His point is that it's hard to tell if that movie was an homage or just a collection of Star Trek references. It goes back to whether or not "It's a Trap" was actually funny or just a bunch of Star Wars references.
I can say that at least for the Carol Marcus part and putting people in Torpedoes.
And it did seem like Dr. McCoy working on the torpedoes was reminiscent of The Undiscovered Country. I had that thought as soon as a saw it.
He's certainly right about the Chapel part so it just had me wondering with the jumping from ship to ship ala Data and Nemesis...were these references...intentional. Once you point them all out it does seem to be a movie of..."Remember when this happened".
I was glad he pointed it out. That was the quiet nagging itch after walking out of the theater.
I'm still not sure what I thought of that movie. I can't tell if I appreciate that it tried to appeal to those who liked TWoK, or if I felt like it was a horrible rip-off of it. Eh, I guess that really doesn't matter so much. I mean, at the end of the day, Khan was just incredibly under-utilized given the scenario they had dreamed up. Pity, he could have been a great evil good guy.
It's a better movie than more than half of the Trek films including it's predecessor which was a horrendous mess of a plot.
Films by My Rank
1) The Undiscovered Country *** Best Plot and Execution
2) Wrath of Khan *** Best Theme and Execution
3) The Voyage Home *** Best Continuation & Concept
4) The Search for Spock *** Best Drama
5) Into Darkness *** Best Style & Humor
6) Generations *** Worst Concept
7) The Motion Picture *** Worst Pacing
8) Insurrection *** Worst Story
9) The Final Frontier *** Worst Execution, Worst FX
10) Star Trek (2009) *** Worst use of Contrivance & Plot Devices, Worst Villain
11) First Contact *** Worst Character Use, Worst Character Development & Worst Drama
12) Nemesis *** Worst Plot
This movie kept us engaged, perhaps it was TOO FAST and it was extremely corny but sometimes that goes with funny. I don't know if I would ever purposely sit down to watch it again. I have far more respect for Galaxy Quest as a real film than I do of Into Darkness as a parody. I was just happy the writers put together a moderately acceptable plot and didn't resort epic amounts of contrivance and plot holes
If I ran across it on cable or at a friends house, I'd be okay with seeing it again.
1-10, 1 being the movie I could watch over and over... 10 being the movie I'd watch on occasion...
1) First Contact
2) Wrath of Khan
3) The Voyage Home
4) The Search for Spock
5) Generations
6) The Motion Picture
7) Nemesis
8) Insurrection
9) The Undiscovered Country
10) The Final Frontier
11) Into Darkness
12) Star Trek (2009)
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB 1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD 32 GB RAM Windows 11 Pro
I don't know about like vs dislike...It's not that simple for me.
Motion Picture was a solid film in what it was trying to do. It was a thought provoking movie. The plot was sound, The pacing was slow. There were not contrivances, the plot devices were well balanced, the characters had personal drama. It was a good story. It may not have been the story everyone was interested in but it told it's story well. I can still watch it and it's mostly because the movie treats itself as an EPIC though provoking film. It still gets ranked 7 on the bad side of my list but it's not because of the story mechanics were grossly in error as with the others.
6,7,8, are THE most mediocre of the Franchise. Just blah....not compelling exciting or original.
I don't get how the Chapel remark is even a thing.
She is mentioned in the first film, in the 2nd film she is mentioned as having left, and heavily inferred that she left because she had an affair with Kirk.
The only thing that made me think about that scene, is in this universe maybe she is David's mother?
Watched it yesterday, and it was a good movie for my taste. It's much better than the previous one, that's sure.
Therefore, it is clearlly a mix of things from ST-II, ST- ST-III, ST-VI and many episodes from TOS to TNG, with a tint of superheroes and Star Wars. Nothing that new in fact, but the mix worked fine I think. And... since Khan is frozen, not dead, he will come back at some point, what isn't bad, cause Bennedict interpreted a really good Khan. I think that Khan's blood will be the starting point for a new Genesis Project, don't you now?
It's almost like you can see the lit impulse engines through the damage/hole in the saucer...
Granted... for some reason, the first shot in the video is from when the Enterprise get's slung out of warp... the rest is when they're falling towards the Earth...
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB 1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD 32 GB RAM Windows 11 Pro
Into Darkness is by a long long way the best ever Star Trek film. It succeeds as a remake of Wrath of Khan. It succeeds as a new Trek story. It succeeds at action. Adventure. Humour. Drama. Morality. It checks every single box. Its really quite an achievement.
It's weird to me that people pour such scorn on this film. It's both a highly competent movie, and highly enjoyable. I find it hilarious that people react as if it was universally hated and loathed. It's quite the opposite. it was financially successful, and highly popular. I have yet to meet a person IRL who didn't like it; just whiney fanbois on the internets, who moan about everything, find a little clique of like minded petty people, and validate their opinion based on that. :P Sadly this is a growing trend on the internet. To form large cliques and pretend as if that validates your opinion, and cyber bully people and brow beat them. Of course, then everyone does the same thing, so it just turns into a sad grind, and giant horrible ranty arguments spew forth on forums, facebook and reddit. SSDD.
I really liked the Plinket review. Some of his criticism was fair. He is usually spot on about his nitpicks and highly educational and literate on cinematography and the craft, (with a lot of comedy thrown in) but at the end of the day the largest criticism of the film was they threw the fans a lot of bones.. given I am a fan, I enjoyed catching them, so this wasn't a negative for me
Into Darkness is by a long long way the best ever Star Trek film. It succeeds as a remake of Wrath of Khan. It succeeds as a new Trek story. It succeeds at action. Adventure. Humour. Drama. Morality. It checks every single box. Its really quite an achievement.
it is a pretty great film but i have seen a few better trek movies. i preferred(laugh if you wish i know some of you hate it) nemesis but into darkness was rather nice. some bits were a little bad and i wish we had seen more of the klingons in it, some cooler ships than the federation ones would also be a good addition( things like the old klingon BOP, the valdore from nemesis, the scimitar from nemesis, the dominion dreadnought, and maybe some fighters) but i am guessing that the way abrams is doing it his next trek will be a remake of search for spock? if you think of them purely as isolated films the abrams stuff is great, in comparison to other treks they are marginally inferior.
JJ Abrams first Trek film had the look and feel spot on, great new versions of the classic characters, brilliant ships and created a living, breathing WORLD unlike anything we've ever seen in Star Trek. In short, it blows all other Trek away. Plot wise I have lots of problems with it though and in some respects it felt like Nemesis on rinse and repeat. The alternate timeline stuff was contrived and forced but I forgive it most of its faults because unlike 90% of other Trek, it was entertaining and vibrant. It felt ALIVE where so much of Trek feels embalmed.
Into Darkness however is one of my all time favorite sci fi films because it took all the things I loved about JJ's first film and married them to a good STORY that MAKES SENSE. Ordinarily I'd have a big problem with a remake of a classic like Wrath of Khan and would dismiss such a project as lazy and unoriginal, but this film actually has a much more interesting take on the whole Khan premise - as well as a much more believable one. And kudos to the writers for keeping things simple and direct!
I' ve been a Trek fan all my life. I know what Roddenberry's so-called "vision" is all about. And Into Darkness contains that vision and presents it in a way you can actually believe. A "perfect" society of tolerance and enlightenment is impossible (as well as BORING) and if Star Trek is trying to teach us to strive to be better, then setting it in a world where all of those goals have already been achieved defeats that vision! How can you notice the light unless there is some darkness? Also, this is the first Trek film I can think of where the villain doesn't die a horrendously violent death...
Tobian, we've never met in RL, but I was not a fan of the movie. Not jumping on the bandwagon--I saw it almost a month after release. Based on all the hints and remarks made by friends of mine I went into it with great enthusiasm! I was looking forward to a great experience, heading over to a friend's place and boring the <bleep> out of his wife talking about it into the wee hours of the morning.
Then I watched it.
My problem with it was actually very specific--it misused two potentially excellent story-lines and villains. If the movie had been all about Khan (NOT a remake) that would've been excellent even with Cumberbatch's "can you see my molars? No, wait let me emote some more" dialogue delivery. If it had been all about Admiral Marcus and his subversion of Starfleet, that too could have been excellent.
Both together? Well, it was far from chocolate and peanut butter.
I don't hate it (though I expressed such sentiments at the time, I had muchly of the nerd rage I shall admit). No, I'm just VERY disappointed in it.
It's ok, you're allowed to not like it, I'm happy for people to like or not like it as is their wont, my point is that some people misrepresent reality: that 'everyone' hated it, which is not the case.
I'm getting a little tired of being dismissed as a 'fanboy' (??!?!) because I couldn't wait for a movie to end while I was watching it. "You don't share my opinion because you're so weak-willled!"
My problem with it was actually very specific--it misused two potentially excellent story-lines and villains. If the movie had been all about Khan (NOT a remake) that would've been excellent even with Cumberbatch's "can you see my molars? No, wait let me emote some more" dialogue delivery. If it had been all about Admiral Marcus and his subversion of Starfleet, that too could have been excellent.
Both together? Well, it was far from chocolate and peanut butter.
That was the best aspect of the film - combining Khan and Marcus's agendas. It was GENIUS. I wanted to applaud the screenwriters for making that connection.
Interesting word, contrarianism. It's also not applicable, given, as I pointed out the 'majority' liked the movie. Unless you mean the majority of people in this thread, then I can see your point. However the 'majority' don't bother posting on Scif fan forums either
At the end of the day I am not going to tell people how to feel, because that's all it comes down too: How you feel about a film. All the logical arguments always come down to that essential point: You can't tell someone to like something, because it is critically acclaimed, or because it sold X million cinema tickets. It's all irrelevant. You either like it or you don't. It doesn't matter how elaborate or intricate your argument is, how big your dad is. I use the word 'fanboi' in this context, as typically a fanboi is someone who measures every part of the franchise's dick against every other aspect of the franchise's dick, and other franchises' dicks. We have had several pages of 'my favourite trek film is this (list) - no this is my list' ad infinitum. I haven't bothered to read all this thread. If I could I would delete it, but, like a digital hydra, 2 more would spring up in it's place, measuring ST ITD's dick against other trek films. It's a tedious facet of nerddom. If you're personally not doing that, then I am not referring to you (nano) in that case! The thread will no doubt die out when the next 'raped my childhood' film comes out, and then I'll have to ignore those threads instead
That was the best aspect of the film - combining Khan and Marcus's agendas. It was GENIUS. I wanted to applaud the screenwriters for making that connection.
Conceptually the idea was fine. The problem is that the execution of it was very flat. You'd think somebody like Cumberbatch would have gotten a good deal more dialogue than he had actually ended up with.
Interesting word, contrarianism. It's also not applicable...
I'm sorry, but it very much is. Your basis for 'the majority' is "a handful of people I've talked to about it." So the ones that agree with you, they're the 'majority', but the ones that don't ... well they're just just whiney fanbois on the internets, who moan about everything, find a little clique of like minded petty people, and validate their opinion based on that.
I really don't think you realize the conflict between the point you're making and how you're going about making that point.
I was referring to box office sales and critical acclaim as well, and I am sorry if you don't like that description, it doesn't stop it being any less true. The whole 'George Lucas raped my childhood' song kind of nails it. Most people simply don't care enough to be that passionate and hate something, they just go 'meh, was a crap film' and don't take to their nearest fan convention / internet forum / facebook group, to have a weep and wail about it.
I will reiterate I HAVE NOT READ ALL OF THIS THREAD, it is boring and stupid, so yes, I have come half cocked and missed much of the discussion, but I've seen so much of it elsewhere, it colours me biassed, because all of the little memes reverberate round the internet, and it's all the same things being repeated ad nauseum.
Posts
I can say that at least for the Carol Marcus part and putting people in Torpedoes.
And it did seem like Dr. McCoy working on the torpedoes was reminiscent of The Undiscovered Country. I had that thought as soon as a saw it.
He's certainly right about the Chapel part so it just had me wondering with the jumping from ship to ship ala Data and Nemesis...were these references...intentional. Once you point them all out it does seem to be a movie of..."Remember when this happened".
I was glad he pointed it out. That was the quiet nagging itch after walking out of the theater.
It's a better movie than more than half of the Trek films including it's predecessor which was a horrendous mess of a plot.
Films by My Rank
1) The Undiscovered Country *** Best Plot and Execution
2) Wrath of Khan *** Best Theme and Execution
3) The Voyage Home *** Best Continuation & Concept
4) The Search for Spock *** Best Drama
5) Into Darkness *** Best Style & Humor
6) Generations *** Worst Concept
7) The Motion Picture *** Worst Pacing
8) Insurrection *** Worst Story
9) The Final Frontier *** Worst Execution, Worst FX
10) Star Trek (2009) *** Worst use of Contrivance & Plot Devices, Worst Villain
11) First Contact *** Worst Character Use, Worst Character Development & Worst Drama
12) Nemesis *** Worst Plot
This movie kept us engaged, perhaps it was TOO FAST and it was extremely corny but sometimes that goes with funny. I don't know if I would ever purposely sit down to watch it again. I have far more respect for Galaxy Quest as a real film than I do of Into Darkness as a parody. I was just happy the writers put together a moderately acceptable plot and didn't resort epic amounts of contrivance and plot holes
If I ran across it on cable or at a friends house, I'd be okay with seeing it again.
1) First Contact
2) Wrath of Khan
3) The Voyage Home
4) The Search for Spock
5) Generations
6) The Motion Picture
7) Nemesis
8) Insurrection
9) The Undiscovered Country
10) The Final Frontier
11) Into Darkness
12) Star Trek (2009)
Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
32 GB RAM
Windows 11 Pro
Motion Picture was a solid film in what it was trying to do. It was a thought provoking movie. The plot was sound, The pacing was slow. There were not contrivances, the plot devices were well balanced, the characters had personal drama. It was a good story. It may not have been the story everyone was interested in but it told it's story well. I can still watch it and it's mostly because the movie treats itself as an EPIC though provoking film. It still gets ranked 7 on the bad side of my list but it's not because of the story mechanics were grossly in error as with the others.
6,7,8, are THE most mediocre of the Franchise. Just blah....not compelling exciting or original.
She is mentioned in the first film, in the 2nd film she is mentioned as having left, and heavily inferred that she left because she had an affair with Kirk.
The only thing that made me think about that scene, is in this universe maybe she is David's mother?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWLGH0VHUVs
It's an interesting full body analysis and break down of Into Darkness.
(Some strong language)
Therefore, it is clearlly a mix of things from ST-II, ST- ST-III, ST-VI and many episodes from TOS to TNG, with a tint of superheroes and Star Wars. Nothing that new in fact, but the mix worked fine I think. And... since Khan is frozen, not dead, he will come back at some point, what isn't bad, cause Bennedict interpreted a really good Khan. I think that Khan's blood will be the starting point for a new Genesis Project, don't you now?
It's almost like you can see the lit impulse engines through the damage/hole in the saucer...
Granted... for some reason, the first shot in the video is from when the Enterprise get's slung out of warp... the rest is when they're falling towards the Earth...
Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
32 GB RAM
Windows 11 Pro
I really liked the Plinket review. Some of his criticism was fair. He is usually spot on about his nitpicks and highly educational and literate on cinematography and the craft, (with a lot of comedy thrown in) but at the end of the day the largest criticism of the film was they threw the fans a lot of bones.. given I am a fan, I enjoyed catching them, so this wasn't a negative for me
Into Darkness however is one of my all time favorite sci fi films because it took all the things I loved about JJ's first film and married them to a good STORY that MAKES SENSE. Ordinarily I'd have a big problem with a remake of a classic like Wrath of Khan and would dismiss such a project as lazy and unoriginal, but this film actually has a much more interesting take on the whole Khan premise - as well as a much more believable one. And kudos to the writers for keeping things simple and direct!
I' ve been a Trek fan all my life. I know what Roddenberry's so-called "vision" is all about. And Into Darkness contains that vision and presents it in a way you can actually believe. A "perfect" society of tolerance and enlightenment is impossible (as well as BORING) and if Star Trek is trying to teach us to strive to be better, then setting it in a world where all of those goals have already been achieved defeats that vision! How can you notice the light unless there is some darkness? Also, this is the first Trek film I can think of where the villain doesn't die a horrendously violent death...
Then I watched it.
My problem with it was actually very specific--it misused two potentially excellent story-lines and villains. If the movie had been all about Khan (NOT a remake) that would've been excellent even with Cumberbatch's "can you see my molars? No, wait let me emote some more" dialogue delivery.
Both together? Well, it was far from chocolate and peanut butter.
I don't hate it (though I expressed such sentiments at the time, I had muchly of the nerd rage I shall admit). No, I'm just VERY disappointed in it.
I can't wait until geeks move past contrarianism.
That was the best aspect of the film - combining Khan and Marcus's agendas. It was GENIUS. I wanted to applaud the screenwriters for making that connection.
At the end of the day I am not going to tell people how to feel, because that's all it comes down too: How you feel about a film. All the logical arguments always come down to that essential point: You can't tell someone to like something, because it is critically acclaimed, or because it sold X million cinema tickets. It's all irrelevant. You either like it or you don't. It doesn't matter how elaborate or intricate your argument is, how big your dad is. I use the word 'fanboi' in this context, as typically a fanboi is someone who measures every part of the franchise's dick against every other aspect of the franchise's dick, and other franchises' dicks. We have had several pages of 'my favourite trek film is this (list) - no this is my list' ad infinitum. I haven't bothered to read all this thread. If I could I would delete it, but, like a digital hydra, 2 more would spring up in it's place, measuring ST ITD's dick against other trek films. It's a tedious facet of nerddom. If you're personally not doing that, then I am not referring to you (nano) in that case!
Conceptually the idea was fine. The problem is that the execution of it was very flat. You'd think somebody like Cumberbatch would have gotten a good deal more dialogue than he had actually ended up with.
I'm sorry, but it very much is. Your basis for 'the majority' is "a handful of people I've talked to about it." So the ones that agree with you, they're the 'majority', but the ones that don't ... well they're just just whiney fanbois on the internets, who moan about everything, find a little clique of like minded petty people, and validate their opinion based on that.
I really don't think you realize the conflict between the point you're making and how you're going about making that point.
I will reiterate I HAVE NOT READ ALL OF THIS THREAD, it is boring and stupid, so yes, I have come half cocked and missed much of the discussion, but I've seen so much of it elsewhere, it colours me biassed, because all of the little memes reverberate round the internet, and it's all the same things being repeated ad nauseum.