STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

[flemm]

This is why the target audience is NOT Star Trek fans.

Well, they're certainly part of it. These movies are fan service overload.

I have several friends who are big Trek geeks, but I'm the only one who ever posts about it online. And we have different opinions about the movie and stuff. Imagine that

It's mainly online in threads like this where you get this factional thing, where it's the "whiney fanboys" against the movie's aggressive cheerleading squad.

Actually everyone I saw the movie with was taken out of the film by the Khan "quote" or whatever you want to call it, including myself, though I'm open to reassessing that upon second viewing.

 

[mattman8907]

i just realized they cut the scene of scotty hugging Uhura when Kirk "dies"

 

[Gepard]

Hooray! Welcome to the club.

And of course, having said this, after a night sleeping on it all the dumbass parts of the movie have risen to prominence in my mind. Why the hell did Khan hide the Augments in torpedoes, of all things? And why on Earth did Admiral Marcus know about it, and leave them in situ when he sent them to the Enterprise? (It's the latter that really bugs me; I could just about buy this as a way of Khan smuggling his crew out, since he knew the admiral would want to ship the torpedoes out at some point, but that would require the admiral to not know about it. The way it played out is just dumb.)

Actually everyone I saw the movie with was taken out of the film by the Khan "quote" or whatever you want to call it, including myself, though I'm open to reassessing that upon second viewing.

I find myself glad that I knew about it ahead of time; it reduced the impact. It was still dumb, but it was sort of like having already seen it so it didn't seem as bad.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I've seen it twice and didn't notice any different audience reaction to that scene than to any other on either occasion. I laughed both times, because I got a kick out of it - I can't swear that I was completely alone in laughing, but I must have been one of a very few.

 

[Belz...]

This is why the target audience is NOT Star Trek fans.

Well, they're certainly part of it. These movies are fan service overload.

They put stuff in for the fans, yes, but the movies are mainly directed at general audiences. Otherwise they wouldn't make the money they make.

Why the hell did Khan hide the Augments in torpedoes, of all things? And why on Earth did Admiral Marcus know about it, and leave them in situ when he sent them to the Enterprise?

I see two options: either he wanted to use the Augments on the Klingons and weaken them before invading, or he thought of killing two birds with one stone: killing Khan with the very torpedoes containing his people, and bombard Qo'Nos and start a war, conveniently wiping out the only witnesses (the Enterprise).

 

[JarodRussell]

They put stuff in for the fans, yes, but the movies are mainly directed at general audiences. Otherwise they wouldn't make the money they make.

Could we please finally stop with this "fans vs. general audience" fallacy? It's wrong. It doesn't exist.

Especially the notion that a film "made for" fans is boring for non-fans. Who the fuck came up with this?

And when you've been "part of the general audience", and you become a fan of one film, is the sequel suddenly "not made for you", because you are no longer "part of the general audience"?

 

[Gepard]

I see two options: either he wanted to use the Augments on the Klingons and weaken them before invading, or he thought of killing two birds with one stone: killing Khan with the very torpedoes containing his people, and bombard Qo'Nos and start a war, conveniently wiping out the only witnesses (the Enterprise).

Probably not the former, given that the warheads were still active. The problem I have with the latter is that it just seems like a bizarre and frankly roundabout way of cleaning up his mess. The guy's involved with Section 31 and has the clout to build and captain a ship like the Vengeance. If he wanted the Augments gone, why not just dump them in an incinerator somewhere and hide the paperwork?

When it was revealed that Marcus sabotaged the warp core and stranded the Enterprise on purpose, my first thought was that he intended the Klingons to find what appeared to be a Starfleet ship smuggling supersoldiers into their space, and that that would be the pretext for war. But then it turned out that the torpedoes were live and Marcus did want them to be fired on Kronos, so...

The frustrating part about all of the Khan/Augment stuff is how close it comes to making sense, and yet...not...quite. I feel like they could have given that element another pass and really polished it up. Alas.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The khan-sickles in the torpedoes was a weakness in the plot, no doubt about it. Not a critical flaw; some of my favorite movies have ridiculous plots - see Raiders Of The Lost Ark, for instance.

 

[EnsignRedshirt]

Saw the film last night and really enjoyed it.

Action packed, of course, that's inevitable, but my primary concern, as it usually is with Trek, is how the moral themes are presented, which I think the film did a decent job of doing.

I liked the themes of vengeance and what kind of disastrous consequences it can have and the importance of rising above the desire for pure revenge.

The only thing I really didn't care for was the Spock vs. Kahn chase and fight at the end. Jumping from conveniently placed transport to the next felt really cheesy in a Star Wars prequel sort of way.

Might sound weird, but this film, for me, had the most "Deep Space 9" feel of any of the Trek films. Aside from Section 31, the whole morality of war and what ordinarily "good" Starfleet officers will do in the name of "saving" the Federation was fairly well done.

And they crashed that god-awful ugly Vengeance ship. Good riddance to that monstrosity.

Good film, though, I'd love them to explore something a bit more "out there" and "unknown" in the next film without such a clear "bad guy". Maybe if Abrams doesn't helm the next one we could see that happening.


Sorry, all over the place here. I'm still digesting the thing and need to see it again.

 

[Belz...]

Could we please finally stop with this "fans vs. general audience" fallacy? It's wrong. It doesn't exist.

Of course it does. By definition, in fact. Many, many people who go see Into Darkness have either never seen a Star Trek movie or series or have not been fans of the franchise. They are, by definition, not fans, and therefore unlike fans they are unconcerned with minutiae and continuity. This is the distinction I am making, and when you make a movie, your principal objective is to make money so you can make more movies, so appealing to the larger set of people who are not die-hard fans is a better strategy.

And when you've been "part of the general audience", and you become a fan of one film, is the sequel suddenly "not made for you", because you are no longer "part of the general audience"?

No, that is a total misrepresentation and over-analysis of what I was saying.

When it was revealed that Marcus sabotaged the warp core and stranded the Enterprise on purpose, my first thought was that he intended the Klingons to find what appeared to be a Starfleet ship smuggling supersoldiers into their space, and that that would be the pretext for war. But then it turned out that the torpedoes were live and Marcus did want them to be fired on Kronos, so...

I think the Klingons were meant to find the Enterprise after the torpedoes were launched. Marcus intercepted the ship only when he realised the plan was going sour.

And they crashed that god-awful ugly Vengeance ship. Good riddance to that monstrosity.

I actually like the Vengeance. I agree that it's ugly, but in the right way. It looks like something section 31 (or the Galactic Empire) would dream up as their version of the Enterprise.

 

[JarodRussell]

They are, by definition, not fans, and therefore unlike fans they are unconcerned with minutiae and continuity.

Minutiae and continuity in a work of fiction has nothing to do with fandom. They are just details within the fictional world someone is building. Good work makes sense, bad work doesn't. If an author is concernced with creating a thoroughly thought out universe, you receive that. Think Tolkien. He wrote his universe FULL of minutiae, according to your logic, for the general audience, since he didn't have a fan base to begin with.

There is no connection between audience reception and internal continuity. There is no connection between good/bad and made for fans/made for non-fans. Seriously.

 

[Belz...]

Minutiae and continuity in a work of fiction has nothing to do with fandom.

Well, they are the sort of things that only fans are concerned about, so I'd say they have something to do with it.

Good work makes sense, bad work doesn't.

Well, that's not entirely true. While I agree that good products are better received and are a better long-term investment, it's not like movie studios never cut corners for increased short-term profits.

Think Tolkien. He wrote his universe FULL of minutiae, according to your logic, for the general audience, since he didn't have a fan base to begin with.

Again, that is a total misrepresentation of what I said. I do believe I've made it clear.

There is no connection between audience reception and internal continuity. There is no connection between good/bad and made for fans/made for non-fans. Seriously.

I never said there was. What do you think I'm saying, anyway ?

 

[GMDreia]

I, for one, loved the design of the Vengeance. I loved the way it was filmed, how it filled up the screen. I loved seeing something that was that huge and warlike and devastating, but for once belonged to humans. And I loved the fact that we finally got a story focused on Section 31. This was what I wanted in a Trek film, and to me, it was the best film since TUC (and addresses some of the same issues). I love seeing the unsanitary things that go on behind the scenes of the Federation, that give you the utopia we all see. Star Trek throughout its history has been filled with cloak and dagger and corrupt Starfleet captains and admirals.

I have mixed feelings about the use of Khan. I just didn't buy that he was Khan. When he said "MY NAME IS KHAN" in the bridge, the first thing that went through my head was, "sure you are". I still don't really buy it on some level, for some reason. But the character was enough of a force of nature that I found myself feeling, "okay, I'm scared sh**less of you, whoever you are".

It was a great story. I suspect with a different actor, I might have bought that he really was Khan. A more charismatic, warmer actor might've brought a different quality to him. NuKhan didn't so much seem old school leader as he seemed weapon in human form.

HOWEVER - I also feel that in this day and age, this is exactly how Khan would've been written.

Nonetheless, you really can't escape the fact that the character of Khan comes with fifty years of lore baggage.

But on the whole, this stands out as one of my very favorite Trek films.

 

[Belz...]

Look, JarodRussell, all I'm saying is that random moviegoers usually don't care whether some character said something 20 years ago that contradicts another line in the new movie. The only people who mind are those who, like me and, I assume, you, have a working knowledge of Star Trek lore. Moviemakers (and not just those who work on Trek) may attempt to please fans for various reasons, but their target is the largest possible audience, and sometimes this means doing something that will not please fans in order to please the rest of the viewers.

You said the distinction doesn't exist, but it does, just like the distinction between any demographics exists. Different people want different things, and depending on who you're depending on to make your business work, you will try to appeal to them, and usually the hard-core fans that go over minutiae happen to be a small minority.

By the way, I love your avatar. It looks like Arnie is going to kill me.

 

[poundpuppy29]

I loved this movie

It had everything that I love in scifi movie action adventure witty comedic moments & great character moments

A+ is my grade

 

[TommyW]

I actually quite liked the "KHAAAAAAAAAAN" line. Especially how it flowed straight into the Vengeance almost ramming the Enterprise as it dived through the atmosphere. Definitely got the pulse racing that bit.

By the way - did the film actually explain how the hell Khans blood is compatible with a Tribble?

 

[Belz...]

I have to admit that, when he yelled KHAAAAANN!! I thought it was a bit much and started to grin, until the Vengeance came into shot and I went "Holy mother of--".

 

[CaptainStoner]

I actually quite liked the "KHAAAAAAAAAAN" line. Especially how it flowed straight into the Vengeance almost ramming the Enterprise as it dived through the atmosphere. Definitely got the pulse racing that bit.

By the way - did the film actually explain how the hell Khans blood is compatible with a Tribble?

I don't think it did explain the medical science. It was just McCoy at a workbench in the middle of sickbay. Any explanation would have been technobabble anyway. But it worked for me. McCoy was able to throw the super-regenerative switch somehow by using a sample of Khan's blood.

An annoying fan's scoffing affected some of my experience, such as with Quinto screaming KHAAAAnnnnn...honestly the worst part of the last two films was the geek with a bug up their ass two seats to my left each time.....I thought the line was delivered all right though....there's no topping Shatner in this regard, but it was delivered well, and Spock vs. Khan was awesome.

 

[flemm]

By definition, in fact. Many, many people who go see Into Darkness have either never seen a Star Trek movie or series or have not been fans of the franchise.

Well, of course some of the people in the seats are already fans, and some are not. As a literal distinction, it exists.

But that is not the point JarodRussell was making. What he's saying is that there is no easy way to distinguish between aspects of the film that connect with those two groups (or not). It's not "fans VS the general audience."

A similar sort of comparison would be something like the Avengers. Was this movie made for (1) comic fans, (2) fans of the comics and the other Marvel movies, (3) fans of only the other movies, (4) people who had never seen any of the prior movies and never read a comic in their lives?

Well, all of those groups, really. Doubtless that is part of its appeal.

Edit: In passing, that's one reason why it's so appealing for Hollywood to constantly revamp or reboot existing properties. To varying degrees, a large chunk of the audience already recognizes it and understands, broadly speaking, what it is about.

That's part of what makes the "general audiences vs. fans" idea a fallacy.

Take James Bond, as a good example.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

I see two options: either he wanted to use the Augments on the Klingons and weaken them before invading, or he thought of killing two birds with one stone: killing Khan with the very torpedoes containing his people, and bombard Qo'Nos and start a war, conveniently wiping out the only witnesses (the Enterprise).

Probably not the former, given that the warheads were still active. The problem I have with the latter is that it just seems like a bizarre and frankly roundabout way of cleaning up his mess. The guy's involved with Section 31 and has the clout to build and captain a ship like the Vengeance. If he wanted the Augments gone, why not just dump them in an incinerator somewhere and hide the paperwork?

When it was revealed that Marcus sabotaged the warp core and stranded the Enterprise on purpose, my first thought was that he intended the Klingons to find what appeared to be a Starfleet ship smuggling supersoldiers into their space, and that that would be the pretext for war. But then it turned out that the torpedoes were live and Marcus did want them to be fired on Kronos, so...

The frustrating part about all of the Khan/Augment stuff is how close it comes to making sense, and yet...not...quite. I feel like they could have given that element another pass and really polished it up. Alas.

Khan revealed in the Brig that he was attempting to smuggle them out in the torpedoes he designed, but was not able to follow through on the plan.

This tells me Admiral Marcus was unaware the augments were on those Torpedoes.

Khan surrendered when he realized his men were in those advanced torpedoes, and did not want his crew killed.

He also correctly realized that Kirk likely came in person, even though the weapons would have been the easy way to kill him, and thus was someone of conscience he could manipulate into helping him.