|
Auron posted:I don't...but I think I know where you are going with this; I'm pretty positive there is a Vengeance model at the very end. I saw the Phoenix and what I think was the NX-01 Enterprise as well. Yes, you're right, I noticed that too and that is... odd.
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 17:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:16 |
|
|
Apollodorus posted:I finally saw this, and honestly it felt like someone made a movie out of all of the Star Trek parts of my brain, as well as the grad student in Classics parts. The way different elements of established Trek are incorporated, manipulate, and reinterpreted was extremely rewarding for someone who's been a Trek fan since age 5. Just a few things off the top of my head: My only complaint about the film's character action is that I don't really think Kirk and Spock got enough screen time together. Pine and Quinto have really good chemistry but given that the emotional climax of the film is Kirk's death, the rest of the movie had them separated for the most part and dealing with their own struggles. Part of what made Spock's death at the end of WoK so powerful was that the audience had 70 some odd episodes of them acting and growing together. Obviously we're never going to have that in these films, but to me that just means the writers should have had them together as much as possible, instead of separating them.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 17:57
|
|
|
ChronoReverse posted:Maybe not as heavy as our memories of the movies they came from but sufficient for those who don't know. I'm doing my best to sort out my nostalgia and I think I'm doing OK, but it would be disingenuous of me not to mention that I loving love Star Trek II. Like, one of the best films of 80s, no joke. Having said that, I think the failure of the themes at the end of In Darkness doesn't have anything to do with that. I don't think it's much of a stretch to say that if you're trying to express a point about mortality, you lose a lot of gravitas if you don't actually take anything away, permanently.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
Aatrek posted:In addition to a Saturn V rocket and the Apollo capsule, the other spaceships were the pre-NX-01 ringship Enterprise, the Phoenix, the NX-01, the Kelvin, the movie Enterprise, and I think the Vengeance. Yeah I was pleasantly surprised at all the Enterprises that were included there, including both the NX-01 and the XCV 330.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:02
|
|
|
I dunno. Someone mentioned that unless you watched ST2 in the theatres back in the day (I didn't), it's EXACTLY the same thing since you'd know the third movie is called The Search for Spock.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
Well the plot was full of ridiculous holes, they performed all sorts of fan service that just had the effect of annoying me.... but 'John Harrison' is now firmly in my shortlist for 'ultimate movie badass', it helps that he manages to act everyone else off the screen (he really is better at 'everything').
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:06
|
|
ROCKET SCIENCE
|
echoplex posted:Yes, you're right, I noticed that too and that is... odd. Yeah, I noticed it too. Maybe Kirk should have said "Wait, WTF is this, let's take THAT instead!"
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:07
|
|
|
DFu4ever posted:I was almost certain they were going to do that bit and was surprised they didn't. I honestly wasn't too much of a fan of all the references in this movie, but was fully expecting the final line to be "Second star to the right, and straight on til morning." It just felt like it should've been there.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:11
|
|
|
DFu4ever posted:I was almost certain they were going to do that bit and was surprised they didn't. I've seen a few people say they expected or wanted that to happen, but that line makes no sense for this Kirk to say at this point in the series.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:11
|
|
|
Schlitzkrieg Bop posted:I've seen a few people say they expected or wanted that to happen, but that line makes no sense for this Kirk to say at this point in the series. Would've made as much sense as them meeting Harry Mudd before they began the five year mission
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:12
|
|
|
ChronoReverse posted:I dunno. Someone mentioned that unless you watched ST2 in the theatres back in the day (I didn't), it's EXACTLY the same thing since you'd know the third movie is called The Search for Spock. It's not the same because (OH MY GOD I'M DOING IT) Spock's rebirth implied at the end of WoK is in line with the film's main science fiction theme stemming out of the Genesis plot, and his reintroduction to the cycle does nothing to diminish his sacrifice because there's shitloads of pathos both for his family and friends, and eventually himself when it turns out he's really not the same person at all when he comes back to life (but this last point is outside the parameters of the second film, where the focus should remain). The problem in In Darkness is that while Kirk's death is a component of the story that works very well for Spock's arc, in the end it kind of screws up Kirk's.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:17
|
|
|
Kull the Conqueror posted:I'm doing my best to sort out my nostalgia and I think I'm doing OK, but it would be disingenuous of me not to mention that I loving love Star Trek II. Like, one of the best films of 80s, no joke. Having said that, I think the failure of the themes at the end of In Darkness doesn't have anything to do with that. I don't think it's much of a stretch to say that if you're trying to express a point about mortality, you lose a lot of gravitas if you don't actually take anything away, permanently. With that theme in mind, of course Kirk comes back to life. It's the archetypical Christ analog.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:18
|
|
|
Hip-Hoptimus Rhyme posted:I honestly wasn't too much of a fan of all the references in this movie, but was fully expecting the final line to be "Second star to the right, and straight on til morning." It just felt like it should've been there. Someone said this earlier, and now that I think about it I think it could have worked as yet another inversion on expectations, declaring the intent to become lost in Never Neverland, a place of dreams (and weren't they already there? With the focus on dream physics and logic, specifically recalling Inception at one point). Undiscovered Country quoted Peter Pan as a wistful rebellion against aging and closure, it was an escape. Danger fucked around with this message at 18:33 on May 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:19
|
|
|
Of course this movie isn't really being made for old fans anyway, so little nods are appropriate but if someone hasn't seen any Star Trek at all besides the 2009 movie, it's probably a lot less 'annoying'. I have a few friends that are perfectly aware of Star Trek, but never really saw much except perhaps an occasional episode when they were a kid. It's not at all unheard of either. I just found out on Saturday a guy I've been tattooing on and off for the past couple of years (and a member of SA) has never seen any of the Star Wars films. Edit: I mean, I know one of my friends who I went with to the theater last night "got" the models on Admiral Marcus' desk, but I'm sure that a lot of people in the theater didn't.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:20
|
|
|
Hip-Hoptimus Rhyme posted:Would've made as much sense as them meeting Harry Mudd before they began the five year mission Outside of the fact that the quote ties in pretty tightly with the events of Star Trek 6 and the fact that the movie was the end of the line for the original cast, it would feel really out of character for young Kirk in this series to suddenly throw out a literary reference.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:20
|
|
|
Also, I just want to say that I honestly like that Abrams is continuing the theme of "Kirk bangs space babes constantly".
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
Strange Matter posted:I don't think that's what the film was about, though. I think it is more about characters experiencing growth by being pushed beyond their personal psychological blocks. For Kirk, his determination to save his crew is hampered by his belief that there is no such thing as an unwinnable situation; in his death, he finally comes to understand what his father knew onbard the Kelvin, which is that sometimes sacrifice is necessary to save the people you care about, and that Spock's adage "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" is more than just cold logic. Spock, on the other hand, comes to terms and accepts the emotions he experienced when Vulcan was destroyed, and understands the impact of losing a friend in death. I just don't think it works because Kirk's disbelief in the unwinnable situation doesn't have anything to do with a problem he might have with self-preservation; his problem is that he's about saving his crew, his family above all other considerations. His dying instead of anyone else on the ship teaches him nothing (he's constantly putting himself in these precarious positions anyway), and especially moreso since he's brought back to life anyway. Like I said after the post you quoted, I agree with you that Spock's arc was complete.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:27
|
|
|
Schlitzkrieg Bop posted:Outside of the fact that the quote ties in pretty tightly with the events of Star Trek 6 and the fact that the movie was the end of the line for the original cast, it would feel really out of character for young Kirk in this series to suddenly throw out a literary reference. I mean, I can agree with you there, it wouldn't have really made much sense for him to say it, but it just felt like it should've been there. I really love the ending to TUC and wouldn't have minded at all for them to reference it.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:28
|
|
|
Hip-Hoptimus Rhyme posted:I mean, I can agree with you there, it wouldn't have really made much sense for him to say it, but it just felt like it should've been there. I really love the ending to TUC and wouldn't have minded at all for them to reference it. I love the ending too, which I guess is why I didn't want them to reference it. The little references thrown about in the movie don't really distract me much, but I'm really just a casual Star Trek fan so most of them pass over my head to begin with. But Star Trek VI really earned that ending and that line specifically so I'm glad they didn't try to shoehorn in it. If anything, I think Kirk's "Thataway" from TMP would have fit pretty well with the attitude Pine bring to the role.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:36
|
|
|
Kull the Conqueror posted:I just don't think it works because Kirk's disbelief in the unwinnable situation doesn't have anything to do with a problem he might have with self-preservation; his problem is that he's about saving his crew, his family above all other considerations. His dying instead of anyone else on the ship teaches him nothing (he's constantly putting himself in these precarious positions anyway), and especially moreso since he's brought back to life anyway. Like I said after the post you quoted, I agree with you that Spock's arc was complete.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:38
|
|
|
Yeah I get that, but isn't Pike's first film monologue dramatically superceded by the speech he gives Kirk in In Darkness when he says "You can't get by on blind luck forever!" By the end of the film, blind luck is exactly how he gets by with zero negative consequences. But yeah, I think we're pretty much on the same page here.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
The movie was fun, but it just cements in my mind that cannon and continuity are absolute plagues in sci-fi series and almost always get in the way of telling a good story. Tell me a good story and explore an idea, and if it contradicts the "official record" or whatever it shouldn't matter one bit. I hope the next film gives us somethin totally new instead of just rehashing characters/events/species/stories again. That whole Checkhov in WoK/Space Seed continuity error needing an official "cannon" explanation is a new one on me though. It's such a minor thing and completely irrelevant for the story being told.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 19:03
|
|
|
BulletRiddled posted:The movie was fun, but it just cements in my mind that cannon and continuity are absolute plagues in sci-fi series and almost always get in the way of telling a good story. Tell me a good story and explore an idea, and if it contradicts the "official record" or whatever it shouldn't matter one bit. I hope the next film gives us somethin totally new instead of just rehashing characters/events/species/stories again. Koenig jokes that he believes Chekov accidentally made Khan wait an uncomfortable amount of time to use the bathroom. It all happened because Chekov left a floater.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 19:06
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:Koenig jokes that he believes Chekov accidentally made Khan wait an uncomfortable amount of time to use the bathroom. It all happened because Chekov left a floater. You left out the best part, that as Chekhov was leaving the bathroom Khan would have said "I never forget a face..."
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 19:13
|
|
|
BulletRiddled posted:The movie was fun, but it just cements in my mind that cannon and continuity are absolute plagues in sci-fi series and almost always get in the way of telling a good story. Tell me a good story and explore an idea, and if it contradicts the "official record" or whatever it shouldn't matter one bit. I hope the next film gives us somethin totally new instead of just rehashing characters/events/species/stories again. Back when WoK came out, the majority of people who went to Star Trek movies were old school fans, so yeah it got complained about a lot. And back then, it was letters in the mail and conventions since email didn't exist yet haha. Trek fans were really willing to spend a lot of time and money on letters back in the day  Edit: well it really was weird since Chekov wasn't in the episode at all. It would have made more sense if it was Sulu who was aboard the Reliant. GATOS Y VATOS fucked around with this message at 19:21 on May 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 19:16
|
|
|
7thBatallion posted:And V'Ger has already been encountered in this alternate universe. By Nero. Was this mentioned in the comics or something?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 19:18
|
|
|
The movie was pretty, and I like all the actors, but it really, really plays as WoK fan fiction, in the worst ways. I wasn't spoiled for it, but I guessed most of the plot when Spock dropped the whole "needs of the many" line at the beginning, and I was sad that it turned out that way. The whole 'let's give Spock a girlfriend!' from the first movie, plus 'OMG, what if the whole thing was like, in reverse!', Scotty's comedy sidekick, and the bigger, badder starship are all pretty lame. I thought the actors all did the best they could, but I wish they could have made a new character for Cumberbatch, instead of badly recycling an old one. Also, I would watch a movie just about Scotty and Chekov being in Engineering together and dealing with the assholes on the bridge.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 19:23
|
|
|
I guess I'm one of the few old time fans who has no problems with Spock and Uhura having a relationship.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 19:24
|
|
|
GATOS Y VATOS posted:I guess I'm one of the few old time fans who has no problems with Spock and Uhura having a relationship. I just rewatched the series and Uhura was hitting on Spock in the show. Well she did until her entire personality got erased and they had to teach her from the ground up.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 19:26
|
|
|
Gatts posted:The way the top Trek films work is basically I'd probably go: 1. Wrath of Khan 2. Undiscovered Country 3. Into Darkness 4. Whales
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 19:28
|
|
|
GATOS Y VATOS posted:Was this mentioned in the comics or something? Yes, in Star Trek: Nero.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 19:29
|
|
|
Did anyone notice the strong influence of the Moonraker theme in this score? It happened a couple of times, it's like the first 4 notes of the main Moonraker motif. There's also a hint of Star Wars in there - when Scotty goes into the Vengeance hanger, there's definitely Star Wars Sneaky Mystery Music followed by a bit of Moonraker.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 19:36
|
|
|
Tequila Bob posted:Yes, in Star Trek: Nero. Did Nero just obliterate V'Ger or what? I haven't read Star Trek: Nero and I'm curious.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 19:55
|
|
|
Tequila Bob posted:Yes, in Star Trek: Nero. So...like...VGer's just hanging about somewhere and Nero gets all up in its grill?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 19:58
|
|
|
GATOS Y VATOS posted:I guess I'm one of the few old time fans who has no problems with Spock and Uhura having a relationship. I just wish they'd done more with it. It seems kind of throw-away -- even when he's confessing his lack of feelings as, essentially, PTSD, he's talking to Uhura *and* Kirk. The best line about the whole relationship comes from Kirk when he asks if they're fighting and says "What is that even like?" Because what would a relationship with Spock be like? What would any of it be like? Who knows?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 20:00
|
|
|
Kull the Conqueror posted:Yeah I get that, but isn't Pike's first film monologue dramatically superceded by the speech he gives Kirk in In Darkness when he says "You can't get by on blind luck forever!" By the end of the film, blind luck is exactly how he gets by with zero negative consequences. But yeah, I think we're pretty much on the same page here. The movie may not kill any main characters but a lot of crew got sucked out into space/warp and he failed to stop Khan from killing I'd guess around 50,000 people when he rams the Vengeance into SF, not to mention the loss of cultural history when he smooshes Alcatraz.. The movie doesn't really dwell on it, and for that I thought it was weaker, but there are negative consequences, even if it's only future generations not really getting the full impact of that level in Tony Hawk Pro Skater 3.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 20:10
|
|
|
So apparently, after reading the plot over at Sperg-Alpha, Kirk never actually dies?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 20:11
|
|
|
Zapp Brannigan posted:So apparently, after reading the plot over at Sperg-Alpha, Kirk never actually dies? Well, he didn't get to "brain death" or whatever. McCoy clearly yells to his staff to prep a cryo-tube to "preserve his brain functions", so there's something still going on in there.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 20:12
|
|
|
Schlitzkrieg Bop posted:I've seen a few people say they expected or wanted that to happen, but that line makes no sense for this Kirk to say at this point in the series. Exactly. That line was specifically meant to be a bittersweet "So long and thanks for all the fish" sort of epitaph, since they knew that it was the final original crew movie. Unless they were giving up on the franchise, the line would have been painfully out of place. *Nevermind. I should have refreshed I guess. GATOS Y VATOS posted:I guess I'm one of the few old time fans who has no problems with Spock and Uhura having a relationship. Considering that she was crushing on him regularly in TOS, I was actually expecting it as a "twist". Lord Frankenstyle fucked around with this message at 20:48 on May 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 20:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:16 |
|
|
You know, I've been thinking about this movie and its predecessor a lot lately. They are big, flashy, aggressively stupid movies, but I still like them and I've been trying to figure out why. At this point, I have a kind of working hypothesis. I think it's because previous to these movies, Star Trek had just forgotten how to have fun. I watch the original series and Next Generation back-to-back on television, and it's amazing to me how different the atmosphere is in the two shows. It just seems to me like everyone in The Next Generation is so buttoned-down and professional and stick-up-their-rear end boring. Seriously, you have a room that can re-create absolutely any scenario you can imagine and your guilty pleasure is re-enacting Raymond Chandler-esque detective novels? Everyone is so stiff and formal and tepid. Not that it wasn't a smart, interesting show...but it just lacked a lot of the adventure and camaraderie of the original series. I love the new movies (and the original series) because Kirk and crew are charming and fun and alive in a way that Picard and his jazz-trombone playing crew weren't. The same goes for Janeway and what's-his-name in Enterprise, only those shows didn't even have smart going for them. Deep Space Nine was a bit better, but mostly because of the non-Federation characters. I like that Kirk is a brash smart-rear end who banters with his crew. I like that there's sex and loud music and the universe doesn't feel so dry and clinical and academic. Yes, they're stupid movies, but I don't think that makes them bad movies.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 20:46
|
|
