The holodeck is a TAS thing (The Practical Joker) and Q is just reuse of the Trelane concept (The Squire of Gothos).
Why can't I have a Kirk vs. Borg film? TNG used all types of characters/races/concepts from TOS.
STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]
- Thread starter Agent Richard07
- Start date
The holodeck is a TAS thing (The Practical Joker) and Q is just reuse of the Trelane concept (The Squire of Gothos).
Why can't I have a Kirk vs. Borg film? TNG used all types of characters/races/concepts from TOS.
I wouldn't mind seeing that at all. By the way here's what Lindelof said a few days ago in an interview.
I wouldn't hold my breath for nuTNG. If it ever does happen, I can't see it happening before 2025 at the earliest.
Just got a quick question: At the end of the film I have heard there is a "Space; the Final Frontier..." scene before the credits roll. Can someone tell me who speaks? Is it Spock Prime again?
Is there any scene after credits?
I mean at the end of the films right before the end credits. The final scene of the film. Like in Star Trek (2009), where we see a shot of the Enterprise, and Spock Prime does the "Space: The Final Frontier..." narration. I've been told that there is one, and that whoever narrates it says "five year mission" as opposed to "ongoing mission". Was just wondering who narrates it this time around. Whether it is Spock Prime again, or someone else.
After the last credits roll the screen stays black and you can hear JJ breathing.
Hm, i'm pretty open-minded about this reboot but i do have to draw the line at the Borg...
Just a personal preference though...
I want Kirk to face a terrorist cell of rogue Vulcans led by Sybok. Everything non-Vulcan about them can be blamed on Vulcan blowing up.
There are no future TNG movies and there won't be.
No Borg. Please. Initially the Borg were unique as Trek villains. They had no leaders, just a relentless hive mentality. There was no reasoning with them. Their motive was simple: conquer and absorb. Perpetuate the species. Come in like swarms of locusts and destroy everything. No great depth. Just great power and unthinking terror. That concept was mostly ruined with the focus on a Borg queen in FC. Not that FC wasn't good, but allowing them to be personified in one individual (the queen) who had personal motives and reasoning kind of defeated the purpose of creating them. They became no different than any other villain.
★★★ (out of 5)
Well, that was kind of underwhelming...
It probably won't surprise anyone here that I've been a huge Star Trek fan since I was a child, but I feel I need to state that first because some of my frustrations with the film probably stem from its inconsistency with the lore and spirit of the Trek universe. I mean, those are hardly the movie's only problems, but I imagine someone unfamiliar with Star Trek beyond the 2009 movie might be much more forgiving of some of those flaws and be able to just lean back and enjoy the ride. Because the "ride" part is certainly the one thing this movie mostly excells at. The pacing is breathless, the visuals impressive, the actors charismatic, and the action often exciting, even as some of the action scenes, and indeed the entire structure of the film's plot, often feel like a mere rehash of its predecessor.
Despite greatly enjoying J.J. Abrams' first installment, I'll admit I went into the sequel with some reservations, due to some persistent rumors about the villain and to the marketing materials seemingly working very hard to downplay the "space adventure" element and the fact that this is, indeed, a Star Trek movie. It turns out at least some of those concerns were unfounded, as the parts with people in leather jackets running around planet surfaces shooting guns are much less prominent than I feared and the majority of the action does take place on starships in space, involving a lot of familiar characters and places. I was, however, right about the villain (or villains, as it turns out) being quite problematic. The movie has two major villains, one of them, Admiral Marcus, a personified jumble of convoluted conspiracy theories (not too surprising, given screenwriter Bob Orci's political views), the other, John Harrison/Khan, a blurred cypher without any background information or clear motivations, whose menace only becomes apparent in the context of the story when it's spelled out by a wholly gratuitous cameo appearance. I mean, everybody who has seen TWOK knows that Khan is bad news, but I felt this was never properly set up in this movie outside of the Old Spock cameo. I almost suspect they were hesitant to delve into Khan's backstory to avoid dealing with the whole "Eugenic Wars in the late 20th century" thing, but I do think some more more background info on the character would have been necessary. As it stands, it barely has any relevance to the story that Harrison turns out to be Khan and he could have easily been replaced with an original character to much better effect. The lack of clear character motivations makes for a pretty convoluted story, that paradoxically still manages to remain utterly predictable at every turn.
You may wonder at this point why I still gave the movie an "above average" rating, when I clearly disliked so much about it. Well, as I hinted at in the beginning, I do think there is a lot to like about it on a technical level, and I do think that many non-Trekkies will probably enjoy it a lot more than I did. (Which is ironic, seeing that they worked so hard to shoehorn in quite a few contrived Trek references "for the fans.")
In fact, I think most everyone who worked on this movie did a pretty great job except for the screenwriters, which makes this the second year in a row where my biggest movie-related disappointment of the year was co-written by Damon Lindelof (although to be fair, the other two writers have been responsible for a fair number of clunkers over the years, as well). I'll probably rewatch the movie at least once to see if I can ignore its problems and just enjoy the more fun elements, but for now, I'm going to have to say it was mostly a letdown for me.
Well, that was kind of underwhelming...
It probably won't surprise anyone here that I've been a huge Star Trek fan since I was a child, but I feel I need to state that first because some of my frustrations with the film probably stem from its inconsistency with the lore and spirit of the Trek universe. I mean, those are hardly the movie's only problems, but I imagine someone unfamiliar with Star Trek beyond the 2009 movie might be much more forgiving of some of those flaws and be able to just lean back and enjoy the ride. Because the "ride" part is certainly the one thing this movie mostly excells at. The pacing is breathless, the visuals impressive, the actors charismatic, and the action often exciting, even as some of the action scenes, and indeed the entire structure of the film's plot, often feel like a mere rehash of its predecessor.
Despite greatly enjoying J.J. Abrams' first installment, I'll admit I went into the sequel with some reservations, due to some persistent rumors about the villain and to the marketing materials seemingly working very hard to downplay the "space adventure" element and the fact that this is, indeed, a Star Trek movie. It turns out at least some of those concerns were unfounded, as the parts with people in leather jackets running around planet surfaces shooting guns are much less prominent than I feared and the majority of the action does take place on starships in space, involving a lot of familiar characters and places. I was, however, right about the villain (or villains, as it turns out) being quite problematic. The movie has two major villains, one of them, Admiral Marcus, a personified jumble of convoluted conspiracy theories (not too surprising, given screenwriter Bob Orci's political views), the other, John Harrison/Khan, a blurred cypher without any background information or clear motivations, whose menace only becomes apparent in the context of the story when it's spelled out by a wholly gratuitous cameo appearance. I mean, everybody who has seen TWOK knows that Khan is bad news, but I felt this was never properly set up in this movie outside of the Old Spock cameo. I almost suspect they were hesitant to delve into Khan's backstory to avoid dealing with the whole "Eugenic Wars in the late 20th century" thing, but I do think some more more background info on the character would have been necessary. As it stands, it barely has any relevance to the story that Harrison turns out to be Khan and he could have easily been replaced with an original character to much better effect. The lack of clear character motivations makes for a pretty convoluted story, that paradoxically still manages to remain utterly predictable at every turn.
You may wonder at this point why I still gave the movie an "above average" rating, when I clearly disliked so much about it. Well, as I hinted at in the beginning, I do think there is a lot to like about it on a technical level, and I do think that many non-Trekkies will probably enjoy it a lot more than I did. (Which is ironic, seeing that they worked so hard to shoehorn in quite a few contrived Trek references "for the fans.")
In fact, I think most everyone who worked on this movie did a pretty great job except for the screenwriters, which makes this the second year in a row where my biggest movie-related disappointment of the year was co-written by Damon Lindelof (although to be fair, the other two writers have been responsible for a fair number of clunkers over the years, as well). I'll probably rewatch the movie at least once to see if I can ignore its problems and just enjoy the more fun elements, but for now, I'm going to have to say it was mostly a letdown for me.
Just got back from a second viewing, and the consensus over drinks among six of us was that it's either the Klingons or Borg next time. Star Trek 3 : The Wrath of Khan was also discussed...but it would have to be out of those three you'd think.
Audience reaction wasn't as exuberant tonight as opening night, but the film still got a rousing round of applause at the end. I can't see anything that will stop this film making squillions, and I still stand by my initial impression that only a few minor changes to the opening and closing 15 minutes would have made this film just about perfect.
As an old school TOS fan I give this one 8/10. My long suffering wife who is just a casual Trek watcher absolutely loved it, and thinks it's the best one yet.
A few random thoughts :
- I am now aboard this Enterprise. I want lots more films. I now care about these guys, and I want to see what the five year mission has in store for them.
- Khan needn't have appeared in the film...it would have worked just fine without him.
- Chris Pine impressed everyone we saw it with, and new-Kirk seems to really be growing on people now, after a mixed reaction last film
- Nobody disagrees that Scotty and Bones are the stars of this series, and if the next film was nothing more than the two of them on a pub crawl, I'd be more than happy
- Not sure what the point of Carol Marcus was...
- Perhaps they shouldn't have unmasked that Klingon...much more mysterious with those hoods on
- Karl Urban and Simon Pegg are just brilliant. I think DeForest Kelley and Jimmy Doohan would be thrilled at how these two have interpreted Bones and Scotty.
-For TOS fans, I picked up throwaway lines referencing : Mudd's Women, The Apple, ST : TMP...
I agree
I thought the Borg were really scary until the queen was intoduced in FC and VOY. Though I do like the Borg queen immensely. But by introducing her they made the Borg as a whole less intimidating.
I don't really want the Borg or Q vs nuTOS because I think they need Q vs a stuffy captain and nuKirk certainly isn't that.`
And do you want Kirk to actually defeat the Borg when Picard couldn't or do you want the Borg to kick Kirk's ass. I think Kirk needs to be freakin awesome in the next movie.
I saw the film on Thursday in 3D, and have to admit.... I absolutely loved it.
I thought it was better than the 2009 film, and it did relate back to TOS and specially Wrath of Kahn very well.
Can' wait for the next one, hope it isn't another 4 years. Though with JJ Abrahms taking up Star Wars, I fear it might be.
I thought it was better than the 2009 film, and it did relate back to TOS and specially Wrath of Kahn very well.
Can' wait for the next one, hope it isn't another 4 years. Though with JJ Abrahms taking up Star Wars, I fear it might be.
I wouldn't hold my breath for nuTNG. If it ever does happen, I can't see it happening before 2025 at the earliest.
Trek 13: 2016
Trek 14: 2019
Trek 15, TNG: 2022?
Maybe Trek 14 can be the nuTOS nuTNG crossover?
Plz new screenwriters though, for the love of Q !
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Poll
