|
Cingulate posted:Wasn't there a confession? I remember the bomber sent a spacEmail to Admiral Marcus. Correct. He sends a transmission before blowing the place up. Harrison didn't want anything from inside since he WAS the source for a lot of the poo poo going on. He wanted the reaction from said attack.
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 16:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:31 |
|
|
Reminder that the KHAAAAAAN scream is only mocked/spoofed slightly less than the generic NOOOOOOO. A callback to it done completely seriously (like that one poster suggested upthread) would be missing the point. (Much like the new ROTJ Vader scream, which did effectively ruin one of the single best moments of the original Star Wars movies)
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 16:49
|
|
|
api call girl posted:(Much like the new ROTJ Vader scream, which did effectively ruin one of the single best moments of the original Star Wars movies) Haven't heard of this. They added a new scream to ROTJ? Saw Into Darkness last night and enjoyed it for the most part. Wasn't as good of a film as the first one to me but I really liked the guys portrayal of Khan. As a Star Wars/Star Trek fan I feel like yeah maybe this isn't completely true to the Star Trek genre but at least it's not the Star Wars prequels level of bad that almost turned me off of the franchise. nictigre03 fucked around with this message at 17:10 on May 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 17:08
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:The original has a shot of the moon with the scream echoing through space. It is super super silly. It is also awesome and one of my all time favorite movie moments. I think the scream echoing in space, with the moon (and volume of the scream) slowly receding worked really well. It wasn't JUST the scream. I don't think Spock yelling "KHAAAANNN!" works because we just had a very emotional moment with Kirk dying that is supposed to echo the mirror scene in TWOK. The audience is supposed to feel sadness, especially if they saw TWOK. Then Spock yells the comeback line and at least to me, it didn't feel right. The original line was pretty cheesy, and having a cheesy scream after a sad scene ruins the impact of both. If this was done differently - say, showing a clearly distraught Spock leaving Engineering, then increasing angry (losing control of his Vulcan side) as he finds Khan on Earth and orders himself beamed down. He turns, sees a figure running - and yells a battlecry of "KHAAAAAAAAAN!" Cheesy but now it's the start of an action sequence, and there would have been more of a buildup.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 17:09
|
|
|
nictigre03 posted:Haven't heard of this. They added a new scream to ROTJ? Yep, when the Emperor's electrocuting Luke, you know how Vader's just looking back and forth and he doesn't have another line until way later? Yeah. It's like poetry.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 17:11
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:I think the scream echoing in space, with the moon (and volume of the scream) slowly receding worked really well. It wasn't JUST the scream. Agreed. I did think the Kirk dying scene was VERY well done, with Spock just having a mental breakdown. However, it was completely nullified when KHAAAAAN happened and the entire theatre erupted into laughter.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 17:15
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:That doesn't mean it's a silly metric though, the Bechdel test is a genuinely interesting way to consider gender in film. Imagine the test gender flipped, practically every single film features two men talking about a subject that's not a woman. That said, it really wouldn't have hurt to have one women on board that ship, or actually, in that whole movie series whose main purpose is something else than being a sex interest or mother for either Kirk or Spock. For example, a sex interest for McCoy :3
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 17:34
|
|
|
This was a fun movie. I'm glad that it had no pretensions about bullshitting us with the resurrection blood thing. Like, yeah, obviously you can't loving kill off one of the two main characters in film number 2 and have anyone anywhere buy it. So, pretty much no attempt was made to hide from us that they were going to bring Kirk back, and it's like, sure, cool, makes sense. I've seen people go on in disgust about how the presence of a resurrection serum RUINS the UNIVERSE (THE UNIVERSE!!!) and it's just utterly baffling; one of the core premises of Star Trek is that impossibly powerful technology trivializes almost every material problem except in those situations, which happen to be the ones put onscreen, in which some plot device or other forces the technology to stop working. So they can bring people back from the dead now, who gives a poo poo? I'm glad that the Abrams movie are embracing technology as awesome wizard magic rather than quaking in fear of "overpowered" plot devices as though they were balrogs unleashed by digging too deep. I had one major problem with the movie, which was that Khan sort of never graduated beyond physical, mano-a-mano fight scenes. I loved watching his superhuman physicality in action, and I thought the scene in which Kirk tried to physically abused him and just utterly failed was great. That meant that Khan was a villain Kirk couldn't defeat through an action movie in-person confrontation; if you're within arm's reach of that guy, your loss is inevitable, so you have to back off and get back into your ship and outwit him somehow. But, the confrontation between the protagonists and antagonists was only a ship-to-ship maneuvering challenge for like, thirty seconds total - we barely got to see any kind of intellectual or verbal back-and-forth between Khan and the good guys. If I was writing the movie, I'd have had the scene in which Khan crushed the general dude's skull like a grape and took possession of the giant evil Enterprise happen like halfway through the movie, and not blow up the giant evil Enterprise until very near the end. Khan just never seemed to get the chance to stretch his legs and be a large-and-in-charge villain - he was always a vigilante or a fugitive or a prisoner or whatever. Oh, yeah, and as for actual "plot hole" nitpicking I found the sudden appearance of Earth in the final action scene really jarring. They could've done some more work to establish that both ships were hurtling towards earth rather than just sort of hanging out in space somewhere, and I also would've appreciated some sort of quick demonstration of why the two Enterprises were the only two ships in thesky.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:I think the scream echoing in space, with the moon (and volume of the scream) slowly receding worked really well. It wasn't JUST the scream. That it didn't happen this way upsets me immensely.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 17:43
|
|
|
A lot of people seem to ignore that Bones explicitly says that Kirk was never really dead and still had some brain functions left or whatever when they froze him. So it is actually still impossible to just resurrect someone who gets shot in the heart or whatever and the serum matters jackshit for any future tension.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 17:46
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:Oh, yeah, and as for actual "plot hole" nitpicking I found the sudden appearance of Earth in the final action scene really jarring. They could've done some more work to establish that both ships were hurtling towards earth rather than just sort of hanging out in space somewhere, and I also would've appreciated some sort of quick demonstration of why the two Enterprises were the only two ships in the sky. They kinda address this? When they shot out of warp they're right by our Moon and we get a short shot of Earth in the distance. They even say they're about 200k miles or kilometers (cant remember the unit). I just assumed that since poo poo doesn't magically stop (or does it with these ships?) in space they still had a good amount of momentum from abruptly leaving warp. But yeah they could have done a much better job.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 17:46
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:Oh, yeah, and as for actual "plot hole" nitpicking I found the sudden appearance of Earth in the final action scene really jarring. They could've done some more work to establish that both ships were hurtling towards earth rather than just sort of hanging out in space somewhere, and I also would've appreciated some sort of quick demonstration of why the two Enterprises were the only two ships in thesky. Star Trek has never handled the 'Home' fleet well in any incarnation. It's simply never there when it should be.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:They kinda address this? When they shot out of warp they're right by our Moon and we get a short shot of Earth in the distance. They even say they're about 200k miles or kilometers (cant remember the unit). I just assumed that since poo poo doesn't magically stop (or does it with these ships?) in space they still had a good amount of momentum from abruptly leaving warp. Oh, yeah? I totally missed the moon in that shot. I don't remember the actual distance some character or other called out, either, so this could be totally on me.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 17:50
|
|
|
One thing that I did find a bit odd but is a bit spergy admittedly is that Marcus' daughter has a British accent. Just thought it was a bit weird. Maybe her mom raised her though. nictigre03 fucked around with this message at 18:42 on May 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 17:53
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:Oh, yeah? I totally missed the moon in that shot. I don't remember the actual distance some character or other called out, either, so this could be totally on me. It was literally just one shot in the entire sequence if I remember right that establishes where they got off warp and I think it was Kirk that asked someone how far from Earth they currently were. Again, they could have done better to establish the momentum.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 18:00
|
|
|
Simply Simon posted:A lot of people seem to ignore that Bones explicitly says that Kirk was never really dead and still had some brain functions left or whatever when they froze him. The problem isn't finding some super cells that repair radiation damage. We can vaguely imagine nanites doing that right now even, flying around and fixing DNA, that is way more likely than warp drive or humanoid aliens sexually compatible with us or anything else in that whole series. The problem is that they would have to rush hard to put him under or he takes irreparable brain damage. With brains, the problem isn't so much the individual cells being damaged - maybe we can reliably repair damaged neurons and synapses in the future, that's easily believable; the problem is that if you have to repair that, and do it, you fundamentally change the brain. The person IS in the exact patterns in his head right now, and if the patterns are breaking down, the person is getting lost, irrecoverably. You wouldn't resurrect the person, you'd create a new person. You can transplant a liver, but a brain transplant is a person transplant. Of course, the point of the scene is to give Spock some FIRE while he chases after Khan and it worked beautifully. He's out for blood - literally. Mr. Harrison, you've just signed up to become a blood donor for a friend of mine. Awesome. Happy Noodle Boy posted:They kinda address this? When they shot out of warp they're right by our Moon and we get a short shot of Earth in the distance. They even say they're about 200k miles or kilometers (cant remember the unit). I just assumed that since poo poo doesn't magically stop (or does it with these ships?) in space they still had a good amount of momentum from abruptly leaving warp. ACTUALLY, it wouldn't work at all since it breaks the laws of nature, but ... I liked how massive the Enterprise seemed in the cinema. I saw it in 3D, and it definitely had a nice sense of scale (don't know how it compares to 2D). Cingulate fucked around with this message at 18:03 on May 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
Simply Simon posted:A lot of people seem to ignore that Bones explicitly says that Kirk was never really dead and still had some brain functions left or whatever when they froze him. I think Bones did say that Kirk was only mostly dead. Maybe they should have brought Kirk to see Miracle Max? DFu4ever posted:Star Trek has never handled the 'Home' fleet well in any incarnation. It's simply never there when it should be. The Mars Defense Force. 
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 18:06
|
|
|
DFu4ever posted:Star Trek has never handled the 'Home' fleet well in any incarnation. It's simply never there when it should be. You can handwave the Earth fleet away since you have an admiral on the dreadnaught who's probably jamming anything coming out of the Enterprise and who's probably told Starfleet command that Kirk has rebelled against the Federation or something.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 18:16
|
|
|
I really enjoyed it myself. I understand why they included KHAN because even in the reboot universe you knew as a fan the S.S. Botany Bay was floating out there and that had to be handled for fan service because people were practically assuming Star Trek 2 was going to be a remake of Wrath of Khan anyway. Taking care of both the finding of the Botany Bay and the backstory of Khan in the reboot universe allows that to be handled so that you can focus on other/new stories. I didn't like plot holes such as Khan can apparently "transwarp beam" himself from Earth to Kronos with a portable transporter. Then why in the hell does Starfleet not just transwarp beam some commandos after him and kill him instead of some stupid overly elaborate scheme which hopes to incite a war? Even if the admiral doesn't want to for reasons - why doesn't Kirk/Spock/etc. bring it up instead of giving us a shuttle chase on Kronos? I liked the use of Section 31 although I don't know why the Admiral would blab about its existence to Kirk instead of saying "that's classified" or having a scene where he mentions Section 31 in private to Khan/etc. I liked having Carol Marcus be a part of the story. I liked the little details included throughout such as Praxis and other nods to the source material. I wish we'd get a television show featuring the cast from the movies, but it is probably cost-prohibitive?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
This movie solidifies my impression that fans will go through great lengths to poo poo all over things they love in order to seem more intelligent or cooler or whatever. Most of the 'plot holes' people are complaining about are easily explained if you actually watched the movie. The very beginning of the movie we see Kahn use his blood to revive a little girl. If you can't deduce what's going to happen from there, I don't know what to tell you. Nearly every other 'plot hole' is usually just 'this character should have acted like this' which isn't a 'plot hole'. In addition, it's easily explained by the break neck story pacing of the entire movie. Two key things that people seem to conveniently forget while watching this movie: 1. Cumberbatch is a villain who is disorientated and without a plan. He has a vague idea of what's going on, what the score is, but he's really just acting out of pure heart. He's not Lex Luthoring it up over here, he's just a super-intelligent guy who's winging it as best as he can. Also, stop asking why he can't revive the frozen crew when he was working on them, Bones specifically says that the technology to revive them doesn't exist any more. He would have to re-create that technology. 2. Pretty much everything that happens once the U.S.S. Vengeance shows up probably happens extremely close to discourse time. I'd say that an hour in story time passes between the Vengeance's appearance and Spock's capture of Kahn. With this in mind, Admiral Marcus is probably the ONLY one in the entire film who has a clear idea of what he wants to accomplish All-in-all, great film. Not the best, but still amazingly well done, and probably in the top 20% of tightly written sci-fi scripts. Guilty fucked around with this message at 01:09 on May 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 18:50
|
|
|
Guilty posted:Also, stop asking why he can't revive the frozen crew when he was working on them, Bones specifically says that the technology to revive them doesn't exist any more. He would have to re-create that technology. This might have been explained, but how was Khan awoken?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 18:57
|
|
|
EDIT: Misremembered. Never mind.
CloseFriend fucked around with this message at 19:02 on May 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 18:59
|
|
|
along the way posted:This might have been explained, but how was Khan awoken? They awoke him on the Botney Bay. Then removed the cyrotubes from the ship. The ship has the technology but he does not have access to the ship.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 19:01
|
|
|
Saw it late last night and, while I didn't really like the story or how it was constructed, the acting was top notch. Cumberbatch, Quinto, Pegg, Saldana, Pine, Weller, 'errybody. I'd almost see it again for their performances, I just wish the movie stayed as strong near the end as it did in the first half hour or so Edit: the "you should have let me sleep" scene was brutal and amazing Propaganda Hour fucked around with this message at 19:11 on May 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 19:08
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:I had one major problem with the movie, which was that Khan sort of never graduated beyond physical, mano-a-mano fight scenes. I loved watching his superhuman physicality in action, and I thought the scene in which Kirk tried to physically abused him and just utterly failed was great. That meant that Khan was a villain Kirk couldn't defeat through an action movie in-person confrontation; if you're within arm's reach of that guy, your loss is inevitable, so you have to back off and get back into your ship and outwit him somehow. But, the confrontation between the protagonists and antagonists was only a ship-to-ship maneuvering challenge for like, thirty seconds total - we barely got to see any kind of intellectual or verbal back-and-forth between Khan and the good guys. This is pretty much my main beef with it as well. After the Khan reveal, I was expecting a lot more mind games and tactical warfare to happen. They really emphasized the physical part of Khan's superiority but not the mental aspect. TWOK 2 was great because it seemed like Khan was always two steps ahead of the game until Kirk manages to use his own intellect against him. The crew-swap to armed torpedoes as the method to defeat him seemed anticlimactic. Also, Benedict Cumberbatch's monologues just didn't have the same gravitas as Ricardo Montalban. He seemed like he was trying to go for menacing but it didn't really have that effect to me. I keep thinking of that part in TWOK before Kirk does the infamous yell, where it starts off, I'll do far worse than kill you. I've hurt you. And I wish to go on... hurting you. I shall leave you as you left me, as you left her. That gives me loving chills every time, and none of Cumberbatch's dialogue really had the same effect. That said, I enjoyed all the callbacks, got especially teary eyed at the reversal of the Kirk/Spock death scene, even though it was pretty obvious that his death wouldn't last, Spock's battle with his emotions was really well done. hope and vaseline fucked around with this message at 19:29 on May 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
Guilty posted:This movie solidifies my impression that fans will go through great lengths to poo poo all over things they love in order to seem more intelligent or cooler or whatever. Most of the 'plot holes' people are complaining about are easily explained if you actually watched the movie. The very beginning of the movie we see Kahn use his blood to revive a little girl. If you can't deduce what's going to happen from there, I don't know what to tell you. I'm trying to think of a way to put this, but I don't think you're really reading what people are writing. The complaint is the exact opposite of what you're framing it as, almost.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 19:22
|
|
|
Darko posted:I'm trying to think of a way to put this, but I don't think you're really reading what people are writing. The complaint is the exact opposite of what you're framing it as, almost. There are people trying to nitpick in that way in the last couple of pages. The film is bad for different reasons with the plot though (and the best defence so far has literally been 'you expected too much and should lower your standards').
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 19:29
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:That doesn't mean it's a silly metric though, the Bechdel test is a genuinely interesting way to consider gender in film. Imagine the test gender flipped, practically every single film features two men talking about a subject that's not a woman. Exactly - I know that there's many scenarios in which the Bechdel test misses the point/misses the real story. But it's a very interesting rule of thumb, and in some cases - I argue with this film - it can be a useful instrument to elucidate a failure. Points taken though, I know that film fails Bechdel test != misogynistic film
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 19:36
|
|
|
LLJKSiLk posted:I didn't like plot holes such as Khan can apparently "transwarp beam" himself from Earth to Kronos with a portable transporter. Then why in the hell does Starfleet not just transwarp beam some commandos after him and kill him instead of some stupid overly elaborate scheme which hopes to incite a war? Even if the admiral doesn't want to for reasons - why doesn't Kirk/Spock/etc. bring it up instead of giving us a shuttle chase on Kronos? The fate of that last thing does explain why we never saw all the super-tech like the Kelvan warp drive and the mind-swap machine from TOS again, though: Section 31 confiscated them!
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 19:41
|
|
|
Darko posted:I'm trying to think of a way to put this, but I don't think you're really reading what people are writing. The complaint is the exact opposite of what you're framing it as, almost. Because anyone just about who's saw Wrath of Khan for the first time after the 80s knew that Spock wasn't really dead. Does that make his death bad? I get people who are bothered that the homage seemed excessive or silly, even if I disagree, but the idea that it's cheap or whatever because we know it won't stick (or later see that it doesn't stick) is harder for me. Unless these people hated the death scene in Wrath of Khan too (or they saw it in Theaters or whatever). In both cases, the characters think it's real, and their reactions are reactions to a real death. And that's still poignant.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 19:46
|
|
|
There is alot of expected hate for this movie and that is no surprise and I can't really hate on anyone for nitpicking. I mean the essence of Star Trek is in the details. But I really enjoyed it. It had alot of action but if you think of the overall plots they were Star Trek missions Save a native population without disturbing it immensely, defeat you enemy by outsmarting him instead of "pew pew" to death...and the like.. Khan's actor made me think of Ricardo Montabaum even before the reveal. It was really fun, I enjoyed it, I understand the hate, but I will see it again
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
On the subject of whether Khan's magic blood bringing Kirk back from the dead is a plot hole and/or an example of "Supernova destroying the galaxy" level audience intelligence insulting, I think it's important to keep in mind that this is Star Trek. This show is home to the robotic heart, the replicated spinal cord, the pill that grows new kidneys, and the Universal Medical Foreheard Thingy that Fixes Everything. Reviving people after they are technically dead with no ill effects and up to and including completely undamaged brain function even after significant passage of time is a thing that happens in several episodes of the show. It's just a conceit that they bring up given the advanced medical technology they have. Voyager had an episode called Mortal Coil where the entire plot is built around the fact that Neelix dies and is brought back to life a full 18 hours later with "magical" Borg Nanoprobes. It's not directly parallel because that entire episode was about dealing with mortality and death, but it's relevant because it's not THAT Neelix comes back from the dead that is a big deal to The Doctor, its ONLY THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT PASSED that is unusual. It didn't bother me in the slightest in that context. I made the exact same assumption I made in WoK: that Spock/Kirk "dying" wasn't the problem, it was that the damage was too extensive to reverse even if they revived his vital functions, so he was "too dead" to bring back. Khan's blood didn't bring Kirk back, it fixed the radiation damage the same way it fixed the genetic disease the girl had, and it was Federation medical science that brought him back because it had been less than, what, 10 minutes? 15 tops. Heck, modern medicine can bring you back without any ill signs for at least 3 minutes or so.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 20:17
|
|
|
Sanguinia posted:On the subject of whether Khan's magic blood bringing Kirk back from the dead is a plot hole and/or an example of "Supernova destroying the galaxy" level audience intelligence insulting, I think it's important to keep in mind that this is Star Trek. This show is home to the robotic heart, the replicated spinal cord, the pill that grows new kidneys, and the Universal Medical Foreheard Thingy that Fixes Everything. Reviving people after they are technically dead with no ill effects and up to and including completely undamaged brain function even after significant passage of time is a thing that happens in several episodes of the show. It's just a conceit that they bring up given the advanced medical technology they have. Voyager had an episode called Mortal Coil where the entire plot is built around the fact that Neelix dies and is brought back to life a full 18 hours later with "magical" Borg Nanoprobes. It's not directly parallel because that entire episode was about dealing with mortality and death, but it's relevant because it's not THAT Neelix comes back from the dead that is a big deal to The Doctor, its ONLY THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT PASSED that is unusual. To Further this in S1 of TNG an alien took control of Picard's body and beamed himself out into space killing Picard's body...then they just messed with the transporters and made a new Picard without the alien attached. This is nothing new. Don't get me started on Billy Riker
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 20:23
|
|
|
MrTpug posted:This is nothing new. Don't get me started on Billy Riker 
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 20:34
|
|
|
Man, I've watched quite a bit of Trek, but I must've missed whatever this was from. In what circumstance does Riker have fake sideburns?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 20:44
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Man, I've watched quite a bit of Trek, but I must've missed whatever this was from. In what circumstance does Riker have fake sideburns?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 20:46
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Man, I've watched quite a bit of Trek, but I must've missed whatever this was from. In what circumstance does Riker have fake sideburns? That is DS9 and that is not Will Riker that is his duplicate Tom, who was created in a transporter mishap.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 20:46
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Man, I've watched quite a bit of Trek, but I must've missed whatever this was from. In what circumstance does Riker have fake sideburns? When it's evil Riker. Created from a transporter accident when one Riker was materialized on board the ship but the other remained marooned on a world with a unique atmosphere when the beam signal bounced off and went back to the planet. Then that Riker was rescued, pursued Troi, went off on his own, joined the Maquis, stole the Defiant (that gif) and eventually got brought to hard justice.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 20:48
|
|
|
Gatts posted:When it's evil Riker. Created from a transporter accident when one Riker was materialized on board the ship but the other remained marooned on a world with a unique atmosphere when the beam signal bounced off and went back to the planet. He was then most likely killed when the Maquis was wiped out. bobkatt013 fucked around with this message at 20:52 on May 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 20:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:31 |
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:He was then most likly killed when the Maquis was wiped out.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 20:50
|
|