View Full Version : Star Trek Into Darkness
Just saw the latest. Star Trek Into Darkness, and all I can say for fans is WOOOOOOOOOOOOW.
If you're a Trek fan, not to be missed. So many great Star Trek related stuff (there's even a Tribble!), great classic Trek dialogue (who ever wrote it clearly a die hard fan..), and great special effects and very much in the spirit of Star Trek as it should be.
Yup, Kirk still a slut. :D
The casting is just astounding to me (if you saw the last Star Trek you know what I mean) with the young versions of the crew, so dead on it's scary.
Dragged a tad toward the end, but it gets an A rating from me.
http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/star-trek-into-darkness/
Great news. I liked the last one and hoped this one would be good too.
Great news. I liked the last one and hoped this one would be good too.
The last one was fun, this one is f-ing great. Maybe the best Trek movie of them all.
I really enjoyed this movie. I actually saw it in Moore, OK the day before the tornado :(
I like how Section 31 is involved, it's one of my favorite parts of DS9. I also like how the NX-01 and Phoenix models are on the Admiral's desk if you look closely.
PA PATRIOT
05-25-13, 18:47
I think they went a little far on the character personalities especially with Scotty and Chekov when compared against the originals. Also Capt. Kirk is portrayed as a real wild card and hot head which is way over the top in my opinion but overall I also liked both movies.
I really enjoyed this movie. I actually saw it in Moore, OK the day before the tornado :(
I like how Section 31 is involved, it's one of my favorite parts of DS9. I also like how the NX-01 and Phoenix models are on the Admiral's desk if you look closely.
I didn't notice that. Cool. No stone was left unturned with this Trek movie tying in all prior movies and series and all done in a way that really worked vs seeming forced or ad hoc.
Full of win.
I loved the juxtaposition of Kirk in the reactor and Spock outside...
Loved it!
Koshinn, I had no idea you were down below me in Ok. If you're a resident of Moore, or have ties to it, I wish you all the best, Ironically when watching the coverage on Fox and KTUL out of Tulsa I noted the still photo of the theater they kept showing still had "Into Darkness" remaining on the marquee.
I found that horribly ironic.
Loved it!
Koshinn, I had no idea you were down below me in Ok. If you're a resident of Moore, or have ties to it, I wish you all the best, Ironically when watching the coverage on Fox and KTUL out of Tulsa I noted the still photo of the theater they kept showing still had "Into Darkness" remaining on the marquee.
I found that horribly ironic.
I'm actually not in Moore, I was just there seeing the movie because the Warren is/was the best theater ever.
Good deal. Glad you're ok.
Belmont31R
05-25-13, 22:51
Will be seeing it early next week. Loved the last one
The last one was fun, this one is f-ing great. Maybe the best Trek movie of them all.
*Kuthropalli voice*. "Three words dude, WRATH OF KHAN!!"
The production values were good and there was a ton of action but the story really could have used some work. There were missed opportunities to do something that would have been new and cool.
I'm not against the idea of paying homage to the previous Trek shows and movies but recycling memorable dialogue and a signature scene was a mixed bag. For some fans, they loved hearing the cherished lines. For others, it came off as an unintentional caricature of the original.
Just in case some people reading this haven't seen the movie, I don't want to reveal any crucial details. That said, there's a reason they rebooted the series. It had grown stale. Retreading some of the familiar ground takes us right back into territory we already know. Abrams and his crew should be adding to the story instead of just taking the best bits of the original and redoing it.
Batman was a reboot, yet the joker still showed up. Batman is to the joker like Kirk is to ...
Even though it did retread some classic material I still thought it was one of the best Star Trek films ever made.
**SPOILERS**
As a lifelong Star Trek fan I found many of the scenes very well played and emotionally engaging, but I admit I did roll my eyes quite a bit as well. For me, the bits that pulled dialogue right from Wrath of Khan bordered on corny.
And would Kirk really have been able to "kickstart" the warp core? Furthermore, I thought putting a gigantic hotel-type vertical atrium in the middle of the Enterprise was just dumb. Not to mention that apparently Federation starships no longer need any sort of forward momentum to remain in orbit around a planet.
**SPOILERS**
As a lifelong Star Trek fan I found many of the scenes very well played and emotionally engaging, but I admit I did roll my eyes quite a bit as well. For me, the bits that pulled dialogue right from Wrath of Khan bordered on corny.
And would Kirk really have been able to "kickstart" the warp core? Furthermore, I thought putting a gigantic hotel-type vertical atrium in the middle of the Enterprise was just dumb. Not to mention that apparently Federation starships no longer need any sort of forward momentum to remain in orbit around a planet.
Star trek has never been about realism. There are far fewer physics breaking things in the new movie than the 2009 movie. The 2009 movie is a case study in bad science. But does it really matter?
And if a starship can lift up off a planet from below an ocean without using its main engines, it can certainly remain in orbit where there's a fraction of the gravity pulling on it without actually maintaining forward velocity. It's not ideal, but it can obviously be done.
**SPOILERS**
As a lifelong Star Trek fan I found many of the scenes very well played and emotionally engaging, but I admit I did roll my eyes quite a bit as well. For me, the bits that pulled dialogue right from Wrath of Khan bordered on corny.
And would Kirk really have been able to "kickstart" the warp core? Furthermore, I thought putting a gigantic hotel-type vertical atrium in the middle of the Enterprise was just dumb. Not to mention that apparently Federation starships no longer need any sort of forward momentum to remain in orbit around a planet.
Bro, if you're seeing a Star Trek movie for realism or anything approaching hard science, you don't "get" Star Trek.
They make up their own physics as they go along, and this was probably the best movie in terms of that of them all!
Two, i guess you can either really enjoy how they pulled various dialogue and other stuff from all past Star Trek movies and series and have a huge grin like you were 10 again, or you can find it corny.
It was corny, and I loved. :D
I grinned like an idiot through it all ("Damn Jim, I'm a doctor, not a torpedo expert!") and laughed out loud in several places over it, and for the first time in decades, truly felt at one with the Trek experience as I felt watching the original series on as a kid.
Bless the writer of that screen play!
ForTehNguyen
05-26-13, 18:49
was a great enjoyable movie, much moreso than the first one. Enjoyed it a lot more than Iron Man 3
Are you a serious Trek fan?
Serious Trek fan:
You have seen every episode of the original series more than once
You have seen every episode of the Next Generation at least once
You have seen at least a few episodes of the animated series.
You have seen all Trek movies at least once
You watched the "other" series just because they had "Star Trek" in the name, no matter how bad some of them were (and some were pretty f-ing bad!)
That's the minimum threshold.
The above would not make one a serious die hard Trek fan but at least gives one minimum creds and quals. :D
If you exceed that minimum threshold for "serious" fan status, what would the next level require? I think I could pass it, but may fall short of uber ultimate die hard Trek fan status. For example, have never been to a Trek convention and asked the panel of actors from the show what getting beamed up feels like... :dance3:
However, in my world view, I have "plank owner" status as I grew up watching Star Trek as it aired.
That's right bitches, my mother was a fan so at the age of 1-4 (66-69) was watching it. :dirol:
If you liked the one a few years ago, you gotta see this one.
We saw it in IMAX 3D.
Pretty good movie.
Belmont31R
05-26-13, 21:52
Just saw it tonight. Liked it a lot. Good setup for another movie.
Star trek has never been about realism. There are far fewer physics breaking things in the new movie than the 2009 movie. The 2009 movie is a case study in bad science. But does it really matter?
And if a starship can lift up off a planet from below an ocean without using its main engines, it can certainly remain in orbit where there's a fraction of the gravity pulling on it without actually maintaining forward velocity. It's not ideal, but it can obviously be done.
Huh. All this time, and I never got that "standard orbit, Mr. Sulu" meant "put the Enterprise over this spot and stay there..." :p
Huh. All this time, and I never got that "standard orbit, Mr. Sulu" meant "put the Enterprise over this spot and stay there..." :p
It's a geostationary orbit at any altitude and latitude!
Are you a serious Trek fan?
Serious Trek fan:
You have seen every episode of the original series more than once
You have seen every episode of the Next Generation at least once
You have seen at least a few episodes of the animated series.
You have seen all Trek movies at least once
You watched the "other" series just because they had "Star Trek" in the name, no matter how bad some of them were (and some were pretty f-ing bad!)
That's the minimum threshold.
The above would not make one a serious die hard Trek fan but at least gives one minimum creds and quals. :D
If you exceed that minimum threshold for "serious" fan status, what would the next level require? I think I could pass it, but may fall short of uber ultimate die hard Trek fan status. For example, have never been to a Trek convention and asked the panel of actors from the show what getting beamed up feels like... :dance3:
However, in my world view, I have "plank owner" status as I grew up watching Star Trek as it aired.
That's right bitches, my mother was a fan so at the age of 1-4 (66-69) was watching it. :dirol:
AND...I'll raise the bar with every Trek Expo in Tulsa Oklahoma since '01! Have met all the main actors from the original series and personally gotten autographs. All minus Deforest Kelly who passed away shortly before I got involved in the cons.
Just saw it. Great movie and it does get me excited for the upcoming new Star Wars movie/movies scheduled for a first release in 2015. J.J. Abrams directed the reboot Star Trek movie of a few years ago, Into Darkness, and will be directing the next Star Wars.
-Jax
Ok, I'll be the lone voice of dissent. I saw it but liked the original The Wrath of Kahn much, much better. Into Darkness was not a bad film, I am just partial to my childhood classics. I'm also not a Trekkie who fawns over all things Roddenberry, but I do see Star Trek II: TWOK as the single best movie in the origional series and an 80's SciFi classic.
Perhaps my greatest criticism is the over-acting. Chris Pine did a good job playing a novel version of Kirk, but everybody else seemed to overplay their hand trying to recreate the original characters. Bringing back Leonard Nimoy for a camio seemed to confuse the timelines and character development.
Bottomline, they would have been much better served by using this new series of movies to flush out the original character's early careers prior to the 60's TV series (i.e. Kirk's life as a junior officer).
The_War_Wagon
05-27-13, 01:02
Meh... they had 4 years to write a script, with - supposedly - the brightest minds in Hollyweird working on it, and a practically limitless budget ($185,000,000 to make this), and Reverse Angle - STII: TWOK, was the BEST they could come up with? :o
So they mashed together Space Seed, with elements of STII, STIII, and maybe a few other TOS bits & pieces, and this is all I got for my $25 ticket/coke/popcorn and FRIGGIN' ONE HOUR of 'coming attractions?!?!?'
I've got the whole mancrush thing going on Benedict Cumberbatch since the BBC cast him in Sherlock!, so if you HAD to replace Ricardo Montalban, I'm down with this update, but...
The whole thing seemed like writing your Ph.D. dissertation, by cutting & pasting it from Wikipedia articles. The Foley Artist Phalanx CANNOT completely paper over a thin plot to start with. :ph34r:
Star trek has never been about realism. There are far fewer physics breaking things in the new movie than the 2009 movie. The 2009 movie is a case study in bad science. But does it really matter?
And if a starship can lift up off a planet from below an ocean without using its main engines, it can certainly remain in orbit where there's a fraction of the gravity pulling on it without actually maintaining forward velocity. It's not ideal, but it can obviously be done.
Puzzle me this then... Why do they BUILD them at a space dock? It's not TREK, it's just science, and I hate how they abuse it, being that Gene Roddenberry basically predicted so much of what was coming, yet they can't stick to the simple tenants. Either way, I will always be a Trekkie.
:D
Are you a serious Trek fan?
Serious Trek fan:
You have seen every episode of the original series more than once
You have seen every episode of the Next Generation at least once
You have seen at least a few episodes of the animated series.
You have seen all Trek movies at least once
You watched the "other" series just because they had "Star Trek" in the name, no matter how bad some of them were (and some were pretty f-ing bad!)
That's the minimum threshold.
The above would not make one a serious die hard Trek fan but at least gives one minimum creds and quals. :D
If you exceed that minimum threshold for "serious" fan status, what would the next level require? I think I could pass it, but may fall short of uber ultimate die hard Trek fan status. For example, have never been to a Trek convention and asked the panel of actors from the show what getting beamed up feels like... :dance3:
However, in my world view, I have "plank owner" status as I grew up watching Star Trek as it aired.
That's right bitches, my mother was a fan so at the age of 1-4 (66-69) was watching it. :dirol:
Does shaking Majel Barrett-Roddenberry's hand count? And shaking Micheal Dorn's hand, and Marina Sirtis' hand andd Patrick Stewart's, and LeVar Burton's, and Rene Aburgenwhateverthe****therestofitsoundslike's hand count?
Love TREK. Love STARWARS. Total nerd from the beginning. :D
Saves on all the gas flyin' 'em up into space.
Puzzle me this then... Why do they BUILD them at a space dock? It's not TREK, it's just science, and I hate how they abuse it, being that Gene Roddenberry basically predicted so much of what was coming, yet they can't stick to the simple tenants. Either way, I will always be a Trekkie.
:D
They build the Enterprise in Iowa. Not in space.
They build the Enterprise in Iowa. Not in space.
Yes, in the reboot, but not in the original. See, that's where the divergence starts, or not really starts, but separates from the original series. :D
AND...I'll raise the bar with every Trek Expo in Tulsa Oklahoma since '01! Have met all the main actors from the original series and personally gotten autographs. All minus Deforest Kelly who passed away shortly before I got involved in the cons.
You sir are hard core!
NoveskeFan
05-27-13, 10:05
Growing up in the 80's, I watched the original series with my Dad. I think it came on after Bonanza. Used to go outside and pretend I was on away missions. I have enjoyed every series and movies since then, some more than others. Really looking forward to seeing the new movie, and hopefully turning my daughter into a nerd :D
http://i523.photobucket.com/albums/w354/jamesbaezan/IMG_0299_zpse5181f66.jpg
http://i523.photobucket.com/albums/w354/jamesbaezan/IMG_1278_zpsdc33ba69.jpg
Voodoo_Man
05-27-13, 10:09
Been watching Star Trek since I was old enough to understand - Shatner years.
I think it was a good film.
Belmont31R
05-27-13, 11:29
Bottomline, they would have been much better served by using this new series of movies to flush out the original character's early careers prior to the 60's TV series (i.e. Kirk's life as a junior officer).
In the reboot they are cadets and get called to active duty. Captain Pike is taking a crew of cadets into battle. So they basically go from cadets to officers and assume the roll of an active duty crew. Kirk never really spent time as a junior officer in the reboot.
In the reboot they are cadets and get called to active duty. Captain Pike is taking a crew of cadets into battle. So they basically go from cadets to officers and assume the roll of an active duty crew. Kirk never really spent time as a junior officer in the reboot.
Which I think is crap. Spock was an active duty LCdr. Even after he was relieved, he should have assumed command later. Kirk and all the other cadets should've been, at most, instantly graduated to Ensign. Maybe make Kirk a Lt.
As is, I don't feel like he earned his rank. It'd be like if we instantly promoted all MoH winners to Colonel. Doing something heroic once doesn't give you the experience and knowledge necessary to lead at that level.
Belmont31R
05-27-13, 11:51
Which I think is crap. Spock was an active duty LCdr. Even after he was relieved, he should have assumed command later. Kirk and all the other cadets should've been, at most, instantly graduated to Ensign. Maybe make Kirk a Lt.
As is, I don't feel like he earned his rank. It'd be like if we instantly promoted all MoH winners to Colonel. Doing something heroic once doesn't give you the experience and knowledge necessary to lead at that level.
Spock was basically an instructor at the cadet academy anyways. Not part of an active duty flight crew as far as I could tell.
Probably just the best way to go from showing Kirk as a baby to captain in one movie. It's a bit iffy common sense wise but you also have to remember they said a lot of the fleet was deployed and then all of the ships that jumped ahead of the Enterprise to Vulcan were destroyed by Nero. So Starfleet was extremely short on ships and crews. Makes kinda sense at that point that people would be making big jumps in rank and responsibility.
Kirks role as Captain does get addressed in #2.
Why do they BUILD them at a space dock?
Because when they start building them they aren't capable of flying? Which means they can't maintain their position because they are just a frame or an empty hull?
Because a space dock allows people and supplies and all that good stuff to be moved on board the old fashion way, IE, physically from the dock?
Because wit a space dock multiple ships can dock there at once and everybody can be there, like a space station, instead of just having several ships all hovering next to each other waving out their windows?
Phillygunguy
05-27-13, 12:10
I thought it was pretty good however, it was interesting that some of the traditional rolls between Kirk and Spock reversed even the ending was similar to another ST movie ( I won't say a to not spoil it for others) but roles reversed Overall good movie looking to see more
ForTehNguyen
05-27-13, 12:18
Puzzle me this then... Why do they BUILD them at a space dock? It's not TREK, it's just science, and I hate how they abuse it, being that Gene Roddenberry basically predicted so much of what was coming, yet they can't stick to the simple tenants. Either way, I will always be a Trekkie.
:D
in Star Trek 1 the Enterprise was being built on Earth
in Star Trek 1 the Enterprise was being built on Earth
And I could never figure out why, considering the ginormous space station that was certainly built in space.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-7bJV5PucAd8/TgSOR5itrTI/AAAAAAAACBo/KpjpPLZ8_jE/s1600/Starbase+03.jpg
Growing up in the 80's, I watched the original series with my Dad. I think it came on after Bonanza. Used to go outside and pretend I was on away missions. I have enjoyed every series and movies since then, some more than others. Really looking forward to seeing the new movie, and hopefully turning my daughter into a nerd :D
http://i523.photobucket.com/albums/w354/jamesbaezan/IMG_0299_zpse5181f66.jpg
http://i523.photobucket.com/albums/w354/jamesbaezan/IMG_1278_zpsdc33ba69.jpg
Wow, just wow. I like Star Trek, but you REALLY like Star Trek.
I like Star Trek, but let's be honest here; it was stale. TNG was great, but Voyager as a show really showed how stale the people running the franchise at the time were getting. It actually started showing in DS9. Add to that the fact that TNG cast and crew were really done after First Contact. Insurrection wasn't any better than any of the episodes on TV and Nemesis was not a great ending for a cast that I think deserved better. Enterprise would have been an interesting idea in someone else's hands.
Abrams/Bad Robot breathed new life into the franchise and I thinks it's great that they did. I know this movie is their take on Space Seed and in some ways WOK, but who cares? It was fun, it was exciting and it was a well made film. I hope they do the same with Star Wars as the last three movies were terrible.
Belmont31R
05-27-13, 13:07
Wow, just wow. I like Star Trek, but you REALLY like Star Trek.
I like Star Trek, but let's be honest here; it was stale. TNG was great, but Voyager as a show really showed how stale the people running the franchise at the time were getting. It actually started showing in DS9. Add to that the fact that TNG cast and crew were really done after First Contact. Insurrection wasn't any better than any of the episodes on TV and Nemesis was not a great ending for a cast that I think deserved better. Enterprise would have been an interesting idea in someone else's hands.
Abrams/Bad Robot breathed new life into the franchise and I thinks it's great that they did. I know this movie is their take on Space Seed and in some ways WOK, but who cares? It was fun, it was exciting and it was a well made film. I hope they do the same with Star Wars as the last three movies were terrible.
I liked DS9 a lot especially the last few seasons. I seem to like series more that are more of a running story than a bunch of independent episodes loosely tied together. You can watch most of TNG episodes out of order and it won't really matter much. DS9 had a great run with the Dominion.
MountainRaven
05-27-13, 13:10
Generally, I find MovieBob to be accurate and he and I usually share the same opinions about things:
Escape to the Movies: Star Trek: Into Darkness (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escape-to-the-movies/7335-Star-Trek-Into-Darkness)
That being said... I think I have heard enough good about this movie that I might watch it in theaters, anyway.
They build the Enterprise in Iowa. Not in space.
Actually, it's possible that it's built in multiple locations, including orbit. How they get it from IA to orbit and/or back, I do not know.
And I could never figure out why, considering the ginormous space station that was certainly built in space.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-7bJV5PucAd8/TgSOR5itrTI/AAAAAAAACBo/KpjpPLZ8_jE/s1600/Starbase+03.jpg
Yeah, that's just a Wal-Mart....
;)
I liked DS9 a lot especially the last few seasons. I seem to like series more that are more of a running story than a bunch of independent episodes loosely tied together. You can watch most of TNG episodes out of order and it won't really matter much. DS9 had a great run with the Dominion.
DS9 was/is my fave. Maybe it's because it's the one I grew up with (more so than TNG, although I did watch lots and lots of TNG growing up and I still enjoy TNG to this day). Of course, Voyager was during the same time period and I couldn't stand VOY. Maybe because one of the central plots was an actual interstellar war. Maybe because the Defiant was a kick-ass little ship and the only Starship in Starfleet (aside from maybe the Enterprise-E) where form followed function. It was a warship. It was well-armed, well-armored, small, quick, and maneuverable. When the Defiant went into a fight, it was always the underdog. And they finally put a cloaking device (as standard equipment) on a Federation ship! Maybe, as much as I like Picard, I liked that Sisko was willing to punch Q in his face. Maybe it was the alien architecture of the station, the fact that they couldn't just run away (unlike the Enterprise) from what they just did in the episode before. Maybe it was that they actually had to give the Bajorans and Cardassians some depth.
And then when the same people who made DS9 work did the re-make of Battlestar Galactica, I enjoyed that, too. Hmm....
NoveskeFan
05-27-13, 13:17
Wow, just wow. I like Star Trek, but you REALLY like Star Trek.
Yep. I never really could figure out why the ladies were not into me during middle school & high school...:laugh:
Yep. I never really could figure out why the ladies were not into me during middle school & high school...:laugh:
LOL. i would really like to say that I was popular in school, but that would just be a bold faced lie. Odd thing is that I use to work with this girl who is just smoking hot, really intelligent and a huge Star Trek fan. Add to that the fact that if you ever go to comicon or something like it, there are just tons of good looking girls there. Ahh, we were just ahead of our time. :laugh:
Actually I'm probably as big of a fan as your are, I just don't have a room full of starships; yeah, I'm a little jealous. I actually almost got in a fight with security at Comicon just trying to get of a couple of photos of William Shatner when he was there signing autographs, so that should give you a good idea of how big of a fan I am.
Generally, I find MovieBob to be accurate and he and I usually share the same opinions about things:
Escape to the Movies: Star Trek: Into Darkness (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escape-to-the-movies/7335-Star-Trek-Into-Darkness)
Thanks for the link. Good review.
Growing up in the 80's, I watched the original series with my Dad. I think it came on after Bonanza. Used to go outside and pretend I was on away missions. I have enjoyed every series and movies since then, some more than others. Really looking forward to seeing the new movie, and hopefully turning my daughter into a nerd :D
http://i523.photobucket.com/albums/w354/jamesbaezan/IMG_0299_zpse5181f66.jpg
http://i523.photobucket.com/albums/w354/jamesbaezan/IMG_1278_zpsdc33ba69.jpg
Awesome on every level! I've got the majority of the ships as well. They make good winter night projects.
The kid is a total classic you have there!
I loved the juxtaposition of Kirk in the reactor and Spock outside...
Spoiler Alert!!! La! La! La!!!
Belmont31R
05-27-13, 21:04
Spoiler Alert!!! La! La! La!!!
Been over a week now. Time to talk.
Been over a week now. Time to talk.
Besides, nobody can honestly expect to read a thread about a movie and not get spoilers.
If you don't want spoilers, don't read threads about the movie.
Hell, I closed my eyes/hit mute/fast forwarded/went LALALALALA when the commercials came on because I knew I was going to see it in theater shortly after opening.
decodeddiesel
08-02-13, 21:35
Old thread, but I wanted to say I was thrilled to find Star Trek still playing months later. We're going to see it one last time in the theater. The movie is outstanding and deserves to do well. This is the first flick in a long time (last was No Country for Old Men) I have felt the need to go see a number of times in the theater. I've been watching TOS frequently during my job hunt as well. Even made a trekie out of my Ukrainian wife lol.
Army Chief
08-02-13, 23:05
Don't feel too far behind; I just (finally) saw it last week at the second-run theater. It was the first time we had gone out for a family movie since all of this cancer business started exactly one year ago, so even if the movie had been flat, it was a sure win for us.
Thankfully, the movie was not at all flat, and I really like the direction things have headed under J.J. Abrams. Well, now I sound like a serious Trekker, but you get the basic idea. ;)
AC
I've watched it a few times and I l liked it. But I have to ask how can they produce a star trek movie and give Shatner some sort on camera time??
decodeddiesel
08-03-13, 01:07
Don't feel too far behind; I just (finally) saw it last week at the second-run theater. It was the first time we had gone out for a family movie since all of this cancer business started exactly one year ago, so even if the movie had been flat, it was a sure win for us.
Thankfully, the movie was not at all flat, and I really like the direction things have headed under J.J. Abrams. Well, now I sound like a serious Trekker, but you get the basic idea. ;)
AC
Thats really awesome AC, and it makes me happy to hear. I really enjoy this movie. It might be a reason to move up from my 34" TV to something better when it comes out on Bluray.
I must admit I really enjoy the trek references. Nurse Chapel, Khan, the dialog between Kirk and Spock at the warp core, Dr. Carol Marcus, tribble, Fleet Captain Christopher Pike...
Ok the suppressed Trekkie is starting to bubble up. :cool:
decodeddiesel
08-03-13, 01:09
I've watched it a few times and I l liked it. But I have to ask how can they produce a star trek movie and give Shatner some sort on camera time??
True, but Nimoy Spock fills the gap well in my opinion. Too bad Doohan and Kelly aren't around. Did you know Scotty was a WWII combat vet who was wounded on D-Day? True Story.
Side note that only the deeper into it fans will recognize but Michael Ansara that played the Klingon "Kang" in the original series passed away July 31st evidently.
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20081213042943/memoryalpha/en/images/2/2a/Kang2268.jpg
With movies under his belt such as Cloverfield, Super 8, & the Star Trek reboot, J.J. Abrams-IMO- is the new Steven Spielberg.
VERY much looking forward to his involvement in the future Star Wars movies.
Jaws...he needs to remake Jaws. That might be awesome.
-Jax
MountainRaven
08-03-13, 11:17
I forgot Cloverfield and Super 8 even existed.
:eek:
JJ Abrams and the Mystery Box (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/7295-Mystery-Bonks), this (mostly) accurately reflects my feelings on the dude.
Short version: Abrams is great at marketing, but no way in hell is he the next Spielberg.
EDIT: Also worth watching (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTfBH-XFdSc&feature=youtu.be).
decodeddiesel
08-03-13, 13:41
Side note that only the deeper into it fans will recognize but Michael Ansara that played the Klingon "Kang" in the original series passed away July 31st evidently.
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20081213042943/memoryalpha/en/images/2/2a/Kang2268.jpg
Thats a shame.
I recognize it's the same sash Worf wore in season 1 on TNG.
Star Trek Into Darkness: 10 Things That Make No Sense.
Spoilers.
http://whatculture.com/film/star-trek-into-darkness-10-things-that-make-no-sense.php
decodeddiesel
08-04-13, 11:15
Well good points are made here. I guess suspension of disbelief or artistic license are important concepts when viewing Star Trek.
The promotions bug me. Are we to believe Kirk starts as an enlisted guy then becomes a mustang by going to the academy, only to become a ships captain sometime during his senior year? How things have changed in 250 years.
According to wikipedia "Kirk was granted a field commission as an ensign and posted to advanced training aboard the USS Republic. He then was promoted to lieutenant junior grade and returned to Starfleet Academy as a student instructor.[3] Students could either "think or sink" in his class, and Kirk himself was "a stack of books with legs".[4] Upon graduating in the top five percent, Kirk was promoted to lieutenant and served aboard the USS Farragut.[3] While assigned to the Farragut, Kirk commanded his first planetary survey and survived a deadly attack that killed a large portion of the Farragut's crew,[3] including his commanding officer, Captain Garrovick. He received his first command, the equivalent of a destroyer-type spaceship, while still quite young.[5]"
Much more believable than what JJ Abrams came up with in the relaunch. Once again however, I don't see documenting Kirks early career moves as an enlisted guy and junior officer as box office smashing success.
MountainRaven
08-04-13, 11:21
Well good points are made here. I guess suspension of disbelief or artistic license are important concepts when viewing Star Trek.
The promotions bug me. Are we to believe Kirk starts as an enlisted guy then becomes a mustang by going to the academy, only to become a ships captain sometime during his senior year? How things have changed in 250 years.
According to wikipedia "Kirk was granted a field commission as an ensign and posted to advanced training aboard the USS Republic. He then was promoted to lieutenant junior grade and returned to Starfleet Academy as a student instructor.[3] Students could either "think or sink" in his class, and Kirk himself was "a stack of books with legs".[4] Upon graduating in the top five percent, Kirk was promoted to lieutenant and served aboard the USS Farragut.[3] While assigned to the Farragut, Kirk commanded his first planetary survey and survived a deadly attack that killed a large portion of the Farragut's crew,[3] including his commanding officer, Captain Garrovick. He received his first command, the equivalent of a destroyer-type spaceship, while still quite young.[5]"
Much more believable than what JJ Abrams came up with in the relaunch. Once again however, I don't see documenting Kirks early career moves as an enlisted guy and junior officer as box office smashing success.
I think a better idea, and a more realistic one, would have been to put Kirk on a security team and make Pike the the Captain.
Then Pike gets to do all the Captainy things while Kirk gets to do all the stupid-JJ Abrams-Kirk, physical, fighting things. After the crap that happened in the first movie, he could even reasonably be chief of security (or at least 2iC of security - he'd be inexperienced enough to not be CoS and being 2iC means he still gets to do ops but is important enough that his opinion will matter to Pike and his boss).
You know. Like BSG. If they had made any of the central characters an officer of Marines (instead of having their pilots lead the Marines).
Army Chief
08-04-13, 12:24
All valid points, but you guys do realize that none of this is even going to happen for like another 200 years, right? I mean, who knows, they just might get it right. ;)
AC
Grand58742
08-04-13, 16:24
Jaws...he needs to remake Jaws. That might be awesome.
-Jax
I personally think Hollywood has run out of original ideas for the most part and is doing remakes due to lack of talent. And overall, the remakes have been disasters. Just look at a few of the selections over the last five years in remakes and how well they have done:
Red Dawn 1984 - Cult classic that lives on today. Grossed $38M in 1984 dollars
Red Dawn 2012 - Complete flop that only took in $48M in 2012/2013
Karate Kid 1984 - Classic that caused many a young boy to start kicking things with the crane technique
Karate Kid 2010 - Meh, I like Jackie Chan, but he's no Miyagi
Nightmare on Elm Street 1984 - Instant cult classic with a bad guy you can actually laugh at
Nightmare on Elm Street 2010 - WTF? Really? Cheesy and lost the original appeal of Freddy. No Wes Craven, no Nightmare.
(Looking at that list so far, 1984 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_films_of_1984)was a pretty good year for movies)
Total Recall 1990 - Classic Arnold kill everything that moves with comedic moments and hot women.
Total Recall 2012 - WTF was that with a minor saving grace that it had Jessica Biel in it. Complete flop.
True Grit 1969 - John Wayne
True Grit 2010 - Other dude
Okay, the True Grit is a reach since it followed the original book more closely. I like Jeff Bridges but a John Wayne he is not. I liken his appearance in True Git as something akin to using Leonardo DiCaprio to replace Clint Eastwood in Pale Rider or Billy Bob Thornton as Major Reisman in Dirty Dozen...Lord I hope nobody from Hollywood is reading this and gets any ideas.
So what's next? The going to remake Gone with the Wind? Godfather? E.T.? Lawrence of Arabia?
Anyway, having finished my minor rant, JJ Abrams is probably one of the few that can pull off reboots with any ability so I was good with the Star Trek reboot. There was only one way of pulling it off and they did it perfectly. But overall, I hate it when Hollywood goes for the whole remake/reboot thing. The majority of the time they get it wrong and the appeal of the original is lost.
Jaws needs to be left alone in my opinion. It's fine the way it is.
Holy crap....1984 was an amazing year for movies
(oh, and I really enjoyed Into Darkness....)
And another thing, even though Nero in the previous movie decided for whatever reason to not once in 25 years go back and warn his planet of their future catastrophe, there simply is no way that that information does not make it back to them anyway. Thus either red matter is used in time and Romulus is not destroyed and everyone is saved, or they all high tail it off the planet in time and everyone is saved. Which means Nero does not go back in time to kill Kirk's father. Which means everything that happened in the TV show has to happen just as it did.
MountainRaven
08-05-13, 08:55
And another thing, even though Nero in the previous movie decided for whatever reason to not once in 25 years go back and warn his planet of their future catastrophe, there simply is no way that that information does not make it back to them anyway. Thus either red matter is used in time and Romulus is not destroyed and everyone is saved, or they all high tail it off the planet in time and everyone is saved. Which means Nero does not go back in time to kill Kirk's father. Which means everything that happened in the TV show has to happen just as it did.
They side-stepped that particular can of worms with the whole alternate universe thing.
In any case, according to JJ Abrams the reason why the Federation is so much more advanced in his universe than in the 'Prime' universe is because the crew of the Kelvin took pictures of the Narada.
The Klingons actually captured the Narada and got to study it for an extended period of time (while it was disabled by George Kirk's suicide run) and Nero and his crew were detained on Rura Penthe (the transmission that Uhura hears about the escape from Rura Penthe and a Klingon battlefleet being destroyed? That's Nero and crew).
So just imagine what Nero might have given the Romulans. It's possible that the Romulans might have even tried to pull him in and leave Vulcan and the Federation well-enough alone (Romulus wins, either way) but he didn't, hence the whole "the Empire and I stand apart" thing from talking to Pike.
In any case, we don't really know, because JJ Abrams was more interested in fighting Starfleet and time travelers than fighting Klingons and Romulans.
In any case, we don't really know, because JJ Abrams was more interested in fighting Starfleet and time travelers than fighting Klingons and Romulans.
You forgot his bromance with lens flares.
Is this really happening? Is there really a trekky argument/debate going on right now over the merits and plot of a fictional alter-reality?
lol
my thoughts to :)
its like on photography forums talking about how light would really be in the cave of monsters it would not reflect like that etc.. ? but oh the monsters they could be real ? hahahaha
Is this really happening? Is there really a trekky argument/debate going on right now over the merits and plot of a fictional alter-reality?
lol
Army Chief
08-06-13, 19:04
Technically, it would be a Trekker argument.
Trekkie is a term applied (usually with some derision) by those outside of the fold. Not that I should know anything about that, but I do.
;)
AC
Technically, it would be a Trekker argument.
Trekkie is a term applied (usually with some derision) by those outside of the fold. Not that I should know anything about that, but I do.
;)
AC
I'm not worthy for I am only a normy! :D
I wouldn't mind having a tribble for a pet though
MountainRaven
08-06-13, 19:28
Technically, it would be a Trekker argument.
Trekkie is a term applied (usually with some derision) by those outside of the fold. Not that I should know anything about that, but I do.
;)
AC
I've been into Star Trek my whole conscious life (ditto Star Wars) and I've only ever called myself a 'Trekkie'. I have no idea where this 'Trekker' term comes from.
Army Chief
08-06-13, 19:35
Perhaps there is no longer any real distinction made. I got a knot tied in my rear back in the early 80s for using the "wrong" term with an acquaintance who was, to understate the matter, very into all-things-Star Trek.
He told me that the regular convention-types self-identify as Trekkers, and the weirdos (along with those who have no investment in the series at all) say Trekkie. Then again, he's probably sitting in a dark closet somewhere tonight sucking on a Vienna sausage. Odd duck.
AC
FromMyColdDeadHand
08-06-13, 19:50
You forgot his bromance with lens flares.
Lens flare in computer generated footage always makes me chuckle.
Kind of like bokeh and OOF areas in animated movies....
I really liked both new Trek movies. They did bollocks up the first one with not getting the Nero time line coherent.
Is this really happening? Is there really a trekky argument/debate going on right now over the merits and plot of a fictional alter-reality?
lol
If you only knew the power of geek rage. You think the arguments about DI Vs. SS piston are legendary? Pffft. Wait till you see a Trek Vs Wars or Trek Vs NuTrek battle, then get back to me. The legions of dead and wounded posters, butt hurt galore, and the incredible vocabulary used to deliver catastrophic verbal beat downs are sights to behold if you can deal with it. It's glorious I tell you, glorious. In the end you'll be crying for your momma wishing for simpler times like AK Vs AR. :D
Disclaimer: I am a mod, and have been for years, on the largest Trek board out there. I still get amused at the aneurysm inducing battles that some of the posters get into and how damned seriously they take it.
If you only knew the power of geek rage. You think the arguments about DI Vs. SS piston are legendary? Pffft. Wait till you see a Trek Vs Wars or Trek Vs NuTrek battle, then get back to me. The legions of dead and wounded posters, butt hurt galore, and the incredible vocabulary used to deliver catastrophic verbal beat downs are sights to behold if you can deal with it. It's glorious I tell you, glorious. In the end you'll be crying for your momma wishing for simpler times like AK Vs AR. :D
Disclaimer: I am a mod, and have been for years, on the largest Trek board out there. I still get amused at the aneurysm inducing battles that some of the posters get into and how damned seriously they take it.
Ill take your word for it, the mental masturbation must be intense to say the least. What is said forum anyway? I wouldn't mind following up, you know for research purposes :D
sandman99and9
08-07-13, 20:14
If you only knew the power of geek rage. You think the arguments about DI Vs. SS piston are legendary? Pffft. Wait till you see a Trek Vs Wars or Trek Vs NuTrek battle, then get back to me. The legions of dead and wounded posters, butt hurt galore, and the incredible vocabulary used to deliver catastrophic verbal beat downs are sights to behold if you can deal with it. It's glorious I tell you, glorious. In the end you'll be crying for your momma wishing for simpler times like AK Vs AR. :D
Disclaimer: I am a mod, and have been for years, on the largest Trek board out there. I still get amused at the aneurysm inducing battles that some of the posters get into and how damned seriously they take it.
There is nothing like being yelled at in Klingon by a pissed off trekkie :)
S.M.
They side-stepped that particular can of worms with the whole alternate universe thing.
In any case, according to JJ Abrams the reason why the Federation is so much more advanced in his universe than in the 'Prime' universe is because the crew of the Kelvin took pictures of the Narada.
The Klingons actually captured the Narada and got to study it for an extended period of time (while it was disabled by George Kirk's suicide run) and Nero and his crew were detained on Rura Penthe (the transmission that Uhura hears about the escape from Rura Penthe and a Klingon battlefleet being destroyed? That's Nero and crew).
Then, according to Abrams, since the Narada was so damaged that it was captured and was not capable of fending off the Klingons, when Nero escaped and took back control of the Narada, how was he able to fend off the Klingons with that same crippled ship?
MountainRaven
08-08-13, 08:53
Then, according to Abrams, since the Narada was so damaged that it was captured and was not capable of fending off the Klingons, when Nero escaped and took back control of the Narada, how was he able to fend off the Klingons with that same crippled ship?
Basically...
The Narada is a mining ship, as Nero claims. Or was. But for some reason (never explained) the Tal Shiar decided to use the Narada as a testbed for some reverse engineered Borg technology (after the Hobus nova... the whole timeline is really kind of screwed up). And it's that technology that made the Narada huge and 'inside-out' looking and gave it the fancy multiple projectile missile-torpedo-things.
So while Nero and his crew were busy being prisoners, the Narada was busy repairing itself, like a Borg cube. (All presumably under the watchful eye of some very interested/confused Klingon scientists and warriors... most of whom are probably dead.)
That's the extent of known canon. There is a theory that the Narada had become self-aware and may have actively assisted Nero and his crew in escaping Rura Penthe. But that's just a theory, AFAIK.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.