Amph JJ Abrams' Star Trek Into Darkness

Discussion in 'Community' started by Ulkesh2, Sep 8, 2010.

  1. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    Make Trek big enough to appeal to everyone or small enough so that the fans can own it and it can make it profitable at a lower box office level.

    Star Wars has a bigger audience than Trek, but at this point it's not really much more respected. Abrams has proven that he lacks the talent to make a big box office hit out of a weakened franchise. Letting him direct Star Wars is a horrible mistake, unless the point is to kill off Star Wars so that we can get more great original stories that show us something we've never seen before. Maybe that's Abrams' secret agenda - assassinating worn out franchises to force Hollywood into doing something new. I can get behind that.
    Coruscant likes this.
  2. Darth_Invidious Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jun 21, 1999
    star 5

    That's curious, I though Lucas had already done a pretty good job himself in regards to SW with the PT. :p
  3. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    Yes, but he was unable to finish the job and so sold the brand off to an organization that could kill it properly.
    harpuah likes this.
  4. ShaneP Ex-Mod Officio

    Member Since:
    Mar 26, 2001
    star 6
    I tend to like most Trek, even the bad stuff. I just like stuff set in space. I still give STID a B grade overall, despite the story going off the rails for me post-Khan reveal. And aping of the sacrifice at the end by cleverly flipping it....yeah guys but you missed the point. Kirk would aways do that. Spock would not. It worked so effectively in TWOK because it was Spock doing it, not Kirk. Spock had grown as a character. It was a completion of an arc begun way back on the OS.

    Still fun ride though. But Khan and TWOK was a crutch for the writers.
    Jedi Merkurian likes this.
  5. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    But I don't think audiences are staying away because the writing is lazy. Audiences are staying away because "Star Trek" is in the title..
  6. Darth_Invidious Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jun 21, 1999
    star 5

    The Evil Disney Empire won't kill it properly, unfortunately. I fear that in their hands it'll suffer a fate worse than death or any of the horrors the worst sadist can conjure. [face_worried]
  7. The2ndQuest Tri-Mod With a Mouth

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 10
    I disagree that in TWOK, Spock "wouldn't do that". He was the one with the "needs of the many" mantra. Kirk was the one who would rather save a friend and risk others in the process.
    Juliet316 likes this.
  8. Juliet316 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 27, 2005
    star 7
    Well Nemesis was absolute crap as opposed to a head scratching plot hole here and there that the audience could swallow or get around.
  9. I Are The Internets Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 20, 2012
    star 7
    Nemesis was crap because it was a bunch of bloated old farts running around a ship with an exasperated Patrick Stewart trying to understand why he wasn't the A-list star he deserved to be. Also, Tom Hardy was BORING. Tom Hardy is almost never boring. Takes a lot to **** that up, but they did.
  10. Darth Guy Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 16, 2002
    star 10
    Nemesis was indeed crap. It superficially and stupidly ripped of WoK because that's the only Trek story ever. It was padded by nonsensical, boring chase and action sequences. It imposed arbitrary limits on the technology that hadn't been there before. The captain had the attitude of "Maaaan, **** the Prime Directive. This **** is COOL!" It introduced a boring villain who had no history with the main characters and was forced into confrontation with them more by plot contrivance than any real personal conflict. It ignored basic elements like the size of the ****ing ship (Deck 29 on a 24-deck ship) because... COOL. Punching things seemed to be the conflict solution of choice. It was helmed by a director who appeared to have barely-concealed contempt for the source material. Oh, and worst of all, the cast was old!

    But hey, at least it introduced seatbelts.
    Last edited by Darth Guy, May 30, 2013
  11. The2ndQuest Tri-Mod With a Mouth

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 10
    Wasn't the extra decks pat of the Enterprise-E refit, along with the changes to the nacelles?
  12. Emperor_Billy_Bob Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 9, 2000
    star 7
    I am totally of the opposite mind. These new Star Wars movies are being marketed by Disney, and written by the toy story 3 guy. I doubt Abrams has all THAT much influence, but even if he did...I think what he has done to ST fits SW better anyway.

    Mark my words, after the Prequels, the world is set for a "Star Wars is back!" narrative. These new movies will get positive reception, I would bet a kidney.
    Merlin_Ambrosius69 likes this.
  13. Darth Guy Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 16, 2002
    star 10
    I know the model had slight changes, but 5 extra decks? No.
  14. I Are The Internets Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 20, 2012
    star 7
    Sweet, I could use another kidney.
  15. DantheJedi Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 23, 2009
    star 5
    I thought it was to cover up the "There are 23 decks-They've overruned decks 26 thru 13" error of First Contact, but that's just me.
  16. The2ndQuest Tri-Mod With a Mouth

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 10
    Maybe Deck 29 is, like, a little room on the bottom ;)
  17. Emperor_Billy_Bob Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 9, 2000
    star 7


    Hey, I liked evil Romulan Picard
  18. Emperor_Billy_Bob Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 9, 2000
    star 7
    There were no good TNG movies because the series was not filmic.
  19. Darth Guy Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 16, 2002
    star 10
    First Contact has flaws (as everything does), but it was good. At the very least, it maintains the basic Star Trek theme of "humans are capable of being better" which the subsequent TNG films and the Abrams reboot largely eschew.
    Souderwan likes this.
  20. I Are The Internets Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 20, 2012
    star 7
    Maybe Deck 29 is like the Room of Requirement from Harry Potter, and you can only access it if you need something.
  21. Emperor_Billy_Bob Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 9, 2000
    star 7
    What I remember most from First Contact is Picard double fisting phaser rifles, at which point my eyes were about to roll out of my head and through the wall.
  22. Juliet316 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 27, 2005
    star 7
    So basically Star Trek into Darkness but with the TNG cast? ;)

    Have you even watched First Contact?

    Edit: Question ninja'd by @Darth Guy
    Last edited by Juliet316, May 30, 2013
  23. Darth Guy Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 16, 2002
    star 10
    I have no idea what you're talking about. [face_whistling]
    Juliet316 likes this.
  24. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    Is this one of those embarrassingly stupid arguments I've heard so much about?

    There were no good TNG movies because Kirk don't die, just like Batman don't quit.
    Last edited by Arawn_Fenn, May 30, 2013
  25. Coruscant Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2004
    star 6
    Saw it again, in IMAX.

    It's a very entertaining film. I definitely have to give it that. All in all, I'd rate this Star Trek a solid 2.5 out of 4 stars.

    The main problem with Into Darkness, however, is that it is not convincingly "Star Trek." What is "Star Trek"? Beyond the starships, the Starfleet uniforms, the phasers, the Klingons, the pointed Vulcan ears, the core cast of characters, and all those innately Star Trek things, there's just a massively important ingredient missing from this chapter that was present in the best of "old Trek." The movie is thematically deaf to what old Trek was all about. I think Guy said it well, "humans are capable of being better," (is that a quote from Roddenberry or someone else involved in Star Trek?). Without this ingredient, all the other classic details of Star Trek are like putting lipstick on a pig.

    Sure, the film had the commentary on drone strikes, and there were a few other weak, rather shoehorned manifestations of that unique Star Trek theme, but Into Darkness is missing an authentic feel that would otherwise separate it from being just another action-adventure revenge story in space, and actual "Star Trek." I guess I just feel like Orci, Lindelof, Abrams, all the guys involved in the making of new Trek, have completely missed out on reintroducing the number one most important thing Star Trek had to offer the world. It's like they are inside the cockpit of the space shuttle Enterprise, but instead of realizing it's meant to fly around in space, they're yee-hawing around the Earth's lower atmosphere, instead.