a whit about percentage- or histogram-type rankings of how other people feel about the movie; what opinions I may form will have nothing to do with how others react.

I still don't know whether I will see it in a theater. I have no problem admitting that the 2009 movie did not get any ticket money from me. Nor has any Trek movie since First Contact.

Leaving entirely aside the question of just who the villain is and why he's adopted a life of villainy, I don't see why (i) having established a new "reality" we need to have appearances by guest characters we've met before, or (ii) the filmmakers thought a crew so new to each other (in reality as well as in movie-time) would be shown to best advantage in a great-big-3D-villain story, as opposed to something with a little subtlety.

 

[Count Zero]

One thing I do wonder is how this film - especially regarding all those little references and name dropping - comes off to non-fans or casual fans? Is it distracting? Do they even notice or would it be part of an organic story to them?

The thought crossed my mind while watching, at the mention of Section 31. It makes me wish I could forget everything I know about Star Trek for a couple of hours to find out whether the movie would hold up on its own merits.

 

[Ensign_Redshirt]

My analysis of STID.

The plot: While many are probably gonna say that STID is a remake of "Space Seed" and/or TWOK, the plot of the movie actually seems to be like a highly condensed version of Season 4 of Star Trek: Enterprise. S4 of Enterprise featured Human Augments, Section 31 (including a S31 operative named Harris), the threat of war with the Klingons because of the Augment/Section 31 interference, and finally Peter Weller in the role of a (human) villain. Does any of this sound familiar?

The theme: The movie's over-arching theme can best be summarized by nuKhan's line "Is there anything you wouldn't do for your family?" NuKhan's main motivation for his actions throughout the movie is that he wants to protect/save his own men. His motivation is mirrored by Noel Clarke's character, a Starfleet officer who agrees to suicide-bomb a Starfleet facility after nuKhan promises to save the life of that officer's daughter. In the beginning of the movie, we also see Kirk breaking the Prime Directive in order to save Spock's life and in towards the end of the movie Kirk (almost) sacrifices his own life in order to save his ship and his crew. So, the answer the movie gives to the question at the bginning of this paragraph is "yes"... we break the rules, commit crimes and even are willing to give our own life in order to protect our own "family".

The politics: STID flat-out calls the U.S. government's drone warfare policies and the practice of extrajudicial killings of terrorists both illegal and amoral and is surprisingly blunt about its stance. It also seems clear that the destruction of Vulcan now serves as an allegory on 9/11 since it lead to a a far more aggressive Starfleet (and apparently to a more agressive Section 31 as well). The jet-black paintjob and the very angular design of the USS Vengeance was also somewhat reminiscent of the design of the F-117 Nighthawk.

Final observation: Peter Weller playing a character named "Alex Marcus". No kidding!

 

[Shazam!]

what else is Spock supposed to do? He's going off like a volcano. It's a powerful moment

Is hulking out Spock's new thing now? Are we going to watch future movies waiting for the obligatory Spock freak out?

 

[beamMe]

One thing I do wonder is how this film - especially regarding all those little references and name dropping - comes off to non-fans or casual fans? Is it distracting? Do they even notice or would it be part of an organic story to them?

The thought crossed my mind while watching, at the mention of Section 31. It makes me wish I could forget everything I know about Star Trek for a couple of hours to find out whether the movie would hold up on its own merits.

Non-fans will not notice the the in-references (the boyfriend didn't).

Did the audience in your cinema laugh out loud at all the appropriate moments in the film too?

 

[F. King Daniel]

My semi-random thoughts and observations. Massive and detailed spoilers

-The character interaction. It was all wonderful. They weren't a military organization, they were a family.

-Sulu's badass message for Harrison ("Remind me never to piss you off.")

-The TOS references. McCoy birthing Gorn triplets?, Kirk and co. taking Harry Mudd's confiscated ship.

-I'd have cut McCoy's arm off and beamed him up when he got stuck in the torpedo.

-Kronos! I have no idea what was going on with Praxis (was it crashing into Kronos? It looked as though it had already exploded) but it looked beautiful from space. The planet's surface looked suitably awesome and apocalyptic too.

-Khan's epic one-man massacre of three or four Klingon Birds-of-Prey and their crews. "April's Gun" was seemingly just an internal name for it, with no relevence to the film itself.

-The entire film looked amazing.

-And it was topical.

-And packed one hell of an emotional punch.

-Nimoy cameo! Possibly the most fanwanky moment in Trek history. In the good way

-I really wish Spock hadn't yelled "KHAAAN!", it took me right out of the movie. It was bad.

-Was the death scene was a line-for-line recreation of the WoK original? I recognized some phrases but assumed most of the dialogue was new. I guess I don't have WoK memorized. I didn't pick up on the Khan blood cure, and really thought the film would end with Spock in the gold shirt!

-Kirk was sent back to the academy, but then made first officer under Pike, then becomes captain again when Pike dies. Spock is transferred away then back again before he can leave. Scotty resigns. All is back to normal by the end. They squeezed a lot into two hours!

-Science Officer 0718. Hearing Madeline's weird voice. The rest of the cool new aliens.

-The brig glass with magic movable/resizable hole. VERY cool.

-Chekov's fear and the music when Kirk tells him to "go put on a red shirt"

-Future Earth! Seeing busy streets with cars and civilians was utterly surreal after decades of Starfleet compounds and sleepy backsteets. Loved it.

-Khan's skull-crushing finishing move.

-The USS Vengeance was seemingly built in a TMP-style drydock (albeit an enclosed one) in orbit of Jupiter.

-Scotty's attempt to run across the Vengeance's cargo bay

-The Enterprise has side-mounted torpedo launchers, like canons on an old sailing ship.

-Avoiding details about Khan's backstory. They say he's a relic from 300 years ago, and mention some of his regime's unpleasent goals, but go no further.

-The addition of cure-all blood to Khan's backstory (which although somewhat odd it doesn't contradict anything directly). But why did they have to capture him at the end and use his blood, when they had 70+ of his fellow supermen on board?

-Not actually seeing the S.S. Botany Bay. Meh.

-Turns out you CAN show a battle at warp with the new swirly blue warp FX.

-LOTS of fanservice. Although I think they went way too far with the WoK remake and scream, the rest I loved.

-Seeing nodels of the NX-01 Enterprise, NX-Alpha and Ringship Enterprise in Admiral Marcus' office made me smile.

-Khan ends the film on ice and not dead. Good choice!

-I'm gonna have to see this film again. Soon.

 

[Deck 1 - Bridge]

I've had a headache all day building up to seeing this film as I've read some mixed reviews and online fan forums have been beside themselves with rage about the plot and main protagonist so I approached Star Trek Into Darkness with excitment but also with a degree of foreboding.

As a Star Trek fan, I want good Star Trek films but Star Trek films need to be commercially successful and and commercially successful Star Trek doesn't necessarially mean good Star Trek and therein lies the problem with the JJ Abrams 2009 reboot of the Star Trek franchise, this manifests itself particularly in the latest instalment.

It's an amazing film to look at but:

This isn't a good Star Trek film, it is a good popcorn flick but one that is ultimately forgettable in the final analysis. It feels as if JJ Abrams creative staff have taken the best of the established Star Trek universe and thrown it together with clever cinematography and a big budget but without any thought or deference to what made it good in the first place. The characterization of the Enterprise crew is taken for granted in that Shatner et al established the characters and one is left with the impression that the portrayal of the Enterprise crew is a triumph of style over substance. Why was Nimoy there? This is Die Hard in space and a blatant rip-off of an earlier Star Trek film that even now stands the test of time in terms of story and spectacle - for this reason alone I cannot forgive this film. It's fanwank from production people who aren't fans but thought they knew what fans wanted but who also know that 95% of the target audience won't know anything about the film this is ripped off from.

Benedict Cumberbatch's appearence is probably the films saving grace in stark contrast to the instantly forgettable Alice Eve and the main cast struggle through lazy writing that attempts to stand on the shoulders of a science fiction film of repute and fond memory.

Star Trek wasn't ever just action and adventure, it was there if you wanted it, but underneath there was heart and soul and a more subliminal message of inalienable values, friendship and loyalty, this is missing from this incarnation of Star Trek because what has been done is so contrived.

Go and see it, if you aren't a fan you'll find it perfectly entertaining but if you are a Star Trek fan you may just find yourself sat there getting increasingly angry at the arrogance of JJ Abrams who assumes he can reimagine a particular piece of Star Trek folklore and make it better.

He can't, Star Wars needs to be better than this if this is his best effort.

2.5/5

 

[Xaios]

a blatant rip-off of an earlier Star Trek film that even now stands the test of time in terms of story and spectacle

I had to stop reading here. Story, I'll give you that one. But spectacle? Please. Roger Ebert panned the space battles in Wrath of Khan when it first came out in 1982. Sure, some of the movies had beautiful visuals, but that's a far cry from being a spectacle. Before ST09, the only Star Trek movie that had really succeeded with the "spectacle" side of things was First Contact.

 

[Count Zero]

Did the audience in your cinema laugh out loud at all the appropriate moments in the film too?

Probably also at some inappropriate ones. I didn't take exact notes of it but the witty lines, obviously funny moments and the jokes all got laughs.

The theme: The movie's over-arching theme can best be summarized by nuKhan's line "Is there anything you wouldn't do for your family?" NuKhan's main motivation for his actions throughout the movie is that he wants to protect/save his own men. His motivation is mirrored by Noel Clarke's character, a Starfleet officer who agrees to suicide-bomb a Starfleet facility after nuKhan promises to save the life of that officer's daughter. In the beginning of the movie, we also see Kirk breaking the Prime Directive in order to save Spock's life and in towards the end of the movie Kirk (almost) sacrifices his own life in order to save his ship and his crew. So, the answer the movie gives to the question at the bginning of this paragraph is "yes"... we break the rules, commit crimes and even are willing to give our own life in order to protect our own "family".

The politics: STID flat-out calls the U.S. government's drone warfare policies and the practice of extrajudicial killings of terrorists both illegal and amoral and is surprisingly blunt about its stance. It also seems clear that the destruction of Vulcan now serves as an allegory on 9/11 since it lead to a a far more aggressive Starfleet (and apparently to a more agressive Section 31 as well). The jet-black paintjob and the very angular design of the USS Vengeance was also somewhat reminiscent of the design of the F-117 Nighthawk.

Those are some excellent observations. I didn't make the connection to the drone policy at all but you're right about that.

-The addition of cure-all blood to Khan's backstory (which although somewhat odd it doesn't contradict anything directly). But why did they have to capture him at the end and use his blood, when they had 70+ of his fellow supermen on board?

I wondered about that, too. They even had one of them unfrozen earlier. I suppose it was the only way that would make Spock not killing Khan believable.
You could rationalise it that way: McCoy had only experimented and created a serum out of Khan's blood. The other guy's blood might be different (e.g. blood type) and they couldn't unfreeze anyone else because time was of the essence.

 

[Deck 1 - Bridge]

a blatant rip-off of an earlier Star Trek film that even now stands the test of time in terms of story and spectacle

I had to stop reading here. Story, I'll give you that one. But spectacle? Please. Roger Ebert panned the space battles in Wrath of Khan when it first came out in 1982. Sure, some of the movies had beautiful visuals, but that's a far cry from being a spectacle. Before ST09, the only Star Trek movie that had really succeeded with the "spectacle" side of things was First Contact.

The uniforms, the bridge, the military and naval overtones, the music, the pacing, the human drama, the cinematography of the film generally, the 1700's style of 2 starships running alongside each other while firing, I could go on and on! I saw TWOK at the age of 12 and went out and bought the soundtrack album the following day, won't be doing that with this, can't say I'll even rent the DVD at this stage TBH.

The fact that a couple of crappy effect shots don't ruin the film is a significant factor in my opinion of this.