ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Star Trek Into Darkness Reviews

tomdaltonz

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5

Report this May. 19 2013, 9:47 pm

So Kahn is an allie of Kirk, then twist the experience to the point where Kirk dies to save the ship while Spock has to watch him die helplessly, using almost the same dialogue from TWOK in the process.  In the abscence of a genesis planet to bring back Kirk, instead Kahn's own blood is the key to bringing Kirk back?  Essentially in this version it's Kahn who saves Kirk's life.  Huh?  Well it's Bones using a serum he developed from Kahn's blood...I feel like Abrams is really just trying to see how far he can stretch the original storyline (or pervert it,) until the fans try to lynch him.


He destroyed Vulcan in the first movie and that almost seemed unforgiveable for a while, now Kahn saves Kirk.  What's next?  A brokeback affair involving Sulu and Worf's great grandfather?  I think JJ's f'ing with the fans.


"Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music."

jayson.deare

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6

Report this May. 19 2013, 11:40 pm

[quote]


[quote]


As an old fan I did see ST2009 which I enjoyed and was able to suspensd some disbelief as to some of the bad science etc in name of restarting a franchise. I will use my thoughts of new movie to try an explain what I feel a lot of old fans are thinking I just saw ST:ITD and the movie was ok but I hate to say it, it wasn't good. it's just more of the same stuff that we get shoveled our way every year by Hollywood. While Into Darkness was an enjoyable thrill ride there's just enough wrong with it for me to be glad that Abrams may be moving on two Star Wars or very sorry.

I could go on like a Fanboy about the things that irritate me and are utterly ignored by writers some that really make no logical sense but since I am a fan I will only list 4

1.) Transwarp Beaming please for the love of God get rid of this beaming across the galaxy BS who the hell needs a Starship when you can just beam on over

2.) No sense of Actual time passing at all even if it's just simulated or even remotely speed up. We warp from Quo'Nos to Earth in seconds just no...

3.) Why did they redesign the Klingons the new ones look like some Dessert thugs with the Piercings doesn't make sense also would not have been affected by Time Travel
4.) The promoting and demoting of anyone at random I mean common....

I think Star Trek needs some fresh blood again, I liked how we allude to the five year missions but I just felt that the heart of Star Trek was taken away and replaced with insert any Generic Action Movie here. The cast I love the idea of the reboot I love. While 2009 had a few plot holes I felt it was a stronger story and the whole time travel alternate reality thing can explain it away. I loved the first sequence of the movie it felt like I was watching some fun Star Trek Again, the morality of everything and Kirk changing his mind about the orders was very well done as well.

What i miss is the heart of Start Trek and the larger ramifications. Star Trek 6 we have politics, betrayal, friendship, action and in the end a new beginning. It was really something to see. I just hope that being out on this 5 year mission while give us something more than just a 2.5 hour action movie that can almost be done with "insert character name here" and not Kirk Spock, McCoy and the crew of the U.S.S Enterprise 1701.

I am pretty sure I could come up with a better story than this one in 5 minutes. In fact I will write a few plot points of one down. Based on the TOS Episode Arena more commonly known as the one with the Gorn

1.) Enterprise receives a distress signal and arrives on a decimated colony, the citizens that survive don't know why they were attacked.

2.) During the investigation the Enterprise and the planet are attacked by an unknown race the Gorn with Captain Kirk being taken prisoner

3.) The Gorn Captain challenges Kirk to a fight in an Arena, During the fight Kirk tries to better Understand the Gorn and why they attacked the Colony taken a cue from Into Darkness enter section 31

4.) After a short battle the Enterprise recovers Kirk who then sues to make a temporary alliance with the Gorn

5.) The Enterprise and the Gorn go after a rogue element of Starfleet Section 31 that is taken preventative action against a potentially hostile race with their dreadnought (Enter U.S.S Vengeance)

6.) Enterprise saves the day while forging a new alliance for the United Federation of Planets.

I know I pulled two elements from the new movie but heck this one seems a lot more like Star Trek with a lot more character to me. Anyhow let's hope the 3rd one finally gets it right I could excuse the first one as a new beginning but not the second....


 


Oh and one last thing how the heck is the Neutral Zone so close to Quo'Nos that you don't need to warp there sigh....


[/quote]


 


Im sorry you didn't enjoy it. That's a bummer. 


A couple of quick comments:


1. Your story idea is really no better than the basic premise of the film. Its not bad, but it's certainly not better. Sounds like "Arena" redone. No character arc for Kirks growth and no arc for furthering the Spock relationship. 


2. There were hardly ever any "larger ramifications" in Star Trek.Particularly not in TOS or TNG. 


3. You praise TUC in one line and then bash how the Enterprise gets to the Neutral Zone too quickly in STID a few lines later. Did you watch TUC? They basically do the exact same thing in that movie. In fact the Enterprise never even goes to warp in TUC on the way there or escorting the KRONOS ONE back. it's ridiculous. Let's hold everyone to the same standard. 


4. Wholeheartedly agree about transwarp beaming. It's awful. I was hoping they'd move away and forget it ever happened. Good call on that one!


[/quote]


 


1.)I was using the Arena as a concept of how to make a higher minded movie like they basically rehashed Wrath of Kahn. There are plenty of other things that I could come up with.


2.)This is true in both of the series however there were larger ramifications in the Movies so that is what I was refering to. Such as saving humanity from V'ger, Bringing the Galaxy Closer together, preventing a madman from taking the Genesis device.


3.)With regards to moving fast you can make an argument that in TUC they do move to fast however it does not take the split seconds that it does in STID. WHen they set forth to arrive at Rura Penthe first and foremost the Enterprise was close to Klingon space as they had traveled towards the empire. There was a scene with them crossing the border. Kirk and McCoy were in the prison for a few days. In STID they jump to wapr Carol Marcus literraly says he will catch us queue Pew - Pew and in a matter of seconds there is a space battle going on behind the moon.


I enjoyed the movie a large souless inconsistent even within it's own narrative summer blockbuster and I will never critisize anyone for liking it. I enjoy some movies that when I really break them down are pretty terrible. For Me STID is like a brandy chocolate without the brandy! I enjoy the outer coating but when I am looking ot enjoy to center and main part of the choclate is missing and the hollow experience that it is becomes apparent.

Del_Duio

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 28

Report this May. 20 2013, 8:25 am

I saw the movie last night and thought it was awesome. I'd rank it at #4 behind WoK, ST 2009, and ST 6.


Of course there's no beating Monteblan's Khan but Benedict was pretty great for the parts he was in. I'm glad they did not re-do the whole "cat and mouse" WoK scene with the 2 damaged starships because for awhile there that's what it looked like was going to happen.


The whole reversal of the Kirk / Spock antimatter chamber scene was great however when Spock yelled "KHAAAAANN!!!" I have to admit I felt a twinge of cheesiness. Oddly enough when Spock said "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" there was no such cheesiness. I guess you have to pick your moments when it comes to homage!


The new look Klingons with the Predator-style armor are cool and actually sort of scary for once which was good. I have no doubt Klingons and the war Admiral Marcus wanted to start will be front and center in the next one.


And there was even a tribble. Huzzah!


I'm glad Carol Marcus was more than just for the T&A factor and hey there's nothing saying that she HAS to have a kid with Kirk now. I mean some things might not always be pre-determined even with the new timeline.


Special props to Chris Pine who I thought did a really great job with Kirk acting-wise. When Pike took the Enterprise away from him he actually looked pained and sad and BELIEVABLE.


Karl Urban's Bones is just superb, let's give him the lion's share of the lines in the next one. "Damnit, Jim! There's Klingons hovering around Uranus!" Hahahaha, tell me that wouldn't crack the joint up hahaha..


DXF Games: Hasslevania, Equin: The Lantern, ODW, Neil Peart Mission The Camera Eye! http://dxfgames.com

ItalianTiberius24

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 177

Report this May. 20 2013, 8:37 am

i'm as hardcore of a trekkie as there can be....ive seen and own every episode of all the tv series including the cartoon, ive seen and own all the movies, ive read around 20-30 star trek books and own many more, and have read about half of the comics but own them all....saying all that i have to admit that i did enjoy the movie after utterly dispising the first jj trek movie....even though i did have a fun time at the movie there's no way id rank this or the other rebootted trek ahead of the real stuff.....i understand what these movies are....this new one is just a collage of previous trek with the roles recasted and a 190 million dollar paint job....im not going to give them more praise when they have every advantage and everything they want when the actors/creators of previous trek movies/shows had to scrape by most of the time by the skin of their teeth on very fixed budgets, had technological limitations, crazy deadlines, and many many more hardships but still persevered and delivered in my opinion the greatest entertainment in pop culture history....they created timeless stories and experiences that will live on and be retold forever....these 2 newer movies, not so much...they relied heavily on what came before and at times just rehased previous story points....im more interested in what comes next for this franchise....im sure there will be a 3rd trek movie in this universe but then what?....reboot the tng crew into a movie and cherry pick cool stories from there, maybe mix and match some things, slap a 200 million dollar budget on it and feed it to us? then do the same to ds9, etc????....no thank you i'd rather have something that continues the narrative/continuity and moves star trek foward instead of being stuck in the nostalgic mud we're in now...contrary to what alot of people may think star trek has a main narrative like star wars and such...now its much deepper and has many more layers but its there....you really just cant reboot the franchise like superhero movies do....supeheros are rebooted constantly in their main form of comics so the narrative constantly changes....not so with something like star trek or star wars....i mean i dont think star wars fans would be too happy if they redid the original trilogy with newer younger actors and a bigger budget....but of course they are NOT doing that but are making a true sequel and furthering their narrative....


I don't believe in the no-win scenerio.

Treknoir

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1784

Report this May. 20 2013, 9:38 am

SPOILERS DON'T READ IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE


Saw the movie, enjoyed the movie but it was uneven. You could drive several trucks through the plot holes in ST09 but I enjoyed it better than STID.


The GOOD: The pacing was just right, perhaps even a little too fast. I was never bored. Benedict Cumberbatch could read the menu board at McDonald's and I would throw ALL my money at him. The ships, aliens, warp, transporter, clothing, aliens, space scenes were fanstastic. Let's keep it real, past iterations of ST movies suffered becuase the visuals were lacking. I liked that this film gave everyone an opportunity to shine while still maintaining focus on the Trek Trinity. The issue between Uhura and Spock was not drawn out or made the focus of the film. Excellent.


The MEH: The Klingon dude was clearly the lab created love child of Geordi LaForge with the weird blue contacts and Xerxes from 300 with a little Klingon ridges thrown in for good measure. WTF? I didn't hate it or love it.


The Bad: I loved Benedict but he was wasted. Peter Weller was wasted too. Khan was not necessary to the film. At all. The story itself seems like a horrible compromise between the writers: half wanted TWOK redux and the other half wanted a Section 31 caper. I stand by my previous posts on the casting of Khan so I won't repeat myself. If they had to use him, Benedict could have been a member of Khan's family, a new villain, or perhaps created from DNA culled from Khan's crew. Also, I think the writers should have picked a single plot and gone with it instead of the mashup that was filmed. This felt very similar to Spider Man 3: too damn much going on. I am sick of these studios taking the "throw it on the wall and see what sticks" method of writing and storytelling. Sometimes less is more. Or better yet, try something original and craft a solid story. I can't fault JJ (Orci and Lindelof) and Paramount for this alone because every major studio does this now. Even Pixar has moved away from the solid story formula. But I digress. The story had, IMO, much more promise as a "dark" tale if the Section 31 angle was really explored and focused on. The story was there. Spock's attempts to live by the rules even if they were morally wrong would have been FAR more interesting if it was SF itself that turned out to be the bad guy. Khan was a cheap trick.


The UGLY: The fanwank was practically pornographic. Bigger, longer, UNCUT! At times endearing (Tribbles, Sulu's foreshadowed captaincy, Carol Marcus) at other times it was ri-damn-diculous (Khan, the radiation scene and Vulcan hand salute, and KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNN!!!!!!). I was particularly irked by Nimoy's appearance and sage babble about "paths" and whatnot. Look dude, if alternate Spock is calling you about Khan CLEARLY sh*t got real and you need to be straight and to the point (i.e., "he's DANGEROUS, do not trust him, LLAP").


Overall, I give this film a 7.5/10. It looked good, it was exciting, but the story was lacking and unfocused. I could forgive the silliness of ST09 because it attempted to set a new course. But with STID the writers seem to have lost heir way trying to appease diehard fans and non-fans and not really doing justice for either group. My hope for the next film is for the writers to focus on the story. Craft something original, see if you can organically tie-in some canon elements, but don't let canon concerns be the primary driver. Keep the pacing and look of STID.


It is curious how often you humans manage to obtain that which you do not want. - Spock

DS9_FOREVER!

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 201

Report this May. 20 2013, 3:01 pm

Quote: Vger23 @ May. 19 2013, 7:41 pm

>

>I think the Cumberbatch as Khan complaint can be dismissed as easily as any other gaffe trek fans are typically willing to forgive. How about Checkov being recognized in TWOK? Kirsty Alley inexplicably turning into Robin Curtis in TSFS? Klingons having pink blood in TUC? Data's emotion chip changing size, shape and location every time it is shown? The list is as long as the franchise itself quite honestly. 

>I think ultimately they tried to cast different actors, but at the end of the day they needed to cast the best actor they could. 

>


Yup, I didn't have a problem with Cumby playing him. That "problem" could have been easily "fixed" had it been revealed early that he underwent surgery to hide his true identity.


I just found this great Star Trek MB!!  photo ac1685424929087bf1b7e7e0d734f861.jpg

DS9_FOREVER!

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 201

Report this May. 20 2013, 3:07 pm

Oh, don't forget our english speaking Picard was from France. 


I just found this great Star Trek MB!!  photo ac1685424929087bf1b7e7e0d734f861.jpg

Kat Faerie

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1

Report this May. 20 2013, 3:43 pm

Here's my Blog Review of Into Darkness.  Spoiler Alert, it sucked!  


http://ktslagle.wordpress.com/2013/05/20/into-darkness-the-redshirt-of-star-trek-movies/

$20,000 Pyramid

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1

Report this May. 20 2013, 8:48 pm

When Kirk is in a dazed state, that sounds like William Shatner's voice saying something.

MurphysLaw

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1

Report this May. 21 2013, 6:26 am

OneDamnMinuteAdmiral has it right on the money. John Harrison did not need to be Khan, he could indeed have been anyone and still pulled it off as the villain for this movie. It was a blatant excuse to pander off of the success of Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan, and showed a certain amount of laziness, therefore, in the writing. The postulations of the fan community pre-release, on the basis of the previews alone, showed the fans have more creativity going than the writers of the film. I, too, did not require a reiteration of the death scene in engineering, nor Zachary Quinto's mimicry of William Shatner's "Khan" emote. (Somehow, I think this is called plagarism in courts somewhere?) So, with all that said, can the fans write the last film, please? Because with a universe as broad as the Star Trek universe, do we really need to rip-off prior canon just to pocket a few more million dollars?


Err, what am I saying? Of course they do. It's Hollywood.

GenXAccord

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2

Report this May. 22 2013, 3:12 pm

Star Trek: Into Darkness. Sigh! It looks like they managed to just flip flop the Star Trek Movie Curse from the odd to the even numbered movies. I guess someone thought it would be a good idea to do "Fast and Furious" in space and call it Star Trek. Action, action, and more action! Don't let the action slow down or people might notice we left out intelligence, character development, chemistry and good dialogue. Just throw more action and visuals at them. Surely they won't notice the giant plot holes and lack of logical explanations for many character's actions. And the characters and dialogue that they stole from a certain other Star Trek movie? Pathetic! This is one to wait for on DVD or Blue Ray, that is for sure.
Two and a half stars from me. One star for visuals and special effects, one star for acting, and a half a star for the action which was great until it just...never...stopped. The writers should be replaced, the director that didn't question the Fast and Furious in space with no depth or character development and couldn't get believable chemistry between the characters this time around should have his pay docked. And bastardizing another Star Trek movie for villains and especially stealing exact dialogue is not only reprehensible it made many scenes downright ridiculous. The only thing I really liked was the new, more alien looking Klingons. And let's not even get started on the time it took to get from Earth to Quonos compared with the time it took to get back. Is that warp drive or slipstream drive?


And plot holes...where to begin? From the get go...why was the Enterprise hidden in the ocean? Tranporters not working? Never had the ship in orbit around a planet before? You can beam halfway across the galaxy but you have to hide the ship in the ocean? Spock was ok with breaking the Prime Directive to the point of saving the indiginous people, but not ok with them seeing the Enterprise and having to file a detailed report on that? The list after this is long and tiring, but it does indicate a story that was written around the action and cool visual scenes and not the other way around. The plot and story was an afterthought to connect the "cool" action scenes and visuals. This team of writers is good at build up but awful at payoff, "Lost" is a shining example of this. "Fun" is fine but mindlessness is not. I would love to have seen what Christopher Nolan would have done with Trek even if it would have been too dark for most people.

AtoZ2

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1297

Report this May. 22 2013, 4:29 pm

 


For the most part I enjoyed it. The actors are all extremely talented and encompass their character roles with genuine appreciation of who they are.


No they weren't the sketch like mimics we see in all those online fan based creations that for some reason unknown to me use only straight lipped dialogue, mostly because that's how "fan boys" see these characters.


The production level of the film was the highest I've seen come out of the franchise and mostly professionally done.


My only gripe about the film is using the Khan card so soon into this series of films.


While the baseline story for Khan is completely different then what happens on TOS, they should have saved it for a new TV series or comics only.


The role reversal of dialogue might have worked for some, but I have never been a fan of such things.


It would have been better to have Khan yell out "KIRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRK!!!!!!!!!!!!"

pst1993

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 8

Report this May. 22 2013, 6:24 pm

Now I love Star Trek (2009).  Because not only are we exploring an alternate reality which was a great way of rebooting the franchise.  And I think we know how alot of people act to change nowadays in comics, books and movies.  "I don't want change!  I don't want change!  Everything has to be the same!"  So anyway, we were able to explore more of the Star Trek Universes.  We see more of Earth now.  We now know what Earth looks like in the 23rd century at least in Star Trek.  So there was a lot of pressure for this movie to be as good if not better then the last one.  Unfortunetly, it suffers from sequel-itis.  Now J. J. Abrams isn't a huge a huge Star Trek fan.  That was his strength for the first movie.  Now it's a weakness.  He's bassicly saying "what do the fans want?"  This more of a repeat of Iron Man 2.  It's case of him seeing how many easter eggs he can put in there and icons to put in there for Trekers to reconise.  The refrences are fun at first but later it's like "dude, I want something original."  It's more of an action film with Star Trek stuff put in there.  But it's still a good movie.  The charecters were great (even though some were doing impersonations of the original cast).  The highlight is Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan.  As a summer movie it's good.  Now for my rating.  I'm using a censored version of Spill.com's ratings.  Perfect ... you already know what it means.  Full Price means must see.  Matinee means enjoyable.  Rental means rent it on DVD.  Fail means horrible films.  Epic Fail means it's one of the worst films in existance.  For Trekers, this is a Matinie.  Some of you may nitpick the movie and get angry.  For a regular fan of movies, Full Price  

Spectrum67

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7

Report this May. 22 2013, 7:28 pm

As a long time ST-TOS fan, we just returned from Into Darkness and I personally had mixed emotions on it... I won't go near as far as those who swear Abrams has killed the franchise, but I will definitely say that he has changed it... While I was thrilled with the 2009 Reboot and the casting, I was less than thrilled with this follow-up movie as a whole.


I found it actually having too much action... from before the opening credits clear through the closing... almost non-stop... and would have rather had it paced more like the 2009 movie, or like the previous movies and TV shows. They crammed a couple of movies worth of it in two hours... but the action itself was good and well done, with great use of modern technology.


I was less than enthused with the human side of Spock stepping even further forward this movie... think Uhura relationship for one, and his anger and hostility/fighting for another... and as a big Bones fan, I was more than a bit upset that they took the subtle traits of his and blew them to huge proportions that had him being cartoonish and a caricature of himself. I liked it more in the 2009 movie where we noticed them, and took it to be a nod to Urban's casting and acting. Bones was great in his own right and he needed no stressing of his uniqueness.


I didn't like the role reversal and the plot theft of Kirk's apparent death as he saved the ship and its crew... it was too much like the Spock death, and I thought it was too easy of a way to go... And the way he was revived was too predictable in my book.


But in the end, I found the acting superb on all counts and the movie very entertaining; I would recommend it  to everyone as a Summer movie to go see... I just hope the next director tones it down a hair and brings it back towards it's roots. I doubt that will happen, but I'd rather have this result than no ST-TOS movies at all. I was disappointed after seeing the 2009 movie and the clips of this one... I suppose I went in with too much expectation of it stepping forward, and found it being a step back. Don't get me wrong, there was much I really liked about it... and I was entertained throughout the entire movie... I just had too high of hopes. I also expect that after the BRD is released, and I see it a few more times, I will warm up to it.


BTW; I did find the Khan suspense part to be done well... and found Pine to have out-shined Quinto in this one, as opposed to the other way around as it was in 2009... IMO.  

quantumstring12

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 826

Report this May. 22 2013, 8:59 pm

I thought Into Darkness was extremely entertaining and liked it instantly. But, of course, there were things that gave me pause.


 


Some of the good with some of the bad: I liked the intro. Saving a species instead of just observing is the "Kirk" thing to do. I must have missed why the ship was in the water, but they can't send a shuttle from orbit?? So, of course, the prime directive is violated and this species is now contaminated and Kirk loses the Enterprise. Has anyone noticed the Command of the Enterprise has changed hands FIVE different times in two movies?? Oooookay.....


 


Engineering looks like a freakin' beer factory. It's messy, disorganized, confusing, chaotic. But it was good to see Scotty get more time and be more a part of the story. And then of course, he resigns. And now Chekov is running things. WHAT?!?!! I did like the "Put on a red shirt" comment from Kirk though.


 


The Spock/Uhura thing. Ugh..... I really wouldn't mind it if they kept it a bit more subtle. But as they're flying into Kronos and she goes on some sort of teenage whiney rant about Spock giving his life while saving a world....I mean, really? Now? Well, I guess her feelings were hurt and needed to express how hurt she was....making it all about herself. I literally wanted to puke up my popcorn. You're landing on a hostile world, trying to capture a renegade Star Fleet officer who just blew up a bunch of people and then killled Captains and 1st Officers just days ago, and you want to bring that up??? I'm all for comedic relief but that was petty, IMO. I don't remember Klingons ever wearing masks. I could be wrong, but it did seem a bit odd.


 


Benedict Cumberbatch was brilliant. Ruthless. He stole the movie. He made the Khan story work for me. I felt a bit slighted as TWOK is one of my faves, but with the alternate time line, I thought the story arc was solid. Peter Weller gave a great performance as Marcus. I did cheer for Khan as he crushed his skull with his bare hands. Nice touch. It shows just how far Khan will go. Too many one-liners from Bones and not enough story related dialouge. Someone already mentioned this and I agree. He's a far better actor.


 


The CGI were incredible. Nothing to complain about here. When the Enterprise was blasted out of warp by Marcus....one of the best scenes ever in Star Trek, IMHO. The warp trail crackles were a nice touch as well.


 


Overall a great movie with just a few 'hmmms?'.


 


 


 


 

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum