|
Man it was a great movie. When Khan was shooting down Klingons with the two guns.. So badass.
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 12:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 00:29 |
|
|
Cellophane S posted:I don't think transporting works like that, worst case you could end up as a mess of atomic goo. It worked in Voyage Home...
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 12:26
|
|
|
Veg posted:Man it was a great movie. All the physical fight scenes were ACE.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 12:26
|
|
|
jivjov posted:It worked in Voyage Home... drat, you're right. Well it's not like Star Trek is 100% consistent.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 12:27
|
|
|
thatbastardken posted:I was getting vaguely annoyed about people saying Into Darkness is a rejection of Old Trek, and I think I've figured out why it was bugging me: It's the other way round, a celebration of the influences of the older works, and this can be clearly seen by comparing the villains from the '09 film and ID. I don't think you and the other mentality is necessarily in disagreement.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 14:03
|
|
|
As a long time star trek fan this film was more then i could have hoped for.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 15:18
|
|
|
I really enjoyed it. Once again as in ST2009 the cast are, for me, the absolute standout point. In particular, Benedict Cumberbatch is a delight to watch and Zachary Quinto and Karl Urban both absolutely nail their characters. The only thing that really bugged me was the death and resurrection of Kirk. On the one hand, I liked the reversed nature of the warp core scene and thought the conversation between a dying Kirk and Spock was beautifully done. I didn't even mind the KHAAAAAAAAAN scream. But when Spock dies at the end of WoK it's a true sacrifice - we see his funeral, we see a real sense of loss. Whereas in ID as soon as McCoy injects that tribble with Khan's blood early on it's immediately clear to anyone with half a braincell what's going to happen and it completely and utterly robs any kind of drama out of the scene. But then it's all okay because we can just get distracted by the Spock/Khan fight with giant swingy haymakers just like TOS 
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 15:34
|
|
|
Aztech posted:As a long time star trek fan this film was more then i could have hoped for. Exactly. I've been a fan for most of my 31 years and I thought this was the best TREK thing I'd seen in ages.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 16:26
|
|
|
Sodomy Non Sapiens posted:I really enjoyed it. Once again as in ST2009 the cast are, for me, the absolute standout point. In particular, Benedict Cumberbatch is a delight to watch and Zachary Quinto and Karl Urban both absolutely nail their characters. Yes but on the other hand When Spock dies in Wrath is means that ST III has to happen to get the crew together again..
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 16:37
|
|
|
I've maybe already said this but the physical fisticuffs in the movie felt really awesome in the true sense of the word.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 17:37
|
|
|
Just got back from seeing this and thought it was pretty good all round but there were a few things that i thought were off. The crazy ominous music for Kahn right at the beginning Old Spock's inclusion didn't appear to add anything at all to the plot. In fact, it seemed silly because i thought Old Spock was supposed to be a secret, but there he was blabbing about alternate timelines right in front of everyone on the bridge The whole scene with Spock/Kirk in the engine room at the end was extremely trite and the "Kaaaaahn" scream by Spock ended up just being funny rather than emotional. Being Scottish, Scotty was an awful caricature of the Scotty character reduced to comic relief (probably because of Simon Pegg) rather than being that useful in the film. Hell, they replace him with Chekov for most of the film  Enterprise falling into Earth, presumably means that the entire battle between the ships took place in orbit above Earth, yet there were no interruptions by Starfleet or any of the ships mentioned to be within the solar system at the beginning of the film. Surely there would be some serious questions about this Super secret giant new starfleet ship blowing the poo poo out of the enterprise right above earth?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 19:16
|
|
|
I enjoyed it (and it included my favourite Beastie Boys track!), but like the first one it relied on sheer breathless pace to deter you from going "Hey, wait a minute..." as it played out. Things like the just-resigned Scotty being able to borrow a shuttle and casually cruise into the Federation's equivalent of Area 51 to land inside the Vengeance without anyone noticing or what must have been tens of thousands of civilian deaths at the end being more or less ignored stuck out even with the movie going "No, come on, keep moving, got something else to look at now!" The callbacks to ST2 were a bit laughably overdone as well. I still hope they do a third one, though. Five year mission! 
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 20:54
|
|
|
Kin posted:
Probably but it's a 2 hour movie, how much exposition do you want? Also your spoilered comment about the music is completely baffling to me. Do you agree with Rick Berman that music should never ever call attention to itself? That's what got Ron Jones fired from TNG. Star Trek NEEDS dramatic music.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 23:30
|
|
|
Cellophane S posted:Probably but it's a 2 hour movie, how much exposition do you want? It was a little unsubtle, but they were also, I think, trying to give Cumberbatch a big 'HE IS NOW A MOVIE STAR' entrance, like Wayne in Stagecoach or something.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 23:50
|
|
|
Gaz-L posted:It was a little unsubtle, but they were also, I think, trying to give Cumberbatch a big 'HE IS NOW A MOVIE STAR' entrance, like Wayne in Stagecoach or something. And it was fine. It was cool!
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 23:52
|
|
|
Cellophane S posted:Also your spoilered comment about the music is completely baffling to me. Do you agree with Rick Berman that music should never ever call attention to itself? That's what got Ron Jones fired from TNG. Which pisses me off to no end. Ron Jones is a fantastic TV composer. Berman was the loving worst.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 00:41
|
|
|
Payndz posted:I enjoyed it (and it included my favourite Beastie Boys track!) Please say there's a cardassian intergalactic scene.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 00:43
|
|
|
trashcangammy posted:Please say there's a cardassian intergalactic scene. Shatner never mispronounced intergalactic
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 00:59
|
|
|
All the talk about "where were the other ships", remember the bit where the captains and xo's of all the ships in the sector gathered in the meeting room and got shot?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 01:41
|
|
|
theperminator posted:All the talk about "where were the other ships", remember the bit where the captains and xo's of all the ships in the sector gathered in the meeting room and got shot? Field promotions for everybody!
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 01:51
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Field promotions for everybody! Not so fast Harry Kim
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 01:53
|
|
|
Just got back from seeing it in imaxthreedee. Expectations completely and totally fulfilled. Cumberbatch is going to be in absolutely everything from now on, GO MAKE MORE SHERLOCK. But I'm really not too pleased with how it looked. Saw it at 70mm IMAX theatre, sitting 3 rows down in the middle - a perfect spot. There was crosstalk on static scenes, nearly every panning shot (there are lots) was strobed/ghosted really really terribly, and in many scenes the 3d effect was really badly done - like a popout book; if you've ever had problems with 3d and headaches/motion sickness this movie will not agree with you. But I know these weren't a theatre projection problem because the scenes which were specifically filmed and composed for IMAX, space scenes mostly, were absolutely jawdropping spectacular. Another thing is that the subtitles/location names were still placed in the hard corners of the screen - which in IMAX means having to turn your head or you can't read them (and when you do turn your head the 3d effect fails), which to me is a really dumb oversight. This movie would be best seen in IMAX2d, which unsurprisingly was JJ's initial plan before the studio forced him to post-3d it. twoot fucked around with this message at 02:06 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 01:59
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Field promotions for everybody! That's a good point, actually.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 02:02
|
|
|
This thread just reminded me how much I disliked Quantum Harry Kim. drat you, thread.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 02:57
|
|
|
Gonz posted:This thread just reminded me how much I disliked Quantum Harry Kim. Just Quantum?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 03:03
|
|
|
Were there any criers in any theatres apart from mine? I ask because it's driving me completely insane how almost everyone in my theatre was either in tears or holding back and as far as I can tell this is a phenomenon strictly bound to my own theatre. Hell, even Cumberbatch admitted to being in tears at the premiere along with a number of other stars (I forget who) yet no one has reported on such a thing happening anywhere else in all of the countries where it's premiered or is currently being screened, leading me to believe everyone in my theatre just happened to all be having a really bad day at exactly the same time.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 03:07
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:Just Quantum? Touché, salesman.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 03:17
|
|
|
amoraxkaka posted:Were there any criers in any theatres apart from mine? A few comedy moments got a few laughs. Beyond that, the only noise I heard out of the audience I was in was when Kirk dies and they cut back to a scene of McCoy working at his desk, with the dead tribble beside him. In the two to three seconds before the tribble shuddered back to life at least a dozen people in the audience put it all together in their minds and muttered "Oh gently caress off..." For a moment there I was actually curious as to how it'd play out. The Kirk is dead. This is huge and momentous. How the hell do you go on from that? Declare this movie to be the 12th and final? Re-do "The search for Kirk" as 13? Time travel? Faked death? False Kirk? Holodeck shenanigans? Unreliable narrator? Should they grow some testicles and actually make him be dead and make a 13th movie without Kirk in it? Bring back the Shat? All of those options have flaws, some greater than others. They'd have to come up with something special to earn it. But instead they held true to the TV legacy and went with cheap  .Magic blood that raises the dead and was invented in the 20th century and never duplicated since. Science does not work that way. In those two to three seconds, I realised I didn't particularly want to be in the audience anymore and I don't think I was alone in that. Pity the refund cutoff was about half an hour earlier.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 05:28
|
|
|
Suuure. Nobody actually thought for a second that Kirk would stay dead
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 05:50
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Yes but on the other hand When Spock dies in Wrath is means that ST III has to happen to get the crew together again.. Not really, when ST2 came out it was assumed that Nimoy was exiting the series. He'd made no decision either way.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 06:18
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:Not really, when ST2 came out it was assumed that Nimoy was exiting the series. He'd made no decision either way. Indeed. He even said as much at the Phoenix Comicon I went to in 2011: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osAAwHYxzz0 The camera panning over to Spock's torpedo casket was included in the film after the whole thing had been shot as a last second decision.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 06:25
|
|
|
Very happy to see that there was some stronger writing than Star Trek (2009), and that the franchise is trying to tack back towards the tone of TOS. It'll probably never quite replicate that magic, but that's ok. It's gotta be contemporary instead of just a retro throwback. forever gold posted:That is an alien view to most film goers and even most ardent cinephiles. Ultimately the function of a film is to relate a narrative, and while the film can be exceptionally artful in the technical means it uses to relate a narrative, if it doesn't impress or engage in that regard then it's a failure. And at the end of the day J.J Abrams is no Terrence Malick but an exceptionally pedestrian director who is no more technically impressive than hundreds of other directors in Hollywood, so I'm not sure why this Film Comment type argument is pulled to defend him, of all directors! 
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 06:33
|
|
|
Maarak posted:Very happy to see that there was some stronger writing than Star Trek (2009), and that the franchise is trying to tack back towards the tone of TOS. It'll probably never quite replicate that magic, but that's ok. It's gotta be contemporary instead of just a retro throwback. Shatner's incredible, visible contempt in that montage never ceases to amaze me. That may be the very moment he accepted that he had become a joke.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 07:38
|
|
|
ComposerGuy posted:Which pisses me off to no end. Ron Jones is a fantastic TV composer. Berman was the loving worst. Rick Berman slowly but surely sucked the life out of Star Trek. The music is a good example of that, it just gets more and more generic until in Voyager where it is literally just "there"
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 07:56
|
|
|
Wandle Cax posted:The gunfight with Keri Russell and Cruise, helicopter chase, the bridge scene, the shanghai heist, just off the top of my head. Those are some random action scenes that don't have any distinctive flavor and a hundred other action directors could have created, whereas the Tom Cruise CIA heist scene in the first Mission Impossible became a mini-pop culture phenomenon. In his entire career J.J Abrams has not produced 2:45 minutes as tense and suspenseful as this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOi9hHjmYq4
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 09:31
|
|
|
Cellophane S posted:Probably but it's a 2 hour movie, how much exposition do you want? The timing was out of place and ridiculous. We'd only seen him say "I can help" and we're suddenly given the most villainous sound I've heard in a movie for the last decade. There was no context to it, no buildup and it worked against plot elements that became apparent half way through the film. Why didn't robocop get a evil guy music intro?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 12:00
|
|
|
amoraxkaka posted:Were there any criers in any theatres apart from mine? I had tears running down my face at the Space Area 51 part, but that was mostly mirth at Scotty's absolutely gobsmacked expression, plus the pair next to me furiously whispering "IT'S THE BORG" "no, gently caress off" NO BUT IT'S THE BORG"
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 13:05
|
|
so I could say that I finally figured out what this god damned cube is doing. Get well Lowtax.
|
theperminator posted:All the talk about "where were the other ships", remember the bit where the captains and xo's of all the ships in the sector gathered in the meeting room and got shot? On this: Ships move and communicate in Abrams Star Trek at the speed of plot. That's fine. But what's also clear and consistent in these films is that detection and awareness in space is much smaller than TNG-era Star Trek has us accustomed to. We're used to seeing people being ordered to scan entire sectors of space in seconds, in both Abrams films there's stuff hidden around Jupiter that people can't detect from Earth orbit. Also the entire fight happens in a few minutes and the Enterprise's communications are down. And there's no reason for the other ships to still be around Earth given that Kirk and Co. revealed that Khan is on Kronos. There are plot holes, but I can deal with the idea that nobody's able to react in time.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 13:29
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:On this: Ships move and communicate in Abrams Star Trek at the speed of plot. That's fine. But what's also clear and consistent in these films is that detection and awareness in space is much smaller than TNG-era Star Trek has us accustomed to. We're used to seeing people being ordered to scan entire sectors of space in seconds, in both Abrams films there's stuff hidden around Jupiter that people can't detect from Earth orbit. Also the entire fight happens in a few minutes and the Enterprise's communications are down. And there's no reason for the other ships to still be around Earth given that Kirk and Co. revealed that Khan is on Kronos. There are plot holes, but I can deal with the idea that nobody's able to react in time. That doesn't explain the utter lack of any form of Orbital presence on the Home Planet of Starfleet. There is more than one Admiral, there should have been more ships than the ones mentioned at the beginning of the film (commerse, trade and general transport for one thing outside of additonal Starfleet facilites/ships). It's a massive plot hole created only because Abrams wanted some form of shock factor "OMG Earf blow up good" disaster porn much like 2012 the movie or that latest film about the whitehouse exploding). Kin fucked around with this message at 18:45 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 16:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 00:29 |
|
|
Hello Internet! I just returned from seeing this on IMAX. Now I went into this movie totally blind except for seeing the trailer and thought it was a lazy, generic, piece of crap. Here's how I think the meeting went "So new Trek movie! Need ideas! Anyone?" "Well Wrath of Khan was popular, let's remake that!" "No we tried that with Nemesis and that was a piece of poo poo" "It will be different this time! We have the old crew and this time we can make it so Kirk dies and Spock shouts KHAAAAAAAAAAAN!" They need to stop trying to recreate the golden years and find the balls needed to take the series in it's own direction. I was kinda with the movie when it was a mysterious secret agent guy gone bad; that showed potential. I rapidly got bored when it turned into KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN/Nemesis all over again. When Khan was revealed the movie became predicable and boring 'pew pew pew' fodder.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 18:45
|
|