Star Trek: Into Darkness

[Ghambit]

You have to admit:

Was I the only one that felt Star Wars in this Trek?  Even the damned Klingon patrol ships were essentially tie-fighters with horizontal wings.

[Ironwood]

I detested the prime directive whenever it came up because it always seemed to be a roadblock to doing the right thing.  

Actually, it was admitting that the right thing on that scale is simply not ever clear cut.

That's just historical fact, alas.

[Khaldun]

You have to admit:

Was I the only one that felt Star Wars in this Trek?  Even the damned Klingon patrol ships were essentially tie-fighters with horizontal wings.

What annoys me in this thread is that folks are assuming:

a) that if you didn't like this film, you must love all other Trek or not care about the plot holes in it. Not me. My feelings about a lot of Trek (films and series) are lukewarm. In many ways I liked the first reboot film better than older Trek.
b) that if you didn't like this film, you habitually nitpick everything. Not me. Most of the time my suspension of disbelief settings are pretty generous.

[Ironwood]

There's a wild difference between 'this is a movie, suspend disbelief' and the writers/director flat out saying 'you chucklefucks will swallow anything.'

I was really looking forward to this one after the first one (which I liked) but the more hype and mystery and bollocks started surrounding it, the more alarm bells went off.  And now people, who thought like me, are telling me it's dire.

Fair enough.  I'd rather skip it than end up moaning in this thread.

[Lantyssa]

Meh.  I'm still going to see it.  Most of you guys hated Borderlands when I thought it was a fun game.  I'll sneak in some snacks and shut my brain off.

[Numtini]

There are two prime directives. TOS prime directive only refers to pre-star-faring civilizations. TNG and later prime directive is pretty much America First isolationism.

I'm fine with the first, the latter is immoral. At the time B5 was an almost shocking contrast as its entire mission was essentially to meddle in galactic politics and Clark's isolationists were the enemy.

The Motion Picture is slow and often dull, I still love it as the only Star Trek tale that evoked true awe in me.

I remember seeing in in the theater and after so many years of fuzzy tv reruns, the long flyby of the Enterprise was an incredible experience. Not that it holds up, but at the time it was wow.

[01101010]

The Motion Picture is slow and often dull, I still love it as the only Star Trek tale that evoked true awe in me.

I remember seeing in in the theater and after so many years of fuzzy tv reruns, the long flyby of the Enterprise was an incredible experience. Not that it holds up, but at the time it was wow.

The story in the Motion Picture I rank just behind Khan. I loved the tie into man's early space exploration coming back to complete the circle.

[Mrbloodworth]

Missed opportunity:

[Rendakor]

I saw this last night and liked it. My experience with ST includes only a few episodes of Voyager when I was younger, and the 09 movie a few weeks ago because my friends insisted I watch it then go see this. There were some silly bits that didn't make sense, and a lot of overly dramatic moments, but all in all it was a good action flick.

[HaemishM]

I enjoyed it as a brain dead action flick. Things happen because. Well, really because they want a particular shot or effect or something but it doesn't have to make any sense and trust me, it does not.

But...

[murdoc]

I quite liked most of this, but it did get really stupid towards the end.

[Khaldun]

[90Proof]

I watched the movie this afternoon in a regular theater, no 3-D and no IMAX magic.  I was underwhelmed 

[SurfD]

[Khaldun]

[Lakov_Sanite]

Star Trek has ALWAYS been hand-wavy techno-magic filled top to bottom with plot holes.

Rose-colored glasses.

This movie was good.

[Ingmar]

I enjoyed it as a brain dead action flick. Things happen because. Well, really because they want a particular shot or effect or something but it doesn't have to make any sense and trust me, it does not.

But...

[Lakov_Sanite]

[Megrim]

Movie was fine. Best pulpy sci-fi since the 5th Element. Action was good, acting was good, less lens-flare was good, effects were good. Even the plot made sense.

Worth seeing.

[HaemishM]

The story in broad strokes made sense. The PLOT (the points along the story's timeline to reach the broad strokes) really made very little sense at all.

[Lakov_Sanite]

[Ingmar]

[Ragnoros]

Best pulpy sci-fi since the 5th Element.

Mighty strong words those.

[Megrim]

Best pulpy sci-fi since the 5th Element.

Mighty strong words those.

Yep. Pretty much is though.

[MrHat]

I enjoyed it.

Afternoon flick in a uncrowded theater with the full massive screen.  I actually had a moment of "wow, we've come a long way these effects are pretty awesome."

My biggest gripe (action brain on, plot hole brain off) was:


I only have vague memories of the original series and movies, so maybe someone can enlighten me.

[Megrim]

I enjoyed it.

Afternoon flick in a uncrowded theater with the full massive screen.  I actually had a moment of "wow, we've come a long way these effects are pretty awesome."

My biggest gripe (action brain on, plot hole brain off) was:


I only have vague memories of the original series and movies, so maybe someone can enlighten me.

[DraconianOne]

It entertained me for a couple of hours so I can't really complain. I laughed, I smiled, I sighed heavily at the extremely obvious use of Chekov's gun (no relation.)  Thoughts:

[Surlyboi]

I liked it.

[K9]

[Merusk]

It's a Trek film for people not interested in or only casually interested in Trek.  They threw tropes at you without getting why they were done and that's fine and dandy for what it was.   Don't think on it too hard at all, though.

I don't think it will stand-up for multiple viewings or be one of those movies in frequent rotation on some male-oriented cable channel like LOTR has turned in to.  

As for the bitching about ST in general upthread: Most of those are tropes from the 40's and 50's sci-fi and action serials that gave-birth to the series.  Bitching about the senior officers beaming down to a planet is like bitching that Indy was totally breaking all scientific and archeological principles and practices in his movies.

[Merusk]

[Tannhauser]

I enjoyed it.  It's a summer action film.  Not choosing to think too much about some of the plot elements though.  I can see why some dislike it.  It messes with 'canon' etc. but consider it a 'lensflareverse' where cars float on air but flyers rely on old VTOL turbine engines.

Christ, now I'm thinking about the plot elements again.  To the Lobotomizer!

[Lakov_Sanite]

Non spoilery question but does a turbine engine necessarily need to work the way it does now, in the future? Was the turbine even a turbine engine or just some sort of intake? 

[Merusk]

Turbines would need to work that way if they were turbines, yes.  I understand the mechanics are simple but pretty set such that other than fuel efficiency a turbine today is the same as a turbine from 50-60 years ago.  Much like the refrigeration cycle is all about compressing and expanding a gas, we can make it more efficient but not change the underlying physics.

The better question is why would they be needed if medical gurneys can have anti-grav devices small enough that the gurney is only 3" thick.

[Lakov_Sanite]

Could be a weight limit/power ratio equation on the anti-grav stuff in that a power source big enough to float a plane would not be feasible. 

Turbine stuff makes sense but imo it's only silly to assume that all methods of transportation would be the same in the future.