Escape to the Movies: Star Trek: Into Darkness

[Vivi22]

snip

I'm going to pretty much agree with this, especially the first point. Honestly, I was never a huge fan of Movie Bob to begin with, but between his specific Mystery Box video, and this review lambasting the movie for something that I completely agree, was not actually presented in the marketing materials the way he seems to think it was, I've got to say I'm done watching Bob's stuff. It's frankly painful to see him look so hard for reasons to tear into films like this and Amazing Spider-Man, either because of his own warped expectations or because he doesn't like the director, or he's simply too close to the source material to not go in jaded, or any other reason that he falls victim to.

I hate to reiterate it again, but I think it needs to be said simply because it proves a point about him: there was no mystery box in the marketing materials. This film was never presented as having some top secret twist relating to John Harrison or any other character. It was inferred by people like Bob, and sure, they may have been right, but that does not mean they were selling the movie on it, nor does become a valid point of complaint about the movie.

Frankly, Bob is a terrible film critic. Not because he isn't even remotely objective (he's not, but that isn't really a requirement of the job to be fair), but because in cases like this he's not actually criticizing the movie. He's criticizing what he thought the movie was going to be, and trying to pretend he's bringing up some glorious all revealing insight in the process.

Sorry Bob, but that's just ridiculous, and you should really be ashamed of how poorthis review is.

 

[bojac6]

I wouldn't call this a movie "good" either...

This movie is GREAT and I wholeheartedly recommend you go see it now, screw whatever bob says and go watch it.

Why? Because it's fun without being stupid.

It's better than Iron Man 3 in every single way, the action is better, the cinematography is nicer, the climax is better the "twist" is better and if it wasn't for RDJ, this movie would blow Iron Man 3 so far out of the water that Greenpeace would have to bring a semi-truck to get it back in. THis is of course my opinion, so feel free to scream at your screen now about how I am wrong etc.

It's better than Wrath of Khan, it's damn well better than every Star Trek movie that came before it (in MY OPINION, bear in mind, I am not a Star Trek fan, nor did I never watch an episode of the Star Trek series).

Hell, I liked it better than most of the Marvel movies that came before it, including The Avengers (yeah yeah, I said Jehova, get your beards ready now). (I never read Marvel/DC comics either).

This movie was everything I wanted it to be.
A fun science-fiction action-romp with a likeable cast, great cinematography, a great score, good performances all-around, some throwbacks to the "original" even complete and utter dolts like me can understand and a good plot. Of course, this is far from being on-par with science-fiction classics, such as Moon and "2001", but then again this movie doesn't try to go that route.



(Also, why did Bob need to "critique" this movie and feels that revealing the "twist" is something he has to do, when in his Iron Man 3 review, he tiptoed around it, telling us how great the twist was, when, in all honesty, the "Iron Man Twist" is just as bad, if not worse than this movie's "twist".)

Well I am a big Star Trek fan. I was the only one in the theater laughing at the guy being from Section 31 (something from Deep Space Nine), and many other references. With those credentials established, let me say I agree with you on so many points.

This movie did references right, unlike Iron Man 3. I'm going to spoiler tag the rest, but know this contains spoilers for both Iron Man 3 and the Star Trek

Spoiler

The big twist of Iron Man 3 is that Kingsley's not the Mandarin. Meaning the commercials lied to me directly. Remember the part when Bob said the Star Trek movie did everything short of lie to you to get you in the seat? Well, Iron Man 3 did lie to me. Directly. And as set up for a stupid twist that didn't mean anything.

The twist, as it were, in Star Trek is so great, because it's an audience based twist. Yes, the new movies haven't gone into the Eugenics Wars, and that's the point. When Khan says "My name is Khan," all the characters go "Yeah? So?" while the audience is going "shit just got real." References to all kinds of Star Trek perforate the movie, and they aren't fan-service like throw away lines in Iron Man 3. The only reason PTSD after the Avengers movie was a problem for Tony Stark was because he told me. There wasn't much character development in that film, it was just there to say "Hey look, it's a follow up to The Avengers." In this movie, it's all references that still mean stuff. If you know what Section 31 is, you go "Holy crap, it's Section 31" and if you don't, they explain it to you. A newbie to Trek may not know of all the times Sisko had to shut that down, but they know enough to know it's basically DARPA meets the NSA with no oversight.

As for the retreat of Wrath of Khan, I loved it. I loved how it was re-imagined. How they dared to do that and pulled it off well. I enjoyed how characters switched roles and places and how so much was the same, but different. Frankly, it gave me so much hope for the reboot Star Trek series, precisely because it showed how it can hit all of the favorite points of Trek, but make them fresh. Would I like to see a new Star Trek tv show that dares to be more about exploration, sure. But as Star Trek movies go, this one did a great job.

In short, highly recommended.

 

[Xman490]

Yeah, I was a bit lukewarm about the reboot(the 1st movie) too.
I never really had any investment into the series, as I never watched it, but I can't imagine how painful it would be for me if I had.

As I am in this situation as well, I was surprised when I saw that this movie - ON IT'S OWN - is quite thrilling and enjoyable. I watched the spoiler half of this review, as I was curious to see what Bob hates about this movie.

I was ready to complain that "I now find Bob's opinion not worth listening to." Now, I say, that he should have mentioned that this movie is a big letdown IF you've seen the Star Trek television episodes and Wrath of Khan.

 

[Caostotale]

I hardly paid attention to any of the news, and I still figured out what the surprise was once I learned that there is, indeed, a surprise.

Going to see it tonight, but I have a feeling Mr. Plinkett will have afield day with this movie.

Bet you anything Mike really liked this movie. He already gave a very positive review of the first JJ Abrams reboot. So no, Plinkett won't be reviewing Into Darkness.

I thought the Plinkett review of the reboot Star Trek was one of the best he's put together. For him, the movie was a net positive, but not unless one views it as a 'guilty pleasure' and divorces it completely from any love for the previous Star Trek canon.

I also quite enjoyed his first 'mini-review' of the movie, where a woman gets abducted and raped in an alleyway by the movie only to ultimately walk off (beaten and bruised) saying, 'ehh, that wasn't so terrible.'

 

[Jegsimmons]

Star Trek: Into Darkness

MovieBob gives us a frank and spoiler filled review of the latest Star Trek film.

Watch Video

Holy fuck movie bob...are minds must have Vulcan mind melded because i thought the same exact thing when i saw this movie.


Spoiler Warning!!!!!


When the revealed Khan was actually Khan i about walked the fuck out. It was stupid, it was wasted, and worst of all....THEY DIDN'T GET KHAN RIGHT!!!!

Khan is supposed to be of Latino decent with a tad bit of European, as opposed to a fucking Brit.
Now don't get me wrong, the guy who played him acted the living hell out of that part, and i'd love to see his work again, but at the same time, no backstory on Khan, not even the fact he was a fucking dictator who owned a third of earth at one point and killed thousands of people.

His battle scenes are pathetic and don't hold as much tension, the two other bits from wrath of Khan were just shoe horned in and pissed on, and worst of all.....NOTHING IS ACCOMPLISHED!!!!

Now the klingons were cool, and the klingon fight scene was awesome, but at the same time, it just opened plot holes.

the Admirals plan makes no fucking sense. too many redundancies and stupid shit.
Its obvious on what shit is going to happen and why.

I don't hate this movie, but i'm disappointed with it.

And im convinced Abrams may not understand sci-fi at all and im worried about what will happen with star wars.

 

[Oroboros]

Having seen the movie, I can say it was just more of the same as the last movie, except of lesser quality. Aside from the horrible plot and hamfisted war on terror plot, there were far too many action scenes that seemed almost 'video game' in character, and there is such *volume* of action scenes that they just blend together after a while and lose all tension- it's all just one big slog to get through for me.

And when it's all said and done? There was almost zero character development. The ridiculous manner in which Kirk was promoted in the first movie is repeated again-in even less time-he goes fro m captain,to cadet, to first officer to captain again in the space of minutes adn the status quo is maintained, and the whole subplot about Kirk beign an inexperienced and arrogant pain in the butt who will get everyone killed is essentially brushed off. The only real character development to speak of is that Kirk and Spock are finally set up as friends-it only took two movies to do so!.

The fanservice was really thick in places, and it really went past homages to other movies into straight up retreads of previous material.

I can't really reconmend it.

 

[Amir Kondori]

I am a huge Trek fan, watched all the original series, TNG, well I've watched everything lets just say that, even the God awful Enterprise, which actually got good its last season just before it was killed off.
I liked this movie. I thought the first movie was a good action sci-fi movie but one that really only used the Trek universe as a dressing, something painted over the movie to pull in more people than it might have otherwise. A lot of what makes Trek Trek, convincing and at least semi-plausible(most of the time) technobable/plot points, missions about exploration and peace where humanity overcame its darker nature, and cooperation and understanding amongst all races and creeds, was completely missing in the first movie.
The second movie, while having a lot of problems, at least trys to work within some of those themes. I understand the problems Moviebob has with the film and I even agree with a lot of them, but the film still worked for me. With Gene gone I don't think we'll ever see any Trek fiction that adheres the bright ideals he tried to convey, but this film at least tried.

 

[Amir Kondori]

I'm really starting to dislike moviebob, because of his general attitude and just the fact that a lot of the time I'm not agreeing with him, as I absolutely loved the new Star Trek. I'm not sure if I'm going to keep watching him, so many of his reviews just seem to be based solely on his point of view and opinion of the movie and not the actual movie (he probably could have done this review without ever seeing the movie), and to me he comes off as a bit of a douche bag.

Really? Your big problem with a guy who reviews movie, a movie "critic" is that his reviews are based on his point of view? Well what else do you expect his reviews to be based on? Your point of view?
Also, how could have done this review without seeing the actual movie? He references specific plot points and twists that you would have to have seen the movie to know. He is a critic. He won't always agree with you. I really liked this movie a lot but it did have some major problems. He is correct that they redid the ending but with a twist. I won't get into more here as I don't want to spoil anything for anyone who hasn't seen it yet.
Can we all agree we will stop attacking critics for expressing opinions we disagree with?

/Watching this movie made me want to go home and watch Wrath of Khan

 

[Amir Kondori]

Ugh...they had to pull that fanservice card, huh? No thanks.

Don't assume you won't like it based on a review. If you are a Trek fan in any way you should still see it. It definitely has its problems but it also does some things very well and is very fun to watch.

 

[Klatz]

I enjoyed it as spectacle, the ships and action were thrilling. But it was like a McDonald's hamburger, tastes good at the time but then it sits uncomfortably in your stomach. That's how this movie was for me. At first I thought it was okay, not bad, enjoyable. Now after some digesting, it's fallen into not good category.

Here's the things that bothered me enough to downgrade the movie

Spoiler

If they needed magic restorative blood from a genetically engineered person why didn't they take it from one of Khan's crew members? Is Khan different somehow?

And what, there's no other ships in the vicinity of the Federation capital to help Enterprise? And there's no way for someone one the planet to beam everyone off the falling ship? What?


The sense of scale seemed awfully small. To get to the Klingon home world it took what seemed like minutes at warp. And then there's the calling Scotty (on Earth presumably) from the vicinity of Klingon home world. The whole galaxy seems to have been reduced to the scale of the solar system.

If Khan was cunning and ruthless why didn't he just destroy their life support and waltz onto the Enterprise to claim his crew?

This things just sort of made the movie dumb to me. Not all what I expect Trek to be.

 

[Zetatrain]

Just saw the movie like 2 hours ago. As a Star trek fan, I was a tad disappointed, but I did enjoy this movie despite the amount of criticism you'll see in this post

WARNING LOTS OF SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!

Spoiler

The movie's strongest point is its action scenes and its humor, pure and simple.

Story and character wise....its a mixed bag

Characters:
Probably the best part character wise is that the how the movie continues to build upon the friendship of Kirk and Spock, and I did like the scene in the shuttle where Spock explains his fear of death.

However, one problem was the scene were Kirk dies. I don't think scene was done badly, though it could have better, however it didn't move me either. I think part of the problem is that we haven't seen Kirk and Spock as friends on screen enough for the scene to have much impact. The scene from Wrath of Khan was not only written better, but the movie had the advantage of TOS coming before it. Before I saw Wrath of Khan I saw a good amount of TOS and I knew that Kirk and Spock were best friends. Therefore, it made Spock's death all the more devastating and sold me on the fact that Kirk just lost a dear friend. Long story sort the reboot series didn't build upon the friendship between Kirk and Spock enough and opts for a payoff to early.

I know people say that the rest of the crew of the Enterprise are just going through the motions, but then again they always have in previous movies. Not really saying its not a valid criticism, but rather I'm used to this so it does not really bother me.

As for the two villains, Admiral Marcus and Khan, I'll get to them as a explain my thoughts on the overall story.

Story

Well it had some good ideas, but they try to cram too much into the film and the result is a bit messy.

The story was obviously going for a cautionary tale about revenge. In the film there are three people out for revenge, Kirk, Khan, and Marcus(sort of). Kirk wants to avenge Pike, Khan wants to avenge this people (that he thought were dead),and Marcus wants revenge on the Klingons. I know Marcus' desire for a war with the Klingons can be seen more as a "its us or them" situation, but the fact that he names his ship the USS Vengeance (its called that in the credits) makes me think otherwise.

Now this in my opinion was a pretty good set up. Marcus' desire to fight the Klingons leads him to turn to a man he didn't fully understand(Khan)and probably wouldn't have employed under normal circumstances. Khan's desire for revenge gets Pike killed and enrages Kirk. And Kirk's desire for revenge leads to him unwittingly becoming a pawn to start an intergalactic war with the Klingon Empire.

I also like how the destruction of Vulcan and most of the Vulcan race is a huge reason why the Federation has been going down a more militaristic path. Its a nice bit of continuity that shows how the events of the first film are greatly affecting the future of this alternate universe.

Here's the problem. Kirk never really ponders or reflects upon his need for revenge, Khan's desire for revenge is somewhat undermined by the fact that his people aren't dead, and we never get much of a reason why Marcus would want revenge on a personal level.

The movie does not spend enough time showing us how the need for revenge is affecting these characters and the choices they make.

Another problem is the ending in general as it really isn't good enough to sell the message about revenge. Part of the reason is because there doesn't seem to be any significant impact that came about because of Kirk's desire for revenge.

Here are some general changes I feel should have been made

1)More focus on Marcus as a villain and his motivations
2)Kirk fires most or all of those "special" torpedoes (without knowing their contents) in an attempt to kill Khan but fails (somehow)
3)Scrap Kirk's death scene (save it for a later movie) and the whole chase scene on Earth and use the time to develop the characters more...in fact scrap the whole ending
4)In the end Marcus and the USS Vengeance are destroyed, but the Klingon Empire finds out that the Enterprise fired the torpedoes at Chronos and declares war on the Federation (or at the very least pushes the two sides to the brink of war)
5)Khan escapes (along with his people if any are still alive) and convinces the Klingons to let him join them so he can get revenge on Kirk and the Federation

I know this is somewhat of a cliffhanger ending, but it would show how Kirk's inexperience and thirst for revenge has led to dire consequences. It would also tie in better to Pike's speech about how Kirk's attitude will someday get him and a lot of his people killed. This also allows for Khan to have much more screen time and development as a villain in future films. I think this kind of ending would be a lot more fitting considering the title.

Basically, like the first movie, Into Darkness is fun to watch, but still has some problems in the character and story department.

 

[Calibanbutcher]

When the revealed Khan was actually Khan i about walked the fuck out. It was stupid, it was wasted, and worst of all....THEY DIDN'T GET KHAN RIGHT!!!!

Khan is supposed to be of Latino decent with a tad bit of European, as opposed to a fucking Brit.
Now don't get me wrong, the guy who played him acted the living hell out of that part, and i'd love to see his work again, but at the same time, no backstory on Khan, not even the fact he was a fucking dictator who owned a third of earth at one point and killed thousands of people.

Excuse me, but even I know that's wrong, and I have never watched an episode of any Star Trek series in my life.

His full name is "Khan Noonien Sing", according to the new movie, which implies that he is actually of INDIAN descent. And wikipedia confirms that. The mere fact that a latino PORTRAYED an Indian dictator in the original series soesn't make the character a latino.

 

[Moeez]

JJ Abrams never liked or cared for Star Trek, this recent Daily Show interview with Jon Stewart is enough proof:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-may-13-2013/j-j--abrams

So not surprised how wrong this reboot feels.

 

[xPixelatedx]

Ugh...they had to pull that fanservice card, huh? No thanks.

So, what fan service are you referring to?

1.Using the Star Trek Franchise
2.Using the characters of the original series
3.Using Old Spock from the original series
4.Showing Klingons
5.The negative chemistry between Spock and Kirk
6.Basing the new ship designs on the old ones

...Well, I'll stop there since you probably get the message. When you reboot a franchise, nothing you do can technically 'stand on it's own' because that's not what a reboot is. Of course they will eventually have to encounter the villains and a lot of the plot devices of the older series. It wouldn't be Star Trek if it lacked what defines Star Trek.

 

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Wow Movie Bob. This is why you're going to hate Star Wars 7. You can't watch a movie that uses a popular franchise and accept they're using some great things in the franchise in an attempt to make a good movie. If I was making a Star Trek movie and wanted a great villain for it that fans would like I'd certainly use Khan. I really enjoyed Star Trek Into Darkness even though I'm a huge Star Trek fan. Maybe it would help if you can accept people are doing something new with a franchise and are taking familiar elements and trying to make something new like a certain other movie called The Amazing Spider-Man. When Star Wars 7 comes out and if it uses a iconic character and twists them in a new way I'll be watching with an open mind and enjoying it while you will probably hate the movie just because of it.

 

[Madman123456]

Another rather questionable Lensflare indulgence in mediocrity. Meh. I highly doubt there's going to be anything really good to be had with this Franchise, so what would it take to kill it off? And Star Wars right along with it.

 

[Vivi22]

JJ Abrams never liked or cared for Star Trek, this recent Daily Show interview with Jon Stewart is enough proof:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-may-13-2013/j-j--abrams

So not surprised how wrong this reboot feels.

Except in that very interview he goes on to say that he got into the series once he was brought onto the first movie and appreciated it quite a bit more. But I guess acknowledging that gets in the way of taking something out of context to justify nerd rage, so feel free to continue ignoring the entirety of the interview if you need to in order to continue feeling smug.

 

[Gorrath]

Ugh...they had to pull that fanservice card, huh? No thanks.

So, what fan service are you referring to?

1.Using the Star Trek Franchise
2.Using the characters of the original series
3.Using Old Spock from the original series
4.Showing Klingons
5.The negative chemistry between Spock and Kirk
6.Basing the new ship designs on the old ones

...Well, I'll stop there since you probably get the message. When you reboot a franchise, nothing you do can technically 'stand on it's own' because that's not what a reboot is. Of course they will eventually have to encounter the villains and a lot of the plot devices of the older series. It wouldn't be Star Trek if it lacked what defines Star Trek.

As a huge trekkie I also felt like they were going out of their way to point at things and go: "Rember this thing you liked! Here it is, eh, EHHH!" And after a while it got tiresome. The things you listed as fanservice really weren't the big fan-servicy things.

For me, the hardest part to watch was:

Spoiler

The scene where spock comes down to find Kirk in the irradiated chamber. I get that it was supposed to show how both men's character was intact despite the alternate universe storyline, and that if their roles were reversed either would have died for the ship. But without any of the weight or chemistry that the original had, it felt like it was simply pandering in the worst way, as if it were trying to recapture one of the most emotionally jarring and deep moments in Strak Trek history without having any of the soul.

This was made all the wrose by them having already showed us the out. How can I care that Kirk is about to die if McCoy has already announced that Khan's blood might be able to resurrect the dead? From the moment McCoy made that statement, which seemed to have nothing at all to do with what was going on in the scene in which he said it, it was instantly obvious what was going to happen.

OT: All in all, it was an internally consistent space action movie that wasn't terrible on its own, but freaking peeved me off as a trek fan. I think the biggest issue the movie had was trying to have two antagonists, leaving no time for one or the other to be developed very well. I have to question its pacing and story, which seemed to me to have no few plot holes. I think the most egregious issue with it though was that in order to make its twist work, it had to do a CRAPLOAD of tell and not show. So many important plot shaping points were simply thrown at is in dialogue.

Also, Moviebob, the reason the Klingons looked like they did was because they were supposed to capture an 'inbetween' point in Klingon evolution. The radical difference between what Klingons looked like in the original series vs what they looked like in Next Generation and beyond was explained by Worf in DS:9, well, sort of explained. I actually applaud the make up work here as it captured a pretty decent looking in between state.

 

[daibakuha]

I don't see why everyone's saying that only trek fans don't like this. It's not a great movie, at best it's a decent action film that's really, really dumb. Characters do things for no reason, people beam across the known universe, Khan is some kind of superhero. All of that could have been forgiven though if the characters didn't simply retread their arcs from the first movie. More than half the cast is completely ignored.

 

[Moeez]

JJ Abrams never liked or cared for Star Trek, this recent Daily Show interview with Jon Stewart is enough proof:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-may-13-2013/j-j--abrams

So not surprised how wrong this reboot feels.

Except in that very interview he goes on to say that he got into the series once he was brought onto the first movie and appreciated it quite a bit more. But I guess acknowledging that gets in the way of taking something out of context to justify nerd rage, so feel free to continue ignoring the entirety of the interview if you need to in order to continue feeling smug.

He didn't really appreciate it, he more just understood why people like it. He didn't exactly jump on the chance to do a Star Trek reboot. It comes across in his reboots where the first movie felt more Star Wars (hardly any technobabble or politics, focus on action sequences and humor), which is why most people found it funny that he's doing Star Wars now. The only thing these reboots have got right are the characterisations, which is not exactly hard to do when you have actors who probably have more fondness for the characters than the director.