Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 5

[Marvin]

Devin has done this little rant/review. Where was this guy a week a half ago, or even back in 2009 for that matter. Safe to say, he thinks it sucks. Alot.

 

[thestartrekker]

Could you link to the review please?

 

[thestartrekker]

Found it. Very spoilery, so don't read if you haven't seen it yet.
Though he raises a lot of things that I've said before in my spoiler tags, that I obiviously agree with, I only disagree with him in one minor point, that's his admiration for Quinto's Spock. But when the writers give you stuff to do and lines to say/shout, whada you do? Mehh

 

[Solidus]

Good thing I can't stand Devin I've always hated his views mainly because he writes a lot of them to rile up the Internet. His reviews are not the thing just him in general is unpleasant.

 

[Tony Stark]

Personally I think Nick Meyer's second Star Trek, Star Trek VI The Undiscovered Country is just almost as good as The Wrath of Khan.

I like that movie, especially Christopher Plummer's performance, but to me that one just hasn't held up as well over time as ST2 has. It's not a bad movie by any means, and I enjoyed it, but when I think of truly great Trek movies I think of ST 2009, ST First Contact and TWOK.

Part of it for me is Horner's score is probably one of the greatest movie scores to date. The score is like another character in the film, it really narrates the story.

I found the score for TUC, to be underwhelming, and pretty forgettable.

Goldsmith's scores are fantastic, but Star Trek TMP, was a pretty boring movie, but the score was fantastic. When he was called to do First Contact, that is when his score really shines.

 

[DrMylesOBoogie]

This film was worse than I could have imagined. I was cringing in my seat. Worst cinematic experience since Prometheus. This is Superman Returns bad.

 

[terry78]

Jesus, care to elaborate without spoiling?

 

[Tony Stark]

Yeah that is 180 degrees different than the reviews are stating. I've heard some say they didn't like it as much at Trek 2009, but I don't see how it could be that bad.

 

[enquencle]

For those who have seen it, is it worth seeing in 3D? Or should i just go to a normal screening? Problem is 3D screenings are only before 3 p.m., absurd.

Honestly, I've only seen ST09 and the orginal motion picture, I havent had the chance to see any other one, but I'm really exited for this one. Will that make it more enjoyable? or completely the opposite? Just being curious with this question.

 

[SWAT]

Just saw it and I really liked it a lot. On par with the first one for sure.

More John Harrison would't have harmed the movie. But Y'know... I liked Iron Man 3 and people are saying that sucks too. So don't listen to me.

 

[Octoberist]

This film was worse than I could have imagined. I was cringing in my seat. Worst cinematic experience since Prometheus. This is Superman Returns bad.

Image if I went to the 'Man of Steel' forum and said "I saw Man of Steel and it was just bad", and left without any other explanation, argument or reason.

 

[Visceral]

Well I don't know about Star Trek but I just saw Big Dirty Girls 3 and it just sucked, definitely worse than part two and not even close to part one. I hope they reboot it soon.

I give it 6.9 out of 10.

 

[Octoberist]

Contains spoiler regarding film.

Spoiler

'Star Trek Into Darkness' Eyes $100M Box-Office Opening

Projections for "Star Trek Into Darkness" have surged in the past week, putting J.J. Abrams' space epic sequel on track to take in more than $100 million at the box office over its extended debut weekend.

Paramount Pictures will dock "Star Trek Into Darkness” in 336 Imax 3D theaters Wednesday, one day ahead of its nationwide rollout in more than 3,800 locations.

The sci-fi adventure should easily knock Disney’s Marvel superhero sequel “Iron Man 3,” which is coming off a $72 million second week, out of the weekend's top box-office spot. Other studios are steering clear: there are no other wide releases this week.

Expectations have risen since Paramount last week announced Imax sellouts for Wednesday's shows in New York, L.A., San Francisco and several other major markets, and moved the wide release date up a day, from Friday to Thursday.

On Tuesday, tickets for "Star Trek Into Darkness" accounted for 71 percent of online ticket broker Fandango's sales, and rival Movietickets.com reports more than 300 sellouts. The reviews have been very strong; it has an 88 percent positive rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

Paramount and director Abrams successfully re-launched the franchise with “Star Trek” in 2009 by broadening its appeal well beyond its Trekkie base, running up more than $255 million domestically in the process. The sequel is expected to do even better, and that’s good news for producers Paramount, Skydance Pictures and Abrams’ Bad Robot Productions, since the production budget was $190 million and there’s been a major marketing push behind the film.

Chris Pine returns as Capt. Kirk, and is rejoined by Zach Quinto (Spock), Zoe Saldana (Lt. Uhura), Karl Urban (Bones), John Cho (Sulu), Anton Yelchin (Chekov) and Simon Pegg (Scotty). British actor Benedict Cumberbatch comes aboard as the baddie Khan. Robert Orci and Alex Kurtzman, along with Damon Lindelof, wrote the screenplay.

"The anticipation for this film has been strong and steady for months,” BoxOffice.com Editor-in-Chief Phil Contrino told TheWrap. The film's hardcore fans have are energized, and January's announcement that Abrams would be directing Disney's "Star Wars VII" further stoked their anticipation.

Contrino agrees that the film’s base is expanding, but thinks "Into Darkness" also will get a boost from some older fans.

“The buzz around the last film was so strong that I think this one will be bring in a lot of the fans of the older films,” he said. The 11 previous movies in the series have grossed more than $1.8 billion globally since “Star Trek: The Motion Picture" launched the franchise in 1979.

Those movies hewed closed to the mythology (“Beam me up, Scotty”) of the culturally iconic 1960s TV show created by Gene Rodenberry. The last film and “Into Darkness” both make nods to the classic series, but forsake overt references for more action.

Some of that is Abrams’ putting his stamp on the franchise, but some of the focus and the marketing has been tweaked to make the movie more appealing to foreign audiences. For all of its success domestically, the series has not been a moneymaker overseas.

Determined to reverse that trend and turn “Into Darkness” into a global hit, Paramount hosted focus groups in foreign markets, who told the studios they were more interested in the action than “Trekkie stuff,” and the studio adjusted the film and the marketing. They also sent the filmmakers and cast members on a number of trips abroad to build anticipation, and added British stars Cumberbatch and Alice Eve to the cast to pique interest in that market.

The strategy worked, at least last weekend. “Star Trek Into Darkness” brought in $31.7 million from seven territories, led by the more than $13 million from the U.K., in its foreign debut.

http://www.thewrap.com/movies/article/star-trek-darkness-eyes-100m-box-office-opening-91566

 

[Octoberist]

I'm not going to negate El May of Latino Review or Devin Faraci (in whom I actually like. I don't agree with him all the time but he's a great writer) too much, but I just remember last week they really stressed how the tracking for this film is at a single-digit low and were set on it. And now it's at a high.

Tracking is a tool, but man, does it fluctuate. Who knows? The 100 Million could off by 20. I guess my point is that people, including journalists and bloggers, shouldn't see relay too heavily on the tracking system. Even last week, 'Gatsby' beat expectations despite some predicting much lower numbers.

 

[jmc]

For those who have seen it, is it worth seeing in 3D? Or should i just go to a normal screening? Problem is 3D screenings are only before 3 p.m., absurd.

Honestly, I've only seen ST09 and the orginal motion picture, I havent had the chance to see any other one, but I'm really exited for this one. Will that make it more enjoyable? or completely the opposite? Just being curious with this question.

Avoid 3D if possible.

 

[ThePhantasm]

This film was worse than I could have imagined. I was cringing in my seat. Worst cinematic experience since Prometheus. This is Superman Returns bad.

That's kinda generic, can you elaborate? What's bad about it?

 

[DKDetective]

Phil Gee gives a great spoiler-free review on the latest MovieMoan podcast. Given what Trek means to me and the reasons why I liked the 2009 reboot, I have a strong feeling I will be agreeing with everything he said.

 

[titansupes]

Are we still not posting spoilers? Am I allowed to post my super-spoilery ramble if I put it in tags?

 

[thestartrekker]

Based on Octoberist revealing to

Spoiler

everyone Khan is indeed the villain of the piece, I'd say it is safe to post spoilers now without the tags, nothing else you could say could spoil it more now.

'Star Trek Into Darkness' Eyes $100M Box-Office Opening
Chris Pine returns as Capt. Kirk, and is rejoined by Zach Quinto (Spock), Zoe Saldana (Lt. Uhura), Karl Urban (Bones), John Cho (Sulu), Anton Yelchin (Chekov) and Simon Pegg (Scotty). British actor Benedict Cumberbatch comes aboard as the baddie Khan. Robert Orci and Alex Kurtzman, along with Damon Lindelof, wrote the screenplay.

 

[jmc]

SPOILER TAGS!!!!!!!!

 

[DrMylesOBoogie]

Image if I went to the 'Man of Steel' forum and said "I saw Man of Steel and it was just bad", and left without any other explanation, argument or reason.

Where to begin? The beauty of the first film was that they managed to reboot and alter the timeline so that we could journey to uncharted territories with a genuine air of uncertainty and suspense. But the first thing they've done is rehash

Spoiler

Wrath of Khan

. Taking some of the most iconic Trek moments and watering them down. But even if I hadn't seen previous films prior to the 2009 reboot, this would still fail for me as a film. It's simply dull. The humor falls flat. The action set pieces carry absolutely no suspense and the list of insanely dumb character decisions is all but too long to mention.

 

[Silvermoon]

SPOILER TAGS!!!!!!!!

Agreed... hello people, there are still a LOT of us that haven't seen it yet and even IF other sites are openly posting spoilers does NOT make it okay to do it here yet. Spoiler tags PLEASE!!!!!!

 

[titansupes]

Here's the ramble I posted on EyesSkyward.com right after seeing it. Apologies if some of it doesn't make sense, I was excited and wrote quick. I need to see this movie again, too.


Big spoilers:

Spoiler

Just saw it. Loved it.

I'm about to ramble:

All Vad's complaints are completely valid, but Abrams is just so damn good at making these things so intense and emotional that I just give myself to them. My biggest problem, like you guys, is the Kirk death. Specifically, down to the exact lines "Better get down here. Better hurry." and all the "Ship...Out of danger?" stuff. But damn, when Kirk says "I'm scared..." that's a great moment. And, even though I was surprised when it happened and it took me out of the movie a little... I liked Spock's "Khaaan!" It was straight up fan service that half of me loved and the other half wanted out right away. What would have made the whole thing better to me? Leaving Kirk dead at the end of the movie. With no clues about a return, Spock being made full Captain etc. But then we may have been subjected to "The Search for Kirk", which I just don't think I could've handled. In the end, while it was acted and directed well... The fact they were ripping it off and immediately resolving it with the blood, made it feel cheap. The more I think about it, the less I like it.

He did this on the first movie too, and I was glad it happened again... Abrams is so good with shock and intensity. Both through the characters (Pike getting shot, his reaction to getting shot as well as Spock and Kirks) and that whole fight really. Just... the atmosphere of it. When the characters are under attack, I genuinely feel exhilarated and under siege myself. I the U.S.S Vengeance for the first time only a week or so ago and thought "Three Trek movies in a row of a big black bad guy warship outgunning Enterprise? Seriously?" But man, when it burst out of warp and directly in front on Enterprise... I audibly gasped. It was just that well shot and played. Same when it caught up to Enterprise mid-warp. Ships do this in Trek all the time, but this one was a complete "No way... Oh ****!" moment. Same with knowing that it was a STARFLEET warhip, led by a superior (who was damn menacing) in a no hope situation (Kirk's plea for the crews lives and 'I'm Sorry' were great). Man, I loved all this stuff. In these moments, I felt thrilled, scared and lonely. Great acting and direction.

Harrison is Khan. Okay. As Vad said, though there was quasi-effective misdirection the last 4 years, we all assumed it was him or Mitchell. But while watching the movie, up until McCoy's "looks like we have a genuine superman aboard" line, I honestly had no inkling that he wasn't John Harrison. I never stopped liking him, I think he was used very effectively... With the exception of the whole of Kirk's death/resurrection. I was genuinely disappointed when a devastated McCoy sat at his desk... And both he and I remembered the tribble. And I did find myself thinking "Why not just use one of the other 72 guys?" And his defeat was a little weird, I expected one more lightning quick scene of him in between Spock's uppercut and Khan back in cryo-sleep.

Anyway. Energy. Atmosphere. Intensity. Character beats and interactions. Abrams nails it. Great fun. I just hope the NEXT one maintains that... And is smart and moral (though I don't think this one was totally shallow).

Oh, and it was specifically the fight on Kronos that made me think "Abrams is going to direct the HELL out of Star Wars". And I fully expect Ardnt to deliver more than Orci and Kurtzman ever could, so I'm even more excited for Ep.VII now.

EDIT: Oh, Nimoy's cameo! I really liked that. The knowing and pained look on his face when New-Spock says the name Khan.... Man, that was good. One thing though, when he comes on the view screen and they both say Mr.Spock... Does everyone know about Spock-Prime before this? I was expecting a few cutaway "WTF?" reactions from the bridge crew, especially Uhura.

RE-EDIT: And for what it's worth, I didn't actually notice the lens flares at all. I'm sure they were there, but he's toned them down significantly, I think.

 

[marvelrobbins]

Once I see It this weekend I will post my view but chances are I will be harsh
with It especilly Since I didn't like Iron man 3 and I can't take seriously all
the glowing reviews It got.

My feeling Is
In age of Transformers too many people have blinders on

My compassion for these films Is classic Trek.Now before people claim I will
just like everything classic Trek.I found the motion Picture boring as hell.I prefer
DS9 over the NG.First Class was only good NG film.Voyager Is worst Star Trek.
I gave up on Enterprise In season 2 live but I came to regret that after later watching seasons 3 and 4 on DVD(save for the horrable final episode)

Spoiler

As for Khan as villain that doesn't bother me.The alternate reality thing they pulled was to pull a reboot without ailenating the exsisting fanbase and sending them on riots.The entire point of reboots Is so they can do redo stories.J.J. Abrams has long history of playing In other people's worlds.The Idea they would never use the most famous villian of OS was crazy

 

[terry78]

You ****ers can't spoil until midnight tonight. That is when it opens here in the states. Where it matters.