I'm kinda bummed that you guys seem to dislike the movie so much. I just got back, loved the movie, wanted to get in on some conversation, and the first page of discussion I found was all about how this movie was the equivalent of corpse rape. Woops!
We all still like Deep Space Nine at least, right?
The movie was fun but you do kind of have to let go of the old Trek in order to enjoy it. The writers for the new Trek don't put as much thought into the implications of what they're writing as the (good) old Trek writers.
The movie was fun but you do kind of have to let go of the old Trek in order to enjoy it. The writers for the new Trek don't put as much thought into the implications of what they're writing as the (good) old Trek writers.
I think you just have to fall in to the same group of people that inexplicably think that the Big Bang Theory is hilarious.
Deep Space 9 was a pale imitation of Babylon 5, sorry. DS9 did get better the more they lifted from B5, though.
Trek has some good episodes and movies, but, as a franchise, it's all over the place. This particular movie sacrifices far too much plot, logic, and characterization for the sake of keeping the action kinetic and making wink-wink-nudge-nudge references to the original movies.
Like, in Wrath of Khan, Spock's death was really meaningful, because that's what they ended the movie with. It took a whole 'nother movie to bring him back, and the reprecussions lasted well into the later films. In this movie, the dramatic death is cheaply resolved.
The "Kirk repairs the warp drive" sequence took me way out of the movie, because all I could think about during that sequence was Galaxy Quest's ridiculous engine room, "whomever wrote this episode should DIE!"
I'm kinda bummed that you guys seem to dislike the movie so much. I just got back, loved the movie, wanted to get in on some conversation, and the first page of discussion I found was all about how this movie was the equivalent of corpse rape. Woops!
We all still like Deep Space Nine at least, right?
I never liked DS9.
The ships never had any shields during the big battle scenes.
Michael Dorn, who had played the Klingon Starfleet Lieutenant Worf, was contacted for a role during the start of filming, and was asked to play an officer. Eventually the filmmakers decided that "they didn't want to mix the old with the new" and cut him out.
Yeah, we wouldn't want to mix the two universes at all...that would be... silly.
I'm kinda bummed that you guys seem to dislike the movie so much. I just got back, loved the movie, wanted to get in on some conversation, and the first page of discussion I found was all about how this movie was the equivalent of corpse rape. Woops!
We all still like Deep Space Nine at least, right?
I never liked DS9.
The ships never had any shields during the big battle scenes.
Those effects cost money.
As for the comparison with Babylon 5, I find them very similar in terms of quality. B5 has just as many problems as Trek, they just make leaps of logic in different places.
0
Options
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
I'm kinda bummed that you guys seem to dislike the movie so much. I just got back, loved the movie, wanted to get in on some conversation, and the first page of discussion I found was all about how this movie was the equivalent of corpse rape. Woops!
We all still like Deep Space Nine at least, right?
I grew up with reruns of TOS and all the newer series and was pleased as punch with the new movie. I'm just happy to see Star Trek pulled out of the murky grey depths of what amounted to endless philosophical bureaucracy and have actual life in it again.
Of course, the fact that the current Star Trek is just movies also means it's all spectacle because of the nature of Hollywood, but oh well, it beats another half-baked Star Strek series that dies a slow boring death and only hangs on for lack of competition in the sci-fi TV genre. If a series comes out of these movies, at least it won't be another "let's spend 3/4 of this episode dicking around with philosophy while people we could help are dying horribly" sort of Star Trek.
The movie was fun but you do kind of have to let go of the old Trek in order to enjoy it. The writers for the new Trek don't put as much thought into the implications of what they're writing as the (good) old Trek writers.
I think you just have to fall in to the same group of people that inexplicably think that the Big Bang Theory is hilarious.
Yeah, I can't stand the Big Bang Theory and loved this new movie a bunch. Fair share of hokey and overdone bits? Sure, but still a Star Trek I might actually care about, and the entire history of Star Trek wavers between great moments and loads of crappy drivel. Loads. DS9 averaged out as pretty good most of the time (and it had actualdeus ex machina so I find all the gripes about teleportation to be kinda ironically funny), but lots of Next Generation, Voyager, and Enterprise end up more like the high-pitched whine of a dentist's drill in the ear than good writing. And TOS as well, obviously, but hey, the Sixties. It's amazing that show happened at all. For all that Star Trek was originally about exploration and whatnot, the amount of bitching about rules of contact and non-interference and politics and Prime Directive crap in the later series got reeeeeaaal old as a writing tool.
The current movies aren't what I'd want in a series, but we wouldn't get that anyway because the current actors would be too expensive. But the movies and the series never aligned in terms of budget and spectacle, so that's hardly a new thing. Old Star Trek is definitely done, for better or for worse, but the fate of the likes of Enterprise and movies like Nemesis (ugh) made sure of that more than these newer movies ever did.
Now I'm gonna go watch DS9, because I haven't watched that in ages.
The movie was fun but you do kind of have to let go of the old Trek in order to enjoy it. The writers for the new Trek don't put as much thought into the implications of what they're writing as the (good) old Trek writers.
It's worse than that, really. A lot of people are saying Into Darkness is better than most of the Trek movies but I honestly disagree just because of the shitty writing. I could just feel it as the movie went on - the plot was utter nonsense, things just happened, and characters behaved unnaturally. In regards to the climax of the film:
The reason why Spock's death in WoK worked was because it was earned by that point, we had enough history with those two characters for it to have real emotional weight. Kirk's (fake) death in this felt false, not just because everyone watching knew he would live, but because this is only the first sequel in the new franchise after 4 years. It just made people who've seen WoK think of that, and everyone else wondering what the big deal is. Either way, it takes you out of the film and makes the entire thing come off as insecure. If they're only going to produce 2 hours of new Trek content every 3 or 4 years, make it stick and stand on it's own instead of just referencing ancient history. Into Darkness just boldly goes where others have been before.
The movie was fun but you do kind of have to let go of the old Trek in order to enjoy it. The writers for the new Trek don't put as much thought into the implications of what they're writing as the (good) old Trek writers.
Uh ... no you don't? That movie is perfectly enjoyable on its own without having to let go of anything.
I think you just have to fall in to the same group of people that inexplicably think that the Big Bang Theory is hilarious.
Or we could just stop implying that people are some sort of lunatic for enjoying that movie. @Kid Presentable is right - the negativity in this thread is a bit much.
alice eve even in the movie? I am not a star trek person, is she a character space from the original that they have to fill out that they missed in the previous movie? Did she go along on the 5 year journey? they could of just as easily had any other character do that work on the torpedo on the planet.
Doctor Marcus was Kirks ex-girlfriend in Wrath of Khan, and had his son (and never told him). Her presence is the first big hint that we're in Wrath of Kahn remake territory.
Mainly I think she was added as a long-term love interest for Kirk, since Uhura (and Spock) were both taken.
Plus, having more than one woman on the cast wouldn't hurt.
Watching DS9 last night I came up with a completely crazy theory, that I know isn't true but here it is anyway.
The Dominion is behind the Maquis as part of their plan to destablise the Alpha Quadrant and the Cardassians in particular. spoilers because lots of text incoming
See I started thinking about how the Dominion infiltrates and destablises rival states in order to make it much easier to conquer. Now the Alpha/Beta quadrants have 4 major powers, The Federation, the Klingons, The Romulans and The Cardassians.
They Infiltrate Earth and cause some chaos, they have a changling as the right hand man in the Klingon Empire, we don't get any insight into the Romluan Empire, but the Cardassian government goes into lots of chaos and we know the Dominion infilitrates the Obsidian Order at least
We know the Dominion likes to spark wars between enemies so they can swoop in and destroy whoever is left (The Federation Klingon war is such a ploy)
So what if the Maquis is the work of some Changelings hoping to turn some discontent over a treaty into a full fledged war between the Cardassians and Federation?
Unlikely I know but it would be trivial for Changelings to turn that discontent the settlers in the DMZ have, into wanting to fight and then hoping that once Federation citizens kill Cardassians (or vice versa) it escalates.
At first the Maquis is a small terrorist incident but it grows and grows and inflicts actual defeats on the military and grows into a movement of thousands with many supporters in the Federation. yet takes the Dominion only a matter of weeks to beat them - perhaps because Changelings set up the organisation and know where all the hidden bases are.
In particular I think the Vulcan lady from "the Maquis part 1 +2" is a changeling. Shes on a mission to get the maquis a vast amount of weaponry, much more than they should need for simple self defence. And during her chat with Quark she comes off so weird. She doesn't want to eat, she haas to be talked into a drink and seems unfamiliar with the concept of a toast, later on Quark talks her into dinner and looking at the dinner table she is all confused. She's like if someone impersonated a Vulcan by reading what they are like and is taking their emotional standoff-ishness too far. Not to mention starting an armed conflict over the DMZ which could cause a wider war isn't very logical
And for all the fuss made over there being Cardassian colonies in the DMZ/under Federation jurisdiction they never cause any trouble. Unlike the ex-fed colonies and Maquis which not only conduct a guerilla war but at one point start rendering whole planets unihabitable to Cardassians.
I'm not saying the whole Maquis are puppets (We know via Eddington, Ro Laren and the Voyager crew they do have genuine sympathisers) but it only takes a few changeling agitators to turn a protest movement into an armed insurgency. Perhaps the Changelings were hoping the large amount of Starfleet defectors would convince the Cardassians that the Maquis was actually backed by the Federation and start a full on war.
Nearly everything that happens to Cardassia slowly gets them in a more and more weaker position to the point they join the Dominion. So what if that was the Dominions plan.
The Obisidian Order which is a key part of Cardassian life gets infiltrated and destroyed, The Cardassian system of government changes from a military autocratic style of government to a civilian one. Which then leads to them getting attacked by Klingons (due to the Klingons having a Changeling in their government - all part of the plan).
So the Cardassian people, under attack by Klingons, Maquis and with a government thats changing into something they aren't used to turn to the Dominion, and 1/4 of the major Alpha Quadrant powers are in their pocket.
And once the Dominon are in control of the Cardassians the Maquis aren't needed to destablise the Cardassians anymore and so get wiped out.
and if your planning to infilitrate an entire quadrant of space what better way to start than by organsing an armed group based around hiding in a region of space thats not only pretty damm unnavigable but next door to the Wormhole.
Now I this theory has more holes than a block of swiss cheese but its fun to think of crazy theories.
The movie was fun but you do kind of have to let go of the old Trek in order to enjoy it. The writers for the new Trek don't put as much thought into the implications of what they're writing as the (good) old Trek writers.
Uh ... no you don't? That movie is perfectly enjoyable on its own without having to let go of anything.
Except they introduce a lot of things that kind of ruins things if you take the old Trek into consideration.
Transwarp beaming is a good example. In the old Trek, the Iconians were able to rule a vast empire because their gateways allowed them to travel between star systems without ships. When rogue Jem'Hadar took one over, Weyoun said that it would only take them a year to conquer the Dominion. Now that the Federation basically has the power to just beam a bomb to ships or planets from lightyears away, they can easily become the dominant power in the Alpha Quadrant. In fact, transwarp beaming made Admiral Marcus's plan to launch the torpedoes at Khan completely pointless.
Not to mention things like
Admiral Marcus being completely brazen about Section 31 despite the fact that it's supposed to be a secret organization that uses only covert operations and hides itself so well that the intelligence organizations of other races don't even know of its existence.
Admiral Marcus holding their meeting at the Daystrom Institute, a science facility, to discuss military matters, after a terrorist attack.
Khan wanting to commit genocide against "inferior people" and attacking the Enterprise after getting the torpedoes even though in the original Trek, he wanted to rule over people because he believed that it was his right. When he took over the Enterprise on Space Seed, he wanted the crew to join him and he only used force when persuasion didn't work.
The Kobayashi Maru test being about experiencing fear instead of facing the no win scenario. The original Kobayashi Maru was much more significant and it was about so much more than just fear. It's an intense psychological test to truly prepare an officer for command by gauging how they would face a situation in which not only would they have to send their people to die but face the possibility that everyone under their command will die. The way it's boiled down to something so simplistic in the new Trek is kind of insulting.
The movie was fun but you do kind of have to let go of the old Trek in order to enjoy it. The writers for the new Trek don't put as much thought into the implications of what they're writing as the (good) old Trek writers.
The movie was fun but you do kind of have to let go of the old Trek in order to enjoy it. The writers for the new Trek don't put as much thought into the implications of what they're writing as the (good) old Trek writers.
Um
The Genesis Device is a good example. The writers saw that the Federation can gain a huge advantage over other races with that technology so they explored those implications in Star Trek 3 with Klingons wanting to steal it. They eventually show that the technology isn't feasible and basically buries it.
Similarly, whenever they introduce some super powerful technology that could give one race a huge advantage, they generally try to give it some kind of limitation, make it very hard/impossible to replicate, or make sure that it becomes unusable or gets lost by the end of the episode. For example, they blew up two Iconian Gateways.
With the new Trek, they introduce several things that will really screw up the balance of power in the Alpha Quadrant without putting any limitations on them or making sure they can't be replicated.
The movie was fun but you do kind of have to let go of the old Trek in order to enjoy it. The writers for the new Trek don't put as much thought into the implications of what they're writing as the (good) old Trek writers.
Uh ... no you don't? That movie is perfectly enjoyable on its own without having to let go of anything.
Except they introduce a lot of things that kind of ruins things if you take the old Trek into consideration.
Transwarp beaming is a good example. In the old Trek, the Iconians were able to rule a vast empire because their gateways allowed them to travel between star systems without ships. When rogue Jem'Hadar took one over, Weyoun said that it would only take them a year to conquer the Dominion. Now that the Federation basically has the power to just beam a bomb to ships or planets from lightyears away, they can easily become the dominant power in the Alpha Quadrant. In fact, transwarp beaming made Admiral Marcus's plan to launch the torpedoes at Khan completely pointless.
Not to mention things like
Admiral Marcus being completely brazen about Section 31 despite the fact that it's supposed to be a secret organization that uses only covert operations and hides itself so well that the intelligence organizations of other races don't even know of its existence.
Admiral Marcus holding their meeting at the Daystrom Institute, a science facility, to discuss military matters, after a terrorist attack.
Khan wanting to commit genocide against "inferior people" and attacking the Enterprise after getting the torpedoes even though in the original Trek, he wanted to rule over people because he believed that it was his right. When he took over the Enterprise on Space Seed, he wanted the crew to join him and he only used force when persuasion didn't work.
The Kobayashi Maru test being about experiencing fear instead of facing the no win scenario. The original Kobayashi Maru was much more significant and it was about so much more than just fear. It's an intense psychological test to truly prepare an officer for command by gauging how they would face a situation in which not only would they have to send their people to die but face the possibility that everyone under their command will die. The way it's boiled down to something so simplistic in the new Trek is kind of insulting.
These complaints are perfectly reasonable - only pointless, as Abrams doesn't say that this is a continuation of the old universe, but a new one. So it really doesn't matter what Section 31 was in the old universe, let alone what it was supposed to be. This universe is different.
I am a fan. I have watched every episode of every show, I have watched every movie multiple times. I have over a hundred of the novels at home and I spent quite a bit of time thinking about the universe.
And I don't give a shit about what Abrams changed. Both movies were hella fun in a way none of the old ones were. I only ever saw the the TNG movies in the cinema (what with living behind the iron curtain and all) - none of those were as fun or as big as these 2.
You didn't enjoy the movie? Fine. But the old universe doesn't go away, neither are the movies or tv shows or books. Everything is still there to enjoy. Star Trek and Star Trek Into Darkness doesn't take ANYTHING away from the stuff that came before it.
No, you see a film we don't like retroactively makes everything we used to like about Star Trek awful.
I can't watch DS9 anymore because Star Trek is bad now.
It sucks, but those are the rules, I can't do anything about it.
No, you see a film we don't like retroactively makes everything we used to like about Star Trek awful.
I can't watch DS9 anymore because Star Trek is bad now.
It sucks, but those are the rules, I can't do anything about it.
The movie was fun but you do kind of have to let go of the old Trek in order to enjoy it. The writers for the new Trek don't put as much thought into the implications of what they're writing as the (good) old Trek writers.
Uh ... no you don't? That movie is perfectly enjoyable on its own without having to let go of anything.
Except they introduce a lot of things that kind of ruins things if you take the old Trek into consideration.
Transwarp beaming is a good example. In the old Trek, the Iconians were able to rule a vast empire because their gateways allowed them to travel between star systems without ships. When rogue Jem'Hadar took one over, Weyoun said that it would only take them a year to conquer the Dominion. Now that the Federation basically has the power to just beam a bomb to ships or planets from lightyears away, they can easily become the dominant power in the Alpha Quadrant. In fact, transwarp beaming made Admiral Marcus's plan to launch the torpedoes at Khan completely pointless.
Not to mention things like
Admiral Marcus being completely brazen about Section 31 despite the fact that it's supposed to be a secret organization that uses only covert operations and hides itself so well that the intelligence organizations of other races don't even know of its existence.
Admiral Marcus holding their meeting at the Daystrom Institute, a science facility, to discuss military matters, after a terrorist attack.
Khan wanting to commit genocide against "inferior people" and attacking the Enterprise after getting the torpedoes even though in the original Trek, he wanted to rule over people because he believed that it was his right. When he took over the Enterprise on Space Seed, he wanted the crew to join him and he only used force when persuasion didn't work.
The Kobayashi Maru test being about experiencing fear instead of facing the no win scenario. The original Kobayashi Maru was much more significant and it was about so much more than just fear. It's an intense psychological test to truly prepare an officer for command by gauging how they would face a situation in which not only would they have to send their people to die but face the possibility that everyone under their command will die. The way it's boiled down to something so simplistic in the new Trek is kind of insulting.
These complaints are perfectly reasonable - only pointless, as Abrams doesn't say that this is a continuation of the old universe, but a new one. So it really doesn't matter what Section 31 was in the old universe, let alone what it was supposed to be. This universe is different.
I am a fan. I have watched every episode of every show, I have watched every movie multiple times. I have over a hundred of the novels at home and I spent quite a bit of time thinking about the universe.
And I don't give a shit about what Abrams changed. Both movies were hella fun in a way none of the old ones were. I only ever saw the the TNG movies in the cinema (what with living behind the iron curtain and all) - none of those were as fun or as big as these 2.
You didn't enjoy the movie? Fine. But the old universe doesn't go away, neither are the movies or tv shows or books. Everything is still there to enjoy. Star Trek and Star Trek Into Darkness doesn't take ANYTHING away from the stuff that came before it.
And that's exactly what I said. You're letting go of your attachment to the pre-established lore so that you're not looking at the new universe with the same implications that the old universe had.
No, you see a film we don't like retroactively makes everything we used to like about Star Trek awful.
I can't watch DS9 anymore because Star Trek is bad now.
It sucks, but those are the rules, I can't do anything about it.
Except no is saying that. No one is saying that DS9 or TNG now sucks because of the existence of Abrams universe.
Abrams is exploiting ideas that already have an established meaning. If you do not let go of all the baggage that comes with those ideas then that will color your views of the new universe.
If you still think of the Kobayashi Maru like it was in WoK then the new version of the Kobayashi Maru would seem like a bastardization or an insult to the original.
I thought the reason that the thing that happened at the beginning of the film and then was done away with 5 minutes later was because...
Marcus gave the Enterprise back to Kirk, and let him have Spock as his 1st officer because he had every intention of sending them to Kronos to start a war, and then showing up later and destroying the enterprise anyway and probably blaming it on the Klingons as a way to make sure he was never connected to Khan.
The movie was fun but you do kind of have to let go of the old Trek in order to enjoy it. The writers for the new Trek don't put as much thought into the implications of what they're writing as the (good) old Trek writers.
Uh ... no you don't? That movie is perfectly enjoyable on its own without having to let go of anything.
Except they introduce a lot of things that kind of ruins things if you take the old Trek into consideration.
Transwarp beaming is a good example. In the old Trek, the Iconians were able to rule a vast empire because their gateways allowed them to travel between star systems without ships. When rogue Jem'Hadar took one over, Weyoun said that it would only take them a year to conquer the Dominion. Now that the Federation basically has the power to just beam a bomb to ships or planets from lightyears away, they can easily become the dominant power in the Alpha Quadrant. In fact, transwarp beaming made Admiral Marcus's plan to launch the torpedoes at Khan completely pointless.
Is it at all possible that the section 31 building that blew up was the only place the transwarp formula was kept? *poof* now it's out of their hands. Also, I suppose we should ignore the fact that beaming is notoriously unreliable
Not to mention things like
Admiral Marcus being completely brazen about Section 31 despite the fact that it's supposed to be a secret organization that uses only covert operations and hides itself so well that the intelligence organizations of other races don't even know of its existence.
Meh.
Admiral Marcus holding their meeting at the Daystrom Institute, a science facility, to discuss military matters, after a terrorist attack.
The what now?
Khan wanting to commit genocide against "inferior people" and attacking the Enterprise after getting the torpedoes even though in the original Trek, he wanted to rule over people because he believed that it was his right. When he took over the Enterprise on Space Seed, he wanted the crew to join him and he only used force when persuasion didn't work.
He suffocated the entire bridge crew before locking Kirk in a hyperbaric chamber to suffocate again, before trying to persuade anyone to join him.
The Kobayashi Maru test being about experiencing fear instead of facing the no win scenario. The original Kobayashi Maru was much more significant and it was about so much more than just fear. It's an intense psychological test to truly prepare an officer for command by gauging how they would face a situation in which not only would they have to send their people to die but face the possibility that everyone under their command will die. The way it's boiled down to something so simplistic in the new Trek is kind of insulting.
it's about facing death, in the original. Not "the no-win scenario". It's equally about facing death in the new timeline
No, it's not possible at all to destroy a breakthrough formula with a bomb. Just like you can't murder 2+2=4.
Jesus Christ, the guy who came up with it is in the movie the entire time.
If we reduce "incredibly complex formula" to "2+2", then sure. Anyone can come up with it again.
There's only one person who knows the formula - Old Spock. And one guy who can re-create it - Scotty.
Neither of them would want to give it back to Starfleet.
And, yes, it is completely possible to wipe out any one piece of information. If that information is stored on one computer system and that system gets blown up, it's gone.
See: Canticle of Leibowitz, Deconstruction of Falling Stars, the destruction of the Library at Alexandria, and so on.
The movie was fun but you do kind of have to let go of the old Trek in order to enjoy it. The writers for the new Trek don't put as much thought into the implications of what they're writing as the (good) old Trek writers.
I think you just have to fall in to the same group of people that inexplicably think that the Big Bang Theory is hilarious.
Cool, now anybody who liked it is stupid. Alright. Thanks thread, I'll be back to reading you when we're done with movie talk I guess.
The idea that a futuristic interstellar governing body put their most important technical knowledge in one place that could be completely eradicated with a bomb the size of a ring is completely ridiculous. Doesn't quite compare to the Library of Alexandria or sci-fi written before the internet was even imagined.
And why wouldn't Scotty give it to Starfleet? He already did give them the formula and guess what, he works for Starfleet! Of his own free will, I imagine.
The thing that strikes me as a really bizarre decision
is to redo Wrath of Khan in the first place
Wrath is such a good movie, relying on well established and loved characters to heighten the drama.
Abrams is perfectly capable of crafting his own stories, why invite comparisons like that?
Yeapp. I don't really understand it either. Right before I went to see the movie I had that bit spoiled. And I was like "really? why?", not quite believing it. But there you go.
I just hope the 3rd movie is something completely original and they don't go "oh, war with the Klingons? Lets re-do the undiscovered country."
alice eve even in the movie? I am not a star trek person, is she a character space from the original that they have to fill out that they missed in the previous movie? Did she go along on the 5 year journey? they could of just as easily had any other character do that work on the torpedo on the planet.
Doctor Marcus was Kirks ex-girlfriend in Wrath of Khan, and had his son (and never told him). Her presence is the first big hint that we're in Wrath of Kahn remake territory.
Mainly I think she was added as a long-term love interest for Kirk, since Uhura (and Spock) were both taken.
Plus, having more than one woman on the cast wouldn't hurt.
If they could give their female characters some kind of agency and point that'd be great, too.
+3
Options
PolarisI am powerless against the sky.Registered Userregular
New Movie Stuff Spoilers:
Wrath is obviously a fan favourite and with good reason, IMO, it's the only Star Trek movie that actually works as a movie. By that I mean, remove the SciFi/StarTrek elements and, the themes of the film, ageing, revenge, self sacrifice are universal and well told throughout the film. These themes culminate with Spock's death and Kirk's "no-win scenario", this is why the scene in the engine room has such weight - the entire film builds to it.
None of those elements exist in the new film, and so Kirk's death has little weight and overall the film is "just" a Star Trek/Action flick, but as such was pretty enjoyable and there were some nice moments and, imo, it was just as "fun" as the 2009 film. Khan was a little gimmicky unfortunately, and you could have removed him and still had the typical (but dull) "Crazy Starfleet Admiral" main baddie and the entire story would have worked I think.
That being said, the new films have some good/great stuff going for them, the opening sequence of 2009 was still the highlight of the two films and right up there with anything in the entire film francise IMO, and with so little SciFi anywhere these days, long may they continue
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Wrath is obviously a fan favourite and with good reason, IMO, it's the only Star Trek movie that actually works as a movie. By that I mean, remove the SciFi/StarTrek elements and, the themes of the film, ageing, revenge, self sacrifice are universal and well told throughout the film. These themes culminate with Spock's death and Kirk's "no-win scenario", this is why the scene in the engine room has such weight - the entire film builds to it.
None of those elements exist in the new film, and so Kirk's death has little weight and overall the film is "just" a Star Trek/Action flick, but as such was pretty enjoyable and there were some nice moments and, imo, it was just as "fun" as the 2009 film. Khan was a little gimmicky unfortunately, and you could have removed him and still had the typical (but dull) "Crazy Starfleet Admiral" main baddie and the entire story would have worked I think.
That being said, the new films have some good/great stuff going for them, the opening sequence of 2009 was still the highlight of the two films and right up there with anything in the entire film francise IMO, and with so little SciFi anywhere these days, long may they continue
Basically all the Star Trek movies work as movies. So I don't really understand what you're saying. A few of them aren't very good movies, but they all have themes outside of the Sci Fi.
The idea that a futuristic interstellar governing body put their most important technical knowledge in one place that could be completely eradicated with a bomb the size of a ring is completely ridiculous. Doesn't quite compare to the Library of Alexandria or sci-fi written before the internet was even imagined.
And why wouldn't Scotty give it to Starfleet? He already did give them the formula and guess what, he works for Starfleet! Of his own free will, I imagine.
It's also perfectly plausible because
Section 31?
An insanely covert group that's working out of one building; they're so black they don't have any off-site locations because those might be discovered and traced back. Nobody knows they exist, so nobody is going to bomb them.
It's arrogance.
Scotty is leaving on a 5-year voyage. Perhaps he realized how dangerous the tech was, and refused on the grounds that the Federation isn't ready for it.
The idea that section 31 would revive a 21st century dictator then let him know of the only location to where they store all their data is not what I would label "perfectly plausible".
The guy can't even figure out if his crew is alive and where they are but he can wipe out knowledge of the most important tech that has been discovered since warp? Ok.
The idea that section 31 would revive a 21st century dictator then let him know of the only location to where they store all their data is not what I would label "perfectly plausible".
The guy can't even figure out if his crew is alive and where they are but he can wipe out knowledge of the most important tech that has been discovered since warp? Ok.
Khan was working for Section 31. This is established in the movie
+2
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
The movie was fun but you do kind of have to let go of the old Trek in order to enjoy it. The writers for the new Trek don't put as much thought into the implications of what they're writing as the (good) old Trek writers.
I think you just have to fall in to the same group of people that inexplicably think that the Big Bang Theory is hilarious.
Let's investigate ways to be less twattish in this thread.
I thought the line was the trans-warp equation was confiscated.
Being the result of time travel the equation would have been banned on ethical grounds. At least in the older Star Treks that would be the case. Future tech is usually confiscated. The same reason the Federation doesn't use cloaked ships or half the sh*t it's capable of. They like to fight with one hand tied behind their back. That's why the only credible threats were the Borg and the Dominion, they had superior technology.
Trans-warp beaming is a potential WMD. It's existence would spur the Romulans to use whatever mad cr*p the Tal'Shia have in a pre-emptive strike. In Star Trek the races don't use half the weapons at their disposal because of MAD.
DAKBARBER on
+3
Options
Mr_Rose83 Blue Ridge Protects the HolyRegistered Userregular
The idea that section 31 would revive a 21st century dictator then let him know of the only location to where they store all their data is not what I would label "perfectly plausible".
The guy can't even figure out if his crew is alive and where they are but he can wipe out knowledge of the most important tech that has been discovered since warp? Ok.
Khan was working for Section 31. This is established in the movie
Even more reason why they wouldn't let him know jack shit. Not telling their agents what they're really doing or why is their whole MO…
What really worries me is that, potentially at least, someone pointed out a lot of this stuff in production and the decision was made to ignore the illogic/inconsistency anyway. Not sure if that's better or worse than "they were too dumb to notice" to be honest.
I know it is, that doesn't make it not monumentally stupid. Even if the writers would openly come out and say that this is the case, knowledge of transwarp beaming was destroyed, it'd be a dumb explanation. The very idea that section 31 brought an unknown entity into their fold is already dumb enough.
Section 31 isn't established as some kind of organization with the jurisdiction to confiscate data from Starfleet. They aren't even acknowledged to exist. That's their core operational strength, nobody knows they exist.
The Section 31 episodes of DS9 were my favorite. They didn't operate big hulking battlecruisers and fight wars with them. They didn't even have an organizational structure. They got outsiders to do things for them, and those individuals didn't even know they were working for Section 31 most of the time. That's what allowed them to remain covert, even from the hierarchy of Starfleet.
Watching DS9 last night I came up with a completely crazy theory, that I know isn't true but here it is anyway.
The Dominion is behind the Maquis as part of their plan to destablise the Alpha Quadrant and the Cardassians in particular. spoilers because lots of text incoming
See I started thinking about how the Dominion infiltrates and destablises rival states in order to make it much easier to conquer. Now the Alpha/Beta quadrants have 4 major powers, The Federation, the Klingons, The Romulans and The Cardassians.
They Infiltrate Earth and cause some chaos, they have a changling as the right hand man in the Klingon Empire, we don't get any insight into the Romluan Empire, but the Cardassian government goes into lots of chaos and we know the Dominion infilitrates the Obsidian Order at least
We know the Dominion likes to spark wars between enemies so they can swoop in and destroy whoever is left (The Federation Klingon war is such a ploy)
So what if the Maquis is the work of some Changelings hoping to turn some discontent over a treaty into a full fledged war between the Cardassians and Federation?
Unlikely I know but it would be trivial for Changelings to turn that discontent the settlers in the DMZ have, into wanting to fight and then hoping that once Federation citizens kill Cardassians (or vice versa) it escalates.
At first the Maquis is a small terrorist incident but it grows and grows and inflicts actual defeats on the military and grows into a movement of thousands with many supporters in the Federation. yet takes the Dominion only a matter of weeks to beat them - perhaps because Changelings set up the organisation and know where all the hidden bases are.
In particular I think the Vulcan lady from "the Maquis part 1 +2" is a changeling. Shes on a mission to get the maquis a vast amount of weaponry, much more than they should need for simple self defence. And during her chat with Quark she comes off so weird. She doesn't want to eat, she haas to be talked into a drink and seems unfamiliar with the concept of a toast, later on Quark talks her into dinner and looking at the dinner table she is all confused. She's like if someone impersonated a Vulcan by reading what they are like and is taking their emotional standoff-ishness too far. Not to mention starting an armed conflict over the DMZ which could cause a wider war isn't very logical
And for all the fuss made over there being Cardassian colonies in the DMZ/under Federation jurisdiction they never cause any trouble. Unlike the ex-fed colonies and Maquis which not only conduct a guerilla war but at one point start rendering whole planets unihabitable to Cardassians.
I'm not saying the whole Maquis are puppets (We know via Eddington, Ro Laren and the Voyager crew they do have genuine sympathisers) but it only takes a few changeling agitators to turn a protest movement into an armed insurgency. Perhaps the Changelings were hoping the large amount of Starfleet defectors would convince the Cardassians that the Maquis was actually backed by the Federation and start a full on war.
Nearly everything that happens to Cardassia slowly gets them in a more and more weaker position to the point they join the Dominion. So what if that was the Dominions plan.
The Obisidian Order which is a key part of Cardassian life gets infiltrated and destroyed, The Cardassian system of government changes from a military autocratic style of government to a civilian one. Which then leads to them getting attacked by Klingons (due to the Klingons having a Changeling in their government - all part of the plan).
So the Cardassian people, under attack by Klingons, Maquis and with a government thats changing into something they aren't used to turn to the Dominion, and 1/4 of the major Alpha Quadrant powers are in their pocket.
And once the Dominon are in control of the Cardassians the Maquis aren't needed to destablise the Cardassians anymore and so get wiped out.
and if your planning to infilitrate an entire quadrant of space what better way to start than by organsing an armed group based around hiding in a region of space thats not only pretty damm unnavigable but next door to the Wormhole.
Now I this theory has more holes than a block of swiss cheese but its fun to think of crazy theories.
Hmm, that is an interesting theory.
That said, I've always considered myself a Maquis sympathizer.
Rebelling in that situation has always struck me as a legitimate use of force. And considering the demographics of people who have historically lived on the frontier, I would expect them to try and fight back.
Federation doesn't use cloak because of a treaty with Romulans, not because of ethics. There is nothing unethical about transwarp beaming. Whole episodes cover the technology in each series. I forget the name, but there's one in TNG where data is trying to figure out the planet-to-planet transportation that a species possesses, and ends up failing. But the entire episode covers the possible ramifications for Starfleet of that kind of technology.
As far as time travel ethics, I've never heard of the Federation complaining about shit handed to them from the future. I forgot how Voyager handled it in its finale. And I'd like that to remain forgotten along with Voyager.
Posts
We all still like Deep Space Nine at least, right?
Ironically, Hitler himself liked DS9. It's confusing!
Trek has some good episodes and movies, but, as a franchise, it's all over the place. This particular movie sacrifices far too much plot, logic, and characterization for the sake of keeping the action kinetic and making wink-wink-nudge-nudge references to the original movies.
The "Kirk repairs the warp drive" sequence took me way out of the movie, because all I could think about during that sequence was Galaxy Quest's ridiculous engine room, "whomever wrote this episode should DIE!"
I never liked DS9.
The ships never had any shields during the big battle scenes.
Yeah, we wouldn't want to mix the two universes at all...that would be... silly.
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
Those effects cost money.
As for the comparison with Babylon 5, I find them very similar in terms of quality. B5 has just as many problems as Trek, they just make leaps of logic in different places.
I grew up with reruns of TOS and all the newer series and was pleased as punch with the new movie. I'm just happy to see Star Trek pulled out of the murky grey depths of what amounted to endless philosophical bureaucracy and have actual life in it again.
Of course, the fact that the current Star Trek is just movies also means it's all spectacle because of the nature of Hollywood, but oh well, it beats another half-baked Star Strek series that dies a slow boring death and only hangs on for lack of competition in the sci-fi TV genre. If a series comes out of these movies, at least it won't be another "let's spend 3/4 of this episode dicking around with philosophy while people we could help are dying horribly" sort of Star Trek.
Yeah, I can't stand the Big Bang Theory and loved this new movie a bunch. Fair share of hokey and overdone bits? Sure, but still a Star Trek I might actually care about, and the entire history of Star Trek wavers between great moments and loads of crappy drivel. Loads. DS9 averaged out as pretty good most of the time (and it had actual deus ex machina so I find all the gripes about teleportation to be kinda ironically funny), but lots of Next Generation, Voyager, and Enterprise end up more like the high-pitched whine of a dentist's drill in the ear than good writing. And TOS as well, obviously, but hey, the Sixties. It's amazing that show happened at all. For all that Star Trek was originally about exploration and whatnot, the amount of bitching about rules of contact and non-interference and politics and Prime Directive crap in the later series got reeeeeaaal old as a writing tool.
The current movies aren't what I'd want in a series, but we wouldn't get that anyway because the current actors would be too expensive. But the movies and the series never aligned in terms of budget and spectacle, so that's hardly a new thing. Old Star Trek is definitely done, for better or for worse, but the fate of the likes of Enterprise and movies like Nemesis (ugh) made sure of that more than these newer movies ever did.
Now I'm gonna go watch DS9, because I haven't watched that in ages.
It's worse than that, really. A lot of people are saying Into Darkness is better than most of the Trek movies but I honestly disagree just because of the shitty writing. I could just feel it as the movie went on - the plot was utter nonsense, things just happened, and characters behaved unnaturally. In regards to the climax of the film:
Uh ... no you don't? That movie is perfectly enjoyable on its own without having to let go of anything.
Or we could just stop implying that people are some sort of lunatic for enjoying that movie. @Kid Presentable is right - the negativity in this thread is a bit much.
Mainly I think she was added as a long-term love interest for Kirk, since Uhura (and Spock) were both taken.
Plus, having more than one woman on the cast wouldn't hurt.
The Dominion is behind the Maquis as part of their plan to destablise the Alpha Quadrant and the Cardassians in particular. spoilers because lots of text incoming
They Infiltrate Earth and cause some chaos, they have a changling as the right hand man in the Klingon Empire, we don't get any insight into the Romluan Empire, but the Cardassian government goes into lots of chaos and we know the Dominion infilitrates the Obsidian Order at least
We know the Dominion likes to spark wars between enemies so they can swoop in and destroy whoever is left (The Federation Klingon war is such a ploy)
So what if the Maquis is the work of some Changelings hoping to turn some discontent over a treaty into a full fledged war between the Cardassians and Federation?
Unlikely I know but it would be trivial for Changelings to turn that discontent the settlers in the DMZ have, into wanting to fight and then hoping that once Federation citizens kill Cardassians (or vice versa) it escalates.
At first the Maquis is a small terrorist incident but it grows and grows and inflicts actual defeats on the military and grows into a movement of thousands with many supporters in the Federation. yet takes the Dominion only a matter of weeks to beat them - perhaps because Changelings set up the organisation and know where all the hidden bases are.
In particular I think the Vulcan lady from "the Maquis part 1 +2" is a changeling. Shes on a mission to get the maquis a vast amount of weaponry, much more than they should need for simple self defence. And during her chat with Quark she comes off so weird. She doesn't want to eat, she haas to be talked into a drink and seems unfamiliar with the concept of a toast, later on Quark talks her into dinner and looking at the dinner table she is all confused. She's like if someone impersonated a Vulcan by reading what they are like and is taking their emotional standoff-ishness too far. Not to mention starting an armed conflict over the DMZ which could cause a wider war isn't very logical
And for all the fuss made over there being Cardassian colonies in the DMZ/under Federation jurisdiction they never cause any trouble. Unlike the ex-fed colonies and Maquis which not only conduct a guerilla war but at one point start rendering whole planets unihabitable to Cardassians.
I'm not saying the whole Maquis are puppets (We know via Eddington, Ro Laren and the Voyager crew they do have genuine sympathisers) but it only takes a few changeling agitators to turn a protest movement into an armed insurgency. Perhaps the Changelings were hoping the large amount of Starfleet defectors would convince the Cardassians that the Maquis was actually backed by the Federation and start a full on war.
Nearly everything that happens to Cardassia slowly gets them in a more and more weaker position to the point they join the Dominion. So what if that was the Dominions plan.
The Obisidian Order which is a key part of Cardassian life gets infiltrated and destroyed, The Cardassian system of government changes from a military autocratic style of government to a civilian one. Which then leads to them getting attacked by Klingons (due to the Klingons having a Changeling in their government - all part of the plan).
So the Cardassian people, under attack by Klingons, Maquis and with a government thats changing into something they aren't used to turn to the Dominion, and 1/4 of the major Alpha Quadrant powers are in their pocket.
And once the Dominon are in control of the Cardassians the Maquis aren't needed to destablise the Cardassians anymore and so get wiped out.
and if your planning to infilitrate an entire quadrant of space what better way to start than by organsing an armed group based around hiding in a region of space thats not only pretty damm unnavigable but next door to the Wormhole.
Except they introduce a lot of things that kind of ruins things if you take the old Trek into consideration.
Not to mention things like
Admiral Marcus being completely brazen about Section 31 despite the fact that it's supposed to be a secret organization that uses only covert operations and hides itself so well that the intelligence organizations of other races don't even know of its existence.
Admiral Marcus holding their meeting at the Daystrom Institute, a science facility, to discuss military matters, after a terrorist attack.
Khan wanting to commit genocide against "inferior people" and attacking the Enterprise after getting the torpedoes even though in the original Trek, he wanted to rule over people because he believed that it was his right. When he took over the Enterprise on Space Seed, he wanted the crew to join him and he only used force when persuasion didn't work.
The Kobayashi Maru test being about experiencing fear instead of facing the no win scenario. The original Kobayashi Maru was much more significant and it was about so much more than just fear. It's an intense psychological test to truly prepare an officer for command by gauging how they would face a situation in which not only would they have to send their people to die but face the possibility that everyone under their command will die. The way it's boiled down to something so simplistic in the new Trek is kind of insulting.
Um
The Genesis Device is a good example. The writers saw that the Federation can gain a huge advantage over other races with that technology so they explored those implications in Star Trek 3 with Klingons wanting to steal it. They eventually show that the technology isn't feasible and basically buries it.
Similarly, whenever they introduce some super powerful technology that could give one race a huge advantage, they generally try to give it some kind of limitation, make it very hard/impossible to replicate, or make sure that it becomes unusable or gets lost by the end of the episode. For example, they blew up two Iconian Gateways.
With the new Trek, they introduce several things that will really screw up the balance of power in the Alpha Quadrant without putting any limitations on them or making sure they can't be replicated.
These complaints are perfectly reasonable - only pointless, as Abrams doesn't say that this is a continuation of the old universe, but a new one. So it really doesn't matter what Section 31 was in the old universe, let alone what it was supposed to be. This universe is different.
I am a fan. I have watched every episode of every show, I have watched every movie multiple times. I have over a hundred of the novels at home and I spent quite a bit of time thinking about the universe.
And I don't give a shit about what Abrams changed. Both movies were hella fun in a way none of the old ones were. I only ever saw the the TNG movies in the cinema (what with living behind the iron curtain and all) - none of those were as fun or as big as these 2.
You didn't enjoy the movie? Fine. But the old universe doesn't go away, neither are the movies or tv shows or books. Everything is still there to enjoy. Star Trek and Star Trek Into Darkness doesn't take ANYTHING away from the stuff that came before it.
I can't watch DS9 anymore because Star Trek is bad now.
It sucks, but those are the rules, I can't do anything about it.
Star Trek is OVER.
And that's exactly what I said. You're letting go of your attachment to the pre-established lore so that you're not looking at the new universe with the same implications that the old universe had.
Except no is saying that. No one is saying that DS9 or TNG now sucks because of the existence of Abrams universe.
Abrams is exploiting ideas that already have an established meaning. If you do not let go of all the baggage that comes with those ideas then that will color your views of the new universe.
If you still think of the Kobayashi Maru like it was in WoK then the new version of the Kobayashi Maru would seem like a bastardization or an insult to the original.
added my comments in bold.
Jesus Christ, the guy who came up with it is in the movie the entire time.
If we reduce "incredibly complex formula" to "2+2", then sure. Anyone can come up with it again.
There's only one person who knows the formula - Old Spock. And one guy who can re-create it - Scotty.
Neither of them would want to give it back to Starfleet.
And, yes, it is completely possible to wipe out any one piece of information. If that information is stored on one computer system and that system gets blown up, it's gone.
See: Canticle of Leibowitz, Deconstruction of Falling Stars, the destruction of the Library at Alexandria, and so on.
Cool, now anybody who liked it is stupid. Alright. Thanks thread, I'll be back to reading you when we're done with movie talk I guess.
Wrath is such a good movie, relying on well established and loved characters to heighten the drama.
Abrams is perfectly capable of crafting his own stories, why invite comparisons like that?
And why wouldn't Scotty give it to Starfleet? He already did give them the formula and guess what, he works for Starfleet! Of his own free will, I imagine.
Yeapp. I don't really understand it either. Right before I went to see the movie I had that bit spoiled. And I was like "really? why?", not quite believing it. But there you go.
I just hope the 3rd movie is something completely original and they don't go "oh, war with the Klingons? Lets re-do the undiscovered country."
If they could give their female characters some kind of agency and point that'd be great, too.
None of those elements exist in the new film, and so Kirk's death has little weight and overall the film is "just" a Star Trek/Action flick, but as such was pretty enjoyable and there were some nice moments and, imo, it was just as "fun" as the 2009 film. Khan was a little gimmicky unfortunately, and you could have removed him and still had the typical (but dull) "Crazy Starfleet Admiral" main baddie and the entire story would have worked I think.
That being said, the new films have some good/great stuff going for them, the opening sequence of 2009 was still the highlight of the two films and right up there with anything in the entire film francise IMO, and with so little SciFi anywhere these days, long may they continue
Basically all the Star Trek movies work as movies. So I don't really understand what you're saying. A few of them aren't very good movies, but they all have themes outside of the Sci Fi.
It's also perfectly plausible because
An insanely covert group that's working out of one building; they're so black they don't have any off-site locations because those might be discovered and traced back. Nobody knows they exist, so nobody is going to bomb them.
It's arrogance.
Scotty is leaving on a 5-year voyage. Perhaps he realized how dangerous the tech was, and refused on the grounds that the Federation isn't ready for it.
The guy can't even figure out if his crew is alive and where they are but he can wipe out knowledge of the most important tech that has been discovered since warp? Ok.
Let's investigate ways to be less twattish in this thread.
Being the result of time travel the equation would have been banned on ethical grounds. At least in the older Star Treks that would be the case. Future tech is usually confiscated. The same reason the Federation doesn't use cloaked ships or half the sh*t it's capable of. They like to fight with one hand tied behind their back. That's why the only credible threats were the Borg and the Dominion, they had superior technology.
Trans-warp beaming is a potential WMD. It's existence would spur the Romulans to use whatever mad cr*p the Tal'Shia have in a pre-emptive strike. In Star Trek the races don't use half the weapons at their disposal because of MAD.
What really worries me is that, potentially at least, someone pointed out a lot of this stuff in production and the decision was made to ignore the illogic/inconsistency anyway. Not sure if that's better or worse than "they were too dumb to notice" to be honest.
Nintendo Network ID: AzraelRose
DropBox invite link - get 500MB extra free.
Section 31 isn't established as some kind of organization with the jurisdiction to confiscate data from Starfleet. They aren't even acknowledged to exist. That's their core operational strength, nobody knows they exist.
The Section 31 episodes of DS9 were my favorite. They didn't operate big hulking battlecruisers and fight wars with them. They didn't even have an organizational structure. They got outsiders to do things for them, and those individuals didn't even know they were working for Section 31 most of the time. That's what allowed them to remain covert, even from the hierarchy of Starfleet.
Hmm, that is an interesting theory.
That said, I've always considered myself a Maquis sympathizer.
Rebelling in that situation has always struck me as a legitimate use of force. And considering the demographics of people who have historically lived on the frontier, I would expect them to try and fight back.
As far as time travel ethics, I've never heard of the Federation complaining about shit handed to them from the future. I forgot how Voyager handled it in its finale. And I'd like that to remain forgotten along with Voyager.