Star Trek Into Darkness...

USian Pie said:
It was a fun watch, lessened only by numerous common-sense, "WTF?" plot point moments and foreshadowing done with sledgehammer-like subtlety.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned elsewhere is the apparent evolution of the Enterprise into something that can easily travel underwater and in atmosphere, too. It always seemed implied that the Enterprise was a creature built in space for use in space -- like a battleship lives its entire life in water.

Now it's become the 23rd century equivalent of an amphibious, submersible aircraft carrier with giant-ass tank treads and a periscope. If the Enterprise can do it all, they lose opportunities to have interesting challenges in the future.

Of course it doesn't really matter now that it looks like transporters can do pretty much anything. Wait, why did we need a starship again? And what are all these shuttles on board for? And why do we have a Communications Officer whose primary duty seems to be working the Vulcan?
Click to expand...
This was not the first time they have submerged The Enterprise underwater.

I really feel the best part of the reboots is the casting. The hit a home run with almost every choice. Zachary Quinto, Simon Peg, Carl Urban, and Zoe Saldano are all fantastic picks for their respective rolls.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
 
reverend1 said:
This was not the first time they have submerged The Enterprise underwater.
Click to expand...

Ok. So they were stupid before, too. My point is that limiting its capabilities make for more interesting challenges later.

There's always some explanation in both the Star Wars and Trek universes for everything. It's fantasy and I guess part the appeal is making up the "that could happen" to get past it.

That's why I always grit my teeth and regret saying anything about either one.

Let me tell you about the time I asked how you can exceed the speed of light in an instant without being squashed to goo against the bulkhead. I got inertial dampeners right up my ass.
 
USian Pie said:
Ok. So they were stupid before, too.

There's always some explanation in both the Star Wars and Trek universes for everything. It's fantasy and I guess part the appeal is making up the "that could happen" to get past it.

That's why I always grit my teeth and regret saying anything about either one.

Let me tell you about the time I asked how you can exceed the speed of light in an instant without being squashed to goo against the bulkhead. I got inertial dampeners right up my ass.
Click to expand...
You have to believe that in the next 400 years or so we will learn how to exceed the speed of light, develop artificial gravity (that on annoyed my wife last night during the movie) and somehow get around all of the rest of the laws of physics, unless they provide a good plot point.
 
Liked it...didn't blow me away for some reasons already mentioned. I agree that the casting is good; everyone exhibits enough connection with the original character traits to bring some familiarity yet it still feels fresh.
 
Mark Wein said:
And speaking Klingon. And being HOT.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I definitely like that they've expanded Uhura beyond just being the token chick on the bridge (and they finally made it canon that her name is Nyota after years of it just being in the novels). She's more than just a radio operator, now. They started hinting at more in the TOS movies, but they finally took it all the way with her being a language expert.

As far as the movie, I loved it. I'm a Trekkie since I started watching TOS at 7, before TNG even premiered. A lot of people accuse it of just being an action flick, but they're completely missing the subtext of terrorism and your own government becoming the enemy. It's probably because they weren't preachy about it.

My only really big complaint is that Admiral Robocop was a bit over the top. He's a good actor but he totally overacted. And as much as I enjoyed seeing Alice Eve in her Starfleet Regulation skivvies... It wasn't actually a necessary scene.
 
Mark Wein said:
You have to believe that in the next 400 years or so we will learn how to exceed the speed of light, develop artificial gravity (that on annoyed my wife last night during the movie) and somehow get around all of the rest of the laws of physics, unless they provide a good plot point.
Click to expand...
You can tell your wife that they explain a theory of how artificial gavity works (fictional in-universe scientific fact) on page 144 of Star Trek: The Next Generation: Technical Manual.
pybahe2y.jpg
 
Speaking of Admiral Robocop, did anyone else think that he was trying really hard to recreate a Jack Nicholson YOU NEED ME ON THAT WALL monologue?
 
Sherlock in space would have been ok, if not for the constant "but that doesn't make any sense at all" alarm going off in my head. And, being a science fiction movie fan, I have what I consider a large "suspension of disbelief" ability.

Oh, yeah, the the guy the cast to play Captian Kirk. No, just no - he projects more as captain of the high school football team than captain of a starship.
 
GomezAddams said:
Sherlock in space would have been ok, if not for the constant "but that doesn't make any sense at all" alarm going off in my head. And, being a science fiction movie fan, I have what I consider a large "suspension of disbelief" ability.

Oh, yeah, the the guy the cast to play Captian Kirk. No, just no - he projects more as captain of the high school football team than captain of a starship.
Click to expand...

I disagree with the choice of Chris Pine playing Capt Kirk. I think he does a very good job indeed. I think he plays it just about as well as anyone could considering this is an action movie.

Lets not forget that Capt Kirk is not Capt Picard.
 
Acadiafall said:
Lets not forget that Capt Kirk is not Capt Picard.
Click to expand...

I remember reading a debate somewhere about who was the better StarTrek captain, Kirk or Picard. The pro Kirk quote I remember best went along the lines:

"Deanna Troi wears skin tight lycra, can read Picard's mind and it doesn't matter".


Regarding the sci fi tech, there was a documentary about it once where someone asked how the Heisenberg compensators in the transporter system worked. The answer was "Very well, thank you." :grin:
 
STID was pure popcorn. enjoyable in the theater, but completely devoid of nutritious content.

upon further reflection, i decided the film was not worth further reflection.
 
VoidTerraFirma said:
Bound, gagged, immolated and peed on the ashes of my beloved Wrath of Khan. A re-imagining of that true classic...

Cumberbatch was good, though.
Click to expand...
Which was itself a re-imagining of Moby Dick, but one of my favorite films of all time (as was another Moby Dick redux, Jaws)
 
i think the casting is excellent. especially Kirk and Spock. hell even the Dr isnt a cliche.

this isnt your granddads Star Trek, and thats why it works on its own as a popcorn movie that isnt inclusive (you dont have to have watched Star Trek to like it, in fact if you did you have more reason not to like it)

Its the definitive re-boot: it kicks the old franchise movies in the ass.

Im a huge Trek fan (mostly Voyager and to some extent Enterprise) but never liked any of the movies. I pretty much despise TOS though.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top