Author Topic: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}  (Read 9938 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline General Battuta

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 214
  • i wonder when my postcount will exceed my iq
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
It's an issue to the extent that this flexibility always runs one way and not the other.

 

Offline NGTM-1R

  • I reject your reality and substitute my own
  • 213
  • Syndral Active. 0410.
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
Simple thought exercise then.

Who would you actually have play Khan?
"Load sabot. Target Zaku, direct front!"

A Feddie Story

 

Offline General Battuta

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 214
  • i wonder when my postcount will exceed my iq
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
You wanna stick with Montalban, Javier Bardem!

 
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
isn't he about as old as montalban was in space seed? i mean the main gimmick of a prequel is that everyone has to look younger than they were in the original
The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of Hell.

 

Offline AdmiralRalwood

  • 211
  • The Cthulhu programmer himself!
    • Skype
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
But here's the thing for me: Benedict Cumberbatch is pretty good in the role. I enjoyed watching him be evil and superhuman. As far as this film is concerned, he was a good choice to play the main antagonist. I do not doubt that there are actors of other, more appropriate skin tones who could do the same job, but none of them were cast for the role. Whether that is an expression of JJ Abrams' or the Hollywood casting system's basic racism is not really relevant to me enjoying Cumberbatch's performance here, and I quite simply do not care enough about these issues, or Trek continuity, in order to do things like buying tickets to one movie and watching this one instead (Not that that would be possible in the cinemas around here anyway).
I'm not saying that Benedict Cumberbatch didn't put in a fantastic performance (knowing Cumberbatch, it was probably amazing), but it would have been ridiculously easy to have Benedict Cumberbatch play a genetically-enhanced villain without making it racist, and that would to have simply had him not be Khan. The thing about Khan is that he's supposed to be somebody's idea of a perfect human... and he's not white. That is kind of important.

I was a lot more excited about the movie when they were hinting he was going to be Gary Mitchell (who has the benefit of being white in the original series).
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Codethulhu GitHub wgah'nagl fhtagn.

schrödinbug (noun) - a bug that manifests itself in running software after a programmer notices that the code should never have worked in the first place.

When you gaze long into BMPMAN, BMPMAN also gazes into you.

"I am one of the best FREDders on Earth" -General Battuta

<Aesaar> literary criticism is vladimir putin

<MageKing17> "There's probably a reason the code is the way it is" is a very dangerous line of thought. :P
<MageKing17> Because the "reason" often turns out to be "nobody noticed it was wrong".
(the very next day)
<MageKing17> this ****ing code did it to me again
<MageKing17> "That doesn't really make sense to me, but I'll assume it was being done for a reason."
<MageKing17> **** ME
<MageKing17> THE REASON IS PEOPLE ARE STUPID
<MageKing17> ESPECIALLY ME

<MageKing17> God damn, I do not understand how this is breaking.
<MageKing17> Everything points to "this should work fine", and yet it's clearly not working.
<MjnMixael> 2 hours later... "God damn, how did this ever work at all?!"
(...)
<MageKing17> so
<MageKing17> more than two hours
<MageKing17> but once again we have reached the inevitable conclusion
<MageKing17> How did this code ever work in the first place!?

<@The_E> Welcome to OpenGL, where standards compliance is optional, and error reporting inconsistent

<MageKing17> It was all working perfectly until I actually tried it on an actual mission.

<IronWorks> I am useful for FSO stuff again. This is a red-letter day!
* z64555 erases "Thursday" and rewrites it in red ink

<MageKing17> TIL the entire homing code is held up by shoestrings and duct tape, basically.

 

Offline General Battuta

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 214
  • i wonder when my postcount will exceed my iq
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
Could've made him Joachim and saved Khan for a sequel!

 
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
The thing about Khan is that he's supposed to be somebody's idea of a perfect human... and he's not white.

wow that's actually progressive in an intelligent and non-self-congratulatory way

who came up with khan, it can't have been roddenberry
The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of Hell.

 

Offline General Battuta

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 214
  • i wonder when my postcount will exceed my iq
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
Khan was originally like an Aryan superman during the script but I believe he was altered during script revisions (before or after casting Montalban I'm not sure).

They originally wanted Benicio Del Toro for STID, I guess he couldn't do it.

 
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
so can we accept that, in this case, boycotting the film is probably a disproportionate response given that their first choice was a hispanic actor?
The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of Hell.

 

Offline AdmiralRalwood

  • 211
  • The Cthulhu programmer himself!
    • Skype
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
so can we accept that, in this case, boycotting the film is probably a disproportionate response given that their first choice was a hispanic actor?
I never called for a boycott; I just said that I, personally, can't give this movie money. If that's not a dealbreaker for you, then by all means enjoy it.
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Codethulhu GitHub wgah'nagl fhtagn.

schrödinbug (noun) - a bug that manifests itself in running software after a programmer notices that the code should never have worked in the first place.

When you gaze long into BMPMAN, BMPMAN also gazes into you.

"I am one of the best FREDders on Earth" -General Battuta

<Aesaar> literary criticism is vladimir putin

<MageKing17> "There's probably a reason the code is the way it is" is a very dangerous line of thought. :P
<MageKing17> Because the "reason" often turns out to be "nobody noticed it was wrong".
(the very next day)
<MageKing17> this ****ing code did it to me again
<MageKing17> "That doesn't really make sense to me, but I'll assume it was being done for a reason."
<MageKing17> **** ME
<MageKing17> THE REASON IS PEOPLE ARE STUPID
<MageKing17> ESPECIALLY ME

<MageKing17> God damn, I do not understand how this is breaking.
<MageKing17> Everything points to "this should work fine", and yet it's clearly not working.
<MjnMixael> 2 hours later... "God damn, how did this ever work at all?!"
(...)
<MageKing17> so
<MageKing17> more than two hours
<MageKing17> but once again we have reached the inevitable conclusion
<MageKing17> How did this code ever work in the first place!?

<@The_E> Welcome to OpenGL, where standards compliance is optional, and error reporting inconsistent

<MageKing17> It was all working perfectly until I actually tried it on an actual mission.

<IronWorks> I am useful for FSO stuff again. This is a red-letter day!
* z64555 erases "Thursday" and rewrites it in red ink

<MageKing17> TIL the entire homing code is held up by shoestrings and duct tape, basically.

 

Offline jg18

  • A very happy zod
  • 210
  • can do more than spellcheck
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
Just saw the movie in an IMAX theater and I'll agree that it's really good. I gave it a 1/2 rating using The Watch Test** which is saying quite a lot for someone who rented the first movie and stopped it sometime after
Spoiler:
the Red Death kills a lot of people and they meet Leonard Nimoy and stuff (the plot just became a mixed-up mess at that point, my opinion of course)

I think I'll stay out of the question on casting choices, though.

**The Watch TestTM is a nice alternative to the usual star-based scale for rating movies. It just assumes you're wearing a watch. The score starts at zero. While watching the movie, you add 1 point for every time you look at your watch and 1/2 point for every time you really want to look at your watch but don't. The score is just the sum. Zero is a perfect score, and there's no upper bound on the score for a bad movie.

 

Offline watsisname

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
Just got back from an IMAX showing.

It was pretty spectacular.  Some "argh" moments, to be sure, but overall I enjoyed it even better than the first.

Had to divert power away from the part of my brain that knows orbital mechanics, though. :S  FULL POWER TO EYE-CANDY, WHEEEE
In my world of sleepers, everything will be erased.
I'll be your religion, your only endless ideal.
Slowly we crawl in the dark.
Swallowed by the seductive night.

 
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
**The Watch TestTM

Does wishing your watch could fire a laser to smite the ****bags sitting two rows ahead who can't shut the **** up count? I might have to give the movie a 200 if so and that'd be pretty depressing.

Movie itself: a bit more 'meh' than good. Everyone saying it was so great makes me feel like I'm missing something.
Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

 

Offline StarSlayer

  • 211
  • Men Kaeshi Do
    • Steam
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
**The Watch TestTM is a nice alternative to the usual star-based scale for rating movies. It just assumes you're wearing a watch. The score starts at zero. While watching the movie, you add 1 point for every time you look at your watch and 1/2 point for every time you really want to look at your watch but don't. The score is just the sum. Zero is a perfect score, and there's no upper bound on the score for a bad movie.

That test seems to grade how boring a film is rather than providing a metric for how good it is.  Plenty of bad movies will slip through the cracks of that test.  The Room for example is a tour de force in awful, but could potentially score really well in your test because it's like watching a train wreck unfold.  Granted it provides no lower bound on the other hand its upper bound is capped at "It kept my ADD at bay." 
“Think lightly of yourself and deeply of the world”

  
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
Just got back from an IMAX showing.

It was pretty spectacular.  Some "argh" moments, to be sure, but overall I enjoyed it even better than the first.

Had to divert power away from the part of my brain that knows orbital mechanics, though. :S  FULL POWER TO EYE-CANDY, WHEEEE

the most important part of learning orbital mechanics is learning how to forget about orbital mechanics when watching scifi
The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of Hell.

 

Offline watsisname

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
Quote
The Room

OH HAI
In my world of sleepers, everything will be erased.
I'll be your religion, your only endless ideal.
Slowly we crawl in the dark.
Swallowed by the seductive night.

 

Offline NGTM-1R

  • I reject your reality and substitute my own
  • 213
  • Syndral Active. 0410.
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
Actually worth the extra money to see in 3D, unlike Iron Man 3.

Also, some poor bastard got credited as "Enterprise Redshirt".
"Load sabot. Target Zaku, direct front!"

A Feddie Story

 
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
Just saw it this morning, and I'd like to say it was pretty good.

Well I'd like to, because I can't think of anything wrong with the movie. But still, I'm feeling a little disappointed in it. I just feel like it was missing something, something that I can't put my finger on.

So far, after a few hours thinking about it, it seems to just lack any of the tension that made Wrath of Khan a classic. And it also lacked any sort of battle of wits, like you would expect from Khan, somebody who's super-strong but also super-humanly smart.

Warning: Spoilers not in spoiler tags for readability

Tension: "Oh man, Sulu is totally showing his whole hand, and stating over a communication channel aimed at the Klingon home world that there's a Federation ship, prepared to fire Federation weapons, at Klingon sovereign territory, where there happen to be high-ranking Federation officers. That can't possibly be a good idea." Oh, it didn't matter.
Tension: "The Enterprise is dead in space because sabotage! Will the dreadnaught blow it up?" No, the warp drive was repaired. "But will it actually work well enough to escape???" Yep, works just fine.
Tension: "Oh carp the Enterprise is getting blown to pieces!" But we've already established that the Admiral's daughter is on board and can diffuse the situation, and Scotty is on board the dreadnaught and can diffuse that.
Tension: "Khan never planned to spare anybody! He's going to kill everyone now that he recovered his crew!" Not likely, since we already figured out EXACTLY what Spock did a few minutes ago. They diffused the tension before it even showed up.
Tension: "All that damage knocked the warp core out of alignment, we're going to dieeeeeee!" Nope, not if you've ever seen a science fiction movie before. I wonder, which of the only two people in a position to fix the ship will heroically fix the ship?
Tension: "Well Kirk's dead. Dang." Nope! Khan has magic blood that will probably bring things back to life. Hey check out that tribble.

Potential: "I bet Khan had a really good reason for shooting up all those high-ranking command crews." Nope, it was 'cause he was mad.
Potential: "Well, at least he's going to have an awesome plan for escaping/enacting the next phase of his 'screw everything up' thing." Nope, magically beamed away to Qo'noS.
Potential: "I'm sure he at least had a great reason for beaming into the heart of the Klingon Empire. To start a galaxy-breaking war? He has some sort of alliance with the Klingons to bring death to his enemies?" Nope. Not at all. Might as well have been deep space.
Potential: "Ah, I see. His whole plan all along was to steal the dreadnaught and rescue his people!" But how could he have possibly known that the admiral would load up all 72 of them onto the Enterprise, that Kirk would try to apprehend him instead of using the long-range torpedoes that Khan himself helped build, and that the admiral would personally command the dreadnaught to come secretly blow up the evidence.
Potential: "Oh yeah, here we go. The Enterprise and the dreadnaught are crippled, no weapons, no engines. Now we get into the battle of wits and mind games. First person to fire a shot or escape wins. Yes." Oh they're just getting sucked down to Earth (which I should mention is a lot further away than The Moon at this point).
Potential: "Khan's alive and the dreadnaught is moving! Of course! Here's our chance for a final showdown!" Nope, he's ramming San Francisco because he just really dislikes that city.
Potential: "Well at least it's the Enterprise's chance for some cool move or sacrifice to save thousands of lives on the surface." Nope, just dodge and watch the ship crash.
Potential: "Oh man, Spock is pissed. Will he be able to defeat Khan in a protracted hand-to-hand battle, or will there finally be some sort of battle of wits???" Ok, protracted hand-to-hand battle. Can't complain I guess.


Oh look, I put my finger on it. Go me. Sorry for the long spoilers.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2013, 03:39:47 pm by Scourge of Ages »

 

Offline jg18

  • A very happy zod
  • 210
  • can do more than spellcheck
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
**The Watch TestTM is a nice alternative to the usual star-based scale for rating movies. It just assumes you're wearing a watch. The score starts at zero. While watching the movie, you add 1 point for every time you look at your watch and 1/2 point for every time you really want to look at your watch but don't. The score is just the sum. Zero is a perfect score, and there's no upper bound on the score for a bad movie.

That test seems to grade how boring a film is rather than providing a metric for how good it is.  Plenty of bad movies will slip through the cracks of that test.  The Room for example is a tour de force in awful, but could potentially score really well in your test because it's like watching a train wreck unfold.  Granted it provides no lower bound on the other hand its upper bound is capped at "It kept my ADD at bay." 

Depends on how you define "good" in the context of movies. I define it as "entertaining". If I'm not checking my watch, that's a good sign that I find the movie entertaining. If I'm constantly checking my watch, that means I can't wait for it to end. (Keep in mind that I rented the first Abrams Star Trek movie and couldn't even sit through the whole thing.) It sounds like The Room is arguably entertaining and thus would probably score low, although I suspect that its watch test score would be much higher on the second viewing, since watching the same unfolding train wreck repeatedly sounds pretty dull. Maybe you need multiple viewings to get an accurate value? Or there are just movies worth watching exactly once and others worth watching more than once? Incidentally, I'm seeing it again with my co-workers tomorrow (it was with other people yesterday), so we'll see what score it gets then.

Moving back on-topic: Yeah, Scourge, I can see the movie had a bunch of flaws and shortcomings that I ignored while watching it. I really need to get around to watching the original movies.

 

Offline Axem

  • 211
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness [SPOILERS}
I quite enjoyed the movie. While the first was quite messy in my opinion, trying to establish all the characters and establish a new timeline; this one was much more enjoyable and started to show that sort of Star Trek idealism that was found in the series.

My only problems were: Did it really need to be Khan? Like AdmiralRalwood said, it could have been someone else, and I would have been just fine with that. I sort of get within the context they brought him back, but I don't know how well a 300-year old man can help design new weapons and ships... ("George Washington, help us defeat the Nazis! They have tanks and airplanes!" "What's an airplane? Can you shoot at it with a musket?")

And I think by using Khan, it almost invites criticism on how the movie wasn't The Wrath of Khan. But I did enjoy the flipped scenarios between Kirk and Spock, its sort of slightly redeemed with that.

Also everything in this new Star Trek universe is like 5 minutes away from each other. Someone transported from Earth to Kronos? No problem. Warp there and back in no time. It just really decreases the scale of the universe and makes everything seem less grand.

Still, the meat of the movie was very delicious.