Ten Forward

Welcome Guest 

Show/Hide Header

Welcome Guest, posting in this forum requires registration.





Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Star Trek Into Darkness
ecmyers
Administrator
Posts: 86
Permalink
Post Star Trek Into Darkness
on: December 11, 2012, 09:50
Quote

By now I expect most people here have seen the Star Trek Into Darkness teaser and have Opinions. I figured I would start off a thread to discuss it, if you're feeling speculative or perhaps merely full of rage, or even ambivalent.

If you haven't seen it yet, the Japanese cut of the trailer with some additional footage is here:

If this is all some clever, or overt, misdirection, then I'm kind of onboard. Abrams knows what we all expect, and when he's good, he can manage to subvert that in some surprising and interesting ways. But sometimes he also goes for the obvious choices, which is less satisfying. Anyway, I had hoped to avoid any spoilers for this, but that is kind of ridiculous and I'm finding myself getting caught up in the mystery. So what do you all think?

Torie
Administrator
Posts: 73
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: December 11, 2012, 13:14
Quote

Well, you all know what I think... looks like a crappy Michael Bay movie. All of this kind of reminds me of the second X-Files movie, where it seemed like they sat around and thought "Man, you know what people want to see in an X-Files movie? Absolutely nothing that made the show great! Let's just use this script I found in the men's room at McDonald's!"

I have to assume that the hands thing is intentional misdirection/callback. If this is really a Khan plot I think they'd be advertising that fact really heavily.

DemetriosX
Lieutenant
Posts: 43
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: December 11, 2012, 14:07
Quote

So now they're saying that Cumberbatch is somebody called John Harrison, which was the name used for generic crewman in a bunch of TOS scripts (but never on screen). It's all just misdirection after misdirection. That or they've stolen the script for The Incredibles with Kirk as Mr. Incredible and Cumberbatch as Syndrome. It's also now been revealed that Alice Eve will be playing Carol Marcus, which is either more misdirection or points more to a Khan plot.

On top of everything else, Abrams swore he heard the complaints of just about everybody and would cut down on the lens flare. But obviously there's so much of it in this movie that they couldn't find enough shots without it to make a trailer. Abrams is going to screw the franchise so hard, it will never recover.

Lubitsch
Cadet
Posts: 1
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: December 11, 2012, 22:01
Quote

I've posted this already elsewhere, but it tackles a main problem:
I'm afraid the times of the blockbuster leave Star Trek no route of escape on the big screen. I never watched this stuff because there were spectacular action acenes, self contained comedy sequences for cheap laughs and certainly not because there were evil villains twirling their moustaches while destroying something for some reasons. However these are the demands of a zillion dollar movie and the authors have written exactly this kind of trash throughout their careers, why should they suddenly come up with something better?
The classic films managed to avoid these pitfalls pretty well, Kruge is admittedly a cardboard villain, Final Frontier picks up too many cheap gags, but beyond that there's ironically only Khan as potential cliche who however successfully lives on the screen by his charisma. When the TNG era arrived, digital effects and their "benefits" for storytelling came in at the same time and while Generations is still an interesting though obviously failed high concept film, already the super villain and the threat to a planet creep in. First Contact also dangerously toys with the superfluous concept of a villain, the Borg Queen and again it's about destroying the world, but the surrounding elements are strong enough though the scene on the deflector dish is - as spectacular as it may be - already a hint of gratuitous actions scenes to come. With Insurrection begins the unavoidable decline into evil villain/action/comedy territory and Abrams finally sheds even the pretense of having any ambitions or doing Star Trek - except in name with characters who sound vaguely familiar.
There really isn't anything to look forward to for a Trek fan because under Abrams there's just an empty shell left. As for the revenge theme ... I hope these hacks manage at least a plausible reason for revenge. In Nemesis the villain was created and massively abused by the Romulans and he plans revenge on the Federation (?), in the 2009er film Spock tries to help the Romulans, fails and Nero wants to destroy the Federation (?). Can't the authors at least manage to write some basic motivations and situations?

Ludon
Ensign
Posts: 27
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: December 11, 2012, 22:50
Quote

All I'm really expecting from the next film is more of the same from J.J. - a turn off your brain and eat popcorn while watching pretty things explode movie.

If "John Harrison" is going to seek revenge for having been left for dead, then it's clear that he hadn't read the Star Fleet Handbook which is handed out to every recruit and cadet. On page 238, the section dealing with Red Shirts, the introductory lines make all expectations clear.

Red Shirt status - Usually the blob's first bite. The first function of red shirted crew members is to serve as delaying fodder to give the top officers more time to either come up with a solution or to get away. Promotion to Gold or Blue Shirt status usually depends on luck as much as on skill, talent and ability.

toryx
Lieutenant
Posts: 58
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: December 13, 2012, 09:03
Quote

I've purposely been avoiding any news about the next Abrams movie so that when I get suckered into going and seeing it by my so-called friends, I can be pleasantly surprised to see Karl Urban reprising McCoy again and turn off my brain for the rest of the nonsense.

Torie
Administrator
Posts: 73
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: December 17, 2012, 17:44
Quote

They showed a different and new trailer for this before The Hobbit, that gives a little more narrative and story. It felt STRONGLY like a Khan repeat. I'm sure "John Harrison" is just some misdirection. I am still hoping they won't go that route (and if they do, I'm not sure why they aren't playing it up instead of playing it down), but I generally expect to be disappointed with JJ Abrams.

The other trailers before The Hobbit were Oblivion, Pacific Rim, After Earth, and Man of Steel. I was shocked at how similar they all were and how much they kind of blended into one another. They really are churning these things out by the dozen nowadays. It feels like 1996 all over again, what with space blockbuster action movies no one will remember next year.

toryx
Lieutenant
Posts: 58
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: December 19, 2012, 09:45
Quote

I haven't had the chance to see The Hobbit yet but I've seen all of those trailers except for the JJ Abrams ones. I have to agree, they do look quite a bit alike. Especially Oblivion and After Earth. Though admittedly, I like contemplative stories about what the earth might be like centuries or millennia from now, so that's okay. I'd rather see those than Abram's interpretation of Khan, if that's what Into Darkness turns out to be about.

dep1701
Lieutenant
Posts: 50
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: December 20, 2012, 18:24
Quote

I'm really hoping this does not turn out to be a Khan retread. I still hope it won't be a retread at all. Why create an alternate timeline where you can shed 40 years worth of canon, just to play it safe by retelling a familiar story?

That being said, I would say, if they were going to do a remake I would realy rather see them remake an episode like "Where No Man Has Gone Before". It would fit into the action movie formula of having a big, bad villain to rail against, while the friend against friend part would add a little human drama. Also,an advantage would be that it would be a less obvious retread than Khan. Most people other than hard core fans wouldn't know who Gary Mitchell is. Plus,I think it would be kinda cool to see the Enterprise plunging into the galactic barrier on the big screen.

Still, I hope that it is an original story idea, with a new character.

toryx
Lieutenant
Posts: 58
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: December 24, 2012, 12:43
Quote

Well I saw The Hobbit the other night and all the trailers that Torie mentioned ran before it. So that was my first viewing of the Star Trek Into Darkness trailer and I found myself thinking as I watched it that aside from the familiar images of the Abram's Enterprise crew, there's absolutely nothing about the trailer that speaks of Star Trek to me. If I hadn't seen the first movie and were it not for Spock's ears, if I had come into the trailer knowing nothing about the upcoming movie, I don't think I'd have ever guessed it had anything to do with Trek.

bobsandieg-
o
Lieutenant
Posts: 58
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: December 24, 2012, 15:30
Quote

I've see the Hobbit linked trailer also. The only part of the trailer that sparked interest in me is Pike talking about learning humlility. IF he is speaking to Kirk and ht estory is about this Kirk learning a little humility then there is the possibility of a story.
Sadly, I also, yesterday, went to an IMAX presentation of the Hobbit (to compare and contrast the 24 vs 48 frame presentations) and I saw the 9 minute sneak peak of Into Darkness.
SPOILERS FOR THE SNEAK PEEK FOLLOW
/
/
Really? It's going to be this dumb?
Plot convient no transporter to get Kirka false problem.
Federation crew using a solution that *toady* we could do better with our tech. (They're no need to send Spok into a volcano - a drone can do that.)
A volcano is threatneing an entire planet? you know JJ planet's are really really big.
Hiding the Enterprise under water from the primative natives? What orbit isn't good enough?

toryx
Lieutenant
Posts: 58
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: May 18, 2013, 22:41
Quote

Okay, glutton for punishment that I am, I went and saw Into Darkness. And now I'm SO ANGRY. *sigh*

I have now come to the conclusion that the only reason JJ Abrams did these movies was as an audition (of sorts) for doing Star Wars Episodes VII and up. Now that he got them, will he please leave Star Trek alone?

But Karl Urban still rocks McCoy. So there's that.

Ludon
Ensign
Posts: 27
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: May 25, 2013, 00:26
Quote

Only a few details discussed below so should be safe for those thinking about seeing this movie.

Harlen Ellison has written a screenplay for Isaac Asimov's I, Robot. This screenplay will never be made into a movie. I've read it. Science fiction fans would enjoy it and Asimov fans would be glad that it was faithful to Asimov's words. That's not good enough for the budget this movie would require. The general movie audience would not connect with this one. It took that Will Smith rousing shoot-em-up vehicle to bring the notion of Asimov's words to the big screen. Star Trek had what it took to bring in the audience but the magic faded. Star Trek had been unable to change with the audience's expectations and the ways that it tried alienated many, if not most, of its long time fans. Has anyone in this group uttered a positive comment about Star Trek Nemesis? My thought after seeing it for the first, and only, time was 'Have I just seen the end of the Star Trek Franchise?' Then came J. J. Abrams' Star Trek and the franchise had an audience again. I was entertained by the movie but I thought of it more as a J. J. Abrams movie set in the Star Trek universe. My comment above tells what I had expected from this new movie.

Into Darkness entertained me in ways that J.J.'s first Star Trek didn't. That Indiana Jones opening segment seems like pure silliness at first but it is relevant to the rest of the story. If we cannot be sure about our dealings with our own society, why should we think we'd be sure in playing god with other societies? Questions raised within this story are the same questions we've raised in discussing re-watched episodes here. What should be done - what the Prime Directive says to do, the moral thing to do, or that which seems right, that which you know is right, to do in a given situation? Then there is the question of Star Fleet's direction. Should it be fleet geared for exploration in the hope of establishing peaceful relations with newly contacted advanced civilizations - but ready, if needed, to defend itself? Or, should it be a war fleet standing ready to fight against known and suspected enemies? This has been debated more than once within the Star trek universe. We have discussed the issue here.

The comedy in this movie felt right. From the reaction of a member of the Bridge Crew when told to put on a red shirt, to the banter between the sacred trinity (Kirk, Spock and McCoy), it approached the feeling of the original crew movies. While the explosions and broken things went beyond what I've known in Star Trek over the years, I can accept that they are what modern movie audiences expect and I didn't feel that they detracted from my enjoyment of the story. And about that quiet little scene near the end. While that could have been setting the stage for a future story, it was a pleasant little Star Trek moment for me. What is the moral thing to do and what is the right thing to do given the situation?

I'm sure others will disagree with my reaction, but I'm comfortable with having enjoyed this movie. Where do I rank it among the Star Trek movies? Fourth, after First Contact, The Voyage Home, and Wrath of Khan. Where do I rank it among movies overall? I don't know. After thinking about it, I'd say that First Contact is Seventh, after August Rush, Wind, Contact, Searching For Bobby Fischer, In Bruges, and Ghost Dog. Other movies would be between First Contact and The Voyage Home. Will I buy it when it's released on home video? Yes.

As I said above, I felt that J.J.'s Star Trek was a J.J. movie set in the Star Trek universe. With Into Darkness, I feel that J.J. has given us a Star Trek movie. It's not necessarily a Star Trek story for me and my generation, but he did entertain me this time and he gave me things to think about. That's all I ask of Star Trek. If it takes J.J. and his shiny red ball to keep Star Trek alive for now, than so be it. I'll listen to his stories while he shows us pretty things exploding.

ecmyers
Administrator
Posts: 86
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: May 26, 2013, 11:43
Quote

I'm pretty sure that Torie hasn't seen this yet, and I'm further pretty sure that she will hate it. For now I'll say I agree with most of your points and that I did enjoy it. Overall, it's very fun with some sidelined attempts to be meaningful and raise some interesting questions. The humor and dialogue worked for me, and I mostly love this new cast, but the story didn't give me what I wanted, and I don't think it quite stands on its own. I'm not sure if we'll do a more in-depth review, since we clearly have our hands full enough with writing and law school and trying to keep up with the TNG re-watch, but I'll definitely have more to say on this later.

dep1701
Lieutenant
Posts: 50
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: May 26, 2013, 17:06
Quote

Okay, I've seen it twice now ( in IMAX 3D...a format I never thought a Star Trek movie would be in ) and as a big noisy action packed popcorn flick, it works. Huge scientific gaffes? Of course. Plot holes large enough to fit J.J.'s ginormous Enterprise through? Absolutely. Derivative? By it's very nature, emphatically yes. An entertaining ride, surely. Is it the Star Trek I grew up watching and loving? No. Do I enjoy it for what it is? Yes.

Without giving details away, I sometimes felt I was watching a mash-up of Star Trek's II and VI, but I felt there were enough clever twists and turns to keep me from feeling like I'd seen it all before ( even though at times there was dialogue I probably could have recited along with the actors ). I also enjoyed the fan-wank moments; echoes of McCoy's "Shut up, Spock we're rescuing you!" line from "The Immunity Syndrome", the mentions of Daystrom, Mudd and Chapel, Dr.Boyce's name appearing on a medical monitor towards the end, the exploded ( presumably ) moon Praxis in orbit around Kronos - btw; I thought it was spelled Qo'nos -, the models of the Phoenix, NX-01, and Matt Jefferies ring ship at Starfleet,etc. The visuals were fantastic and things 'blowed up real good'. I was glad J.J. toned down the lens flares a bit, but I still have problems accepting Budgineering, and the NIF laboratory as the warp core. These settings look too comtemporary to me and take away from the sleek, clean future presented in TOS ( and promised by the revamped bridge and even the exterior of the Enterprise ).

I thought Chris Pine did a wonderful job as Kirk, especially in his scenes with Bruce Greenwood as Pike. I could feel his gratitude and pain. Quinto's Spock I enjoy, but I do feel he's a trifle more emotional at times than he should be. I try to remind myself that this Spock is considerably younger than his TOS counterpart, and has been through a lot of trauma in the last two movies, but his losing control so often, and so publicly just feel somehow wrong. I have considered that at a similar age in TOS ( in "The Cage" ) he was more expressive, but really, that was just more of a character not being nailed down yet, rather than a conscious decision on the part of Roddenberry and Nimoy.

For the one SPOILER I will discuss here at this time;

I still have a hard time believing that the Enterprise and Vengeance, being as far away as the Moon during the battle, somehow drift close enough to Earth to suddenly be pulled down by it's gravity. Without warp drive ( or even impulse engines at that point in the film ) the Moon is still pretty far away from Earth. If it's pull was that strong, we'd never be able to keep anything in orbit. That's not my only problem with the science and plotting of the film, but that one really bugs me, and since it's been in the trailers, I feel it's safe to discuss.

toryx
Lieutenant
Posts: 58
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: June 2, 2013, 18:18
Quote

I'm pretty sure that Torie hasn't seen this yet, and I'm further pretty sure that she will hate it.

That's my feeling too. I really want to take a special trip to NYC just so I can have drinks with Torie and Deep Thought while we bitch about the movie. That would almost make the experience worth it. I was so sad to visit some old friends last weekend and find that they actually rather liked it. Oh well.

Torie
Administrator
Posts: 73
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: June 2, 2013, 23:14
Quote

I have been avoiding this thread sooooo carefully because I have been ridiculously busy since it was released (on my birthday--and the last movie with that honor was Episode I, THANKS HOLLYWOOD). But I have finally, FINALLY seen the movie.

Uggggh. Toryx, we definitely need some drinks for this one. I am going to try to find some time to write a post about it, either formally or just on this thread, because I have such a mess of reactions and feelings at the moment and I want some time to let them settle. The short answer is that I actually really enjoyed it for the first half hour or so, until I realized that my fears had come to pass about what I thought it was all along and then I got really angry.

toryx
Lieutenant
Posts: 58
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: June 4, 2013, 11:01
Quote

Dammit, I wrote this big post and did something wrong and lost the whole thing. So...to sum up:

Glad you finally saw the movie, Torie! We definitely need to get together sometime soon with drinks to commiserate. I've been disappointed to find that most of the other people I know liked Into Darkness. I need someone to be bitter with!

I agree about the first 30 minutes. I'd been in fierce denial about Benedict's character for so long that I was hoping that he'd be someone else. When the hopes were dashed, the enjoyment fled. And it just got worse from there.

One good thing has resulted of all this: I actually like the original movies even more now than I did before. I watched The Motion Picture again last week and quite enjoyed it. Sure it was slow but I much preferred it to either of Abram's movies. Clearly, I'm just not his audience.

dep1701
Lieutenant
Posts: 50
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: June 6, 2013, 14:48
Quote

Since there are mixed feelings here about "into Darkness", I thought I'd post two links to reviews offering differing opinions of the film.

Toryx and Torie should find the second one quite entertaining:

http://trekmovie.com/2013/05/14/mark-altmans-review-of-star-trek-into-darkness/

http://io9.com/star-trek-into-darkness-the-spoiler-faq-508927844

No matter what your opinion of the movie, the second article is downright hilarious.

toryx
Lieutenant
Posts: 58
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: June 10, 2013, 13:50
Quote

Yep, io9's article was a good one.

Kevin
Ensign
Posts: 22
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: June 20, 2013, 15:07
Quote

The news for me wasn't that I hated STID. After all, I hated Star Trek (2009), so that's pretty much what I expected. (My review of that film is here: http://krblack.livejournal.com/143876.html)

The news was how much I hated STID. Even a month later, I feel like there's something I need to purge from my system. These days (staring down the barrel of my 40th birthday), I can forget bad movies and even good ones pretty fast if I don't write something down about them, but I just keep coming back to STID. Unfortunately, the thought of writing about it bores me terribly--when you push at something, you want there to be something to push back. This, above all else, is why I was moved to start my own TOS rewatch on G+. (Which is how I found you people!)

Kevin
Ensign
Posts: 22
Permalink
Post Re: Star Trek Into Darkness
on: September 10, 2013, 19:03
Quote

Just in case you need a reason to get pissed off at Robert Orci:

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/07/star_trek_writer_abuses_fans_tells_them_to_fck_off_partner/

I finally posted my own reaction to STID here: http://krblack.livejournal.com/145292.html

Pages: [1]
Mingle Forum by cartpauj
Version: 1.0.34 ; Page loaded in: 0.052 seconds.

About the Author