|
The main problem with the brewery set is that the moment you realise it's a brewery you can't ever unsee it and suspension of disbelief goes out of the window. I'd actually be happy with the Kirk + Scotty danger sequence because it does actually make sense that the engineering section of a starship would be a central hub for all the plumbing, but for the fact that they're clearly in a brewery. The brief shots of the Kelvin engineering (which I presume are also brewery) were fine. I can totally buy into the perception it gave me that the saucer section of a starship is all whiteness and pristine corridors and ipads, and the lower hull is a more open and utilitarian sprawl of machines that make ship work.
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2013 12:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 02:37 |
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:That's why the villain is the personification of canonicity ("I saw it happen! Don't tell me it didn't happen!"). This is why I love reading your posts. Sometimes I agree, sometimes I don't, and sometimes my mind gets blown by how I could have missed something that's so obvious once you see it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2013 11:41
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:His motives are just really stupid. He had no reason to take his anger out on Spock, and his assumption that Spock didn't even try or even intentionally allowed Romulus to be destroyed, was weak. And then he wants to destroy all of the Federation? It just doesn't make any sense. Nothing is established in the movie to explain any of his issues with half of the galaxy. Plus you would think someone on his crew would be like "yo, we kinda been out here for a few decades, you don't think this is batshit crazy?" You might have noticed a recurrent motif in the film that when someone sees their planet explode taking everyone they loved with it, it unhinges them emotionally. Nero and his crew lost everything and they can't even mourn properly because they're forever cut off from the world they once knew. e: ^^ what do you mean 'for no good reason' he watched his planet burn and with it his family
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2013 01:13
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:I like the brewery because it has a low-budget, exploitation aesthetic to it. How many 'bad' sci-fi films take place in a refinery doubling as a space station, or something? Star Trek literally has its sleek, iPod bridge built on top of one of these cheap location shoots. It's the foundation. Other Star Treks lack this contrast between upper and lower, idealism and practicality, brain and guts, and so-on. The brewery is basically the bathroom that has been conspicuously absent from the enterprise for decades. Where did everybody poo poo? It looks great in the intro with the Kelvin because it is just this very industrial space and you only see it in brief fragments that are all iron girders and steam and explosions. When the Captain gets off the turbolift it's clear that he's walked into the underbelly of the ship and then with a few steps he's gone. In contrast the extended engineering shots on the Enterprise make it impossible not to see the fact that they're running round a brewery and pretending that's it's a future engine room. e: also it's empty. Kirk and Scotty beam in and there's nobody monitoring the equipment doing stuff. They have a run around some empty gangways. In the end Scotty ejects the warp-core and he seems to be the only one there. The film doesn't show off a working space, it shows off a space where things are placed in large drums and then left to ferment. Alchenar fucked around with this message at 11:07 on Feb 18, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2013 11:02
|
|
|
Cheap Trick posted:I had no idea a brewery was being used as the engine room until it was pointed out in the making-of segment on the Blu-ray It's kinda obvious when they go to Uhura's station in 'Communications' or wherever that's supposed to be and it's just a row of people sitting in front of a couple of huge beer vats.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2013 12:52
|
|
|
Supercar Gautier posted:It's a minute long. Exactly. It also provides a moment of danger and energy in order to break up what would otherwise be a very long sequence of people standing around talking to each other. e: also "can I have a towel please" is a fantastic line perfectly delivered, so it's worth it for that
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2013 12:24
|
|
|
I think it's that the TNG-era made people assume that 'trek' and 'good action film' are mutually exclusive fields.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2013 10:45
|
|
|
Showing the girl getting blown out of the Kelvin and the engineering space exploding at the start of the film has more importance than just those scenes though because later in the film it gives you a frame of reference for when the Enterprise arrives at Vulcan in the middle of the most graphic and detailed debris field Star Trek has ever shown. Abrams shows you what happens when a Starship gets shot up, then he shows you an entire fleet that's been torn apart and invites your imagination to do the rest without a host of repetitive shots of corridors exploding.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2013 11:43
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:Don't go all Dirk Benedict on us, now. Taking a notoriously sexist character and switching the gender for the new series could potentially be really awesome, if done well. I said this in the Star Wars thread, but sci-fi has a real lack of proactive female characters that it really should work to fix.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2013 16:50
|
|
|
Great_Gerbil posted:Which is why I think it's too much of a coincidence. Yeah but this would be the first time that Kirk and Marcus get together, which makes sense if you're looking for a canonical love interest for Kirk's early career.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2013 15:49
|
|
|
api call girl posted:Ughhhh. Yeah I know, but if you were looking for a name for a love interest which is a reference to old-trek but which also gives you complete freedom to tell your story without anyone complaining you've changed something, that's the name I'd go for.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2013 16:38
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:I can somewhat accept that, but I have some trouble accepting that a Genetic Superman, who is regularly said to be extremely intelligent, would blame a fellow human for a planet exploding. There's round-the-bend, and there's genetically-augmented-pants-on-head. You kinda missed the bit of the background where the genetically augmented supermen are a bunch of racial supremacists who start a third world war. The reason Star Trek Humans ban genetic augmentation is because in Star Trek it turns out that when you create literal Nazi Supermen then they invariably start acting like Nazi supermen.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2013 14:07
|
|
|
There's a bit of a Star Trek 3 vibe going on, from the fact that the main characters aren't in uniform to the whole crashing the Enterprise thing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2013 11:53
|
|
|
alg posted:Wow, I'm excited. What is that giant ship? On the one hand from the side it looked like it could be a re-imagined Excelsior. Then again, those railgun thingys were very not-Starfleet.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Does anyone know what the aliens at 1:32 are? Those look a lot like the Klingon helmets from the 2009 deleted scenes. e: just watch the scene here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pchkWmhCMXM, I think they're the same helmets. Alchenar fucked around with this message at 18:10 on Apr 16, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2013 18:06
|
|
|
ODC posted:I like the helmets. It's a smart way to address the forehead issue, in canon or otherwise. If you don't accept Star Trek Enterprise as canon then the helmets are just a cultural thing that happened to develop in this timeline and we the viewer don't really need to know if there are ridges under the helmets or not. If you do accept Star Trek Enterprise as canon it still makes sense because the affected Klingons would want to hide their shame. I think it's really just 'we're on a budget and don't want to spend loads on make-up for shitloads of background extras, just make a dozen or so helmets that get the point across'.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2013 19:16
|
|
|
Dreadnought makes sense. It looks very much like what Abrams's Starfleet would build as a warship.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2013 19:50
|
|
|
Barometer posted:Maybe I'm too much of a nerd or something but it bothered me. If they have artificial gravity then it wouldn't happen and if the gravity were off from a power outage or something they'd be in zero G and it wouldn't happen, they'd be floating around. I mean, I like the idea but it just doesn't make sense. If the ship is falling through an atmosphere out of control (as we see in the trailer) then it makes perfect sense.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2013 23:42
|
|
|
feedmyleg posted:I think it's more "we don't want to make a crucial design decision about what Klingons look like in the new universe in what is probably a minor scene when they could be part of a major plot in another film in the near future." Except the same decision was made for the deleted scenes in Star Trek, and those scenes were actually fairly significant until it was decided to just drop the entire Nero POV mini-arch and have future-Spock explain what's explained there.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2013 09:28
|
|
|
All of the films are about old people being old and slow and Star Trek 2009 was the first Star Trek film about a young crew having adventures and they changed up the pace to be more like Star Wars to accommodate that and I guess people don't like their Star Trek to be about young people having adventures.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2013 16:55
|
|
|
Cardboard Box A posted:Yeah good catch! I'm going with 'climactic battle between Enterprise and Evil-enterprise over Earth climaxes in both ships crashing out of orbit. Maybe the Enterprise survives, maybe it doesn't'. e: oh I hadn't heard that quote at the end before "I am better" "At what?" "Everything." Yeah he's Khan. Alchenar fucked around with this message at 12:23 on Apr 20, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2013 12:20
|
|
|
Thom12255 posted:I really hope the reason Kirk got instantly promoted from Cadet to Captain in the duration of like a week is that half of Starfleet died and they just had to take what they had left. Nah, that's not what happens. 'The Fleet' is off doing peacekeeping at some system which is why when Vulcan gets hit they have to empty the academy to fill out whatever ships they have in spacedock around Earth and send them off. That's why Kirk and Spock have the post-Vulcan argument where Kirk wants to go to Earth and Spock wants to meet up with the fleet. Starfleet keeps it's current strength but loses several entire classes of trainee officers.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2013 18:05
|
|
|
twoot posted:If we are picking holes; even if the plan had succeeded without a sun Romulus's habitability would plummet. Not Romulus' star that blew up.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2013 20:49
|
|
|
Blistex posted:I don't know if I'm alone here, but I've always wanted to see the Klingons and Federation duke it out on an even footing (no birds of prey please), and a with the exception of a few episodes of DS9, we havn't really seen this. I sort of feel that TNG "neutered" the Klingons by making them the Federation's ally. Watch the Klingon Academy videoclips.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2013 13:34
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
The main problem I see is that it isn't a remake of one Star Trek film. It's a remake of two of them with the plots mashed together and there just isn't enough time to do both plots properly while still trying to treat iconic supporting characters a star moment of their own and the result is that neither quite make sense. For example: Benedict Cumberbatch's character goes to a place in the film and him going to that place is quite important for one of the plots. But his character doesn't actually have a reason to go to that place and in retrospect it becomes glaring in a way that I don't feel any of the plot 'holes' in the 2009 film significantly detract from it. They should have picked one story or the other, not try to do both.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2013 19:08
|
|
|
Payndz posted:The only reason I can think of for Harrison going there is that he knew it would give Admiral Robocop the perfect excuse to kick off his plan for war with the Klingons, meaning he'd bring and use what he thought were the super-torpedoes, and that in turn would let Khan recover and revive his people. However, Kirk threw everything off by volunteering to take the Enterprise rather than letting Robo send the USS Vengeance, so I don't know how everything was supposed to work out at all. Hollywood villain 7th-dimensional chess, I guess. That's what I thought at first, except when Khan goes to Kronos he thinks his crew are dead. It's only when Kirk tells him how many torpedoes that he realises they're still alive and that Marcus is apparently such an idiot he hasn't realised where the missing Cryo-tubes are. Then instead of killing Kirk and the others and goading Sulu into firing his crew to him, he surrenders because that's what he calculates to be his best move.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2013 20:53
|
|
|
See this is why they should either have gone with the Wrath remake or the Undiscovered Country remake plot. The story would have been better if it was a straight up 'We woke Khan up and he went rogue. Also he's trying to wake up the rest of his crew and we have no idea where the gently caress they are'. It would also have been better if it had been a straight up 'Everyone thinks war with the Klingons is inevitable, there's a starfleet conspiracy to have the war sooner rather than later.' Either one of those plots makes for a good film with the themes they wanted to go with. Instead they try both and it's just messy.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2013 07:56
|
|
|
ShineDog posted:No, I was in exactly the same place. Thought it was ok, but ended up thinking it was an absolute turd. Every plot point is explained to you, in detail, as if you were a child. It's not just Chekovs gun (the concept, not movie Chekov), it's the fact that Chekovs gun get's held up to the camera and you are told THIS WILL BE IMPORTANT AND THIS IS HOW AND WHY. What I hated is that the motivations for the antagonists aren't shown, they're just told to us. Marcus tells us in the first 10 minutes of the film proper that he's in charge of Section 31 and is preparing for war with the Kingons. Literally nobody else in Starfleet (and there's plenty of opportunity for Pike to say something) mentions war tensions with the Kingons. So aside from the fact that he just announced to the audience that he's a bad guy, rather than show us his motivation the scrip just has the character spell it out. Similarly, Khan just delivers a monologue where he states that he's all angry because he was used and blackmailed and thought his crew was dead etc etc. It's all so shallow because there's not enough time to even explain their motivations in the way that Nero was explained in 2009. I have a fairly clear idea in my head as to how to straighten out the plots - they needed to drop one of the antagonists and the plotlines they were remaking. Example - lets say we want to run with the remake of Undiscovered Country thread. Start with a pre-credits sequence that's on the bridge of the Enterprise. They're responding to a distress signal from a freighter in the neutral zone. Aha, the audience thinks! It's the Kobayashi Maru, I've seen this! Except it isn't - they're really there. Things go south and Kirk has to rescue Spock in much the same way he does in this film, except the breach that Spock reports is that of the neutral zone. The rest of the film is Marcus sending the Enterprise off to do shady stuff on the Klingon border and Kirk and the crew gradually realise there's a false-flag conspiracy to start a war. No Khan. Neat, simple, show that the Klingons are an issue and that everyone thinks war is coming. Follow that story properly. I thought the acting was great. I thought the character story between Kirk and Spock was great. I thought the overarching plot that all of this takes place in was a train-wreck. Bonus unintended terrible moment: Spock literally asks Carol Marcus what she's doing on the ship. I agree - her character has literally no purpose and is totally irrelevant to the story. Worse, she takes the place of Spock in the Torpedo surgery scene when there's an obvious reason in this film why mid-way through you might want to confront Spock with the possible death of a friend that he's able to avert at the last moment. The underwear scenes makes it pretty clear that her main purpose for existence is to reassure the viewer that Kirk still has the notgays. Alchenar fucked around with this message at 00:10 on May 14, 2013 |
|
#
¿
May 14, 2013 00:06
|
|
|
ShineDog posted:Absolutely, they just flat out state a whole bunch of poo poo and I'm supposed to care. And worse, quite often I'm supposed to care because of context lent by the original shows or movies! Oh yeah, they rely so completely on that that characters in film don't react to things the audience is supposed to react to. Specificially: 1.Marcus reveals Section 31. If you know what that is then Starfleet having a secret black-ops division is a pretty big deal. Zero reaction from Kirk and Spock. 2.Khan reveal. You just find out you have space-hitler on your ship. Zero reaction. Someone casually mentions about 15 minutes later in the film that he's a bad guy because he genocided people he thought were genetically inferior. Generally nobody cares though. Those are really really important things for you to actually care about any of the callbacks and things happening in the film and it just isn't dealt with properly at all.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2013 00:14
|
|
|
Wandle Cax posted:It's explained literally by the character right before it happens. When she tells Kirk to turn around. It was to put her space suit on or something. Except Kirk doesn't go with her. They have to get other guy. There's literally no reason for her to change then and there. e: The issue with the Scotty scene is that while it technically makes sense, it's also very obviously contrived to get Scotty off the ship so he can provide a lazy deus ex-machina later in the film. Similarly Chekov clearly has gently caress all to do in the film so he's packed off to engineering and then there's a peril scene for Scotty and Kirk near the end that exists for the sole purpose of him showing up and saving them at the last second and it's a 'oh right, they needed to give the actor something moment.' It's just impossible not to notice that characters do things primarily because the plot requires them to. Scotty resigning and neither person backing down. Kirk not firing the torpedoes (irony, they don't have fuel cells anymore so if he had followed orders and tried to fire them then then nothing would have happened and the plot would have unravelled then and there). Khan goes to Kronos which is great for Marcus's plans but makes no sense because Khan doesn't actually have any reason to go to Kronos (he thinks his crew are all dead remember, he has no plan to trick Marcus into firing the torpedoes which wouldn't work anyway because they don't have any fuel). If they hadn't been trying to run the Khan and Starfleet war-conspiracy plots side by side then he could have just beamed to the Vengeance and the film could have been focused entirely on trying to hunt him down. Alchenar fucked around with this message at 13:01 on May 14, 2013 |
|
#
¿
May 14, 2013 12:48
|
|
|
Payndz posted:That's more a TNG-era thing, though, with Roddenberry coming up with bizarre suggestions that Picard is like Jacques Cousteau and the Enterprise is his Calypso (that happens to be run entirely along military lines and is capable of devastating planets, but whatever). In TOS, Kirk was an explorer, yes, but he was first and foremost a military commander frequently tasked with gunboat diplomacy. And Scotty wasn't just the guy with the spanners who kept the engines working, but also third in command of the entire ship, after Spock. The Undiscovered Country is a film that's explicitly about Kirk and the other Captains being dismayed at Starfleet demilitarizing.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2013 13:02
|
|
|
Cheap Trick posted:I do see where you're coming from. To be honest, when I'm watching movies, I'm willing to accept that the story may be "on rails" or have contrivances like this. Although I sure don't expect everyone else to watch movies this way. Maybe I'm just not a discerning viewer I'm willing to accept rails to a degree. The problem with this film is that scenes are obviously written in in order to give actors something to do, rather than because they drive the plot in any significant way. They have an all-star cast and try to give everyone 'their scene', but the result is that everyone just feels underused and I feel that time spent giving actors these scenes could have been better spent putting some flesh on the main plot.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2013 16:17
|
|
|
I just appreciated one more thing that reveals just how lazy the plot is: The jump a year forwards at the end. Why? Because that crisis with the Klingons, the war that the head of Starfleet is convinced is coming enough to set in motion all the events of the film, the threat that's realistic enough that everyone on the Enterprise thinks that full-scale war is just one bad incident away - turns out it's just not a big deal. It's a year later, nothing happened, nothing to see here, move along. The film doesn't even give Marcus the decency of being an antagonist who's faced with a genuine dilemma and picks the wrong option; he's just flat-out wrong.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2013 18:00
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:Wouldn't the Klingons demand that the Federation turn over the officer that invaded their territory and killed a bunch of their troops? I'm not sure how we would have handled it during the Cold War, but given the choice between all-out war and throwing some guy under the bus... I don't think that the Klingons are a cold war metaphor anymore. Which is stupid, because the half of the film that isn't a callback to Wrath is a callback to The Undiscovered Country. In this film the Klingons are just there to provide random antagonists for a meaningless action sequence. It all just goes to how soulless and contriver the plot is - Marcus tells us that the Federation is at the brink of war with the Klingons. But we're just told that and we aren't shown anything to really give us that impression because the only Klingons we see are the ones on their homeworld and it just doesn't seem true. That's problematic because it makes the guy who's the antagonist for 90% of the film (from when he announces to the audience that he's head of Section 31 to dying) someone who's motivations aren't actually real. Nero was at least mad with grief. This film just has the head of starfleet go insane for no reason at all. And start a conspiracy to change Starfleet despite the fact that he's already in charge and could just militarise in the open.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2013 22:43
|
|
|
ShineDog posted:Whether or not you like the movie or not, it's a million miles from classic trek. Into darkness is a full on action movie. As I said, personally, I think it suffers from it's pace. In particular, Khan just seems like a super strong generic scary who is generically manipulative. Since theres no time to actually characterize anyone outside of Spock and Kirk (a bit) you just get characters spouting a handful of lines that are meant to define them, which doesn't go nearly far enough to justifying the choices they take. There are ten seconds in the entire film where Khan is Khan. That's when they're on the bridge of the Vengeance and he takes out Scotty, Kirk, breaks Carol's leg and then kills Marcus in an swift series of calculated actions. It's swift, powerful, brutal violence that's markedly different from the fight with the Klingons earlier and reveals Khan for the barely controlled seething mass of rage that he is. In that moment you see why everyone's scared of him. In that moment the line he has earlier about viciousness makes sense. In that moment you appreciate him as the villain. And then the moment is gone and the film is virtually over anyways. e: it's the things like that which irritate me because they show what the film could have been if it was less of a mess. The acting talent was all there. The fast pace worked with the 2009 film. The film has a character arch with Kirk and Spock that it wants to tell and by and large I think it does that. But everything about the story and script around that just fails utterly. Alchenar fucked around with this message at 00:30 on May 16, 2013 |
|
#
¿
May 16, 2013 00:24
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:Also - presumably Admiral Marcus doesn't know that the capsules have frozen supermen in them. But he knows that there were 72 popsicles, and there are 72 torpedoes. Nobody did the math? And if Marcus did know the contents of the capsules, why give them to the Enterprise at all? Once Khan went rogue, they serve no use to force Khan to create weapons. Either get rid of them or try thawing out someone else to see if they know how to build weapons. I don't think most of your quibbles with the plot are important (the problems are more fundamental that finding chinks in the causation), but yeah the only way to resolve Khan and Marcus's plots is if Marcus doesn't know where the crew are. Which is mind boggling stupid because an obvious way to clean up the whole plot would have been to drop the Marcus antagonist line and just go with 'we woke Khan up to get him to build weapons, now he's escaped and loving poo poo up and we have no idea where his crew is (twist, they're hidden right under your nose)' and that's the starting point for an adventure. It also has hilarious knock on realisations, such as that if Kirk had just followed Marcus's plan and fired the torpedoes from range then nothing would have happened because their fuel cells are all missing. Alchenar fucked around with this message at 01:01 on May 16, 2013 |
|
#
¿
May 16, 2013 00:58
|
|
|
WastedJoker posted:Just read a few pages. If they'd just not had the character in the first place then about 90% of the film could have been virtually the same with very minor alterations.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2013 16:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 02:37 |
|
|
The film is not a remake of WoK. It's a remake of The Undiscovered Country, with a poo poo-ton of callback to WoK..
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2013 22:21
|
|