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

GenXAccord

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2

Report this Jun. 08 2013, 10:25 am

http://io9.com/star-trek-into-darkness-the-spoiler-faq-508927844


 


The review at the above link is spot on.

warp speed

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 24

Report this Jun. 08 2013, 10:47 am

Quote: GenXAccord @ Jun. 08 2013, 10:25 am

>

>http://io9.com/star-trek-into-darkness-the-spoiler-faq-508927844

>The review at the above link is spot on.

>


Thank you. Finally a perfect line by line explanation of why this movie is so bad. I only hope that the producers don't keep going down this same road of trying to copy past successes. I for one am tired of watching reruns. Especially when the remakes are so bad.

SpockType

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 289

Report this Jun. 08 2013, 2:03 pm

At first I was reluctant to see that film - at least at the movie theater (cinema/bioscope) anyway. Just the promo poster and name made it seem like it was another of those many modern films that are too violent, with gloom and doom. I also thought it would be straying too much from Gene Roddenberry's theme of an optimistic view of the future. I hadn't seen the trailer. Even the previous one, I thought did, to an extent, with the destruction of the Vulcan homeworld. 


I saw it today anyway, at the movie theater. It was also in 3D. (The 3D was not so effective.) It was quite good. It also wasn't that violent anyway. It certainly had quite a storyline. I was also surprised to see Leonard Nimoy in it, who I thought had retired. He only had a small role anyway.


That new TOS film series would take some getting into for me, who's been a Star Trek fan since the early 1970s. That's with the much more advanced original Enterprise, different actors portraying those characters, a somewhat different timeline, etc. Their past is probably more like our time. Oh well, I am getting into it.


It seems like it might as well have a separate category here, called something like 'Re-imagined Original Series'. (That can be as in film series, not TV series.)   

Morosk

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 25

Report this Jun. 08 2013, 6:22 pm

seen it and it was just a fantastic movie..the klingons new look while faithful to the klingons we know from the STG was absolutely awesome and the special effects breathtaking!

CrimsonComet

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6

Report this Jun. 08 2013, 7:26 pm

Ok, before I start, I would like to ask a question.  How in the world, do you put Nemesis (probably the WORST Star Trek movie) so high on your ratings list?  Also, how is the Undiscovered Country not second, or at the very least above the Final Fronteir?   Now for the review.  I did not like it as much as I wanted to because all I saw were new versions of "Space Seed", Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan, and Star Trek: The Search for Spock.  Many of my collegues just could not get over themselves on how great the movie was.  Personally the only redeeming quality was Simon Pegg's version of the loved Lt. Com. Montgomery Scott.


There comes a time in every young man's life when they turn to a father, uncle, brother, or God, and ask the question 'Why am I here, what is my purpose?'.

Timbis

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1

Report this Jun. 09 2013, 9:17 am

The first "new" Star Trek movie was supposed to establish a new timeline, new future, new adventures, a new five year mission, giving JJ the freedom to do anything he wanted without the restrictions of cannon. Why would he choose to "reboot" the best Star Trek movie ever! All the actors do a great job playing those iconic roles, they look the same, they talk the same, the behave as you would expect a young Kirk or Spock to behave, but we are supposed to believe because the timeline is different Khan is now ENGLISH! What did Hollywood suddenly have a shortage of latino actors? How would Admiral Marcus, the head of Starfleet find the Botany Bay? He's a desk bound paper pusher, but he just happened to go into deep space? This movie has more holes than the swiss cheese I had for lunch. 17 year old Chekov is now "Chief Engineer? None of the twenty or more people we've already seen down in engineering are qualified? He's a 17 year old ensign, the ships navigator, just "put on a red shirt" and he's ready. LMAO!!! Why would they need Khans blood to bring Kirk back to life? They have 72 other genetically enhanced people on the Enterprise, if his blood would bring people back to life so would any of theirs, which bring a question to the ending. Starfleet has 73 people with blood that can bring people back to life, and they put them in warehouse storage? No research, section 31 would be all over that! This is a great action movie if you are not a Star Trek fan, but JJ has no clue what a Star Trek movie should be. Star Trek is about moral issues, the human condition, Ricardo Montalban is turning over in his grave.

Morosk

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 25

Report this Jun. 10 2013, 4:40 pm

[quote]


The first "new" Star Trek movie was supposed to establish a new timeline, new future, new adventures, a new five year mission, giving JJ the freedom to do anything he wanted without the restrictions of cannon. Why would he choose to "reboot" the best Star Trek movie ever! All the actors do a great job playing those iconic roles, they look the same, they talk the same, the behave as you would expect a young Kirk or Spock to behave, but we are supposed to believe because the timeline is different Khan is now ENGLISH! What did Hollywood suddenly have a shortage of latino actors? How would Admiral Marcus, the head of Starfleet find the Botany Bay? He's a desk bound paper pusher, but he just happened to go into deep space? This movie has more holes than the swiss cheese I had for lunch. 17 year old Chekov is now "Chief Engineer? None of the twenty or more people we've already seen down in engineering are qualified? He's a 17 year old ensign, the ships navigator, just "put on a red shirt" and he's ready. LMAO!!! Why would they need Khans blood to bring Kirk back to life? They have 72 other genetically enhanced people on the Enterprise, if his blood would bring people back to life so would any of theirs, which bring a question to the ending. Starfleet has 73 people with blood that can bring people back to life, and they put them in warehouse storage? No research, section 31 would be all over that! This is a great action movie if you are not a Star Trek fan, but JJ has no clue what a Star Trek movie should be. Star Trek is about moral issues, the human condition, Ricardo Montalban is turning over in his grave.


[/quote]


 


There is an explanation for each critic u have mentioned, but i m too tired to write it..i m sure someone will do it though  


yet i ll just say one..do you remember that the khan crew was frozen and they didn t have a chance to open any of the capsules\missiles in time to heal Kirk? 

Eosphoros

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4

Report this Jun. 11 2013, 4:27 pm

Lousy TWOK ripoff meets lousy INS ripoff meets lousy TSFS ripoff with a twist condensed in 5 minutes. With some elements ripped off from several other real Star Trek films.


-273.15

Elaine Kirk

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1

Report this Jun. 11 2013, 5:29 pm

I loved the movie. It was very intriguing and quite the type of movie that one would almost expect to be more like the Fast and Furious series, not quite Star Trek. After seeing it twice in theaters (Yes I'm a total Trek nerd! :}) I found this video on YouTube. Don't worry about the title, just watch it. The person who posted this found it on the movie soundtrack.


http://youtu.be/u2sL4WjVpGI


It is amazing. It perfectly personifies Benedict Cumberbatch in the movie in his role as John Harrison/Khan. And I agree. I had no idea he was going to be Khan. Someone in my grade level ruined it on the last day of school. I was so pissed at her. Yeah, my high school is pretty full of Trekkies, even if some won't admit that they actually are.


I did have one problem with the movie though. It was the whole "Pike's dead" thing. While it makes a good fanfiction plot point for me, it showed me just how awkward it is to cry in contacts. And then when it was Kirk instead of Spock who died, even the guy next to me was bawling. He wasn't doing a good job of hiding it. Other than that, it was overall a fantastic movie.

fireproof78

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 342

Report this Jun. 11 2013, 9:33 pm

Quote: Elaine Kirk @ Jun. 11 2013, 5:29 pm

>

>I loved the movie. It was very intriguing and quite the type of movie that one would almost expect to be more like the Fast and Furious series, not quite Star Trek. After seeing it twice in theaters (Yes I'm a total Trek nerd! :}) I found this video on YouTube. Don't worry about the title, just watch it. The person who posted this found it on the movie soundtrack.

>http://youtu.be/u2sL4WjVpGI

>It is amazing. It perfectly personifies Benedict Cumberbatch in the movie in his role as John Harrison/Khan. And I agree. I had no idea he was going to be Khan. Someone in my grade level ruined it on the last day of school. I was so pissed at her. Yeah, my high school is pretty full of Trekkies, even if some won't admit that they actually are.

>I did have one problem with the movie though. It was the whole "Pike's dead" thing. While it makes a good fanfiction plot point for me, it showed me just how awkward it is to cry in contacts. And then when it was Kirk instead of Spock who died, even the guy next to me was bawling. He wasn't doing a good job of hiding it. Other than that, it was overall a fantastic movie.

>


Don't feel bad. I cried when they showed the photo of Noel Clark's character's daughter right after he sets the bomb off in the archvie. That was a heart wrenching scene for me as a father. Pike's death was a close second.


I loved Admiral Marcus as a villain, and wish he had had more screne time and shown the depths of his descent in to reject the Federation ideals and basically becoming obsessed with war. To me, that plot line deserved so much more but was still well done. I just would have liked to hear more of Marcus' POV and Kirk's realizing that it conflicts with the Starfleet ideals.


Oh, Kirk's death? Spot on for the theme of the movie. Watching it, I didn't care that it took from TWOK, because the themes of the two movies are very different. Chris Pine's performance was superb, in my opinion, because it carried more weight for him to sacrifice  himself for the sake of his ship and his crew. I didn't quite cry because I was so blown away by the performances.

JohnFourtyTwo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6015

Report this Jun. 14 2013, 9:14 pm

Quote: darmokattanagra @ Jun. 02 2013, 9:20 pm

Quote: DS9_FOREVER! @ May. 31 2013, 6:46 pm

Quote: Kilrahi @ May. 31 2013, 6:00 pm

>

>

>

>How was this a revenge story?  Did we watch the same film?

>

 

Sooooo correct.

I think you two DID watch a completely different movie.

1. Khan vs. Admiral Marcus/Starfleet

2. Kirk vs. Khan

3. Spock vs. Khan


Agreed.


"No matter where you go, there you are." - Motto from the USS Excelsior's dedication plaque and the movie "The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension"

warp speed

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 24

Report this Jun. 15 2013, 6:20 pm

Pike didn't die at Starfleet Hedquarters. He was injured by radiation from his own ship. Kirk returned him to aliens who gave him the illusion of health. This movie is a mockery of Star Trek and it's fans. Don't waste your time or money watching this reimagined version of Star Trek.

ElimGarak00

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14

Report this Jun. 30 2013, 4:44 am

I enjoyed Star Trek into Darkness as an action movie.


I’ve already seen it twice and I’m looking forward to the Blu-ray later this year.


The pace of the movie was very fast, a lot of different things happening. It’s probably to attract a new audience. But sometimes, not very often they did take the time to slow down a bit. Which I appreciated.


I think it is an original story. Yes, they did use the Khan character but it wasn’t a copy of The Wrath of Khan. Accept for the very obvious Kirk-Spock vice versa scene.


And I must ask: the looks of the Klingons... what’s that all about?!


 


I’m looking forward to the next Star Trek movie (alternate timeline)…and maybe even a new Star Trek television series about the 24th century or beyond with the correct timeline, thank you very much.

newstar

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 354

Report this Jun. 30 2013, 10:14 am

Quote: DS9_FOREVER! @ Jun. 04 2013, 9:50 am

>

>Don't see how you can see Spock as "in character" crying and screaming "KHAAAN!!!" rocket. He knew Kirk for about a year, and for about 1/2 that he was at odds with him.

>


The way I explained Spock's deep sorrow over Kirk's death was the mind-meld old Spock did with Kirk in the first movie.  Through it, I figure Kirk got a sense of the deep friendship between them.  There certainly wasn't time otherwise for the pair in reboot universe to acquire the deep friendship, though battleing danger together caused bonding, and finding at the end of Trek2009 that they can work as a smooth partnership.  The end of 2009 felt like real Trek to me, left me feeling euphoric that we had back a young, hansome new crew doing real Trek.  I didn't feel the same way after STID.


I wasn't keen on original Kirk screeming KAAAAAHN! like a maniac in WOK. In the series he's usually calm, controlled, professional.  That was an uncaracteristic lapse to do that on the bridge in front of his crew.


I liked it even less when new Spock did the scream.  I was rolling my eyes, it was like a farce at that point.  Like a fan film run amuck.  I did not feel his anger nor feel sorrow myself over Kirk's death because I was absolutely sure he wasn't staying dead. That, for me, was the worse moment in the film, and yet I do appreciate the homage.  My husband and kids enjoyed it, perhaps with a second viewing I can look at it differently. 


  I posted a link to my non-spoiler review, previous page I believe.  Basically, I really enjoyed the movie on the whole, but got bored with the non-stop blowing up of things.  I have the same probelem with other current blockbusters, especially Transformers 3. The character moments and plot intrigue we did have were wonderful, but they were too few and too short.  I recently re-watched Top Gun, my kids hadn't seen it, and noticied how much screen time they allowed for Cruise to sit and show emotion as he mulled over his errors and problems.  We didn't get that in this movie, there was no time to really feel what anyone was goining through.  They gave a brief indicatoin of the emotions, then bang, moved on to something exploding, as if we'd get bored if nothing was on fire. Very sad.


   I love the reboot set-up and cast, and eagerly await the next movie.  I just hope it will be real Star Trek ideology that GR would have approved of (he didn't approve of WOK).  This film was too dark, too much like a disater flick with a lot of death and destrution.  It was not about hope for the future, optimism, exploration.  Please, lets have real Trek next time with these great chacaters.  Have the next script ready to shoot some at the same time and not have four years between movies.  We need to use the actors while they're still young.  I hate seeing them only two hours every few years when they're so good! 


Imagination is the only thing that's truly free.

DS9_FOREVER!

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 200

Report this Jun. 30 2013, 12:46 pm

Quote: newstar @ Jun. 30 2013, 10:14 am

Quote: DS9_FOREVER! @ Jun. 04 2013, 9:50 am

>

>

>Don't see how you can see Spock as "in character" crying and screaming "KHAAAN!!!" rocket. He knew Kirk for about a year, and for about 1/2 that he was at odds with him.

>

The way I explained Spock's deep sorrow over Kirk's death was the mind-meld old Spock did with Kirk in the first movie.  Through it, I figure Kirk got a sense of the deep friendship between them.  There certainly wasn't time otherwise for the pair in reboot universe to acquire the deep friendship, though battleing danger together caused bonding, and finding at the end of Trek2009 that they can work as a smooth partnership.  The end of 2009 felt like real Trek to me, left me feeling euphoric that we had back a young, hansome new crew doing real Trek.  I didn't feel the same way after STID.

I wasn't keen on original Kirk screeming KAAAAAHN! like a maniac in WOK. In the series he's usually calm, controlled, professional.  That was an uncaracteristic lapse to do that on the bridge in front of his crew.

I liked it even less when new Spock did the scream.  I was rolling my eyes, it was like a farce at that point.  Like a fan film run amuck.  I did not feel his anger nor feel sorrow myself over Kirk's death because I was absolutely sure he wasn't staying dead. That, for me, was the worse moment in the film, and yet I do appreciate the homage.  My husband and kids enjoyed it, perhaps with a second viewing I can look at it differently. 

  I posted a link to my non-spoiler review, previous page I believe.  Basically, I really enjoyed the movie on the whole, but got bored with the non-stop blowing up of things.  I have the same probelem with other current blockbusters, especially Transformers 3. The character moments and plot intrigue we did have were wonderful, but they were too few and too short.  I recently re-watched Top Gun, my kids hadn't seen it, and noticied how much screen time they allowed for Cruise to sit and show emotion as he mulled over his errors and problems.  We didn't get that in this movie, there was no time to really feel what anyone was goining through.  They gave a brief indicatoin of the emotions, then bang, moved on to something exploding, as if we'd get bored if nothing was on fire. Very sad.

   I love the reboot set-up and cast, and eagerly await the next movie.  I just hope it will be real Star Trek ideology that GR would have approved of (he didn't approve of WOK).  This film was too dark, too much like a disater flick with a lot of death and destrution.  It was not about hope for the future, optimism, exploration.  Please, lets have real Trek next time with these great chacaters.  Have the next script ready to shoot some at the same time and not have four years between movies.  We need to use the actors while they're still young.  I hate seeing them only two hours every few years when they're so good! 


The problem is, Kirk received the mind meld from Spock(prime) not Spock. I don't see anyway that could influence nuSpock like that.


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

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