Star Trek Into Darkness (Post-release)
- Thread starter Vivek
- Start date
But the ship wasn't a natural plot device, it was a context sensitive one. If you're just going to have these things onboard the ship without any prior establishment, you might as well have anything onboard the ship to fit whatever tricky situation our heroes are in. Star Trek used to be way better than that.
No, the ship was meaningless to the plot. It could have easily been a shuttle eupuipedbthe same way. This is a week criticism.
Kerr Avon
Master Member
See, when I go to see the movie, I want to be able to SEE the movie. I don't want to have to go buy some comics to read up on the other part of the movie to fully understand what's going on in the movie. That's just annoying on Abram's part that he can't even tell a complete story in one product.
It's just about as bad as how he apparently had to explain all the significant plot holes of the first film in some comics.
SmilingOtter
Master Member
That's entirely the way he (and Lindelof) roll. His first "Trek," about half the mysteries in "Lost," and some of "Cloverfield's" plot all require outside knowledge to fully "get." Maybe not so much in STID, but I'm about tired of it, and the both of them.
Zombie_61
Master Member
Did he? If anything, Montalban's performance sold the character, not the way the character was written. And what, exactly, makes him such a "bad ass"? Let's see...
1. Khan's first attack on the Enterprise amounts to nothing more than a well-landed sucker punch. He uses the fact that he's in a stolen Federation vessel to his advantage, knowing Kirk would be hesitant to open fire on a "friendly" ship, then allows Kirk to get the upper hand.
2. He and his "superior" crew torture and murder a group of scientists that, presumably, had little or no security detail to protect them; nothing more than terrorist/bully tactics.
3. He "maroons" Kirk, et al, underground, then allows them to escape.
4. He allows Kirk to prey on his arrogance, and follows the Enterprise into the Mutara Nebula against the sound advice of his second in command.
5. He ultimately loses his crew and his life because of his lack of tactical strategy.
Don't get me wrong, I love The Wrath of Khan and Montalban's performance. But when you take a truly critical look at Khan in that movie you realize "the ultimate bad ass" does some foolish and cowardly things.
Last edited:
Saw this flick last week on Thursday night. After the credits started rolling, I thought to myself that this is a great Trek movie for those who haven't seen any of the originals or those who aren't huge fans. It's entertaining, fast-paced and has some good action.
Unfortunately, I'm a Trek fan. Much of what I took issue with has been discussed but here's my list anyway:
- The Enterprise is not a submarine. Sooooo many plot issues with that alone.
- Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan. I know that the events of the 2009 flick changed the realities but Khan and his crew were floating around in the Botany Bay long before that happened. I would've rather had BC be Khan's right-hand man who's trying to restore Khan to leadership rather than what we got. It would've been a nice touch to see "KHAN" written on one of those cryo-tubes as they were put in storage at the end of the film. Also, I never got the feeling that Khan was anything but a 2-faced jerk. Khan was so much more complex than that but they didn't bother going there. That's too bad.
- Engineering. Hated the brewery look the first time, still hate it. The warp core was cool but I don't understand how they can make the rest of the ship interiors look so slick yet neglect engineering.
- Alice Eve's undie scene. Don't get me wrong, she's gorgeous but there really wasn't a good reason to show her like that. Less is more and a change of camera location could've made that scene less gratuitous.
- The relationship dynamic between Bones, Spock and Kirk that I thought was a bit lacking. I liked that in the old flicks and it wouldn't be a terrible thing to allow those three talented actors to touch on that a bit more.
- KHAAAAAAAN! I really, really wish they didn't put that in. As it is, we see Spock crying. That alone should be enough to establish that he's sad about Kirk. Less is more. Again.
- I never really liked the Uhura/Spock couple. I don't think it really serves the plot of either flick enough to have it continue. She was always such a strong woman and as well as Zoe Saldana portrays her, that part is just not *quite* there yet. She had a few spots in each flick where she shined but that relationship to Spock just dragged her back like an anchor.
- The Klingon scene. I thought they looked good. I kinda wished that Uhura wasn't so good at Klingon (as in ST6 - one of my most favourite movie scenes ever). Minor detail, not an actual peeve.
- The dress hats. Hated them. The unis were a bit dull but looked much sharper without the lids.
All in all, not the worst movie I've ever seen (still Battlefield: Earth) but a good, general representation of what Trek is all about to those not in the know.
Unfortunately, I'm a Trek fan. Much of what I took issue with has been discussed but here's my list anyway:
- The Enterprise is not a submarine. Sooooo many plot issues with that alone.
- Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan. I know that the events of the 2009 flick changed the realities but Khan and his crew were floating around in the Botany Bay long before that happened. I would've rather had BC be Khan's right-hand man who's trying to restore Khan to leadership rather than what we got. It would've been a nice touch to see "KHAN" written on one of those cryo-tubes as they were put in storage at the end of the film. Also, I never got the feeling that Khan was anything but a 2-faced jerk. Khan was so much more complex than that but they didn't bother going there. That's too bad.
- Engineering. Hated the brewery look the first time, still hate it. The warp core was cool but I don't understand how they can make the rest of the ship interiors look so slick yet neglect engineering.
- Alice Eve's undie scene. Don't get me wrong, she's gorgeous but there really wasn't a good reason to show her like that. Less is more and a change of camera location could've made that scene less gratuitous.
- The relationship dynamic between Bones, Spock and Kirk that I thought was a bit lacking. I liked that in the old flicks and it wouldn't be a terrible thing to allow those three talented actors to touch on that a bit more.
- KHAAAAAAAN! I really, really wish they didn't put that in. As it is, we see Spock crying. That alone should be enough to establish that he's sad about Kirk. Less is more. Again.
- I never really liked the Uhura/Spock couple. I don't think it really serves the plot of either flick enough to have it continue. She was always such a strong woman and as well as Zoe Saldana portrays her, that part is just not *quite* there yet. She had a few spots in each flick where she shined but that relationship to Spock just dragged her back like an anchor.
- The Klingon scene. I thought they looked good. I kinda wished that Uhura wasn't so good at Klingon (as in ST6 - one of my most favourite movie scenes ever). Minor detail, not an actual peeve.
- The dress hats. Hated them. The unis were a bit dull but looked much sharper without the lids.
All in all, not the worst movie I've ever seen (still Battlefield: Earth) but a good, general representation of what Trek is all about to those not in the know.
Last edited:
nickytea
Master Member
Civvies were in starfleet cases. Hands them to Hendorff.
nickytea
Master Member
Did you really find yourself wondering at an incomplete narrative? Did Obi Wan mentioning an unexplained Clone Wars tick you off?
I'd go so far as to say the transmedia potential wasn't explored nearly enough. I want more of the narrative to be immersively spread across medias. It can create a wonderfully engrossing story experience.
But if you're mad about a few offhanded references, I shudder to think what your reaction would be to that progressive of a story structure.
Kerr Avon
Master Member
Funny you mention the Clone Wars. The entire Star Wars universe would have been better off WITHOUT showing that.
nickytea
Master Member
Do you think, maybe, that was my point?
You said:
Would you say the same about Lucas? Ignoring the fact that you refer to the movie as a "product," I think "Clone Wars" and "Mudd Incident" (The line you are objecting to) are fairly equivocal in their contexts.
Proper
Well-Known Member
Exactly! The depth and breadth to which some of these individuals dig to try to rip apart Abrams and his Trek is almost unbelievable.
Last edited:
tgreco
Sr Member
You make some good points, but in WOK it had an internally consistent logic.
Khan after all was frozen for 300 years, on a sleeper ship. Foolish... perhaps... cowardly... maybe... but ruthless... definitely.
As portrayed in TWOK, he was driven. His marooning on Ceti Alpha 5, the death of his wife, and 20 years of scraping a liven on a baren sand heap. So it all stood up. And as a character, Khan makes sense. His hatred of Kirk drove him to self destruction, and it was deeply personal, and identifiable.
Abrams Khan can't stand up to that kind of scrutiny, because there was almost no character development. There was one scene where he beat up some klingons... (which I suspect was lifted from the episode of Enterprise with the augments, which IS included in this time line as it predates the divergence point)
Other than that, there was never a demonstration of how intelligent or ruthless he was. Spock prime has to tell nu-Spock that he was intelligent and ruthless... (blatently piggy-backing on the mystique of Montalban's performance)
In the context of just this film, the only thing you know is that his name is Khan, and he's genetically superior... He's been doing ship design for Section 31, and that he has 72 frozen crew members that he wants to keep alive.
WE live in an age where you can fire a missile and hit a building from 100 miles away, why does Khan need to be 12 feet from the building to kill the leadership of Starfleet 150 years from now?
Worse than that... in a film with Khan in it... the big villian turns out to be the war mongering Admiral of Starfleet?!?!?!?!
jlee562
Sr Member
Look, if you really don't like the story of Into Darkness, than so be it. But really, let's not pretend like the film is inherently weak because of a recycled character. Was The Dark Knight an inherently weak film because it reused Joker and Two Face?
Again, not saying that you have to like Into Darkness, but reusing Khan, in and of itself, is a poor reason to discount the film.
Again, not saying that you have to like Into Darkness, but reusing Khan, in and of itself, is a poor reason to discount the film.
There's a reason why the writers chose to have Khan quote (and paraphrase) Melville, and not because it sounded BA when spoken by Ricardo Montalban. Khan was, in that movie, Captain Ahab, with Kirk being his white whale. Both Khan and Ahab met their demise because of their monomaniacal obsession with killing their enemy, an enemy that has grievously injured them.
He doesn't need to be there. He wants to be there. The visceral feel of a kill is more satisfying than one from a distance, especially when your target is man who is holding your family hostage.
mynameschris
Well-Known Member
Where the ship comes from is in the comic tie in, it adds depth to the universe by having them have a shuttle confiscated from a previous mission. To me it doesnt need to be explained, why they wouldnt have dropped it off on Earth is the only real question.
When Kirk arrives at the shuttle he is carrying duffel bags, probably with a change of clothes for Hendorff and the other red shirt. Maybe the weapons should have come out of a bag instead of a compartment in the shuttle, but maybe they searched it and knew they were there but as it was safely locked down in the hanger either left or returned them to the shuttle (they could have been in the bags).
What was wrong with the Bird of Prey? Other than the design of the bridge set dramatically changing with no reason...
I like engineering, has that industrial look that the original ship had which was lost in the refit and any design afterwards with the exception of the E-E.
The shuttlebay I like alot more than on previous shows which looked too small, same with the shuttles and they nailed the shuttle design this time around.
That scene in ST6 (also one of my favourites) never made sense to me, Starfleets main enemy for the majority of her career and she needs a book to have a basic conversation with one. This Uhura makes much more sense as a Comm officer than the original who relied on technology.
Liked the uniforms, the hats not so much but I dont suit hats so dont like them anyway, they looked good on the Honour Guard at the end of the film.
I rewatched Space Seed the other day, to be fair Khan is a pretty weak villain who only got his way due to an even weaker member of the crew helping him despite him acting violent towards her, so much for the progressive ideals of Star Trek. Even when she then betrayed him he welcomed her with open arms!
WOK is what made Khan such a threat but as others said he was revenge mad to the point he made the worst decisions, the Khan in this film is cold, calculating and felt superior to the Enterprise crew just like in Space Seed.
He had Marcus twisting him and using him with the leverage of his crew, Marcus was obviously smarter than Kirk and didnt give him access to information on how to control the ship (terrible writing) nor did he have a goo goo eyed crew member helping him. When he thinks his crew is dead he causes all sorts of damage and tries to destroy Marcus and Starfleet by starting a war with the Klingons which would have worked if Kirk hadnt changed him mind.
How is it weak criticism if you say it could have just been a regular shuttlecraft? At least it's been established in the previous movie and in this movie that the Enterprise has shuttle crafts of various types onboard. And when you consider how much money could have been saved by not building the civilian ship both inside and out, it not only is lazy writing, it's pointless budget spending.
mynameschris
Well-Known Member
But any Starfleet shuttle would be recognised by the Klingons which is why they arent wearing uniforms or using Starfleet weapons.
He wanted to be personal, wanted them to know it was him and to work out where he went... Otherwise why beam to Kronos at all, he was taunting anyone who was left, probably hoped Marcus would survive, by being so savage in his attack instead of a cold and calculated missile strike.
My big thing about engineering is that it doesn't look like it'd fit inside the ship. There's nothing in the design to indicate that it's near a bulkhead or that there's part of the hull nearby or that the piping has to conform to the space within the hull. To me, it's as though engineering is supposed to be this massive, wide open space. Even the original Enterprise didn't look like that. Call me picky, but most of it just doesn't look "spacey" enough.
I can agree with you here. The new Uhura seems more linguistically savvy than the original, but lemme pose this question: how is it that she's so fluent in Klingon if they really don't have much contact with them?
mynameschris
Well-Known Member
Yeh there is that, I just like the more industrialised nature of it, especially the Warp Core this time around, I agree it does seem just a little big, almost as if it doesnt end. I think thas the reason we will never see an attempt at some sort of cross section of this ship.
There is that, but Hoshi learnt Klingon and they have had dealings with them for about 100 years, so they must have learnt how to speak to each other and she did say she wasnt great at it, better than the poorly thought out and written she was in STVI.
Similar threads
