STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]
- Thread starter Agent Richard07
- Start date
That should've been Kirk's reply to Pike's "what have you learned from this?"
Well I saw it three more times this holiday weekend. Once in IMAX (a different IMAX and it was really LOUD) and twice in 2D. IMAX viewing was a little under half full and the 2D was nearly sold out both times. It's doing well and considering what the haul F&F6 took in, the numbers for STiD are impressive.
I saw it today in front of a full house and still loved it. Though I still found the left-wing messages to be ridiculous. Also, I wish they would have let the Enterprise fire off one shot.
I'm still going to miss Pike. Bruce Greenwood really acted the hell out of that character.
I'm still going to miss Pike. Bruce Greenwood really acted the hell out of that character.
Not sure how the messages in this movie are "left-wing"? Is providing someone a fair trial really a "left-wing" concept?
A
Amaris
Guest
What left wing messages? The only messages I found in the movie were "striking without being certain of your target is bad," "don't underestimate a criminal mind," "every criminal deserves a fair trial," "revenge is not a valid justification to kill," "instigating a war with another race under false pretenses is wrong," and "indiscriminately killing people in peacetime is a no-no."
Those aren't "left wing," those are sane.
Sadly, it appears to be - unless, of course, one is using criticism of drone strikes to attack the current Administration, in which case it's apparently just basic fairness.
If you don't like liberal and progressive ideas, it's best not to watch any version of Star Trek sober.
It is part of the movie. So it will cause some political side-discussions.
We saw a 1:30 Imax show today, and the theater was full.
At $17.00 a ticket, that's pretty good.
This is the dilemma at the heart of the prequel comic book Countdown Into Darkness.
Stimpy: So, uh...let's scout around.
Ren: You fool! We can't just wander around like eediots! We'd better see what the prime directive says about alien worlds.
Stimpy: (flips through the space cadet handbook) The prime directive! It says to 'scout around.'
Ren: Great! Let's go.
One thing I would have done with this film is to leave the story basically as it is, but do something that Nolan did in the Dark Knight, and that is to give nearly equal time to the various philosophies, so that we can see them all at play and decide for ourselves.
Int the Dark Knight, there is almost equal time getting us to understand the different philosophies of the characters and where thy stand on the morality scale.. and I'm talking about Batman/Bruce Wayne, Joker, Dent, Gordon. Each of these characters is given a moment in which their ideologies are placed at the forefront. They are each given equal footing.
In STiD, Section 31 is a very important element to the story, an yet for some reason, they are almost a passing reference tossed aside. Why not give the viewer some insight as to what they are about, a little more detail about how they have and can continue to protect the Federation. We might not ultimately agree with their vision for a more militarized Starfleet, but that doesn't mean that the writers can't make a good case for it. We don't agree with the Joker, necessarily, but his ideas feel ultimately convincing, or, close to it. that's why he's such a good adversary. I think Section 31's role could have been fleshed out and defended, and so could all of the other viewpoints.
Even with all the plotholes that would still remain, it would make this story one that peopel will remember fondly.
.
Int the Dark Knight, there is almost equal time getting us to understand the different philosophies of the characters and where thy stand on the morality scale.. and I'm talking about Batman/Bruce Wayne, Joker, Dent, Gordon. Each of these characters is given a moment in which their ideologies are placed at the forefront. They are each given equal footing.
In STiD, Section 31 is a very important element to the story, an yet for some reason, they are almost a passing reference tossed aside. Why not give the viewer some insight as to what they are about, a little more detail about how they have and can continue to protect the Federation. We might not ultimately agree with their vision for a more militarized Starfleet, but that doesn't mean that the writers can't make a good case for it. We don't agree with the Joker, necessarily, but his ideas feel ultimately convincing, or, close to it. that's why he's such a good adversary. I think Section 31's role could have been fleshed out and defended, and so could all of the other viewpoints.
Even with all the plotholes that would still remain, it would make this story one that peopel will remember fondly.
.
A
Amaris
Guest
People are already remembering it fondly. Adding in extra dialogue to create some quasi-conflicted viewpoint turnaround would slow things down and drag them out pointlessly. How it is now works out just fine.
I don't know.. people enjoyed the Dark Knight, and that film really allowed us to see all sides nearly with equal time.
Yeah, Bruce Greenwood was great. It's a shame they didn't give him a better death. I wish they'd kept him alive longer and had him going into the radioactive chamber instead. At least then they'd have had a meaningful emotional sequence between him and Kirk or something. Kirk going in there meant nothing because everyone and his dog knew he was gonna be fine
A
Amaris
Guest
Star Trek is a bit more fast paced than the Dark Knight, and the lines a little less blurred. Batman's world is very shades of gray, and TDK is built up that way, as is BB.
Star Trek? Not so much.
