Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Discuss anything vaguely M&M related here, such as comics, movies, and action figures.
User avatar
Arkrite
Cosmic Entity
Cosmic Entity
Posts: 11094
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 5:02 pm
Location: The Frozen North

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Postby Arkrite » Sat May 18, 2013 8:17 pm

As a big fan of the original series (warts and all) I still just can't make myself like these these movies.

They wanted to make a Star Trek movie that's more accessable to the public? Cool! I can get behind that.
With one stipulation: Make a new crew.

Don't use an old crew. If you're going to reboot a beloved series using beloved characters you need to get those characters right on the money or it just makes it look so bad to the fans on all sides.

Now I know what the majority is saying: "But the movie is good". And that makes me cringe, but okay you liked it, that's cool.

My question is: Will the general public they made it more acessable to remember it in a year? Two?
I'm going to make an ass out of myself and make an ssumption: Probably not.

Know who is? The Star Trek fans.

So, yeah, congrats. They made a movie that'll make some money and be promptly forgotten and eventually villified by the online community. (I'm looking at you, Star Wars Prequils)

Where if they'd just made it Captain Edward C. Harris, his science officer T'Von and his grumpy cheif medical officer "Doc"... well, they'd probably have kept the Trekkies on your side.

You'd have avoided directly comparisons while being able to do "wink-nudge" style things. Fans probably would have ate it up and called for a new TV series at the same time.

I just think that if you're going to refference old materials directly in an attempt to bring in the fans you should:
A) Know the materials
B) Like the materials

I've heard that the director doesn't fit either of those. My mind just boggles.

But I'm just a noname schlub whom nobody would ever allow to make a movie.
So what do I know? ;~)

User avatar
tomorrow
Mastermind
Mastermind
Posts: 2386
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 4:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Postby tomorrow » Sat May 18, 2013 10:05 pm

I don't know about that. I mean, if the new films were going to be vilified, that probably would have already happened by now. And while I've heard mixed reactions from fans on the first film (and to some extent the current film; though the only general consensus I've picked up on so far is that a lot folks seem to think the plot was only "okay", and that a lot of folks really liked the guy playing the bad guy), its not been anything like the reactions I remember when the Star Wars prequels were coming out.

But then again, the intensity with which negative criticism is projected online has somewhat dramatically increased in recent years. These boards are more civil than many, but still, even here, I remember threads from when I first joined being more back-and-forth with folks who like things commenting more than folks that don't... but almost epidemically across the internet, these days the negative criticism of... well everything really... just simply drowns out everything else.

So, maybe you're right about the vilifying.

User avatar
Thakowsaizmu
Zealot
Zealot
Posts: 1279
Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 12:28 am
Contact:

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Postby Thakowsaizmu » Sun May 19, 2013 7:32 am

The only reason I have not vilified the second nuTrek too much yet is because to do so would be to spoil the entire movie. It was predictable. I predicted it when I heard there was a second nuTrek movie coming out :(
♀♥♀
百年如石、一點如漆

User avatar
tomorrow
Mastermind
Mastermind
Posts: 2386
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 4:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Postby tomorrow » Sun May 19, 2013 2:38 pm

Interestingly, "spoiling" is another big complaint I've heard from a bunch of people. Apparently some news sources spoiled the entire film in their "reviews" and "reports" before the U.S. release. In fact, more than a couple of folks have told me that one article on Yahoo news was almost a total copy/paste of the film summary from wikipedia, laying out every major detail of the film with no warning at all. I would probably have read that one myself if a friend who knows that I review articles at breakfast hadn't e-mailed me to skip that particular article.

Apparently, predictable or no, a lot of folks totally had this movie spoiled for them. Though I have heard the predictable complaint, a large part of why most folks seem to call the plot only "okay".

User avatar
HappyDaze
Luminary
Luminary
Posts: 2731
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 6:23 pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Postby HappyDaze » Sun May 19, 2013 3:32 pm

Being predictable isn't half as offensive to me as being nonsensical. There were too many parts where the audience was expected to be captivated by the effects so much that they'd ignore obvious lapses in reason.

User avatar
Thakowsaizmu
Zealot
Zealot
Posts: 1279
Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 12:28 am
Contact:

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Postby Thakowsaizmu » Sun May 19, 2013 4:09 pm

I want to know who, in world, designed the Enterprise. Because so much of the ship's design from 1 and 2 makes no sense :|
♀♥♀
百年如石、一點如漆

User avatar
HappyDaze
Luminary
Luminary
Posts: 2731
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 6:23 pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Postby HappyDaze » Sun May 19, 2013 7:07 pm

Starting with "Why the hell is there so much glare on the bridge?"

User avatar
The_Watchman
Mastermind
Mastermind
Posts: 2300
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 1:38 pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Postby The_Watchman » Mon May 20, 2013 2:33 pm

My wife and I enjoyed it but agreed that it would have been much better if the villain had been anyone else or else a decoy. The sub-plot of just what Starfleet should be in a post-Nero galaxy was far more interesting to me than terribly done fan-service. I was really hoping for a twist of that-character-who-shall-not-be-spoiled turning to good by the example of Kirk and company. I think the only thing that would have made "The Line" tolerable would have been if it was shouted in despair over a heroic sacrifice rather than once again in anger but with a stupid twist. It would have redeemed a lot of my issues with the reboot and shown that the production team at least understood Roddenberry's vision. As it was, it was a decent sci-fi action movie but it had nothing that makes Star Trek distinct.

The point of Star Trek is embracing optimism for the future in the face of how bleak our present can seem. At the height of the Civil Rights struggle, Gene Roddenberry showed a future where people of all colors worked together toward peace and exploration. I can't help but feel like this movie's title was painfully apt for where it dragged the ideals of Star Trek. Hell, the very idea of most of the villains of Star Trek, including John Harrison, is that they can not fit into the future that the Federation has created and that is why they will fail. It's pointless if the Federation wins through a fist fight or a bigger gun. They have to win by being more dedicated to their ideals, by embracing creativity and a passion to know the unknown, and by an unwillingness to ever surrender hope for cynicism.

PS: I pretty much expect to be making a similar rant after seeing Man of Steel. It looks like a good action movie but I can't help but fear it'll be more of "Superman wins cause he's the strongest or cheats the best" that seems to happen in basically every Superman movie besides Superman III.
"This is all your fault! You shouldn't have taken that cat! You don't teleport into strange metal places and steal pets!"
Builds

JetstreamGW
Daredevil
Daredevil
Posts: 733
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2011 3:38 pm

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Postby JetstreamGW » Tue May 21, 2013 5:13 pm

Honestly, I really liked it. Was it too full of fanservice? Yes, yes very much. I was actually laughing during the dramatic bits near the climax, because I could predict every single one... But you know what? Bollocks it, I don't care. The performances are awesome. I love every single new cast member. Especially Karl Urban... And Simon Pegg. Every word that comes out of Simon Pegg's mouth is made of precious metal and awesome.

User avatar
tomorrow
Mastermind
Mastermind
Posts: 2386
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 4:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Postby tomorrow » Wed May 22, 2013 3:33 pm

Without spoilery details (some folks may not have gone out and seen it yet), I think some of things they are going for with the new films are subtly interesting from the whole alternate reality standpoint and the whole fate/free will dynamic. Certain things may vary but other things (particularly grand-scheme-of-things)... even with grandiose Nero-level meddling in the course of events... are more or less meant-to-be. Likewise, there seems to be some effort to emphasis the relationship between Spock and Kirk literally being pseudo-fraternal, that the two of them despite obvious surface dissimilarities are at their core two-sides of the same coin. Its not just that they're fates are seemingly entwined, but that in the grand scheme of things their roles/destinies/potential for making certain choices are nigh interchangeable.

User avatar
death tribble
Disciple
Disciple
Posts: 686
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2004 8:19 am
Location: London.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Postby death tribble » Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:10 am

Why remake the second movie ? I mean seriously.
The big fault I have with the film is how close the ships are to each other or the station before going into warp. Never heard of impulse power ?
The look of the Klingons was lamentable.
One of the only good outcomes is Roddenberry's maxim. No battleships, we've gone beyond that.
Dangerous when cute

User avatar
Mr Mole
Firebrand
Firebrand
Posts: 837
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 9:33 am
Location: Washington (the state, not the district)

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Postby Mr Mole » Tue Aug 27, 2013 5:05 pm

Wow. Just got around to watching this one last night... And I''m having trouble finding the words to describe how my decades of Star Trek enthusiasm has effectively had the life squeezed out of it.

If I'd somehow managed to disassociate the movie from everything I know about Star Trek... And also completely ignored the giNORmous plot holes... The mediocre acting and even worse script would've still left me cold.

I... I just... I'm speechless... :|

User avatar
roguescribner
Paragon
Paragon
Posts: 3430
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 9:10 am

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Postby roguescribner » Tue Aug 27, 2013 6:13 pm

After everything I'd heard about the movie, I refused to pay money to see it in the theaters. I had the opportunity to watch it for free the other day and gave it shot. I had reservations and the movie did nothing to ease them. Basically, it's as you said: even if I forget it's Star Trek, it's still so ridiculous and superficial that it wouldn't matter. This movie was just full of wrong. Even as a generic action movie it's barely passable as entertainment. I thought the whole point of the reboot was to do something new, but instead they took something old and made it suck.

I wish Abrams luck with Star Wars!
GM - Age of Heroes Chapter 2
Sarvak - The Injustice Gang

User avatar
Arkrite
Cosmic Entity
Cosmic Entity
Posts: 11094
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 5:02 pm
Location: The Frozen North

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Postby Arkrite » Thu Aug 29, 2013 11:02 pm

These amused me.

Spoiler alert! These links will pretty much tell you the entire plot of the movie. You were warned. Spoiler alert!

Honest Trailers - Star Trek (2009)

Honest Trailers - Star Trek Into Darkness

User avatar
Mr Mole
Firebrand
Firebrand
Posts: 837
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 9:33 am
Location: Washington (the state, not the district)

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [May 17, 2013]

Postby Mr Mole » Fri Aug 30, 2013 7:55 am

Arkrite wrote:These amused me.

Those were great! I especially enjoyed Star Trekintodarkness' description as the "all new sequel to the franchise reboot based on the sequel to the original franchise." Had me laughing out loud. :mrgreen:


Return to “Sidekicks Lounge”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest