• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Star Trek into Darkness (spoiler thread)

On that "101 TV shows with the Best Writing" thread, that list puts TOS way above TNG (and Battlestar), which is really all you need to know about the credibility of that list.
 
given that it was written when there were 3 channels and that TNG wouldn't exist as a heady sci-fi show, and it invented a crapload of sci-fi tropes. i think it's understandable
 
meh, your dislike of TOS is documented and uninteresting. Fact: BDZ's least favorite star trek is TOS; that's all you need to know about the credibility of his opinion on the subject.
 
Voyager is pretty bad. TOS is pretty bad. ENT is way underrated. Definitely better than TOS.

Saying you really enjoy watching TOS is like saying you really enjoy watching the Twilight Zone. Highly influential but doesn't really stand up to a rewatch in a modern context. Campy and boring.

If you want to talk writing, it's DS9-TNG-ENT-TOS/VOY
 
bigdoublezero said:
Voyager is pretty bad. TOS is pretty bad. ENT is way underrated. Definitely better than TOS.

Saying you really enjoy watching TOS is like saying you really enjoy watching the Twilight Zone. Highly influential but doesn't really stand up to a rewatch in a modern context. Campy and boring.

If you want to talk writing, it's DS9-TNG-ENT-TOS/VOY
Click to expand...

Agree to disagree about ENT. Show would have been terrible without Bakula IMO. I do agree TOS is not super rewatchable but man I still think it is better than ENT.

TNG and DS9 are pretty close for me. I think TNG will always win out since I grew up on it but DS9 is definitely second if not close to 1B.
 
Last edited:
Saw it tonight. Way later than most, but enjoyable nonetheless. Khan gets the Raiders of the Lost Ark treatment at the end, but I think it leaves it open for him to come back. Since the Enterprise is now embarking on her 5 year mission of exploration, I imagine the next film will be entirely away from earth with the Enterprise completely on her own battling some foe.
 
TR1982 said:
I just don't understand why if you're going to use the alternate universe to free yourself from the restraints of Star Trek canon, that you wouldn't harness that to explore entirely new possibilities, and instead retread over the same story lines and themes from the original movies. And if you're going to do that, why would you shove it in the viewers face with blatant references like the Khan scream and radioactive warp core? I went hoping to see Star Trek taken in an innovative new direction, and instead I felt like I had seen some very well financed fan fiction about how the Wrath of Khan could have happened.

That being said, it's a good movie, and definitely worth seeing, at the very least for the visual effects. I must say I was also disappointed that they decided to make Peter Weller's character a true antagonist, and didn't instead make him a morally gray character, letting the viewer decide for themselves the merits of armament against an external threat. It also would have made the plot much more intriguing.
Click to expand...

This pretty much sums up my line of thinking. I mean, the movie was enjoyable on the surface, but I was disappointed that they opted to tackle Khan again...and in the 2nd movie of a rebooted series too. If they go fuck with whales in the next couple of movies, I'm really gonna be pissed.
 
I enjoyed it. Thought it was pretty slickly done, but also entirely forgettable, if that makes sense.

The flip of Kirk into the warp core instead of Spock was OK, but then why immediately bring him back with Kahn's blood in the same movie. If you're going to go full out that route, why not do something like have Kahn's blood be the genesis of a new Genesis project (see what I did there?) and then bring back Kirk in the next movie. I mean, if you're just going to keep ripping off the original movies, why not?
 
Also, if Khan is so damn perfect, then Cumberbatch needs to get some better teeth.
 
EatLeadCommie said:
This pretty much sums up my line of thinking. I mean, the movie was enjoyable on the surface, but I was disappointed that they opted to tackle Khan again...and in the 2nd movie of a rebooted series too. If they go fuck with whales in the next couple of movies, I'm really gonna be pissed.
Click to expand...

Agreed about the whales but surely they are smart enough to know not to go that route again.

I am not so upset they dealt with Khan again because, well, his character is a substantial enemy of Kirk's. I mean it being the second movie may add some to the parallels being seen but I thought it was novel enough to not be a rehash. To me it would be like getting pissed multiple Batman movies have had the Joker. I mean when an antagonist is somewhat central, they get included in reboots for the most part. The story was different enough to be fine by me until they did that dumb role reversal in the core. It was unnecessary and reminds viewers of Wrath of Khan so much a movie about Khan doing something completely different is being thought of as a rehash. They really screwed the pooch on that scene and it was just so goddamned predictable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top