Visit The Official Star Trek Shop Now!

Into Darkness Second Week + Polls

stid_strip_5
Vote and chat about Star Trek Into Darkness during the second week of US/Canadian release in this sticky open thread.

 

Sticky 5: Into Darkness Second USA/Canada Week

Opening week is behind us, and Star Trek Into Darkness is now entering its second week (domestically). Fans continue to buzz about the movie so once again we have a special sticky open thread for opening week.

TrekMovie.com has already posted a review and now it is your chance. TrekMovie has created a new fan reviews page for Into Darkness.

 

Previous Into Darkness Spoiler Discussion Threads

May 20 – US Opening week

May 17 – Open Weekend

May 15 – Domestic Fan Sneak Open Day

May 8 – Early Countries Open Day

 

POLLS

Here are our current polls for those who have seen Into Darkness, including a new one on what the movie needed more of (if anything).

[poll id=”720″]

[poll id=”719″]

[poll id=”718″]

[poll id=”716″]

DISCUSS STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS (WITH ANY SPOILERS)

Feel free to chat about the movie in the comments section below, including discussing any spoilers.

 

 

WARNING: This open thread is for people who have seen the movie. If you haven’t seen the movie you really shouldn’t be reading this as you are sure to get spoiled.

 

NOTE: The usual rules of Internet forum decorum apply (keep it family friendly, no flaming, trolling, being annoying, etc).

Sort by:   newest | oldest
Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle
May 28, 2013 8:00 pm

Given all the negative comments we get here from some folks, it is heartening to see that the “silent majority” of Star Trek fans — a huge 68% — think this is either a great Trek movie or the best Trek movie.

Enough said!

Phil
May 28, 2013 8:02 pm

Gonna have to go see it next weekend…

DggJag
May 28, 2013 8:02 pm

I have now seen it four times. While I doubt I will see it again in the theater, GIhave pre ordered the Blu Ray from Amazon.

Startrekfangirl
May 28, 2013 8:07 pm

Now that I’ve seen it twice, the things that bugged me the first time–lifting the dialogue from TWOK, for instance–didn’t bother me nearly as much. I predicted that longtime fans would express more disappointment than people new to the franchise, and so far that has proven true with my friends. Newbies or people not so geeky that they can recite dialogue from TWOK didn’t mind the parallels to TWOK or the fact that the villain was Khan. Those of us who are so familiar with canon that we CAN recite the dialogue might have been disappointed because we KNEW how the plot was going to unfold as soon as we realized Khan was the villain.

At any rate, I recommend anyone who was disappointed in the movie to give it a second look. It’s so quickly paced that it’s hard to catch everything the first tine through.

MJ
May 28, 2013 8:07 pm

I have seen it now 3 times. i like it more every-time I see it. Great Trek movie, if not quite as perfect as Trek 09.

Ahmed
May 28, 2013 8:07 pm

@1. Admiral Archer’s Prize Beagle

So, you categorize any criticism of the movie as “negative comment” or what ?

MJ
May 28, 2013 8:11 pm

Ahmed,

I think he primarily means that certain dude here, who I and many others now refuse to address directly, who has posted probably up towards 500 times on his personal issues with STID in the past two weeks.

Mark
May 28, 2013 8:13 pm

I read an article when The Bible miniseries came out earlier this year about how the biggest obstacle it faced wasn’t atheists or an immoral culture, but Christians! Many weren’t happy about this story being excluded or being changed to suit other purposes, things looking the way they did, etc. The writer surmised that the Bible stories were so personal to so many, there was just no way everyone would be pleased with the final product. After watching the first episode, I came to this conclusion: The Bible miniseries was what was produced, and though I would have done it differently, I appreciated what they did for what it was.

Having followed these post now that the movie has come out, I realize Star Trek fans are the same way with Into Darkness. Some hate it because its not the way they would have done it. Some can’t get over changes and the lifting of certain story elements from a certain past movie. Though I would have done it differently, I appreciated it for what it was and thoroughly enjoyed it– in fact I probably enjoyed it more the second time around! I’m glad its making the money it is and hope they get the third file out in 3 years.

Captain, USS Northstar
May 28, 2013 8:14 pm

What did STID need more of? Time! I could have sat through 30 additional minutes or more — it was that good.

Like MJ (5), I have seen it three times and I love it more every time I see it.

MJ
May 28, 2013 8:15 pm

And I think we are now realizing just how great Trek 2009 was. If Trek 2009 had never come out, people would be appreciating this new movie so much more.

As Trek Fans, we may have to face the possibility that TWOK and Trek 2009 may never be surpassed in any future Trek movies. Those movies are the Gold Standard for Star Trek.

Silvereyes
May 28, 2013 8:17 pm

MJ, gotta hand it to you, you have been right about khan since the beginning (relatively speaking)… And all this because Orci spelled something with a K when it should have taken a C!

mhansen0207
May 28, 2013 8:17 pm

10.

I do think you’re right, but I don’t know. Speaking from my own perspective, I REALLY REALLY love Into Darkness. So much so that at first I grappled on whether I like 2009 or Into Darkness better.

For me, they make great companion piece movies, each bringing something unique to the table. Of course, one can have preferences, but this was a great one-two punch pair of films in my opinion. I couldn’t be happier!

PaulB
May 28, 2013 8:22 pm

#10 – Well said, MJ!

Tiger
May 28, 2013 8:22 pm

@10

You thought Trek 2009 was that good???

I thought it was good but nothing amazing. It had a bigger budget so it looked good but I still had problems with it and the story was just ok. In fact I place as #6! out of all Treks, right in the middle of the pact I actually rate STID higher #5 because the story was much stronger. And believe that has problems too as people cited.

I generally like the Abrams films but Im still waiting for one I can say I LOVE! Maybe it will be the next one, we’ll see.

MJ
May 28, 2013 8:23 pm

@11. Thanks! That, and a trust of Anthony’s and other information….plus, yes, I got lucky to some extent! :-)

Ahmed
May 28, 2013 8:25 pm

@ 10. MJ – May 28, 2013

“And I think we are now realizing just how great Trek 2009 was. If Trek 2009 had never come out, people would be appreciating this new movie so much more.”

Yeah, I like ST2009 even more now after seeing STID.
Granted, Nero is still one of the worst Star Trek villains but other than that, ST2009 was far superior in everything from the excellent intro to the characters & the music.

May 28, 2013 8:27 pm

“As Trek Fans, we may have to face the possibility that TWOK and Trek 2009 may never be surpassed in any future Trek movies. Those movies are the Gold Standard for Star Trek.”

I think you may be right, and I think that is why you see many people saying Trek belongs back on TV. The 2-hour movie format just can’t seem to do what we’ve all come to know and love justice.

Sarek of Vulcan
May 28, 2013 8:28 pm

10 and 12

Please explain why you think ST 2009 was better than STID. While I liked ST 2009 overall, it had major plot holes and relied on the crazy bad guy story, which is hardly novel. I think STID is a much better film and much closer to the vision and philosophy of ST. STID had a solid story and strong writing.

MJ
May 28, 2013 8:28 pm

@14. To each his own, but I love Trek 2009, and without many reservations.

That being said, now that the five year mission is starting, I do hope we get a shift in the plot and focus — for the next film at least, I don’t need to see Kirk on any more alchol/sex benders, and I don’t need any more revenge villains. I want “strange new worlds” in the next one, and no more rehashing of stuff from TOS.

May 28, 2013 8:30 pm
I’ve been thinking about some of the comments posted in last week’s poll about STID being about 9/11. I’d been thinking about some of the parallels to 9/11 myself but I don’t believe that STID is about 9/11 itself but more about the aftermath. To draw my parallel, I think you need to look at both ST09 and STID together. Admiral Marcus states his motives stem from the destruction of Vulcan and how vulnerable the Federation seemed at the time. His actions in STID are not a reaction to the London bombing but are in fact a reaction to the destruction of Vulcan. Now those who say that STID claims that 9/11 is an inside-job have their opinions, absolutely, but I disagree with that assessment. I believe STID reflects upon the actions people take after such a horrific incident. Marcus acted the way he did because of the destruction of Vulcan, probably the greatest attack ever raged against the Federation (including all incarnations of Trek). I think that Marcus went overboard in his reaction to the destruction of Vulcan taking a very aggressive and proactive stance to defend the Federation from any possible future attack, going as far as to try to start a war with the Klingons who had nothing to do with Vulcan’s destruction. I think STID speaks of being wary of over-reacting when something atrocious takes place. Kirk’s initial reaction to Pike’s death was to blow Khan to kingdom-come. However, he fell back on his morales (as… Read more »
MJ
May 28, 2013 8:31 pm

@17. Matt, you are right on there. And wouldn’t it be great if the move back to TV could be in the form of high-production quality limited seasons like on HBO and Showtime — 10 episodes per season with story arcs.

I’d love to see the Trek analogy to the way they do Game of Thrones.

ObsessiveStarTrekFan
May 28, 2013 8:31 pm

@9. Captain, USS Northstar

I Agree with that sentiment absolutely! I hope (probably in vain) that JJ & company release an extended version on DVD/Bluray instead of just including a few deleted scenes in the ‘extras’.

I’ve seen the movie 8 times so far. That’s probably it for me now, until the DVD comes out, due to other commitments. I can honestly say I appreciate the movie more each time I see it.

Tribble Chow, adult formula.
May 28, 2013 8:34 pm

I’d really like to see this new Enterprise kick a little butt in the next movie. I know they are starting the 5 year mission and I’d like to see them come across something new to cannon. Into Darkness was stunning visually and never let up. As a long time fan, I loved it! Yes there were times I raised the BS flag here and there from tech and cannon perspectives. But for me it didn’t make or break the movie because I was just happy to finally get my Trek fix. I wish someone would do a cutaway schematic for the big E. In the movie you see this atrium type space were you can see the decks stacked and engineering is all over the place. For the next movie I’d love to see strange new worlds and folks or other life living there. I’d like to see Kirk and crew handle first contact with one or multiple civilizations. Maybe a space battle thrown in for good measure along with more of those great visuals from ID. Once again STID……great movie!

Sarek of Vulcan
May 28, 2013 8:34 pm

17 Matt Wright

I agree completely that ST belongs on TV where it can tell compelling stories on a smaller scale without the need for blockbuster action, the loss of major characters, or destruction of the ship or important planets in every episode.

I’m not so sure ST 2009 was better than ST VI or ST IV.

Spock/Uhura Admirer
May 28, 2013 8:36 pm
#8 ”I read an article when The Bible miniseries came out earlier this year about how the biggest obstacle it faced wasn’t atheists or an immoral culture, but Christians! Many weren’t happy about this story being excluded or being changed to suit other purposes, things looking the way they did, etc. The writer surmised that the Bible stories were so personal to so many, there was just no way everyone would be pleased with the final product. After watching the first episode, I came to this conclusion: The Bible miniseries was what was produced, and though I would have done it differently, I appreciated what they did for what it was. Having followed these post now that the movie has come out, I realize Star Trek fans are the same way with Into Darkness. Some hate it because its not the way they would have done it. Some can’t get over changes and the lifting of certain story elements from a certain past movie. Though I would have done it differently, I appreciated it for what it was and thoroughly enjoyed it– in fact I probably enjoyed it more the second time around! I’m glad its making the money it is and hope they get the third file out in 3 years.” You first stated that, in your observation, the problem with your miniseries reference was the people it was made for. Then, you say STID is the same way. I think that’s faulty because STID was made for TOS… Read more »
MJ
May 28, 2013 8:36 pm

CaptainJon,

I am predominantly in agreement with your opinions here on how the movie was more in regards to post-911 than 911. The one departure I would make is that Marcus is not really like Bush; rather, he is the Dick Cheney anology in the movie. The would obviously have to be an unseen President of Starfleet who enable Marcus in this future to get away with his out of control policy — that unseen President, who probably thought he was doing the right thing — that guy would be your George Bush here.

kmart
May 28, 2013 8:39 pm

I really despised both movies, but while 09 was worthless, at least the second one had a few character moments that worked. Unfortunately this time out, Greenwood and Cumber made the regulars look like performers in a high school skit.

The lip-service to war w/o justification is so feeble as to be offensive — it’d’ve been better if we’d seen Marcus mock-up a fake klingon cruiser and then crash it into an Earth city to get support for his war, which would have had resonances for the real world while also calling up some of the best elements of the greatest of TREK novels, THE FINAL REFLECTION.

Kirk’s moron response about the natives seeing the ship certainly belies the notion put forth in 09 about him being some kind of genius, because his attitude is at a total remove from anyone with a measure of intelligence. In their effort to have him evolved into recognizable Kirk, they decided to throw away their newly-made-up stuff.

But if I went through all of my objections to this movie, I’d be writing for HOURS.

MJ
May 28, 2013 8:40 pm

@26. I meant to say, “President of the Federation”

ol pointy ears
May 28, 2013 8:41 pm
Hey All; I am a life long star trek fan (spin-offs n’ all) , etc. The Trek into the Dark was a good/ok movie for what it is/was great special effects, nice music, good diversity of environments = creative thinking – but… Where was the mystery and clues to think about? Too much just telling us everything. Why no cliff-hangovers… cliff hangers? (will Kirk Live?, what will become of Khan and his 72 augments?, what will be the design of the fixed up uss ent?, etc.). Does it really make any sense to say this is the same characters with a different time-line? Spock was supposed to serve under Pike for 10-13 yrs. before Kirk was Captain so how old are all the main characters supposed to have been by the time they were all together and how close or far away are they now from that? Same for meeting off with Khan both times. Did into Darkness put st 2 t wrth of kn as the first TOS ep space seed? If the 5 year mission didn’t start yet then why did Enterprise go to the Klingon Qonos planet? Does it really make any sense to say this is entirely a mirror alternate reality dimension universe with Prime Nimoy Spock acting like it is all “recognizable”? I understand the need for freedom and a fresh start but why not just say Prime Spk Nimoy went into this alternate parellel mirror universe. Story – wise… ST 2009 Better for Nero… Read more »
MJ
May 28, 2013 8:44 pm

@26. “Kirk’s moron response about the natives seeing the ship certainly belies the notion put forth in 09 about him being some kind of genius, because his attitude is at a total remove from anyone with a measure of intelligence. In their effort to have him evolved into recognizable Kirk, they decided to throw away their newly-made-up stuff.”

I think you missed the whole point this. He is immature, cavalier, even read to make integrity compromises, and certainly “not ready for the chair”, and is not “his father’s son” as he was in the original timeline. After the experience, of course he would no longer have that attitude.

His growth was part of the movie — we were watching it happen before our eyes. That is the point here!

Sarek of Vulcan
May 28, 2013 8:46 pm

20 CaptainJon

I think you have written a brilliant analysis of STID, except for your statement that Adm. Marcus was not a villain. He wanted to start a war of aggression and was willing to kill anyone who disagreed with him or who tried to expose him, including the Enterprise and her entire crew! He tossed aside the rule of law and the best traditions of Starfleet and the Federation because he was so sure he was right.

The greatest villains in history think what they have done “is the right thing.” Not only do most villains say they are doing the right thing, but they actually believe it, which makes things even more tragic. (George Bush included.)

Paul
May 28, 2013 8:50 pm

Yea, it was a good movie and all that. Maybe a tad complicated for a casual non-trekkie viewer, but certainly likable.

By the way:

“336. Paul – September 14, 2010
To all Khan opponents: Khan doesn’t have to be a villain. He can be AN ALLY. This is an alternate universe, don’t forget that. :-)”

I should totally start writing story ideas for Paramount. :-P

Paul
May 28, 2013 8:52 pm

Also, they should’ve kept Kirk dead. Just sayin’.

endeavour crew
May 28, 2013 8:55 pm

boborci,

If you could make the ultimate ST movie what TOS episode would it be from or would you personally do something never seen before????

Didn’t know you had a beagle! My wife looked up beagle research (we have 2 German Shephards) and was appalled (as I was) at the number of companies that conduct tests on them because they are so gentle and easy to manipulate……………..very sad.

Anyways I just watched some old TOS movies-ST V…..etc…..
and while they were TREK, they were so CHEEEEEESY………not totally in a good way and……………it gave me good perspective on STID.., it was a GREAT movie………….

Applause to you and everyone involved…………….

MJ
May 28, 2013 8:58 pm

@31 Sarek of Vulcan,

Marcus was a villain, but a villain with a self-consisted rules that at the surface would seem to support good. Fore me, who brought to mind the character of General Scott, played by Burt Lancaster, in Seven Days in May — spookingly patriot to the level where he loses all sense of morals that would normally support his goals.

Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle
May 28, 2013 9:00 pm

Awesome conversations here, everyone. It’s so refreshing that a certain person is taking the night off here for a change.

Ahmed
May 28, 2013 9:05 pm

How about for the 50th anniversary in 2016, they bring in some of the prime universe characters, not as cameo, but as part of an epic story that span both universes.

oh & bring in new writers as well, people who can actually come up with an original exciting Trek story

Jonboc
May 28, 2013 9:06 pm

Something I’ve been asking myself is, exactly what kind of organization is Starfleet? Part government? Part civilian? Some strange hybrid? Obviously a vehicle of exploration and military purpose. But the way Scotty can just up and hand in his resignation and head to the bar…without consequence… is very strange…yet it has precedence in the original series. In The Apple, Kirk actually “fires” Scotty after using the threat of being fired as a way to motivate the engineer. You just don’t “fire” someone in the military. Strange indeed.

MJ
May 28, 2013 9:10 pm

It’s weird how in this movie McCoy was all there for jokes mainly, but Scotty was so much more serious. Not that I didn’t like the new take on Scotty (Pegg is a better actor than I thought), but McCoy didn’t really have a great role in this movie other than humor relief.

CaptainJon
May 28, 2013 9:10 pm

MJ

Very interesting point that I hadn’t considered.

Sarek of Vulcan,

The more I’ve thought about it since posting, the more I have come to realize that Marcus is indeed a villain, but truly in the tragic sense. His heart was in the right place but the way in which he went about trying to better the Federation was seriously flawed. I was incorrect in my original posting to say that he’s not a villain.

BTW, thanks!

Bob Dahlia
May 28, 2013 9:11 pm

“They should’ve kept Kirk dead” If that happened, what would the next movie be about? Star Trek III: The Search for Kirk. No, I’m very happy Kirk is alive and well. Speaking of Kirk’s character arc, did anyone notice “Punch it” becomes “Take us out” at the end.

CaptainJon
May 28, 2013 9:12 pm

@ endeavour crew,

I’m personally in favor of a cross between “The Doomsday Machine” & “Errand of Mercy” as I posted in last week’s thread. The planet-killer destroys both Federation & Klingon outposts, triggering a war but when everyone realizes what’s going on, they have to work together.

Personally, I think it would make for some awesome space battles and the cooperation despite all differences is in true Trek form!

David
May 28, 2013 9:17 pm

The Problem with this movie and any movie is they are 2 short compared to a TV series, Star Trek is meant for tv and weekly stories and then u can have your character development, etc. I enjoyed the movie for what it was, my problem is how long do u go with this crew. 1 more movie is what we are going to get from this team. Can you see them doing even 7 movies like fast and furious. Its a limited tease and in the end we are going to have 3 movies and then what. Star wars now is doing what Star Trek should have done, multiple movies in different eras, new cartoon show. Star Trek fans get a comic book and a movie every 4 years.

Curious Cadet
May 28, 2013 9:19 pm

@38. Jonboc,
“In The Apple, Kirk actually “fires” Scotty after using the threat of being fired as a way to motivate the engineer. You just don’t “fire” someone in the military.”

I believe that was a joke. Albeit a sardonic one.

But you’re right, if an officer refuses your direct order, then I believe you relieve him of his duties and throw him in the brig for insubordination. I don’t believe he gets to resign at that point.

MJ
May 28, 2013 9:26 pm

Starfleet operates more like those exploration ships from the 19th century — military ranks, but scientific and civilian type staff and rules as well.

It’s a hybrid organization.

MJ
May 28, 2013 9:30 pm

@43. Not seven movies. But I certainly could see the re-upping all the cast for 2 more movies. I think 5 movies will likely be made.

If the movies keep making towards $400M (and this one still will, thanks to he international box office), then they will make more than 3 movies — you can take that to the bank.

And if they make five movies, look for Khan to return in movie 5.

Phil
May 28, 2013 9:31 pm

@44. Yeah, in hindsight, relieved would have been a much better word.

mikejohnson
May 28, 2013 9:33 pm

@43

Hey, what’s wrong with a comic book?? ;)

SPEAKING OF WHICH. Issue #21 comes out tomorrow in print & digitally. It picks up where STID ends. Hope everybody checks it out. Many cool things on the way.

Mike J.

Phil
May 28, 2013 9:37 pm

@33. Agreed. Would have solved a lot of problems, and opened up this universe to new exploration.

Then again, I’m in the minority that Spock should have stayed dead at the end of WOK…

kmart
May 28, 2013 9:37 pm
30, His growth is something that should have happened well before this, in ANY timeline. The arbitrary arc they put him through works fine if you are doing this as Joseph Campbell mythology (as in SW), but doesn’t work here at all. That you’d even allow somebody into Starfleet with the attitude he shows here is absurd. And again, he is supposed to be somebody who is very intelligent in this timeline/reality. What, they don’t teach anthropology at Starfleet? (and all the arguments about Nero’s incursion changing everything can’t hold up well either, because if there was that much change, the PD would have been history too.) You’ve got so much in the way of credibility issues with this universe to start wtih that it is almost easier for me to believe it will simply implode of its own accord, as in it just doesn’t seem viable, though I guess that is the fault of the writers. A starfleet where according to Pike you can make captain in eight years? Where you ‘enlist’? A place that until now really did take the best of the best of the best but now has cupcake-level morons? But what else should I expect from the abramsreality of an engineering section made up of modern-era fittings and a bridge that you’d need sunglasses in just to ATTEMPT to read your board, what with all the glare and lights? Where the moon is somehow 40,000 miles closer to Earth than it is now, and that… Read more »
wpDiscuz