Why Is "Into Darkness" So Hated?

I find Generations to be the absolute worst Trek movie out of the entire canvas. I will never watch that movie again. I find nothing special about III, and find that by the time the film ends on Vulcan, it is a slog. I actually find the Final Frontier to be a lot of fun, and can rewatch it with the best of them.

 

Well, I don't hate it. It's my least favourite of the Kelvin movies and it has a number of issues, some more annoying than others, but I still enjoy it from time to time.

On a related note: I purchased a 4K TV and reader recently so I went ahead and got the 4K versions of the three reboot movies. I got a pleasant surprise while watching Into Darkness a few minutes ago: they colour corrected much of the movie, especially the exterior shots, to be less blue and more natural. The Enterprise particularily looks even more stunning here. A welcome improvement, even though I usually despise such corrections.

 

Star Trek Into Darkness is my least favorite.

For me, its biggest offenses are:

1) A repetition of the exact same character arc for Kirk as from 2009 Star Trek. He needs to learn a lesson in responsibility. Okay.

2) Using the 'member-berry of Star Trek II as a massive emotional climax for two of its main characters. Also, couple that with how Kirk seems annoyed at Spock for the entire movie. But when Kirk , Spock has an emotional meltdown. But they're really not friends here.

3) John Harrison being Khan. Make him one character or the other. I literally don't care what they do with Khan. But to have the character shift identities in the middle of the movie for...what reason? It's not like the characters know who he is. But we do.

I could go on.

 

Such power cannot be allowed to stand. That is the Starfleet way.

And that...leads to hate of the entire movie?

 

Montalban truly was inspired casting, and I love them for doing it.

 

I enjoyed the movie, but the Khan reveal fell flat because he means nothing to the main characters he's talking to. It would be like Darth Vader telling Luke that he's Cassian Andor's father.

Thought it might've been interesting if he had been another character like Joaquim who was pretending to be Khan, but then it would've been a different movie.

 

The Khan reveal is something that I actually have warmed up to, even though I strongly disagree with Khan as the secondary villain. The reveal is more of a tonal shift, from Khan as the McGuffin, the object Kirk is hunting for, to his reassertion of his authority, reclaiming his rightful name of "Khan" and how Marcus had taken that away from him.

When Khan tells Kirk his name in TOS it doesn't mean much to the crew either. Only later do they put all the historical pieces together. Like in ID, by the time Spock and Kirk put it all together it is too late to prevent death and destruction.

Thematically it's actually quite interesting, as names carry a certain amount of importance to Kirk and to Khan. We see a bit of mirroring from ST 09 to ID: "My name is James Kirk." "And who am I?" "Your father's son." to "My name is Khan."

The person behind the name is not the significant moment; the reclaiming of the name is.

 

He could be!

 

Honestly, I loved this movie the best out of the trilogy, with the first film coming in as a very close second favorite. I enjoyed seeing all the character interactions and even the cameo of Carol Marcus (who they should have kept in for the third one considering her and Kirk's future). I think what I loved most about it was seeing Kirk and Spock actually act as friends instead of their rocky relationship in the first one. It was a fun and complex film.

 

Which was actually the past of a different timeline.

 

Kelvin Kirk didn't seem all that interested in Marcus. I would have liked if they had subverted expectations and went with McCoy instead (who did seem interested in her).

 

Indeed. The growth in the second film, especially with Carol, was well done. She was missed in Beyond.

 

This movie is going to be 10 years old this year...

 

*decays*

 

Ah, memories. All those years ago I saw ST:ID in the theater with a buddy who had only a passing familiarity with Star Trek, and hadn't even seen Star Trek (2009). He was confused because "the bald guy" wasn't in this movie.

Kor

 

Hurts it on first watch too. When I first saw it there was audible laughter in the theater during the "Khaaaaan" yell -- not really what the filmmakers were going for. As for rewatch, Abrams' movies get worse the more you see them; that should tell you something.

 

That's certainly one opinion. I still enjoy the Abrams films, and consider Star Trek (2009) one of the best entries in the whole Trek film catalog.

 

Into Darkness is my favourite of all the films and every time I watch it again it only reaffirms my view. 09 is my second favourite.

And just to forestall the potential charges of being a newbie to Trek, I’ve seen every official iteration more than once (save Prodigy—just didn’t grab me) and I’ve been doing so since autumn 1973.

 

Nope. Still rewatch them more than any other Trek film. TUC tops my list but still prefer the fun of these films.

Same with The Force Awakens.