Into Darkness
- Thread starter ronbrothers
- Start date
I rewatched 09 and ID yesterday. Both films are much better than I remembered.
Had sorta the same reaction (watched them earlier this week). I've always liked them a lot already, though.
STID is so flawed.
The characters are hyper-charged cartoons and the plot is wildly nonexistent. Good action, good cast, terrible writing
The characters are hyper-charged cartoons and the plot is wildly nonexistent. Good action, good cast, terrible writing
I love ST ID and every time I watch it, there is a new level of character growth that I didn't pick up on before.
Sure, it has its flaws, but I certainly don't see them overwhelming the insensitivity of Kirk and Spock's character moments.
Sure, it has its flaws, but I certainly don't see them overwhelming the insensitivity of Kirk and Spock's character moments.
STID was the only Trek movie I ever walked out of in the theater. (I later forced myself to sit through the whole thing on DVD).
I hated it both times and will probably never watch it again. For all those that loved it, more power to you.
I hated it both times and will probably never watch it again. For all those that loved it, more power to you.
I couldn't wait for it to end but I stuck it out. Star Trek 2009 and Beyond were very entertaining but Into Darkness was a mess.
I liked STID when it came out and I still do after repeated viewings.
That actually makes a lot of sense. Would explain why the concept drawings for the gun Khan's armed with on Qo'nos are labelled "April's gun." Also, I guess this is why they decided to make the prequel comic about April?Speaking of which, I was looking at Orci's twitter the other day and
I agree totally.
I thought it was the weakest of the reboot trilogy, but I still enjoyed Into Darkness.
I liked what they were going for with the USS Vengeance and Section 31. The battle between Enterprise and Vengeance seemed to be a kind of rejection of the militaristic direction Star Trek was going post-TNG, and an affirmation of the peacekeeping and humanitarian mission of TOS-era Starfleet.
Part of what made TOS-era Star Trek so good were the sledgehammer-subtle metaphors and social commentaries.
I liked what they were going for with the USS Vengeance and Section 31. The battle between Enterprise and Vengeance seemed to be a kind of rejection of the militaristic direction Star Trek was going post-TNG, and an affirmation of the peacekeeping and humanitarian mission of TOS-era Starfleet.
Part of what made TOS-era Star Trek so good were the sledgehammer-subtle metaphors and social commentaries.
I loved Into Darkness. Yes, Spock yelling "Khaaaaan!" was stupid, but I thought the flipped death scene was brilliant. Like a fixed point in time from Doctor Who (and Trek novels), someone's gonna die saving the Enterprise from Khan.
It's emotional highs and lows were stronger than Beyond's, IMO. Pike's death and Kirk's subsequent breakdown were especially well done. I'm not yet sure which of the two sequels I prefer, but I do love Star Trek the most.
It's emotional highs and lows were stronger than Beyond's, IMO. Pike's death and Kirk's subsequent breakdown were especially well done. I'm not yet sure which of the two sequels I prefer, but I do love Star Trek the most.
Into Darkness is easily the best of the reboots, with Beyond being a distant third. Biggest difference being that ID has a story to go along with the action. But the action itself is also better in my opinion. I don't quite understand the claims of plot inconsistencies compared to the other two, or the claims of rip off because it brings back certain moments - this entire reboot is based on bringing things back. I rank it below First Contact as the #2 best Trek movie.
For myself (been watching Star Trek since 1969 - I was 6); It is my favorite Star trek feature film (well, it and STII:TWoK depending on my mood.)
Also, I think people claiming they just decided to 'rip off' or 're do' ST:TWoK weren't honestly paying attention. YES - it takes elements from STII:TWoK and uses them (in a sense juxtaposing Kirk and Spock in them); but for me - their usage made sense in the context of the film and the scenes were there for a reason.
The basic plot wasn't hard to follow either, but you need to remember this a very different Star tFleet then what we had in teh Prime Universe. This Star Fleet:
1) Encountered a Romulan starship from 120+ years in the future (the previous Earth Romulan war was 75 years in the past - and this was the first Romulan encounter since then. IE This universe's "Balance of Terror", except Star Fleet was WAY outmatched.)
2) This hip not only decimates a majority of Star Fleet single-handedly; it outright destroys one of the founding worlds (Vulcan) of the Federation.
^^^
Given the above, this new Universe's stance of bigger ships with more firepower; and also Admiral Marcus decision of: "Screw peaceful exploration, space is REALLY DANGEROUS and the hostile aliens REALLY HOSTILE - so we need to do whatever we can to protect Earth and what we have...
Is not an unbelievable response/reaction. neither is his decision to make use of Khan's keen intellect to design bigger/badder starships. (And if you think Khan is 'too primitive' - remember the PU Khan learned enough to commandeer the Enterprise after reading a few tech manuals for a few hours. In the JJ-Verse, he was revived and RECRUITED (IE I'm sure Marcus showed him everything and gave him time to become familiar with the current Federation tech - and turned him loose.) Marcus however also knew Khan for what he was, and kept him in line by effectively holding Khan's crew's well being hostage. Khan being Khan of course did outsmart Marcus, leading to the situation Marcus (and Spock and Kirk) found themselves in during STID. (And again, I don't find Marcus' idea of starting a war with the Klingons because he believes Star Fleet will never be more ready then it is now to confront, defeat, and control the outcome unreasonable given what he's seen and been through.)
JJ-Spock also seems to have more of a fascination with his mortality (because of the loss of his mother, and all those who died in the destruction of Vulcan, and possibly due to him meeting with his much older self.) That's what leads him to mind-meld with Admiral Pike at the moment of Pike's death; and that one act has a profound effect on him that carries on through the remaining events in STID and may explain why he's in general 'more emotional' in STB too.
But given all that I had no problem with his reaction to Kirk's death in STID and I LIKED the scene where Spock screams "Khaaaan!" as again, given everything that's happened to him (which he talks about too) it's not an unreasonable reaction; nor is wanting to make sure Khan is stopped.
As for the whole 'magic blood' bit...is that ant worse (or different) then Spock being saved from permanent blindless in the TOS episode 'Operation Anihalate' in the last 5 minutes from "an extra internal eyelid Vulcans forget that they have..." - or the 'Genesis Device' of ST:III somehow regenerating Spock to a younger version that grows just fast enough to be at the original Spock's exact age; and further, to suddenly age at a normal rate from the point the Genesis planet is destroyed?
Amazing how one of these (both patently ridiculous plot devices) is applauded/accepted, while the second is derided as 'ridiculous/unbelievable'; ESPECIALLY when you look at all the other ridiculous plot contrivances throughout Star Trek's story history.
Yes, STID was connected to BOTH the TOS episode 'Space Seed' and to 'STII:TWoK'; but IMO it was hardly just a 'numbers filled off' ripoff of either. (IMO) Again, it waffles between #1 and #2 (with ST:TWoK") for best Star Trek feature film made, for me at least.
Also, I think people claiming they just decided to 'rip off' or 're do' ST:TWoK weren't honestly paying attention. YES - it takes elements from STII:TWoK and uses them (in a sense juxtaposing Kirk and Spock in them); but for me - their usage made sense in the context of the film and the scenes were there for a reason.
The basic plot wasn't hard to follow either, but you need to remember this a very different Star tFleet then what we had in teh Prime Universe. This Star Fleet:
1) Encountered a Romulan starship from 120+ years in the future (the previous Earth Romulan war was 75 years in the past - and this was the first Romulan encounter since then. IE This universe's "Balance of Terror", except Star Fleet was WAY outmatched.)
2) This hip not only decimates a majority of Star Fleet single-handedly; it outright destroys one of the founding worlds (Vulcan) of the Federation.
^^^
Given the above, this new Universe's stance of bigger ships with more firepower; and also Admiral Marcus decision of: "Screw peaceful exploration, space is REALLY DANGEROUS and the hostile aliens REALLY HOSTILE - so we need to do whatever we can to protect Earth and what we have...
Is not an unbelievable response/reaction. neither is his decision to make use of Khan's keen intellect to design bigger/badder starships. (And if you think Khan is 'too primitive' - remember the PU Khan learned enough to commandeer the Enterprise after reading a few tech manuals for a few hours. In the JJ-Verse, he was revived and RECRUITED (IE I'm sure Marcus showed him everything and gave him time to become familiar with the current Federation tech - and turned him loose.) Marcus however also knew Khan for what he was, and kept him in line by effectively holding Khan's crew's well being hostage. Khan being Khan of course did outsmart Marcus, leading to the situation Marcus (and Spock and Kirk) found themselves in during STID. (And again, I don't find Marcus' idea of starting a war with the Klingons because he believes Star Fleet will never be more ready then it is now to confront, defeat, and control the outcome unreasonable given what he's seen and been through.)
JJ-Spock also seems to have more of a fascination with his mortality (because of the loss of his mother, and all those who died in the destruction of Vulcan, and possibly due to him meeting with his much older self.) That's what leads him to mind-meld with Admiral Pike at the moment of Pike's death; and that one act has a profound effect on him that carries on through the remaining events in STID and may explain why he's in general 'more emotional' in STB too.
But given all that I had no problem with his reaction to Kirk's death in STID and I LIKED the scene where Spock screams "Khaaaan!" as again, given everything that's happened to him (which he talks about too) it's not an unreasonable reaction; nor is wanting to make sure Khan is stopped.
As for the whole 'magic blood' bit...is that ant worse (or different) then Spock being saved from permanent blindless in the TOS episode 'Operation Anihalate' in the last 5 minutes from "an extra internal eyelid Vulcans forget that they have..." - or the 'Genesis Device' of ST:III somehow regenerating Spock to a younger version that grows just fast enough to be at the original Spock's exact age; and further, to suddenly age at a normal rate from the point the Genesis planet is destroyed?
Amazing how one of these (both patently ridiculous plot devices) is applauded/accepted, while the second is derided as 'ridiculous/unbelievable'; ESPECIALLY when you look at all the other ridiculous plot contrivances throughout Star Trek's story history.
Yes, STID was connected to BOTH the TOS episode 'Space Seed' and to 'STII:TWoK'; but IMO it was hardly just a 'numbers filled off' ripoff of either. (IMO) Again, it waffles between #1 and #2 (with ST:TWoK") for best Star Trek feature film made, for me at least.
I'm really torn on it.
I loved the majority of the film, especially the early stuff - Pike dressing down Kirk and the London scene with almost no dialogue in particular.
The guest cast were great - Cumberbatch, Greenwood and Weller are all powerful presences.
I also loved the darker take on Trek. This wasn't just our usual evil and mad Admiral who was so clearly in the wrong to our goody two shoes crew - Kirk was well and truly on board to begin with, and understandably so. What's more, it tackled some pretty big and controversial modern topics, which Trek films generally don't do (even the ones which are topical are pretty thin and uncontroversial, eg whaling).
However, the last 15 minutes or so took me out of it. It just didn't need the rehash of that scene, or the mass destruction which followed, or Spock's rage.
With a different last portion, it probably would have been my favourite Trek film, but as it is it sits around sixth.
Having said that, the backlash is way over the top. I'm not a devotee of TWoK, so maybe it doesn't bother me as much as some, but it is in no way even close to the worst Trek film.
I loved the majority of the film, especially the early stuff - Pike dressing down Kirk and the London scene with almost no dialogue in particular.
The guest cast were great - Cumberbatch, Greenwood and Weller are all powerful presences.
I also loved the darker take on Trek. This wasn't just our usual evil and mad Admiral who was so clearly in the wrong to our goody two shoes crew - Kirk was well and truly on board to begin with, and understandably so. What's more, it tackled some pretty big and controversial modern topics, which Trek films generally don't do (even the ones which are topical are pretty thin and uncontroversial, eg whaling).
However, the last 15 minutes or so took me out of it. It just didn't need the rehash of that scene, or the mass destruction which followed, or Spock's rage.
With a different last portion, it probably would have been my favourite Trek film, but as it is it sits around sixth.
Having said that, the backlash is way over the top. I'm not a devotee of TWoK, so maybe it doesn't bother me as much as some, but it is in no way even close to the worst Trek film.
Last edited:
So you're giving Into Darkness a pass on a bunch of stupid shit because other stupid shit exists? That doesn't make any sense.
I also walked out of the theater on STiD. Like you, I later forced my self to watch the whole thing, but only because it's Trek. There are so many moments in that movie that make me cringe. Terrible film.
I remember watching Nemesis in the theater 2002. I was bored to death, but I made it through the whole thing.
Similar threads
- Poll
