Star Trek Into Darkness

[Savor Dam]

If anything, Karl Urban is more Dr. McCoy than DeForest Kelley was...in the movies. Kelley's McCoy was better in the TV era, but by the time the movies were made, he just had lost something in his portrayal. It was too soft; the gruff edge started to turn into some thing almost...maudlin. Not sure if it was the actor or the direction, but it did not work for me.

[Menolly]

Gotta agree with dAN and SD, murrin.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

Unanswered question: what exactly was on that scroll at the first of the movie?

I would guess that it was sacred texts of their religion, immediately discarded in favor of the ship in the sky.

Based on the quick little glance we got of it, and neither character bothered to unroll it and look at it themselves, I suspected it looked like a technical diagram of some sort. Not a major point, mind you, but something that struck me as curious.

[SoulBiter]

Just saw this movie yesterday and I had made sure NOT to stop by here and get spoilered before the movie. So the movie for me was a total unknown of plot. I think thats important to the movie. When they do some of the reveals in this movie, there is so much more impact when you are learning about them for the first time. I dont know why people learn all about a movie plot before going and seeing it. To me that just ruins the movie. I love being surprised by whats going on.

Spoiler

When they do the big reveal on Khan, there is an audible (Whoaaaaaaa) from the movie theater. Adding Carol Marcus was something I wouldnt have thought of and those things give me a feeling of being back in the ST Original series movies again.

At the end, when they are setting the course

Spoiler

and leaving with the refitted Enterprise on their 5 year mission,

the course I would have had Captain Kirk set would have been "Sulu, Second star to the right, and straight on till morning. Lets see whats out there.", as the final tribute in this movie to the old ones.

[sindatur]

Why does everyone jump straight to “Oh, Gawd, it’s a Wrath of Khan remake, how original”

Wrath of Khan’s entire premise was based upon Kirk in TOS stranding Khan and his followers on a harsh planet, that became harsher when the planet (or star?) next door blew up, costing Khan’s wife (Marla Givens) her life. It was revenge for that, that was khan’s entire motivation in Wrath of Khan. In the JJVerse, there was no prior meeting between Khan and kirk, so it can’t possibly be a WoK retread.

Second, it also is not a Space Seed retread, Kirk didn’t find the sleeper ship and wake up Khan and followers. There is a whole Conspiracy behind Khan’s motivations and actions, it has absolutely nothing to do with Kirk or their history. The fact john Harrison is really Khan is pretty much just a nod to the TOS audience, the stories of Space Seed and Wrath of khan, have nothing in common with Star Trek Into Darkness, other than Super Human Strength and the name Khan.

I thought the movie was great, and I think the movie would’ve been pretty much exactly the same as it is now, without John Harrison’s character having been revealed as Khan

[Hashi Lebwohl]

it can’t possibly be a WoK retread.

Exactly--it isn't a remake. Harrison and Marcus are using each other, one recover his people and another to start a war.

Despite Vulcan being destroyed in the first movie, Spock Prime is in a perfect position to give the Federation a significant advantage over everyone else with a few pieces of technical advice. He already gave them the transwarp equation, so they can teleport across vast distances or onto ships in warp, but he could also give them interphasic shielding (or whatever it was called, the one where Dr. Crusher took the Enterprise into the corona of a star), more efficient warp technology, and whatever else I am missing. He won't, of course, but he might.

[Orlion]

I'm just not interested in watching a movie determined to trip over itself nodding to all sorts of "references" to the original movie.

But roles were switched!

Oooo, how creative

I'm also sick that I might have to wait for Star Wars VII for a proper Star Trek movie

[ItisWritten]

Why does everyone jump straight to “Oh, Gawd, it’s a Wrath of Khan remake, how original”

Wrath of Khan’s entire premise was based upon Kirk in TOS stranding Khan and his followers on a harsh planet, that became harsher when the planet (or star?) next door blew up, costing Khan’s wife (Marla Givens) her life. It was revenge for that, that was khan’s entire motivation in Wrath of Khan. In the JJVerse, there was no prior meeting between Khan and kirk, so it can’t possibly be a WoK retread.

Second, it also is not a Space Seed retread, Kirk didn’t find the sleeper ship and wake up Khan and followers. There is a whole Conspiracy behind Khan’s motivations and actions, it has absolutely nothing to do with Kirk or their history. The fact john Harrison is really Khan is pretty much just a nod to the TOS audience, the stories of Space Seed and Wrath of khan, have nothing in common with Star Trek Into Darkness, other than Super Human Strength and the name Khan.

I thought the movie was great, and I think the movie would’ve been pretty much exactly the same as it is now, without John Harrison’s character having been revealed as Khan

Except

Spoiler

for Original Spock's insight into Khan, which allows Reboot Spock to get the upper hand.

[aTOMiC]

Why does everyone jump straight to “Oh, Gawd, it’s a Wrath of Khan remake, how original”

Wrath of Khan’s entire premise was based upon Kirk in TOS stranding Khan and his followers on a harsh planet, that became harsher when the planet (or star?) next door blew up, costing Khan’s wife (Marla Givens) her life. It was revenge for that, that was khan’s entire motivation in Wrath of Khan. In the JJVerse, there was no prior meeting between Khan and kirk, so it can’t possibly be a WoK retread.

Second, it also is not a Space Seed retread, Kirk didn’t find the sleeper ship and wake up Khan and followers. There is a whole Conspiracy behind Khan’s motivations and actions, it has absolutely nothing to do with Kirk or their history. The fact john Harrison is really Khan is pretty much just a nod to the TOS audience, the stories of Space Seed and Wrath of khan, have nothing in common with Star Trek Into Darkness, other than Super Human Strength and the name Khan.

I thought the movie was great, and I think the movie would’ve been pretty much exactly the same as it is now, without John Harrison’s character having been revealed as Khan

Except

Spoiler

for Original Spock's insight into Khan, which allows Reboot Spock to get the upper hand.

Except

Spoiler

Reboot Spock does virtually nothing with the information that original Spock gives him. I was kind of surprised that reboot Spock didn't prepare some kind of trap or device that would have popped up during his conflict with Khan that informed the viewer that original Spock gave reboot Spock some off camera information that would finally capture Khan. Not a big deal but something I noticed.

[SoulBiter]

I'm just not interested in watching a movie determined to trip over itself nodding to all sorts of "references" to the original movie.

But roles were switched!

Oooo, how creative

I'm also sick that I might have to wait for Star Wars VII for a proper Star Trek movie

Except that it sounds like you haven't seen the movie at all. So how the heck would you know?

There are some 'nods' but the movie is not at all what you are describing. This is not a remake of WoK by any stretch. However you probably should pass anyway because you already have decided you won't like it and seeing it would not change your mind at all.

[ussusimiel]

I saw the film over the weekend. I was a bit disappointed overall because I had thoroughly enjoyed the first reboot. I was hoping they would take it on a bit, but I didn't feel that really happened (in saying that I was very happy with the inclusion of the sharp political criticism. More of that, please!). (I was talking to someone who hadn't seen the first film and they said that they really enjoyed this one and had fun working out the whole parallel universe thing, so, maybe some of the pleasure of the first one came from that.)

I was very impressed with Cumberbatch as Harrison (no need for the Khan connection at all). He's a very good actor, but I wasn't sure how the action stuff would suit him. As per the last one, the internal scenes of the Enterprise are excellent, I'm just still not sure that the whole set up in engineering is best designed for a spaceship that is likely to be in tight corners. I know it's not a warship, but huge spaces where people can fall and be thrown about just doesn't seem like the best thing. (I did like that they actually had belts for their seats on the bridge for when things got rough. That always bugged me ).

I agree that Karl Urban was unnecessarily chewing the carpet as Bones. It almost seemed to be an in-joke, as Kirk tells him to lay off the metaphors, but it's like gruff-on-coke or something. It adds nothing (not even humour) and becomes more and more annoying as the film goes on. (I thought Bones was played perfectly in the first film.)

I don't know was it deliberate, but it seems like every 10 mins in the film that someone is in a life-or-death situation: Spock, the little girl, Pike, Harrison's crew, Marcus' daughter, Kirk's crew, Kirk etc. If there was some theme here (I haven't figured out what yet) it was being sledgehammered into us in a manner that was way too heavy-handed.

I agree with Murrin (in the OP) that the crash near the end was borderline gratuitous. The level of destruction was massive and for Spock to be more concerned about being involved in a footrace rather than helping with the rescue operation seemed preposterous (and maybe deliberately outrageous ).

Overall I thought it was a missed opportunity: two good baddies, some political overtones, a developing relationship between Spock and Kirk (I did enjoy the bit where Uhura, Spock and Kirk were in the shuttle discussing relationships ) and the tension between a maverick like Kirk and a quasi-military organisation like the Federation. There was plenty to work with but, unfortunately, IMO they managed to make a bit of a hash of it. Hopefully they'll get it right in the next one!

u.

[sindatur]

It doesn't make sense to me that so many people complain about Spock (The only one available and able) pursuing Harrison. Harrison could've escaped and caused millions or billions more deaths

[I'm Murrin]

I don't have a problem with Spock chasing Harrison; I have a problem with the film not addressing the widescale destruction of the crash at all.

[ussusimiel]

I don't have a problem with Spock chasing Harrison; I have a problem with the film not addressing the widescale destruction of the crash at all.

Agreed. When I saw the ship come down into the water I thought, 'That's okay. It'd be really stupid if it crashed into the city and wiped out thousands of people after all the hammering on during the film about the importance of individual lives!'

u.

[I'm Murrin]

It's all too easy to imagine the amount of thought that went into it: "Hey, wouldn't it look cool if we crashed the huge spaceship into a city?"

[Cail]

Saw Star Trek into Darkness yesterday.
I found it very entertaining.
I don't care about the obvious references to the other Star Trek 2 so it didn't bother me.
I wasn't looking for problems and had no trouble just enjoying the film.

-nuff said.

I'm stunned you liked this.

Years ago, you castigated me for what you thought was my "ideal" Star Trek.....

Cail, I only have to look as far as some of your favorite sci fi films to know what you'd like out of a Star Trek reboot movie. That is to say it would need to be hellishly voilent and disturbing. I think the director you are looking for is David Lynch. I'm guessing he'd come up with a way of getting Spock to mind screw a victim until he bleeds from his nose and eyesockets and then his head would litterally split open and the two halves would cascade to the floor with high definition clarity and in glorious slow motion revealing the minute details of the man's inner brain matter.
It's really cool to imagine but it isn't Star Trek.
I'm one of those fools that continues to crave new adventures but was also annoyed at Voyager and Enterprise. I want to see more but I don't want to see crap. This new film has the chance to really set things up for a nice run of continuing stories and I'm excited about that. I also realize that there are those that find Star Trek in its true form boring, sterile and un realistic.
As Cail said recently in a different forum "Different Strokes". I say AMEN to that.

This was a hellishly violent film that featured someone getting their head crushed.

I thought it was awful.

[Rau Le Creuset]

I loved this movie just as much or even more than it's 2009 predecessor. It was everything a summer blockbuster should be; funny, exhilarating, fast paced, and emotional. I may not be a "real" star trek fan because I never watched the original series or any other of their series for that matter, but my father has and because of these movies I went out and bought him the original series on Blu-ray to watch it again. I'm always reading about people hating this movie and strangely enough it's always from Star Trek fans. If anything this movie should rekindle their love for star trek.. plus it wasn't made to be like any of the other previous Star trek films or episodes.. it was meant to be for anyone.. fans or newcomers alike


I'm not saying that peoples opinions are wrong.. I'm just saying that for some reasons this movie was judged very harshly in a lot of places (Like any movie is for that manner). At this point I've forgotten the rest of what I wanted to say so I guess I'll shut up now.

If I was going to have one complaint about this movie it would be that some of the writing was pretty cheesy. some of the Khan lines could have been a lot better than they were. Also I never understood why they couldn't heal Kirk with any of the 72 frozen men's blood.

[Zarathustra]

I really liked this movie the first time I saw it. The second time was great, but all the reboot aspects started bothering me. I suppose I know Wrath of Khan too well. It's not that they redid a Khan story--that doesn't bother me in itself--but that they copied/pasted actual lines of dialog right out of the previous film and put them in the mouths of actors who don't give nearly as good a performance in these crucial moments. People can make fun of Shatner's acting ability all they want, but Spock's death scene and Kirk's eulogy still get to me after all these years, and they kick Into Darkness's ass. Pine is okay in action scenes, though he's not as convincing as a lady's man as he likes to think. But he's absolutely horrible in dramatic scenes. And it's not just Pine, but the guy who plays Spock, too. Their scene at the radiation chamber is just cringe-worthy. Spock's tears and his, "Khaaaannn!" is almost as bad as Darth Vader's, "Noooo!" in RotS. And giving McCoy's dialog to Pegg ("... better hurry") diminishes the gravity of that scene even more. Shaun of the Dead has absolutely no business being a within a parsec of the classic Spock death scene of WoK. It's just a travesty hearing them butcher these classic lines.

[Cail]

To be clear, I think it functions well as an action movie, but I think it fails miserably as a ST movie. Zar hits the nail on the head with his critique....These actors simply can't convey the depth of the source material, and there's too much lifted directly from the source material (thank God there was no, "This. Is. Ceti. Alpha. Five!".

[Hashi Lebwohl]

the guy who plays Spock

Zachary Quinto. He does an amazing job at the deadpan/flat-affect portions of the Spock character but when he dips into emotion it isn't quite right, I concur.

I don't mind a reboot--how many times has Batman been rebooted? Superman? Now Spiderman, as well. James Bond. the king of reboots? It appears that Robocop is soon to be rebooted, as well. That being said, if you are going to reboot a franchise then for pity's sake do not rehash old material from the original franchise in an attempt to cash in on it, even if you think you are merely paying homage. Paying homage is fine but this reboot is damned near a rip-off. If you are going to reboot, then reboot and go in new directions, don't rehash old stuff.

The true Trek fans are the ones who are suffering here. They face a difficult choice: either a) they ignore the reboot movies and retain all the lore they have learned over the years about the history of the Star Trek universe or b) they have to embrace the reboot movies and all of their lore is now wrong, much of it not ever having happened. Given that the movies couldn't be made without the studio's approval, since the studio owns the rights, then the movies are, by default, canon and thus invalidate all the old canon info, at least past the point in the past when Nero emerges.

Now...Khan. I have nothing against Mr. Cumberbatch; he is simply a hot item for moviegoers right now and I do not blame him at all for capitalizing on this and taking every well-paying role that comes his way, including voicing Smaug. However, he isn't as good an actor as Ricardo Montalban was--that man had more screen presence.

Finally, that poor actress who played Carol Wallace. Apparently her only reason for being in the film at all was so that we could see her standing there in her underwear. She probably deserved better than that.

So we are supposed to believe that Spock either didn't notice the holo image of the large, black Federation ship at the Admiral's briefing or he didn't think it was worth mentioning? Really?