|
|
Post by CRAMBAM on May 17, 2013 12:55:52 GMT -5
Do NOT post in this thread if you have not seen the movie.
This is more than just spoilers...this is everything.
I want to get down my initial reaction.
The movie of course had its share of plotholes, and I will get into some of them a little later, but let me start by saying I think it was arguably the best Star Trek anything since 1991.
The movie opens with Kirk on a planet running from his life while saving that planet from a volcanic eruption that would destroy its primitive civilization.
PLOT QUESTIONS--what were Kirk and McCoy doing there? It may have been explained, but other than to run away and jump off a cliff, why were there in that scene?
Why was the Enterprise underwater and not in space? What did they do that couldn't be done with a shuttle?
Kirk in this movie still is basically the same guy we saw in the last movie. Kind of right, but still out of character.
It was as if the purpose of this movie was to get Kirk to a point where he actually deserved his command. That actually makes sense, since the last movie clearly didn't get us there.
Interesting issue with the Prime Directive in this movie. Kirk made a decision that Kirk Prime definitely would have made. He may not have been as seasoned as his counterpart in the destroyed timeline, but he acted like James Kirk.
What I was a little unclear was Starfleet's interpretation of the Prime Directive. I don't remember Spock objecting to saving the planet, so I'm assuming then that doing so was ok. Spock's prime directive objection was making the ship visible to save his life.
Kirk of course did the right thing, and the Kirk thing to do.
That of course led to a report that caused Pike to give Kirk a dressing down, and he said a lot of things the audience said after the last movie. It was a well written, well delivered scene.
Even the so called betrayal of Spock wasn't bad. Spock may not be perfectly written, but he was better written in this movie than last one.
The tensions between Kirk and Spock really were not a big deal, and unlike last time, it's not like they were enemies or irrational.
Kirk at this point learned to tolerate the differences, and was working to establish a relationship with him. And it seemed Spock wanted the same thing.
I do feel they aren't quite writing Spock right. He is still way too emotional. More on that later.
So now we have the scene where Starfleet meets.
I absolutely loved that Kirk was the first one to deduce what was about to happen. That was a sign of the brilliant instincts Kirk has.
Pike's death--not thrilled, but it's not terrible. Pike Prime arguably had a better fate once he returned to Talus IV, but it's not like they killed one of the main crew. It served its purpose.
At this point, I was wishing George Kirk lived. Imagine that scene done with Kirk's father dying instead of Pike.
PLOTHOLE--why would Admiral Marcus set this up and put himself in danger?
But ok, Robocop gives Kirk his command back, since apparently, there were no more experienced people on EARTH.
I would argue that's ok since Marcus was setting up a war, and would have rather used a green captain as a patsy than a captain he might need.
Scotty--it's no secret one of my biggest complaints about the last movie was that Scotty was not treated right. This movie did an infinitely better job this time around--to the point where I no longer feel Pegg needs to be replaced. Pegg was given better material.
That said, I can't see Scotty resigning his commission over not wanting to sign for a torpedo. Nor can I see Kirk accepting his chief engineer leaving before such an important mission.
That's a big weakness in the characterization, but it set Scotty up for bigger and better things.
Unfortunately, it also set Chekov up as a chief engineer. The logic behind this is ridiculous, given that he is not part of the engineering department, and I would think one of Scotty's underlings would get the job. Ultimately, Abrams couldn't think of anything for Chekov to do, and he got the job because his character is Chekov.
Kirk being convinced to capture Harrison alive was ok, though had he just shot the torpedo, I would have been fine with it. It's not just following orders, it's justice.
Going back to Scotty, I guess had he been on the ship, it would have been fixed faster, but they really should try to stop giving Chekov all the Scotty jobs.
The Spock/Uhura romance is still as horrible as ever, but at least it took a lesser role this go around.
So now we see Harrison is a superhuman, and obviously the big reveal that he is Khan is happening. I was really disappointed here, because as I've said many times, it was so unoriginal to use Khan. He's NOT the Joker, and they told two very good stories.
Star Trek is to go boldly where no one has gone before, and here it's just going backwards and saying that you are devoid of better ideas.
So no, I'm not happy they used Khan.
Yet this is why Abrams destroyed the prime universe.
It also makes no sense that Starfleet would simply trust this guy, and work with him like that, but that's a plothole.
BUT, having said that, Harrison was very good. Khan was a better villain than Nero by far. I do think that they went a little overboard with the superhuman thing. Khan is genetically superior. Stronger, smarter, and all that. But he's not a Kryptonian.
Kirk did beat him in a fair fight in Space Seed. Nero wouldn't make him stronger.
Could he take out the Klingons like that? Yes. Klingons are stronger, but not Vulcan level stronger.
Didn't seem too Star Trekkie to murder those Klingons--they did nothing wrong. But it was a kill or be killed moment.
Alice Eve was a nice nod to Trek fandom. That said, her main purpose was to be shown in a bikini. I didn't mind that, but anyone could have been the admiral's daughter.
They should have gone with an American accent.
As the movie moved on, they clearly did a lot of nods to Trek history. That's both good and bad, but more good. Bad because it shows a lack of originality, but GOOD, because it shows that they are catering to the big time fandom. I enjoyed almost every nod they made.
Scotty being on the Vengeance was very predictable. I guess if he's going to inexplicably be off the ship, that's a good way to get him back and save the day.
The interactions between Spock and Khan were well done.
The cameo of Spock Prime was outstanding. Funny part was that never having seen the movie, I had Nimoy's dialogue in my head before he said it. When Spock asked Spock Prime if he beat Khan, my own head said, "yes, but at great personal cost." I guess that's a good sign they wrote Spock Prime in character if I can respond for him and the writers give him those lines.
Kind of a freaky moment for me.
Spock Prime's advice to Spock was obviously helpful, and it was pretty good writing that Spock was able to outsmart Khan by acting the way Kirk would act.
So it seems we are at a point where Khan was beaten, and the Enterprise needed saving. The only way to save the ship, which somehow moved 200000 kilometers and was in Earth's orbit, was to go into a room filled with radiation, in a no win scenario.
Sound familiar? Was it original? Of course not.
Was it a ripoff?
I wouldn't say that. To me, it was a CLEAR homage more than a rip off. It was intentional. The dialogue was almost the same. Kirk did what Spock did while Spock was busy doing what Kirk would do. Now of course, in TWOK, had he been there, Kirk would have run into that chamber too.
It was very in character for Kirk to do what he did.
The scene between Kirk and Spock was also a reverse copy of TWOK, yet the one thing I will say here is it didn't have the same feeling. Pine and Quinto were awesome in this movie, but they still can't touch Shatner and Nimoy. Plus, we were far more invested in Kirk and Spock at the time, and I don't know about you, but I had no fear that Kirk would die, even when he died. This wasn't Generations.
Where they went wrong in this scene was it had Kirk and Spock both out of character. Kirk would never say that he was scared of dying. He would have just cared about his crew and would have been at peace with his death knowing that his crew and ship were ok.
And Spock would not be crying like that. He MIGHT get angry. But he wouldn't be crying.
So Kirk "dies," and Spock is pissed. That's fine.
We got Khan, the genetic superhuman, v. Spock, the Vulcan.
Here's where I think they went a little wrong.
Abrams, and I think this holds true for most movies today, just doesn't know how to stage a good fight.
I don't want Spock and Khan rolling around on some hover thingie.
Get them on the ground. Have Khan get the phaser, break it, give Spock an angry look, and it's on.
A bad ass fight where two beings with super strength go at it.
The fight had some great moments. The nerve pinch resistance was actually well done. Khan got in his blows, but I think Spock should have had more offense too.
The worst part was one of my biggest pet peeves in movie fights. I call it the Under Siege ending. The bad guy is fighting our hero, and just as the bad guy is about to win FAIR AND SQUARE, the good guy's girl hits the bad guy from behind and either kills him or enables the good guy to get the upper hand. This was a text book version of that, and it was not needed.
Why not just have Spock finally turn the tide, and as he is beating Khan to a pulp, THAT is when Uhura comes in and stops him, minus the phaser stuns?
You have to admit, Khan's blood being the key to waking the dead is kind of dumb. Wouldn't they basically consistently just use frozen Khan's blood to essentially make people immortal from then on?
So killing Kirk was weak, but the way they saved him was kind of a McGuffin device.
But I guess it was needed for our happy ending.
So overall, I would say this movie wasn't perfect, but it was the best Star Trek since 1991. SIGNIFICANTLY better than the last one. Not as good as the top TOS movies, but way better than the worst TOS movies and kick the shit out of the TNG movies.
On a scale of 1 to 10, where TWOK is a 10, and the last movie was say, a 6, I would rate this movie a 7 1/2 to 8.
Much better work.
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on May 17, 2013 13:51:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by TrekBeatTK on May 18, 2013 17:26:04 GMT -5
I will post a fuller review when I have time and the headspace, but right now I will just say this:
Worst. Star Trek. Movie. Ever.
I would seriously rather watch Insurrection and Enterprise. This movie never really felt like Star Trek to me, and ultimately became parody. Halfway through, I no longer cared about anyone in this universe and wanted them all to just die. Once I heard "My name is Khan" it was all over for me. I was really hoping the rumors weren't true, though I had even braced myself for it. But no amount of preparation could ready me for what ultimately happened. I didn't get any of the Trek optimism from it anywhere, and so much of it was laughably nonsensical.
I never thought I would be one of these guys, but i will not pay money to see a third movie written and directed by these guys. Unless the third movie is to bring back Daniels from Enterprise or the starship Relativity from Voyager to wipe out this entire timeline.
-TK
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2013 18:05:26 GMT -5
The worst part was one of my biggest pet peeves in movie fights. I call it the Under Siege ending. The bad guy is fighting our hero, and just as the bad guy is about to win FAIR AND SQUARE, the good guy's girl hits the bad guy from behind and either kills him or enables the good guy to get the upper hand. This was a text book version of that, and it was not needed. Why not just have Spock finally turn the tide, and as he is beating Khan to a pulp, THAT is when Uhura comes in and stops him, minus the phaser stuns? Funny, I don't remember Steven Seagal needing help from anyone, let alone his girl, when he beat the crap out of Tommy Lee Jones and Everett McGill one on one in Under Siege 1 & 2! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2013 18:31:04 GMT -5
Yet this is why Abrams destroyed the prime universe. While I did enjoy Star Trek Into Darkness earlier this afternoon, the fact Khan is now British who looks absolutely nothing like Ricardo Montalbán finally proves that JJ Abrams stories come from a mirror universe and our original prime timeline is still intact!  |
|
|
|
Post by CRAMBAM on May 19, 2013 8:07:34 GMT -5
At the end of Under Siege, the first one, the villain is shot by Erika Eleniak from behind.
As for the next movie, I'd like to see them on some sort of major quest that we can root for, not fighting a villain, but saving something.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2013 10:29:43 GMT -5
At the end of Under Siege, the first one, the villain is shot by Erika Eleniak from behind. Yeah, but that was only one of their henchmen, Colm Meaney, not the main baddies Tommy Lee Jones and Gary Busey. |
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on May 19, 2013 16:50:13 GMT -5
I'm not sure whether I should laugh or cry with respect to this movie. Perhaps its worst crime is that it has me just as content to not do either. It's left me feeling more apathetic about it than anything.
I don't know if I'll write any kind of extensive review of the film at some point or not, although since last night after seeing it, I don't feel particularly moved to do so. I thought it was a mediocre movie, and given that it was a something of an off-the-beaten path rehash/remake, that also has me wanting to rate it another notch downward.
Anyway, the Drudge Report also has this linked to on its Home Page, which is how I found it. Be warned though if you haven't seen the movie as yet, as this report contains something of a Spoiler when reporting the Box Office info:
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on May 19, 2013 18:59:53 GMT -5
They're obviously relying on statistical modeling to arrive at a projected box office total for the weekend given that Sunday's receipts can't be in as yet, and since there's nothing on television tonight (even though it's rainy and miserable in the East), the movie might do a little better tonight than they're expecting.
Over at Digital Spy:Zap2it has also reported on the film's performance:
|
|
|
|
Post by TrekBeatTK on May 19, 2013 20:42:05 GMT -5
This is the first time I'm actively rooting for a Star Trek movie not to make money. I'm that annoyed with how awful it was.
Though the teaser was illogical and stupid, it got us to a point where the movie was saying "no Kirk, you don't deserve that captain's chair!" which I was so pleased with. It was both in character for Kirk and a way to fix the horrible mistake of how the last movie ended. Then we got references to Section 31 which made me squeal with delight (especially since I had predicted John Harrison would be with Section 31). The attack where Pike died was dramatic and pretty good, and I liked the touch of Spock mind-melding with him. And it led to what was for me the best line in the movie, which was when Spock said he chooses not to feel the emotions specifically because he does care and he never wants to feel that way again. I really liked that, though I hated the scene that set it up. Uhura was written so badly; just an emotional naggy bitch.
But then the whole rest of the movie destroyed all the goodwill I had gotten from that first half hour (which had its fair share of stupid moments as is). The Khan story was pedestrian. He's bad, but he's good, but no he's really bad. I could go on and on with complaints, but I don't think I'm ready for that yet. But what was the deal with the tumbling Enterprise action sequence? They just threw all physics out the window. This isn't Star Wars; you can't just do it because it looks cool. If the gravity is working, then they shouldn't be tumbling, and if it's not then they shouldn't be able to run on walls. It made no sense.
And is it just me or does this Enterprise seem like it has way too much useless empty space? All the rooms are enormous, and there's even corridors with a big empty hole of nothing in the middle. It's the most inefficient design. But then, what should we expect from the guy who rewrote Prometheus and the guys who gave us Transformers 2?
The movie was a mediocre popcorn movie as is, but I agree that making it Khan unnecessarily just made it worse. Spock screaming "Khaaaaan!" was just parody.
-TK
|
|
|
|
Post by CRAMBAM on May 20, 2013 7:43:36 GMT -5
I think this movie may perform less at the box office than last time, but for me, it was a significantly better movie. I totally get the critiques and won't argue that strongly. But I will say I liked this one.
Was it intelligent and thought provoking like TOS at its best? No. It lacked in originality, but it did have good characterization with Kirk, McCoy, and Scotty. I don't like the differences in Spock, but I did like Quinto and they were doing a better job at getting the relationships better.
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on May 20, 2013 16:09:15 GMT -5
Here are a few more interesting articles about STID's lower than expected Box Office showing over the weekend.
Over at Box Office Mojo:'Into Darkness' Boldly Goes Where 2009's 'Trek' Went Beforeby Ray Subers  Weekend Report: Star Trek Into Darkness earned $84.1 million through its first four days, which is almost identical to its 2009 predecessor... > FULL STORY Rotten Tomatoes:Box Office: Star Trek opens softer than expected
|
|
|
|
Post by TrekBeatTK on May 20, 2013 16:42:53 GMT -5
What's funny is the way they are trying to reason out why it's not doing as well.
FACT: there is a section of the fanbase who saw the last movie and resolved not to see this one regardless.
FACT: Trek movies generally make more of their money from the fans than from outsider crossover traffic. A few like First Contact and Voyage Home are exceptions.
FACT: once word of mouth gets out among fans that they did indeed go with Khan, there are more fans who will not go see it. I predict a large drop-off between weekends.
I doubt the release date had very much to do with it.
-TK
|
|
|
|
Post by CRAMBAM on May 20, 2013 18:20:40 GMT -5
The thing is, this was a better movie than in 2009.
If your facts are right, that's a shame.
Even at lower than expected, the movie is doing very well. Should be interesting where it ends up in the rankings. I wonder if it will finish more than the TNG movies combined.
I do agree Khan was a mistake.
The movie would have been almost no different had the villain actually been John Harrison. Khan didn't add to the quality of the film.
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on May 20, 2013 18:47:45 GMT -5
The thing is, this was a better movie than in 2009. No, it wasn't, although that first film certainly had its share of many flaws as well. |
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on May 21, 2013 14:56:07 GMT -5
Over at io9, although I haven't read it yet . . . Star Trek Into Darkness: The Spoiler FAQ After making a mere $84 million at the U.S. box office, Star Trek Into Darkness is considered by some to be a disappointment. Perhaps the problem is that it was a touch confusing. To help our readers better understand it, we've complied and answered these Frequently Asked Questions about the movie. Read… io9.com/star-trek-into-darkness-the-spoiler-faq-508927844
|
|
|
|
Post by TrekBeatTK on May 21, 2013 19:15:25 GMT -5
I read that one yesterday and found it to mirror my thoughts pretty well.
Though it doesn't get into one more issue: why do they refreeze Khan at the end of the movie? Why not just kill them all?
-TK
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on May 21, 2013 23:45:44 GMT -5
Okay, I know I'm late to the party, but I've finally gotten around to putting down some of my thoughts about the movie. Be advised that it does contain Spoilers. Given that there are so many of those here in this folder already from the rest of you, I figured there was no point in holding back.
So here we go . . .I hated the opening scene of this movie and was afraid while sitting there watching it that it was a prelude to a lousy film. It made "Star Trek" look ridiculous and I found it embarrassing. I hoped though that the rest of the movie would improve immediately afterward. In some ways it seemed to at first, but as everything unfolded, leading up to the climax wherein they did a reversal of "The Wrath of Khan", with Kirk sacrificing himself for the good of the many, and Spock being the one on the outside looking in, the movie descended into ridiculous self-parody. I thought it was silly that Pike would give Kirk such a hard time for having saved Spock's life, although he did point out that the mission Kirk chose to undertake by trying to stop the volcano from erupting, rather than his just sitting back as a passive observer, was something he chose to do, and was a breach of protocol in itself. And why was the Enterprise submerged underwater so as to hide their presence from the primitive inhabitants of the planet? At least Scotty indicates that it's totally crazy when he first appears, but that didn't stop the writers from choosing to stick with it anyway. I also found myself wondering after the fact if that was their way of also mocking fans of the original series that don't like the Abrams-Orci-Kurtzman, and now Lindelof, take on Trek. After all, think about what the natives were doing in that last scene where they're shown --drawing a diagram of the Enterprise in the dirt with a stick as the others all looked on and marveled at the design. Harrison shows up offering to help save the life of Mickey's sick daughter early on, but of course, there's a catch. Then there's the destruction of the Archive. Kirk appears to be the only one thinking on his feet, figuring out just before that next attack that blowing up the Archive would result in an emergency meeting at Starfleet HQ, in the very room they're meeting to discuss the terrorist strike in London. We find out later that Admiral Marcus was already acquainted with the villain who is responsible, so how come he doesn't reach the same conclusion as young Kirk about what his enemy would do next? Other observations: * In the big screen features that starred the original cast, Earth settings were a picturesque idyllic vision of a promising utopian future, whereas in this film, our home planet appears more gritty and dreary, and seems to be a place of a more dystopian existence in contrast. * What's the deal with Khan's crew being hidden in torpedoes? Does that really seem like a smart move by a brilliant foe? * It would have been nice for the Botany Bay to have at least been mentioned by name. * How did Khan transform into an Englishman with a pale complexion? (No sarcasm intended in the direction of Benedict Cumberbatch, who performed competently in the film at least). * Nimoy was a master of bringing the audience right to the edge of his refraining from showing emotion, even though we knew of the battles raging inside him wherever this became an issue, but Quinto crying as Spock the way he did because Kirk had sacrificed himself to save the crew? I cringed is all I can say. Not that it wasn't warranted given the circumstances, but it came off so wimpy, and dare I say it, but _gay_ as well. It was too forced and sappy, and even harder to accept given that these two guys haven't particularly liked each other to boot in these first two films. They seemed to have grown to accept each other at best, without particularly liking each other. * Admiral Marcus being so intent on not just destroying the Enterprise, but killing her entire crew as well. Why, so as to cover his tracks? So then every crew member aboard his ship is a part of his black ops team? No one deems it worthy to object to his determination to take out another Starfleet vessel, with all hands aboard? * Khan getting what he wants from Spock, or so he thinks, and then not living up to his end of the bargain, and wanting to destroy the Enterprise as well. Again, what for? Didn't Khan show himself to be the type of guy in the original series who only resorted to force when necessary in order to achieve his goals? He could be brutal, but wasn't there also a sense of honor to the man and how he conducted himself? * Superblood as a means to try and revive Kirk after he already died. Gee, I guess Starfleet has a new tool in its arsenal to save lives. Of course, we'll probably never hear of it again. It's also a little difficult to give them a hard time on this one as a 'cheat' given that we've seen similar last-minute life-saving solutions in the TV series, and with their having resurrected Spock from the dead in the third movie featuring the original cast. However, it still looked so silly here, seemed forced, and came off like a cheat in spite of all that. Also, it wasn't as though it was a life or death imperative to keep Khan alive given that they had seventy-two other supermen sitting in cold storage aboard the ship. The best excuse for keeping Khan breathing was that they might not have wanted to go through the bother of having to wake another of the survivors out of cryo in order to extract a blood sample. All in all I'm giving this movie just two stars out of a possible four. It's one thing to have a lousy opening --a film could stand to potentially recover somewhat from that, but it's another to do a retread of an earlier episode and movie, and recycle dialogue from the second and turn it around in such a way so that it's not only unoriginal, but looks utterly ridiculous in the process, and that unfortunately is what happened here. It ruined the movie. **
|
|
|
|
Post by CRAMBAM on May 22, 2013 6:16:00 GMT -5
I stand by my original review. I feel this was much better than the last one, and it was better than anything we have got since 1991.
But I'm hardly going to be one of those people that blasts those that have a negative reaction. I see the points those are making, and they are valid concerns and critiques.
Orci did answer the "why not use one of the other people's blood" question. Basically, they were pressed for time, and knew what Khan's blood could do. For all they knew, this magic blood was unique to Khan.
Quinto is no Nimoy. But I wonder if that's more the writing than the actor.
I wonder what would happen if they took the script from Space Seed, used this cast, and remade it word for word. I bet even if you used the same sets and effects, you still have an episode of similar quality. The recasting wasn't the problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on May 22, 2013 15:42:15 GMT -5
I stand by my original review. I feel this was much better than the last one, and it was better than anything we have got since 1991. But I'm hardly going to be one of those people that blasts those that have a negative reaction. I see the points those are making, and they are valid concerns and critiques.
Orci did answer the "why not use one of the other people's blood" question. Basically, they were pressed for time, and knew what Khan's blood could do. For all they knew, this magic blood was unique to Khan.
There's no reason to think Khan's blood would have been any different than any of his other genetically engineered comrades, but even if they wanted to try and use that as an excuse, they made no attempt to do so in the movie, so as with the baloney they try and dish our way with regard to their first film, such as why Nero's actions supposedly made sense when it didn't (why single out Spock, who was the one man who tried to help Nero and his people), what they say outside the film is pretty meaningless and is not canon.Quinto is no Nimoy. But I wonder if that's more the writing than the actor. I wonder what would happen if they took the script from Space Seed, used this cast, and remade it word for word. I bet even if you used the same sets and effects, you still have an episode of similar quality. The recasting wasn't the problem.
By the way, I read half of your review last night, and have to get back to it later tonight. I'm leaving the house in a few minutes for an interview at 6:30 and I'm not even sure when I'll be back tonight, but I will finish reading it as soon as I can. It was a very long review though, and I didn't want to read it passed the halfway point last night because I was becoming very fatigued while reading it (and no, it wasn't reading your review that made me tired, just so we're clear --it was simply because it was getting late and I was beat). I will get back to it though |
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on May 23, 2013 1:15:17 GMT -5
>>Khan was a better villain than Nero by far. I do think that they went a little overboard with the superhuman thing. Khan is genetically superior. Stronger, smarter, and all that. But he's not a Kryptonian. Kirk did beat him in a fair fight in Space Seed.<<
I thought there was potential for the fight sequence between Spock and Khan during the climax of the film for that very reason, but Quinto should have dropped some pounds for the role, and I suspect he'll be even heavier by the next film. I don't think he bulked up for this sequel. I think he's just gaining weight because he's now hit the age where it starts happening to a lot of men.>>Didn't seem too Star Trekkie to murder those Klingons--they did nothing wrong. But it was a kill or be killed moment.<< The way that scene played out, I really didn't have much of a problem with it because it was mayhem, and they knew they couldn't have afforded to be discovered by the Klingons to begin with because it was probably a death sentence if they were, and clearly the one Klingon who spoke to Uhura wasn't particularly interested in being receptive to her plea.>>Alice Eve was a nice nod to Trek fandom. That said, her main purpose was to be shown in a bikini. I didn't mind that, but anyone could have been the admiral's daughter. They should have gone with an American accent.<<
It was noticeable of course, but how could you let it bother you much after the way they morphed Khan? I wonder if they even asked her if she could try and speak with an American accent, but given how they altered Khan, they probably figured there was no point in worrying about her British accent. Nice looking gal though --one hell of a bod.>>As the movie moved on, they clearly did a lot of nods to Trek history. That's both good and bad, but more good. Bad because it shows a lack of originality, but GOOD, because it shows that they are catering to the big time fandom. I enjoyed almost every nod they made.<< Here's the thing --I think they just figured they could do Khan 'better', and given their egos, that's exactly what they decided to do. The problem is that they cannibalized the material in such a way as to make it ridiculously corny as well. In fact, they didn't even bother to try and fill in Khan's backstory to any significant degree. I put the pieces together once it had become clear that the 72 torpedoes were actually the other survivors from his ship -- that's how successfully I managed to avoid all Spoilers about it until I wound up in the theater to see it. So it was no surprise to me at all that he was going to reveal his true identity in the brig. One or two people in the theater were a little stunned by it, but I wasn't in the least. I heard a woman in back of me who was taken by surprise by it when he blurted out his actual name though, but the pieces were all there leading up to the big reveal, so the nods to canon were at least accurate, and the script had a very seemingly well-rounded clean-ness to it all the way around. The writing had a polished quality to it, but the recycled dialogue didn't help them and had the opposite effect. I'm also willing to bet that a lot of the problems with the script specifically in this area is likely attributable to Damon Lindelof, which is why I can't stand the guy. He's a menace. He did real damage to "Prometheus", and now he's spread his funk into the Trek universe.>>The cameo of Spock Prime was outstanding. Funny part was that never having seen the movie, I had Nimoy's dialogue in my head before he said it. When Spock asked Spock Prime if he beat Khan, my own head said, "yes, but at great personal cost." I guess that's a good sign they wrote Spock Prime in character if I can respond for him and the writers give him those lines.<< I don't think he said "at great personal cost" though. I believe he said simply, "Yes, but at great cost", not that it matters all that much I suppose. I too was able to anticipate the back and forth there as well by the way --the words came out just as I worded them in my head, but it was a short scene. I didn't have a problem with the cameo. It was cool, but in a way, Nimoy has also done his colleagues from the original episodes and movies a disservice by what he's condoned here. Abrams' two Trek films are largely style and action over substance. Everything is a high octane adrenaline rush, and they won't even definitively differentiate their version of Trek by declaring it a parallel universe outright rather than the prime universe having been undone and in a state of rewritten. Of course though, it's getting harder to ignore the obvious differences between the two given that Khan wasn't a pale Englishman back in the prime universe, so what was the point of their making that kind of a change? Do they not even care? As I said, I don't think this is a poor reflection of Cumberbatch or the performance he turned in; the guy was fine...he did a good job, but what are we to make of the change, that it was a result of British Colonialism in India during the 20th century in this new Trek universe? And just to be clear, I didn't really even have a problem with a Mexican playing a Sikh Indian, since one of Khan's parents may not have been Indian. His lineage was never delved into in any great detail, so for that reason there was absolutely no reason to get bent out of shape over it, but how do you change Khan to a Brit in the new version? Cumberbatch is a fine actor, and I can see why they would have wanted to cast him as the main villain, but they also disregarded the background of the character we know in order to do it.>>The scene between Kirk and Spock was also a reverse copy of TWOK, yet the one thing I will say here is that it didn't have the same feeling. Pine and Quinto were awesome in this movie, but they still can't touch Shatner and Nimoy. Plus, we were far more invested in Kirk and Spock at the time, and I don't know about you, but I had no fear that Kirk would die, even when he died. This wasn't Generations.<< That was also part of the problem with it though, because you knew there was no way he was going to die, so there was absolutely no suspense.>>And Spock would not be crying like that. He MIGHT get angry. But he wouldn't be crying.<< Again, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that this was attributable to Lindelof. It may not have been, but it really wouldn't surprise me in the least were I to find out it originated from him. However, Orci and Kurtzman should have known better, but let's also not forget that these are the same two guys who felt it necessary to make a statement by blowing up Vulcan in the last movie, which has apparently changed Spock in this version of Trek in such a way that he finds it far more difficult to govern his emotions. And I wouldn't be the least bit surprised either if that was their rationale tor leaving it in.
But I'm glad we're at least in agreement that it was ill-conceived on their parts, because clearly, it was.>>Here's where I think they went a little wrong. Abrams, and I think this holds true for most movies today, just doesn't know how to stage a good fight. I don't want Spock and Khan rolling around on some hover thingie. Get them on the ground. Have Khan get the phaser, break it, give Spock an angry look, and it's on.<< Ya know what? You're absolutely right. I couldn't quite put my finger on just why that scene didn't sit all that well with me, but you just nailed it. Yes, what you described would have also been derivative and a variation of the fight between Kirk and Khan in "Space Seed", but if there's going to be nods to the fandom, and clear-cut references which made it obvious what they were doing in this film and where they were drawing from, they might as well have gone all out and done it there in that scene as well. And I do think it would have played better. The insane frenetic action could have still been there, but they could have set the stage to that better than they did, so excellent point.>>You have to admit, Khan's blood being the key to waking the dead is kind of dumb. Wouldn't they basically consistently just use frozen Khan's blood to essentially make people immortal from then on?<< An observation of mine as well, but one that was so obvious that it simply could not have been missed. That they had the temerity to do that despite the apparent implications to the aftermath really bugged me, and yet, those ramifications hadn't stopped them from doing it anyway when they sat there writing the script. Not a good move at all. But as I also said, given some of the 'outs' in the original series that helped saved the major characters, it's hard to put the screws to them on this one, and they knew it, so they did it.
Doesn't make it any less silly though just the same.
And while we don't agree overall about the quality of this film, at least we're thinking for ourselves.
I still think you're wrong though. <g> |
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on May 23, 2013 1:28:03 GMT -5
The movie was a mediocre popcorn movie as is, but I agree that making it Khan unnecessarily just made it worse. Spock screaming "Khaaaaan!" was just parody. -TK
This movie would have been average without it probably, but with it included, it drops to even below that level. |
|
|
|
Post by Mel on May 23, 2013 1:28:25 GMT -5
I really enjoyed that article.
I wanted ST rebooted with a new crew. But I never envisioned this. It's heartbreaking.
|
|
|
|
Post by CRAMBAM on May 23, 2013 6:30:07 GMT -5
A few things--
First, of course Shatner and Nimoy were originals. They were and still are very good actors that created these roles, grew them, and made them popular.
But if Pine and Quinto are different, it isn't because of THEM. It's because of the writing. So yeah, if you give them a well written TOS script, they would be fine.
I felt the writers tried to make the TOS characters more in line with who they should be. Not perfect, but better.
Regarding the blood and Orci's comments. I think explaining the time factor, which could easily be inferred on screen, is a bit different than Orci making an off screen comment where the exact opposite is inferred on screen.
For example, if Orci says there wasn't enough time to test another augment's magic blood, the movie kind of shows that. Granted, there are arguments that could be made that if Kirk was in stasis, they should have had all the time in the world, but when dealing with a miraculous discovery, there is at least some logic in Orci's statement.
Contrast that with Orci saying the prime universe exists, when that goes against the physics of Star Trek. There, they had a chance to explain it perfectly, chose not to, the movie doesn't back them up, and it's a clear case of having their cake and eating it too. Much different.
Quinto crying was an out of character moment and a poorly written one.
|
|
|
|
Post by CRAMBAM on May 23, 2013 6:42:21 GMT -5
Back to the review discussion...
Yes, Khan has 5 times Kirk's strength, and that's a big deal. But in the Space Seed fight, Khan took Kirk's shots, but Kirk DID hurt him. It took the Khan killing pipe to take Khan down, but it worked. So Kirk punching Khan until he was exhausted should have done something.
Regarding Alice Eve, apparently there may have been a scene shot that said after the Kelvin was destroyed, events changed and she was raised in England instead of San Francisco. But obviously, we need to wait for the blu ray for that.
Maybe Nimoy did say "at great cost," but the point is I heard the line in my head before I heard it on screen. That was cool.
I liked Cumberbatch's performance. But he really shouldn't be taking over a part originated by Montalban. Great actor, but poor choice. It simply could have been avoided by not using Khan.
The Spock/Khan fight could have been even more epic. We do care about Kirk. We do care about Spock. We do care about their friendship. Even Spock Prime, under the right circumstances, could lose it and get pissed off. Nimoy was far more subtle, but even so, when Spock was pissed, you knew.
If they were mirroring scenes anyway, mirroring the Kirk/Khan Space Seed fight with Spock in Kirk's role would have been a very good thing to do. Two beings, with immense strength, going toe to toe. They did so much right in that scene, but it was staged poorly, and could have been much better.
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on May 23, 2013 17:49:00 GMT -5
First, of course Shatner and Nimoy were originals. They were and still are very good actors that created these roles, grew them, and made them popular. But if Pine and Quinto are different, it isn't because of THEM. It's because of the writing. So yeah, if you give them a well written TOS script, they would be fine. I felt the writers tried to make the TOS characters more in line with who they should be. Not perfect, but better.
We can even look to how Shatner and Nimoy handled their original scene in TWoK. Kirk didn't cry as Spock sat down to die, but you knew he was crying inside, and he came damn near as close to it openly without doing it. That also reflects the difference between those two actors and their younger counterparts of today. They knew their characters so well, that that stuff came pretty naturally to them.Regarding the blood and Orci's comments. I think explaining the time factor, which could easily be inferred on screen, is a bit different than Orci making an off screen comment where the exact opposite is inferred on screen. For example, if Orci says there wasn't enough time to test another augment's magic blood, the movie kind of shows that. Granted, there are arguments that could be made that if Kirk was in stasis, they should have had all the time in the world, but when dealing with a miraculous discovery, there is at least some logic in Orci's statement.
And nevertheless, keeping Khan alive when they still had seventy-two more supermen in cryo-stasis doesn't really hold up. They could have had McCoy say something about their knowing what Khan's blood could do, whereas they didn't know that about the other genetically modified members of his crew and would have to do testing, which they didn't have time for, but they didn't do that, so it's a weakness in the script. They could have included a line or two to attest to what Orci is now using as his argument, but they didn't in the film, so he's just dreaming up what sounds like a convenient excuse after the fact to cover his tracks and the tracks of his other two writing colleagues. |
|
|
|
Post by CRAMBAM on May 24, 2013 6:11:42 GMT -5
You can't compare the TWOK scene to the STID scene. I would argue that the Spock death scene was the best acted scene in Star Trek history. Nimoy and Shatner nailed it. They were so great that the scene doesn't lose a thing knowing that Spock is reborn.
One of the more amazing parts of that scene was that the dying Spock stands up in the radiation room, and straightens his uniform.
Agreed, a line by McCoy would have been better in that scene with Khan's magic blood. For all we know, there is a line that was filmed and will be included on the blu ray.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mel on Sept 30, 2013 14:44:44 GMT -5
REPOSTED FROM THE SPOILERS ALLOWED FOLDER
I finally saw STID on DVD, via Netflix. Btw, I saw it the day it came out, whereas WWZ has a huge waiting list. My comments, probably nothing new, in no order.
I liked the music.
Enough of Spock Prime.
The movie was too long.
Gee, thanks for blowing up Section 31.
I am tired of older men calling Kirk, “son.”
I loved that Scotty was on the Dreadnought.
I wish Pike was still alive. I didn’t like Marcus, but his character could have lived, too.
When Cumberbatch gave his name, I thought Kahn, as in Madeline Kahn. If old Spock hadn’t mentioned Noonien's name, maybe Cumberbatch's color wouldn't have mattered, in this Trekverse.
At the memorial and christening of the new Enterprise, Kirk recited what he called the captain’s oath which began, "Space, the final frontier. These are the voyages ..." What? Is that a captain‘s oath??
On the new Enterprise, the crew wonders where they'll go and what they'll find. Part of me thought, finally, now they can explore. Another part thought, Abrams could use this uplifting scene as a way to end the Trek movies, now that he has beamed aboard the real mothership, Star Wars.
|
|
