RLM - Half in the Bag does STID [SPOILERS]

[Shazam!]

Boiling a film down to its plot points and laughing at it tells me nothing of its quality (but it tells me plenty about the quality of the "review"). So trying to use that portion of the "review" as proof of the poor quality of Star Trek Into Darkness isn't going to work.

Yes, but you have to feel that the plot is silly enough for you to warrant breaking it down in such a manner.

You're right, you could do the same to TWOK or Iron Man 3 or whatever but the point is, they didn't, because presumably they enjoyed those movies : /

 

[BillJ]

You're right, you could do the same to TWOK or Iron Man 3 or whatever but the point is, they didn't, because presumably they enjoyed those movies : /

I think if you spend forty-five minutes reviewing a movie, you enjoyed it on some level. Just like I don't believe the folks who constantly post how much they hate Abrams Trek really hate it.

 

[sonak]

yeah, except that part of the review was clearly exaggerated for comedic effect to make the movie sound dumb. You can do that with anything, including TWOK. Here, I'll give it a shot:


-So there's this planet that exploded, but it knocked ANOTHER planet into the EXACT orbit of the exploded planet. No one found out about this, and no one on the USS Reliant noticed from their charts that a whole planet was missing.
-And then these scientists have come up with this magical tech that creates functioning ecosystems from nothing at all.
-And there's this madman who can stick bugs in guys' ears and brainwash them somehow, and Kirk has an old flame and a son he didn't know about, and Khan wants revenge on Kirk even though he tried to kill Kirk, and Kirk mercifully let him go, and had nothing to do with the other planet exploding...

All you're doing there is making fun of the elements by rephrasing them in a silly way, not the plot. For instance, the 'magical tech' and 'the bugs which brainwash somehow' are explained well enough (in technobabble terms) that they're a non-issue in a sci-fi film. STID's very plot is what's ridiculous, not just the elements. It's a wacky, convoluted mess.

They simply know the audience they're playing too. Many of the people likely watching those reviews are people who simply can't let go of the Prime timeline.

The reviewer that had the best criticisms of the film, IMO, was Jay, the only one of the three who wasn't a Trekkie - he gave his opinions on the film as a film, not a Star Trek film. Why do you think they're playing to an audience at all? You think they're lying about how they felt about the movie?

Do you honestly believe STID to be so far above criticism that anyone who says they didn't like must be dishonest and obviously lying? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?

So we're saying that you're not allowed to find fault in STID because other films are silly too?

criticizing a film for silly elements of the plot is fine, but doing so in a deliberately exaggerated way for comedic effect and then pretending that you're making a serious criticism of the film is pretty dumb. I liked STID a lot, but I certainly don't think it's above criticism.

My favorite film of the original series is TVH and my favorite film of the TNG series is STFC, and I certainly would admit that they have silly plot elements, but I wouldn't do some segment of a review where I pretended to be summarizing the plot, but was actually just being goofy and ridiculous to make it seem incoherent, and then use THAT to show that the plot actually WAS incoherent. (I think that was a run-on.)


STID had some problems(not too many, though), but an incoherent plot wasn't one of them. It moved quickly, but it wasn't hard to follow.

 

[sonak]

You're right, you could do the same to TWOK or Iron Man 3 or whatever but the point is, they didn't, because presumably they enjoyed those movies : /

I think if you spend forty-five minutes reviewing a movie, you enjoyed it on some level. Just like I don't believe the folks who constantly post how much they hate Abrams Trek really hate it.

well remember that these guys are internet reviewers who have a business model as well. They want to make their reviews a certain length to get traffic. RLM's SW prequel reviews were very long, but I don't think Stoklasa actually liked them that much.


What I don't get though is how he could have liked STXI better than STID. Too me, STID is a big improvement, and if you already liked the first one, then he should have liked the second.

 

[Shazam!]

criticizing a film for silly elements of the plot is fine, but doing so in a deliberately exaggerated way for comedic effect and then pretending that you're making a serious criticism of the film is pretty dumb

How else should they do it? The interwebs is already choc-full of wordy reviews and analysis.

At the end of the day they're still going to think the plot was silly regardless of how they present their views.

 

[Michael]

Too me, STID is a big improvement, and if you already liked the first one, then he should have liked the second.

Nonsense. I loved the first one! But this one was a big letdown for me. So what exactly are you saying?

 

[StarMan]

Too me, STID is a big improvement, and if you already liked the first one, then he should have liked the second.

Nonsense. I loved the first one! But this one was a big letdown for me. So what exactly are you saying?

I'm in the same boat. We must be defective.

Confirmation bias? Seriously? If you're going to play that card, you need to apply it across the board. How many individuals here have invested a couple of years championing the movie - long before they'd even seen a frame?

Still, great to see those wonderful trailers again. Man, they got me pumped for this movie.

 

[Ryan8bit]

You're right, you could do the same to TWOK or Iron Man 3 or whatever but the point is, they didn't, because presumably they enjoyed those movies : /

I think if you spend forty-five minutes reviewing a movie, you enjoyed it on some level. Just like I don't believe the folks who constantly post how much they hate Abrams Trek really hate it.

They did say in the review that they did enjoy it on some level. And they also praised JJ Abrams.

 

[sonak]

Too me, STID is a big improvement, and if you already liked the first one, then he should have liked the second.

Nonsense. I loved the first one! But this one was a big letdown for me. So what exactly are you saying?

Too me, STID is a big improvement, and if you already liked the first one, then he should have liked the second.

Nonsense. I loved the first one! But this one was a big letdown for me. So what exactly are you saying?

I'm in the same boat. We must be defective.

Confirmation bias? Seriously? If you're going to play that card, you need to apply it across the board. how many individuals here have invested a couple of years invested in championing this movie - long before they'd even seen a frame?

Still, great to see those wonderful trailers again. Man, they got me pumped for this movie.

Well I wrote "to me," indicating that it was just my opinion. You're free to prefer STXI to STID if you like, it's just that STID had a much better story, a much better villain, and much improved characters. But if none of that matters to you...

 

[Alex1939]

This RLM was a rare miss for me and I love RLM usually. It's always great to get a new Half in the Bag or Best of the Worst episode.

I did really like their discussion about Khan. How in space seed Kirk beat him up with a metal tube. But now Khan is basically one of the X-men. Had me rolling on that bit.

 

[neoworx]

It IS Star Trek: Fast and Furious. The plot made no sense and has as much substance as the Transformer movies. Which is none.

VERY well put. Yet another opinion (WARNING: it ain't pretty:

http://wrathofdhanprops.blogspot.com/2013/05/into-darkness-goes-boldly-where-better.html

 

[BillJ]

It IS Star Trek: Fast and Furious. The plot made no sense and has as much substance as the Transformer movies. Which is none.

It makes about as much sense as a 20th century human being able to run a starship in a few hours, magical terraforming technology, that Khan would search everywhere but the transporter room on Regula One or the fact that Khan could find and locate the Genesis torpedo but didn't beam Kirk up from Regula and kill him.

 

[The Doctor]

It IS Star Trek: Fast and Furious. The plot made no sense and has as much substance as the Transformer movies. Which is none.

VERY well put. Yet another opinion (WARNING: it ain't pretty:

http://wrathofdhanprops.blogspot.com/2013/05/into-darkness-goes-boldly-where-better.html

Hey, look everyone, he's pimping his blog! How cute.

 

[Vyse]

It IS Star Trek: Fast and Furious. The plot made no sense and has as much substance as the Transformer movies. Which is none.

It makes about as much sense as a 20th century human being able to run a starship in a few hours, magical terraforming technology, that Khan would search everywhere but the transporter room on Regula One or the fact that Khan could find and locate the Genesis torpedo but didn't beam Kirk up from Regula and kill him.

Very true.

Kahn's plan depended on Kirk being so rusty that he would not have raised shields to another federation ship not responding to hails. We aren't talking firing on it, just raising your shields to protect yourself. Project Genesis is so important and dangerous, yet there is no security at all there. The oldest, lamest conceit in all of Star Trek, "The ship is the only one in range. They have limited supplies or not prepared, but going anyway". What if two ships showed up to fight Khan? He would have been screwed then. Enterprise's sensors work, when the Reliant's does not. A nebula that screws up sensors being conveniently close to the science base. Khan has gotten older, yet the other Augments haven't? Chekov was not on the ship during Space Seed, yet Kahn remembers him. Didn't the Reliant notice that there was one less planet in the Ceti-Alpha system in the beginning of the film? The Enterprise would have been able to get far enough away from the explosion with impulse power at the end of the film.

 

[Tom Servo]

yeah, except that part of the review was clearly exaggerated for comedic effect to make the movie sound dumb. You can do that with anything, including TWOK. Here, I'll give it a shot:


-So there's this planet that exploded, but it knocked ANOTHER planet into the EXACT orbit of the exploded planet. No one found out about this, and no one on the USS Reliant noticed from their charts that a whole planet was missing.
-And then these scientists have come up with this magical tech that creates functioning ecosystems from nothing at all.
-And there's this madman who can stick bugs in guys' ears and brainwash them somehow, and Kirk has an old flame and a son he didn't know about, and Khan wants revenge on Kirk even though he tried to kill Kirk, and Kirk mercifully let him go, and had nothing to do with the other planet exploding...

All you're doing there is making fun of the elements by rephrasing them in a silly way, not the plot. For instance, the 'magical tech' and 'the bugs which brainwash somehow' are explained well enough (in technobabble terms) that they're a non-issue in a sci-fi film. STID's very plot is what's ridiculous, not just the elements. It's a wacky, convoluted mess.

They simply know the audience they're playing too. Many of the people likely watching those reviews are people who simply can't let go of the Prime timeline.

The reviewer that had the best criticisms of the film, IMO, was Jay, the only one of the three who wasn't a Trekkie - he gave his opinions on the film as a film, not a Star Trek film. Why do you think they're playing to an audience at all? You think they're lying about how they felt about the movie?

Do you honestly believe STID to be so far above criticism that anyone who says they didn't like must be dishonest and obviously lying? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?

Well my favorite goofy thing about TWOK is the fact that while on a minor training cruise, the Enterprise just HAPPENS to be be the closest ship to Regula 1, and the Reliant, and Khan, even though it really had no reason to be. I mean Khan's plan really would have sucked if Kirk had been relegated to some desk at Starfleet command.

I'm sorry I cannot take someone seriously when they'll overlook the Ceti Alpha 5/6 issue. I mean its a planet that's missing....a whole planet. Not only do they miss it, they mistaken if for another one. It's the action around which the whole story begins to unfold. If you're willing to overlook that, but not some of the plot conveniences and issues with the Abrams films, they you're just a hypocrite.

 

[Vyse]

Also, wouldn't Kirk have let the rest of Starfleet know about Kahn? Something like "Hey there is this really dangerous guy named Kahn on that planet. You may not want to go there, just an FYI".

 

[sonak]

It IS Star Trek: Fast and Furious. The plot made no sense and has as much substance as the Transformer movies. Which is none.

It makes about as much sense as a 20th century human being able to run a starship in a few hours, magical terraforming technology, that Khan would search everywhere but the transporter room on Regula One or the fact that Khan could find and locate the Genesis torpedo but didn't beam Kirk up from Regula and kill him.

Very true.

Kahn's plan depended on Kirk being so rusty that he would not have raised shields to another federation ship not responding to hails. We aren't talking firing on it, just raising your shields to protect yourself. Project Genesis is so important and dangerous, yet there is no security at all there. The oldest, lamest conceit in all of Star Trek, "The ship is the only one in range. They have limited supplies or not prepared, but going anyway". What if two ships showed up to fight Khan? He would have been screwed then. Enterprise's sensors work, when the Reliant's does not. A nebula that screws up sensors being conveniently close to the science base. Khan has gotten older, yet the other Augments haven't? Chekov was not on the ship during Space Seed, yet Kahn remembers him. Didn't the Reliant notice that there was one less planet in the Ceti-Alpha system in the beginning of the film? The Enterprise would have been able to get far enough away from the explosion with impulse power at the end of the film.

yeah, except that part of the review was clearly exaggerated for comedic effect to make the movie sound dumb. You can do that with anything, including TWOK. Here, I'll give it a shot:


-So there's this planet that exploded, but it knocked ANOTHER planet into the EXACT orbit of the exploded planet. No one found out about this, and no one on the USS Reliant noticed from their charts that a whole planet was missing.
-And then these scientists have come up with this magical tech that creates functioning ecosystems from nothing at all.
-And there's this madman who can stick bugs in guys' ears and brainwash them somehow, and Kirk has an old flame and a son he didn't know about, and Khan wants revenge on Kirk even though he tried to kill Kirk, and Kirk mercifully let him go, and had nothing to do with the other planet exploding...

All you're doing there is making fun of the elements by rephrasing them in a silly way, not the plot. For instance, the 'magical tech' and 'the bugs which brainwash somehow' are explained well enough (in technobabble terms) that they're a non-issue in a sci-fi film. STID's very plot is what's ridiculous, not just the elements. It's a wacky, convoluted mess.

They simply know the audience they're playing too. Many of the people likely watching those reviews are people who simply can't let go of the Prime timeline.

The reviewer that had the best criticisms of the film, IMO, was Jay, the only one of the three who wasn't a Trekkie - he gave his opinions on the film as a film, not a Star Trek film. Why do you think they're playing to an audience at all? You think they're lying about how they felt about the movie?

Do you honestly believe STID to be so far above criticism that anyone who says they didn't like must be dishonest and obviously lying? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?

Well my favorite goofy thing about TWOK is the fact that while on a minor training cruise, the Enterprise just HAPPENS to be be the closest ship to Regula 1, and the Reliant, and Khan, even though it really had no reason to be. I mean Khan's plan really would have sucked if Kirk had been relegated to some desk at Starfleet command.

I'm sorry I cannot take someone seriously when they'll overlook the Ceti Alpha 5/6 issue. I mean its a planet that's missing....a whole planet. Not only do they miss it, they mistaken if for another one. It's the action around which the whole story begins to unfold. If you're willing to overlook that, but not some of the plot conveniences and issues with the Abrams films, they you're just a hypocrite.

yeah, these pretty much cover it. TWOK has tons of silly plot elements, but what it has over STID is a thirty-year-old nostalgia filter and the original cast and all their goodwill behind it.(Again, I love TWOK, but I don't let my enjoyment of something interfere with my ability to see flaws in it. TWOK is very well-written from a character and thematic perspective, but it has some pure silliness to it.

 

[Phily B]

All these little nitpicks are doing my head it, people are using these 2-3 tiny plot details to shit on the movie. It's pathetic. TWoK relies entirely on the gross incompetence of Kirk when meeting the Reliant.

 

[M'Sharak]

It IS Star Trek: Fast and Furious. The plot made no sense and has as much substance as the Transformer movies. Which is none.

VERY well put. Yet another opinion (WARNING: it ain't pretty:

http://wrathofdhanprops.blogspot.com/2013/05/into-darkness-goes-boldly-where-better.html

Ain't pretty? Well, I've seen fan-viewpoint reviews which got a lot uglier than that, but it does tend a bit to checklist-y and nit-picky.

One thing: while several here and on other forums may early on have suggested Javier Bardem as a possible Khan, I can't recall reading any serious reports that he'd been in consideration by the filmmakers at any point for any role in what became ST Into Darkness.

One more: Brighton? Other than the fact that Cumberbatch used to visit his grandmother's house there, I'm afraid I don't see the significance.

 

[BillJ]

TWoK relies entirely on the gross incompetence of Kirk when meeting the Reliant.

Well, that and Khan suddenly turning ass-stupid when he has Kirk cornered on Regula. He could've beamed him up and beat the shit out of him or sent a photon torpedo down and literally buried Kirk.