Abrams: Star Trek Into Darkness Problems

[Amaris]

I like JJ because he had always been a mature and respectful guy.
Tha said, he's a bit too hard on himself here. Stid had some problems (and star trek beyond will have issues too) but the movie is still pretty much praised by critics.

This. I loved ST09 and STID. Did each have issues? Sure, but then another favorite of mine, ST:TVH had issues of its own that I gladly ignore because it's so much fun. I hate that JJ feels he needs to apologize, because he did nothing wrong. There isn't a single movie made that doesn't have some flaw or another somewhere. Critics will hate something for a myriad of reasons, and it's not always avoidable. No one has 20/20 foresight.

 

[Devon]

I will say that I think one point I might be critical of with "Into Darkness" was it seemed like it had a Beginning and End, but kind of a middle. The story was essentially they chase Khan to Kronos and bring him back home, and there are some shenanigans along the way. The "kind of a middle" was the part that it's a conspiracy and Admiral Marcus wants a war with the Klingons. I think this should have been explored a little more or at least have everything wrap around this a little more. The film did a good job with "peeling" back layers of what was setting up to be the conspiracy, with Scotty discovering the Vengeance, the torpedo tubes, etc.

However, I feel this one criticism is easily made up for with the good qualities of the film.

As for the infamous Kirk death scene, I understand where this tiny segment might come off as a "rip off" (and I think it's HUGELY over exaggerated that the whole film is a "rip off" of "The Wrath of Khan" when it has almost no resemblance to it other than two characters and one scene) that I think it's worth noting something Robert Orci said several years ago, that because of the deviations in this timeline the timeline is trying to "mend" itself. So in someways what happened in one timeline are happening in the other timeline, but with a facelift, so to speak.

 

[Rowdy Roddy McDowall]

I will say that I think one point I might be critical of with "Into Darkness" was it seemed like it had a Beginning and End, but kind of a middle.

STID seemed solid enough for me. But if you must have a weaker third, never let it be the end.

As for the infamous Kirk death scene, I understand where this tiny segment might come off as a "rip off" (and I think it's HUGELY over exaggerated that the whole film is a "rip off" of "The Wrath of Khan" when it has almost no resemblance to it other than two characters and one scene)...

It's an homage. I just wish Abrams could have limited himself to one for STAR WARS. Spare us the umpteenth bad feeling about this. If the homage is different enough (not the case with SUPER 8's collection either), perhaps it's worth filming. Except for his TREKs, Abrams is continuously rehashing the scenes we loved from 1977. But he loves them too much to improve on any.

 

[Jeyl]

I think it's worth noting something Robert Orci said several years ago, that because of the deviations in this timeline the timeline is trying to "mend" itself. So in someways what happened in one timeline are happening in the other timeline, but with a facelift, so to speak.

Does Roberto Orci really deserve credit for something that wasn't even explained in the movie he wrote? He had two movies to explain this and neither one acknowledged it.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Does Roberto Orci really deserve credit for something that wasn't even explained in the movie he wrote? He had two movies to explain this and neither one acknowledged it.

Uh. "It's the same but different" is like the main theme of nuTrek.

 

[Jeyl]

Uh. "It's the same but different" is like the main theme of nuTrek.

And that's unfortunate. Of all the strengths that the Star Trek franchise has had in the past 50 years, rehashing their own stories with an added 'twist' was certainly not one of them.

 

[BillJ]

And that's unfortunate. Of all the strengths that the Star Trek franchise has had in the past 50 years, rehashing their own stories with an added 'twist' was certainly not one of them.

You're right, usually when they rehashed a story (which was quite a bit) there was no twist. The pure fact of the matter is that Into Darkness lifted about four minutes of material from another film but, on the whole, told its own story using a character we were already familiar with.

 

[Kemaiku]

And completely reversed the character rolls in the process. Kirk himself made the sacrifice, at an earlier time in his life. Something of a central plot point to TWoK was Kirk being more willing to stand behind other people and let them die in his place for years.

 

[fireproof78]

You're right, usually when they rehashed a story (which was quite a bit) there was no twist. The pure fact of the matter is that Into Darkness lifted about four minutes of material from another film but, on the whole, told its own story using a character we were already familiar with.

And completely reversed the character rolls in the process. Kirk himself made the sacrifice, at an earlier time in his life. Something of a central plot point to TWoK was Kirk being more willing to stand behind other people and let them die in his place for years.

Indeed. The lynch pin of Kirk's arc in the first two was him accepting responsibility. I recall a running joke that people in ST09 seem to actively avoid the Captain's chair (Spock's run to beam to Vulcan, Chekov to the transporter room, Kirk going on the Narada). I kind of like the idea that Kirk is running from responsibility and the consequences of his actions, right up until the Vengeance catches up with him.

I love the themes of Kirk's growth in both films.

 

[ISS Enterprise]

The entire problem with the movie is the JJ verse reset everything to show anything new can happen, BUT then he makes a partial remake of 2 esipsodes that already happened - Space Seed and TWOK

I was frustrated reading that he wanted Khan as baddie in 2nd movie. You reset teh universe to only go back and repeat stuff with a twist......

 

[Phily B]

People complained about too much homage in ID, but he went up to a whole new level in TFA which was a ridiculous movie.

 

[Kemaiku]

Taking one character and a few minutes of screen time in the combined over 4 new hours, ouch, what you poor people must have had to endure. Almost like being made to watch the other nearly two hours of Wrath of Khan that wasn't at all used in the new movies about twenty times by now.

 

[F. King Daniel]

And that's unfortunate. Of all the strengths that the Star Trek franchise has had in the past 50 years, rehashing their own stories with an added 'twist' was certainly not one of them.

Actually, Trek's been recycling plots for a very long time. The Motion Picture/The Changeling, The Naked Time/The Naked Now, that Voyager episode where Seven was all alone/that Enterprise episode where T'Pol was all alone and so on.

 

[Jeyl]

Actually, Trek's been recycling plots for a very long time. The Motion Picture/The Changeling, The Naked Time/The Naked Now, that Voyager episode where Seven was all alone/that Enterprise episode where T'Pol was all alone and so on.

I said it wasn't one of their 'strengths', I never said they didn't do it. In fact, the list of examples you have kind of help my argument in how rehashing stories doesn't always lead to a good product. The Motion Picture is such a mess of a movie in how it lacks a clear direction and does the crew of the Enterprise a disservice by focusing on newly introduced 'one-shot' characters rather than develop any of the original crew who were all present.

The Naked Now? Star Trek: The Next Generation's first regular episode has our crew doing idiotic things and acting completely unprofessional BEFORE they get the drunk virus. No ranking officer on duty in engineering? Let a kid watch over everything! It's an episode that's so bad the show's writer took their name off the credits because they were so embarrassed by the end result.

And T'Pol being alone? That's not a rehash. That's a blessing. Anytime T'Pol is not alone she's too busy being Archer's bigotry punching bag.

 

[Kemaiku]

Exactly, you're all starting to see why this needed rebooted so badly. Man, it only took seven freakin' years.

 

[Yanks]

You're essentially complaining because he wasn't the right color.

More accurately, "they" are complaining because Cumby is white. Can't have that you know... It's clear they attempted for quite some time to solicit the services of an actor with the correct skin tone for the part but were unsuccessful... so all the "whitewashing" crap has racist undertones.

I love the themes of Kirk's growth in both films.

I do too. But my complaint is they tried to hard to develop him too quickly. I can't get to youtube at work, but there is a great vid depicting Kirk's development through the 1st two movies. Very detailed and complete.

I'm not sure I understand folks that don't like the criticisms of the "nu" trek movies. I didn't go into STID wanting to see a movie that pissed me off. I wanted to see the best ST movie ever made! Sadly this wasn't the case, although it sure as hell could have been. Everything that is wrong with this movie is caused because they decided to put Khan and TWoK in it. Remove Khan, make Harrison an augment protecting eggs from Cold Station 12 and this could have been epic!

- No 72 corps to steal or put inside torpedoes
- No stupid Khan reveal that didn't mean anything to all those "new" fans they are targeting and pissed of most of the folks that knew Khan.
- No rip-off reversal crap at the end... especially knowing that Kirk was never going to stay dead.
- No Khan super-blood needed.

I was soooooo anticipating STID after seeing ST2009. The first one was fantastic (although the story is stupid and Nero is quite possibly the worst villain in cinematic history). It didn't matter, it was fun, original and our beloved crew was together again! I was stoked!!

Then the writers thought it prudent to play instead of write. They gave themselves a clean slate and weren't bold enough to go there.

After STID I had no real hope to get a real movie from these guys, then Paramount tanked Orci and brought in some fresh blood and my hopes have risen for STB.

To this article, JJ is taking the high road here. The problem was the writing, not JJ. JJ listened after 2009.... shaky cams and lens flares were reduced and we got a real engineering plant instead of a beer factory to name a few. The problems in STID lay in the writer's lap. You can blame JJ if you wish, but I don't think that would be right.

 

[Kemaiku]

You mean like the rip off of knowing Spock wouldn't stay dead and the confirmation from the studio not long after the film and long before TSFS came out?

That massive copout?

That need a magic matter missile planet and so on to make happen?

 

[Yanks]

You mean like the rip off of knowing Spock wouldn't stay dead and the confirmation from the studio not long after the film and long before TSFS came out?

That massive copout?

It was not a forgone conclusion that Spock would return. Remember, he wanted out ... was supposed to die in the movie's opening sequence until the script was leaked...then fan threatened to bomb/kill folks...

So no, not like that.

 

[eyeresist]

- No rip-off reversal crap at the end... especially knowing that Kirk was never going to stay dead.

But then why bother watching anything?
The point is suspension of disbelief. You may know intellectually that the hero is death-proof, but you buy into the jeopardy emotionally. Or you don't buy in, in which case it might be unsatisfying, but then that's the fault of the writers/directors/actors in the specific instance.

 

[DaddlerTheDalek]

I think STID is a good movie. But I have to admit that the TWOK sacrifice reversal scene was kind of... awkward (But Pine was great in that).