Star Trek Into Darkness Discussion

Rust, I applaud your reasoning there. That's exactly how I see the rules of temporal physics in Trek...

... and your assessment of the utopian future ideal. What a lot of people miss in Thomas More's work is that it's a satire. While the English homophone eutopia, derived from the Greek εὖ ("good" or "well") and τόπος ("place"), means "good place," the actual word comes from the Greek: οὐ ("not") and τόπος ("place") and means "no place."

New Kre-O set coming:

\

This movie is now out on digital download. Gonna pick up the combo pack on the 10th. A poll at a Trek convention labeled this film as the worst of them all. Which I don't agree with at all.

I do not agree either. And I have been a very diehard Trekkiie since 1971!!!

Ronpur wrote:

I do not agree either.  And I have been a very diehard Trekkiie since 1971!!!

Yeah, back before I'd ever even heard the word "Trekker."
One of my very first memories (from about '71) is watching Journey to Babel with my father.

mattmanw54301 wrote:

This movie is now out on digital download. Gonna pick up the combo pack on the 10th. A poll at a Trek convention labeled this film as the worst of them all. Which I don't agree with at all.

Wow...did none of those voting see STV: The Final Frontier or ANY of the Next Gen films besides First Contact?

Any sins of "Into darkness" are minor next to them....

The Gene Lantern wrote:

mattmanw54301 wrote:

This movie is now out on digital download. Gonna pick up the combo pack on the 10th. A poll at a Trek convention labeled this film as the worst of them all. Which I don't agree with at all.

Wow...did none of those voting see STV: The Final Frontier or ANY of the Next Gen films besides First Contact?

Any sins of "Into darkness" are minor next to them....

Agreed. Minor nitpicks aside, this movie kicked my ass 6 ways to Sunday. Brilliant update of the Khan story. It's a lot more intelligent than it needed to be. The philosophical questions about how militarized Starfleet should be, combined with the character development being a little bit more even, and Kirk having to EARN the captain's chair, made this probably in the top 3 or 4 for me. I would rank it 1. Wrath of Khan, 2. First Contact, 3. Into Darkness, 4: Trek 2009. I didn't think that they could top the 09 movie, but they hit the ground running in a big way. I love it.

I think it got voted down mostly because it's new and it's popular to do so.

The haters and reactionaries that want to go back to the "good ol' days" (What they think it means: DS9 and Star Trek VI. What it actually means: Enterprise and Star Trek: Nemesis) just flat out refuse to give "Abrams Trek" any sort of credit. Heck, I've seen the films blasted simply because the writers worked on "Transformers".

Do I think Into Darkness is one of the franchises' greatest entries? Absolutely not. But saying it's not in my personal top three (VI, IV, and II respectively) means I'm comfortable putting it in my #4 spot without feeling like anything is being slighted.

I'd put Into Darkness at the same level as Star Trek III - a decent, if flawed, production. Amusingly, both movies share the same flaws in their narrative flow (specifically, it feels far too "busy" and tries to do too much with too little time to explore it all properly).

And I definitely think the movie deserves props for the questioning of whether or not Starfleet should be militarized. Khan was window dressing in this film for me - the confrontation between Kirk and Marcus over the "soul" of Starfleet.

Dang it, this is the movie die hards have been yearning for for years. Whether it's a good movie or not is certainly open to debate, but I'm shocked at how many so-called Trek fans outright dismiss the main message of the movie...mainly because to acknowledge it would destroy their whole argument about why the movie sucked in the first place.

Rust wrote:

I'd put Into Darkness at the same level as Star Trek III - a decent, if flawed, production. Amusingly, both movies share the same flaws in their narrative flow (specifically, it feels far too "busy" and tries to do too much with too little time to explore it all properly).

I can go along with that. A 3, but not a 2 or 6.

I just hope they go with an original plot for the next film. Now that they got Khan out of their system, let's do some new stuff.

I'd say the whole Section 31/Militarization of Starfleet was a original plot. Like I said, Khan just felt like window dressing in this film.

After their brief bit on Qo'nos, I'm hoping the next movie gives us Klingons, I know that means we're likely to see a alternate Chang, Kurge, Kang, Koloth, etc, but I *really* want to see more of them. The Klingon segment is probably the most arbitrary and pointless scene in the film (only establishing Harrison as "something more then Human"), but I still got a huge kick out of it.

This is coming from a guy who HATES the Klingons, especially since they took up wearing the 'Stereotypical Warrior' hat in TNG. My all time favorite Klingon character would be Kurge from Star Trek III - mostly because his intentions were in the service of his people. Secure Genesis to ensure the Empire wasn't at a fatal disadvantage against the Federation. I really liked Kurge's motivations and Lloyd's performance really does not get the respect it deserves. Also why Star Trek VI is my favorite film, as it has Klingons acting "out of character" and being cunning and deceitful and they are better for it.

So I'd really like to see how they'd do in a stand alone film of their own. Plus, the ship redesigns have been absolutely gorgeous - so I'm curious to see how the Klingons D7 Cruiser would get updated (Those Atmospheric Birds of Prey - which looked like lumps of nothing in stills - really wowed me in motion).

Besides the name Khan and his abilities, there was not much reused from previous stories....except for the Wrath of Khan reversal at the end. The new look Klingons are very intriguing. I can not wait to see what comes of them. I wish models were still popular with fans. I would love kits of those Klingon aircraft.

I think this movie left off in a perfect way. The crew has matured, and the 5-year mission has begun. It would really be a good time to go back to TV, but I doubt that would happen with this cast.

I do worry what direction the next film will take, and will it be such a long wait as between the last two. With the short attention span of the general public, there is a big danger of loosing the momentum of the popularity of the franchise. 2 years for a sequel to be in the theater. Any longer, and the audience will have moved on.

In the comics, they have directly continued where the movie left off. Spock's pon farr has been dealt with, and the Klingons have found out who it was who set foot on Q'onos. So they are getting ready for war. And Section 31 has approached the Romulans for some unknown reason. So yeah, the monthly comic sets a nice pace for the continuing story.

Bampin. Picked up the DVD tonight, and have watched it straight through at work. I have to say, I love this movie. It gets better every time I watch it. Can't understand the vitriol that is leveled at JJ. "For hate's sake, I spit my last breath at thee....".

And don't say it's because I'm not a 'true' Trekkie. STFU with your elitist bull. I've been watching Trek since before I could talk. I understand if people don't like it, but then just say that. Don't make other people out to be dumb or 'false Trekkies' because their opinion differs. Trek is about differing ideas, and points of view. Look at the IDIC, for crying out loud.

Anyone who hasn't seen this yet, check it out. Don't take mine or anyone else's word for it. Decide for yourself. Then come back here and tell us about it. Respectfully, of course.

Matt, well said. One of my first memories is watching Star Trek with my dad. One my best friends became my friend because we were wearing the same Star Trek shirt on the first day of 2nd grade. He and I disagree on a lot of fronts (liberal/conservative, trekker/trekkie), but as you said, the whole point of Trek is acceptance of those that are not like us.

On a side note, I'm just finishing up the 40th Anniversary book, Crucible McCoy: Provenance of Shadows, and as a North Idaho conservative, have been very pleased by his handling of McCoy in the American South of the 1940's. His utter inability to understand the racism he encounters there is great. I loved his argument that pointing out that Benny is "colored man" has just as little significance as pointing out that another person is a "left handed man." It's a distinction that does not matter.

Apparently some special features are exclusive to certain retailers: http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/082813_1415#.Uh9lglsfYyQ.twitter

my new gf made me watch this film....i couldn't have liked it less (fan of the original series and movies). She asked if i was angry he was doing the new star wars, and i replied no, because i think j.j.'s trek films have been more star wars than trek.

I have to retract some of my sentiments. I watch Into Darkness on blu-ray and... well... I saw a lot more weakness in it on this viewing. To the point where I think I agree more with the people calling this one of the worst films.

Finally saw it for the first time the other day. I really enjoyed it! Cumberbatch was great and it would have been better to see more of him - that'd be my only nitpick, but honestly I still very much enjoyed it.

I still really liked it. The Khan stuff will always rankle, but I'd watch it before Nemesis, Insurrection or Final Frontier. I certainly will never believe its the worst movie.

jonwes wrote:

I still really liked it. The Khan stuff will always rankle, but I'd watch it before Nemesis, Insurrection or Final Frontier. I certainly will never believe its the worst movie.

Agreed 100%. Saw it twice in the theatre and had a great time both times!