Jump to content

The New Star Trek Movie


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Well, I went and saw my annual movie tonight - "Star Trek Into Darkness." The visuals were beyond unreal, what you can do with computers these days...in fact they were so mind-boggling I didn't really pay attention to the sound. I guess I'll need to see it again at home and analyze the soundtrack.

Anyway, it made me think that J. J. Abrams will do a great job with the Star Wars franchise. He seems really sensitive to the type of "thinking" behind Star Trek, and kept the characters, the dialog, and the plot lines faithful to the original and also to TNG. I suspect he'll have the same reverence for Star Wars, while still putting his stamp on it.

Reminds me of mastering engineers who are completely faithful to the intent of a song, but add their own special overlay to bring out everything they can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Coincidentally, Star Trek Into Darkness was the first movie I'd been to this calendar year as well. As an action movie, I enjoyed it and thought it was well done. As a Star Trek movie, not so much.

Abrams obviously has a gift for action/adventure, and he's done a good job at studying and recreating the character traits of the original Star Trek cast. However, in my opinion, he's largely missed the central theme of Star Trek: exploration

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Good point, Geoff. But it seems a lot of what you describe ended when the series shifted from the small screen to the big screen. In a way, Star Trek Into Darkness is more like "Wrath of Khan Re-Loaded."

But you also bring up a bigger point: How many "action" movies have any kind of soul? The first three Star Wars movies were all about updated versions of timeless myths, and the myths were more central to the experience than the special effects. Even Skyfall (my annual movie for last year) at least asked cliched questions about youth vs. age, which seems pertinent given that the James Bond franchise is 50 years old.

And where are people's souls, anyway? When I see news stories about high school kids plotting to kill other high school kids, you have to wonder whether some people are having their souls removed surgically at birth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Did you watch it in 2D or 3D?

 

About the only time I go to the theater is when I vacation at the beach. A late lunch and matinee is a great way to escape the mid day heat and full sun. I don

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think the nature of movies vs. TV episodes makes movies lean to action more than exploration.

 

I liked the movie, as I liked the previous one. I like Star Trek but I'm not a fanatic about it, so while I think Abrams definitely hasn't been 'faithful' to the franchise, I like seeing a new take on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators


Geoff Grace wrote:

Coincidentally,
Star Trek Into Darkness
was the first movie I'd been to this calendar year as well. As an action movie, I enjoyed it and thought it was well done. As a Star Trek movie, not so much.

Abrams obviously has a gift for action/adventure, and he's done a good job at studying and recreating the character traits of the original Star Trek cast. However, in my opinion, he's largely missed the central theme of Star Trek:
exploration

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I saw it Sunday....Looks great, sounds impressive, but as a "prequel" it dosen't work for me, the last one is in the same boat.....

They killed Spock's mom, so I guess she won't be around on Vulcan (which is gone as well) when Spock comes home from the Genisis Planet.....

They killed Christopher Pike, so no more "menagerie" pilot, scratch that.....

For all the effort they expended on casting the leads with actors that are believable as younger versions of the folks we're used tp seeing, Khan has frikken' blue eyes.....

The scene where Kirk and Spock reverse roles from ST 2 was telegraphed from a mile away, and ridiculous....IMO

From here on out they've screwed with the timeline so much that I guess its pretty much a tabula rasa, and as such they can do whatever they want I suppose.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Since this thread has now entered spoiler territory, I'd like to add one thing that shouldn't be read by anyone who wants to be surprised by the movie.

 

********** SPOILER ALERT **********

 

The thing that bothered me the most about Star Trek Into Darkness was the casting of Khan Noonien Singh. Ethnically, the character

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I find it strange they went with Khan in the first place. Before the movie came out there was some speculation that the villian would be Garth of Izar, another villian from the original series. Ex Starship captain, as well as a contemporary of Kirks, I think he would have made a whole lot more sense than a short haired blue eyed Khan who was from a different century. It wouldn't have altered the story much at all to go that way, seeing as they never thawed out any of Khan's buddies anyway. Garth also had all that shape shifter stuff going on, which they could have made great use of.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I didn't know it was Khan until the guy asked, "How many torpedoes do you have?" and someone responded, "72".  I somehow recognized the number and realized it was him.  Personally, I thought it was clever to put him back in but as a surprise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...