Star Trek: Into Darkness

The movies weren't terrible.  Stop saying they were.

All of this discussion about its sticking to the source material could be utterly forgiven if it was a good film on its own. I liked the first reboot despite its lack of trek. Into Darkness doesn't stand up on its own.even if it was just a standard sci fi action flick I'd have found it terrible, there would still be plot holes, the inconsistencies would still be there, the dodgy underwear scene would still be there...

I didn't even consider the canon violations til 2 hours after leaving the theatre.

That underwear scene really bothered you. It was a very mild sexy cameo, it happens all the time in movies and shows, it's just another sexist thing that becomes the everyday norm.

But aside from canon, if you just don't like the movie then fine. That's just like, your opinion man. I do like the first reboot more though.

The movies weren't terrible.  Stop saying they were.

What the originals? The old Star Trek movies are fairly notorious for being awful.

Quote from: Saddam Hussein on May 23, 2013, 02:32:59 PM

The movies weren't terrible.  Stop saying they were.

What the originals? The old Star Trek movies are fairly notorious for being awful.

They weren't all bad, and at least they weren't Transformers-tier action flicks.

Quote from: rooster on May 23, 2013, 03:05:58 PM

Quote from: Saddam Hussein on May 23, 2013, 02:32:59 PM

The movies weren't terrible.  Stop saying they were.

What the originals? The old Star Trek movies are fairly notorious for being awful.

They weren't all bad, and at least they weren't Transformers-tier action flicks.

Michael Bay is an asshat.

Quote from: Saddam Hussein on May 23, 2013, 02:32:59 PM

The movies weren't terrible.  Stop saying they were.

What the originals? The old Star Trek movies are fairly notorious for being awful.

A couple of them are.  Most of them are considered pretty good.

Quote from: Blanko on May 23, 2013, 03:20:09 PM

Quote from: rooster on May 23, 2013, 03:05:58 PM

Quote from: Saddam Hussein on May 23, 2013, 02:32:59 PM

The movies weren't terrible.  Stop saying they were.

What the originals? The old Star Trek movies are fairly notorious for being awful.

They weren't all bad, and at least they weren't Transformers-tier action flicks.

Michael Bay is an asshat.

Why?

Quote from: rooster on May 23, 2013, 04:51:24 AM

There's reason to fake it if he wants to take everyone by surprise.

Again, if you can shrug off a dozen phaser blasts, why bother pretendting to be stunned to get perhaps a half-second advantage over the others?

Because when Kahn was "stunned" the first time, it wasn't a half-second advantage that he was after. 

Quote from: rooster on May 23, 2013, 03:23:35 PM

Quote from: Blanko on May 23, 2013, 03:20:09 PM

Quote from: rooster on May 23, 2013, 03:05:58 PM

Quote from: Saddam Hussein on May 23, 2013, 02:32:59 PM

The movies weren't terrible.  Stop saying they were.

What the originals? The old Star Trek movies are fairly notorious for being awful.

They weren't all bad, and at least they weren't Transformers-tier action flicks.

Michael Bay is an asshat.

Why?

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">South Park - Michael Bay

And according to people on set, he's pretty damn sexist.

http://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag-star-trek-into-darkness/

Skip to 3:20 if you don't want to watch opening episode shenanigans.

http://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag-star-trek-into-darkness/

Skip to 3:20 if you don't want to watch opening episode shenanigans.

I don't want to watch anyone talk about any movie for 45 minutes.

You're boring.

http://redlettermedia.com/mr-plinkett-star-trek-into-reference/

I am amused.
Also, I am not surprised.  JJ Abrhams has no sense of Trek and throws plot points in a mixing bowl then tapes them together with explosions.

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/aug/14/star-trek-into-darkness-voted-worst

Oh, fucking surprise.

I liked them. The action sequences were nice for a change.

I liked them. The action sequences were nice for a change.

So long as you didn't think about it for more than a second.

Saw it last week on red box.
My biggest complaint is the inconsistent and often wrong science.

Cold Fusion is not an explosion of low temperature!
Why the hell can a space suit handle the heat of a volcano but a shuttle craft can't?
Why did they put the enterprise under water?  The population didn't have telescopes so orbit would have been better.
Why does a fighter need a jet engine in the front to fly?
Why is there a god damned moon sitting on the surface of Quo'nos?
How do starships fall into Earth from lunar orbit?
Why does a falling starship skid like a jet and not crash like a rock, creating a crater half a mile wide?
How did Kahn survive an impact that should have turned him into jelly?

On a positive note: Kahn was well done.

Cold Fusion is not an explosion of low temperature!

Because cool CGI effects

Why the hell can a space suit handle the heat of a volcano but a shuttle craft can't?

Because cool CGI effects

Why did they put the enterprise under water?  The population didn't have telescopes so orbit would have been better.

Because cool CGI effects

Why does a fighter need a jet engine in the front to fly?

Because cool CGI effects

Why is there a god damned moon sitting on the surface of Quo'nos?

Because cool CGI effects

How do starships fall into Earth from lunar orbit?

Because cool CGI effects

Why does a falling starship skid like a jet and not crash like a rock, creating a crater half a mile wide?

Because cool CGI effects

How did Kahn survive an impact that should have turned him into jelly?

Bro, it's Kahn.

On a positive note: Kahn was well done.

His performance was good, but Kahn is not supposed to be white. He's Indian.

Saw it last week on red box.
My biggest complaint is the inconsistent and often wrong science.

You must have missed that it's science fiction.

Quote from: Lorddave on September 24, 2013, 03:32:00 AM

Saw it last week on red box.
My biggest complaint is the inconsistent and often wrong science.

You must have missed that it's science fiction.

Science fiction implies a use of correct or vague science.  Star Trek even more so since that's one of its stronger points.  However, cold fusion is not an explosion of cold.  Nor does a starship fall to Earth from the moon.

Its closer to fantasy than science fiction.

Quote from: Andrew on September 24, 2013, 02:35:35 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on September 24, 2013, 03:32:00 AM

Saw it last week on red box.
My biggest complaint is the inconsistent and often wrong science.

You must have missed that it's science fiction.

Science fiction implies a use of correct or vague science.  Star Trek even more so since that's one of its stronger points.  However, cold fusion is not an explosion of cold.  Nor does a starship fall to Earth from the moon.

Its closer to fantasy than science fiction.

Irrelevant. Because cool CGI etc.

Quote from: Andrew on September 24, 2013, 02:35:35 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on September 24, 2013, 03:32:00 AM

Saw it last week on red box.
My biggest complaint is the inconsistent and often wrong science.

You must have missed that it's science fiction.

Science fiction implies a use of correct or vague science.  Star Trek even more so since that's one of its stronger points.  However, cold fusion is not an explosion of cold.  Nor does a starship fall to Earth from the moon.

Its closer to fantasy than science fiction.

Yeah, at least the Prime series and films at least attempted to have some science in them (Even if it was through technobabble)

The new ones are about as close to SF as Flash Gordon was...

Quote from: Andrew on September 24, 2013, 02:35:35 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on September 24, 2013, 03:32:00 AM

Saw it last week on red box.
My biggest complaint is the inconsistent and often wrong science.

You must have missed that it's science fiction.

Science fiction implies a use of correct or vague science.  Star Trek even more so since that's one of its stronger points.  However, cold fusion is not an explosion of cold.  Nor does a starship fall to Earth from the moon.

Its closer to fantasy than science fiction.

Then perhaps you'd better give J.J. Abrams a call and have him change the genre straight away.



 

Yeah, at least the Prime series and films at least attempted to have some science in them (Even if it was through technobabble)

Technobabble isn't science. Or are you just saying that because the words they use sound similar to real scientific terms?

At least they didn't use made up science as an excuse to show off cool special effects.

At least they didn't use made up science as an excuse to show off cool special effects.

Cold Fusion makes a giant cold explosion. 

I'd call that made up science.