Star Trek Into Darkness [** SPOILERS FROM POST 452 **]

KenSwee

Technocentral wrote: »

The original "Wrath of Khan" that its based on is 100 times better, check it out.

Checked it out aged 9. Thta's my whole point. Half cocked Star Trek remakes are stupid and pointless. There's a whole universe already created and they go with the safe and stupid option. I agree the original was far superior.
All this movie is is another episode in the bloody mirror universe.

Oceanic Nebula

So many species and worlds to explore and they repeat a story already done and give the Klingons a few minutes.

What was wrong with the Klingons innthe mext generation, DS9 etc. They were far more intimidating. When the Klingon removed his mask he struck me as a human from some tribe like the Masai. Really awful design. You just know in the next movie they'll fukc up the rich Klingon culture already established.

goose2005

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Pedantry regarding how far Kronos is too Earth falls into the who gives a **** category for me.

But that's not pedantry - space is big. Very big, it's the biggest thing there is. If Frodo &co. could suddenly walk to Mordor in a day it would really ruin the epic scope of things.

PhiloCypher wrote: »

I'd be willing to forgive the film its flaws if this was a standalone film, as who cares how they get from A to B or how close the planets are to each other in that scenario but this is an ongoing franchise there has to be some level of planning and logic in their world building. You don't introduce the klingons, as an aggressive expansionist race and to be feared and then have their ships shot out of the sky with a pistol and you don't inexplicably have Qo'nos 15seconds at warp from earth, I mean come on how expansionist can they be if they haven't attacked yet.

True; you have to think through a powerful device before introducing it (e.g. in Harry Potter, things like Polyjuice Potion, Apparition, Portkeys, Imperius Curse, Time-Turners are incredibly powerful and would make a mess of any plot, so characters inexplicably just don't use them)

Oafley Jones

goose2005 wrote: »

But that's not pedantry - space is big. Very big, it's the biggest thing there is. If Frodo &co. could suddenly walk to Mordor in a day it would really ruin the epic scope of things.

I'm genuinely not sure if this is sarcasm, or not.

Anyways, here's Plinkett on STID...

http://blip.tv/redlettermedia/mr-plinkett-star-trek-into-reference-6596457

WhatAMelon

Khan was some sort of wooden Englishman. That's no good. Khan is a guy that ozzes a Latin charisma and an intense thirst for revenge. Kirk's temporary death was predictable, his resurrection pedestrian. They improved Scott a bit this time but he's still something of the comic relief figure and that doesn't do him justice. Scott should be somewhat like McCoy as a slightly older and seasoned figure. Pegg is still like a guy who is satirising Scott on a sketch show rather than him being the real deal. Khan's escape was lazily done. They could've put more thought into the writing for that and achieved the same end. Crowbarring in old Spock was cheap and unnecessary for this film. Admiral Marcis isn't a bad idea but isn't exploited enough because he's crowded out on the baddies stakes. However Marcis is better portrayed as someone who has strayed off the reservation but should wrestle with his conscience before giving the big order to obliterate the Enterprise. Sparse and cheap interplay between daughter and father too. There was room for some intense dialogue there that wasn't taken up.

The plus side is that I liked the bond between Pike and Kirk. I thought the twist were Khan surrenders on Kronos was clever and the torpedo/life pod plot was a idea that was good.

I think the script was very lazily done. They seemed to get bored with writing the script after the first segment and then starting shamelessly shoveling in aspects of The Wrath of Khan. If they put a bit of effort in it would've made a far better piece of cinema. With the exception of the first segment, this film relied on the dazzle of action sequences to carry it through. Yes, it's not a scratch on Star Trek II but was an improvement on the first one of this series.

The biggest problem with the film is that, while it's one of the most thrilling and enjoyable blockbusters in awhile the second you stop to think about it, the entire thing falls apart. There are so many ridiculous and down right stupid moments that you can't keep track of them all.

The script starts with a bang and never once slows down. The first film had a number of quiet, emotional moments where there was no action involved where as this time, every quiet moment takes place in the middle of an action piece. The first scene where they discuss, who will save who is at heart what Trek is about but rather than have the conversation occur in quiet between Kirk and Spock it takes place here with Spock in the middle of an erupting volcano. It feels like a film that's afraid to breath in case the audience gets bored.

Tar.Aldarion

I agree with that, it essentially was as much a star trek film as the new bond or die hard films are to their counterparts. It needed less action.

Beefy78

It's quite strange in a way that at a time in which TV feels able to give us thought-provoking dramas with characters with real emotions who develop over time, Hollywood seems to go in the other direction to the point where, as you said, even potentially decent character moments are taking place during incredibly noisy CGI Volcanic eruptions.

I saw this today. I quite enjoyed it - probably more so than I did the first one. It's not Star Trek though, no matter how many nods to the fans Abrams wants to give.

shadowcomplex

titan18 wrote: »

Both

It would be better than a packet of vice versa anyway

Rubber_Soul

Finally got a chance to see this and while I thought it was an entertaining 2 hours I ultimately felt flat about the whole thing. In a way I like the idea of mirroring the Spock sacrifice theme from Wrath of Khan but as usual Lindelof, Orci and Kurtzman are about as subtle as a hammer to the head and just decide to lazily make a direct copy of the original, even shoehorning the "Khaaaaaaan" shout in case you missed what they were trying to do.

Problem is that it doesn't carry even a fraction of the emotional resonance of the original as you have been hammered over the head a couple of scenes before with the news that Khan's blood brings people back from the dead. Imo the original Spock death also resonated more because of the character of Spock himself. Everyone knows Kirk is heroic but Spock is a cold, unemotional character who makes the ultimate sacrifice to save his friends.

siblers

Eventually got round to seeing it today, quite enjoyed it but the never ending cliches and cheesiness began to piss me off as the film grew on. Also Anton Yelchin's russian accent is annoying as hell. Thought Kirk, Spok and Khan were really good in it though and the plot involving Khan was quite decent. The intro with the volcano was a load of rubbish though.

expectationlost

i don't know why everyone is saying that knoowing benedict is khan is a spoiler, doesn't really spoil anything, unless it makes you think they are copy alot of wrath of khan, was it just to spare the writers embarrasment?

pah

excerpt
From a man of steel breakdown. An excellent read, and the explanation why I didnt give a sh1t what happened at the end and why kirks "death" was so hollow.

THAT MEANS CREATING RELATIONSHIPS WE UNDERSTAND AND FEEL FOR, JUST LIKE WE HAVE WITH OUR FAMILY MEMBERS. IT IS COMPLETELY WITHIN A MOVIE'S INTEREST TO DO SO. SO WHY DO SO MANY REACH OUT FOR THE TANGENTIAL CONNECTION? WHY DO SO MANY RELY ON SCALE AND FALLING BUILDINGS? WHY DO SO MANY THROW SCORES OF STRANGERS' FACES AT YOU AS THEY PERISH? WHY IS IT ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS A PLOT ABOUT THE END OF THE WORLD WHEN THEY NEVER BOTHER TO EXPLAIN WHY IT'S A WORLD WE SHOULD CARE ABOUT? AND WHY DO GOOD FILMMAKERS ALWAYS TRY TO SOLELY RELY ON THE FILMMAKING CRAFT OF A GOOD MUSIC CUE AND A PRETTY IMAGE TO CLAW AT YOUR EMOTIONS THAN BUILDING SOMETHING REAL? LIKE THE HOMELESS PERSON, THEY WANT YOU TO PROJECT YOURSELF ONTO AN UNKNOWN TRAGEDY RATHER THAN JUST BE YOUR FRIEND. THEY FAIL TO REALIZE THAT YOU CAN SHOW THE SADDEST DEATH IN THE WORLD WITH THE MOST HEARTBREAKING MUSIC CUE, BUT IF THERE'S NO REAL MEANING. SERIOUSLY, IF WE DON'T FEEL LIKE WE ACTUALLY LOST SOMETHING, THEN WHAT DOES IT MATTER?

_Kaiser_

I actually just finished watching this seeing as it's hit the 1080p standard.. [LOTS OF SPOILERS AHEAD!!]










As a fan of the original/Prime continuity and series/movies I really didn't think I'd enjoy the 09 reboot but despite myself I enjoyed it, even more on repeat viewings.

But this... this is just godawful tripe! Half the cast/crew barely gets a look-in this time round (including Bones surprisingly) - it seems they went down the route of Enterprise with Archer, Trip and T'Pol being replaced by Kirk, Spock and Khan in this one, right down to Scotty's vaguely Enterprise-styled uniform but grey instead of blue. Carol Marcus was clearly just included to strip off for the teenage boys in the audience.

Speaking of uniforms.. what were they all wearing during Kirk's speech at the end? Caps and all?!

Then there's the "story" - a confused mess of noisy, random action set-pieces and lens flare, out-of-place nods to the original continuity, the virtually line-by-line copy of the Spock death scene from Wrath of Khan (but with Kirk this time - and the ridiculous Spock "NOOOOOOOOOOO!" er... I mean "KHHHAAAAAAAANNN!" scream?! Please!) only to undo the whole thing 15 minutes later with "superblood" :rolleyes:

Speaking of Spock.. Nimoy's cameo was criminally underused this time to the point that they should have just cut it entirely. Then there's Kirk's 20-minute demotion at the start.. he made Captain (again) even quicker than the first time!

"Old" Trek did need a fresh start and while I didn't agree with everything the 09 film did, it did work as a decent Trek-themed sci-fi blockbuster but this latest one is a shambles from start to finish. The original sequel (Wrath of Khan) had genuine heart, emotion, action and consequences that resonated through the next 2 movies in the series - this I'll have probably forgotten by next week.

2/10 and that's only because I like Peter Weller and his Admiral Cartwright impression.

_Kaiser_

Slept on it and no, it's still a mess!

In fact, it reminds me of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAgODVbPq78

... right down to the whole "frat-boy" atmosphere between the senior staff and the way communicators are now apparently long-distance mobiles too (and yea I know you can say Kirk's call to Scotty in the bar was routed through the ship's comm system but we've never seen them do that before either - it's always from a console or the bridge).

Martin's intro in the above clip about execs wanting to recast with younger, edgier crew is something I could really imagine happening during the 09 reboot discussions.

T-Bird

Just watched it again. I think it is a remake of the 1st Khan apperance in Space Seed from the original series (might have been mentioned before)...

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

bizmark

i watched this film tonight..

My god it was the dumbest thing iv ever seen made pacific rim seem like freaking Shakespeare in story telling quality which is impressive (love pacific rim incidentally but still) just one dumb reason for one splosion after another everything had to be BIGGER! bigger splosions bigger ships bigger crashs ! less lens flair thankfully bigger sets for the final "sacrifice" that means nothing even then they did it in the dumbest way possible kick the ****ing warp core back on line? cringe worthy KHAAAAAAAAN really piss off jj abrams i swear he should of just been a games developer for bros of war hes lost on this story telling lark .

Also how can a director completely miss the symbolism of giving khan a smaller ship? hes better than you he doesn't need a equal ship he doesn't need a ship "4 times the size and 3 times the power" of enterprise he can do it with something small and relatively unassuming and he got tricked by the most obvious trick in the book it wasnt even an ego driven mistake he was just an idoit like everything else in this movie.

Terrible dumb film nothing happens apart from stupid crap instant demotions and promotions starting scenes that mean nothing battles that mean nothing klingons that do nothing khan bearly does anything he did absolutely nothing that made him menceing apart from takeing a beating from kirk which doesnt shock me jj abrams doesnt know how to impart anysort of mence or tension or anything with out a over the top explosion or gun battle.

Easily worse than nemesis or insurrection imho

pah

jacksie66 wrote: »

My mates can't understand why I hate this film so much. It just shat all over my childhood. Im a massive trekie. This movie was disgusting in my eyes. Ricardo montaban must be turning over in his grave.

This - and I enjoyed Trek 2009 for the most part.

Mark Hamill

You know what annoyed me most about this film? Its not the stupid story or the badly written characters, it was the scenes of the ship going into warp. When the ship flies off at warp, it leaves a blue glittery trail and there is just a moment of silence while the camera pans into the trail, but then you hear a "sparkling" sound (like a chandelier rocking) as it passes through the trail. That perfectly sums up how Abrahms sees his audience and what little respect he has for them.

In his eyes, the audience are infants, almost mindless morons, instantly distracted by anything and everything, and you must constantly be making sounds or sights to make sure they pay attention to the screen. The "sparkle" sounding warp trail and the constant lens flaring are the movie making equivalent of dangling keys in front of a babies face to get their attention and I cant help finding my intelligence insulted when I watch his films because of it.

bizmark

Also why the christ was a spaceship underwater to avoid detection from a primitive group of people ? why was it not in space like it's designed to operate in did these group of spear chuckers have advanced optics technology or something

Movie is dumb so dumb

THT

The Klingons appearance was awful.

jaykhunter

Wow, lots of negative reaction, I really enjoyed this movie. Despite some ham-fisted emotional drama I thought it was really entertaining and the story/action/Cumberbach were more than enough to cover that. Gorgeous, big-budget film with 500% less shining a torch in my face!

kryogen

jaykhunter wrote: »

Wow, lots of negative reaction, I really enjoyed this movie. Despite some ham-fisted emotional drama I thought it was really entertaining and the story/action/Cumberbach were more than enough to cover that. Gorgeous, big-budget film with 500% less shining a torch in my face!

Give it a bit more time, let the stupidity of it really sink in

krudler

It's as dumb as a bag of hammers but fun, I enjoyed it for what it was, but I really,really wish people who write modern blockbusters would let someone else take a look at their script to make sure there's not as stupid as they are.
The part that annoyed me the most was the guy who Khan makes blow up the Starfleet base, but he does it AFTER Khan saves his daughter?! so hang on, this guy has magically cured your kid, he now has zero to bargain with, and you blow up a building killing thousands? he's already given away his one bargaining chip, just report him!
They could have easily solved that with guy goes into building, blows it up, cut to shot of news report on hospital tv showing the explosion and Khan injecting the kid, bam, it's not that hard ffs.

jaykhunter

I think it helps that I'm a casual Star Trek fan. Like I watched most of TNG back in the 90s but wouldn't know that much about the other series and films (beyond Mr Plinkett's fabulous videos). Like I'm sure there's a ton of references that would tip hardcore fans from homage/reference into "this is plagerism" territory.

krudler

jaykhunter wrote: »

I think it helps that I'm a casual Star Trek fan. Like I watched most of TNG back in the 90s but wouldn't know that much about the other series and films (beyond Mr Plinkett's fabulous videos). Like I'm sure there's a ton of references that would tip hardcore fans from homage/reference into "this is plagerism" territory.

Same I wouldn't be a big Trek fan at all, seen enough of the shows and movies to know about it but not in a hugely in depth amount, its just Into Darkness was so full of plot holes, on 2nd viewing it loses a lot of its enjoyment, its lovely looking, has a brilliant score, Cumberbatch is great, some nice setpieces, just meh, stupid stupid stupid.

Sad Professor

krudler wrote: »

It's as dumb as a bag of hammers but fun, I enjoyed it for what it was, but I really,really wish people who write modern blockbusters would let someone else take a look at their script to make sure there's not as stupid as they are.
The part that annoyed me the most was the guy who Khan makes blow up the Starfleet base, but he does it AFTER Khan saves his daughter?! so hang on, this guy has magically cured your kid, he now has zero to bargain with, and you blow up a building killing thousands? he's already given away his one bargaining chip, just report him!
They could have easily solved that with guy goes into building, blows it up, cut to shot of news report on hospital tv showing the explosion and Khan injecting the kid, bam, it's not that hard ffs.

Why would he do that on the basis of nothing more than Harrison's word?

The film doesn't go into detail about his exact motivations, but we have to to assume that the guy wasn't an idiot. Since that installation was actually Section 31, he possibly already knew who Harrison was, that he was on the loose and very dangerous and not to mess with him. But even if he didn't, his interactions with Harrison would have been enough to tell him that he could easily kill his family if he didn't deliver on his part of the deal. I mean the next time we see Khan he's blowing up Starfleet Command. How do you report a guy like that? Keeping in mind that Earth in the 23rd century is a utopian paradise with no crime and Khan is a genetically engineered superhuman who once ruled half the Earth, etc.

Sibbs

Sad Professor wrote: »

Why would he do that on the basis of nothing more than Harrison's word?

The film doesn't go into detail about his exact motivations, but we have to to assume that the guy wasn't an idiot. Since that installation was actually Section 31, he possibly already knew who Harrison was, that he was on the loose and very dangerous and not to mess with him. But even if he didn't, his interactions with Harrison would have been enough to tell him that he could easily kill his family if he didn't deliver on his part of the deal. I mean the next time we see Khan he's blowing up Starfleet Command. How do you report a guy like that? Keeping in mind that Earth in the 23rd century is a utopian paradise with no crime and Khan is a genetically engineered superhuman who once ruled half the Earth, etc.

Do you really think that's what JJ Abrams was thinking?

The problem is that so much of this movie makes absolutely no sense that I lose the will to decipher any of it. Making sense doesn't matter to the director. He decides that planets will be as close as they need to be to fit his plot for example. He decides that anyone can waltz into a top secret military base. All logic goes out the window.

Penn

jaykhunter wrote: »

Gorgeous, big-budget film with 500% less shining a torch in my face!

The lens flare was still awful in some scenes. At one point when Alice Eve is talking it looked her eyes were about to shoot out blue lasers.