STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

[Therin of Andor]

Couple o questions for Therin or the other lucky few viewers

1. For me, it was a complete surprise. I was convince that rumour was a red herring. It's... highly relevant. Not essential, but a thrill to see.

2. I honestly don't remember. I was still... climbing back from the edge of my seat.

 

[Mad Jack Wolfe]

if people dislike this movie, don't go see it

How will they know if they dislike it?

It's called "a hunch".

So was Quasimodo's back.

 

[Jeyl]

2. I honestly don't remember. I was still... climbing back from the edge of my seat.

Sounds like a bore fest if you couldn't stay awake long enough to realize what was going on..

 

[Ovation]

2. I honestly don't remember. I was still... climbing back from the edge of my seat.

Sounds like a bore fest if you couldn't stay awake long enough to realize what was going on..

I'm sure that's exactly the reason he will give, owing to his oh so negative reactions overall to the movie.

 

[ConRefit79]

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

although this time it's even worse as J.J did not have to worry about the core fanbase buying tickets.

JJ will not be getting this fan's money.

 

[BillJ]

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

although this time it's even worse as J.J did not have to worry about the core fanbase buying tickets.

JJ will not be getting this fan's money.

But he sure is getting a whole hell of a lot of your time.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Meh, they could lose a good portion of the fan base - and they won't - and still be just fine.

 

[Franklin]

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

Obviously there was a lot of Hype around our J.J after Star Trek XI came out, he looked to be breathing new life into the series which had gotten stale. Star Trek Into Darkness however, was a little bit of a dissapointment to me. Without getting into too many spoilers, I have a feeling that the way J.J sees the Star Trek universe is a little bit one note. The performance of Benedict Cumberbatch is the high point of the movie, and expect J.J to get a lot of credit for that but the thing is Benedict would do well with any script.

All this is not to say that the film is bad, far from it. But with the novelty factor gone, STID is just a solid 7/10 actioner with a very good performance by it's main villain. Outside of that it's nothing special, and it suffers the same problems it's predecessor did, in forgetting the roots of the franchise, although this time it's even worse as J.J did not have to worry about the core fanbase buying tickets.

I hope that J.J is not at the helm for the next movie in the series, as it will be nice to see somebody else have a go. J.J can produce consistantly decent product but I feel he is lacking that something extra which will be needed to KEEP this franchise relevant.

It's fine to not like the movie, or feel it's nothing special, but exactly what does it lack to keep the franchise relevant? What roots does it forget? Especially if there are so many references to familiar things in STID.

There is a supposedly clean slate to work with in this new universe, but I also think the producers have made it clear that while this may be a different universe, our heroes still seem bound to experience many similar things (take the comic stories, for example).

Maybe this universe is more derivative of the old one than brand new -- which can be good or bad depending on the quality of the old product to begin with, and the quality of the derivative product.

If this movie is this universe's take on TWOK, it's probably not fair to say it's unoriginal just because it borrows characters and bits from that movie. To me, it would be far more fair to say, "Is this a good story on its own?" And let the chips fall where they may based on that.

If STID grosses more than the previous movie did, at the risk of sounding like an economic determinist, that does keep the franchise relevant.

 

[Kruezerman]

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

although this time it's even worse as J.J did not have to worry about the core fanbase buying tickets.

JJ will not be getting this fan's money.

So why are you here?

 

[ConRefit79]

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

although this time it's even worse as J.J did not have to worry about the core fanbase buying tickets.

JJ will not be getting this fan's money.

So why are you here?

Need to vent somewhere. Should we sit down and shut up while this hack perverts something we've cared about so long?

 

[RAMA]

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

although this time it's even worse as J.J did not have to worry about the core fanbase buying tickets.

JJ will not be getting this fan's money.

They sold on the order of 33-34 million tickets for the last movie. I'd say they'd do 40 million this time. I think they'll be ok without you.

RAMA

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

Should we sit down and shut up while this hack perverts something we've cared about so long?

It doesn't matter whether you do or don't, since the success and wide acceptance of what Abrams is doing - including among the vast majority of Star Trek fans - ensures that it will continue for some time.

 

[Kruezerman]

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

JJ will not be getting this fan's money.

So why are you here?

Need to vent somewhere. Should we sit down and shut up while this hack perverts something we've cared about so long?

Venting while not offering anything constructive to the subject goes against the point of this forum. Also, we have all debated you time and again and you've not budged one bit.

 

[Ovation]

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

JJ will not be getting this fan's money.

So why are you here?

Need to vent somewhere. Should we sit down and shut up while this hack perverts something we've cared about so long?

Who's "we"? Is there a club I don't know about? How does one become a member?

By being a long-time fan? Been a fan for 40 years now.
By having watched every iteration of the show and all the movies? Done and done.
By having read/owned over 100 of the books/comics? Done and done.

Anything else? No?

Feel free to vent, but in my experience, people usually find it more satisfying to vent to a sympathetic audience--as the goal is usually to garner sympathy. But if the goal is something else…

 

[Flake]

For those of you interested in Star Treks box-office potential, I have found this. It is the 'tracking' for Star Trek and a comment from the tracking company that Hollywood pay to research such things. (Reel Source)

                       Male      Female   Adult     Male   Female
                       20-35     20-35      35+     Teen   Teen 

TREK2
Plan on Seeing:        90%        81%       86%      88%   78%
Aware, Not Interested:  6%        10%        8%       7%   12% 
Unaware:                4%         9%        6%       5%   10%

Star Trek: Into Darkness" is as close to a sure thing as you can get
this summer. The tracking is rock solid across all quadrants and it 
is on track to open in the $95 million + range.

 

[Flake]

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

It's fine to not like the movie, or feel it's nothing special, but exactly what does it lack to keep the franchise relevant? What roots does it forget? Especially if there are so many references to familiar things in STID.

Exactly. It is frustrating to see some people marking down the movie because of these supposed issues instead of just enjoying the movie for what it is. Straight out of the blocks this movie is on -3/10 for some people just because it does not agree with their personal vision of Star Trek.

 

[KirkusOveractus]

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

although this time it's even worse as J.J did not have to worry about the core fanbase buying tickets.

JJ will not be getting this fan's money.

Someone here in work saw Iron Man 3 over this past weekend with his son (who is 7 and a huge Iron Man fan). They saw the STID trailer before it, and now the son wants to see it, in fact is excited to see it!

Nothing to worry about - another fan has been brought in and will happily take your spot in ticket sales.

 

[M'Sharak]

2. I honestly don't remember. I was still... climbing back from the edge of my seat.

Sounds like a bore fest if you couldn't stay awake long enough to realize what was going on..

You could have taken the trouble to respond to what he actually said, but all you bring is a petty attempt at a thread-shit? If that's the best you can manage, perhaps you ought to give some thought to not posting at all.

JJ will not be getting this fan's money.

So why are you here?

Need to vent somewhere. Should we sit down and shut up while this hack perverts something we've cared about so long?

Have you considered starting a blog? Pretty much license to vent, those are.

 

[Mach5]

Re: STID: The first sign that Abrahms is NOT infallable [-> G&D]

Should we sit down and shut up while this hack perverts something we've cared about so long?

None of the 716 episodes of Star Trek made from 1966-2005, and none of ten pre-2009 movies suffered any kind of perversion from JJ Abrams. You can check for yourself. Your DVD's are still there, and unless you scratched the shit out of them, you can still enjoy them just like you did pre-09.

On the other hand, the perversion Braga was doing from 1995 onward is pretty much irreparable, but I don't see you bitch about that.

 

[Flake]

Yes I recommend Trek fundamentalists watch Spocks Brain or Threshold on repeat for 132mins if you do not watch Into Darkness, its only fair.