STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

[suarezguy]

Have to give it an F and rank it the worst Star Trek film. The dialogue of the protagonists was mediocre, the action boring and the plotting very convoluted and unbelieaveable.

What he did on Nibiru was against regulations and against the Prime Directive but was it morally wrong? After all, he saved a civilisation from extinction and the presence of the Enterprise was only revealed because he chose to save Spock instead of letting him die.

He seemed overly cavalier about his decision compared to how others regarded the Prime Directive and it didn't make sense that Spock wouldn't have objected, let alone to the point of playing the major role, and then not try to defend the decision later.

There's a difference between reusing a story and thematic idea and blatantly trying to remake much of a story; I thought Enterprise "Terra Nova" and Nemesis were much too close to past works and thus some of my least favorite (although "Friendship One" was very recent and bad to begin with).

As for the Eve in underwear scene, it seemed pointless but worse because I didn't like Kirk ignoring her telling him to turn around; the original Kirk would never do that but it seemed, unfortunately, like only a small stretch for Abrams version.

STAR TREK IS: Space opera, action and adventure, playing fast and loose with real science to make it fit whatever serves the plot. Character chemistry, interaction, making the story play well onscreen. Characters are the focus.

Did you find it believable that Uhura would love Spock but be so unaccepting, almost not even understanding, about his reserved, logical nature or that Spock wouldn't alert Kirk about Carol's identity earlier (or that he would contact his alternate self from the bridge)?

 

[Kruezerman]

Oh this is gonna be fun!

 

[Ln X]

Have to give it an F and rank it the worst Star Trek film. The dialogue of the protagonists was mediocre, the action boring and the plotting very convoluted and unbelieaveable.

Don't worry, you are not the only one who feels that way about STID.

 

[F. King Daniel]

He seemed overly cavalier about his decision compared to how others regarded the Prime Directive and it didn't make sense that Spock wouldn't have objected, let alone to the point of playing the major role, and then not try to defend the decision later.

You think Spock would happily a planet full of innocents die? Spock didn't think Kirk would cover up the mission.

There's a difference between reusing a story and thematic idea and blatantly trying to remake much of a story; I thought Enterprise "Terra Nova" and Nemesis were much too close to past works and thus some of my least favorite (although "Friendship One" was very recent and bad to begin with).

As for the Eve in underwear scene, it seemed pointless but worse because I didn't like Kirk ignoring her telling him to turn around; the original Kirk would never do that but it seemed, unfortunately, like only a small stretch for Abrams version.

Take a look at the nasty red marks Shatner's Grabby Kirk left on Reyna's arms in "Requiem for Muthuselah" - Pine's Kirk would never do something like that.

STAR TREK IS: Space opera, action and adventure, playing fast and loose with real science to make it fit whatever serves the plot. Character chemistry, interaction, making the story play well onscreen. Characters are the focus.

Did you find it believable that Uhura would love Spock but be so unaccepting, almost not even understanding, about his reserved, logical nature

She was bothered by his willingness to put himself in danger and his post-Vulcan lack of communication, not his Vulcan nature. As was explained on the ride to Kronos.

or that Spock wouldn't alert Kirk about Carol's identity earlier (or that he would contact his alternate self from the bridge)?

Yes and yes.

 

[DalekJim]

Have to give it an F and rank it the worst Star Trek film.

I'd rank it as one of the weakest but objectively speaking, I think Generations remains the worst.

 

[Joker]

STiD is absolutely nowhere even near the worst or one of the worst.

 

[BillJ]

The dialogue of the protagonists was mediocre, the action boring and the plotting very convoluted and unbelieaveable.

You pretty much just described every Trek film in a nutshell.

 

[JarodRussell]

STiD is absolutely nowhere even near the worst or one of the worst.

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c[/yt]

 

[Agenda]

Kirk - and other captains - broke the prime directive so many times with little to no consequences on tv. So as a fan I had troubles reconciling that with him getting his ass handed to him by starfleet command in this movie.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Because Spock reported it to Admiral Pike, wheras it was always covered up in The Original Series. See Voyager's "Flashback" when Janeway talks about how vague some of the old Enterprise logs were.

 

[Agenda]

Because Spock reported it to Admiral Pike, wheras it was always covered up in The Original Series.

I realize it's not meant to be taken too seriously, but that kind of interpretation makes Starfleet Command look like clueless idiots and the senior officers of the Enterprise look like renegade insubordinates.

 

[F. King Daniel]

That's pretty much how it's been all along. Take a look at the clueless overseers and commisioners that Kirk had to deal with on the original show. The Federation always wanted things done one (usually ridiculous) way, Kirk always knew better.

 

[Nine of Four]

I thought the title "Into Darkness" was strange, because it really had nothing to do with the movie. It seems as though J.J. Abrams just chose it as a title because it was dramatic.

 

[Noname Given]

I thought the title "Into Darkness" was strange, because it really had nothing to do with the movie. It seems as though J.J. Abrams just chose it as a title because it was dramatic.

a Starfleet Admiral builds a Dreadnought in secret and has plans to START a Federation/Klingon war...
^^^
Yep, I don't know how "Into Darkness" relates to the story of the Federation official disavowing Federation principles to start a war.

 

[saddestmoon]

I thought the title "Into Darkness" was strange, because it really had nothing to do with the movie. It seems as though J.J. Abrams just chose it as a title because it was dramatic.

Losing Pike (as a mentor / father-figure influence) in the way that he did, and coupled with Kirk's statement of "I have no idea what I'm supposed to do, only what I can do..." - against the backdrop of the off-the-grid/under-the-radar 'go after John Harrison' mission, prompted by Marcus - suggesting a mission outside of the realm of Starfleet and into something of an unknown terrorist threat (even before the USS Vengeance / Khan reveals) - the title of the movie makes perfect tonal sense, IMO.

It's also in keeping with almost all the other Trek movie titles ever used as well.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I thought it was supposed to be a play on "Heart of Darkness."

I mean, taken from Heart of Darkness's wiki page:

The story is a thematic exploration of the savagery-versus-civilization relationship, and of the colonialism and the racism that make imperialism possible.

Pretty much sums up STiD.

 

[SeerSGB]

Movie is up on Itunes for purchase.

 

[Amasov]

Just for fun, I took the footage from Into Darkness when Scotty calls up to Spock, "You better get down here, better hurry," and put it to the music from the same moment in The Wrath of Khan to see if they'd fit together.

I was a little surprised that they did!

 

[Kruezerman]

Just for fun, I took the footage from Into Darkness when Scotty calls up to Spock, "You better get down here, better hurry," and put it to the music from the same moment in The Wrath of Khan to see if they'd fit together.

I was a little surprised that they did!

Ooh! I wanna see!

 

[SeerSGB]

Gotta love Simon Pegg: Simon Pegg: 'F--- You' if You Think 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Sucks

Pegg was surprised, responding, "It absolutely isn't the worst 'Star Trek' movie," Pegg said. "It's asinine, you know? It's ridiculous. And frustrating."

He continued, "To be subject to that level of sort of, like, crass f---ing ire, I just say f--- you."