1. Guest,
    If you need help getting to know Xenforo, please see our guide here. If you have feedback or questions, please post those here.
    Dismiss Notice

Star Trek: Into Darkness (Spoilers Discussion and Review)

Discussion in 'Movies' started by Dave Scarpa, May 15, 2013.

  1. Michael Elliott

    Michael Elliott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Messages:
    7,412
    Likes Received:
    176
    Location:
    KY
    Real Name:
    Michael Elliott
    That's pretty bad especially considering it's going to be going up against three giant pictures next weekend.
     
  2. Tino

    Tino Premium
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 1999
    Messages:
    7,294
    Likes Received:
    1,202
    Location:
    Metro NYC
    Real Name:
    Valentino
    We'll see how it holds up. It received an "A" cinemascore from audiences so it should have good word of mouth and decent legs. Here is an excerpt from www.boxofficeguru.com about Trek's opening numbers:
     
  3. Tim Glover

    Tim Glover Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 1999
    Messages:
    7,982
    Likes Received:
    244
    Location:
    Monroe, LA
    Real Name:
    Tim Glover
    Just saw it today in 3D and loved it. Not a fan of 3D but thought it was simply stunning. I was drawn in with all the characters....fantastic visuals & well crafted action sequences. A few nitpicking: felt Peter Wellers (marcus) moments weren't as convincing as they could have been. Some sequence felt a tad tacked on....but those are minor. Looking forward to seeing it again. 9/10.
     
    Tino likes this.
  4. BryanZ

    BryanZ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2000
    Messages:
    1,215
    Likes Received:
    1
    This wasn't one of those movies that I thought was worth seeing in 3D. My wife and I saw the regular version of it but both of us enjoyed the movie.

    ST: ID is a popcorn flick. It is not one of those movies you will look back on and say it was the greatest of it's time or even of the entire ST films. That being said, the movie did at least one major thing of note. There will be no Search For Spock.

    The real accomplishment was the ending. The franchise is now free to go any number of ways including ending the new movies. Other options are returning back to TV, going the way of Wagon Trail to the Stars as in the ST books, or going in another direction entirely.

    Looking at it as a spirngboard film and it surpasses that goal.

    My one major gripe with the film was the rebuild time for the Enterprise. After that much damage it should have taken far longer to rebuild as it was near being totaled.

    Se la ve and enjoy the popcorn flick!
     
  5. Brian L

    Brian L Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 1998
    Messages:
    2,882
    Likes Received:
    0
    +1. I could not agree more.

    I went out of my way not to read much about it or read any reviews. I knew there was buzz that BC was going to by Khan, but I was still surprised the way they did the reveal. I have not enjoyed a film this much since.......well, I can't remember a film I have enjoyed this much.
     
  6. MattBradley

    MattBradley Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    184
    Likes Received:
    17
    Real Name:
    Matt Bradley
    I saw the movie and enjoyed it. Probably helped that my dad was sitting next to me and he was practically cheering in his seat and this is a man who doesn't get into "that sci-fi crap". haha He walked out loving it.

    I loved the opening sequence. The villain reveal was not a big surprise for me and I had put it together with the torpedo story. I really enjoyed the performances and was not expecting the surprise cameo where Spock seeked out advice. The ending was familiar and the Kirk's death story resolution was very obvious. Knew it would be resolved like that. I am also excited about how the next movie is set to unfold. Let the 5 years begin. Oh, and that Klingon looked freaky!
     
  7. Traveling Matt

    Traveling Matt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    418
    Likes Received:
    33
    Saw it last night and found it mildly enjoyable. I think the biggest mistake that can be made when bringing Star Trek to the screen (big or small) is to skip clear, quality social commentary. It should be a very difficult error to make considering the placement of Trek lore in our culture, but it was. Without it, a show simply becomes another sci-fi adventure which is what Into Darkness basically is. It didn't really feel like Star Trek.

    On the bright side, I thought the Wrath of Khan sequence had a nice, quick payoff. That was fun. :)
     
  8. Bill Coolidge

    Bill Coolidge Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    1
    I just saw it today in an XD theater with 3D and Dolby Atmos and thought it was great. I left feeling the same way I felt after seeing "Wrath of Khan": it was a great invigoration of the franchise and I hope they live up to their promise. And as for people complaining about there being no ships in the area: there are never ships in the area. This is a Star Trek movie. There are certain rules. If there were ships, the commanders would have to be insane, incompetent or both.
     
  9. Dave Scarpa

    Dave Scarpa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 1999
    Messages:
    5,337
    Likes Received:
    43
     
  10. TravisR

    TravisR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2004
    Messages:
    24,928
    Likes Received:
    2,762
    Location:
    The basement of the FBI building
    I dumb so me like movie with shiny spaceships. If I was smart enough to be Trek and sci-fi fan, me would have hated it.
     
    Sean Bryan and Michael Elliott like this.
  11. Brett_M

    Brett_M Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,396
    Likes Received:
    58
    Location:
    Mos Eisley Spaceport
    Real Name:
    Brett Meyer
    Ditto.
     
  12. Richard V

    Richard V Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    1,942
    Likes Received:
    430
    Real Name:
    Richard
    LOL, dam, you smart too much am.
     
  13. Greg Kettell

    Greg Kettell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 1998
    Messages:
    1,311
    Likes Received:
    134
    Location:
    NY Capital Region
    Real Name:
    Greg K.
    I saw it yesterday and really enjoyed it.

    Many of the criticisms here are absolutely correct, I rolled my eyes at the line-by-line rehash of the WOK ending, (You know it's bad when you think you know exactly what line will be said next, and it is. And Spock's "Khaaaaaan!" - meh) I did wonder why they needed Khan's blood when they had 72 more of his comrades at the ready. Also, having the leader or other high level insider of the organization (Admiral Marcus) turn out to be the Big Bad is a cliche at this point.

    On the other hand, I think Pine and Quinto are coming into their own in the roles. They felt more like Kirk and Spock to me here than they did in the '09 film (which ultimiately, I felt was a let down). Urban, Pegg and Saldana and the rest were also great. I also loved some of the callouts to classic Trek episodes (tribbles, Mudd, McCoy's, Bone's line about delivering the Gorn octuplets had me rolling - yeah, I know they hadn't had contact with the Gorn yet in the original timeline). Cumberbatch and Weller made great bad guys (cliche & originality aside)
     
  14. Greg Chenoweth

    Greg Chenoweth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    773
    Likes Received:
    295
    I really liked the 2009 film and I am "old school" Star Trek with 43 years viewing experience. I purposely didn't read any info or watch any trailers going in; I like to be surprised. I was not bothered at first that Khan was in the film but I absolutely detested how everything played out after that. It would have been much better to do something different with Khan than to reinvent what was done in the WRATH OF KHAN, which is the best TREK film so far. I don't mind a reboot but there are so many different ways to go with things, why kill Kirk instead of Spock? Why not play up how Khan and his crew were exiled for the wrong reasons and have Kirk and Spock help right the wrong? The best part of the film was when Kirk, Scotty and Khan were all working together.
     
  15. Richard V

    Richard V Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    1,942
    Likes Received:
    430
    Real Name:
    Richard
    Umm, I normal don't get into discussions of Star Trek canon, or other philsophical Star Trek issues, but did they actually say what crimes they were accused of? I don't recall the movie actually giving us the details of what the "Super Beings" did? Perhaps they were not "wronged", perhaps they did commit terrible crimes. Did I miss the explaination for their "exile"?
     
  16. Greg Chenoweth

    Greg Chenoweth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    773
    Likes Received:
    295
    They never mentioned the crimes. The film just said that they were war criminals put in cryogenic freeze. This is what I'm talking about. The film could have delved into the whole back story about their exile and what caused them to go into cryogenic freeze, just like the episode SPACE SPEED did in STAR TREK TOS. The film completely ignored this whole point.
     
  17. RobertR

    RobertR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 1998
    Messages:
    9,661
    Likes Received:
    152
    For the film to ignore the backstory is kind of the point, though. They're not interested in being tied to any past. They want to be free to portray anything any way they like.
     
  18. Bryan Tuck

    Bryan Tuck Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2002
    Messages:
    1,635
    Likes Received:
    156
    Real Name:
    Bryan Tuck
    I didn't hate the movie; in fact, I had fun with the first half. I still like this cast a lot, and some of the energy from the 2009 film was still there.

    But I had some big, big problems with the second half. First of all, I really wish they hadn't gone down the Khan route at all. Khan has already been done brilliantly; plenty of other concepts from throughout the franchise that maybe didn't work as well. Why not choose one of them and do it right? Or better yet, why not do something completely new (which was the whole point of rebooting, I thought)? However, if you're going to do Khan, why not really delve into why he was so evil, instead of just having "Spock Prime" show up and remind us how good That Other Movie was?

    And speaking of that, I never thought I'd say this, but I thought there were actually too many references to the older films and series. There were times when I felt like I was watching an actual remake of Wrath of Khan, and it became distracting. The movie really imploded for me during the "death" scene, which failed on so many levels. The awkward inversion of the original WOK scene coupled with the fact that we knew there was no way they were actually going to leave Kirk dead sucked all the drama out of it. Then Spock suddenly Shatners out "KHAAAAAAAAN!!!" and I almost burst out laughing. One of the most ill-advised and inappropriate "homages" I've ever seen in a movie. Ever.

    Then, the device they used to revive Kirk was also ridiculous. I know it was established way back in "Space Seed" that Khan's blood showed remarkable regenerative properties. And of course, it was used at the beginning of Into Darkness to heal a sick little girl. But it's quite a leap from both that and reanimating a tribble to bringing a dead, irradiated adult back to life, and a clumsily set up leap at that:

    "Bones, what are you doing with that tribble?""It's called plant and payoff, Jim."

    I just didn't buy that at all. And incidentally, Starfleet now has access to a serum that can cure death.

    And I guess I appreciate the attempt at social relevance with the terrorism theme, but it felt rather perfunctory, with mostly just lip service given out a few times.

    It's really too bad; there are some things in the movie I enjoyed, but it just fell so completely apart in the third act that no amount of witty banter or flashy effects could save it.
     
    Scott McGillivray likes this.
  19. Patrick Sun

    Patrick Sun Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1999
    Messages:
    38,550
    Likes Received:
    377
    I can remember Bryan Singer getting roasted for paying too much homage to the original Superman (Donner) film with his "Superman Returns" film, but ST:N2D is getting quite a pass for aping the hell out of WoK. Then again, I went to this film with a group of friends, and was flabberghasted to find out one of them had never ever seen WoK (they did see the ST 2009 film). I literally just went slack-jawed and couldn't form a coherent thought for about 10 seconds. I mean, if you just had your TV on in the background Saturday or Sunday, WoK would have been playing on the screen easily enough. Wow...
     
  20. Chuck Anstey

    Chuck Anstey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 1998
    Messages:
    1,622
    Likes Received:
    102
    Real Name:
    Chuck Anstey
    I didn't really like it for most of the reasons the last few posts talk about and I like the 2009 movie just fine. I was also extremely disappointed that they didn't even discuss the ethical dilemma that last shot of the cryotubes implied. Do we continute to keep alive but frozen 73 individuals who would attempt to take over the Federation, turn it into a military conquest, and kill everyone who stands in their way if they were ever unfrozen on purpose or by accident or do we fire their pods into the sun because they are by their very nature too dangerous for civilization.

    Also, Section 31 was just a group of loosely connected individuals, not a secret wing of the Federation with the ability to build a monster starship. I just think of how much better this movie could have been if they had used Garth of Izar as the villain, especially with the perfect setup of a massively powerful explosive the size of a ring. He could have been one of the few agents of Section 31 and he went a bit overboard by personally attempting to start a war with the Klingons to "save Earth's way of life before its too late". The point of Section 31 was to find and use any and all alien technology to protect the Federation when the normal action in TOS was to seal away powerful technology next to the Ark of the Covenant (or magically forget all about it). So easy to write yet they went with easier and lazier.

    One more thought. During the initial discussion between Pike, Kirk, and Spock about Kirk's misdeeds and poor commanding, Spock was much more like Sheldon Cooper than Spock. Spock was honest but not an idiot and would know exactly what was going to happen. Sheldon Cooper on the other hand would write the report that way because he is oblivious to other people's feeling or social consequences of his actions and the statements Spock made sounded exactly like Sheldon Cooper.
     

Share This Page