Spoilers STAR TREK BEYOND

[Trekkin]

Pick which situation comes closest to the term 'generally accepted to be....'

STID scream - moaned about on the Internet by Trekkies.

TWOK scream - been a pop culture punchline for 30 years.

I admit that I facepalmed during the scream, but a) it didn't ruin in the movie, and b) no one else in the theatre gave a crap. And now I know it's coming, it doesn't bother me near as much.

I'm fond of the TWOK one, but that's the one I probably take less seriously. If I'm watching it with someone, we tend to scream along and imitate Khan's responding evilgasm. The nostalgia is so strong, I can't really be objective about it.

 

[BillJ]

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3xopNvnyps[/yt]

 

[Christopher]

I've already agreed that it didn't "ruin the movie." Is anyone here actually claiming that it did? There's no need to refute something that isn't being claimed in the first place. We can say that something was a bad idea without reducing it to meaningless hyperbole like "ruining the movie." Frankly, coming back with "it didn't ruin the movie," reducing everything to extremes like that, feels like an attempt to shut down criticism altogether. Intelligent criticism is about nuance. It's about being able to acknowledge that a film has faults without it being a condemnation of the entire film.

 

[BillJ]

I've already agreed that it didn't "ruin the movie." Is anyone here actually claiming that it did?

Yes. Here and elsewhere on the interwebs, there are people claiming that it ruined the movie. Lots of people out there with lots of opinions.

 

[Ovation]

I've already agreed that it didn't "ruin the movie." Is anyone here actually claiming that it did? There's no need to refute something that isn't being claimed in the first place. We can say that something was a bad idea without reducing it to meaningless hyperbole like "ruining the movie." Frankly, coming back with "it didn't ruin the movie," reducing everything to extremes like that, feels like an attempt to shut down criticism altogether. Intelligent criticism is about nuance. It's about being able to acknowledge that a film has faults without it being a condemnation of the entire film.

I'm afraid your willingness to acknowledge nuanced positions is a minority position, just here at TrekBBS, let alone at large. No one claimed you thought it ruined the movie, but there have been numerous claims made to that effect since the film came out, both here at TrekBBS and elsewhere online (TrekToday articles are usually a hotbed of anti-Abrams film commentary--in percentage terms, I'd wager, far more than within the fora).

Moreover, there are repetitive claims about what has "generally been agreed" upon that are nothing of the kind (some made in this very thread), regarding "the scream" and the strong implication that said "scream" went on to "ruin the movie". In the face of such obvious hyperbole, it is hardly surprising other hyperbole emerges in response.

 

[Trekkin]

I didn't claim anyone did say that. Just that I acknowledge that scene actually was an issue I initially had, but even there in the theatre I didn't find it that big of a deal. It was what, 3 seconds out of 2 hours?

So I guess what I mean is that I can see mos evidence, but don't agree with his conclusion...if that makes sense.

 

[Christopher]

^What mos said was "it destroyed suspension of disbelief, even I'd guess with a lot of those who gave it a generally favorable review." In other words, even people who liked the movie disliked that part of it. Which sums up my own position pretty well -- I liked the movie, but that part of it pulled me out of the film and I really dislike it. If I disliked the whole movie, then I wouldn't be so upset by that one particular part. The problem is that, since most of the film works pretty well, that one egregiously stupid part is jarring and regrettable.

And yes, I recognize that some people do let it disproportionately color their perception of the film as a whole, which was really my original point -- that I think the stupidity of that one part of the film overshadows the okayness of the rest in many people's minds, and that's why I wish that one part weren't there.

 

[Trekkin]

But it wasn't enough to break my suspension of disbelief. That's all I was saying. I wasn't commenting on (or replying) about anyone else's.

Now why I didn't just write that initial sentence in the first place is a mystery for the ages.

 

[eyeresist]

It's generally accepted that STID went over the line into self-parody with Spock yelling Khan, and that people often laughed in the audience.

The thing I regret most about that scene is that it was so dumb that it overshadowed a lot of good stuff in people's minds. If that one scene had been missing from the movie, I think the movie as a whole would be better regarded.

This. A meta-joke and serious dramatic moment that cancel each other out. Considering this is perhaps THE emotional fulcrum of the movie (Kirk's ultimate sacrifice motivating Spock's vengeful fury), it was a mistake.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I admit that I facepalmed during the scream, but a) it didn't ruin in the movie, and b) no one else in the theatre gave a crap

I liked both screams. I didn't care that STID copied the TWOK one.

(Although if I had to choose, I'd probably pick the STID version, because Kirk's TWOK scream had that cheesy music in the background...)

 

[OpenMaw]

My audience laughed their asses off.

My brother, not a big Trek fan, looked at me as if it were might fault and said "Dude... Really?"

It was a bad choice. Especially at that particular moment. They had just about brought a lump into my throat in the moments prior and then absolutely ruined it with that gag.

 

[Malaika]

Even Zoe Saldana would like to see the Uhura/Spock thing just fade away.

Source, please?

Maybe it's this interview:

random super 'feminist' person interviewing Zoe Saldana: Would you like Uhura to break up with Spock and just be part of the team again?
Zoe Saldana: I don’t know. They have such a special bond. It would be nice to see Uhura do more stuff, but I feel that JJ [Abrams] and his team of writers did such a great job in the sequel and I am pretty sure for the third installment we will see [Uhura] be more hands on as well. It would be heartbreaking for me to know that they would break up​

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=agJpr9fi3HI


What you mean that's the opposite thing mos6507 claimed Zoe said?
I dunno, her comments about that relationship (that had always been supportive. If not vague only when they were promoting stid and she couldn't say if they were still together) must say "she wants it to fade away" in the same alternate reality where Spock/Uhura is a slash ship...

 

[SPCTRE]

My reaction was a bemused "Oh, so you actually went there. Huh. That's super dumb. I can appreciate that".

 

[Malaika]

The Khan scream pulled me out of the emotional scene too. It's that weird and I'm not sure I get the point either. I think that was the last straw for him after all the things that happened to him but they exagerated, this is still Spock if you want to show that side of the vulcans you might want to contextualize it better. I'd understand that reaction better if he had it for Nero who, let's remember it, destroyed his home planet and was responsible for the death of his mother. I can't even begin to imagine how Spock and the other vulcans felt when their people died like that. In that sense, what happened to Spock in the other movie is far worse and he had more reasons to hate Nero than he has for hating Khan (could argue it was Marcus too who was somehow responsible for kirk's death as well as the rest of the victims among the crew)
I feel the first movie did a great job showing his feelings in a context that gave sense to them but still keep his vulcan/human duality.
There were moments of desperation from him like when he screamed 'mother' the moment he understood that they wouldn't beam her and she was falling to her death (him watching the pad - in a later scene too - where his mom should've appeared but never did also was a nice touch and communicate, to me, about his grief more than words) the way he hugged Uhura for dear life, the way he exploded when Kirk hit the nerve and said he didn't love his mother..and then his apparent shame for his loss of control.
In the sequel they focus more on Kirk and that goes at the expense of Spock too. They decided to 'pay homage' to a scene that these characters don't deserve and sacrificed a bit the integrity of the characters to force things.

Anyway, I hope Quinto didn't have to do the scream many times (wouldn't surprise me if they had different takes of it that didn't have it)


Eta: re-read the whole convo here. I don't think that scene ruined the movie as a whole and, honestly, I don't think the general audience will care. Many won't even notice the 'homages' because these movies are their first 'trek'. There are some things about stid that are exasperated by certain fans (e g., the death scene copy, the scream, Alice Eve's underwear scene) to make it seems the whole movie is fail and it is a bit annoying especially when the same people will glorify previous (mediocre) trek movies..

 

[F. King Daniel]

I facepalmed at the scream. I guess it's Trek's version of Darth Vader's ridiculous "Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!"

First time I saw it, it knocked me out of the film for a few seconds, but I was right back in when Spock was chasing Kahn through San Francisco. I imagine viewers unfamiliar with Wrath of Khan would have any issue with it at all.

 

[SPCTRE]

Darth Vader's ridiculous "Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!"

 

[Ovation]

I facepalmed at the scream. I guess it's Trek's version of Darth Vader's ridiculous "Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!"

First time I saw it, it knocked me out of the film for a few seconds, but I was right back in when Spock was chasing Kahn through San Francisco. I imagine viewers unfamiliar with Wrath of Khan would have any issue with it at all.

Precisely. And, I'd wager, such viewers were the majority of those at the cinema. Moreover, I'm willing to bet the vast majority of those who do "have a problem" with the scream simply cannot separate the two (TWOK and STiD) moments and treat them as independent of the other. I've re-watched each moment with the specific purpose of assessing them within their respective movies, without referencing the other. To me, the one in STiD is far more relevant and meaningful than the one in TWOK. Does that mean it worked well enough that people should just shut up about it? Clearly not, as not everyone complaining about it is doing so just to pile onto to something they dislike more generally. In the end, I think each film would work better without their respective "moments". But as they are each there, I choose to regard them independently from each other and, as such, I think the STiD one is more appropriate to the story. But that's me.

 

[mos6507]

I didn't claim anyone did say that. Just that I acknowledge that scene actually was an issue I initially had, but even there in the theatre I didn't find it that big of a deal. It was what, 3 seconds out of 2 hours?

Runtime != impact.

The shot of Kane's sled burning in Citizen Kane was pretty short, but it was the whole "payoff" of the movie, or the shot of the Statue of Liberty in Planet of the Apes.

It's not about length. It's about what you remember afterwards.

The two moments that stick out the most for me in STID are Alice Eve's implausible striptease and Khaaaan! I can't think of any really good moments that compensated for these. The closest would be Pike's dressing-down of Kirk which seemed to symbolize the beef that Trek purists have with his punk characterization. Since Khan was so miscast, none of his scenes resonate. He's got no true scenery-chewing moments the way Montalban did in Khan. They just leaned on the tone of his low UK accent and had him perform the requisite supervillain CGI acrobatics. Meh.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

There's an interesting level of role-reversal in STID compared to TWOK, and I mean one beyond the superficially obvious reversals of who's in the engine room getting a fatal dose saving the ship and who's screaming "Khan!!!"

In TWOK, it was Kirk cheating and Spock teaching Kirk the lesson that sometimes self-sacrifice is the only play.

But in STID, it was Kirk cheating and then Kirk learning on his own that sometimes self-sacrifice is the only play.

Maybe role-reversal isn't quite the right way to describe this, but rather the whole dynamic is more completely internalized within Kirk's character arc.

In any case, that makes the tragedy in STID a different kind and in some ways more bitter than the one in TWOK. We already knew that Spock was a good man, and, in TWOK, Spock capped his brilliant career by going out doing a good deed that had the added effect of rejuvenating Kirk. On the other hand, in STID, Kirk had finally grown as a person, only to have to throw it away to accomplish his good deed. Kirk's legacy wouldn't have been to be to go on and do great things as the better man he had become, but instead he had to choose to use that up completely.

That makes the "Khan!!!" cry in STID one of personal anguish that Spock feels for that sacrifice Kirk has made. On that level, it's more legitimate than Kirk's in TWOK.

I still love the Cheese Whiz application that is Kirk's "Khan!!!" scream in TWOK, though. I've always basked in the way Kirk's scream echoes within the music and finally seems to splash together with it. Glorious!

 

[BillJ]

He's got no true scenery-chewing moments the way Montalban did in Khan.

Which I wholeheartedly disagree with...

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Sy-Yjk-jtg[/yt]

One of my favorite scenes in all of Star Trek and actually showed Khan was one bad, crazy mother fucker.