Star Trek Into Darkness, in theaters May 17, 2013

[Dynaman]

Friend at work saw it and loved it. I'll be seeing it Sunday (hate crowds) and will most likely love it too.

[the white drew carey]

Yes.. that's good design logic.. let's put a giant gaping hole right through the center of our main structure.

By that same logic, then the "Hey, let's connect the two important sections of our ship by a slim, little neck!" should be your next complaint.

[Knight26]

Actually the design logic that Matt Jeffries used was sound to a point. He realized that the engines, and power source would be dangerous so seperated them from the crew space as much as possible. In that way the original Enterprise configuration makes sense from a safety standpoint, true militarily it does not, and I think that is biggest gripe about the vengence is that it is suppossed to be a war ship and has parts that are definitely not warshiplike. Whereas the enterprise as an exploration ship primarily doesn't have to have the same level of reinforcement.

[Chronocidal]

Well, they've always been held together by technobabble to begin with, so the neck and pylons thing doesn't usually bug me (except when building the models.. I still haven't managed to build a 1701 original or refit that didn't have at least one nacelle snap off at some point ).

In this case, it's more that the cutouts just look stupid, along with most of the ship really. I mean.. what actual purpose would something like that serve? Letting you make hand signals across to the opposite side of the saucer?

[the white drew carey]

I'm not as critical of the cutouts. They're just there to look cool, but aren't as nonsensical as other things we've seen in Trek. I mean, look at the Oberth class. How the heck did crewmembers get from the primary to the secondary hull. That is much more "WTF?!?" design than this.

[peter]

Yeah, that was a stupid ship design...maybe they beamed, haha!

[Knight26]

I just saw the movie, what a steaming pile of crap. I am not a huge trek fan, and while some bits were nice homages, I saw enough changes to enrage the typical trekkie to no end. Even trying to watch it as dumb sci-fi movie ticked me off as the blatant disregard of any kind of physics, especially during the falling scene, with the gravity field changing directions constantly had me wanting to call for my money back. Combine that with numerous plot holes, deus ex's, and the absolute worst starship interior designs I have ever seen and I say save your money.

[peter]

Hey, so what were you saying about the RAM launchers fromt he klingon ship? I tried to google up some images, but didn't have much luck. Do you have one handy by any chance? I'm kind of curious how lazy the special effects guys were on this.

[Knight26]

From having just seen the movie, very lazy, the took your basic ram launcher, recolored it and tacked on a couple bits, very obvious in the scene where it slides one right in front of the camera. Here is a RAM launcher for reference:

And this is a SEARAM launcher which is on the toy.

[Kanedas Bike]

Saw it and enjoyed it. I don't remember who it was, Mr. March, I think, that said if you enjoyed Star Trek and Super 8 then you'd enjoy Into Darkness. And I did.

Some points kind of off-putting or dumb? Sure. But entirely forgivable given the overall body of work and perspective that this is Star Trek meant to bring in a new fan base while trying to throw nods to (not piss them off, but to pay homage) the crotchety old-timers and long time fans.

Hope to see it again, hopefully in 3D.

-b.

[Mommar]

Why is everybody who is a fan of the original series crotchety and/or old? I'm 32, I'm neither of those things.

[Kanedas Bike]

Why is everybody who is a fan of the original series crotchety and/or old? I'm 32, I'm neither of those things.

Because of replies like that. Jk

I'm a fan of TOS and older than you, but whenever I see unrelenting criticism of the new Trek movies it's always followed with how what came before was better or how the new movies somehow don't live up to the spirit of them (Roddenberry's utopian future, more science than fiction, etc., etc.). Just smacks of being "cranky" because someone new came along and didn't follow the loooooonnnggg established patter of whats come before from TOS to the various iterations of The Next Generation.

-b.

[Knight26]

I have no problem with breathing new life into the franchise or rebooting it, what I have issue with is bad writing, numerous plot holes, outright willfully disregarding physics, real or franchise established, and horrid, horrid set design. The engineering hull's interior was even worse in this movie then the last, and the only good thing about it was the fusion chamber they filmed on to show the warp core, though the interior of it must have tardis tech and makes no sense at all given what else is shown.

[Kanedas Bike]

I have no problem with breathing new life into the franchise or rebooting it, what I have issue with is bad writing, numerous plot holes, outright willfully disregarding physics, real or franchise established, and horrid, horrid set design. The engineering hull's interior was even worse in this movie then the last, and the only good thing about it was the fusion chamber they filmed on to show the warp core, though the interior of it must have tardis tech and makes no sense at all given what else is shown.

As long as you can accept that one or more of those things existed in Trek before Abrams and you are, or equally critical of old-Trek then "hate on". And let me reiterate that I have always been a fan of Star Trek.

If a movie isn't your cup of tea then cool, but what I don't agree with is the negativity against something new because its not the same as what came before.

-b.

AND I think the new Enterprise is gorgeous. I would love for Diamond Select, or better yet Aoshima, produce a scale replica in toy form.

-b.

[mecha2241]

As long as you can accept that one or more of those things existed in Trek before Abrams and you are, or equally critical of old-Trek then "hate on". And let me reiterate that I have always been a fan of Star Trek.

If a movie isn't your cup of tea then cool, but what I don't agree with is the negativity against something new because its not the same as what came before.

-b.AND I think the new Enterprise is gorgeous. I would love for Diamond Select, or better yet Aoshima, produce a scale replica in toy form.

-b.

You are not alone.

[Chronocidal]

Yeah, it's not so much a "Get off of my lawn!" thing as it is a "Stop ripping out my lawn to replace it with astro turf!" moment.

At a very basic level, it actually reminds me of what happened with the game HAWX. You try to expand on a genre, and make tweaks to make it more appealing to a larger audience.

But that usually winds up causing two things:

1. You piss off the fans who already appreciated the genre for what it was by dumbing it down for the masses.

2. You do nothing impressive enough to actually draw more people in.

I cannot say that Trek hasn't suffered from plot holes and such before (and the old odds/evens rule that Nemesis pretty much blew to smithereens with it's amazing sucktasticalness), but the whole ending of this movie is a complete insult to the original that it's paying homage to. It's like playing the national anthem entirely with flatulence. It has none of the meaning, none of the emotion, none of the value, and none of the payoff of the original. All the elements are there, but they mean nothing, because the entire resolution of the movie revolves around the stupidest deus ex machina I've ever heard of.

Trek always relied on technobabble, but this can't even count as that. It's pure fantasy, and belongs right next to "red matter" on the shelf of "mysterious plot device to solve everything." You may as well just give McCoy a sonic screwdriver and call it a day.

Edited May 17, 2013 by Chronocidal

[Kanedas Bike]

You are not alone.

: )

-b.

[anime52k8]

Yeah, it's not so much a "Get off of my lawn!" thing as it is a "Stop ripping out my lawn to replace it with astro turf!" moment.

because clearly you are the sole owner and caretaker of Star trek, and only you have any right to make decisions about it.

[Kanedas Bike]

On the subject of emotional weight, the part of the movie people are getting hung up on isn't even the real "heart of the film".

There were a few moments that provided heart, or soul, to the movie;

In the beginning between Kirk and another character (can't do spoiler tags on iPad, so I can elaborate), which provide Kirk's motivation throughout the entire movie. I honestly thought that relationship was first and foremost, and not Kirk and Spock in these Trek films considering how Kirk's father died.

Interactions between Uhura and Spock.

Even interaction between Kirk and the whole crew of the Enterprise.

Take the movie for what it is, let it stand or fall on its on merits and not how you think it compared in one way or the other to the older Trek films. IMO if old school Trekkies did that they may actually enjoy the new stuff.

But this film had heart, just not in the places where people want to look in their efforts to compare this vs that.

-b.

whoops, quick edit on that last sentence

Edited May 18, 2013 by Kanedas Bike

[myk]

Yeah, it's not so much a "Get off of my lawn!" thing as it is a "Stop ripping out my lawn to replace it with astro turf!" moment.

At a very basic level, it actually reminds me of what happened with the game HAWX. You try to expand on a genre, and make tweaks to make it more appealing to a larger audience.

But that usually winds up causing two things:

1. You piss off the fans who already appreciated the genre for what it was by dumbing it down for the masses.

2. You do nothing impressive enough to actually draw more people in.

I cannot say that Trek hasn't suffered from plot holes and such before (and the old odds/evens rule that Nemesis pretty much blew to smithereens with it's amazing sucktasticalness), but the whole ending of this movie is a complete insult to the original that it's paying homage to. It's like playing the national anthem entirely with flatulence. It has none of the meaning, none of the emotion, none of the value, and none of the payoff of the original. All the elements are there, but they mean nothing, because the entire resolution of the movie revolves around the stupidest deus ex machina I've ever heard of.

Trek always relied on technobabble, but this can't even count as that. It's pure fantasy, and belongs right next to "red matter" on the shelf of "mysterious plot device to solve everything." You may as well just give McCoy a sonic screwdriver and call it a day.

Excellent point, and it is my one glaring criticism of the movie; I was in love with it and enjoying it up to that point. I've seen WOK more times than I can remember, but "that scene" is one of the most poignant and moving scenes in my limited memory and opinion of films, and IMO they royally blew it. I would even wager that if I had never seen WOK I would have regarded Into Darkness' handling of "that scene" as sloppy, incohesive, almost laughable, especially when you consider the 'deus ex side of it.

Another point is that we haven't had a chance to "grow" and explore those "strange new worlds" with Abram's crew because all we've seen of them is these two movies; nothing they do will match the connection and meaning of TOS and even TNG has with long time fans, as we've been enjoying their stories for YEARS.

Again, TOS/Roddenberry die-hards will be grossly disappointed with this movie if they don't check their expectations at the door. This version of Star Trek is more like Star Trek: The Wrath of Glee than it is a proper homage to 'Trek of old but........that's how it was designed to be, and we need to either take it or leave it...

[Knight26]

I was willing to let a lot of issues with the movie go until the end as well, that is where they really lost me, probably around the start of the "falling" scene, where even my 8 yr old called BS on what was happening on screen.

[myk]

I was willing to let a lot of issues with the movie go until the end as well, that is where they really lost me, probably around the start of the "falling" scene, where even my 8 yr old called BS on what was happening on screen.

Agreed. Guess I'll just build me another Galaxy Class model for nostalgia's sake...

[raptormesh]

Fair enough, but as someone brought up on TNG/DS9/VOY I found it incredibly fun and will watch again. I contend with the idea that it doesn't have emotional depth though.

[myk]

Fair enough, but as someone brought up on TNG/DS9/VOY I found it incredibly fun and will watch again. I contend with the idea that it doesn't have emotional depth though.

Agreed here as well. I've already seen it three times and will probably see it a fourth and last time in IMAX; I'm sure it's a gorgeous film in that format. In my fondest of dreams though, I would love to have Pine, Quintos and the rest of them on a 5 (or 3) year voyage/t.v. series so I could have the chance to bond with them as I did with Shatner, Stewart and all of their people. Don't know if 5 years of lens flare might ultimately blind me, though...

Edited May 18, 2013 by myk

[Chronocidal]

Fair enough, but as someone brought up on TNG/DS9/VOY I found it incredibly fun and will watch again. I contend with the idea that it doesn't have emotional depth though.

Eh, you know, my original thought here was probably too harsh. I do think they're trying to invoke a bunch of emotions about a cast that hasn't been together long enough to even generate those emotions, but oh well.

I admit, I'm going off the spoilers I read, and haven't seen it, so this may not be quite the full case. But that's what it feels like.

Edited May 18, 2013 by Chronocidal

[myk]

To be fair, the relationships can't possibly have the emotional depth of the original. People only saw 3 years of when Kirk and Spock were together, plus the first movie, but I believe in the original timeline, I think they were friends for decades. This version barely met each other one movie ago, and apparently, they're not even serving on the same ship for part of it. They've spent enough time together to maybe have the relationship a couple co-workers have after a year in neighboring cubicles.

Kirk dying to save his crew here and then being resurrected 10 min later by magic is NOTHING compared with TWOK. The characters might be fun, they might get along, but the situation can't compare in the slightest. The entire original was themed on sacrificing your own needs for others'. That doesn't happen here. Kirk just does the job he's called to do, and then magically gets saved. Spock died saving friends. He might not have come back at all, and you left the theater thinking "holy crap." Kirk dies trying to save the production team the trouble of finding a new captain for the next movie, and you leave the theater facepalming.

I admit, I'm going off the spoilers I read, and haven't seen it, so this may not be quite the full case. But that's what it feels like.

Oh wow I hope we didn't ruin it too much for you; go see it before you're totally turned off by the idea of seeing it...

[Chronocidal]

Oh wow I hope we didn't ruin it too much for you; go see it before you're totally turned off by the idea of seeing it...

Don't worry, you didn't ruin anything too much for me. I'm glad it's enjoyable, and people are having fun with it, so I don't begrudge anyone that. I just honestly can't really get into this new timeline version of everything very much to begin with.

Also, there's no theater within easy driving distance where I can really see it at the moment, so it's partly out of being too lazy to drive 3 hours to see it.

[myk]

Lol, I'd argue that NO movie is worth a 3 hour drive...

[Roy Focker]

Why is everybody who is a fan of the original series crotchety and/or old? I'm 32, I'm neither of those things.

I'm old and I loved every minute of it!

I do have one nitpick. A character is demoted in the film yet wardrobe never bothered to remove some of the rank pins off of their costume.

[myk]

I'm old and I loved every minute of it!

I do have one nitpick. A character is demoted in the film yet wardrobe never bothered to remove some of the rank pins off of their costume.

DOH! Someone was paying attention. Well, maybe because rank and flagships seem to change hands on a daily basis, Starfleet figured to just leave it alone, lol...

[Chewie]

I loved the movie.

I never watched ToS and never liked it however I really enjoyed all the original movies.

[ErikElvis]

I thought it was great. I agree that the last 1/4 or so seemed to pace different and be kinda different some how but I think I might go see it again today. I like the new enterprise and I was actually ok with the "other" ship when I thought I wouldnt be.

[Atharun]

As a fun sci fi movie I liked it but as a Trek movie I don't know....The Klingon ship was very odd looking and I honestly kept asking myself why no Andorians were shown. As dumb as that may sound, with all the background aliens I kinda wanted to see a blue person. It did have a very Star Wars feel to it during the chase on Qo'noS...speaking of which they misspelled the Klingon home world as Kronos. Small things like that bothered me.

Edited May 18, 2013 by Atharun

[myk]

I thought it was great. I agree that the last 1/4 or so seemed to pace different and be kinda different some how but I think I might go see it again today. I like the new enterprise and I was actually ok with the "other" ship when I thought I wouldnt be.

Speaking of the other ship...

Didn't anyone notice the flagship of the Federation and some unknown behemoth slugging it out in Earth's orbit? Everytime they showed the Enterprise in orbit preparing for departure there's always a plethora of space docks, shuttlecraft and other starships flitting about; why was surrounding space suddenly so empty? Did I miss something?

[the white drew carey]

Yeah, that was a stupid ship design...maybe they beamed, haha!

That's what I thought.