Poll: Star Trek (2009) vs Into Darkness (Spoilers)
- Thread starter Aike
- Start date
2009. A near perfect film IMHO.
I vastly preferred Into Darkness. I though the plot made a lot more sense, the jokes 'landed' a lot more than in the original (which I thought was a lot 'broader' in terms of humour with the fat hands and the bumping-of-heads on the ceiling and such) and thought it was generally more spectacular and satisfying. Yes the plot had problems but I was grinning the whole way through STID- not the case with ST09.
I liked both equally, but I reckon Into Darkness was better.
Honestly, 2009 had a better pacing to it and it felt fresher but was weighted down by some poor character judgement (by which I mean the villain was weak as all mighty hell).
Into Darkness had a better villain -Cumberbatch nailed it. I reckon he had far more depth than both of his predecessor although I don't think he nailed the revenge aspect I also don't really think that was the point of this literation of the character- this time it was more about family.
Family being said, the crew worked brilliantly as well and the Spock and Kirk scenes, especially when Kirk saves everyone was brilliantly acted.
I also really liked how they didn't kill Harrison at the end. That's a nice change from the standard blockbuster (Only other two I can think of like that was The Dark Knight and the Avengers).
Also, I love that Carol Marcus is part of the crew now. Really love that. The core crew needs at least another women and I'm so happy that's happening. I look forward to seeing her back.
I reckon the script in Into Darkness was a slightly a bit worse but that's mostly because they really upped the fanservice and I'd be lying if I said I didn't like it.
I'm a fan of good script work which is probably why I enjoyed both equally. Overall though I reckon Into Darkness was better simply for the acting and the character work.
Also, loved the empty getting blown to pieces at war, that was some beautiful work.
The Klingon looked awesome as well. Actually alien, well more alien. And it was nice to see that they're still suffering the Worf Effect. Getting their arse handed to them to prove just how badass the villain is. It wouldn't be Star Trek without it.
Honestly, 2009 had a better pacing to it and it felt fresher but was weighted down by some poor character judgement (by which I mean the villain was weak as all mighty hell).
Into Darkness had a better villain -Cumberbatch nailed it. I reckon he had far more depth than both of his predecessor although I don't think he nailed the revenge aspect I also don't really think that was the point of this literation of the character- this time it was more about family.
Family being said, the crew worked brilliantly as well and the Spock and Kirk scenes, especially when Kirk saves everyone was brilliantly acted.
I also really liked how they didn't kill Harrison at the end. That's a nice change from the standard blockbuster (Only other two I can think of like that was The Dark Knight and the Avengers).
Also, I love that Carol Marcus is part of the crew now. Really love that. The core crew needs at least another women and I'm so happy that's happening. I look forward to seeing her back.
I reckon the script in Into Darkness was a slightly a bit worse but that's mostly because they really upped the fanservice and I'd be lying if I said I didn't like it.
I'm a fan of good script work which is probably why I enjoyed both equally. Overall though I reckon Into Darkness was better simply for the acting and the character work.
Also, loved the empty getting blown to pieces at war, that was some beautiful work.
The Klingon looked awesome as well. Actually alien, well more alien. And it was nice to see that they're still suffering the Worf Effect. Getting their arse handed to them to prove just how badass the villain is. It wouldn't be Star Trek without it.
Didn't love the 2009 movie, but liked it a great deal. The plot was full of holes and Nero was a weak villain, but the presentation was fresh and it was nice to witness these characters again. This time around, the new-ness had worn off for me, which led me to focus much more on the story itself. And unfortunately I didn't find a lot to like about it. Weak performances, too much fanwank and a plot that didn't make a lot of sense. STID looks amazing – even more so than its predecessor – but felt rather hollow to this fan.
I saw both movies in a double feature on premiere night. Although I had seen Star Trek several times already, several of its scenes still moved me more than anything in STID. Combined with the (IMO) sometimes rather strange story choices of STID, this makes Star Trek the better movie for me.
Star Trek 4/5
Star Trek Into Darkness 5/5
Star Trek Into Darkness 5/5
This is going to be THE thread in the next few months, because this comparison is very important. It needs to show a positive trend for the survival of the franchise, or else...
just got back from seeing Into Darkness for the second time. took my fiancé along who is not a scifi fan (the most scifi she will go is Lost/Fringe) and she thought it was great. she said as a non-scifi fan she really liked how real it felt, even the space/ ship parts.
definitely enjoyed this film a lot more the second time around. first viewing i was trying to anticipate what would happen and see if the way i'd pieced together the trailer clips in my head played out as a though. they didn't thankfully
this film felt like a Star Trek film - not that '09 wasn't. dare I say it, it felt like a Trek adventure that could easily slot in with the vibe of the original series.
loved how much of the movie was actually spent in space on the Enterprise. and Klingons! FUCK YEAH!!
now if the third movie can boldly go somewhere and have an exploration type story to it I will be a happy boy 
definitely enjoyed this film a lot more the second time around. first viewing i was trying to anticipate what would happen and see if the way i'd pieced together the trailer clips in my head played out as a though. they didn't thankfully
this film felt like a Star Trek film - not that '09 wasn't. dare I say it, it felt like a Trek adventure that could easily slot in with the vibe of the original series.
loved how much of the movie was actually spent in space on the Enterprise. and Klingons! FUCK YEAH!!
now if the third movie can boldly go somewhere and have an exploration type story to it I will be a happy boy I went to see this move with my Dad who didn't rate the first one at all (mainly because he hated the Spock/Uhura relationship and hates it when Spock shows any hint of emotion, plus doesn't really understand the whole timeline issue...but then this was a guy who didn't understand the Batman movies were a reboot and asked me how Heath Ledgers Joker took over from Jack Nicholson's Joker, bless him )
Afterwards he was stunned by how good it was and said it was the best star trek movie of all of them!
I was stunned by this myself, he only came begrudgingly because it was my Birthday and he thought he might get some Space Battles out of it (he's not an action fan per se but since he didn't like the first one he thought that's the only part he'd like...) and ended up loving it so much he sought out a documentary on JJ on the BBC this evening...."Oh, he was the Cloverfield guy, well that explains it I liked that too..., OH and LOST as well!!"
I think this film converted him and might even make him reconsider the first one in retrospect.
Me? Well I loved the first and thought this was even better, the best summer blockbuster by far and one with a lot of heart and character to go with its awe-inspiring action scenes.
Afterwards he was stunned by how good it was and said it was the best star trek movie of all of them!
I was stunned by this myself, he only came begrudgingly because it was my Birthday and he thought he might get some Space Battles out of it (he's not an action fan per se but since he didn't like the first one he thought that's the only part he'd like...) and ended up loving it so much he sought out a documentary on JJ on the BBC this evening...."Oh, he was the Cloverfield guy, well that explains it I liked that too..., OH and LOST as well!!"
I think this film converted him and might even make him reconsider the first one in retrospect.
Me? Well I loved the first and thought this was even better, the best summer blockbuster by far and one with a lot of heart and character to go with its awe-inspiring action scenes.
What he said.
Especially the fanservice was awesome...and the scene where Harrison kicks the crap out of those Klingons. I could watch that over and over.
In any case, well put, I agree with everything.
Which is a clear case of YMVV. I found nothing wrong with the writing...or at least, it didn't bother me in the slightest.
Similar threads
- Poll
