Star Trek Into Darkness (Pre-release)

Bryancd said:
It wasn't STAR TREK to me but my wife, who is not a fan, enjoyed it.
Click to expand...

I had the same result. My wife (who is not a fan of Trek) loved it. I despised it back then. Now I can take it or leave it. I choose to take it.

There really is a great deal of irony about Star Trek II and a director who knew practically nothing about Trek as well.

Wrath of Khan is far and away a better film than Trek 09, however there are still some glaring discrepancies in the story.

Nick Meyer took Trek in a "very" militaristic direction (much to the chagrin of Trek fans in '82). There were a lot of aspects of Wrath of Khan that were "not Trek" in the classic sense.

But Wrath of Khan had Ricardo Montalban- an actor who could take the most ridiculous lines ("I'll chase him round the moons of Nibia...") and deliever them with such conviction that you believed every single word. :eek

And Nick Meyer did the impossible- he managed to keep Shatner's acting contained. Could you imagine what kind of film it would have been if Shatner was unleashed? :lol

Not to mention it had one of the best death scenes of a hero in any film. Perfectly delievered lines!

Wrath of Khan "had" the potential to be a terrible film. The tag line itself is pretty cheesy:

"At the end of the universe lies the beginning of vengeance."


However... magic happened! It was a briliant film!


So now with Abrams at the helm, all I'm hoping for is an engaging story with good acting. I've set aside any hopes for "Great Trek" and an allegorical tale.


Like I said once before, all I want is Spock to say "Fascinating", McCoy to utter, "He's dead Jim!", and Kirk to dropkick the villain. :lol



Kevin
 
SSgt Burton said:
Nick Meyer took Trek in a "very" militaristic direction (much to the chagrin of Trek fans in '82). There were a lot of aspects of Wrath of Khan that were "not Trek" in the classic sense.
Click to expand...

Seeing your Avatar reminded me a lot of the term militaristic. Kirk in the episode "The Corbomite Maneuver" plays a very strict Captain who demands top performances from his crew at all times, even going so far as to tell his crew to run attack drills during duty hours.

And what about Balance of Terror where the crew talk tactics in fighting an enemy from the opposing side and choosing to fight for no reason other than to not appear weak?

The military stuff in Star Trek II wasn't anything new.
 
Regarding the whole "not a Trek fan and loved it," also keep in mind Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. It garnered almost the EXACT same reaction. It was hugely popular with non-Trek fans, but annoyed a lot of the fanbase -- particularly for the campy situation comedy "modern day" San Francisco stuff.

Ironically, when the screenplay was written, Harve Bennett wrote the first and last act (the 23rd century stuff), while the middle of the film -- all of the "modern day" schlock -- was written by...Nicholas Meyer.

JJ Abrams take certainly isn't the best Trek film out there. But it's far from the worst, too. It had flaws. Some big ones. Yet I enjoyed it and I'm willing to give the sequel a chance.
 
It’s not like this hasn’t happened before in the history of Trek.

The reaction to Star Trek: The Motion Picture was all over the place if I recall. It had bland characterizations, uncomfortable looking dull uniforms, a story that had already been told, over long and needless special effects sequences, countless scenes of people staring in amazement or confusion (like the Enterprise crew had never encountered anything unusual in their five year mission), and production design that was uneven to say the least. All this in a movie produced by the creator of Star Trek.

Next Generation was not well received initially either.
 
Caveneau said:
Same here. I also like the ST VI bridge and even the bridge on Enterprise.
Click to expand...

That's my number two favorite of the movie bridges. I play Star Trek Online and I've been hoping they do a TOS Movie bridge pack for the interiors.

I wonder if the next film's bridge will be different from the first?
 
Jeyl said:
Seeing your Avatar reminded me a lot of the term militaristic. Kirk in the episode "The Corbomite Maneuver" plays a very strict Captain who demands top performances from his crew at all times, even going so far as to tell his crew to run attack drills during duty hours.

And what about Balance of Terror where the crew talk tactics in fighting an enemy from the opposing side and choosing to fight for no reason other than to not appear weak?

The military stuff in Star Trek II wasn't anything new.
Click to expand...


"Portraying Starfleet as a military organization flew in the face of everything Star Trek stood for... At one point I forcefully but tactfully reminded Meyer and Harve [Bennet] that Starfleet was the philosophical descendant of NASA, not the Air Force."

-Nichelle Nichols "Beyond Uhura"


The military aspects were hinted at in the TOS. Kirk calls himself "A soldier not a diplomat" in Errand of Mercy... However when Garth of Izar calls Kirk the finest military commander in the Galaxy (next to himself), Kirk replies that he is primarily an explorer now.

Gene Roddenberry was adamant that Starfleet was not the military. However in Star Trek II Starfleet is directly called the military by David Marcus. The Naval overtones were obvious.

Starfleet being the military may have been hinted at before, but not the overt level that Star Trek II demonstrated.


Kevin
 
SSgt Burton said:
"Portraying Starfleet as a military organization flew in the face of everything Star Trek stood for... At one point I forcefully but tactfully reminded Meyer and Harve [Bennet] that Starfleet was the philosophical descendant of NASA, not the Air Force."
Click to expand...

Name one NASA ship that had a weapon on it. I don't recall the Apollo spacecraft being armed with a weapon, yet the Enterprise carries enough armaments to destroy all life on a planet. There's even a General Order to initiate such an action. Again, what is so different about the Wrath of Khan? Is it because they have crew members standing in attention? They did that in the TOS episode "Journey to Babel", WITH PHASERS DRAWN. Heck, the Wrath of Khan has this nice little bit.

Scotty: My Sister's youngest, admiral. Crazy to get to space.
Kirk: Every man's fantasy. I seem to remember it myself.
 
Last edited:
Anthony over at Trekmovie.com had to say this about the 9 minute preview.

"Sulu is piloting the shuttle and doing a lot of screaming about how things are getting hairy, and Uhura is there – apparently for moral support for her man as she gives him a peck on his helmet."

attachment.php


Yes. She's on the shuttle for no other reason than to give Spock moral support. This is borderline bimbo territory she's crossing into.
 
Angelus Lupus said:
Way to ruin a once ground-breaking, strong character, JJ.
Click to expand...

Because inferring a character's entire role in the film from an interpretation of someone else's review of a single scene is guaranteed to be accurate.

Or because there were never any other instances where the Uhura character served little other purpose than to "answer the phone" in previous iterations of Trek.

:rolleyes
 
Zuiun said:
Because inferring a character's entire role in the film from an interpretation of someone else's review of a single scene is guaranteed to be accurate.
Click to expand...

That was the basis of her role in the last movie. The boys go off to save the galaxy, she wishes them well and stays behind to do.... well, corridor running.

attachment.php


*From RiffTrax*
Uhura: MOVE!
Bill Corbett: *confused* I wasn't even in your way.

Bear in mind, the transporter room and the bridge are on the same deck. It's literally right behind the freaking bridge. So taken to it's logical conclusion, Uhura decided to wait in the Transporter room for almost three whole minutes after Kirk and Spock beam onto the Narada before she starts running her way back to the bridge.
 
Just being visible as a black, female, bridge officer was pushing boundaries in the 60's. Martin Luther King certainly thought she was achieving something.
 
Jeyl said:
Name one NASA ship that had a weapon on it. I don't recall the Apollo spacecraft being armed with a weapon, yet the Enterprise carries enough armaments to destroy all life on a planet. There's even a General Order to initiate such an action. Again, what is so different about the Wrath of Khan? Is it because they have crew members standing in attention? They did that in the TOS episode "Journey to Babel", WITH PHASERS DRAWN. Heck, the Wrath of Khan has this nice little bit.

Scotty: My Sister's youngest, admiral. Crazy to get to space.
Kirk: Every man's fantasy. I seem to remember it myself.
Click to expand...

Not to mention, which NASA personnel, who aren't current or prior military, hold military rank? It's not like the head of NASA is an Admiral or a General yet every one in Starfleet held a military rank, wore a uniform, and received medals and commendations. It's also Starfleet who was responsible for fighting the Federation's wars like with the Klingons and the Romulans.
 
This thread is more than 10 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.

Similar threads

Captain Dunsel
Star Trek: Discovery Season 5
2 3
Replies
42
Views
1,558
universaljoint
universaljoint
JiminSTLouis
Paramount Plans Another New STAR TREK Film, Set ‘Decades’ Before TREK ’09
2 3 4
Replies
61
Views
2,865
Treadwell
Treadwell
TazMan2000
Rare Star Trek TNG SPFX video
Replies
3
Views
497
pengbuzz
P
Captain Dunsel
New Book: The Making Of Star Trek II
Replies
11
Views
1,122
DarkKnight
D
The Terminator
RIP Manny Coto - 24, Star Trek. Writer Producer
Replies
3
Views
480
George
George
Back
Top