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

Into Darkness-Not exaclty what a real fan was waiting for...

sibigr

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1

Report this Jul. 25 2013, 10:38 am

Greetings.


I don't have any problem with new ideas or JJ Abrams. Star Trek movies always had a touch of possible future reality and were based in some kind of true science fiction.


Into darkness was something like x-men, kirk spock khan were superpowered superheroes.


What I always loved in Star Trek was its possibility to happen some day. Into Darkness was the first star trek that made me lough in a bad way and say "come on guys, you can't be serious"


So I'm a dissapointed trekkie, I think this was the worst star trek movie I ever watched.

Calliopeia

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5

Report this Jul. 26 2013, 11:52 pm

I wasn't deadly disappointed by the Star Trek into Darkness because the first movie had already set the tone. Yet another american action movie, but set in space disguised in my favourite franchise.


What made me a bit angry in this movie is that Khan Noonien Sing should be of Indian origin. Even the name suggests that. Gene Roddenberry always wanted to represent earths diversity in Star Trek. JJ Abrahams made Khan into yet another angry white guy in space. :-/ Don't get me wrong, I love Benedict Cumberbatch as an actor. However he is not someone I'd pick as Khan.


/Another Trekkie not happy about the new movies. 

rob39874

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 142

Report this Jul. 29 2013, 4:50 am

I agree with you both but to say STID is worse that Star Trek V is a bit of a stretch I would say it is a close thing though 

darth_timon

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 17

Report this Jul. 30 2013, 7:19 am

Well, speaking as someone who considers himself to be a 'real' Trekkie (whatever that is, since you can define 'real fan' in several different ways), I loved STID. It wasn't perfect, to be sure, but was it better than TMP, STV, Insurrection and Nemesis? Easily. Was it better than Enterprise? Very much so. Better than Voyager? To this fan, a definite yes!


I am here to shake things up

willowtree

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1137

Report this Jul. 30 2013, 9:27 am

Quote: sibigr @ Jul. 25 2013, 10:38 am

>

>Greetings.

>I don't have any problem with new ideas or JJ Abrams. Star Trek movies always had a touch of possible future reality and were based in some kind of true science fiction.

>Into darkness was something like x-men, kirk spock khan were superpowered superheroes.

>What I always loved in Star Trek was its possibility to happen some day. Into Darkness was the first star trek that made me lough in a bad way and say "come on guys, you can't be serious"

>So I'm a dissapointed trekkie, I think this was the worst star trek movie I ever watched.

>


I agree. I consider myself a "real" trekkie...if you can define that by saying that I love all the series, the previous 10 movies, I go to conventions, I make my own uniforms, etc.


I was greatly dissapointed with the JJ movies.

queenuhura

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 113

Report this Jul. 30 2013, 12:03 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 30 2013, 9:27 am

Quote: sibigr @ Jul. 25 2013, 10:38 am

>

>

>Greetings.

>I don't have any problem with new ideas or JJ Abrams. Star Trek movies always had a touch of possible future reality and were based in some kind of true science fiction.

>Into darkness was something like x-men, kirk spock khan were superpowered superheroes.

>What I always loved in Star Trek was its possibility to happen some day. Into Darkness was the first star trek that made me lough in a bad way and say "come on guys, you can't be serious"

>So I'm a dissapointed trekkie, I think this was the worst star trek movie I ever watched.

>

I agree. I consider myself a "real" trekkie...if you can define that by saying that I love all the series, the previous 10 movies, I go to conventions, I make my own uniforms, etc.

I was greatly dissapointed with the JJ movies.



I cant agree more. All the depth and meaning of the franchise are missing from these movies. 


*Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations* *Live Long and Prosper*

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3683

Report this Aug. 01 2013, 5:45 pm

Quote: Calliopeia @ Jul. 26 2013, 11:52 pm

>What made me a bit angry in this movie is that Khan Noonien Sing should be of Indian origin. Even the name suggests that.


Benicio del Toro was offered the role of Khan,
and it was made very public that they were close
to a deal, then it just bottomed out. This seems
to happen to del Toro just as often as not. And
I agree with you, Khan should've been Indian ...


Space Seed and the 60s could not have forseen 9/11, or
Political Correctness and how only caucasians can become
cast in parts even remotely "stereotypical," without
running the risk of riots, looting and a box office bomb.


I also dig it as a statement that the ReB00T is not a
slave to its "reference." That it can and will take what
artistic license it wants to, in order to make something
"it's own." Even throwing elements non-TREK fans know,
like Klingons, Tribbles and Khan in one movie, just because.


moscampfire

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16

Report this Aug. 01 2013, 7:42 pm

As an ageing hippie, I'm always disappointed when media resorts to wars. As if conflict must come from them in order to be interesting. Star Trek was an exploration of how conflics can be resloved by understanding the reason other aliens seem in conflict with us. Darmak and Gillard in Tenagra.


I, as an old trekkie, lost intrest in the Enterprise series, because it became a war show. And worse, without a war, we need to have a very,very evil person to fight.


The positive message in Star Trek has been lost in conflict. Good versus Evil all over again. I will always consider Star Trek about how we can see our world outside old religious concepts, and within the more advanced consideration required when dealing with aliens, both on our planet and off.


Peace


Mo

galaxie5

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1

Report this Aug. 03 2013, 3:17 pm

better than the first. third installment better restore Vulcan. I'm appalled that the greatest friendship in of all future


time was given a deathblow by some writer! It reminds me of yet to be produced StarTrek Continuum.Altering the timeline O.K. destroying a planet of absolutely vital best of all human friends I don't like at all. Time ship Atari could easily repair the timeline with little involvement in the over the top action of a third StarTrek film. galaxy5 five better submit  StarTrek Continuum, I wanna visit Vulcan before I die......


way beyond gone.......

us defiant

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 28

Report this Aug. 05 2013, 2:43 pm

 


 


Hi I wanted to comment on Star Trek into Darkness that came out over past summer 2013, forgive me if the review is not up to professional standards; I’m not a professional critic. First of all I think JJ Abrams is genius director he's talented brilliant and I loved what he did with the first Star Trek it was exiting engaging and fun, with that being said, seeing Star Trek Into Darkness left a bad test in my mouth, let me explain, seeing JJ Abrams and 1 and 2, there was nothing to connect JJ Abrams Star Trek 1 to 2,there was no bridge to connect both 1 and 2 there was not a lot of continuity with these films like there was in Star Trek The Motion Picture to the Wrath of Khan to the search for Spock.


      I also think you need that both a Romulan and Volkin presents, I think that's one of most important characters, I think these characters are important, you can't change what they are, you can't change a character like this into something else, I’m sorry but I think this director when into this movie changing Star Trek into something else, I think he went into this movie changing Star Trek to Star Wars it felt more like a Star Wars prequel then Star Trek, now was Star Trek Into Darkness horrible, no, it wasn't one the worse Star Trek films.


  I think in my opinion, He's entertaining the audience, but He's not wowing the audience, He’s not challenging the audience in my opinion, He made to many accommodations to the average movie goer instead of having the average movie goer make accommodations for Star Trek in my opinion instead of saying we are the Federation or we are the Borg or we are the Romulans or he's not saying Star Trek has the better story or Star Trek has the better technology or the better pedigree he's entertaining the audience but he's not challenging the audience, their know substance to this plot their know substance this story, scenario that don't make sence,let me give you an example,doring the end of Star Trek Into Darkness the Captain Kirk life is in jeopardy in the engine room and they have to get Khan's blood to save the Captain Karkheh average movie goer doesn't know who Khan is, also I don't think he's using Chis Pine right, He’s not utilizing he's full potential. 


 


   I think this Star Trek has potential, but I think Paramount Studios needs to reboot next Generation film sooner rather than later because I think a Next Generation film would have so much more potential or a spin off from the last film would have so much more potential then what they’re doing with Star Trek right now, as I said earlier, I think JJ is brilliant director but I don't think he's is the right director for this franchise. In case you didn't notice I'm sort of a Trekkie, Thanks sincerely ANDY.

us defiant

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 28

Report this Aug. 05 2013, 3:41 pm

Dear Star Trek fans I wonder if I can just put this out there, I believe Star Trek is missing something, I think it's missing a director that can give it new ideas a director who's not afraid to take chances, I'll give you an example Christopher Nolan, look at what Christopher Nolan did with the batman franchise I think he totally reinvented that character, and believe that’s what’s missing, I'll believe that's what's wrong with Star Trek.

Catholic.Fan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 76

Report this Aug. 06 2013, 12:10 pm

I'm a "real" fan, as well, and I don't hate the Abrams films.  I take them for what they are: summer blockbusters.  They're "popcorn films", meant for some fun escapism.  Are they true to Trek?  No, but taken in their own right, they are what they set out to be.  I think, too, they actually accomplish that summer blockbuster feeling rather well.  They're fast, explosive, and not very deep.  Everything that makes these big summer films great fun but utterly forgettable by the time the next summer season rolls in.

juliem1222

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2

Report this Aug. 12 2013, 9:04 am

I thought the latest movie could have been more original and not like any of the original movies. I still loved it though

Calliopeia

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5

Report this Aug. 12 2013, 9:51 am

Quote: juliem1222 @ Aug. 12 2013, 9:04 am

>

>I thought the latest movie could have been more original and not like any of the original movies. I still loved it though

>


Yes, I do hope Jar Jar Abrams comes up with something new and original in the comming Star Trek movie.


I'm not overly thrilled with his movies so far. I really like the cast however. Kirk is the one I'd pick differently. The new Spock and Bones are the greatest pick so far. As for the latest movie, Benedict was absolutely not who I'd pick as Khan. As I said earlier, don't get me wrong, Benedict is a great actor, but he is not Khan.

Stickist5334

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 29

Report this Aug. 13 2013, 12:50 pm

The movie going public speaks with their dollars, and as long as shit like the reboot mvoies sells tickets (and it was designed too) then they will keep being made. When it comes to the "all mighty dollar™" all sins are forgiven and encouraged!


Temba, His arms wide!

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