STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]
- Thread starter Agent Richard07
- Start date
So what if a handful of Nibiruans saw a colossal... thing... rising out of the ocean? Most ancient cultures had stranger tales than that in their mythologies.
What was the point of the underwater ship anyway? It's a hiding place? What a ridiculous way to hide the ship. Considering the state of technological development on Nibiru, the Enterprise crew could have operated freely and without risk of being seen simply by working at night.
In of the many interviews released it's either Quinto or Cumberbatch describing those as garbage scows.
That reminds me of a bit I loved in the final fight. Khan has Spock's head and is doing his skull-crushing finishing move, and Spock counters with a mind meld! Khan screamed and let go. Spock was fighting dirty. It was awesome.
I'd been wondering that too. My guess is automated trash haulers, kinda like we saw in Firefly. I don't recall seeing any windows or hint that there was a driver.
I can't wait to get the DVD and see what easter eggs they snuck in there. The last movie had the First Contact Vulcan ship and an ENT Romulan Bird of Prey in the Narada's hangar, and an ENT Vulcan ship zipping through the sky on Vulcan.
Native Americans were astounded by European ships. They included accounts of them in their histories. I think the inhabitants of that planet will likewise do the same with the Enterprise. Personally, I feel there is a difference between a people seeing an alien craft and people being given advanced alien technology.
For scientists, how would a cold fusion device shut down a volcano? And how was that volcano a threat to the planet? Save for the village perched on the slope of the volcano, it didn't seem very threatening to the planet. Super volcanoes are massive - this volcano didn't seem massive to me.
For scientists, how would a cold fusion device shut down a volcano? And how was that volcano a threat to the planet? Save for the village perched on the slope of the volcano, it didn't seem very threatening to the planet. Super volcanoes are massive - this volcano didn't seem massive to me.
Ah, thank you! I assumed correctly
The same way red matter makes a black hole.
The same way the Hobus supernova was a threat to the galaxy.
About Khan. Yeah I thought more about the change in appearance-and why no one seemed to care much about him revealing his real name-was possibly due to him being surgically altered. That rationalization makes me not hate the change as much as I did upon leaving the theater yesterday.
I liked your explanations for some of the other things that happened in the film as well. Not sure if I agree with them, but at least you make the arguments well.
I found the engineering as depicted in this movie wonky. I have already written a thread about the differences between this Enterprise and earlier Enterprises. Warp power goes - there goes the ship.
The worst flaw was the reactor core. How do people service that thing? There are no catwalks. And how does that thing work? I am incapable of understanding how that thing works. I feel there was more thought put into the earlier ships than this one.
And, I learned that this ship has not one, but two shuttlebays. The second shuttlebay has a ingress/egress hatch on the side of the ship. And that this ship has multiple launch tubes located on both sides of the hull. The more I write, the sillier this ship gets.
The worst flaw was the reactor core. How do people service that thing? There are no catwalks. And how does that thing work? I am incapable of understanding how that thing works. I feel there was more thought put into the earlier ships than this one.
And, I learned that this ship has not one, but two shuttlebays. The second shuttlebay has a ingress/egress hatch on the side of the ship. And that this ship has multiple launch tubes located on both sides of the hull. The more I write, the sillier this ship gets.
Good point. That rules it out as plausible 23rd century technology.
I have to say, seeing so much of 23rd century San Francisco was pretty awesome. On my next viewing I'll try to determine what streets they're showing. It almost looked like they ran down Howard St. but I can't be sure.
Chu'lak
Lieutenant
I'm going to put a list together when i am more awake today, but one thing we have always heard aboutbuting haven't seen before are mooring clamps. They are always telling the helm to clear them, and it was finally nice to see them and the Enterprise cast off away from the dock.
I have finally seen the movie, and wow... I was blown away... I totally loved everything about the film..! I think the characters were very well written, especially the dynamics between Kirk and Spock; their evolving friendship and the theme of self-sacrifice forms the heart of the film, and to me, this felt more like ST than most other ST Movies... It's a shame that so many reviewers are over-analysing story details, just like what happened in 1980 with The Empire Strikes Back... It may be hard to imagine now, but back then, TESB got very mixed reviews...
STID reminds me somewhat of Monsters Inc. If you analyse the story, it makes no sense that there's a CDA, since the head knows that children aren't poisonous... Over analyse story-details of Monsters Inc. and you could come to the conclusion that it's a bad plot and therefor a bad movie... But then you miss all the wonderful humour, and the wonderful chemistry between the characters... For me, STID is the same.
STID reminds me somewhat of Monsters Inc. If you analyse the story, it makes no sense that there's a CDA, since the head knows that children aren't poisonous... Over analyse story-details of Monsters Inc. and you could come to the conclusion that it's a bad plot and therefor a bad movie... But then you miss all the wonderful humour, and the wonderful chemistry between the characters... For me, STID is the same.
Was just about to put this in the favorite scene thread. Surely one of the better Enterprise sequences in this film, I'm pleased we got so many this time, and that the ship may be finally viewed on screen from so many angles and perspectives, as opposed to the first movie.
The new impulse drive at the end is awful, btw. The oval one was better, so 50's...
went to the nine o'clock showing last night and the theater was deserted. there was a total of 6 people there and 4 of them were with me.it was playing on four screens and i checked all of them and there was virtually no one there.i wonder how well this movie will do?box office mojo said it made 2 mil, but great gatsby made double that. thats not a very good sign.......
went to the nine o'clock showing last night and the theater was deserted. there was a total of 6 people there and 4 of them were with me.it was playing on four screens and i checked all of them and there was virtually no one there.i wonder how well this movie will do?box office mojo said it made 2 mil, but great gatsby made double that. thats not a very good sign.......
I live in a small community and we don't usually have anyone in the movie theaters. For instance, I saw '09 and Contagion, The Adjustment Bureau, and The Dark Knight Rises in an empty theater. There were 10 people in the theater during the performance I went to.
I forgot to say this about Khan. This man no way resembles II's version. He is more menacing, smarter, and a more sympathetic character (at least for awhile). Watching Enterprise crew members fly out of the ship because a Federation ship was firing on them at warp, is heartbreaking for those that value Starfleet. I thought Spock was incredibly well-written and well-acted, in his dialogue. Just some other thoughts on the movie.
I thought there were a number of occasions where this happened. For instance, Kirk is all gung-ho to follow his orders and "track the bastard down", despite the fact that both Spock and Scotty and to some extent even McCoy "lecture" him that he's wrong.
Spock tells him that hunting someone down and killing them without a trial is against Starfleet directives and morally wrong. Further he tells Kirk he needs to take a little time to think about it to arrive at this conclusion himself. Spock seems to have faith that once Kirk calms down, he will do the right thing. Scotty tells him that they are supposed to be explorers, not military personnel. Kirk is still travelling on the momentum of grief until he sits down in the Captain's chair to inform the crew of their mission. Maybe it was the extra weight of the responsibility of the chair itself, or maybe the echos of Pike's accusations that he was not ready for it finally settle, but almost in mid-sentence Kirk has a change of heart and informs the crew that he will personally go down to Kronos, capture "Harrison" and return him to Earth to face trial.
Is that not exactly a character stepping back from emotions to show how you should respond? (if indeed this is some mandatory requirement of a Trek story.)
I don't know about all this "crew lecturing" and why it's so important, but a number of characters do exactly this.
Pike gives Kirk the ultimate "lecture" at the beginning of the movie. Remember? 'You think the rules don't apply to you because you disagree with them. You use luck to justify playing God. One day you'll get yourself and everyone under your command killed. You don't respect The Chair because you're not ready for it."
Again, Spock lectures Kirk on the morality of what amounts to a government-sanctioned assassination. Scotty lectures Kirk on the merits of exploration over war. Spock lectures Uhura on making assumptions about someone's feelings. Kirk lectures Spock on elevating slavish adherence to rules over friendship. How many more "moral lessons" do you want the characters to impart?
I thought the theme of the movie was quite apparent and was referenced in a variety of ways, driving the point home strongly.
You didn't think her blood-curdling scream was a reaction?
He doesn't have the years of experience Prime Kirk had, that's true, and he feels that lack acutely. But Kirk has intuition and smarts and, as he calls it, his "gut feeling". These attributes have almost always served him well.
No, it's not really explained in words, but I felt their burgeoning affection was apparent in a number of their scenes. When Kirk tells Spock he'll miss him. When, even having been assigned to other ships, their eyes seek out each other during the Harrison briefing (not in a homoerotic way, just because each has become used to getting the others' feedback). Kirk's hand on Spock's shoulder after Pike's death. Their effective and often complementary working relationship, despite their philosophical hurdles. Spock's belief in Kirk's reaching the right decision on his own. Spock's familiarity with Kirk's deflecting his valid arguments with name-calling. Kirk's seeking Spock's approval when he finally makes the right decision to arrest rather than obliterate Khan. Spock's ability to accurately guess Kirk's decisions without words, based only on his familiarity with Kirk's thought processes.
Really, I thought all these things were very clearly telegraphed in the movie.
Seriously? I thought the whole movie was one character-building scene after another. Obviously I was getting a lot more out of it.
Giving up your life for your crew without a second thought is selfish? You have awfully high standards then.
But that's the thing about strong emotions. They evade your control.
Okay, well, at least somebody impressed you.
NOW for the nit-picks? O.M.G. I thought they WERE the nit-picks!
I'm still on the fence about the broadside tubes. In the old galleon days they made sense because most combat happened close, and a cannon fired a dumb projectile.
The torpedoes in Star Trek are smart, in the sense that they can be aimed in various ways (preprogrammed to hit a target a certain way). I think the only advantage of the torp launchers shown in STID is the sheer number of projectiles that can be fired off simultaneously. We've gone from 2 front and 1 rear in the prime universe, to 2 front, 1 rear, and 6 on each side.
Kirk doesn't listen. He goes full-boar into seeking revenge. Scotty is mentioned in my review. And his consequence for speaking out? He's kicked off the Enterprise.
Well, that theory is all good until he decides to beat the crap out of Harrison on Kronos. Super strength is the only reason he doesn't kill him. Then he proceeds to tell Harrison, full of rage, that the only reason he isn't ending him is because is "allowing it." He's playing god. He then uses Harrison after he proves himself to be competent in his information. That's what keeps Harrison alive. And then he orders his death, or at least subdued on the Vengance. Military, indeed.
Every one of those characters, when they are tested, in action, gives the same response. And I covered that in the previous post. For instance, when Spock is tested, his motivation for getting Khan is not to eliminate the threat, that is secondary, to seeking revenge for Kirk dying. Uhura stops him from killing him out of vengeance simply because they need his blood. Spock sought revenge. I don't care what he said earlier in the film, when tested, he came unglued. There was no variation on this theme. We never saw an appropriate response. One is what is on paper, the other is experience. Their training said "this is bad," but when they had the chance to learn why, they just tried to kill as much as they could.
As for Kirk and Spock, there is no reason for it given. They just love each other, nothing hinted as to why. No explanation even as they are seeing each other in Kirk's last moments. We see the love, we don't see why. I want to know why they bonded.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Poll
