STID 5th anniversary

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by Khan 2.0, May 16, 2018.

  1. Rahul

    Rahul Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Which, sadly, shows that nuKirk simply isn't that good a leader. It would have been his job to order Scotty into the reactor. Not just because Scotty would know much better how to repair it (if jump-kicks weren't sufficient, Kirk would have sacrificed himself for nothing), but also because now the ship is without it's Captain in a critical situation. That was not a good decision. This isn't comparable to Captain America jumping on a (test) grenade for his companions. This is something brash, unexperienced pre-Starfleet Kirk from ST09 could have done. Follow his gut instincts to save others. But this is not what a Captain should have done.

    The sad thing is that this exact topic has been handled so often already in Star Trek, and usually so much more better. Sisko had tremendous problems migrating from the "action guy" to the "command chair" guy, ordering Dax with the Defiant on missions, without joining them, helpless and being dependend on his subordinates to do the right thing, but the right thing nevertheless, because he was needed at other places. Troi, learning an Officer has to make sacrifices, even offer sending Geordie, a friend, to certain death, if it's the only way the ship can survive. Archer, when he himself went in a spacesuit on the hull of the ship to help Trip, despite being needed as a Captain, was a weakness. A character flaw. Something that was fitting, because he was inexperienced, handling on gut decisions, and needed to grow.

    From a Captain Kirk, it made no sense to self-sacrifice in that situation and bringing everyone else in critical danger, only because he was so selfish that he couldn't make the "right" choice and send the more technically experienced guy inside. This is not cementing Kirk as a good Captain. This is him being deconstructed as a serious leader. This was not a good decision from the writers.

    Well, or lose his JJTrek designs.:guffaw:
    Seriously, that would be a crime. Yeah, I harp on the JJmovies for unrelated reasons. But goddamn if this isn't the closest I ever have seen to the original Enterprise-but-still-believable-realistic-and-futuristic on a silver screen!
    Ryan Church is a goddamn treasure.
     
  2. TrickyDickie

    TrickyDickie Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Location:
    In a painting, darkly.
    I don't think that the fact that Kirk's death in the second movie was not mentioned in the third is a problem.

    In TOS, we had McCoy, Chekov, Uhura, and Scotty all die....IIRC? There was no mention in subsequent episodes.

    Also, Beyond takes place at a point significantly later than Into Darkness, unlike TWOK-TSFS-TVH.

    Of the 3 new movies thus far, I like them 2-1-3. I just didn't care for Beyond all that much. I think it would have been better if it had been a new take on Garth from Whom Gods Destroy. Instead, we got something that was sorta-kinda-maybe a bit like that, but about as interesting as dishwater by comparison.

    Steve Ihnat is sorely missed....
     
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2018
  3. JKM

    JKM Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2016
    I'm going to be honest here and admit I'm not a transformers fan so I'm not really getting the comparisons.:rommie: Just FYI. Also I respectfully disagree with that thought. If someone goes into a situation expecting to lose their life and does, but is brought back, that's still a sacrifice on their part. They didn't know they would be brought back, they weren't expecting it. Anyway I didn't say his sacrifice was necessary, but being put in the position to make that choice was in my opinion essential to Kirk's arc. Kirk is not Captain Picard, while this IS an alternate universe, he is still going to be Kirk and Kirk in TOS was always the one who would do the most dangerous tasks before he asked his crew to do so. If they had him Picard out and delegate, it would not be true to who Kirk is, in either universe, as I see it.

    Also your comment about it already being handled well in TWOK tells me you might be seeing these movies as perhaps a remake (I could be wrong?) and not what they are, which is basically an alternate reality based on a 'What would happen If' scenario JJ started in the 09 movie. And that is this, 'What would happen to Kirk if instead of being raised by loving parents, and being inspired to join Starfleet because of said Father, he was abused growing up due to his step-father and absent mother. How would that affect how Kirk turned out?' Viewed through that lens ST09 and STID are stories explaining all this.

    I get that some people maybe don't want that story, but I love the fact they spread it out over two movies and not one. Not to mention that would've been impractical to try to squeeze into one movie. I prefer movies to build upon the previous, which is another reason I didn't like Beyond. I could also say I've seen a lot of origin movies that span more than one film. Iron Man comes to mind, though I think instead of calling them both origin movies I would call them developing the character. That's just good storytelling. ST 09 how did Kirk become Captain, STID how did Kirk grow into the Captain we all know/love. It was obvious at the end of the 09 film that this was not the Captain Kirk we were used to. I remember hearing everyone bitch about how a cadet was made a Captain, and ranting about Kirk being this immature ass. My answer, well yes, that is the point. I thought it was much better that they dealt with that in the next film instead of ignoring it. No doubt if they had we'd still be hearing about it. Which brings up my next point about movie tie-ins....

    I disagree, they could have referenced STID in a hundred ways that wouldn't affect the story they did tell with Beyond whether or not you feel it was ridiculous.(I don't :)) They didn't have to make a story based on STID, but they could have the characters quip about events that happened in it. Just like they did with Spock and Spock Primes death and Kirk's line about what he was born into. Speaking of, I don't think that line would have had as much impact if the events of STID hadn't happened. That was the lesson Kirk had learned in STID, better to die saving lives. In 09 he didn't understand his Father's choice, in Beyond he's already been there and can speak to it.

    An awesome tie in I wish they had made, was that at the end of STID we see Kirk who had lost a lot of his confidence that he should be Captain, they should have tied that into him trying to be made a Vice Admiral since they gave him no other reason to have done so. To be clear I'm referencing the line he says to Spock about how Spock should be the one in the Captain's seat and not him. Though what was it, two years down the line, that would probably be a stretch unless they shortened the time frame. Would've have been more interesting character development at least. It was one of those things they barely hinted at in STID and was never dealt with. There were a lot of things like that, they could have tied in, but they just didn't. I just wanted more Character meat and less scenes of alien planet.

    Also Spock's rage made sense to me, but I will admit, only because I'm an original TOS fan. I know they are Thy'la or however you spell that or will become that. Not to mention, Kirk was his BFF and he'd already lost so much, once someone loses that much and then they lose that last person, they crack. It made sense to me. But like I said that's because, 'Jim, I have been and always shall be, yours.' Also this Spock is not Prime Spock, he has a lot more trouble with his emotions, partly because of what he's lost. It makes sense to me :vulcan:

    Krall was such a disappointment, as far as bad guys go. I remember before the movie came out they were saying this film would be about Federation ideals etc along with Krall's line 'this is where the frontier pushes back.' I was expecting them to come across some corner of the galaxy that had powers that be, that were anathema to the Federation and how they dealt with it. And Edris Elba, what a waste of good resources.
     
    Ovation likes this.
  4. JKM

    JKM Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2016
    I'm gonna jump in here with my two cents on that. Kirk's viewpoint is that he got the crew into this. It was his rushing into the whole situation with Khan, that ended up with Marcus trying to destroy him and for doing the right thing. Like he said to Marcus the crew were just following his orders. He had never dealt with the real life repercussions of his actions. He went in there to die because he felt he had gotten them into that mess and he wouldn't have ordered Scotty to his death. After his speech to Spock about the center chair if McCoy had an inkling of where he was in his head space he probably would've benched Kirk because he was emotionally compromised. Also don't forget that Kirk is a genius in this ST ala Pike 'repeat genius level offender.' He would have known enough to take care of it. In my mind if you can forgive Archer for something like that, it's the same thing with Kirk at this point. He doesn't have the experience to know better as he has never had to face it and especially not in these type of conditions. I can't remember if they said what the time gap was between 09 and STID in the films, but he was 25 when he became a Captain I believe, if this was say only a year later, that still only makes him 26 or 27. And no, he wasn't that good a leader at this juncture, that's the whole point, he was promoted too early. In my mind that is the whole point of STID, dealing with that.
     
    Ovation and pst like this.
  5. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    fireproof78
    Again, I disagree and follows with the themes of the film, and Kirk's arc overall. He knew the ship was in good hands, with Spock, and also that they still needed an engineer if he wasn't successful. It was the "No win" situation all over again, with no good options.

    Again, it isn't just that it makes sense as a captain, but also for Kirk as a character.
     
  6. suarezguy

    suarezguy Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM, USA
    Absolutely, it feels like it wants a pat on the back or rounds of applause for doing anything remotely connected to real life disputes without actually being controversial.
    It tries to say and claims it says that militarism and revenge are bad but it really only says that you shouldn't take revenge on an entity that didn't actually attack you. That might have been a simple but OK allegorical plot 3-5 years after the start of the Iraq War, not 10 years after it started and 3-4 years after the election of a presidential nominee who opposed the war from its beginning.
     
    Rahul likes this.
  7. TrickyDickie

    TrickyDickie Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Location:
    In a painting, darkly.
  8. pst

    pst Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2010
    Location:
    los angeles
    mentioned in another discussion, but sort of appropriate for this thread: DST Star Trek Into Darkness Action Figures tentatively dated for december of this year. come with phasers, phaser rifles, phaser blasts, and enterprise bridge styled bases.
    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
    not sure why they went with into darkness, but they look cool, so hey.
     
    Khan 2.0, JKM and King Daniel Beyond like this.
  9. JKM

    JKM Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2016
    My only question is why does it appear Kirk has a gill or hole under his right ear?
     
    saddestmoon likes this.
  10. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    A type 13 planet in its final stage
    Because Steve Trevor is gonna be in Aquaman.

    Maybe.
     
    saddestmoon and JKM like this.
  11. Khan 2.0

    Khan 2.0 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Location:
    earth...but when?...spock?
    cuz its the biggest one :)
     
    pst likes this.
  12. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    fireproof78
    Next film is a redoing of Conspiracy in Kelvin Era.
     
    JKM likes this.
  13. Rahul

    Rahul Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Damn, Spock looks pissed.:guffaw:
     
    pst likes this.
  14. TrickyDickie

    TrickyDickie Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Location:
    In a painting, darkly.
    Hey, it's Rick Jagger and Chloe Saldana!

    [​IMG]

    :hugegrin:
     
    Galileo7 likes this.
  15. M'Sharak

    M'Sharak Definitely Herbert. Maybe. Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Location:
    Terra Inlandia
    I think maybe you meant to post this in the TOS forum?
     
  16. TrickyDickie

    TrickyDickie Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Location:
    In a painting, darkly.
    No....the first thing that caught my eye was the woman's strong resemblance to Zoe Saldana.
     
  17. johnjm22

    johnjm22 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2013
    Location:
    California
    I absolutely hate this movie. It's only the second movie I've ever walked out on in the theater (and I did so even before it got to the infamous "Khaaaaaaan" scene).

    It's a dumb boring generic space-based action movie with Star Trek branding. It's just as bad as Nemesis.
     
  18. The Realist

    The Realist Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2001
    Star Trek into Darkness is the best Trek movie since 1982, and it's not even a close call. The mindless dogpiling it routinely receives online is an indictment of fandom, not of the film.
     
  19. Terok Nor

    Terok Nor Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2015
    Location:
    Rigel VII
    I rewatched the whole Kelvin trilogy recently. Into Darkness was better than I remembered but still not great. This and the 2009 movie got dull fast and lost my attention. Beyond i enjoyed the hell out of.

    I hope the next movie either doesn't have a villain or creates a better one. All three Kelvin villains have the same shtick. I think it was done slightly better with Krall than it was with Nero, a total bore who negated his entire motivation for existing with his final line "I'd rather see Romulus die a thousand times before I accept your help" and "Khan" who was just not Khan to me and simply regurgitated Space Seed and Wrath anyway. Admiral Marcus was the real villain but sadly a moustache twirling one. Krall had a rock solid motivation that was very believable but he was still just another iteration of "bad guy seeking revenge".

    I think the cast found themselves in Beyond. They still felt incomplete in Into Darkness.
     
  20. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    fireproof78
    The dogpiling, I agree, is quite excessive.