Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk
Reload this Page >

Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread (Spoilers, Duh)

Community
Search
Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters
View Poll Results: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread
9.88%
22.67%
36.05%
12.79%
8.72%
2.33%
1.74%
0
0%
1.16%
0
0%
0.58%
Star Trek Into Dullness
4.07%
Voters: 172. You may not vote on this poll

Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread (Spoilers, Duh)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-16-13, 11:57 AM
  #26  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,672
Received 31 Likes on 24 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

HUGE Trek fan. I'm ok with it. I don't feel ripped off by the ending, and their it's what you would've done moment was them coming to terms with each others personalities/styles. 5 times the budget gets you 5 times the action I guess huh.
Old 05-16-13, 11:59 AM
  #27  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Numanoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Down in 'The Park'
Posts: 27,881
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by General Zod
Spoiler:
In the old series "Wink of an Eye" they had the Scalosian water which when drank would speed people up so fast that everyone else seemed to stand still. Keeping this stuff handy would have solved almost every bad situation they were in going forward but it was completely forgotten about after the episode.

So now that they have Kahns blood and plenty of it from the 72 others that sure would be handy to keep around in case of other deaths or injuries wouldn't it? Think we'll ever see it again?
No, and I can tell you one possible way to rationalize it:
Spoiler:
They need fresh blood from Khan, not some serum that has been sitting in the fridge for a year. And Khan is on ice in the warehouse with the Ark of the Covenant, at the other end of the galaxy. Remember, they're heading for deep space now, to begin the 5-year mission.
Old 05-16-13, 12:06 PM
  #28  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
davidh777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Home of 2013 NFL champion Seahawks
Posts: 52,625
Received 1,016 Likes on 840 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Numanoid
I thought we didn't do spoilers in review threads. I wish someone would declare a definite policy.
I wasn't going to use them because I think the Reviews Thread is fair game, but since I was going to talk specifically about the ending, and because it was a number of days before U.S. release, I figured better safe than sorry and followed Sierra Disc's lead. It's always possible people could wander in here without realizing what it is (and it looks like they might already have).
Old 05-16-13, 12:33 PM
  #29  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Ash Ketchum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 12,635
Received 277 Likes on 212 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

A.O. Scott's mixed-to-negative review in The New York Times:

http://movies.nytimes.com/2013/05/16...ef=movies&_r=0

One quote:

After increasingly noisy and bloated starship battles, “Into Darkness” reaches a climax with the smashing of a North American city followed by a long fistfight on a flying metal platform. It’s uninspired hackwork, and the frequent appearance of blue lens flares does not make this movie any more of a personal statement. Mr. Abrams will never be Michael Bay, who can make kinetic poetry out of huge pieces of machinery smashing together. Why should he want to be?
Old 05-16-13, 01:44 PM
  #30  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Navinabob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 8,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Ash Ketchum
A.O. Scott's mixed-to-negative review in The New York Times:

http://movies.nytimes.com/2013/05/16...ef=movies&_r=0

One quote:
And yet, I think Bay's mayhem is much harder to follow these days. Without Bay's frequent use of slow-mo, I'd be in the dark about each and every fight in Transformers.

The only two times I struggled to follow the action on Trek was the hallway battle with Scotty, Khan & Kirk, and then the following fight on the bridge (Shakey-cam fights go off poorly in 3D). I really liked the panning out to see the Khan & Spock fight.

I enjoyed the film personally.
Old 05-16-13, 02:21 PM
  #31  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
joe_b's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,394
Received 93 Likes on 59 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

There were a shitload of trailers attached to my showing: Despicable Me 2, Last Vegas, Ender's Game, World War Z... a couple others I can't recall.

Admittedly, I've never seen an entire episode of any Trek series from start to finish. I did watch Wrath of Khan once and almost fell asleep during it, but even I noticed the "homages" in this new film. I really enjoyed J.J. Abrams Star Trek and it was still an enjoyable experience revisiting this version of the crew. But after waiting four years, I was hoping for a plot that was a little less... predictable? The alternate reality angle gave them free rein to go in any direction they wanted, including killing off major characters. I was hoping they would shake things up a bit more in this one.

Spoiler:
The Khan reveal may be one of the most obvious "spoilers" in film history. Did they think that changing his ethnicity would throw fans off the scent? Cumberbatch makes a good villain, but they couldn't have cast a pastier actor to play a previously olive-skinned character. I was also hoping to see a bit more of the relationship between Kirk and Carol Marcus (who wasn't British before, right?). Being the mother of Kirk's only child (in that other timeline, at least), I wanted to see a bit more of that backstory... but I guess that's what sequels are for.
Overall, I had a good time. Not as enjoyable as the last one, but easily the best film I've seen in theaters this year. High praise, considering I've seen a grand total of four so far.

Last edited by joe_b; 05-17-13 at 05:02 AM.
Old 05-16-13, 03:06 PM
  #32  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
The Antipodean's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 6,640
Received 165 Likes on 118 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

Spoiler:
Screaming Khaaaaan is the new "nuked the fridge" for me.
Old 05-16-13, 03:20 PM
  #33  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
dan30oly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,750
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

Saw it.

Loved it.

Didn't see a single lens flare.

Abrams is a genius.
Old 05-16-13, 03:37 PM
  #34  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Formerly known as "Solid Snake PAC"/Denton, Tx
Posts: 39,239
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

I hate you, Troll.

Seriously though even the trailer has lens flare and I like the last movie. I shall see it tomorrow.
Old 05-16-13, 04:08 PM
  #35  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Mike86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 24,742
Received 1,155 Likes on 901 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

Saw the midnight showing last night. Lifelong Trek fan and I'm not exactly sure how I feel about it yet. I liked certain aspects of it and the cast has mostly grown on me in their roles. Karl Urban as McCoy and Simon Pegg as Scotty have particularly been enjoyable to me as nice nods to their original counterparts. Something about this one just didn't quite capture me like the first one did. Maybe I need to see the film again but this kind of left me underwhelmed especially after being so hyped for it for the longest time.

I agree with others that
Spoiler:
the ending essentially being a re-done version of Wrath of Khan was kind of lame and that Pine and Quinto's scene really didn't feel all that meaningful. They're great actors and I've come to like them playing these parts but what made that scene so powerful in Star Trek II was the fact that we had grown to know and love those characters over such a long time. Seeing Spock die and the movie ending shortly afterwards we were unsure of his actual fate. Kirk's sacrifice felt kind of thrown in to me and not entirely needed.

I also was kind of meh on the fact that this film felt the need for Khan to be the villain. Wrath of Khan is a great classic and this was a new spin on that story but in a lot of ways this film still felt fairly predictable. I kind of was hoping that this film would have been it's own thing rather than trying to re-live the past.

Originally Posted by Sierra Disc
Screaming Khaaaaan is the new "nuked the fridge" for me.
That part literally made me roll my eyes when it happened. It felt so forced and like it was just added for no other reason than the fact it was in the movie they clearly took a lot of their influence from.


I also agree with the sentiment that this movie felt too action heavy. Yeah we get it casual audiences probably aren't going to like the more slow paced, space exploring stuff that Star Trek is known for but this in a lot of ways didn't feel much like a Trek film at all. It felt in some ways like any other sci-fi action film only with Star Trek characters added in.

Last edited by Mike86; 05-16-13 at 04:52 PM.
Old 05-16-13, 04:43 PM
  #36  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
BearFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Corinth, TX
Posts: 8,216
Received 39 Likes on 32 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Mike86

I also agree with the sentiment that this movie felt too action heavy. Yeah we get it casual audiences probably aren't going to like the more slow paced, space exploring stuff that Star Trek is known for but this in a lot of ways didn't feel much like a Trek film at all. It felt in some ways like any other sci-fi action film only with Star Trek characters added in.
It was non stop action, but I am not sure that is anti-Trek ... the more successful Trek movies (Kahn, IV, First Contact) were more action oriented. The slow paced stuff (which I really like) is great for TV, but it never had the same impact on the big screen.
Old 05-16-13, 04:59 PM
  #37  
Inane Thread Master, 2018 TOTY
Thread Starter
 
OldBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Are any of us really anywhere?
Posts: 49,427
Received 909 Likes on 769 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

I really liked it. Sure it could have been more original, but I liked all the nods and the acting was good. Certainly could have been fresher and not as gripping as the original 2009 Trek, but it found its footing and worked for me. Can't wait for more.

Also, thought the 3D was not very effective. Didnt even notice I was watching it in Real 3D after awhile.
Old 05-16-13, 05:14 PM
  #38  
DVD Talk Ruler
 
General Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 24,436
Received 1,278 Likes on 731 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Mike86
Spoiler:
the ending essentially being a re-done version of Wrath of Khan was kind of lame and that Pine and Quinto's scene really didn't feel all that meaningful. They're great actors and I've come to like them playing these parts but what made that scene so powerful in Star Trek II was the fact that we had grown to know and love those characters over such a long time. Seeing Spock die and the movie ending shortly afterwards we were unsure of his actual fate. Kirk's sacrifice felt kind of thrown in to me and not entirely needed.

I also was kind of meh on the fact that this film felt the need for Khan to be the villain. Wrath of Khan is a great classic and this was a new spin on that story but in a lot of ways this film still felt fairly predictable. I kind of was hoping that this film would have been it's own thing rather than trying to re-live the past.
Spoiler:
Yeah Star Trek started in 66 and TWOK was in 82 and that gave 16 years of knowing these characters so the impact so much greater than something over the last 2 years. Plus that was really the first time a major character died in Trek that wasn't dancing around 3 minutes after their brain was restored so the episode ended on a happy note.

I didn't mind Kahn so much. It has been 30 years the previous one and we've had 180 of mostly the same Spiderman movies over that time. There was just enough twist on this that I found it enjoyable.
Old 05-16-13, 05:25 PM
  #39  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Mike86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 24,742
Received 1,155 Likes on 901 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by General Zod
Spoiler:
Yeah Star Trek started in 66 and TWOK was in 82 and that gave 16 years of knowing these characters so the impact so much greater than something over the last 2 years. Plus that was really the first time a major character died in Trek that wasn't dancing around 3 minutes after their brain was restored so the episode ended on a happy note.

I didn't mind Kahn so much. It has been 30 years the previous one and we've had 180 of mostly the same Spiderman movies over that time. There was just enough twist on this that I found it enjoyable.
Spoiler:
Khan wouldn't bother me so much but there's such a vast history that Trek has to it and so many other options or villains that could be explored that I just didn't see the need to go back and use him again. I did like that it wasn't a shot for shot remake of Wrath of Khan but still. It seemed like they just went with the option that was safe in some ways. Although I guess I'm not sure if the audience of today knows Wrath of Khan that well.
Old 05-16-13, 06:10 PM
  #40  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Numanoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Down in 'The Park'
Posts: 27,881
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Numanoid
Anyway, my thoughts:

Spoiler:
I'm a lifelong Trekkie, and have loved pretty much everything Trek, even Star Trek V and Nemesis. I love the 2009 Abrams film, and have seen it probably 20 times. In fact, I attended a double feature tonight and got to see it again before STID. Once again at the climax of the 2009 film, even after seeing it so many times, I got chills. I got no chills from STID. The emotional scenes just left me cold. There really was too much action. I started to think I was watching a Lucas prequel and that's not good. I wanted more down time with the characters, more reflection, more planning. I really hope some of those scenes were shot and are restored in an eventual home video release.

I'm not sure how I feel about Star Trek 2 being Star Trek II. It's what we all predicted in 2009, but I didn't think Abrams would have the nerve to be so obvious. And obvious he was. On the other hand, I give him credit for being so bold as to do exactly what we thought he would, while being sure that he never would. If that makes any sense. Cumberbatch was great, as expected, though I don't see how he was remotely Indian. Also, why does Carol Marcus now have a British accent? Unnecessary changes like that confuse me. And did we really need another Beastie Boys song?

I did like the nods to Mudd, and the Tribbles, of course, meaning that the crew is experiencing many of the same things that the Prime crew did. Which brings up the argument that despite being an alternate universe, their lives are still being guided somehow down the same paths, which accounts for the events of this film. I just wish we would have gotten a discussion about that fact by someone, perhaps Spock and Spock. It just seemed like those kind of little Trek moments were sacrificed for the sake of more action.

Besides Cumberbatch, I thought that Simon Pegg really steals this movie. He is great in every scene, and is hilarious. But what's with the wig? Horrible.

At the end of the day, I'm not sure how I feel yet. It's definitely a step down from the first Abrams film, of that I'm sure. I'm also sure that it will take several more viewings for me to figure out what I really feel about its legacy in the Trek universe. But as a summer action flick, it's a kick-ass thrill ride, and non-Trekkies should love it.
I'll probably add more later as I process it further.
OK, I've just returned from a matinee IMAX showing, my second viewing in 15 hours. And I completely revise my initial take:
Spoiler:
Being free from analyzing all the allusions and homages allowed me to just watch the movie, and it completely took me in this time. I got my chills... 8 or 10 times, at all the right places. I had tears fall from both eyes at Kirk's death. Spock's cry was powerful and dramatic, and seemed completely appropriate. It also seemed like the action was more balanced. I don't know why, but I enjoyed this second viewing 10X more than the first. My rating has gone up immensely, I'd put it just a wee bit behind the 2009 one now. I'd really recommend seeing this more than once. It's a grower. And the IMAX was awesome.

One thing I noticed this time, that I missed before: The archive that was destroyed at the beginning was the "Kelvin" something-or-other archive (seen above the doorway in one shot).
Old 05-16-13, 07:17 PM
  #41  
DVD Talk Reviewer
 
Boba Fett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,283
Received 38 Likes on 30 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

Knowing specific plot points made me enjoy the movie far more than had I went in blindly expecting originality. The biggest problem I had with the film is Pine lacked so much screen presence when placed against Cumberbatch, Urban, Weller, Greenwood, and hell, even Quinto. His Kirk is a true shell of the original character.

That said, it was what I expected, Action Trek 2. No insightful social commentary, just a well-paced, exciting, yet derivative (at least in the second half) film. Not as great as the last film, but a lot better than most of the pre-reboot films.

If I had to give it a grade, a very weak A, maybe A-.
Old 05-16-13, 07:40 PM
  #42  
Banned by request
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 54,150
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

I liked it a lot. It's more Space Seed than Wrath of Khan, which is a good thing. As for the ending, I'm hoping that was a "okay, for the fans, now we're going to do some new things going forward". If future sequels are derivative, I'll think less of this one.

I agree that there was too much action and not enough slow moments. The pacing felt off, like it was rushed, and I noticed characters in the credits who weren't in the film, so maybe there's a longer cut?
Old 05-16-13, 07:44 PM
  #43  
DVD Talk Reviewer
 
Boba Fett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,283
Received 38 Likes on 30 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

If one good thing comes of this, I hope it's that Peter Weller gets more big budget work.
Old 05-16-13, 08:01 PM
  #44  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
tanman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Gator Nation
Posts: 9,924
Received 957 Likes on 664 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

This diehard Trekker LOVED it! I don't know what you guys are harping about. I don't know if those complaining are appreciating the fact that this is an alternate timeline. It is so much more then an homage to wrath of khan. It shows that even with their lives altered and their roles reversed that their friendship is strong enough to make the same type of sacrifice. I also liked how instead of ignoring the weaknesses in the story they address it such as Kirks fast rise to captaincy and his recklessness. All of the references were excellent. Loved that it was section 31!

My only gripe would be the hint with the tribble was too obvious and too close to the end. I think if they did that when he first took the blood sample the audience might have forgotten about it.
Old 05-16-13, 08:04 PM
  #45  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Numanoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Down in 'The Park'
Posts: 27,881
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

Now that it's opening day, let's get this over with:

------------------------------------------
SPOILERS IN THIS POST AND BELOW!

Continue reading thread at own risk.
------------------------------------------



A few other things popped into my head during the movie. Feel free to discuss or ignore:
  • Why has Praxis already exploded? My guess is that the Klingons had to speed up their advancement because of Nero as well, which lead to premature over-mining of the moon.
  • Why does Cumberbatch refer to the life support system being "Behind the aft nacelle"? There is a starboard and a port nacelle, not a fore and aft. Bad writing, mis-read, or valid for some reason I don't understand?
  • Carol Marcus is now British, for some reason. Timeline changes lead her to having a different mother, or being raised in London or something, perhaps?
  • So the crew has already encountered Mudd, and Cyrano Jones, apparently, despite not having started on their 5-year mission yet. Looks like lots of paths have been diverted in the new timeline.
  • I think Kirk could have used a little bubbly-skin makeup in the climax.
  • I like how the writers got Christine Chapel off the ship probably so fans wouldn't keep wondering about her.
  • Also, Kirk in a three-way with at least one cat-girl. Nice to see onscreen what we all knew he was up to in TOS.
Old 05-16-13, 08:11 PM
  #46  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: STL
Posts: 3,197
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

You could just spoiler tag that
Old 05-16-13, 08:26 PM
  #47  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: DVDTalk's Surgeon General
Posts: 5,584
Received 13 Likes on 8 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by anomynous
You could just spoiler tag that
I think he is talking about for the rest of the thread. Typically review threads don't have spoiler tags, but since this one opened early in a few countries and then nation wide sneak preview some of us used them anyways. He is leaving a notice for anyone reading from page one that there will be spoilers without tags from now on in the thread.
Old 05-16-13, 09:05 PM
  #48  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Defiant1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

I saw it last night and loved it. I was never a huge fan of TOS but loved TNG & DS9. This is Action Trek, not the more insightful explorations of humanity and morality that the TV shows did but then again, those wouldn't make the same amount of money in the theatres. It's just something I've learned to accept about the Trek movies.

Like any Trek film, this will be nitpicked to death but from an initial viewing, I thought it greatly succeeded. And as a huge fan of DS9, I was thrilled to see that show acknowledged in the JJ-verse.

I saw this in IMAX 3D but I couldn't really tell which scenes were in IMAX. I read 30 minutes of the movie is in that format so I'm going to assume all the big set pieces were in IMAX.

There were a shit ton of trailers, all for other genre movies coming out soon. Man of Steel (in 3D), Pacific Rim, Elysium, The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones, Ender's Game, Thor: The Dark World, and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

Last edited by Defiant1; 05-16-13 at 09:12 PM.
Old 05-16-13, 09:09 PM
  #49  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 25,058
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Supermallet
I liked it a lot. It's more Space Seed than Wrath of Khan, which is a good thing. As for the ending, I'm hoping that was a "okay, for the fans, now we're going to do some new things going forward". If future sequels are derivative, I'll think less of this one.
What fans wanted them to use Khan? I seem to recall a ton of bitching and naysaying about it.

I'll say this for STiD: it was a fine Trek movie that will never hold a candle to the best Trek movies or even "Space Seed".

I'm reserving judgement about the future of Trek until I'm watching a new Trek TV series, though. Trek movies were always more action-oriented and the ones that weren't were generally terrible. At least Abrams gives us good action.
Old 05-16-13, 09:17 PM
  #50  
Banned by request
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 54,150
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness (Abrams, 2013) — The Reviews Thread

Let's face it, Khan hangs like a shadow over all Trek films except TMP. Even non-Trekkers know about Khan. They needed to get him out of the way.


Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.