3D Blu-ray Review Star Trek Into Darkness 3D Blu-Ray Review (1 Viewer)

[Carlo_M]

Not trying to change your opinion at all Craig, but I think a movie like ST:ID which is getting an 8.0 on IMDB (the same as the 2009 reboot) probably doesn't qualify for the Star Trek odd/even numbered curse.

 

[Gary Seven]

As a side note, I don't know how many here used to (or maybe still do) read the Star Trek novels but Ann Crispin (A.C. Crispin) passed away to cancer last week (RIP , Ann). She wrote some VERY good Star Trek novels (as well as many others). I met her some 30 years ago with Margaret Bonnano (another author). I was reading her last post on her blog and I saw earlier she posted on her feelings on this movie. While she too was not impressed, she did point me to a blog that had an insightful review by one of the more current Star Trek novel writers, Keith de Candido. I thought some of you might find it interesting. I think it's an even handed analysis...

http://www.tor.com/blogs/2013/05/star-trek-into-darkness-review-spoilers?utm_source=newsletter

 

[TravisR]

As a side note, I don't know how many here used to (or maybe still do) read the Star Trek novels but Ann Crispin (A.C. Crispin) passed away to cancer last week (RIP , Ann). She wrote some VERY good Star Trek novels (as well as many others).

Yeah, she wrote the really cool Han Solo origin books for Star Wars too.

 

[CraigF]

Not trying to change your opinion at all Craig, but I think a movie like ST:ID which is getting an 8.0 on IMDB (the same as the 2009 reboot) probably doesn't qualify for the Star Trek odd/even numbered curse.

I know. Just about everybody seemed to like this movie. I admit I may not have been in the best of moods when I first saw the movie, thus my getting annoyed at a movie for pete's sake, so decided to watch it the next day too. I think I was just tired because it went down much better the second time. I still didn't like that bluey-green tinge to so many scenes, it seems in vogue in too many SF films.

 

[Michael Rogers]

Good review. I noted how the slash fans were going to have a field day with some scenes in STID.

As a side note, I don't know how many here used to (or maybe still do) read the Star Trek novels but Ann Crispin (A.C. Crispin) passed away to cancer last week (RIP , Ann). She wrote some VERY good Star Trek novels (as well as many others). I met her some 30 years ago with Margaret Bonnano (another author). I was reading her last post on her blog and I saw earlier she posted on her feelings on this movie. While she too was not impressed, she did point me to a blog that had an insightful review by one of the more current Star Trek novel writers, Keith de Candido. I thought some of you might find it interesting. I think it's an even handed analysis... http://www.tor.com/blogs/2013/05/star-trek-into-darkness-review-spoilers?utm_source=newsletter

 

[Carlo_M]

Wow so okay I finally downloaded the 10GB iTunes version (5.3GB for the digital copy of the movie, 6GB for the extras). I can sort of understand why the commentary wasn't released on the disc because it's about 20+ minutes longer than the real movie. While the commentary is going, they'll freeze the movie, draw circles around things they're talking about, PIP, etc. Not your standard running commentary while the movie itself is going.

But the thing that pisses me off...

Only in the commentary version do you get the changing IMAX aspect ratios ala The Dark Knight Blu-Ray. The digital copy of the film itself is 2.40:1 just like the BD, but the running commentary version gives you the switching aspect ratios. Unfortunately if you want to watch the movie this way, you cannot, without having to have the commentary, PIP, pauses, circles around parts of the picture, etc. So this part to me was like insult to injury. Teasing us with the fact that a variable aspect ratio version was available, but they've chosen not to give it to us unless you're watching the commentary version.

 

[TravisR]

Wow so okay I finally downloaded the 10GB iTunes version (5.3GB for the digital copy of the movie, 6GB for the extras). I can sort of understand why the commentary wasn't released on the disc because it's about 20+ minutes longer than the real movie. While the commentary is going, they'll freeze the movie, draw circles around things they're talking about, PIP, etc. Not your standard running commentary while the movie itself is going.

I think they should have put the 'commentary version' of the movie on a second disc and dropped the DVD from the set.

 

[Nelson Au]

Gary, thanks for the tor.com review. That was good.If I can, I'll try to download the iTunes version this weekend. I wonder if the digital copy, non commentary version is variable aspect ratio too. Probably not!

 

[Carlo_M]

Gary, thanks for the tor.com review. That was good.If I can, I'll try to download the iTunes version this weekend. I wonder if the digital copy, non commentary version is variable aspect ratio too. Probably not!

Sadly, no it is not (see my previous post)

 

[Tino]

I wasn't pissed about all this until I watched the iTunes extra. It's great and should have been included with the regular 3D combo set. My Dell PC was starting to crap out so I decided to splurge and get an iMac and one of the great features is I am now able to stream that enhanced commentary to my tv via Apple airplay. It's awesome. Only cost me close to two grand to do it though.

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Nelson Au wrote (post #4):

In regards to the plot Gary (which I agree with your assessment), and with apologies to Neil, I just discovered these Honest Trailers on YouTube and their take on this movie is great!

Good one! Sometimes I think you do "get it", after all.


And then, too, sometimes I think you don't :

(post #58)

I still have issues, but I understand what the screen writers were up to, with the homage to Wrath of Khan.

"Homage"?!?

How 'bout "gold-digging"? "Plagiarism"? "Lazy, unimaginative writing"? Or, better still, try "outright stealing".

And Pegg for me isn't Scotty. He is coming off as too jokey. Scotty was serious if you watch the series.

Hoot, mahn! Ya canna expect a silk perse from a sow's ear! Almost none of the movie characters have been their tv selves. Tv Kirk, for instance, broke regulations when he had to, but not like the Rebel-without-a-Cause nudnik namesake now on screen!

I hope Spock becomes more like Spock in the next film . . . .

He won't.

. . . and they explore space.

They won't. (The first clue you'll get to that effect will be when they mention that they're not goïng to tell you who the villain will be.)

Ted Van Duyn wrote (post #13):

. . . don't be surprised if the next movie either involves the crew back on Earth, or dealing with another bad guy who wants to specifically attack Earth since that's been the motive for the last three movies in a row.

I'm still not convinced that the folks working on this new take want anything to do with exploration or seeking out new life.

They've probably already told you what the next film (or films) is going to be about

Admiral Marcus: "Kirk, war with the Klingons is inevitable." ("Errand of Mercy", anyone?)

Unending explosions and light shows (a.k.a. flash-and-boom), with a little T&A thrown-in ("Turn around!") are far easier to produce for audiences that think "thrill-rides" make good movies than ones that explore the nature of human existence or the "why?-of-it-all". Those audiences will do fine with alien bars and rock music. ("CONSUME NOW!") Why work when you don't have to?

No, it's ♫"Retread City, Retread City"♫ from now on out for this ridiculously overpriced $200,000,000+-a-pop genericized movie franchise. Get used to it and/or move on.


From what I have been able to glean from the few online sources I care to explore, there exist a few deleted scenes, one reportedly a shower scene with Mr. Cumberbatch in the altogether ("Why?", you ask? What were they thinking?) to this film. Does anyone know whether any of the multifarious physical versions of the BRD edition have these scenes?

Thanks.

 

[benbess]

Like some other fans, I like parts of the JJA Reboot of Trek, and in other ways I find it problematic.

In terms of what I like, I'm glad that it's restored the Trek brand name, which has helped pave the way for these restorations.

I also mostly like the chemistry that the new cast has together.

In terms of action and excitement and big FX, it definitely has those, but like many fans I think JJA's obsession with huge "action," is a mixed thing at best.

I also like some of the things they revived, like section 31 from DS9. That was a cool and thought-provoking part of the movie.

In terms of what I don't like, there are a few things that are annoying or more than that.

First, I think the apocalypse for the planet Vulcan was rather extreme. I don't think the payoff for that was worth it. Killing off 99% of the most beloved people in Trek was something that I can't quite forgive. Yeah, I know it's all pretend, but it still bugs me.

Second, little tech points from the past were ignored. Now Engineering looks like a brewery?? The Enterprise was built on Earth?? The ship goes under water?? I guess. That stuff doesn't bug me nearly as much as blowing up Vulcan, but it doesn't help.

Third, Kirk sometimes seems like a frat boy now. Shatner's Kirk was right up against that line, and maybe he crossed it a couple times, but somehow Pine's Kirk just stays there a bit too long. The new Kirk doesn't command respect in the same way imho.

Fourth, the endless action eventually becomes exhausting and lowers the IQ of the film. Star Trek didn't always do it, esp. in the movies, but it was supposed to be somewhat thought-provoking. New Trek tries, but I think more often misses the ship.

Fifth, the blowing up of Vulcan, as a consequence, killed the "Prime" universe. In other words, as we all know, none of Next Gen ever happened. Or, it happened in another time line, but that's a distinction without much of a difference from the perspective of New Trek.

Like most of you, however, I choose to still keep my imagination of Trek in the Prime Trek Universe. For me the JJA Trek Universe is the alternate path, some alternate universe where things went wrong.

In other words, we can play the record the Captain Kirk's Starlog from The City on the Edge of Forever, and with a few changes it may say part of what I feel sometimes:

"Captain's log, no stardate. For us, time does not exist. J.J. Abrams, back somewhere in the past, has effected a change in the course of time. All Earth history has been changed. There is no Starship Enterprise 1701-D. We have only one chance. We have asked the Guardian to show us Trek's history again: Spock and I will go back into time ourselves and attempt to set right whatever it was that J.J. Abrams has changed."

If only!

Actually, I am entertained by the new movies. I own both of them. And, as I said, I am very glad they have revived the Trek name.

I was actually shocked that at the last Las Vegas Trek convention Into Darkness was voted by fans the worst of all twelve Star Trek movies. What? Worse than 5? Worse than Insurrection? I'd rate it at least a ahead of those two, and maybe even ahead of one or two more.

Anyone else with thoughts on the bigger picture of Trek?

In terms of Prime Trek, I guess the old shows and the novels are the ways to go....

(Yes, I'm avoiding work and wasting time! Lol...)

 

[Jason_V]

Fifth, the blowing up of Vulcan, as a consequence, killed the "Prime" universe. In other words, as we all know, none of Next Gen ever happened. Or, it happened in another time line, but that's a distinction without much of a difference from the perspective of New Trek.

Wrong. I've been having this discussion for the last four years. The Prime Universe-the one with Picard, Sisko, Janeway and Archer-still exists. The only thing that has changed is the destruction of Romulus and Spock Prime leaving. That's it. It still exists as another timeline.

It happened in another timeline, that part is correct. Still exists. As far as we know, Picard is still flying around on the Enterprise, Data is still "dead," Riker and Troi are on the Titan, Sisko is still a god, et al. The events of Trek 09 happened after Voyager got home (the last thing we see on screen of the 24th century). Therefore, nothing has changed. Everything we know about the Prime Universe still applies.

 

[benbess]

....It happened in another timeline, that part is correct....

That's the key point to me. If, and it is a big if, they make another Trek television show, it will likely be in the JJA universe. That means that Prime is not still alive quite in the same way to me. I can still watch the Prime shows, or even read a Prime novel, but movie and TV Trek is now in a different universe, which seemingly is more action-based, and imho has a slightly lower IQ.

 

[Jason_V]

Sure, chances are anything new on TV will be in the alternate universe, but they always have the option of going back to the Prime universe. The novels and comics, I think, have some stories still taking place there as well. It's still there...just a matter of whether we'll see another adventure there or not.

 

[Nelson Au]

All this alternative timeline discussion has me thinking that Generations took place in an alternative timeline. . Would be a good reason as any for me to believe Kirk didn't die on that planet at the hands of Soren.