Wow, just saw this. Much better than I thought it was going to be and as good as the first Star Trek. The chemistry is still there between the actors. I hope they continue with the series.
Mike
Mike
Star Trek - Into Darkness
- Thread starter mrenglish
- Start date
SmokingPipes.com Updates
Watch for Updates Twice a Week
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
Site Sponsors
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
- Status
I agree completely. Part of my worry was the reported casting of Khan but Cumberbatch played it very nicely.
This was a very good "action" movie. But it was the worst "Star Trek" movie I've ever seen, as far as following previous canon. I understand that we're in a new timeline, but some of the writing makes me cringe. They completely reversed the Kirk/Spock roles in the warp core sequence- blasphemy! Spock seems to be as much of a lover as a thinker, this is totally against all previous canon. The opening sequence is a rip off of Raiders of the Lost Ark, there is also a rip off of the Millenium Falcon Death Star scene from Jedi, during the Kronos sequence. And enough of them leaving the damn ship via space jumps. I know most people just want an entertaining flick to pass a few hours, but Star Trek is more than that to me. When J.J. Abrams decides to change fifty years of storyline and built up character traits it really bothers me. You can call me a Trekkie or a Trekker or just plain old nerd, but I think you have a responsibility to the fan base, as well as the movie execs, when you take over the reigns of a franchise with so much history. The Star Wars fans will feel our pain soon enough, as he is set to direct to next set of Star Wars films for Disney.
Still haven't seen in. I'll probably catch it on Netflix or HBO. Was very interested in seeing Cumberbatch. Great actor.
Generally don't like the new Star Trek movies. I think they lack the philosophy behind the older non JJ Trek, and have generally become cheap action movies.
I though the first one was pretty decent, entertaining anyway. I liked Cumberbatch as a modern day Sherlock Holmes, so I'm interested to see him in this role. I have it qued up in Netlix.
A young sci-fi nerd who has no ties to the original Star Trek, so I'm curious as to how it holds up.
A young sci-fi nerd who has no ties to the original Star Trek, so I'm curious as to how it holds up.
That was pretty much my reaction as well. I loved the first movie because it was completely new material. I really hated the fact that the second story was just a rewrite of the 1982 Wrath of Khan movie. The changes they made to the story weren't enough to make it new and unique. In an infinite universe, with a completely new "timeline", there were so many possible stories out there that it was a real shame they rehashed an existing one.
And, yeah, I don't like the new portrayal of Spock very much. Sure, he always struggled to control the human side of his psyche, but the original character was much more successful at it. This modern Spock is a melodramatic cry-baby lol.
phil does bring up some good points. When you compare it to the series I can see his points and agree with them. It is definitely an action flick as that is what will sell in the box office. I guess taken on its own its good but if you hold it to history of Star Trek, not so much. So, if you want entertainment, you will be in for a good time. If you are expecting to hold to the established cannon, not so much.
I hear a lot of complaints that the new Trek movies do not follow the more serious previous Treks ... but I think a lot of people forget that TOS was more action oriented with story and philosophy guiding it along. Also, the complaints about Carol Marcus taking off her clothes was done to "sex up" the movie is an invalid argument as TOS was full of beautiful aliens that Shatner always got with. I'm 27 and grew up on TOS, TNG, DS9 and Voyager ... and while I like the philosophical and moral questions that they addressed, I also feel that too many Trekkies got wrapped up in the more serious nature of the shows that followed TOS and forgot about the more casual and action oriented nature of the Shatner/Nimoy show. I liked the 2009 Star TRek and thought Into Darkness was good, but it was no Wrath of Khan. Cumberbatch's Khan was good, Montalban's was better. I do dislike the more human-than-Vulcan Spock of this new series ... but I don't expect them to stick 100% to canon. Things change and I like what has transpired so far. Can't wait for Abrahms to get his hands on Star Wars, a series he has admitted he is a much bigger fan of.
Before we get too nostalgic for the good old days of Star Trek, let's remember Star Trek IV. It turned into a "Save the Whales" psa with a few cheap jokes thrown in to try and make it interesting. If we really want to go back to that, we could have one where the polar ice caps melted and a race of cosmic polar bears comes back to destroy the earth. Now we have to fly into a black hole to enter a time-travel wormhole and go back to the year 2000 where hijinks ensue.
And yes, Spock is a weak point of the new movies.
And yes, Spock is a weak point of the new movies.
I loved The Voyage Home as a kid ... then I grew up.
Best Trek movies - Wrath of Khan, Undiscovered Country, First Contact, Insurrection, Trek 2009 and Into Darkness.
Worst - Search for Spock, Final Frontier and Nemesis.
Meh- Motion Picture, Voyage Home, Generations.
Best Trek movies - Wrath of Khan, Undiscovered Country, First Contact, Insurrection, Trek 2009 and Into Darkness.
Worst - Search for Spock, Final Frontier and Nemesis.
Meh- Motion Picture, Voyage Home, Generations.
Having grown up watching Star trek since it's beginning, I have this to offer.
Nothing stays the same. Spock is now an emotional basket case, Kirk refuses to follow the rules and is a punk. Uhura is hot and we really should get to see her naked. Scotty is amusing, I like the new Sulu and Chekhov is ok. Khan was ok, but he is no Ricardo. The flip flop of Kirk saving the ship was totally lame and Spock screaming Khan was a complete eye sore. The special affects were cool and it is definitely a better movie than the save the whales ST. All in all I enjoyed most of it and took it for what it was, summer blockbuster designed to entertain.
Nothing stays the same. Spock is now an emotional basket case, Kirk refuses to follow the rules and is a punk. Uhura is hot and we really should get to see her naked. Scotty is amusing, I like the new Sulu and Chekhov is ok. Khan was ok, but he is no Ricardo. The flip flop of Kirk saving the ship was totally lame and Spock screaming Khan was a complete eye sore. The special affects were cool and it is definitely a better movie than the save the whales ST. All in all I enjoyed most of it and took it for what it was, summer blockbuster designed to entertain.
I am a huge, nerdy Star Trek fan. So people ask me if I love the new Star Treks.
I do like them, knowing what they are. They are fun and have brought a little sexy into Star Trek. Do I like them in the way I loved all the old Star Trek's? No. I am the full out, huge nerdy, Technobabble, utopian society Star Trek fan. I love how all of the previous Star Treks have followed canon. So I don't like this new one in that kind of vein.
I do like them, knowing what they are. They are fun and have brought a little sexy into Star Trek. Do I like them in the way I loved all the old Star Trek's? No. I am the full out, huge nerdy, Technobabble, utopian society Star Trek fan. I love how all of the previous Star Treks have followed canon. So I don't like this new one in that kind of vein.
It was like nails on a chalkboard hearing SPOCK scream "Khaaann!" I liked Into Darkness, but there were moments where I was torn between "I wish they wouldn't have retreaded the Wrath of Khan" and "Why didn't they stick to The Wrath of Khan more?"
There were rumors of a series called "Titan" with Jonathan Frakes as captain oof the ship, but I haven't heard anything more about it, lately.
Russ
Russ
I wonder if it has anything to do with this.
Probably not.
but coming from someone who was never really into the star trek thing i really did enjoy their movies from older to newer. Just never got into the tv series.
I feel as though I have seen the new ST for the following reason: I very seldom go to the theater any more, but last time I did it was to see The Hobbit. Aside from the criminally insane pricing of concessions, another pet peeve I have is the ENDLESS previews prior to the movie starting. This seems to get worse every time I go...but the new ST preview prior to The Hobbit FINALLY starting, literally went on and on and on and on and on.
No exaggeration, they must have showed 30 mins of the movie...it was not a preview...it was some type of torturous featurette. I really started to think I was in the wrong theater. The duration of the so-called preview was so over the top ridiculous that I will now not watch the movie simply out of spite. And after reading this thread I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t care for the remaining portion I haven’t yet seen anyway.
No exaggeration, they must have showed 30 mins of the movie...it was not a preview...it was some type of torturous featurette. I really started to think I was in the wrong theater. The duration of the so-called preview was so over the top ridiculous that I will now not watch the movie simply out of spite. And after reading this thread I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t care for the remaining portion I haven’t yet seen anyway.
- Status