Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS Post-Release Thread

I got to see a 70mm print of KHAN last year at the Cinerama.  The whole print was red-tinted and the audio kept going in and out, but it was a SWELL TIME!

Reply
AStar Trek Into Red Tint
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bain View Post

I saw it twice at the movies when it came out when I was 9.

I don;t think I've seen it since, but it left a very lasting impression on me (ear things - damn)

Yes, I saw it in theatres when I was six.  The earworm scene was very intense and unforgettable.

Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlenomad View Post

Yes, I saw it in theatres when I was six.  The earworm scene was very intense and unforgettable.

This was me too...  Though I was just a fresh 5.  Young enough to not really appreciate the film overall (yet!), but old enough to be all "WTF?!?!" about Spock.  All I remembered about it for years were the ear bugs (time to hide!) and dead Spock.  Not 'good' memories!

Reply
ANot good as experience has taught me Mr. Beaks' taste is pretty close to mine as reviewers go.
Reply
A[quote name="Subotai" url="/community/t/147679/star-trek-into-darkness-post-release-thread/100#post_3506162"]Not good as experience has taught me Mr. Beaks' taste is pretty close to mine as reviewers go.[/quote]
Certainly the review did nothing to allay my suspicions that Khan's story was going to be some Umbrella Corporation-caliber "needlessly convoluted and stupid conspiracy scheme backfires predictably, everybody is somehow shocked by this" bullshit. Starfleet, if you don't want Khan threatening you, how about just not reviving him? Or maybe, you know, getting him in prison first?
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Straceski View Post

This was me too...  Though I was just a fresh 5.  Young enough to not really appreciate the film overall (yet!), but old enough to be all "WTF?!?!" about Spock.  All I remembered about it for years were the ear bugs (time to hide!) and dead Spock.  Not 'good' memories!

Somehow, I knew that ear worm (well, more like an ear crab) scene was coming.  I would just about swear that was the clip Siskel & Ebert showed when they were reviewing the film (sometimes I got to see Siskel & Ebert on our local PBS affiliate...it was kind of like "coming attractions" for me).  Either that or the clip was shown somewhere else on television.  One of the other things that stood out for me was the blood on the uniforms...the white, fold-down portion of the uniforms.  Injury and death were very tangible in that film.

Also, the "We've got to get out of here!" scene with Checkov works...when the film clips to Khan and his crew, with their space burkas and sand visors...it's so unsettling.  Kind of scary for a child.  But worth it.

Reply

Wrath of Khan purchased.  Hope it lives up to my memories.

Reply
AIt should. It's not just the best Trek film, it's a legitimately great movie.
Reply
ABack in the early 90's I watched Khan a few times and really liked it, but I remember that my favorite Trek back then was "The Undiscovered Country". Recently I watched them both again for the first time in almost 2 decades and my view has flipped. I think Khan is a better movie today, but that is that. Rather overrated movie imo.
Reply
A[quote name="mcnooj82" url="/community/t/147679/star-trek-into-darkness-post-release-thread/90#post_3506126"]I got to see a 70mm print of KHAN last year at the Cinerama.  The whole print was red-tinted and the audio kept going in and out, but it was a SWELL TIME!
[/quote]Im interested in this old school 70mm buisness. Did they film some if the movie in 70mm or was it blown up to 70? How was the quality?
Reply

The Voyage Home was always my favorite Trek. I wish the movies would stick to being that fun. But I guess someone always has to have revenge on someone or something for these movies.

Reply

Whatever happened to, you know, giving people the benefit of the fucking doubt? I know people are so eager to throw Abrams under the bus for whatever reason, and I can understand the hesitation involved with some of these plot twists. But the overall attitude here seems to be that of "HOW DARE THEY DEFILE MY PRECIOUS TREK" (conveniently ignoring the fact that stupid shit happens a lot in Trek) and most of you HAVEN'T SEEN THE DAMN THING.

If you don't want to now, hey, that's your choice. Just acknowledge that, maybe for some people, these plot twists will work based on how Abrams and company execute them.

Reply

I saw ST2: TWOK back in 1982 as well (I was 12).  THAT film and that experience turned me into a STAR TREK fan.

And yeah, those earworm scenes were intense as hell.

Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Spider View Post

Whatever happened to, you know, giving people the benefit of the fucking doubt? I know people are so eager to throw Abrams under the bus for whatever reason, and I can understand the hesitation involved with some of these plot twists. But the overall attitude here seems to be that of "HOW DARE THEY DEFILE MY PRECIOUS TREK" (conveniently ignoring the fact that stupid shit happens a lot in Trek) and most of you HAVEN'T SEEN THE DAMN THING.

If you don't want to now, hey, that's your choice. Just acknowledge that, maybe for some people, these plot twists will work based on how Abrams and company execute them.

That's exactly how I feel, and I'm a lifelong Trek fan.  Contrary to the venom currently being sprayed in some parts about this film, it was a given that at some point they were going to revisit the Khan story.  It was a topic of discussion on multiple fan boards immediately after the last film hit.  The writers were even asked about possibly revisiting Khan it in at least one interview years ago.  The point is, does the story they've presented work within the logic of this alternate universe?  Does the film, in the end, earn using Khan and earn switching around the people who sacrifice themselves?  Is the film, even though it puts Khan in a completely different situation, still respectful to the spirit of the character?  So far, all signs point to "Yes!" on the latter.  That's enough to keep me interested and get me in line on opening weekend.

Reply

Judas Booth, How about that,you are only...2 years younger than me.  I saw...Star Trek: The Animated Series, and became a fan.  Shatner voiced Captain Kirk in the cartoon, and I became a...Huge fan of William Shatner after that.  I watched...every episode of the original series as well.  I didn't dislike Star Trek The Motion Picture, which I also saw in the theater.  I also enjoyed...Airplane II which includes some of Stu Philips Battlestar Galactica Score.  The director's cut improves the effects and some other things as well.  I like Chris Pine as Captain Kirk.  I do not necessarily want him as...T.J. Hooker another which is another...Favorite series of mine.   I cannot wait to see Star Trek Into Darkness, and already have my ticket for Thursday May 16th.  Live Long And Prosper!

Reply
ATrekkies who enjoyed the last movie will probably hate this movie. Trekkies who disliked the last movie will gleefully hate this movie even more. Film geeks will publicly decry the writing, plotholes and lensflares, never admitting that they actually had a great time in the theater. The rest will like/dislike it in a ratio almost identical to the first film.
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bitches Leave View Post

Trekkies who enjoyed the last movie will probably hate this movie. Trekkies who disliked the last movie will gleefully hate this movie even more. Film geeks will publicly decry the writing, plotholes and lensflares, never admitting that they actually had a great time in the theater. The rest will like/dislike it in a ratio almost identical to the first film.

No change in my expectations then.

Reply
A[quote name="Chris Spider" url="/community/t/147679/star-trek-into-darkness-post-release-thread/90#post_3506302"]Whatever happened to, you know, giving people the benefit of the fucking doubt? I know people are so eager to throw Abrams under the bus for whatever reason, and I can understand the hesitation involved with some of these plot twists. But the overall attitude here seems to be that of "HOW DARE THEY DEFILE MY PRECIOUS TREK" (conveniently ignoring the fact that stupid shit happens a lot in Trek) and most of you HAVEN'T SEEN THE DAMN THING.

If you don't want to now, hey, that's your choice. Just acknowledge that, maybe for some people, these plot twists will work based on how Abrams and company execute them.
[/quote]As I said, nobody is pretending Trek was always perfect. I don't think it had been that good in general since 1999. Just because stupid stuff happened in the past doesn't mean Abrams doing stupid stuff is excused. That sounds awfully similar to defenders of the Star Wars prequels "hey, stupid stuff happened in EMPIRE too!".

I'm willing to give the film a benefit of a doubt. I actually like that they're approaching Khan from a new angle with Section 31 being involved and such. The ending still sounds stupid as fuck, but I hope to enjoy the movie more than not. It's at least got to be better than the last one, right?
Reply

Well, I'm not pretending Abrams is perfect either, but I do think he gets a bad rap more often than not; he's no genius, but he certainly isn't a hack.

Really, this is more about me, coming from the perspective of a casual Trek fan. I love Wrath of Khan as much as the next guy, but I don't pretend it's some holy, unassailable text. I've always been OK with the idea of doing something new with Khan. So this knee-jerk reaction I'm seeing from Ambler and the like seems so out-of-proportion.

Reply
A[quote name="Chris Spider" url="/community/t/147679/star-trek-into-darkness-post-release-thread/100#post_3506890"]Really, this is more about me, coming from the perspective of a casual Trek fan. I love Wrath of Khan as much as the next guy, but I don't pretend it's some holy, unassailable text. I've always been OK with the idea of doing something new with Khan. So this knee-jerk reaction I'm seeing from Ambler and the like seems so out-of-proportion.[/quote]
Is it untouchable and sacred? No, not really. But if someone's going to invite comparison by revisiting its material, they shouldn't be surprised when they get the comparisons they invited. And I'd still like to know, from anybody who's seen this thing: is there any reason for it to be Khan? Does he even approach making sense as a nemesis for Kirk when they don't even (as I gather) have that shared history that led to his revenge obsession in the first place? Ultimately, does it mean anything, or is "Khan" just a nametag slapped on Sherlock's coat?
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Spider View Post

Whatever happened to, you know, giving people the benefit of the fucking doubt? I know people are so eager to throw Abrams under the bus for whatever reason, and I can understand the hesitation involved with some of these plot twists. But the overall attitude here seems to be that of "HOW DARE THEY DEFILE MY PRECIOUS TREK" (conveniently ignoring the fact that stupid shit happens a lot in Trek) and most of you HAVEN'T SEEN THE DAMN THING.

If you don't want to now, hey, that's your choice. Just acknowledge that, maybe for some people, these plot twists will work based on how Abrams and company execute them.

A rant at people hating on the movie sight unseen from a guy who hasn't seen the movie. Tremendous!

Oh, and Abrams is a very skilled director with no actual viewpoint or style of his own whose primary skill is copying...sorry, I mean PAYING TRIBUTE to other people's work. Hack defined.

Reply
A[quote name="Mangy" url="/community/t/147679/star-trek-into-darkness-post-release-thread/100#post_3506935"]A rant at people hating on the movie sight unseen from a guy who hasn't seen the movie. Tremendous![/quote]

You say that as if there's some irony or hypocrisy in that, which there isn't.
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangy View Post

Oh, and Abrams is a very skilled director with no actual viewpoint or style of his own whose primary skill is copying...sorry, I mean PAYING TRIBUTE to other people's work. Hack defined.

Like Tarantino?

(It hurt just to type that.  But c'mon, just about every shot Tarantino frames is an homage to something else.  If that's the standard we're working from, it applies.)

Reply

That's true, I haven't seen the movie either. But you know what? I'M NOT PREJUDGING THE MOVIE BECAUSE OF THAT. A shitload of people are.

Reply
APersonally, I don't have a problem with Abrams, but the writers he tends to rely on pretty much suck.
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Spider View Post

Whatever happened to, you know, giving people the benefit of the fucking doubt?

For what?  I think Abrams has pretty firmly established his aggressive mediocrity by now.  I give the benefit of the doubt to directors who've earned it.

Reply

Yeah, that son of a bitch had the audacity to make three pretty good films.

Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Shape View Post

Like Tarantino?

Everybody steals...everybody.  Some simply do it better than others.  Abrams isn't in that category.  Are we seriously putting Taratino and Abrams in the same room?  One is a genius auteur...the other is a mediocre journeyman who makes everything look and sound great.

Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Shape View Post

Yeah, that son of a bitch had the audacity to make three pretty good films.

MI3 - mediocre

Super 8 - aggressively mediocre

Star Trek '09 - mediocre

Reply

Abrams is an excellent technician, and he works with actors quite well. He's just not that great a writer, or at picking them. So I'd say he's a "good" filmmaker.

Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Shape View Post

Like Tarantino?

(It hurt just to type that.  But c'mon, just about every shot Tarantino frames is an homage to something else.  If that's the standard we're working from, it applies.)

If all of Tarantino's films were only surface level gloss, you'd have a point.

J.J. Abrams is the Carlos Mencia of filmmakers, appropriating techniques while adding nothing to them. The only film he's made that I've wanted to revisit is the first Star Trek, and even that has a lobotomized screenplay.

Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post

MI3 - mediocre

Super 8 - aggressively mediocre

Star Trek '09 - mediocre

Shucks, Ambler, you win.

Reply

There was a tribute to Spielberg by the DGA....Abrams and James Cameron were presenters.  Abrams was seated on stage in between Spielberg and Cameron and at one point Abrams said "sorry, I feel like I'm a clerical error or something." and the audience about died.

At least the guy knows his place...

Reply

You're a very bitter fellow.

Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)