Jump to content

Home

Star Trek Into Darkness

mr_dad

By mr_dad
in Ahto Spaceport Cantina

Recommended Posts

Q Newbie

Q

Posted
Posted

MOAR LENS FLARE! :D

 

Waitaminute. Damon Lindelof helped write this? Ruh-roh. :ohdear:

 

Expect lots of plot holes, dead ends and characters doing stupid stuff for no particular reason, along with a lot of weirdness and emotion that imitate depth, all specifically designed to distract the viewer from the fact that Damon Lindelof is a literary con-artist who doesn't really know WTF he's doing. In short, expect a plot that builds suspense by asking all sorts of intriguing questions and then leaves almost all of them unanswered. :swear:

 

I really wish that people would stop hiring that hack. :dozey:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Miltiades Newbie

Miltiades

Posted
Posted
MOAR LENS FLARE! :D

 

Waitaminute. Damon Lindelof helped write this? Ruh-roh. :ohdear:

 

Expect lots of plot holes, dead ends and characters doing stupid stuff for no particular reason, along with a lot of weirdness and emotion that imitate depth, all specifically designed to distract the viewer from the fact that Damon Lindelof is a literary con-artist who doesn't really know WTF he's doing. In short, expect a plot that builds suspense by asking all sorts of intriguing questions and then leaves almost all of them unanswered. :swear:

 

I really wish that people would stop hiring that hack. :dozey:

Great, Prometheus all over again. I'm quite excited about the movie, but not a fan of Lindelof either.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mr_dad Newbie

mr_dad

Posted
  • Author
Posted

While speculation is fine, I find it very ANOYING, when people make assumptions about movies that they have not seen or haven't been released. Besides, not only is he not the only writer, but the script isn't the only thing that causes a film to be good. Directing, Writing, and Acting are the main things that must be done well in a film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Bob Saget Newbie

Bob Saget

Posted
Posted
My small Star Trek experience comes from watching a few episodes of TNG, and I can say that both this and the previous movie are only Star Trek in the title.

 

not because of the characters Kirk, Spock, and Bones from the original series? Not from the U.S.S. Enterprise that resembles the original series? Not various other descriptions that fit that time?

 

Right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lynk Former Newbie

Lynk Former

Posted
Posted

I'm hopeful that's it's true to what Star Trek is meant to be... but I also know that this is meant to be a Hollywood blockbuster movie, and that means catering to the lowest common denominator... the action movie fan.

 

If they have managed to craft a movie that caters to both the action fans and the Star Trek fans who are craving for that old Star Trek goodness... excellent.

 

Let's see if they have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...
Astor Newbie

Astor

Posted
Posted

Thread necromancy here, but...

 

I say this as a massive fan of The Original Series, so I am biased, but the film sucked. Big time. There was no suspense at all, and it was filled with questionable plot choices and excruciating dialogue.

 

However...

 

Show spoiler
(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)
I can't help feeling they'd have done better by making a shot for shot remake of The Wrath of Khan as opposed to oh-so-cleverly reversing some of the roles.

 

Also, Spock hailing actual Spock to get information about Khan... *facepalm*

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bob Saget Newbie

Bob Saget

Posted
Posted

I saw it today and was thoroughly impressed. What the man above said squared. People hate on this because it's not true to Star Trek's original vision, I call BS. I'm a fan of the original star trek and still like this. It's a new generation, considering how it's an alternate timeline from the mainstream Star Trek, I say we have a great movie here.

 

Cumberbatch was so awesome as Khan, and there were plenty of nods to the original star trek here as well as amusements.

 

I will say the plot was rushed a bit but overall this movie is the best Star trek movie out there. Great acting, great characters, great action, etc.

 

9.6/10

 

This gives me hope that the new Star Wars movies will be great.

 

 

***SPOILER ALERT***

 

Show spoiler
(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)
Spock's KHAAAAAN was the highlight of the movie XD
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zhaboka Newbie

Zhaboka

Posted
Posted

Other than the rushed ending and (SPOILERS) the complete disregard of the fact that the Federation had a quasi-legal military branch trying to start a war with the Klingons, I really enjoyed it. Lindelof was a little much for me, but I could feel the other two writers really getting in there are writing great dialogue, which the actors embodied really well. I agree with the hidden part of the above post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vindikorr Newbie

Vindikorr

Posted
Posted

I still need to go and see it, but from what I've heard it is definitely worth seeing.

 

I agree people saying it's not true Star Trek is stupid. Going by the 2009 reboot at least, I thought that was brilliant, the new ones seem to show a different side of Star Trek that isn't shown in the originals, and while I'm not sure I'd like an entire series revolving around the reboot characters, the odd few films are definitely a fresh change from the originals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astor Newbie

Astor

Posted
Posted

Allow me to clarify - I don't hate it because it's a reboot - I loved the 2009 film, and I went into that one ready to hate it. I think the reboot has great potential, and there's a lot to like.

 

My problems are with the plot. I just don't see the need to retread old stories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bob Saget Newbie

Bob Saget

Posted
Posted

My problems are with the plot. I just don't see the need to retread old stories.

 

You're forgetting that this is an alternate timeline where the stories and events proceed differently. I.E. This movie, if you've seen it. Having a new Star Trek series around the reboot would be interesting since:

 

1. Vulcans are an endangered species

2. Star Fleet is more militarized thanks to Nero's attack

3. Technology is slightly more advanced

4. The characters have evolved differently that the TOS characters

 

I'd think that the reboot has done fine in setting in a path that has some resemblance of TOS, but not enough to make it almost similar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astor Newbie

Astor

Posted
Posted
You're forgetting that this is an alternate timeline where the stories and events proceed differently. I.E. This movie, if you've seen it.[/Quote]

 

No, I'm not forgetting anything, and I don't need to be reminded that it's an alternate timeline.

 

There were parts of the plot I liked, and parts I didn't - the overall idea of bringing the character back I'm fine with. But again, I don't like the way they went about it.

 

For instance -

 

Show spoiler
(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)
Kirk dies. Ok, that's dramatic (even if the manner in which he dies was poorly thought out), I guess. If only they hadn't already set up the get-out clause an hour earlier with the dead Tribble. :rolleyes:

 

And reversing the roles in the aforementioned scene smacks of laziness. And the less said about Spock's outburst, the better.

 

However, Section 31 was a terrible idea in DS9/Enterprise, but I can see how it would work well in the more militarised alternate timeline.

 

And a niggling point - when you're being chased by a pissed off Vulcan through San Francisco, is it really important to stop a grab a trench-coat?

 

Also, 'Kronos' is spelt with a 'Q'. :carms:

 

:p

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bob Saget Newbie

Bob Saget

Posted
Posted

Show spoiler
(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)
Kirk dies. Ok, that's dramatic (even if the manner in which he dies was poorly thought out), I guess. If only they hadn't already set up the get-out clause an hour earlier with the dead Tribble. :rolleyes:

 

And reversing the roles in the aforementioned scene smacks of laziness. And the less said about Spock's outburst, the better.

 

 

Show spoiler
(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)
I don't think so, that was one of the more powerful parts of the movie, and if you'd seen Star Trek II then you'd appreciate how it was done and how the roles were reversed. It flowed smoothly, I fail to see how it was lazily done, nor how Spock's outburst was terrible. In fact, I find it to be a tribute to the original series, that's where you differ from me.

 

Show spoiler
(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)
However, Section 31 was a terrible idea in DS9/Enterprise, but I can see how it would work well in the more militarised alternate timeline.

 

 

Show spoiler
(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)
Whether they say so or not, every government has a division that carries out black ops operations that are not "responsible" of the leading government. Section 31 was like Cerberus from Mass Effect. Enterprise was horribly done all together, Ds9 tried to do it but didn't quite get there. It was one of the few weak story arcs of a fabulous series.

 

Show spoiler
(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

And a niggling point - when you're being chased by a pissed off Vulcan through San Francisco, is it really important to stop a grab a trench-coat?

 

I think that was before he realized he was being chased, a trenchcoat makes a good cover :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...