STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

[Tosk]

I tend to think that if we classify something as a "good movie" but a "bad Trek movie" we're missing the point.

But that is just as much of a judgement call as Gaz's opinion is.

 

[BillJ]

I tend to think that if we classify something as a "good movie" but a "bad Trek movie" we're missing the point.

But that is just as much of a judgement call as Gaz's opinion is.

Maybe.

 

[Tosk]

Who are we, you or I, to tell Gaz that they're missing the point? What is the point?

 

[BillJ]

Who are we, you or I, to tell Gaz that they're missing the point? What is the point?

I tend to think that when someone says its a good movie but bad Star Trek, they're looking for a reason not to like the movie.

I can dislike something for no reason at all, I don't need to try and make myself look unbiased.

 

[Ln X]

I tend to think that when someone says its a good movie but bad Star Trek, they're looking for a reason not to like the movie.

Personal preferences you see. Sometimes you can appreciate artforms through different lenses. In my casual movie lense STID is a decent film. But in my trek lense STID is a mediocre Trek film, my only expectation for Star Trek is for it to be better and more refined than the rest of the films and series out there.

STID's biggest crime is that it can be lumped quite easily with Iron Man 3, Man of Steel and all the other summer blockbusters out there. These films share a lot of things, just not the titles or the names of characters/locations. So yeah gagomg has a point about STID being a decent movie (when compared to what is out there) but a poor Trek film.

 

[Opus]

It's poor Star Trek because it was popular, critically acclaimed, and has become a big summer $$$ maker by people who don't identify themselves as diehard truTrekkies.

 

[CorporalClegg]

STID's biggest crime is that it can be lumped quite easily with Iron Man 3, Man of Steel and all the other summer blockbusters out there.

Except on how they were received by both professional and public movie-goers. And that's a pretty big exception...

 

[BillJ]

STID's biggest crime is that it can be lumped quite easily with Iron Man 3, Man of Steel and all the other summer blockbusters out there.

Except on how they were received by both professional and public movie-goers. And that's a pretty big exception...

Silly person! People's taste and reactions do not reflect on the quality of Star Trek Into Darkness. Only those virgins still living in their parents basements are allowed to pass such judgements.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Sorry.

 

[Tosk]

Really? People still use the "virgin in the basement" insult?

 

[marksound]

 

[Set Harth]

Yeah seriously. Not all of us have parents with finished basements!

I mean, come on now.

 

[BillJ]

Really? People still use the "virgin in the basement" insult?

With some of the nit-picking that is going on over this movie, the "virgin in the basement" mental image seemed apt. So sue me.

 

[marksound]

Believe it or not, I'm watching the movie for the first time right now.

 

[BillJ]

Believe it or not, I'm watching the movie for the first time right now.

Personally, I think it's a fun movie that has some flaws. Your Mileage May Vary.

 

[Phily B]

Now it's out on DVD, I'm hearing a lot of people talking about it again and the consensus is the same as last time - very good movie, good plot. The only complaints seem to be coming from Trek nerds who want to cry about it not being real Trek.

 

[Amaris]

Yeah, I think I mentioned it earlier, but having had the chance to watch it again (I picked it up on DVD after all. I couldn't wait), it is a rather well assembled film, for something that is supposed to be an action/blockbuster. It's fun science fiction, with a dash of color, and a good, solid commentary on current themes. To me, that's quintessential Trek.

 

[SeerSGB]

I've got my gripes with some of the story choices they made, but nothing to the point that it hurts my enjoyment of the movie--certainly nothing that stands out unless I stop and think about it.

If I was being hyper critical of the movie, I could tear it to shreds. But I can do that with just about any Star Trek movie--or movies in general. And, frankly, that fun from time to time, but it's not fun to be in the mindset 24/7 when it comes to a movie.

 

[Amaris]

I've got my gripes with some of the story choices they made, but nothing to the point that it hurts my enjoyment of the movie--certainly nothing that stands out unless I stop and think about it.

If I was being hyper critical of the movie, I could tear it to shreds. But I can do that with just about any Star Trek movie--or movies in general. And, frankly, that fun from time to time, but it's not fun to be in the mindset 24/7 when it comes to a movie.

I prefer to nitpick-to-death a movie I love. If I don't like a movie, I just don't watch it. Seems the logical thing to do. Now, I do tear down movies when people insist such-and-such movie has no plot holes/is superior to another movie in a series, because that's fun, but it's not malevolent in nature.

 

[Phily B]

Yeah, I think I mentioned it earlier, but having had the chance to watch it again (I picked it up on DVD after all. I couldn't wait), it is a rather well assembled film, for something that is supposed to be an action/blockbuster. It's fun science fiction, with a dash of color, and a good, solid commentary on current themes. To me, that's quintessential Trek.

Yes, I can not for the life of me understand the "it's not star trek" stuff. It's more Star Trek than a lot of Star Trek!