Escape to the Movies: Star Trek: Into Darkness

[Hathlinn]

Perhaps Abrams phoned this one in since he also has to tend to the star wars franchise as well. Granted this is no excuse for an uninspired film this early in a reboot but with all the hype for the new star wars films, he'll really have to pull out all the stops...or face a lynch mob.

 

[[Insert Name Here]]

snip

Yeah, but I kinda want to see this for myself just to find out what it's all about and how terrible it is, but I'll be damned if I contribute to their box office gross while doing so.

The thing about Abrams is I'm pretty sure he'll be great for Star Wars, but he hasn't the slightest clue what Star Trek is all about. Nor do I think he really cares.

Nah, I still think he'll ruin Star Wars. I know that Star Wars tends to have more action than Star Trek, which might make his adaption of Star Wars better than Star Trek, but the thing is, like Star Trek, Star Wars is also about story driven action, there really isn't much action for action's sake.

With his Star Trek movies, Abrams has proven he cares fuck all about story or fleshed out characters for that matter.

On your last point, that is really what I'm getting at. The film industry really shows it is quite stupid if it lets a director have control of a franchise he doesn't care about.

It's like giving a writer who's never written and/or hates fantasy, full writing control of some kind of new installment to Lord of the Rings story/franchise.

]Everyone's got their opinion on this one, but I'm definitely disagreeing with Bob. Into Darkness was pretty bloody great.

A couple questions.

1.) How much of pre-Abrams Star Trek have you ever watched, if any?

2.) Think about Into Darkness, remove all the action from it, all the pew pew, explosions, flare. Now, what do you think of the movie?

The reason I ask this is because the proper franchise Star Trek could stand on its own if you took out such action from it. Because in order for someone to defend the movie, they have to defend it without action and fancy special effects as a point, because that is not what Star Trek is about.

I'm doing this for my own research on the average person that ends up liking JJ's schlock version of Star Trek.

To answer your questions:
I've seen all 10 pre-JJ movies, about a season's worth of The Original Series and TNG, about half of Voyager, no DS9, and a handful of Enterprise episodes. Not to mention all the episodes of TNG I watched as a kid but can't remember. So I'm not a huge Trekkie at all, but to assume I haven't seen any would be wrong. And honestly, the original movies were good (First Contact is my personal favourite), but they aren't nearly as sacred and untouchable as they're made out to be. As for the movie, well without the action it still has a kickarse Benedict Cumbercatch villain, a really good cast, especially Simon Pegg's Scotty and Zachary Quinto's Spock, and more acknowledgement of its heritage than its predecessor. As well as the fact that the action is really good. Even if people are too protective to see it as Star Trek, it still makes for a good sci-fi movie.

 

[TheRealGoochman]

I have to disagree 100% with this review, I thought the movie was pretty damn bitchin'

I usually agree with MovieBob, but this time I am all like "Nuh-uh girlfriend, Star Trek rocked all up in this bizzzzznitch" *Snappyfingersincluded*

still a fan, but defending this killer movie with my opinion

 

[Kenbo Slice]

I was raised on Star Trek and my dad is a big Trekkie. I loved this movie and so did he. I'm tired of the "it's not like the rest therefore it is bad."

I loved Benedict as Khan, but what I loved more was

Spoiler

Spock beating the ever loving shit out of Khan, good to see Spock kick some ass

.

 

[mbarker]

I enjoyed that Movie Bob said he was getting sick of this spoiler alert stuff. Too bad he still gave the spoiler alert.

I'm probably still going to see the movie even though I haven't found any of the Star Trek movies very entertaining.

 

[The Ubermensch]

I will completely agree on the story.

However... The costume department fucking rocked that shit. I came for a swatch bucking adventure, I got haute couture fashion exhibition. The architecture and engineering had a neo-noir feel to it... The mother fuckers went Neo-noir, that was cool to watch.

But my god, when they did the whole needs of the many reversal I was so pissed off.

I liked the game's story more than this one.

And fucking abrams with his facking shots of the enterprise with that facking swooping music... Still, it's worth it for the costumes, I want that black guys hooded suit jacket.

I will say in Abrams defense one of the issues with rodenberrys star trek was the lack of focus of life outside of star fleet. I liked seeing the clubs, it made the word seem more alive.

Still yeah... the fuck this guy thinks he is?

 

[fangclaw]

Way off topic but i pray that you'll answer anyway.

Please tell me you're going to do Epic next week and not fast and furious 6.

 

[Robot Number V]

Here are my problems with...Well, with Bob's problems with this movie, in list form:
-A reboot referencing its source material is NOT always equal to fanservice.
-Sometimes you can have a big plot point without it being a "twist".

But you certainly wouldn't know that from Bob's review.


For what it's worth, I liked it. Nothing spectacular, but perfectly enjoyable. I kinda understand why, as a critic, Bob didn't like it, but I still feel like this is WAY more about his hatred of JJ Abrams and his "mystery box" then it is about the actual movie, since he was griping about the same stuff before he'd even seen the thing.

 

[Warachia]

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?

I really liked it, but for two major reasons, 1) It was shot really well, Star Trek has so many fistfights, and many ship vs ship fights, but the reboot didn't use the standard way of showing how the fights went, instead it focused on making the mining ship look sinister and showing the damage it was doing, the hits when a ship got shot felt like they had real impact, rather than a phaser than an explosion, and 2) It had excellent sound usage, the opening part of the film is fantastic, you know the ship is going down, you can see how devastated it is from just the opening volley, the sound of battle fades out and the music picks up in the second round, that was really well done.

Granted the motion and close ups made you feel less like you were actually there and more like you were watching a performance, but I count that as a plus for the movie, so long as it remains consistent I'm happy with it.

 

[Vinculi]

I don't get it, I haven't even seen the original series or Wrath of Khan, but I knew that character was Khan. I didn't even foresee it as a twist, I just assumed that we were supposed to know that, didn't even realise the character would have some other name. Who was going to be surprised be this?

Eh, maybe I'll just watch Wrath of Khan instead.

 

[Warachia]

Maybe I'm too much of a fan of harder sci-fi, but my interest in the movie honestly checked out when the Enterprise (Currently hanging around near the Klingon homeworld) just went and dialed up Scotty's personal phone(All the way back on Earth).

I'm sorry, but just being able to dial up someone in an entirely different star system and have an instantaneous lag-free conversation just ruined it for me. It completely and totally ruined any sense of scale, time and distance that traveling the stars in a faster-than-light spaceship was able to generate. They talked about going into the Klingon home system like they were journeying deep into enemy territory, like they'd be all on their own, carrying out a secret mission... then you just go and dial up some dude's cell-phone back home? Really?

The lack of any real distance or travel-time was a huge disappointment. Yes, I know it isn't a novel and Abrams was trying to tell a fast-paced rompy sort of story. But still, having this all happen in a single day, just felt... dumb.

And why could the Enterprise detect the life-signs of one dude all the way down on the surface of a planet from beyond orbit and NOT the squadron of Klingon aircraft patrolling right nearby?

And why didn't every Starfleet vessel in the Sol system immediately rush to investigate all the shooting and explosions going on by the moon? It's one light-second from Earth. They *had* to be able to detect something happening that close to the homeworld of the entire human race.

And why did the Enterprise suddenly fall into Earth's atmosphere when their ship was bumped out of warp and disabled right by the Moon?

And how the heck did the Vengeance have the acceleration and velocity to cover the distance between the Moon and the Earth so quickly and then not even leave a crater when it smashed into San Fransisco? It just kind of, slid along the ground until it stopped. Something that big making the trip from the Moon should be hitting with megatons of force.

I know, I know. Star Trek has never been hard sci-fi, but still. Things like that only make the actual science-fiction elements of the movie look poorly thought out, and completely dependent on the current needs of the plot.

On the bright side, the effects and cinematography where fairly nice, and there were a couple bits of banter that were genuinely amusing. I really did like the design of the Vengeance. Shame it never really did anything.

You probably wouldn't like the series as a whole then, it's filled with plotholes that even children can find.
FTL communication has been in the series for a long time.
If the Klingons have their shields up or are hiding in caves and you're only scanning the surface then it can be very easy to miss them, more of a writing flaw then a plothole.
I can't defend this one, it's a massive plothole in the entire series, apparently starfleet only keeps one extra ship on alert near earth.
When their warp core finally failed they could not resist gravity any longer, why they were pulled in so fast I do not know.
I can't defend the next point either, though it did level half a city.

 

[Ecliptica Wolf]

Reading these comments from 'true trekkies' just makes me laugh. Suggesting that the only way to come at these movies is from that perspective is entirely wrong. For me even if you take all the action out (which was absolutely incredible) I believed it was still a great film. It helped me to appreciate a new universe and any future star trek series' or films that are created, I'll watch with great anticipation.

Abrams didn't make this for fans of the old series, he just didn't, and that's fine. His audience was clearly new fans and those who watched it occasionally. I know that if someone rebooted something like The Breakfast Club I wouldn't enjoy it unless it went above and beyond, or was just as deep as the last film in different ways.

Suggesting that it ruined Star Trek, or any other similar lines of argument, are completely irrelevant due to the new timeline in the reboots.

A balance between old and new, and I think that's perfectly fine.

 

[WiseBass]

I enjoyed this movie more than I thought I would, and I do disagree with Bob about character development:

Spoiler

Kirk develops as a character. One of the key points in the film is that he's reckless, constantly disregarding any regulations for his own personal convenience and generally refusing to take any responsibility for his actions (or crew) when he does it (hence the falsified report - he tried to lie about it and got pissed at Spock for reporting him). But by the end, he fully accepts responsibility, offers himself up to save his crew, and ultimately sacrifices his life in order to try and save them.

That leads to one of the better "subverted-expectation" moments in the movie. After the attack on Starfleet HQ, Kirk gets reinstated as Captain and sent on a highly risky mission to the Klingon homeworld. You think, "Wait, wait, they reinstated a guy so bad that he's being sent back to the academy? Well, whatever - it's a movie", but then it turns out that it was done on purpose. Admiral Marcus deliberately picked out Kirk for the mission precisely because he thought Kirk (reckless and motivated by revenge) would carry out the attack and kill Khan in a way that served as a war provocation for the Klingons, who would then destroy the sabotaged Enterprise. And if that failed, then Marcus himself would show up to finish the deed and fake it anyways in a publicly unidentified starship. Kirk's reaction to figuring that out is good, as well as his desperation to save his crew.

. . . But that said, the last 15 minutes sucked. It was already making parallels to Wrath of Khan, and that didn't bother me - I loved it when Khan showed up, because Cumberbatch was channeling Montalban superbly in the role. But when they started actually retreading scenes and even lines (like Shatner's "Khaannnn!" scream), it was annoying as hell. Let the damn re-boot stand on its own feet, already! You already know that people are going to watch the movie, so you don't need to keep re-treading the old series - in fact, you shouldn't. The old series petered out with a box office disappointment and a low-rated TV show cancelled in the 4th season.

Carol Marcus is also pointless, and not just because it's a reference nobody who hasn't seen Wrath of Khan will get. She's literally almost pointless to the plot, doing nothing except fooling around with a bomb and getting captured.

 

[Gaijud]

You know what makes a good critic, at least in my opinion? Consistency.

It's ok to go against the mainstream, and being biased against some types of movies or tropes. It's great to have one or two critics that you can look to who seem to share the same gripes as you do, and whose opinions you usually share. But man, lately I just don't know anymore. Listening to him rant on about the twist in this movie, it's every single thing I was yelling at the screen during his Iron Man 3 review.

I didn't care much for this movie before, and just went ahead and watched the review, and now I am kinda curious actually. Could someone tell me how this stacks up against IM3? I mean, I kinda liked that, even though the plot was mind-numbingly stupid at times. Will I enjoy this?

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

I enjoyed this movie more than I thought I would, and I do disagree with Bob about character development:

Spoiler

Kirk develops as a character. One of the key points in the film is that he's reckless, constantly disregarding any regulations for his own personal convenience and generally refusing to take any responsibility for his actions (or crew) when he does it (hence the falsified report - he tried to lie about it and got pissed at Spock for reporting him). But by the end, he fully accepts responsibility, offers himself up to save his crew, and ultimately sacrifices his life in order to try and save them.

That leads to one of the better "subverted-expectation" moments in the movie. After the attack on Starfleet HQ, Kirk gets reinstated as Captain and sent on a highly risky mission to the Klingon homeworld. You think, "Wait, wait, they reinstated a guy so bad that he's being sent back to the academy? Well, whatever - it's a movie", but then it turns out that it was done on purpose. Admiral Marcus deliberately picked out Kirk for the mission precisely because he thought Kirk (reckless and motivated by revenge) would carry out the attack and kill Khan in a way that served as a war provocation for the Klingons, who would then destroy the sabotaged Enterprise. And if that failed, then Marcus himself would show up to finish the deed and fake it anyways in a publicly unidentified starship. Kirk's reaction to figuring that out is good, as well as his desperation to save his crew.

. . . But that said, the last 15 minutes sucked. It was already making parallels to Wrath of Khan, and that didn't bother me - I loved it when Khan showed up, because Cumberbatch was channeling Montalban superbly in the role. But when they started actually retreading scenes and even lines (like Shatner's "Khaannnn!" scream), it was annoying as hell. Let the damn re-boot stand on its own feet, already! You already know that people are going to watch the movie, so you don't need to keep re-treading the old series - in fact, you shouldn't. The old series petered out with a box office disappointment and a low-rated TV show cancelled in the 4th season.

Carol Marcus is also pointless, and not just because it's a reference nobody who hasn't seen Wrath of Khan will get. She's literally almost pointless to the plot, doing nothing except fooling around with a bomb and getting captured.

I think what really annoyed me was that NuSpock didn't sit and try and puzzle NuKhan out himself, he just calls up his alternative future self on new Vulcan and asks him how they handled original flavor Khan. Pragmatic maybe, but it seemed to undercut his own arc way too much.

 

[Wuvlycuddles]

I enjoyed myself, better than Enterprise or Voyager ever was.

Although it had the same problem as the first film, it's like the writers had a check list of things the characters were "famous" for doing from the original films/series and were just ticking boxes. Also it still bothers me they made Kirk a captain right out of the academy.

 

[Saxnot]

Tell us what you really think, Bob.