STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

[Ln X]

How is Picard not going completely overboard in that scene?

I think your grading Star Trek Into Darkness on a Modern Trek scale. The original show had big bombastic emotional characters. What we see on the screen fits perfectly with the Star Trek I grew up with.

Picard does go overboard, he reaches this emotional climax but then finally realises what is happening to him. The scene's best bit is when he simmers down. Whereas in the nuTrek's style, Picard smashes that phaser against the display and then we cut to some action scene or climatic development. That would have been JJ Abram's approach, once an emotional climax has been reached let's hurtle to the next action scene or over-dramatic moment.

And yes I grew up with modern Trek, it's the only Star Trek I watch. I have seen bits and bobs of TOS and it is a product of its time. It was Star Trek in its infancy and a prototype in using a sci-fi drama to explore social issues, so we can forgive any such flaws or weird moments.

But the new Trek films are supposed to be about reinventing the franchise, acknowledging the original series whilst taking elements from TNG and DS9 (where Star Trek developed its maturity). The 2009 Star Trek film did this pretty well, but STID seems several steps backwards and if anything is a devolution into the Star Wars genre. I think Star Trek should stop worrying about being relevant and stop trying to compete with action blockbusters (it is not an action or science fantasy franchise!). If the story and the characters are great then Star Trek can still retain its identity and still be a little nerdy and ponderous.

If a movie like Inception can be made and make hundreds of millions in the box office, and Inception is as weird as they come and it taxes the audience's brain which STID sadly doesn't, then why should Star Trek have to come down to the low standards of today's films? Star Trek did not develop through avoiding risks; which is why VOY and ENT lead to the franchise's demise.

 

[BillJ]

But the new Trek films are supposed to be about reinventing the franchise, acknowledging the original series whilst taking elements from TNG and DS9 (where Star Trek developed its maturity).

I think you misunderstand the point of this reboot. Kirk and Spock are Star Trek. What exactly would be the point of bringing them back if you're simply turning them into Picard and Data?

I think you're taking what you wanted the movie to be and deciding that was the motive of making it. Nowhere do I remember them talking about taking elements from the other series other than as nods to those fans. I also love how a show that talked about revenge, rape and destruction of entire worlds somehow wasn't mature. It was every bit as mature as any of its offspring.

 

[Opus]

So.... you don't want it to make money...

 

[Ln X]

STID cranks the emotion factor to 11

Which is why some of us had such a great time watching it! I wish "Nemesis" had had an emotion factor of 11. They killed off my favourite character and yet I shed not one tear.

Wow! That was one of those ocassions were a movie nearly did make me cry, I have never actually cried while watching a movie but when I watched Nemesis for the first time, I couldn't believe when they killed Data!

I rarely go the cinema, and nearly all the films I watch are at least seven or more years old

Ah, so perhaps this film was not made with you in mind?

You are no longer part of the cinema-going public, but it looks like JJ was partly successful because you did venture out for this film!

If I hear about a movie that intrigues me, no way am I waiting seven years before picking it up on DVD.

I do not wait around seven years to pick up an intriguing movie for DVD. What I'm trying to say is that my DVD collection rarely contains movies which are rather new or recent. It's like a spectrum from the seventies all the way up to the mid 2000s.

Having read some reviews of STID before the movie (I've never been all that concerned with spoilers) I thought I knew what to expect. Everything was praising this movie and saying how better it was compared with the Star Trek 09 movie, so I thought I would be in for a real treat. When they said there was a great villain and much more moral complexities and stuff, I really did think that STID was a return to form of modern Trek albeit with a bit more pace, more action and more soapy moments.

The beginning made me feel right at home,but afterwards it just went downhill, the first half had some promise but it never really delivered and when STID started exhibiting the signs of what poor movies do: flaky plot, poor characterization, bad pacing, OTT drama, a lack of cinematography, plot points that go no where, and lastly cheap shots of flesh. I was left wondering what the critics and everyone else found so good about this movie. It's like the reverse of everyone trashing the film and to your surprise it's actually pretty good, with STID it was the reverse.

 

[Therin of Andor]

But the new Trek films are supposed to be about reinventing the franchise, acknowledging the original series whilst taking elements from TNG and DS9 (where Star Trek developed its maturity).

Who says that's what the new films are "supposed" to be? Maybe you supposed this, and if the films don't meet your exact supposition you are disappointed?

I thought they were supposed to simply be reviving the franchise from its awful Voyager/Nemesis/Enterprise popularity slump and to start the franchise making big bucks again. That is my supposition and the films have done that - and more!

 

[Ln X]

I think you misunderstand the point of this reboot. Kirk and Spock are Star Trek. What exactly would be the point of bringing them back if you're simply turning them into Picard and Data?

I think you're taking what you wanted the movie to be and deciding that was the motive of making it. Nowhere do I remember them talking about taking elements from the other series other than as nods to those fans. I also love how a show that talked about revenge, rape and destruction of entire worlds somehow wasn't mature. It was every bit as mature as any of its offspring.

I liked ST 09 and it had far more maturity and depth than STID had.

So.... you don't want it to make money...

It would make half the money, but if you halved the budget then Paramount would still be getting the same proportion of returns from its investment. You half the budget by trimming down the special effects, being far more careful and measured with the action scenes and cutting down on a bloated advertisement and promotion budget.

But with JJ's approach, the next Star Trek movies will still make as much money as STID. But by that time the franchise will be all but unrecognisable, for me anyway STID sets a very ominous tone for future Star Trek movies. All I can say is this; it will become really obvious when (and if) the third movie arrives.

That's why I hope STID is the last Star Trek movie for some time, the franchise either needs to take a long breather of several years or it spawns a new series. The nuTrek characters just would not work in a series format, again it is pretty obvious why, so we would need a new setting and a new crew. But now it's about the money and new ST movies are the best way to milk this franchise.

 

[BillJ]

But with JJ's approach, the next Star Trek movies will still make as much money as STID. But by that time the franchise will be all but unrecognisable, for me anyway STID sets a very ominous tone for future Star Trek movies. All I can say is this; it will become really obvious when (and if) the third movie arrives.

Star Trek Into Darkness looked and felt like Star Trek to me and I'm a fan of The Next Generation and Enterprise as well.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

None, as Kirk was brought BACK FROM THE DEAD, rendering the poorly kid plot point entirely redundant.

If you think set-up scenes are redundant, I have a thing or two to tell you about narratives.

Yes, that was a pretty ridiculous statement. One might make some argument that the tribble scene was redundant - not a particularly persuasive one, but an argument nonetheless - but the opening with the child was proper set-up.

It's remarkable that some people are so quick to pronounce the "lazy writing" sentence on any story they dislike, then others turn around and go after writers when they do it right.

 

[Therin of Andor]

It would make half the money, but if you halved the budget then Paramount would still be getting the same proportion of returns from its investment. You half the budget by trimming down the special effects, being far more careful and measured with the action scenes and cutting down on a bloated advertisement and promotion budget.

Yeah Paramount, think small!

Wasn't that fans' complaints about STs II, III, V and VI?

But with JJ's approach, the next Star Trek movies will still make as much money as STID. But by that time the franchise will be all but unrecognisable

No, it'll still be Star Trek.

 

[Shazam!]

One might make some argument that the tribble scene was redundant - not a particularly persuasive one, but an argument nonetheless - but the opening with the child was proper set-up.

Horseshit. It set one thing up and then did an entirely different thing later on. You may as well have had him be able to shoot balloon animals from his ass.

As ridiculous as it is, the tribble scene was actually the superior set-up scene because it, y'know, set something up which actually paid off later in the film.

However, had they used McCoy to do a little research on Khan, discover the miracle child and then use that as a reason to run tests on the tribble it would have a. given McCoy something to do b. tightened that particular plot thread and c. rendered both the opening and tribble scene vital to the plot. As it stands now you could literally edit out the opening scene and lose nothing from the story.

 

[JarodRussell]

But if you edit out the opening, why is the father turning into a suicide bomber?

 

[Shazam!]

You'd literally just start with the explosion. Is he ever brought up again or do they just say that Khan bombed some building?

EDIT: Remembered that he was brought up later in the briefing but my point still stands that you could lose that scene(s)

 

[Belz...]

If you think set-up scenes are redundant, I have a thing or two to tell you about narratives.

It's not a set-up scene if you set-up one thing and then do an entirely different thing later on.

Entirely different ? The blood saves the girl from a deadly condition, and later saves Kirk from a deadly condition. How is it even slightly different ?

That would have been JJ Abram's approach, once an emotional climax has been reached let's hurtle to the next action scene or over-dramatic moment.

I don't get that. There's plenty of action in the movie but there's also quite a bit of dramatic tension and chatting. Did you guys all miss that ?

It would make half the money, but if you halved the budget then Paramount would still be getting the same proportion of returns from its investment.

But why would they lose hard cash ? To please you ?

 

[Shazam!]

Entirely different ? The blood saves the girl from a deadly condition, and later saves Kirk from a deadly condition. How is it even slightly different ?

Being dead is entirely different to being alive.

 

[Pingfah]

You'd literally just start with the explosion. Is he ever brought up again or do they just say that Khan bombed some building?

Yeah, why bother with any details, nuance or setting the scene. Hell, why bother with any of the film at all? Just start the film at the final ceremony, a voiceover can explain the rest.

 

[Shazam!]

why bother with any of the film at all?

Good point.

 

[Pingfah]

You should take that advice then, these folks will be all the better for it.

 

[Belz...]

Entirely different ? The blood saves the girl from a deadly condition, and later saves Kirk from a deadly condition. How is it even slightly different ?

Being dead is entirely different to being alive.

He was only mostly dead.

 

[Shazam!]

Inconceivable!

 

[Therin of Andor]

You may as well have had him be able to shoot balloon animals from his ass.

Bonus scenes of the DVD and Blu-Ray. Wait till you see it in 3D!