Star Trek Into Darkness (Post-release)

[JD]

Unfortunate how a film like STID is being praised for the portrayal of it's characters yet we're quick to dismiss what made the original characters they're based on special to begin with. The reason I keep bringing up the original Khan is because what made him unique is completely absent in this film. It doesn't want to portray Khan as a dangerous but sympathetic character who could be reasoned with. It treats him as a two dimensional bad guy who is evil at heart and just wants to kill people. And as for that "It's a totally new character" argument? No. The writers wrote that stupid Spock Prime scene to emphasize the fact that this Khan is the same Khan from the original. If he was a brand new character, why bring in someone who knows nothing about him?

It is a totally new character. As his character changed when Starfleet found him before Kirk did... and like he was in Wrath of Khan, he's become a man on a mission, to get his people and get revenge of Starfleet for manipulating/holding his people hostage him.

 

[SmilingOtter]

IIRC they made holographic lungs for Neelix in "Voyager" as a temporary fix, so I'd surmise that a permanent fix would be possible down the road. That's the problem with magic in stories - you can solve every problem if let it get out of hand.

Second, because that was the deal he made with Harrison, i.e., I'll save your daughter if you blow up the facility (which was actually a secret Federation facility).

Sounds right on the surface, but the daughter was cured first, which would somewhat reduce Mickey's incentive to kill himself and coworkers. Also, the man was Section 31, which isn't known for hiring Lawful Good types, so I doubt he'd keep his end of the bargain out of a misguided sense of fair play.

 

[Jedi2016]

Why couldn't the transporter just reassemble your molecules from pattern buffer memory/the last time it assembled you?

The most obvious answer would that be that it would probably reset your memories to that previous buffer as well. It's also mentioned that the buffers are only so big, and humans take up a tremendous amount of storage and energy, even by Trek standards. There'd be no way to store them long term. Scotty himself was the only person to be ever do it, and only one pattern was saved, the other was too degraded to recover.

 

[Jedi-72]

Saw it this afternoon and have to say that I was pretty impressed. I had no idea that it was a re-imagining of Wrath of Khan going in, and as that became apparent I groaned inside as that is the only Trek movie that I ever really loved and the only one that I own. That said, I walked out loving this movie and eagerly anticipating where Abrams takes Star Wars. It likely won't satisfy every Trek nut, but it got a round of applause at the end of the movie and left me wanting to see it again. I know this is blasphemy for the purists, but I came home and watched Wrath of Khan and found it hokey in comparison. This is 21st century Trek. If you love the 20th century movies, that's cool. But, this is a new totally new Trek and I love it. Bring on Star Wars J.J.!

 

[ghostryder]

How the battle over 'Star Trek' rights killed J.J. Abrams' grand ambitions - MSN Movies News

 

[Kerr Avon]

I went and saw it because I got invited to a special private screening Sat night at Wonderfest. I absolutely hated the first Abrams travesty. This still wasn't that good, but was better than the first garbage. It doesn't make a lot of sense that Abrams insisted the first movie was so he could do all kinds of new stuff, and then just spend a couple hours stealing much better written material. Quite frankly, the scene with Kirk in the engine room was boring to me. It had none of the emotional appeal of the original ending of Khan

A couple of things..

Starfleet realizes what a mistake they made by putting a slacker/Starfleet washout in the Captain's seat and demote Kirk. Of course, 10 minutes later he's a captain again. Why bother with the demotion? At least this time I can buy that the Admiral WANTED someone to fail and start a war.

The costume designer should be shot for the dress uniforms at Starfleet command. Those are the most god awful, colorless, things I've ever seen.

Why does Scotty still have a communicator after resigning from Starfleet AND that Kirk can reach it from across the galaxy like a cell phone in the same coverage area?

McCoy is dumb. If Khan's blood could bring Kirk back, he should know that any of the other 72 genetically modified humans will do that too. You don't need Khan alive at that point.

 

[Apollo]

I have had a few days to think about it and I dig how the cast is starting to come in their own in their roles, just sad that they had nothing to work with.

Absolutely HORRIBLE script.

Hopefully they will get some writers who can actually write or have ideas instead of plagerizing a prior movie.

 

[Shadow345]

I know this is blasphemy for the purists, but I came home and watched Wrath of Khan and found it hokey in comparison. This is 21st century Trek. If you love the 20th century movies, that's cool. But, this is a new totally new Trek and I love it.

I don't know, all the talk about Wrath of Khan being the golden standard of Star Trek that can never be equaled is actually starting to make me despise the film. I really wish that wasn't the case either.

 

[nickytea]

I have had a few days to think about it and I dig how the cast is starting to come in their own in their roles, just sad that they had nothing to work with.

Absolutely HORRIBLE script.

Hopefully they will get some writers who can actually write or have ideas instead of plagerizing a prior movie.

Other than a two line references and a single instance of staging, Into Darkness does not share it's structure with any of the other Trek outings.
Seriously, it couldn't be less like TWoK, if you break them down beat for beat. They just don't match up.

As to TWoK being the "gold standard," I feel like not only does this film celebrate and play off of it, but there are also aspects of criticism in its conemnation of a militarized Trek in favor of an exploratory intent. (Which is what the film ultimately supports.)

 

[Shadow345]

Yeah, I couldn't be more obvious that there is an anti-militarization message in it, Scott literally has a line condemning starfleet for abandoning exploration and becoming more militarized.

 

[ghostryder]

 

[Apollo]

See thats the thing imo TWOK is NOT the standard.

Each of the old Movies had their own groove.

If I am not mistaken Nimoys "Whale" installment set the record for the Franchise in raking in the dough and when it came out a lot of the diehard Trekkies were pissed at that one while non trekkies ie the general public LOVED that one.

Other than a two line references and a single instance of staging, Into Darkness does not share it's structure with any of the other Trek outings.
Seriously, it couldn't be less like TWoK, if you break them down beat for beat. They just don't match up.

As to TWoK being the "gold standard," I feel like not only does this film celebrate and play off of it, but there are also aspects of criticism in it's conemnation of a militarized Trek in favor of an exploratory intent. (Which is what the film ultimately supports.)

 

[nickytea]

Yeah, I couldn't be more obvious that there is an anti-militarization message in it, Scott literally has a line condemning starfleet for abandoning exploration and becoming more militarized.

Not to mention Kirk's wrap-up speech, and the well spoken intentions of the villains for them to define themselves against in action.

 

[Howard]

Ironic really, but the acting on the bridge kinda reminded me of Galaxy Quest in places.
Started off badly too - Prime Directive stuff. What were Kirk and McCoy up to with that scroll?
If Spock was so concerned about the PD and the planet's inhabitants seeing the Enterprise, then why was he breaking the PD in placing the device in the volcano to prevent its eruption?
Some great visuals, some interesting character interplay, but ultimately average.

 

[nickytea]

What were Kirk and McCoy up to with that scroll?

They were distracting the natives so that the shuttle could be maneuvered to drop off Spock.

 

[Jeyl]

It is a totally new character. As his character changed when Starfleet found him before Kirk did... and like he was in Wrath of Khan, he's become a man on a mission, to get his people and get revenge of Starfleet for manipulating/holding his people hostage him.

I would hardly call that justification to go on a murdering rampage. The original Khan spent 15 years on a planet that killed his wife and 20 of his loyal followers while he struggled just to keep everyone else alive. He was actually there to witness it and had all those years to build up his hatred of Kirk. This new Khan's justification for revenge is just lazy. Instead of finding out what Starfleet actually did to his followers when he was forced to leave them behind, he literally assumes that they simply killed them and decides to go on murdering innocents. When Khan finally gets his revenge and has his 72 crew men back, he decides to simply kill Kirk and everyone onboard the Enterprise for no reason. Whatever...

 

[Shadow345]

It's Khan. It's what he does. He dislikes the people which are not the superior people. He has a master race complex like that.

 

[Mola Rob]

'Star Trek Into Darkness' Can't Hit Warp Speed at Box Office | The Wrap Movies

Someday the studio executives will realize that Star Trek just does not have the widespread appeal they want it to have. Turning it into something it is not will not change that fact.

 

[Shadow345]

So just get Michael Bay to direct all blockbusters because money, am I right?

 

[Bryancd]

Unfortunate how a film like STID is being praised for the portrayal of it's characters yet we're quick to dismiss what made the original characters they're based on special to begin with. The reason I keep bringing up the original Khan is because what made him unique is completely absent in this film. It doesn't want to portray Khan as a dangerous but sympathetic character who could be reasoned with. It treats him as a two dimensional bad guy who is evil at heart and just wants to kill people. And as for that "It's a totally new character" argument? No. The writers wrote that stupid Spock Prime scene to emphasize the fact that this Khan is the same Khan from the original. If he was a brand new character, why bring in someone who knows nothing about him?

I see very little of TOS Kirk or Spock in the new characters. The basic archetypes are there, but to me these are all brand new characters not beholding to their past iterations. I praise the depiction and familiarity if the relationships between them but it's all done on a completely new way. It's a fools errand to try and take William Shatner's Kirk and make it jibe with Chris Pine's. I choose to watch these films without a slavish devotion to what has come before. And considering the amount if time Trek has been part of my life that's no mean feat.