Star Trek Into Darkness (Pre-release)

You have seen the film, yes?

Yep, sure did, lined up for it on opening day, 1982. :p

Growing from dead cells to full adult in a matter of days isn't considered "unstable" to you? It was mentioned right in the film.. he was going to continue growing like that until he died (the next day, at the rate he was going), until they got him away from the effects of the device.

And then he's stable. The device is no more; it's consumed in the process. Isn't it? So what's the nature of an effect that persists for all the matter in the vicinity, but no longer has a source?!

The life on the planet would be the only thing the device affected, not the planet itself.

I got the impression the place was coming apart at the seams, by the end.

That's my take on it, anyway. I thought we were past complaints that movies didn't spell out every last detail in plain English for the stupid audience? It's nice to have films that leave some questions up to the viewer to answer.

Where would be the fun in that? :) OK, for Inception, sure. But not so much in a throwaway adventure film, where you don't otherwise appear to be expected to apply much thought. TMP tried to be an intellectual SF film...but WOK set out to be straight action adventure. I didn't actually say I had a problem with that, or the corners that were cut. I'm saying it's a double standard - if you're going to identify the dumb stuff in the new franchise as reason to dislike it then it seems inconsistent to not dislike the old one for similar reasons. It has dumb stuff in bushels. It has entire lame movies - I mean lame by broad consensus, not by fan-rage. Why no hate? Because we're giving passes, for emotional attachment reasons.

Truth be told, it probably wasn't supposed to do that originally but added it in at the end as an out for killing Spock. Have Genesis create a planet for Spock's "coffin" to land on so they have somewhere to go to in ST III when they go searching for Spock.

Also my take. It kinda read as the nuts and bolts of filmmaking showing a bit too starkly under the paint.

Yeeeeaaaahhhhh...we don't do that here. :lol

Hell no. :thumbsup :lol
 
if you're going to identify the dumb stuff in the new franchise as reason to dislike it then it seems inconsistent to not dislike the old one for similar reasons. It has dumb stuff in bushels. It has entire lame movies - I mean lame by broad consensus, not by fan-rage. Why no hate? Because we're giving passes, for emotional attachment reasons.

(y)thumbsup(y)thumbsup

and (y)thumbsup:thumbsup



Kevin
 
Another theory...
The bad guy is Dr Janice Lester, who stole a male Federation Captains body (much as in Turnabout Intruder), she resents Kirk for a sleight on his part while in the Academy, and blames the Federation for her being unable to become a starship Captain. Even though it was because she was nuts.
The blonde could be the male Captain in Lesters body.

It's funny how you can make almost any storyline work with trailers these days.
 
Another theory...
The bad guy is Dr Janice Lester, who stole a male Federation Captains body (much as in Turnabout Intruder), she resents Kirk for a sleight on his part while in the Academy, and blames the Federation for her being unable to become a starship Captain. Even though it was because she was nuts.
The blonde could be the male Captain in Lesters body.

It's funny how you can make almost any storyline work with trailers these days.
They could have made it that Orion girl he snubbed in the first film. If she hadn't been killed off, of course.
 
if you're going to identify the dumb stuff in the new franchise as reason to dislike it then it seems inconsistent to not dislike the old one for similar reasons. It has dumb stuff in bushels. It has entire lame movies - I mean lame by broad consensus, not by fan-rage. Why no hate? Because we're giving passes, for emotional attachment reasons.

No. I don't give the Genesis Device a pass because I have some emotional attachment to the movie, but because the Genesis Device actually relates to the themes of Parts II, III and to a certain extent, IV. Life, death to life again. What theme does the red matter relate to? The only theme I ever got from it was that JJ has a thing for red balls.

attachment.php


In Wrath of Khan, we have this pretty far fetched Genesis Device that in the end compliments the themes of the story, where as Trek09 has this far fetched red matter that does whatever it wants for plot convenience and self-indulgance.
 
"Trailer opens with Pike VO, telling Kirk he has courage but no humility, and someday that will get him and his crew killed."

Obviously something one should learn years later after commanding the Federation flag ship with a crew nearing a thousand.

And he didn't learn that lesson until Wrath of Khan.

Does the new ship have a crew of a thousand? I thought it was 430?


Kevin
 
Does the new ship have a crew of a thousand? I thought it was 430?

Considering that the USS KELVIN was a much smaller and inferior ship than the Enterprise, it still was capable of holding more than 800 crew members. It's not a stretch that the new gigantic Enterprise has a much higher crew count than the Kelvin.
 
Considering that the USS KELVIN was a much smaller and inferior ship than the Enterprise, it still was capable of holding more than 800 crew members. It's not a stretch that the new gigantic Enterprise has a much higher crew count than the Kelvin.

This is arguing semantics on my part, but there is no way to know just "how big" the Kelvin was in comparison to the Enterprise.

Please "don't" bring up any size comparisons "in metres" that come from some online source... Quite frankly they are all over the place, with a range going from "the JJPrise is slightly larger than the TMP Enterprise" to "It's bigger than the Enterprise-D." Just about everyone agrees that JJ et al got the scale wrong.

However in the film, the Enterprise has to duck under a massive saucer section in the debris field- so there "are" ships bigger than the Enterprise in the Federation. The Kelvin "could" have been larger than the Enterprise, but like I said, there is no way to know.


Kevin
 
Considering that the USS KELVIN was a much smaller and inferior ship than the Enterprise, it still was capable of holding more than 800 crew members. It's not a stretch that the new gigantic Enterprise has a much higher crew count than the Kelvin.

Or is new and highly automated.
 
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.
Back
Top