Star Trek: Into Darkness

I like the trailer a lot better than the Teaser. I don't really mind darkening/seriousing things up a bit, but if EVERY franchise is going to get that treatment, they better invent some new plots/sounds effects/visuals, etc. If it's guys running and jumping with guns and the same colors and sounds, yes, it could be Inception, the Dark Knight, etc, etc...

Maybe if they mixed space battles with a little Wooden Ships/Iron men era Naval glory or something, they could hit a new note in the series but do something differently than everyone else...
 
I understand. I maybe misspoke there. I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt right now but yes by glorifying the vfx in the trailers it looks like they are compensating for lack of story possibly. Eh, we'll see I guess.
 
Last edited:
Captain Pierce said:
This thread is really not the place for another listing of the myriad sins of Berman, Braga, Moore, et al, so let's just say that I respectfully disagree with you on the first. :)
Click to expand...

Don't have to worry about Berman, Braga, et al. I just mean that in which he was personally involved. The original series improved vastly when Gene Coon took the lead role midway through the first season. The movies improved vastly when Harve Bennett took over after TMP and Roddenberry was sidelined. And yes, even TNG was markedly better when Roddenberry was shoved off into a corner. (Pretty much everyone agrees the first two seasons sucked, especially the first.)

He was the idea guy, and mad props for that, but his execution was not the best.
 
From the trailer this one looks a little "modern" with the spectacle and destroying things that are infinitely large but that just reflects the current capability of sci-fi movies. They're not going to bring back those fake rocks and red sky from the original TV series. I enjoyed the last movie. I think Chris Pine is an excellent Kirk and Zachary Quinto is a great Spock. I thought that that movie was truer to the original series than much that had come before it. I'm looking forward to this.
 
refocusedmedia said:
Super Bowl spot

Click to expand...

Hmm...If it weren't for occasional fleeting glimpses of the Enterprise and the odd Starfleet uniform, one could be forgiven for thinking this was a teaser for any of a number of generic action movies, and not a plug for a "Star Trek" film.

Perhaps I'm looking back with rose tinted glasses, but I always thought the basic premise of the original Star Trek was about a crew of explorers, far from home, seeking out "new lifeforms and new civilisations" and the adventures that resulted from that. The fact that we are apparently getting two films in a row about a black trench-coat clad villian out to exact his vengence by attacking the Earth seems to indicate a lack of imagination on the part of the filmmakers. When are we going to see any more "Star Trek" that involves trekking to the stars?

As always, I'll reserve final judgement until seeing the actual movie. Perhaps the trailers are intentionally misleading in an attempt to bring in more non-Trek fans by saying "See, this is just like The Dark Knight, but in the future."
 
Wesley Byram said:
Perhaps I'm looking back with rose tinted glasses, but I always thought the basic premise of the original Star Trek was about a crew of explorers, far from home, seeking out "new lifeforms and new civilisations" and the adventures that resulted from that.
Click to expand...

Well, there's quite a lot of this kind of thing in both TOS and TNG (though less so in TNG) if you think about it. You have the Kelvins, Garth, Khan, The Borg, Q, ect. All similar, though not quite on this scale, which is understandable given the budgets.
 
Gary Huff said:
Well, there's quite a lot of this kind of thing in both TOS and TNG (though less so in TNG) if you think about it. You have the Kelvins, Garth, Khan, The Borg, Q, ect. All similar, though not quite on this scale, which is understandable given the budgets.
Click to expand...

You are correct. Not everyone (or everyTHING) the Enterprise meets "out there" is necessarily friendly, and a show without antagonists would get boring rather quickly. My personal frustration is that Abrams and Co. seem to be limited in the kind of stories that they are willing to do in the context of a Star Trek film. IMHO, part of what made Trek as a franchise enduring is the number and varieties of tales that could derive from the premise. There's a whole galaxy of possibilities, but we're getting yet another "save the world from the moustache-twirling bad guy" story again.

Now that you mention the Kelvins, why not use them as the basis for a movie? Giant, multi-tentacled, cosmic horrors from the Andromeda Galaxy, and J.J. would get to use the word "Kelvin" in the film as he does in most of his movies. The original show had budget and technology constraints that kept them from showing the Kelvin's true form, having to make due with the often used trope of the aliens taking human form so that they could live amongst us. A movie could expand upon the Kelvins and show what a 60's TV series could not.
 
Wesley Byram said:
You are correct. Not everyone (or everyTHING) the Enterprise meets "out there" is necessarily friendly, and a show without antagonists would get boring rather quickly. My personal frustration is that Abrams and Co. seem to be limited in the kind of stories that they are willing to do in the context of a Star Trek film. IMHO, part of what made Trek as a franchise enduring is the number and varieties of tales that could derive from the premise. There's a whole galaxy of possibilities, but we're getting yet another "save the world from the moustache-twirling bad guy" story again.

Now that you mention the Kelvins, why not use them as the basis for a movie? Giant, multi-tentacled, cosmic horrors from the Andromeda Galaxy, and J.J. would get to use the word "Kelvin" in the film as he does in most of his movies. The original show had budget and technology constraints that kept them from showing the Kelvin's true form, having to make due with the often used trope of the aliens taking human form so that they could live amongst us. A movie could expand upon the Kelvins and show what a 60's TV series could not.
Click to expand...

It would be far more interesting than more pew-pew.
 
New trailer is here:



Potiental Spoilers:





Now that's more like it. There are actually spaceships in this film! All of the marketing material was starting to make this movie look Earth bound.

Too bad about NCC-1701-JJ. They JUST commissioned her in the last movie. Is that a record for the shortest Enterprise lifespan? Oh well, I guess that's what happens when you assign a cadet to the captain's chair.:undecided

Still skeptical about this movie, but at least this trailer makes it start to look a little more Trek-ish.
 
Wesley Byram said:
New trailer is here:



Potiental Spoilers:





Now that's more like it. There are actually spaceships in this film! All of the marketing material was starting to make this movie look Earth bound.

Too bad about NCC-1701-JJ. They JUST commissioned her in the last movie. Is that a record for the shortest Enterprise lifespan? Oh well, I guess that's what happens when you assign a cadet to the captain's chair.:undecided

Still skeptical about this movie, but at least this trailer makes it start to look a little more Trek-ish.
Click to expand...

So, is that a nod to "Dr Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb"(1964) at 00:35?
 
Man...where to begin with this...The best I can say is that it's a stunning audio visual presentation. As a story, it starts out okay and then piles on bad idea after bad idea until it eventually collapses under the weight of its own crap. The most mystifying decision to me wasn't that they decided to rehash what's considered the best Trek movie and invite comparison, but that they even decided to rehash their own first movie. Kirk seems to have to go through the same underlying character arc he did in the first movie, with some of the same turning points, only in a less interesting way. Not taking into account the offenses it has committed against the original Trek universe, even on its own terms I don't think this movie really works. It just heaps incident upon incident until it's a bunch of noisy nonsense happening without any emotional moorings to give it weight. What emotion they try is dependent on cheap nostalgia, which only serves to remind you that this was done better before.

SPOILERS AHEAD


The biggest of the bad ideas of course is resurrecting Khan as the villain, a decision that only causes problems. If they had kept that character as John Harrison, I don't think it would have made a bit of difference. Benedict Cumberbatch, while a fine actor, is miscast in the role, his cerebral intensity a poor match for the theatrical savagery of Khan. When he tries to pour it on, it comes off badly, with none of the arrogance or threat Montalban pulled off with ease. Better to have left it as John Harrison, and played to Cumberbatch's strengths as an actor. Reusing Khan is the kind of fan service stroking that satisfies nobody. Fans don't want a rehashed version of something they loved in the past. They want something new that reminds them of why they loved the thing in the first place. Nothing exemplifies this more than their recreation of the ending of Wrath of Khan, with Kirk sacrificing himself instead of Spock. It carries none of the emotion of the original version and is resolved in the silliest of ways. Another bad story idea is the whole concept of transwarp beaming. Khan is able to beam himself from Earth all the way to the Klingon home planet. If this technology exists, who needs starships really? And why send a starship to go chase him down at risk of starting a galactic war, when you could just beam a small armed team in pursuit. Then there's the way they "fool" Khan, which anyone could see coming a mile away and undercuts the idea of Khan possessing a superior intellect. Bad writing in this thing from beginning to end. The only good dialogue is taken verbatim from Wrath of Khan. It's perhaps a testament to JJ's skill as a director that the movie is as watchable as it is. Pine is better as Kirk this time out, as Quinto is as Spock. But there doesn't seem to be an original idea in this entire movie. It's the very definition of recycled goods, chewed up and spit back with all the nutritional content filtered out.
 
I didn't totally dislike the film... I thought it had some good one liners...

I agree... about the Kirk arc again... my biggest thing was I was expecting a big battle where the weaker Kirk must defeat the stronger Kahn and it didn't happen...
 
Well it isn't perfect, that much is clear. But I don't get the hate for this movie. It's a loud, big summer blockbuster that was a great way to relax and have some over-the-top fun. I think for what it was, it was great.
 
L1N3ARX said:
But I don't get the hate for this movie. It's a loud, big summer blockbuster that was a great way to relax and have some over-the-top fun.
Click to expand...

When you spread your cheeks and take a giant dump all over something people love profoundly, it's easy to see what the hate is about. And people love Star Trek in a way that is nearly indecent in some cases. For me, I'm a movie lover first, and even by the standards of big summer blockbusters I felt it was just okay. None of the action set pieces raised my heartbeat at all. It was mostly noise I had no investment in. And I think I've spotted a new action movie cliche, characters jumping from one moving platform to another platform moving in the opposite direction, because nothing is more exciting than action that resembles a 90's side scrolling video game.
 
First, let me say that I haven't seen Wrath of Kahn since I was a kid and barely remember anything from it other than Spock dies and the famous yelling of "KAHN!". While JJ and company worked hard to be reverent yet distinctive with 2009's Trek, this film felt like it was winking at the audience and fans every other minute.

It was very uneven. Every single emotional scene felt forced and unearned. Worst of all, Giacchino's magnificent score was being constantly misappropriated to the point that it felt like parody (the first shot of Harrison, barely 10 minutes into the film, is a great example of how poorly used the musical cues were in this film).

Also, Peter Weller was awful... one of those castings where everyone knows the person is way past their acting prime but no one says anything because they know the draw of the name is important (see also Harrison Ford, Robert DeNiro).

That said, it was a fun night out at the movies. The main cast was great, plenty of good banter and comedic relief, and some awesome action pieces (fantastic CGI as well). But, JJ's 2009 Trek was a better film.
 
Last edited:
Wow some pretty tough criticism, it was entertaining. But I had no expectations, didn't even know the story line going in. I guess if you are a hardcore fan, I can see why you might be upset. But was it ever gonna have a chance to be a good movie in your eyes? Or doomed without a chance?

It wasn't without flaws, but it was fun. Saw it in 3D. Spolier (sort of): What was really bad was it was a lot of Spock and Kirk and just a sprinkling of the other crew. They had much better chemistry in the first film.

Ya some things were heavily foreshadowed and fairly predictable. But is a popcorn and coca cola film mixed with some morality of what we are doing on the war on terror.
 
prexdealer said:
Wow some pretty tough criticism, it was entertaining. But I had no expectations, didn't even know the story line going in. I guess if you are a hardcore fan, I can see why you might be upset. But was it ever gonna have a chance to be a good movie in your eyes? Or doomed without a chance?
Click to expand...

It had more than a chance to be good. It could have been great. You have three actors who embody the roles of young Kirk, Spock and McCoy about as well as any fan could hope. A director who, apart from his boner for lens flares, directs with energy and good humor. And an excellent film score. The script was just junk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top