Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Saw this yesterday. It was good for the most part, but I think they pushed this "alternate universe" stuff a bit too far. It shouldn't be used as an excuse to copy and paste moments from past movies.

    [SPOILER]Near the end, it literally turns into Wrath Of Khan. Just because they switch Spock dying with Kirk dying, doesn't make it a clever bait and switch. It's lazy. They could've at least changed the way Kirk dies. [/SPOILER]

    I also thought the first half hour of the movie was completely pointless.

    [SPOILER]Kirk is removed as Captain, and Pike takes over, just so Pike's death has a purpose. Pike dies, and then Kirk is made Captain again. The whole scenario was unnecessary. Pike could've still been killed in that meeting, without the whole "Kirk has been demoted, so he can be promoted" crap, and it would've had a better impact, because it wouldn't have been so damn predictable.[/SPOILER]

    Other than those gripes, it was fun. Cumberbach was a great villain, and the story and action were pretty good. I thought it was a big step down from the first film, but it was a pretty good sequel overall.

    7/10


    Comment


    • This is just a waterdowned remake of Wrath of Khan, minus the Genesis project.

      I hated this movie. Having grown up on the TOS and the movies, Space Speed and Wrath of Khan meant something to me. this is just a train-wreck of epic preparations. I swear the only reason Alice Eve was in the movie was to be damn near naked, she served no other purpose. Benedict was evil scary emo Sherlock, his Khan had no weight, no punch like Richardo did back in the day. There was no build up, and it reminds me of the whole Venom disaster from Spider-man 3. Its like they HAD to put them (Khan/Venom) in there..just cause. The one saving grace were the Klingons, I like the re-design and hope the third one is all Klingon vs the Federation.

      No other stupid ideas that are raped for TOS, please. If I see Harry Mudd i will likely scream. Just leave the TOS alone and finish out this stupid re-boot.

      God i wish for some good old Star Trek TV, that is where the series shinned the best.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Porn N Gore View Post
        The one saving grace were the Klingons, I like the re-design and hope the third one is all Klingon vs the Federation.
        I think they missed the oppourtunity to do that in this film. I liked the idea of the Federation igniting a war with the Klingons, just to catch one terrorist. That would've been a better idea, than just reworking [SPOILER]Wrath Of Khan[/SPOILER], and it would also have some real world parrallels.

        I kind of agree that the movie as a whole, felt a bit unnecessary. There was really no need to retread familiar territory. In this case, a little too familiar. A nod here, a wink there, fine. Not complete recreations of past scenes, and diaogue. It's a new franchise. Come up with some new stories, and villains.

        I just hope this isn't a sign of where the Star Wars flicks might go. I fear that the main villain will be a female, and will be shockingly revealed as the hero's mother.


        Comment


        • Was just trying to rethink this movie, and noting it's mostly a remake of Space Seed (the TOS ep) with some scenes from the ST:WoK movie.

          The thing is they should really be remaking eps from the original series if anything since the movie events are still 30+ years ahead for where the characters are now.

          I really wish they'd use The Doomsday Machine ep for a movie. That's the one with the cone shaped ship with the Deathstar like blast.
          I met her, fifteen years ago; I was told there was nothing left; no reason, no conscience, no understanding; and not even the most rudimentary sense of life or death, of good or evil, right or wrong. I met this cow, with this blank, pale, emotionless face, and the blackest eyes... the devil's eyes. I spent eight years trying to reach her, and then another seven trying to keep her locked up because I realized that what was living behind that cow's eyes was purely and simply... evil.

          Comment


          • This film gets a lot of hate, mainly because of the reasons listed above but it doesn't worry me. I was never into the old flicks to begin with, but I can certainly see why fans would have issues. They do steal scenes and dialog but I think there's enough of the new to balance it out, plus Benedict Cumberbatch is a great villain.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Rusted View Post
              This film gets a lot of hate, mainly because of the reasons listed above but it doesn't worry me. I was never into the old flicks to begin with, but I can certainly see why fans would have issues. They do steal scenes and dialog but I think there's enough of the new to balance it out, plus Benedict Cumberbatch is a great villain.
              Yeah I get the problems... But also I'm a massive fan of TOS and the original films but I absolutely love this one. I like it like people who love Craig's James Bond love that... It's totally reinvented an amazing series in a unique way that keeps it relevant. No gripes here.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by The Revelator View Post
                I like it like people who love Craig's James Bond love that... It's totally reinvented an amazing series in a unique way that keeps it relevant. No gripes here.
                The thing with Craig's Bond though, is that the stories are original. You don't see Jaws, or Blofeld in the new Bond movies, for instance.

                I thought the first Star Trek did an incredible job of putting a new spin on the franchise. I also thought the alternate universe idea was used brilliantly, to explain the new actors playing the same roles. Now, I wish they never did it, because in this flick it was used as an excuse to tread over familiar territory. Is every other movie from here on out going to be sort of like the others, because they take place in a sort of parallel universe?

                This film lacked the confidence the first one did, to try new things, and continue to build it's own identity. Did the villain really have to be [SPOILER]Khan?[/SPOILER] Change his name, and make him a different race, and nothing changes. His inclusion was pure fan service, and really added nothing to the movie at all. In fact, I think it would've been far better if e was just a new villain, because now all everyone is going to do is make comparisons. If he's not that character, he's just a really cool new villain, instead of a reprisal of an iconic one.


                Comment


                • as a fan of tos and the original movies, i have been quite pleased with abram's work in this particular universe. the first star trek was, to me, a damn near perfect movie. i enjoyed the second one very much, but i agree with the previous points; the parts of into darkness that were like wrath of khan came across as week, and took away from an otherwise excellent, entertaining movie. and the end just defies--forgive me--logic.

                  having said that, going forward, i hope they move in a smaller, more science fictiony direction. the cast is fucking excellent and needs to continue, but it's time to explore the five year mission. we don't need to see the crew save the universe/earth/time anymore. let's see them settle into the drudgery of being in space with each, as well as exploring some new worlds and shit.


                  If we suddenly fall should I scream out
                  Or keep very quiet and cling to my mouth as I’m crying
                  So frightened of dying
                  Relax, yes, I’m trying
                  But fear's got a hold on me

                  Comment


                  • I was never into Star Trek until the reboot. I thought it was great and the sequel is even better.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Heretic View Post
                      The thing with Craig's Bond though, is that the stories are original. You don't see Jaws, or Blofeld in the new Bond movies, for instance.

                      I thought the first Star Trek did an incredible job of putting a new spin on the franchise. I also thought the alternate universe idea was used brilliantly, to explain the new actors playing the same roles. Now, I wish they never did it, because in this flick it was used as an excuse to tread over familiar territory. Is every other movie from here on out going to be sort of like the others, because they take place in a sort of parallel universe?

                      This film lacked the confidence the first one did, to try new things, and continue to build it's own identity. Did the villain really have to be [SPOILER]Khan?[/SPOILER] Change his name, and make him a different race, and nothing changes. His inclusion was pure fan service, and really added nothing to the movie at all. In fact, I think it would've been far better if e was just a new villain, because now all everyone is going to do is make comparisons. If he's not that character, he's just a really cool new villain, instead of a reprisal of an iconic one.
                      Well I dislike Craig as Bind and think all three of his movies (especially Skyfall) don't seem original in the slightest. They just try too hard to be edgy for me and end up feeling kind of lifeless. So that I can't agree with. They aren't bad films, I just dislike them. It's just a base comparison... It's similar in that its a reinvention but it doesn't follow the as,e rules as Bond (ie... Make him a dark almost anti-hero). Tis Star Trek reboot is certainly complete different in how it's presented, which is its greatest strength.

                      And honestly I disagree with you saying the villain is just fan service. It made all of the parallels with the original storyline make sense and seem more valid. I liked it and it made every element seem familiar enough to latch onto emotionally while focusing more on action and adventure versus dialogue and politics.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by The Revelator View Post
                        Tis Star Trek reboot is certainly complete different in how it's presented, which is its greatest strength.
                        Yeah, and Star Trek did that with the first flick. Not so much the second. They were moving in their own direction, and it was fresh. It was made for a new breed of fans. They kind of threw that all out the window with the sequel.

                        This movie was just one big reference fest, like they were trying to please all the old guard fans, they didn't mind risking to piss off with the first film.

                        And honestly I disagree with you saying the villain is just fan service.
                        How is it not? The only reason he's the villain, is so that the crowd can gasp in a wave of nostalgia. 60% of the movie is "Space Seed", and "Wrath Of Khan". You know, the two most beloved Star Trek stories ever told. That's fan service if I ever saw it. It's fan service at best. It's lazy writing at worst.

                        It made all of the parallels with the original storyline make sense and seem more valid.
                        So you'd be pleased if every Star Trek movie from here on out, was sort of like the original movie franchise, just because of the "parallel universe" stuff? I like the idea when they introduced it in the first film, but they shouldn't use it as an excuse to be lazy, and just rehash everything.


                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Heretic View Post
                          , but they shouldn't use it as an excuse to be lazy, and just rehash everything.
                          I enjoyed Into Darkness but you hit the head right on the nail because in this universe they can come up with a great new story arch so why just rehash/remake from the classics??? to me that's what the first didn't do.

                          I don't mind the idea of using Kahn in the film but I have a problem when they're using a villain because "well he was from the original series"

                          Why not give us new material that actually makes us think OH WOW that villain is on top with Kahn as being the most badass. For me it was always the Borg from TNG it's not like a writing team couldn't come up with something even more sinister instead of just rehashing old characters.
                          Last edited by Freddy_Lives; 09-15-2013, 10:24 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Heretic View Post
                            Yeah, and Star Trek did that with the first flick. Not so much the second. They were moving in their own direction, and it was fresh. It was made for a new breed of fans. They kind of threw that all out the window with the sequel.

                            This movie was just one big reference fest, like they were trying to please all the old guard fans, they didn't mind risking to piss off with the first film.



                            How is it not? The only reason he's the villain, is so that the crowd can gasp in a wave of nostalgia. 60% of the movie is "Space Seed", and "Wrath Of Khan". You know, the two most beloved Star Trek stories ever told. That's fan service if I ever saw it. It's fan service at best. It's lazy writing at worst.



                            So you'd be pleased if every Star Trek movie from here on out, was sort of like the original movie franchise, just because of the "parallel universe" stuff? I like the idea when they introduced it in the first film, but they shouldn't use it as an excuse to be lazy, and just rehash everything.
                            Well I feel as if it was done well, and you didn't.... Not sure how I'm supposed to make you feel differently. I thought the choice of villain made it even more exciting as well as made it fun to see how old ideas were made to seem fresh. Perhaps not the most inspired concept ever, but I don't think it's as lazy as you claim it is. All in all I found the overall story to be much more exciting and entertaining than the first film.

                            Do I think they should follow the same formula if they continue making this movies? Not necessarily... I'm sure older elements could be re-introduced in interesting ways but they don't necessarily have to be as out in front as they were in this movie.

                            I can't complain.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by The Geek View Post
                              I was never into Star Trek until the reboot. I thought it was great and the sequel is even better.
                              I wouldn't say the sequel is better but they are both super good.

                              I don't give a fuck about Star Trek so certain narrative choices (people were actually complaining about Alice Eve being almost nude. I mean really?) that contradict or change the universe don't bother me one bit.


                              Put "2 Fast 2 Furious" in B&W and Se7en thinks he's watching a Bergman film.
                              I find the Metal Gear Solid series to be mediocre at best.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X