The other Augments were frozen and couldn't be revived without the proper somethingorother sequence, as McCoy said. To try to do so would kill them. Thus they couldn't be used to harvest blood.
STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]
- Thread starter Agent Richard07
- Start date
I don't really seriously care or lose sleep over it.
But while we're here killing some time we have to discuss this stuff.
Generally true. However, we're all here in a little Trek community. What its members think about the movie we're discussing is very relevant. Polls are relevant.
You can't just count on the most vocal members' discussion to see what the deal is.
True,also. Box office success is not always an indicator of quality.
But other than our personal taste & opinions, box office, critics and BBS polls are all we have. And if they all tend to agree, then there's probably something a moviemaker did right.
I'm thinking that Khan (hey I kind of got a thrill typing that..) made the little girl sick in the first place. There wouldn't be much they couldn't cure but I'm sure he came up with something. Identified someone in the right position he thought would be vulnerable, targeted his family and then offered him a solution. What I don't understand is why Khan didn't just blow the place up himself when he had access to it? Is it because he wants to erode Starfleet from the inside by freaking them out that one of their own could do that?
I also don't understand why Marcus thought there was any safety in allowing John Harrison to hang out in Section 31, surely the most dangerous place ever to install a eugenics superman. It seems that initially Khan had him sucked in and he believed they were working together.
When Marcus tells the assembled captains that the transmission he received from the bomber says he was being "forced" to do it by John Harrison it made me think that the bomber wasn't just offered his child's life, he was threatened with losing his wife or other family members as well.
I also don't understand why Marcus thought there was any safety in allowing John Harrison to hang out in Section 31, surely the most dangerous place ever to install a eugenics superman. It seems that initially Khan had him sucked in and he believed they were working together.
When Marcus tells the assembled captains that the transmission he received from the bomber says he was being "forced" to do it by John Harrison it made me think that the bomber wasn't just offered his child's life, he was threatened with losing his wife or other family members as well.
What? You must not have been paying attention. Did you go for a toilet break at any time? Ducked out for extra popcorn?
It hasn't opened here.And because they decided to make their own Kahn film, I'm waiting to borrow it from the library. But from the Spoilers I've read here and elsewhere, it doesn't sound like he learns why he should not have revealed the ship to the primitive aliens at the start of the film. Even at the cost of Spock's life. I know Pike has a long talk with him. So what am I missing that says he agrees he screwed up?
Well it seems wrong to be telling you what happens when you could see it for yourself tomorrow, but as you have hinted that this won't be happening, and seeing as you asked...
Pike lays out the riot act for Kirk and details Kirk's screwups. It was a survey mission, not a rescue. He should never have sent his first officer into the volcano in the first place. He does what he likes and uses luck to justify his actions. He doesn't have an ounce of humility. One day he'll get himself and everyone under his command killed. He doesn't respect the chair because he's not ready for it. It's a pretty comprehensive bollocking. Kirk tries to argue that Pike hired him because he's a rule breaker and that he hasn't lost a single man. That point's quite important to Kirk, obviously his own personal measure of success, but Pike won't have a word of it and informs Kirk he's lost command of the Enterprise.
As the movie progresses, we see Kirk face every single one of these faults. His luck deserts him. His surrogate father is brutally killed and he can do nothing about it. He can match his opponent with neither brain nor brawn. He's not in control of anything. Things go from bad to worse. His crew argue his every decision to a standstill. He is forced to question his own inadequacies and realise that Command is no longer easy.
What does he learn? The fragility of life. That he bears the responsibility for every life under his command. At one stage. when the Enterprise is beaten and the enemy turns her guns on them for one final salvo, Kirk is forced to turn, look every member of his bridge crew in the eye and apologise, because his bravado and thirst for revenge has just gotten them all killed.
He learns that luck will not always be on his side. He learns that he doesn't have the knowledge or training to do his job and when others tell him he's wrong, he should listen. He learns that he is often driven by emotion, and that leads him to make bad, immoral decisions. He's forced to admit that he has no idea what he's doing. And in the end, he learns that he's not immortal and when the only thing he's got left to give is his life, he gives it. And right at the end, he also learns that he's afraid of death.
As the movie progresses, we see Kirk face every single one of these faults. His luck deserts him. His surrogate father is brutally killed and he can do nothing about it. He can match his opponent with neither brain nor brawn. He's not in control of anything. Things go from bad to worse. His crew argue his every decision to a standstill. He is forced to question his own inadequacies and realise that Command is no longer easy.
What does he learn? The fragility of life. That he bears the responsibility for every life under his command. At one stage. when the Enterprise is beaten and the enemy turns her guns on them for one final salvo, Kirk is forced to turn, look every member of his bridge crew in the eye and apologise, because his bravado and thirst for revenge has just gotten them all killed.
He learns that luck will not always be on his side. He learns that he doesn't have the knowledge or training to do his job and when others tell him he's wrong, he should listen. He learns that he is often driven by emotion, and that leads him to make bad, immoral decisions. He's forced to admit that he has no idea what he's doing. And in the end, he learns that he's not immortal and when the only thing he's got left to give is his life, he gives it. And right at the end, he also learns that he's afraid of death.
I'm not sure exactly how much more the movie could have torn down Kirk's ego in 132 minutes. From a character perspective at least, I thought it was a very powerful journey, powerfully acted. I'm not sure why some commentators are criticising the movie of being devoid of character focus. To me, the VFX were just surface decoration for those willing to look no further. This movie is ALL about the character journey, about the heart and soul of this franchise, about making the journey from cadet to captain, about not letting a thirst for vengeance turn you into your enemy. While I enjoyed ST2009, I never really embraced the new characters, especially Kirk, or thought it felt like "Trek". This movie completely turned that on its head for me.
This had all the character interaction and "feel" of Trek that I so missed in the first movie.
Sure it has its problems. Kirk's journey from captain, to academy, back up to first officer and back up to captain again is no less rapid and contrived than it was in the first movie, but this time every promotion comes with a hefty slice of humble pie. Kirk's childlike fantasies about the shiniest ship in the fleet and a five-year mission become very adult, messy realities.
The movie has leaps of logic and technical contrivances that move characters around the chess board quickly, but that makes the plot "dense" rather than scattershot. It's no worse than any other Trek outing in that respect. Leave it to the next technical manual to fanwank all that into some semblance of order. It is certainly aimed at the modern movie-goer, but more in the delivery of the visual quality that audiences expect and in the pace at which it asks you to switch gears rather than simple "dumbing down". What sort of anthropological assessment is justified in calling a whole generation "dumber" than the one that went before. Was there some genetic crisis that I missed?
Anyway, I think you should go along and give it a go. At least that way your opinion on what the movie does and doesn't deliver can be a fair and informed opinion, rather than wishful thinking.
^Increased patrols after the destruction of Vulcan.
What I'm thinking is they will be able to explain every out of time super tech from this point on by saying it was developed a lot sooner because of the increased militarization of Starfleet as a response to Vulcan's destruction.
That's fine. I was hoping it wasn't something daft like old Spock had told them about it or something.
Yes, although I wish they had explained it slightly different, through the Kelvin's destruction.
INTO DARKNESS takes place one year after STAR TREK. So, within one year they found Khan, revived him, introduced him to the technology of the 23rd century, let him develop all kind of super-secret programs and build the Vengance within what... less than a few months?
That works.
Is it stated specifically that it was within that timeframe?
I expect this thread will have 'sploded by the time I wake up.
Mostly, but who knows when Marcus started his secret starship project.
I am getting on, I've been watching Trek since TOS was first on.
TWOK is my faveourite film of all time.
I've been to Into Darkness twice now. I love it, it's a great film.
I like what they did with the scenes from TWOK, this film IS Star Trek.
It doesn't matter if you see it or not, it doesn't matter if you like it or not it is still Star Trek.
Anyone who is avoiding it just because you don't like the spoilers, do yourself a favour, go see it.
The worst thing that will happen is your preconceptions will be proved, you might also come away from it having watched a great film.
TWOK is my faveourite film of all time.
I've been to Into Darkness twice now. I love it, it's a great film.
I like what they did with the scenes from TWOK, this film IS Star Trek.
It doesn't matter if you see it or not, it doesn't matter if you like it or not it is still Star Trek.
Anyone who is avoiding it just because you don't like the spoilers, do yourself a favour, go see it.
The worst thing that will happen is your preconceptions will be proved, you might also come away from it having watched a great film.
What? You must not have been paying attention. Did you go for a toilet break at any time? Ducked out for extra popcorn?
It hasn't opened here.And because they decided to make their own Kahn film, I'm waiting to borrow it from the library. But from the Spoilers I've read here and elsewhere, it doesn't sound like he learns why he should not have revealed the ship to the primitive aliens at the start of the film. Even at the cost of Spock's life. I know Pike has a long talk with him. So what am I missing that says he agrees he screwed up?
Well it seems wrong to be telling you what happens when you could see it for yourself tomorrow, but as you have hinted that this won't be happening, and seeing as you asked...
Pike lays out the riot act for Kirk and details Kirk's screwups. It was a survey mission, not a rescue. He should never have sent his first officer into the volcano in the first place. He does what he likes and uses luck to justify his actions. He doesn't have an ounce of humility. One day he'll get himself and everyone under his command killed. He doesn't respect the chair because he's not ready for it. It's a pretty comprehensive bollocking. Kirk tries to argue that Pike hired him because he's a rule breaker and that he hasn't lost a single man. That point's quite important to Kirk, obviously his own personal measure of success, but Pike won't have a word of it and informs Kirk he's lost command of the Enterprise.
As the movie progresses, we see Kirk face every single one of these faults. His luck deserts him. His surrogate father is brutally killed and he can do nothing about it. He can match his opponent with neither brain nor brawn. He's not in control of anything. Things go from bad to worse. His crew argue his every decision to a standstill. He is forced to question his own inadequacies and realise that Command is no longer easy.
What does he learn? The fragility of life. That he bears the responsibility for every life under his command. At one stage. when the Enterprise is beaten and the enemy turns her guns on them for one final salvo, Kirk is forced to turn, look every member of his bridge crew in the eye and apologise, because his bravado and thirst for revenge has just gotten them all killed.
He learns that luck will not always be on his side. He learns that he doesn't have the knowledge or training to do his job and when others tell him he's wrong, he should listen. He learns that he is often driven by emotion, and that leads him to make bad, immoral decisions. He's forced to admit that he has no idea what he's doing. And in the end, he learns that he's not immortal and when the only thing he's got left to give is his life, he gives it. And right at the end, he also learns that he's afraid of death.
I'm not sure exactly how much more the movie could have torn down Kirk's ego in 132 minutes. From a character perspective at least, I thought it was a very powerful journey, powerfully acted. I'm not sure why some commentators are criticising the movie of being devoid of character focus. To me, the VFX were just surface decoration for those willing to look no further. This movie is ALL about the character journey, about the heart and soul of this franchise, about making the journey from cadet to captain, about not letting a thirst for vengeance turn you into your enemy. While I enjoyed ST2009, I never really embraced the new characters, especially Kirk, or thought it felt like "Trek". This movie completely turned that on its head for me.
This had all the character interaction and "feel" of Trek that I so missed in the first movie.
Sure it has its problems. Kirk's journey from captain, to academy, back up to first officer and back up to captain again is no less rapid and contrived than it was in the first movie, but this time every promotion comes with a hefty slice of humble pie. Kirk's childlike fantasies about the shiniest ship in the fleet and a five-year mission become very adult, messy realities.
The movie has leaps of logic and technical contrivances that move characters around the chess board quickly, but that makes the plot "dense" rather than scattershot. It's no worse than any other Trek outing in that respect. Leave it to the next technical manual to fanwank all that into some semblance of order. It is certainly aimed at the modern movie-goer, but more in the delivery of the visual quality that audiences expect and in the pace at which it asks you to switch gears rather than simple "dumbing down". What sort of anthropological assessment is justified in calling a whole generation "dumber" than the one that went before. Was there some genetic crisis that I missed?
Anyway, I think you should go along and give it a go. At least that way your opinion on what the movie does and doesn't deliver can be a fair and informed opinion, rather than wishful thinking.
Wow. Great analysis. If Kurtzman, Lindelof, and Orci didn't intend this and just lucked into it, then they need to read your post and start saying, "Yeah, that's exactly what we were setting out to do. Yeah."
In TWOK, Kirk's real revelation was about how he had so often tricked his way out of death and thought he was a genius for it, but he actually knows nothing. That fits Kirk in STID, too. This Kirk may become an even greater captain than Kirk Prime for having had this revelation so much sooner.
Thanks for the info Gornsky. But, I'm still going to wait.
Khan said he was woken up a year earlier.
Thats interesting as it means that Kirk was probably captain of the Enterprise for more than a year before demotion.
Saw it for the second time again. Still loved it. What's wrong with me?
Still can't work out the pips.
The shoulder pips = ENT rank pips (which are simplified compared to TNG ones, with no half-pips). Sleeve stripes = TOS sleeve stripes. At least, that was my impression.
I noticed that Kirk wore a unique badge on his dress uniform - one identical to the one Admiral Kirk wore in The Motion Picture. The Admirals had a similar-but-different version (gold and stylized), and everyone else wore plain silver arrowheads.
Perhaps the uniform, badge and pips combine to give an extremely detailed account of one's rank and service history, if examined closely enough
I noticed that Kirk wore a unique badge on his dress uniform - one identical to the one Admiral Kirk wore in The Motion Picture. The Admirals had a similar-but-different version (gold and stylized), and everyone else wore plain silver arrowheads.
Perhaps the uniform, badge and pips combine to give an extremely detailed account of one's rank and service history, if examined closely enough
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Poll
