Escape to the Movies: Star Trek: Into Darkness

[kingnige]

great review of a real disappointment

starting to get really tired of Abrams - nothing is ever really great, and the fan references were very poor. I especially hated the twisted version of the key scene from the previous film, and was very close to just walking out of the cinema.

if Abrams stays on board then not watching the next one. Really hope they move on from him and find someone who wants to make a trek movie, not just a dumb poorly scripted action movie with a trek skin.

 

[Sylocat]

This movie was okay. It just wasn't Star Trek.

Not that Star Trek was a beacon of excellent writing or filmmaking... but its themes set it apart from other sci-fi blockbusters. It was... really, it was sort of a sci-fi FiM, with its themes of exploration, of learning and getting along and listening to others. It was cheesy, but it was sincere, and it wasn't about going in guns blazing. Even Yahtzee recognized this, FFS.

You know how this should have gone? The Klingons should have turned out to be helpful. They should have joined the heroes to help prevent a war. That's the message the film should have sent. Heck, it didn't even need to be STAR TREK to do that, all it had to do was be a movie that wasn't written by the idiots who did the Bayformers movies.

But no, the solution to every problem has to be violence, and the cocky hero who is always picking fights has to be right to pick fights because otherwise it might mess with the vicarious power fantasy that neo!Kirk is meant to trigger in the young white male audience, so the Klingons are portrayed as one-dimensional savages exactly like Marcus claimed they were. So, despite paying lip service to the war-is-bad message, the film winds up preaching the message that the other team is evil and should be slaughtered after all.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Yeah...that whole "mysterious advertising" scheme was the first big red flag that Into Darkness wasn't going to be all that interesting.

There's establishing a mystery as incentive to go see the film while giving the audience enough to keep it interesting (The Prestige springs to mind), and there's being so vague that we don't have a clue what's going on unless we see the film.

As to whether Bob liked it or not, I really don't care. My guess about the big reveal was, unfortunately, correct and it was the very thing I hoped that Abrams wouldn't attempt, because I damn well know he cannot do it.

And because I have to get this off my chest...
If a film has to rely on blunt nostalgic references to carry it (just as Abram's first Star Trek) it's a bad movie.
It's bad because it has no identity of its own. And what else is there between the bland performances and iPod look of everything to appeal to the younger "hip" crowd?

In fact, that's the same fundamental problem with the Seltzerberg films; it's not just the stupid crude half-jokes, it's that references on their own are meaningless (which is part of why I'm not all that fond of Internet Memes. Most people use them because they lack the wit or the guff to speak for themselves, so they just regurgitate something vaguely-related that is/was popular to fit in.)
At least Abrams avoids being overtly offensive, unlike Seltzerberg.

Expect Abrams to do the same to Star Wars, because it's just chalk full of potential references.
Though at this point the franchise pretty much has nothing to lose anyway.

 

[chiefohara]

Here's what I don't get, but what someone might explain to me:
What was it that was appealing about the first reboot Star Trek movie, that people liked and thought was good?

As a trekkie I personally loathed it, but I've heard one guy say that it was about friendship, like TOS relationship between Spock and Kirk, which I think is a good point.
Other than that though, what do people see in J. J. Abrams' work?


For me, Star Trek has always been about our role in the future. I liked Enterprise because it was for a while, a bit more believable and had some interesting problems and challenges(although most of it was fairly shit, there were things to think about).
I don't get any such sort of vibe from the new reboot. It seems like a shitload of references and action scenes, led by mostly uninteresting actors who have no class, no style and no unique aspects to them.
The original Kirk, Picard, Sisko and even Janeway and Archer all had quirks, flaws, personal style and class to them. You could actually imagine having them as a superior officer or even as a captain. For those who've served or been in shipping, you know what I mean. It takes a strong, capable and charismatic person to be a good captain and you feel that you can put your faith in them almost immediately.

Chris Pine seems to have none of those qualities.

In one sense i totally agree with you, the new reboot is a lot more style than substance... A lot of what made trek is missing especially in 'into darkness'. Sulu, Bones and Chekov were pure and simple 'also rans' in the latest movie i feel and im not liking Spork and Uhura's relationship. Doesn't make sense to me.

On the other hand... i strongly agree with the franchise fatigue argument. Rick Bermann and Brannon Braga had became a serious noose around the neck of Star Trek with their first two series of Enterprise. They ignored historical Cannon, and keep too much of the creative control within themselves.

The last two series of Enterprise were great, and i felt Archer especially came into being beautifully as an embittered and weary explorer towards the end of it... but that was because Enterprise had to compete with Ronald D Moore's BSG and Enterprise brought on good writers who had a serious love for star trek , (The way they tied the 4th series back into Cannon i thought was superb)

Compare the last two series to the final episode of Enterprise that Berman and Braga wrote, and you'll see what i mean regarding franchise fatigue. They were killing Star Trek slowly and painfully.

Add to the fact that the politics of the Star Trek Universe hadn't advanced since the last episode of DS9 and you can see why i felt the series was stagnating a little.

JJ Abrams movie gave the franchise a much needed kick up the arse i felt, and i thought the destruction of vulcan was gutsy as hell, it was flashy and kirk was a bit too pretty boy (not to mention young) but i was prepared to give it a chance.

 

[Draconalis]

I want the ending spoiled for me since I wont watch this.

Also... what's with the darker bigger enterprise? Someone quote me with spoiler tags and inform me.

 

[codeg]

Meh, I'll go by the general concensus on Rotten Tomatoes rather than this one review. As someone who hasn't seen anything Star Trek related other than the previous JJ Abrahms one (which I thoroughly enjoyed), I'll be seeing this sometime soon.

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

The reason you liked this film is because you're not a Trekkie. Only non-Trekkies could enjoy it because that's what Abrams wanted. You can't make money unless you pander to the larger audience and not a niche, and Abrams is a Jew after all.

Way to be randomly anti-semitic, jackass!

Ya well, if Shakespeare and South Park can do it then so can I. Historical stereotyping is great.

Shakespeare did it to highlight the stupidity of mindless prejudice, the same way south park largely does.

Im guessing you were trying to do something similar with the narrowmindedness of fanboyism here, but it was too much of a reach... instead of highlighting and reinforcing the point you just came across as anti-semitic.

Well I didn't attack Arabs, Phonecians, Akkadians or Ethiopians so I don't see how. Unless you think that if I attack Australians I am attacking everyone speaking a West-Germanic language. Disliking banana milkshakes doesn't mean I dislike milkshakes altogether. But wait a minute, I wasn't attacking anyone anyway so...

 

[chiefohara]

Im in agreement with Bob on this one.

A predictable Action movie in Star Trek Clothing. The Echoing of the Wrath of Kahn movie kinda killed all the suspense and tension for me.

I also thought Peter Weller was criminally wasted here. A militant Star Fleet Admiral like that spoiling for war with the Klingons should have been kept to ratchet tension up for future films.

 

[malestrithe]

I figured out the twist about 20 minutes into the movie.

I did not like the references to Star Trek 2 the Wrath of Kahn. All of them took me out of the movie very fast.

Still, I like some of the little moments. Karl Urban's speech about the Gorn and giving birth to 8 babies made me want to see that scene more than what's on this movie.

 

[chiefohara]

The reason you liked this film is because you're not a Trekkie. Only non-Trekkies could enjoy it because that's what Abrams wanted. You can't make money unless you pander to the larger audience and not a niche, and Abrams is a Jew after all.

Way to be randomly anti-semitic, jackass!

Ya well, if Shakespeare and South Park can do it then so can I. Historical stereotyping is great.

Shakespeare did it to highlight the stupidity of mindless prejudice, the same way south park largely does.

Im guessing you were trying to do something similar with the narrowmindedness of fanboyism here, but it was too much of a reach... instead of highlighting and reinforcing the point you just came across as anti-semitic.

Well I didn't attack Arabs, Phonecians, Akkadians or Ethiopians so I don't see how. Unless you think that if I attack Australians I am attacking everyone speaking a West-Germanic language. But wait a minute, I wasn't attacking anyone anyway so...

I know you weren't attacking anyone. Thats why i wrote what i wrote.

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

The reason you liked this film is because you're not a Trekkie. Only non-Trekkies could enjoy it because that's what Abrams wanted. You can't make money unless you pander to the larger audience and not a niche, and Abrams is a Jew after all.

Way to be randomly anti-semitic, jackass!

Ya well, if Shakespeare and South Park can do it then so can I. Historical stereotyping is great.

Shakespeare did it to highlight the stupidity of mindless prejudice, the same way south park largely does.

Im guessing you were trying to do something similar with the narrowmindedness of fanboyism here, but it was too much of a reach... instead of highlighting and reinforcing the point you just came across as anti-semitic.

Well I didn't attack Arabs, Phonecians, Akkadians or Ethiopians so I don't see how. Unless you think that if I attack Australians I am attacking everyone speaking a West-Germanic language. But wait a minute, I wasn't attacking anyone anyway so...

I know you weren't attacking anyone. Thats why i wrote what i wrote.

Well next time just write "anti-jewish". Anti-semitic isn't the same thing.

 

[chiefohara]

The reason you liked this film is because you're not a Trekkie. Only non-Trekkies could enjoy it because that's what Abrams wanted. You can't make money unless you pander to the larger audience and not a niche, and Abrams is a Jew after all.

Way to be randomly anti-semitic, jackass!

Ya well, if Shakespeare and South Park can do it then so can I. Historical stereotyping is great.

Shakespeare did it to highlight the stupidity of mindless prejudice, the same way south park largely does.

Im guessing you were trying to do something similar with the narrowmindedness of fanboyism here, but it was too much of a reach... instead of highlighting and reinforcing the point you just came across as anti-semitic.

Well I didn't attack Arabs, Phonecians, Akkadians or Ethiopians so I don't see how. Unless you think that if I attack Australians I am attacking everyone speaking a West-Germanic language. But wait a minute, I wasn't attacking anyone anyway so...

I know you weren't attacking anyone. Thats why i wrote what i wrote.

Well next time just write "anti-jewish". Anti-semitic isn't the same thing.

Next time be clearer about the point you are trying to make so i don't have to.

 

[honeybakedham]

Going to see it tonight. Hope its better than Iron Man 3....

It is.

And I say this having really enjoyed the hell out of Iron Man 3 despite its flaws.

 

[eljawa]

you're not wrong but...ok, I'm not a huge trekkie, but I enjoyed the film. Its not a great piece of art but its a fun action movie. It could have been more, but I like what it is. No, it does not hold up (story wise) to the original Khan, but I still enjoyed it a lot.

Its worth noting that Movie bob has never liked a JJ Abrams film. Seeing as he is only human I am sure he entered predisposed to dislike this film.

 

[wooty]

I quite liked it to be honest. I wanted to go and see a film to relax with after work and thats what I got. Plus.....Cumberbatch, CUMBERBATCH!

What else do I need to say

 

[Jesse Billingsley]

Going to see it tonight. Hope its better than Iron Man 3....

It is.

And I say this having really enjoyed the hell out of Iron Man 3 despite its flaws.

I went in expecting to get a darker Iron Man, where Tony would face challenges that would not only test Iron Man, but himself. Instead, we get CSI: Tennessee edited by John Woo, and directed by Michael Bay. It just wasn't good....For me at least

 

[TheSchaef]

So, you... didn't like it, then?

I liked the movie, generally, and the cast and soundtrack especially, so I was a little more forgiving of the story, but having said that, Orci and Kurtzman seem to write some of the better openings of most Hollywood screenwriters, and the most anti-climactic letdown endings (see also: MI3, Trek 09, and Transformers if you only count the opening narration as the opening).

The part I didn't particularly like were the ridiculous plot devices. Without spoiling too much, there will be a scene where human blood is injected into a Tribble. I don't think you can even conduct medical experiments transferring blood across species, but McCoy apparently is fine doing it ACROSS STELLAR ECOSYSTEMS. And for those of you who haven't seen the film yet, when you see this take place in the context of the film, you know exactly what will happen in the film and exactly how it will be resolved, which sucks all of the weight and emotion out of one of the few genuine character scenes in the film.

 

[Tumedus]

Sounds like typical Abrams, a pretty slightly interesting package with little to no (or outright bad) substance. I really wish this movie would tank so he might be pulled from Star Wars, but I know that is too much to ask.

 

[TheSchaef]

I want the ending spoiled for me since I wont watch this.

Also... what's with the darker bigger enterprise? Someone quote me with spoiler tags and inform me.

I won't even need to do that, assuming you saw Star Trek: Nemesis. If you know the general feel of that movie, and you are aware of the tendency of this movie to feature plot twists and military cloak-and-dagger stuff, you can probably guess exactly what the ship is and how it ends up being used.

It's as Bob said, the writers try to get Shamayalan-like with the big twists, but in a post-Sixth-Sense world, people look for this stuff (especially when the presentation is much less subtle than Sixth Sense), and once you see the pieces laid on the table in the first act, you know exactly how the next two acts will unfold.