- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,363
- Reaction score
- 68,445
he was great in Dredd too.
Star Trek Into Darkness (aka Star Trek XII)
- Thread starter Brian in Mesa
- Start date
he was great in Dredd too.
BillsCarnage
ASFN Addict
Yup, but the problem is he's been cast in movies that haven't been very good (Doom, Pathfinder, etc). Or the movies that were successful he had a small role (LOTR). He was good in Red and Chronicles of Riddick.
Good to see him finally getting some bigger roles in better movies.
As for this Star Trek, meh. Not as good as the first as the action was a bit over the top and a bit predictable in places. Still a fun movie.
BillsCarnage
ASFN Addict
I get your point and agree w/ it to an extent. But look at it from the perspective of a younger generation who hasn't seen the older movies. They may not have a point of reference to compare to.
So JJ has created a new perspective for a whole new group of fans while still pay tribute to the original series.
But as you mentioned a death cannot occur when this specific character can't be killed off. IMO, the revival of the character was an epic bomb along w/ how they revived said character.
I just re-watched the original Star Trek remake that JJ Abrams did and I must say that it is in a different league from this movie. Not saying that this movie wasn't good. It just doesn't compare to the original one that Abrams did.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,363
- Reaction score
- 68,445
agreed. Cumberbatch was a much better villain then Bana, but the action, the character interaction and scope of the first movie just seemed much fresher then the second one. i think the cribbing from Wrath really just soured me on the end of the sequel. the first 2/3s were pretty damn good.
NoelPHX
Space for Sale
I have been a huge Star Trek fan all my life and this is the first time I won't be seeing a Star Trek movie multiple times in the theatre, not to mention I didn't even decide to go on opening midnight showings like I usually do. JJ Trek is just not getting it for me and that is fine because others like it. I am sure I sound just like the TOS fans when TNG came out back in the day.
Of course, I will add it to my collection of Star Trek stuff but I am sure it will collect more dust than my TOS and some TNG movies.
Of course, I will add it to my collection of Star Trek stuff but I am sure it will collect more dust than my TOS and some TNG movies.
This movie was awesome. Sorry, I just don't get most of the bitching about cannon and such. This is exactly what the franchise needed to breathe new life into it. Trek was becoming old and stale. My son is the next generation of Trek fans and before these two films he never gave Trek a thought despite my best efforts. He loved Star Wars and that was it.
After these last two films he is a big fan now. After we walked out of this movie, he simply said "dad, I really love Star Wars but Star Trek is really good too".
The new cast is excellent IMO. Quinto has completely made the character Spock his own. I love Pegg and Urban and I could go on. The stories are not dull by any stretch and Abrams has breathed so much life back into the franchise.
Now that he has already established that the timeline is altered all this continued bitching about cannon is stupid. It's done. It allows the franchise to keep some things the same while putting surprising twists to familiar events. It also allows them to do many new things.
Bravo Abrams. Now I am wondering who the next team will be to do the next Trek since Abrams will probably be to busy with the next Star Wars.
After these last two films he is a big fan now. After we walked out of this movie, he simply said "dad, I really love Star Wars but Star Trek is really good too".
The new cast is excellent IMO. Quinto has completely made the character Spock his own. I love Pegg and Urban and I could go on. The stories are not dull by any stretch and Abrams has breathed so much life back into the franchise.
Now that he has already established that the timeline is altered all this continued bitching about cannon is stupid. It's done. It allows the franchise to keep some things the same while putting surprising twists to familiar events. It also allows them to do many new things.
Bravo Abrams. Now I am wondering who the next team will be to do the next Trek since Abrams will probably be to busy with the next Star Wars.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,363
- Reaction score
- 68,445
My issue isn't screwing with "cannon". I was never a huge Trekkie so cannon's fodder as far as I'm concerned. My issue is more with actually doing something ORIGINAL and the last act of this movie just didn't feel fresh in any way shape or form because I had already seen these exact same scenarios play out before, just with roles reversed. For a guy who's supposed to be a "genius", I think audiences should expect more from him.
Chaplin
Better off silent
I certainly don't think what you're saying is unreasonable. This isn't the Star Trek of old. I'm not a Trekkie either, but I had a lot of appreciation for the early movies and the Next Generation, and there was a certain "thing" about Star Trek that was different than Star Wars or any other sci-fi film series.
These new movies, while entertaining, do not have that "thing" -- the uniqueness of what made old Star Trek "Star Trek" simply isn't there.
That may or may not be a bad thing depending on how you approach the new films.
That is a fair observation depending on how you look at it. I think Abrams is walking a very fine line between not completely alienating old fans and yet making it exciting and fresh enough for the next generation of fans. I have always been a huge Trek fan as my uncle is as well. Even he has finally come around after this film. I think if this was meant to be a complete reboot I would have taken this stance. However, this was really meant to be a hybrid reboot.
I guess you can criticize him for taking that approach but my expectations are probably different. My expectations are that the the franchise does have familiar events or events that should follow cannon or moments in the franchise that are slightly altered and represented on screen.
I don't think this is any different versus many other movies, shows etc. tackling timeline issues. Some events remain the same while others are similar with slight variation. These movies are following that exact same direction. You could argue it would be more original if he just disregarded or avoided those types of scenes and again that is fair.
I would be more pissed off, as a classic Trek fan, if the new franchise didn't tackle the timeline issue this way. If they completely didn't acknowledge past events I would be 100 times more pissed off. In fact, my uncle who was completely against this reboot has come around for this same reason. I asked him what had changed his mind and he said it was the acknowledgement of past events and representation of the plausible alterations on screen.
So, what you see as a lack of originality I see as an acknowledgement of past events. However, I completely understand why you feel the way you do.
Last edited:
Lieutenant Manura! Hailing frequencies!
ATTENTION SHANE AT STARFLEET COMMAND!!!
I'll be seeing this movie on Sunday and will give you a full report! You'll be there with my wife and I to answer questions as they might arise
Till then UC out!
ATTENTION SHANE AT STARFLEET COMMAND!!!
I'll be seeing this movie on Sunday and will give you a full report! You'll be there with my wife and I to answer questions as they might arise
Till then UC out!
Holy *&#@ my bawlz!!!! This was fantastic!!
I'm a TOS person, but am not the slightest bit offended at the WOK remake. It was really, really good. ALL OF IT! Effects - YES! Action - YES! Grumpy McCoy - YES! Just a really top notch film. We enjoyed in immensely. (my wife, who is NOT a ST fan, said she liked it absolutely as well as she could like a ST movie. That's a big compliment from her!)
For a film in general - 4 out of 5 stars. For a genre file - 6 out of 5 stars.
Howz that, Shane?
I'm a TOS person, but am not the slightest bit offended at the WOK remake. It was really, really good. ALL OF IT! Effects - YES! Action - YES! Grumpy McCoy - YES! Just a really top notch film. We enjoyed in immensely. (my wife, who is NOT a ST fan, said she liked it absolutely as well as she could like a ST movie. That's a big compliment from her!)
For a film in general - 4 out of 5 stars. For a genre file - 6 out of 5 stars.
Howz that, Shane?
Holy *&#@ my bawlz!!!! This was fantastic!!
I'm a TOS person, but am not the slightest bit offended at the WOK remake. It was really, really good. ALL OF IT! Effects - YES! Action - YES! Grumpy McCoy - YES! Just a really top notch film. We enjoyed in immensely. (my wife, who is NOT a ST fan, said she liked it absolutely as well as she could like a ST movie. That's a big compliment from her!)
For a film in general - 4 out of 5 stars. For a genre file - 6 out of 5 stars.
Howz that, Shane?
Awesome! About time too. I was in Cancun for 10 days. So just got back! Good stuff my friend!
It was fine. Cumberpatch was good.
Actually he was the biggest surprise for me. I couldn't imaging anybody else playing that part after this movie. I fully expected if they ever did that with the character that I would either hate it or be pissed off someone took a stab.
Dude was straight up menacing and completely believable as someone you would not want to mess with without an army to back you up.
He freaking nailed it IMO.
OP
OP
Freaking awesome!
Last edited:
Cardinals.Ken
That's Mr. Riff-Raff to you!
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,363
- Reaction score
- 68,445
watched this on the plane yesterday...man, it doesn't have a whole lot of rewatchability. pretty forgettable fare if you ask me.
Cardinals.Ken
That's Mr. Riff-Raff to you!
Disposable entertainment is the best you can expect at this when it comes to summer movies.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,363
- Reaction score
- 68,445
Sad, but true. That being the case, people need to stop bowing at the knees of Abrams until he actually creates something truly great.
Chaplin
Better off silent
Bingo. Super 8 and Star Trek were good (but not great), and I don't consider a show like Lost to be exclusively his because, let's face it, he wasn't a day-to-day guy and was just a name. I still think his best product was Alias--it would be Lost if he had more control, which he really didn't.
Cardinals.Ken
That's Mr. Riff-Raff to you!
I give Abrams a lot of credit. His TV properties I've seen (Alias & Lost) were good shows, snd I do like his movies, despite being critical of them.
He's a great concept guy, but finishes stories worse than the Dbacks' bullpen closes games.
I think the whole "Abrams is a genius" thing started with published reports of Tom Cruise not taking "no" as a answer when it came to directing MI3. And his films do rake in the cash. So he has that going for him.
