Discussion in 'Trek Literature' started by DWMarch, May 26, 2013.
No it's not! HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT?!?
How about directions that are different and not even remotely similar?
The movie was great fun but being written with 12-year old boys in mind does pretty much sum it up. Except for the bit of romance for the laydeeez.
I've yet to see a Trek that doesn't cater to 12-year old boys on some level. Hell, I'm a 12-year old boy at heart.
Lol true - but I think the best Treks work on multiple levels. I just prefer those levels not to be dumb and dumber
I think Star Trek Into Darkness works on a lot more levels and is much smarter than people want to give it credit for.
It doesn't mean it's flawless or doesn't have its share of 'wtf?' moments.
I've been a fan since 1972 and I'm still a 12 year old girl in heart.
I love Bad Robot. That does not make me dumb.
Just because something is not explained, does not make it a Plot Hole tm.
The Strange New Worlds editors published a Voyager story that copied TOS's The Corbomite Maneuver.
I got tired of only one DS9 story (Nog likes Keiko), only TNG's Captain's Table Andorian story and only the TOS tv era stories being good. The TOS movie era stories sucked. Also, why no April, Pike, Where No Man and TAS era stories?
I am glad Bad Robot Star Trek exists.
If you insist, then OK, Into Darkness doesn't retread those episodes. But they ARE retreading Khan. And since Kirk has been in pretty much every episode, Kirk is not a retread, and the comparison doesn't measure up.
YES. It's not spelled both ways on the movie title.
I thought they did new and interesting things with Khan. I don't recall Khan doing in "Space Seed" and Wrath of Khan anything like what he does in Into Darkness. Not really a retread at all.
You know, I bet if you go back to fanzines in the 80s, you'd find Trek fans saying exactly the same thing about TWoK, it being a retread of Space Seed.
Yeah, other than the basic backstory for Khan it was a totally different take on the character.
I know some people are mad that they used him as the villain, but I kind of look at it as a Batman/Joker or Superman/Lex Luthor kind of thing hero/nemesis things since a lot of people seem to consider him Kirk's main nemesis. So it makes since to me that we'd get a new version of Khan to go along with a new version of Kirk. Just like we get new versions of Luthor and the Joker to go along with new versions of Batman and Superman.
As for the misspelling thing, I apologize, I didn't realize it was such a horrible thing to do. I'll try very hard not to do it again.
I agree. I think that generally the characterisation is excellent and we have become de-sensitised to sci fi so that we don't give it credit for the level of imagination it requires. I think most sci fi movies stumble when it comes to story logic and this has applied to Star Wars, Prometheus, and many of the Trek episodes. I was watching the Enterprise Incident and couldn't work out why the Romulans hadn't raised their shields to prevent transporting.
I don't know about a Strange New Worlds version of Into Darkness, but if Pocket Books published Myriad Universes: Khan, I would definitely buy it. Just imagine the possibilities!
Personally, I've never considered Khan to be Kirk's arch nemesis like the Joker is Batman's. Ask Average Joe on the Street who Captain Kirk's enemy is, and he's more likely to say "them Klingon dudes" than he is "Khan."
The first Myriad Universes anthology does feature a story in which Khan does win the Eugenics Wars and looks at how the 24th century of that timeline turned out.
I still wish we could get a follow up to that story.
Separate names with a comma.