[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhRmlV0aaDg[/yt]
Go look at the Wrath of Khan death scene again. And watch Star Trek III again.
Go look at the Wrath of Khan death scene again. And watch Star Trek III again.
Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.
- Thread starter bbjeg
- Start date
- Status
And where's the corresponding bit where Spock phoned his older self in Wrath of Khan? These don't make for a rip off. Show me Admiral Marcus' plot to start a war with the Klingons, or Khan being manipulated by Starfleet. Show me the Genesis device in ID or Khan's beef with Kirk. You know, how the actual stories of both films are the same.
It's like posting a side by side clip and saying the ninth season of Smallville is a blatant Superman II rip-off because Zod says "Kneel before Zod!" in both.
It's like posting a side by side clip and saying the ninth season of Smallville is a blatant Superman II rip-off because Zod says "Kneel before Zod!" in both.
I've been a fan since 1975, watched it all numerous times and still don't get the argument that Into Darkness is a carbon-copy of The Wrath of Khan.
Guess I'm stupid or sheeple or something?
The point is that they lifted full scenes, famous lines from Star Trek movies to make this. Because they felt a need to do Khan rather than take the time to come up with something original (re: they consult or hold hostage a person from another planet). Because the conflict of "needs of the many" versus "the rules" is lifted straight from Star Trek II and III.
Because Carol Marcus is introduced in a story that features Khan. Because Khan is still seeking revenge and claiming he is superior.
The Joker stories are not, in any way, the same. You could describe the plot of TDK and never know it's a Batman movie if you had seen only Batman.
The themes. The lines. The characters and the fact they show up at the same time. The same situations dealing with life and death and Spock and Kirk viewing the world differently.
Those are some of my points. I was having a sense of humor with other posts.
Warfare was a theme in Star Trek II. It was showing that technology and scientific achievements can outpace our morality and make it very efficient. What is the Vengeance but a piece of war technology that Khan will use to conquer the galaxy?
That's where Genesis is. No, the plots are not the same. But the themes, the dialogue, the situations that show the familiar characteristics of the characters, all are the same. They made too many "nods." It's not overblown. It's exactly what this movie was. I have said otherwise, but upon watching it again, they finally re-did Khan.
Yes, because STiD was all about Khan being obsessed with revenge on Kirk because Kirk marooned him on Ceti Alpha V years ago, causing Marla McIvers to be horribly killed by a vicious Ceti Eel. And because STiD was all about a middle-aged Kirk coping with a mid-life crisis and coming face to face with the son he never knew. And did I miss the part where Kirk stumbled onto the Botany Bay and Khan seduced Marla? And who played Saavik in STiD again? Or David Marcus?
And, of course, my favorite parts of WRATH OF KHAN are the firefight on the Klingon homeworld, the terrorist attack on Starfleet HQ, the assassination of Christopher Pike, and the evil Starfleet admiral conspiring to start a war with the Klingon Empire. And Scotty sneaking aboard a top-secret Federation warship, of course. I can't believe how STiD ripped all those scenes off!
A couple of (admittedly unsubtle) homages do not a "retread" make, not when the plots of the two movies are totally different.
Edit: And I would argue that WoK wasn't about "war" at all. It was about revenge and the past coming back to haunt you and regrets and sacrifices and so on. Yeah, presumably Khan would have caused trouble with the Genesis Device once he got his revenge, but the movie really wasn't about saving the Federation from Khan or any upcoming war with the Federation. It was more of a personal drama.
STiD, on the other hand, is very much about war and terrorism and conspiracies--and not at all about Kirk confronting his own past.
And, of course, my favorite parts of WRATH OF KHAN are the firefight on the Klingon homeworld, the terrorist attack on Starfleet HQ, the assassination of Christopher Pike, and the evil Starfleet admiral conspiring to start a war with the Klingon Empire. And Scotty sneaking aboard a top-secret Federation warship, of course. I can't believe how STiD ripped all those scenes off!
A couple of (admittedly unsubtle) homages do not a "retread" make, not when the plots of the two movies are totally different.
Edit: And I would argue that WoK wasn't about "war" at all. It was about revenge and the past coming back to haunt you and regrets and sacrifices and so on. Yeah, presumably Khan would have caused trouble with the Genesis Device once he got his revenge, but the movie really wasn't about saving the Federation from Khan or any upcoming war with the Federation. It was more of a personal drama.
STiD, on the other hand, is very much about war and terrorism and conspiracies--and not at all about Kirk confronting his own past.
Yes,because STiD was all about Khan being obsessed with revenge on Kirk because Kirk marooned him on Ceti Alpha V years ago, causing Marla McIvers to be horribly killed by a vicious Ceti Eel. And because STiD was all about a middle-aged Kirk coping with a mid-life crisis and coming face to face with the son he never knew. And did I miss the part where Kirk stumbled onto the Botany Bay and Khan seduced Marla? And who played Saavik in STiD again? Or David Marcus?
And, of course, my favorite parts of WRATH OF KHAN are the firefight on the Klingon homeworld, the terrorist attack on Starfleet HQ, the assassination of Christopher Pike, and the evil Starfleet admiral conspiring to start a war with the Klingon Empire. And Scotty sneaking aboard a top-secret Federation warship, of course. I can't believe how STiD ripped all those scenes off!
A couple of (admittedly unsubtle) homages do not a "retread" make, not when the plots of the two movies are totally different.
If they did a shot-for-shot re-make with a 150 million dollar budget, only then would you see the similarities. Of course, that would simply be "an homage" and a "needed update." They ripped off II and III.
Yes,because STiD was all about Khan being obsessed with revenge on Kirk because Kirk marooned him on Ceti Alpha V years ago, causing Marla McIvers to be horribly killed by a vicious Ceti Eel. And because STiD was all about a middle-aged Kirk coping with a mid-life crisis and coming face to face with the son he never knew. And did I miss the part where Kirk stumbled onto the Botany Bay and Khan seduced Marla? And who played Saavik in STiD again? Or David Marcus?
And, of course, my favorite parts of WRATH OF KHAN are the firefight on the Klingon homeworld, the terrorist attack on Starfleet HQ, the assassination of Christopher Pike, and the evil Starfleet admiral conspiring to start a war with the Klingon Empire. And Scotty sneaking aboard a top-secret Federation warship, of course. I can't believe how STiD ripped all those scenes off!
A couple of (admittedly unsubtle) homages do not a "retread" make, not when the plots of the two movies are totally different.
If they did a shot-for-shot re-make with a 150 million dollar budget, only then would you see the similarities. Of course, that would simply be "an homage" and a "needed update." They ripped off II and III.
I strongly disagree. See my added comments above about how the themes of the two movies are completely different.
"The needs of the many" is established in Trek lore as a Vulcan axiom. It's been used in Voyager and Enterprise.
Khan wants revenge against different people for entirely different reasons. The personal Kirk/Khan beef that WoK is centred around is absent from ID. In fact, Khan goes on two revenge sprees in ID, both times when he believes his crew to be dead. Otherwise he's merely working to free them.
No, you couldn't. The entire Batman cast together? A baddie who laughs manically, dresses like a clown and makes it very personal with Batman?
A former ruthless dictator is found and blackmailed into building weapons of war. Does that sound like WoK? How about his crew being held hostage? And Kirk realizing that getting revenge isn't the way to go?
Where are the themes of ageing in ID? Kirk goes from being miserable on his 50th to "feeling young again" - where in the ID analogue?
The same characters show up at the same time? Ditto every reboot of everything, ever. Carol is there, just like Fayora, Jor-El, Lois, Perry White and a ton of others are all in Superman II, Smallville and Man of Steel.
Just to belabor the point, that's like saying that SKYFALL is a remake of GOLDFINGER because they brought back the old Aston-Martin and Bond still likes his martinis shaken, not stirred.
Of course, the "familiar characteristics" of the characters are the same. They've been the same for nearly fifty years. That's what makes them beloved, iconic characters. And, honestly, the business with Kirk bucking authority and fudging the rules was part of his character long before the second movie. And Spock was willing to sacrifice himself for the good of the many in any number of old TOS episodes.
The Immunity Syndrome, anyone?
Oh, one more thing: Khan touting his superiority in both films is no different than the Joker laughing manically or Lex Luthor plotting against Superman or Blofeld stroking a white cat or Moriarity being described as "the Napoleon of Crime."
Every classic villain has certain distinctive character traits. But, again, just using the same villain again doesn't automatically make a movie an unimaginative rehash or whatever.
Of course Khan is touting his genetic superiority again. That's what makes him Khan. You might as well complain that Dracula is drinking blood again.
Every classic villain has certain distinctive character traits. But, again, just using the same villain again doesn't automatically make a movie an unimaginative rehash or whatever.
Of course Khan is touting his genetic superiority again. That's what makes him Khan. You might as well complain that Dracula is drinking blood again.
Like Khan himself, another creation of our genius that out-paced morality, genesis is the perfect weapon in this movie. The next movie highlights the theme even more by getting the Klingons involved.
It doesn't matter if it's cast-iron weapons or drones, scientific discoveries become used for military purposes.
Not only does this fan want The Prime Timeline back, I do not see what else can be done. Let's face it: to general audiences, STAR TREK is Kirk ... Spock ... Bones. That's the Identity of the Product, right there. I suspect another crew in another millenia is just not going to cut it. It's got to be TOS on the little screen, once again. As for "cannon" issues, is it really that hard to avoid going back to Ceti Alpha V? I mean ... is it necessary to revisit Mudd's Women? Just have them keep going forward, into new areas of exploration and adventure. And I am not, at all, above having the Big 3, here, resexed Battlestar Galactica Style, either! In fact, I'm convinced that is a very real and viable solution to returning STAR TREK to the small screen. If CBS wants STAR TREK, it's got to be with the TOS characters. Praise You, Jesus, my beloved TNG will never have to experience a reboot or recasting, or any of that nonsense, being tucked away into the spinoff category. It was a far superior product and really, the franchise should've stopped there. But, then ... there's all that popcorn at stake ...
Okay, I'll concede that there's some discussion about the military implications of the Genesis Device, but I would still argue that the movie was much more about Khan's personal vendetta against Kirk--and Kirk's personal angst over growing old, etc.
There's actually very little emphasis on "Ohmigod, we have to stop Khan before he launches a devastating attack on Earth." (And the danger of war with the Klingons doesn't figure into the plot at all.) The plot is never really focused on stopping Khan from conquering the Federation or whatever, but on a very personal, intimate duel between two old enemies. The Genesis Device is basically just a plot device to give Kirk and Khan something to fight over. It's not really what the movie is about.
STiD, on the other hand, places all the war and terrorism and evil government conspiracy stuff front and center, and has nothing to do with Kirk's midlife crisis or Khan's obsessive vendetta against Kirk.
They're very different kinds of stories.
There's actually very little emphasis on "Ohmigod, we have to stop Khan before he launches a devastating attack on Earth." (And the danger of war with the Klingons doesn't figure into the plot at all.) The plot is never really focused on stopping Khan from conquering the Federation or whatever, but on a very personal, intimate duel between two old enemies. The Genesis Device is basically just a plot device to give Kirk and Khan something to fight over. It's not really what the movie is about.
STiD, on the other hand, places all the war and terrorism and evil government conspiracy stuff front and center, and has nothing to do with Kirk's midlife crisis or Khan's obsessive vendetta against Kirk.
They're very different kinds of stories.
No, sorry.
The drone strike plot in STID is specifically allegorical to the present day real world, in the context of the War on Terror. The STID torpedoes were intended to target a single man in something analogous to a surgical strike. Kirk's comments about how Harrison deserved a trial comprised a direct commentary, specifically on today's world.
On the other hand, the Genesis torpedo was much more analogous to indiscriminate apocalyptic weapons of mass destruction, laced with Biblical overtones of both Revelations and Genesis, as all but explicitly voiced by McCoy prior to Khan's attack. In no way is TWOK's Genesis torpedo allegorical of the War on Terror.
If this is the standard for one thing ripping off another, you may as well scream "Plagiarism!" every time the ship fires photon torpedoes.
And that's where fandom starts to splinter. TOS is still my touchstone where STAR TREK is concerned, and I'd argue that DS9 was as good or better than TNG . . . .
- Status
Similar threads
