Exactly. What's annoying is the way everybody is treating this so-called "poll" as though it actually reflects the views of all us old-school Trek fans . . . .
5 reasons Into Darkness is a great Trek film
- Thread starter F. King Daniel
- Start date
Exactly. What's annoying is the way everybody is treating this so-called "poll" as though it actually reflects the views of all us old-school Trek fans . . . .
That 87% is the ranking of critics, 91% of people who saw it (229,573), liked it.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_into_darkness/
Maybe the reason financially successful movies are getting good reviews is because they are... good?
I am of the opinion that people are more discriminating with how they spend their money on movies, given that a movie's theater run is much shorter and the home theater experience is much better and more cost effective these days. People are more willing to open their wallets for a movie that is deemed "worth it".
I am of the opinion that people are more discriminating with how they spend their money on movies, given that a movie's theater run is much shorter and the home theater experience is much better and more cost effective these days. People are more willing to open their wallets for a movie that is deemed "worth it".
I agree. If it hadn't been for the actor, MontalKhan would have long since been forgotten. I think Marcus was much the same. The character himself was not well conceived, but Weller made the best of it. But I think that's the trend with most great cinematic villains. There are very few who start out great on the page.
He was evil and even at times maniacal but I thought he also had significant pathos, notably "Admiral Kirk never bothered to check on our progress" and the buried alive monologue.
Allegorical Message:
I thought Into Darkness held a great a message, and was neatly wrapped off with Kirk's speech at the end of the film, about giving in to certain feelings can lead one "Into Darkness". My only complaint was I felt the message got lost at some point about 2/3 through the run.
Opening Sequence:
I have to agree that (now that I recall) this was a lot like a TOS episode feel, and I love the way the Enterprise warped off with the main musical score.
Above Average Villains:
Eh, yes and no. Cumberbatch was awesome, but he is not a good Khan, he is a good John Harrison. I always enjoy a good Peter Weller, and his character was a pleasant surprise.
Emotional Resonance:
I thought the Kirk/Pike scenes were wonderful and the same with Kirk/Spock.
Fun Factor:
Yeah this is pretty much my number one as well, it's just a fun ride that is exciting throughout. Love the effects and the variety of action, though I always want more ship on ship battles (like something out of Nemesis, one of the redeeming qualities of that film).
I thought Into Darkness held a great a message, and was neatly wrapped off with Kirk's speech at the end of the film, about giving in to certain feelings can lead one "Into Darkness". My only complaint was I felt the message got lost at some point about 2/3 through the run.
Opening Sequence:
I have to agree that (now that I recall) this was a lot like a TOS episode feel, and I love the way the Enterprise warped off with the main musical score.
Above Average Villains:
Eh, yes and no. Cumberbatch was awesome, but he is not a good Khan, he is a good John Harrison. I always enjoy a good Peter Weller, and his character was a pleasant surprise.
Emotional Resonance:
I thought the Kirk/Pike scenes were wonderful and the same with Kirk/Spock.
Fun Factor:
Yeah this is pretty much my number one as well, it's just a fun ride that is exciting throughout. Love the effects and the variety of action, though I always want more ship on ship battles (like something out of Nemesis, one of the redeeming qualities of that film).
A
Amaris
Guest
King Lear is the best Star Trek movie ever made.
I agree he had a lot of pathos. He's the perfect villain. He's not - nor ever was - a complex villain. And yet he wasn't quite two-dimensional either. In addition to the pathos, he was imbued with believable motivations for his villainy, and Montaban gave it that extra push. But that film was never about Khan. They developed his reasoning and why he was such a threat early in the film.. not two dimensional but not overly-complex - but they never forgot that the film itself was about Kirk, and Khan was just enough of a wedge to push Kirk from his complacency back to a great captain who needed to learn the toughest lesson of all: the no-win scenario. The film was never about Khan.
Only the original Klingon film. None of those shitty Terran reboots/rehashes ever came close to it.
serenitytrek1
Commander
the fabulous and colourful cast of actors
A
Amaris
Guest
The following includes ST09 as well.
1. It was fun.
2. It is the closest thing to TOS I've ever seen.
3. It was fun.
4. Non-fans actually want to watch it. (neighbors already asked to borrow STID)
5. Did I mention how fun it was?
1. It was fun.
2. It is the closest thing to TOS I've ever seen.
3. It was fun.
4. Non-fans actually want to watch it. (neighbors already asked to borrow STID)
5. Did I mention how fun it was?
the fabulous and colourful cast of actors
I guess Saldana is Alice in this picture?
Pine looks in character. [HERESY ALERT!] You know, he may out-Kirk Shatner. [/HERESY ALERT!]
I was talking about the Wrath Of Khan
Last edited by a moderator:
A
Amaris
Guest
Thank you.
Quinto looks so cute in that pic. 
