GalacticaBBS: Everything wrong with STID in 7 minutes or less... - GalacticaBBS

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1

Everything wrong with STID in 7 minutes or less...

#1 User is online   obsolete toaster Icon

  • Callsign Red-Eye
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 41,399
  • Joined: 06-January 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 22 September 2013 - 10:52 AM

I know, I know; this is beating a dead horse, but it just cracked me up ( :lol: ):



To the fans of STID I apologize, but honestly; every single point this video makes is pretty much irrefutable.
0

#2 User is offline   Bill Icon

  • TU Forum Manager - Callsign Defiant
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 518
  • Joined: 10-February 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Auburn, MA

Posted 22 September 2013 - 01:50 PM

All so true and probably more.

I did finally see it a couple weeks ago.
www.trekunited.com
0

#3 User is offline   Captain Taurus Icon

  • Pick Your Own Title!
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 16,753
  • Joined: 08-September 07
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 22 September 2013 - 02:55 PM

TOASTER!!!! Don't ruin this for me. Actually, only some of his points I agree with...the rest he is nitpicking to death. SENTENCE: LET IT GO!
0

#4 User is online   obsolete toaster Icon

  • Callsign Red-Eye
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 41,399
  • Joined: 06-January 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 22 September 2013 - 06:40 PM

View PostBill, on 22 September 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

All so true and probably more.

I did finally see it a couple weeks ago.


And beyond agreeing with the video (as I did), what else did you think, Bill?

Quote

TOASTER!!!! Don't ruin this for me. Actually, only some of his points I agree with...the rest he is nitpicking to death. SENTENCE: LET IT GO!


Oh, come now ( :D ).... it wasn't just nitpicking really; these are perfectly valid criticisms. I used to defend ST: Generations (a movie I still like, BTW) against many vicious slings and arrows, but even I had to acknowledge that many of the criticisms were right. I still enjoy the movie (I'm one of about ten people who did, I think), but I can honestly acknowledge it's failings, too.

I think part of the reason there is so much STID online backlash (honestly, I haven't seen this much since NEM) is because we waited four years for this one, and it's painful how they just dropped the ball in so many ways. So, I think the criticisms come from a place of concern rather than disdain. We ALL love ST dearly and we want it to succeed. But it also hurts all the more when it seems to be "going the wrong way" (as Kara Thrace would put it).

Many of us who are deeply critical of STID do so in the hopes that if the criticism reaches critical mass, maybe the next one can be better (as it did with TMP and TWOK...). Criticism is a HEALTHY thing to art, not a hinderance. It's how art grows and evolves. ;)
0

#5 User is offline   Captain Taurus Icon

  • Pick Your Own Title!
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 16,753
  • Joined: 08-September 07
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 22 September 2013 - 10:17 PM

View Postobsolete toaster, on 22 September 2013 - 06:40 PM, said:

And beyond agreeing with the video (as I did), what else did you think, Bill?



Oh, come now ( :D/> ).... it wasn't just nitpicking really; these are perfectly valid criticisms. I used to defend ST: Generations (a movie I still like, BTW) against many vicious slings and arrows, but even I had to acknowledge that many of the criticisms were right. I still enjoy the movie (I'm one of about ten people who did, I think), but I can honestly acknowledge it's failings, too.

I think part of the reason there is so much STID online backlash (honestly, I haven't seen this much since NEM) is because we waited four years for this one, and it's painful how they just dropped the ball in so many ways. So, I think the criticisms come from a place of concern rather than disdain. We ALL love ST dearly and we want it to succeed. But it also hurts all the more when it seems to be "going the wrong way" (as Kara Thrace would put it).

Many of us who are deeply critical of STID do so in the hopes that if the criticism reaches critical mass, maybe the next one can be better (as it did with TMP and TWOK...). Criticism is a HEALTHY thing to art, not a hinderance. It's how art grows and evolves. ;)/>



Criticism is also the route of all evil! LOL. I think, if you look at this objectively, that more than half of his criticisms were garbage! Pure and simple. I mean he points to one of the alien crew and says, Who's this? Then he points to another and wonders why she didn't have a bigger role because she is beautiful. Come on! Get with the program. These are nitpicks. Not valid criticisms in my opinion. He pointed out one flaw that I found in the first showing of Trek and that was the model of the top secret ship on Admiral Marcus' desk. Another valid criticism was the beginning of the film where Kirk shoots their ride! What was up with that?! But pointing out things like a RED Starship....Who gives a Frak!

There is a line between nitpicking and valid criticism and I think that is a tight line which your balance needs to be spot on.
0

#6 User is online   obsolete toaster Icon

  • Callsign Red-Eye
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 41,399
  • Joined: 06-January 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 22 September 2013 - 10:34 PM

View PostCaptain Taurus, on 22 September 2013 - 10:17 PM, said:

Criticism is also the route of all evil! LOL. I think, if you look at this objectively, that more than half of his criticisms were garbage! Pure and simple. I mean he points to one of the alien crew and says, Who's this? Then he points to another and wonders why she didn't have a bigger role because she is beautiful. Come on! Get with the program. These are nitpicks. Not valid criticisms in my opinion. He pointed out one flaw that I found in the first showing of Trek and that was the model of the top secret ship on Admiral Marcus' desk. Another valid criticism was the beginning of the film where Kirk shoots their ride! What was up with that?! But pointing out things like a RED Starship....Who gives a Frak!

There is a line between nitpicking and valid criticism and I think that is a tight line which your balance needs to be spot on.


What about using transwarp beaming to escape the ship, or many other points? Yes, I'll agree that the red ship and the 'who's this?' things were added as jokes, but about 85-90% of those were honest complaints IMO.
Yes, it's nitpicking but we're geeks. It's what we DO. :P
0

#7 User is offline   Captain Taurus Icon

  • Pick Your Own Title!
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 16,753
  • Joined: 08-September 07
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 23 September 2013 - 03:03 AM

View Postobsolete toaster, on 22 September 2013 - 10:34 PM, said:

What about using transwarp beaming to escape the ship, or many other points? Yes, I'll agree that the red ship and the 'who's this?' things were added as jokes, but about 85-90% of those were honest complaints IMO.
Yes, it's nitpicking but we're geeks. It's what we DO. :P/>


I didn't have a problem with the portable transwarp escape to Klingon space. It made sense when they mentioned that the facility that was blown up was a secret division of Starfleet to create new technology to combat any kind of threat against Starfleet. Think of it as a modern James Bond contraption! I think his complaints were more like 40% not 80% - sorry, was I nitpicking! Bahahahhahhah!
0

#8 User is online   obsolete toaster Icon

  • Callsign Red-Eye
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 41,399
  • Joined: 06-January 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 23 September 2013 - 06:41 AM

View PostCaptain Taurus, on 23 September 2013 - 03:03 AM, said:

I didn't have a problem with the portable transwarp escape to Klingon space. It made sense when they mentioned that the facility that was blown up was a secret division of Starfleet to create new technology to combat any kind of threat against Starfleet. Think of it as a modern James Bond contraption! I think his complaints were more like 40% not 80% - sorry, was I nitpicking! Bahahahhahhah!



No, I was agreeing with the video's point about why wouldn't Starfleet put escape transwarp transporters on ships like the Enterprise; as in, when Enterprise is hurtling towards Earth....
0

#9 User is offline   p0is0n0us Icon

  • Custom Graphics Designer
  • View blog
  • View gallery
  • Group: Global Moderators
  • Posts: 8,254
  • Joined: 06-January 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Photoshop, Photography, Gaming, Cooking, Scifi, Reading, Movies.....all the usual stuff.

Posted 23 September 2013 - 01:23 PM

I watched STID again on the flight over to the UK. I was trying REALLY hard to put aside the blatant plot holes and inaccuracies. I still found Kirk's death scene obnoxious.
0

#10 User is online   obsolete toaster Icon

  • Callsign Red-Eye
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 41,399
  • Joined: 06-January 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 14 July 2017 - 07:32 AM

* Human blood and tribble blood are compatible (?!?). When's the last time a human gave a transfusion to a Guinea pig?

* Khan is kept under the control of S31; presumably he was being closely watched (otherwise he's not under their control, right?). Yet he manages to clandestinely stuff 72 torpedoes with his people (?!).

* Khan somehow knows (and counts on) Kirk mindlessly obeying orders and firing on the Klingons in order to 'save' his people. Given Kirk's reckless penchant for disobedience (see: first quarter of the movie), I'd say that was a bad gamble.

* Khan also assumes that Kirk will fire ALL 72 torpedoes and won't bother to check to see if they've detonated on the surface of Kronos and killed their intended target (a man who is clearly a threat to the Federation). When is the last time we EVER saw the Enterprise fire 72 torpedoes into a planet to kill a single human target? Even in ship-to-ship combat they’ve only needed to fire one or two. Was “Harrison” made of solid neutronium?

* Spock delivers the torpedoes to Khan, who doesn't even bother to check (via a quick internal scan or a visual ID) whether Spock would've double-crossed him, which he would (and which he did), given how Khan double-crossed HIM. Khan's 'superior intellect' should've anticipated that.

* S31 is facing an all-out war with the Klingons...yet Admiral Marcus is willing to destroy the Federation flagship just to snuff out ONE disobedient captain. Really? With all-out war on the horizon, you WOULDN'T want the guy who saved Earth one movie ago on YOUR side, Admiral?

* Took the Enterprise a while to get to Klingon space (long enough to solve the Carol Wallace/Marcus enigma, at least...but only a few minutes back from there to lunar orbit (?!)

* Khan's superblood saves dead tribbles and radiation fried captains. Is death now obsolete in this alternate Federation? A potential fountain of youth is NEVER followed up on...

* Uhura insists on saving Khan (when Spock is beating the daylights out of him) yet they have 72 other cryotubes full of viable donors aboard...Spock could've easily killed Khan and they would've had PLENTY of super blood left.

* If Khan had superblood all along, why did Marla McGivers die on Ceti Alpha V in TWOK? Why did ANY of his people die if their own blood had such amazing reparative and restorative properties? Radiation burns cells; that means his blood can reverse necrosis. In theory, it repairs tissue damage. NONE of his people should've died. Ever. Either in the previous universe OR in the alternate timeline (Khan was lost in space in 1996; centuries before Nero’s interference).
Major retcon here, folks.

* Khan saves Mickey the Idiot's daughter, yet insists that the guy perform a suicide bombing act in gratitude. Um...Khan could've used his transwarp beaming to beam a detonator inside of S31's HQ without the loss of Mickey the Idiot. Or he could've detonated a bomb by remote (where's his so called superior intellect, for chrissakes?).

* And back to that transwarp beaming thing: if Khan had time (and a lack of surveillance) to stuff his people into torpedoes) why didn't he just transwarp beam ALL of their tubes onto the waiting-in-Jupiter-orbit USS Vengeance and use HIS command codes to take over the ship? Clearly the Vengeance had a tiny crew aboard (why all the windows then, I wonder...); so Khan could've easily beamed aboard, immediately locked out the main computer using his still active code (don't ask me why Starffleet didn't change it), and gas the remaining crew (ala his strategy in Space Seed). He and his people could've warped away in a brand new, heavily armed and fortified starship.
They would've had the whole galaxy at their mercy.

* Kirk violates the Prime Directive blatantly and VERY casually, I might add, causing a planet to worship the Enterprise as a deity... and is only busted down in rank?!? This is Starfleet’s TOP ORDER. The order that officers swear to give their LIVES to uphold (I just saw “The Omega Glory” a couple weeks ago). So.... er, what the hell? I realize TOS Kirk had violated it many times, but the stakes were usually a lot higher than ONE officer’s life.

I can think of more, but that oughta do for now.... :P
0

#11 User is offline   maneth Icon

  • Global Moderator - Callsign Tiger
  • Group: Global Moderators
  • Posts: 4,460
  • Joined: 17-December 06
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Exploring the secrets of Destiny with Dr. Rush
  • Interests:BSG, Stargate SG-1, SGA and SGU, Farscape, Star Trek, Babylon 5, Crusade, Andromeda, Firefly, Doctor Who...

Posted 14 July 2017 - 09:13 AM

:lol: You really hate the movie, don't you? I found it entertaining, but unlike the best sci-fi movies, it's best if you don't think too much when you watch it.
Posted Image
Posted Image
0

#12 User is online   obsolete toaster Icon

  • Callsign Red-Eye
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 41,399
  • Joined: 06-January 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 14 July 2017 - 10:28 AM

View Postmaneth, on 14 July 2017 - 09:13 AM, said:

:lol:/> You really hate the movie, don't you?


Whatever makes you think that? :P

Quote

I found it entertaining, but unlike the best sci-fi movies, it's best if you don't think too much when you watch it.


And I don’t mind a little suspension of disbelief either; all movies have logistical flaws if you look closely enough. Human beings make mistakes; as do screenwriters, granted.
But STID’s are so open and brazen that I can’t enjoy the movie because of them; they’re too obvious and in-my-face to avoid. It’s like the screenwriters weren’t even TRYING to win me over.

Looking past the laughably bad moments of the movie (“My name... is... KHAAAN”; I never thought I’d accuse Cumberbatch of Shatner-esque overacting, but there it is), it’s just so logistically flawed that I can’t even be entertained by it. My suspension of disbelief is considerable if I’m enjoying the show (sound in space, for example) but in the case of STID? The movie is so cynical and negative, that I can’t even enjoy it as a shallow fantasy. The first time I saw it, it was in 3D and IMAX and I admit, I was overwhelmed by the spectacle of it (not to mention we’d all waited 4 long years for a new ST movie and were starved for it).

By the 2nd viewing (in normal non-IMAX 2D) the eye candy dissipated, and I was left just watching a really BAD movie.

So many moments are milked for cheap, obvious ‘fanboy’ sentiment, too.

* Spock and Kirk’s ‘switcheroo’ death scene; there is a difference between ‘homage’ and ‘cut-and-paste’; using dialogue lifted from TWOK (“Ship...out of danger?”) and just switching the names falls into the latter category.

* Tribbles are thrown in for no good reason, other than fanboy wankage. They’re not even used for what tribbles are good at (see: the far better “Trails and Tribble-ations” of DS9).

* Mudd’s ship is another ‘for fanboys only’ moment. Means nothing to anyone else.

* Even Khan’s big reveal (“My name is...” ) is spoken like the Sermon on the Mount, but it is a revelation that is meaningless to this timeline's Kirk and Spock; they have no idea WHO this man is.
Not to mention that the surname ‘Khan' is as common in Northern India and the Arab world as Smith or Jones would be in the UK or the United States. If he’d followed it up by “...Noonien Singh” it might’ve allowed Kirk and Spock to put it together themselves. But to see a very British white guy (with blue eyes) saying his name is “Khan” wouldn’t and shouldn’t mean anything to anyone in the 23rd century. That moment could only work (and IMO it doesn’t) because of the audience’s familiarity with TWOK, which this movie so feverishly and desperately tries to emulate.

* Carol Marcus is ‘reimagined’ from a tough civilian scientist protecting her son into a Starfleet cheerleader creampuff who just wants daddy’s love.
I hate what was done to her character (even if Alice Eve is mighty easy on the eyes... ;) ).



So yeah, it’s fair to say that I have issues with this movie. :P
0

#13 User is offline   maneth Icon

  • Global Moderator - Callsign Tiger
  • Group: Global Moderators
  • Posts: 4,460
  • Joined: 17-December 06
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Exploring the secrets of Destiny with Dr. Rush
  • Interests:BSG, Stargate SG-1, SGA and SGU, Farscape, Star Trek, Babylon 5, Crusade, Andromeda, Firefly, Doctor Who...

Posted 14 July 2017 - 12:10 PM

:lol: And I don't blame you at all. I much prefer the other Abrams Treks. Granted, Kirk's far too rapid rise from cadet to captain annoyed me in ST09, but it was still an entertaining movie. In Beyond, the cast's just getting into its stride, so I do hope for more. I just want them to tell new stories. A nod to long-time trekkies who know TOS intimately is okay, but I really don't want to see any more reimagined old villains from TOS. Khan was enough. We don't need a reimagined whales movie!
Posted Image
Posted Image
0

#14 User is offline   I Voted Baltar Icon

  • Were I unwed, I would take you in a manly fashion
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5,469
  • Joined: 29-January 10
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Raxicoricophalopotorious
  • Interests:Me, beer and Grace Park.

Posted 14 July 2017 - 12:33 PM

View Postobsolete toaster, on 14 July 2017 - 07:32 AM, said:

* Khan is kept under the control of S31; presumably he was being closely watched (otherwise he's not under their control, right?). Yet he manages to clandestinely stuff 72 torpedoes with his people (?!).


That's not a big issue - we've seen it all over the place. The Great Escape (both film and reality) saw tunnels being built under the Germans nose. Different scenario, but similar situation - no matter how closely watched, the person planning the jailbreak can find a way.


View Postobsolete toaster, on 14 July 2017 - 07:32 AM, said:

* Khan somehow knows (and counts on) Kirk mindlessly obeying orders and firing on the Klingons in order to 'save' his people. Given Kirk's reckless penchant for disobedience (see: first quarter of the movie), I'd say that was a bad gamble.

* Khan also assumes that Kirk will fire ALL 72 torpedoes and won't bother to check to see if they've detonated on the surface of Kronos and killed their intended target (a man who is clearly a threat to the Federation). When is the last time we EVER saw the Enterprise fire 72 torpedoes into a planet to kill a single human target? Even in ship-to-ship combat they’ve only needed to fire one or two. Was “Harrison” made of solid neutronium?

* S31 is facing an all-out war with the Klingons...yet Admiral Marcus is willing to destroy the Federation flagship just to snuff out ONE disobedient captain. Really? With all-out war on the horizon, you WOULDN'T want the guy who saved Earth one movie ago on YOUR side, Admiral?

* Khan saves Mickey the Idiot's daughter, yet insists that the guy perform a suicide bombing act in gratitude. Um...Khan could've used his transwarp beaming to beam a detonator inside of S31's HQ without the loss of Mickey the Idiot. Or he could've detonated a bomb by remote (where's his so called superior intellect, for chrissakes?).


This was all Marcus' plan. Khan didn't really have one. Khan's whole plan was smuggle his people out and escape - which went a bit tits up. The only part of his plan that worked was the Starfleet meeting.

The rest was all Marcus; he wanted a heavily armed Enterprise in Klingon space. He sent an emotionally distraught Kirk out there with 72 super-special torpedo's to antagonise the Klingons and had the ship sabotaged to ensure they'd be caught. Using all 72 of them would work - completely obliterate the area and run. But even then, you didn't need to use all of them - just one - the rest on the ship are evidence to link the Enterprise to the event. That entire sacrifice of the Enterprise was to ensure the war he wanted happened - and then when he was busted, he just wanted to kill the witnesses. Which all makes sense.

Khan didn't even realise his people were on the ship until Kirk started talking. The only major question here is one of circumstance - was Khan's rebellion a convenient excuse for Marcus' plan to be put into motion? Or did he play Khan all along to gamble on it happening? I'd have liked to have seen that answered and to have Khan vulnerable, outsmarted by a normal human, but I'm fine with it being open ended.

.....though the suicide bomber plan ruins the idea of it being open ended. Clearly Khan was out of the loop and needed that helping hand. Was he caught? Was he on the run? He must have been to be hiding in the shadows. Either that, or this was his distraction hoping someone else would take the fall and that went wrong. That'd be too much to cram in there though and drag out the A to B.


View Postobsolete toaster, on 14 July 2017 - 07:32 AM, said:

* Spock delivers the torpedoes to Khan, who doesn't even bother to check (via a quick internal scan or a visual ID) whether Spock would've double-crossed him, which he would (and which he did), given how Khan double-crossed HIM. Khan's 'superior intellect' should've anticipated that.


Khans superior intellect was never superior though - and even if it was, his ego was even greater! Space Seed was 90% ego more than smarts.


View Postobsolete toaster, on 14 July 2017 - 07:32 AM, said:

* Took the Enterprise a while to get to Klingon space (long enough to solve the Carol Wallace/Marcus enigma, at least...but only a few minutes back from there to lunar orbit (?!)


OH! That I have more than speculation for! There's a graphic in the film that acts as a hidden explanation. In the KT they've discovered transwarp corridors like the Borg use. One of the displays shows a corridor between Qo'nos and Earth. VERY deeply hidden, and I'm not sure if it's for the purpose of demonstrating why the return was so quick, but it's in there somewhere.


View Postobsolete toaster, on 14 July 2017 - 07:32 AM, said:

* Khan's superblood saves dead tribbles and radiation fried captains. Is death now obsolete in this alternate Federation? A potential fountain of youth is NEVER followed up on...

* Uhura insists on saving Khan (when Spock is beating the daylights out of him) yet they have 72 other cryotubes full of viable donors aboard...Spock could've easily killed Khan and they would've had PLENTY of super blood left.

* If Khan had superblood all along, why did Marla McGivers die on Ceti Alpha V in TWOK? Why did ANY of his people die if their own blood had such amazing reparative and restorative properties? Radiation burns cells; that means his blood can reverse necrosis. In theory, it repairs tissue damage. NONE of his people should've died. Ever. Either in the previous universe OR in the alternate timeline (Khan was lost in space in 1996; centuries before Nero’s interference).
Major retcon here, folks.

Khan and the blood is an intriguing one. Mainly as it strikes me that only Khan has it. He was part of Section 31 -an agency that build a secret ship and took advanced tech like the transwarp beaming out of public use and into their possession. Are we sure the magic blood is from 1996 and not a 23rd century upgrade? If thats the case, that property will never be seen outwith S31 again.

It also partially explains why the others never entered McCoy's mind when he made the orders to retrieve Khan; no one else has it. Even if they did and it WAS A 1996 upgrade, he'd only tested Khan's blood and had absolutely no reason to believe anyone else's genetics had the same properties; it'd be reckless wishful thinking if he did and there's no way anyone would take that bet.

View Postobsolete toaster, on 14 July 2017 - 07:32 AM, said:

* Kirk violates the Prime Directive blatantly and VERY casually, I might add, causing a planet to worship the Enterprise as a deity... and is only busted down in rank?!? This is Starfleet’s TOP ORDER. The order that officers swear to give their LIVES to uphold (I just saw “The Omega Glory” a couple weeks ago). So.... er, what the hell? I realize TOS Kirk had violated it many times, but the stakes were usually a lot higher than ONE officer’s life.


As far as anyone knew, Kirk was treated appropriately. No one had the perspective of the planet, just the risk; All Spock could have stated was that they compromised their cover - no one would know the result of that. Breaking that rule was a dual thing; it was done for good, but he was still disciplined as he was letting reckless ego get in the way.

The only failing I have is that they failed to follow up properly; Kirk goes form reckless playful captain, to serious situation - there's no curve inbetween that shows him either struggling or learning. to me thats the flaw in the film - everything points to him needing to grow the frak up, then he realises he needs to take his own life to save the ship - but there's nothing in between.

The rest is movie logic and filling in the blank - and I genuinely hate that movies spoon feed things these days. So much of ID was between the lines and left for people to think about instead of being explained to. Some intentionally, some not so much. But there's enough to piece together the plot points, but not the characters points for me.


View Postobsolete toaster, on 14 July 2017 - 10:28 AM, said:

* Even Khan’s big reveal (“My name is...” ) is spoken like the Sermon on the Mount, but it is a revelation that is meaningless to this timeline's Kirk and Spock; they have no idea WHO this man is.
Not to mention that the surname ‘Khan' is as common in Northern India and the Arab world as Smith or Jones would be in the UK or the United States. If he’d followed it up by “...Noonien Singh” it might’ve allowed Kirk and Spock to put it together themselves. But to see a very British white guy (with blue eyes) saying his name is “Khan” wouldn’t and shouldn’t mean anything to anyone in the 23rd century. That moment could only work (and IMO it doesn’t) because of the audience’s familiarity with TWOK, which this movie so feverishly and desperately tries to emulate.


In fairness - they did the exact same in the original Space Seed. Because if he said his full name, its game over and he's busted :P

Secondly, it felt to me more like reclamation. not on the first viewing but after watching once or twice it looked more like a scene in which someone is finally able to be free, stop living under a false name and false identity (even a false face!) and just reclaim who they are: Khan.

There's a history of that and, whil eI can't be sure, I do wonder if that was the approach when doing the scene as there is a hesitation and a slow pride in the name.


View Postobsolete toaster, on 14 July 2017 - 10:28 AM, said:

* Carol Marcus is ‘reimagined’ from a tough civilian scientist protecting her son into a Starfleet cheerleader creampuff who just wants daddy’s love.
I hate what was done to her character (even if Alice Eve is mighty easy on the eyes... ;)/> ).


I LOVED that! Even in a different timeline, a younger Carol Marcus suddenly finds her reason to hate Starfleet. Marcus was a shady character to begin with (I have issues there) but this gave her anti-Starfleet position actual reason, which was amajor weak link in TWOK.

.....I'm gonna stop typing now :P

Overall though - I don't think ID is a tremendous film by any stretch, but I honestly think it' held up to standards higher than most of Star Trek. TWOK was based on plotholes that it made no effort to fill. It's always struck me as peculier.
Posted Image
James St James | Serious stuff. Sexy spandex.
0

#15 User is online   obsolete toaster Icon

  • Callsign Red-Eye
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 41,399
  • Joined: 06-January 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 14 July 2017 - 05:50 PM

Quote

Khan didn't even realise his people were on the ship until Kirk started talking.


Which makes his ‘plan’ all the more foolish... he had to HOPE that Kirk had them aboard. Why didn’t he just transwarp beam them onto the Vengeance (along with himself), take the ship over with his command codes and hot foot it the hell out of there??

Quote

The only major question here is one of circumstance - was Khan's rebellion a convenient excuse for Marcus' plan to be put into motion? Or did he play Khan all along to gamble on it happening? I'd have liked to have seen that answered and to have Khan vulnerable, outsmarted by a normal human, but I'm fine with it being open ended.


Open ended... or as I call it, plot hole. :P

Quote

In fairness - they did the exact same in the original Space Seed. Because if he said his full name, its game over and he's busted :P


But the problem lay in the execution. In Space Seed (an episode I’m not very fond of, BTW) Khan says it kind of matter o’ factly, “Khan is my name... (just) Khan.”

In STID, he says it as if it should MEAN something. My point was that to Kirk and Spock (in this timeline), it DOESN’T. To them, Khan is Joe Q. Nobody at this point. But Cumberbatch (an actor I normally adore) just drips acid-blood all over that line, “My NAME is... KHAAAAN.” It’s said with such zeal but it’s meaningless.

Quote

The only failing I have is that they failed to follow up properly; Kirk goes form reckless playful captain, to serious situation - there's no curve inbetween that shows him either struggling or learning. to me thats the flaw in the film - everything points to him needing to grow the frak up, then he realises he needs to take his own life to save the ship - but there's nothing in between.


^ Very much agree with you on this.
I would’ve preferred if ST09 was lesson enough as far as Kirk learning to be a captain. In my head canon, I just cut from ST09 (which to me, should’ve been the start of the 5 year mission) and three years later to ST Beyond (which I really loved). I prefer to think that Kirk’s 2nd lesson in growing up (AFTER he got the keys to the ship) just never happened. You don’t need STID to repeat the lesson, unless you’re going to show Kirk actually learning something. We don’t. All we see is him recklessly killing himself (but not really) at the very end.

Learning to die isn’t learning command. That’s the fast way out...

Quote

Even in a different timeline, a younger Carol Marcus suddenly finds her reason to hate Starfleet. Marcus was a shady character to begin with (I have issues there) but this gave her anti-Starfleet position actual reason, which was amajor weak link in TWOK.


We don’t know if her dad in the prime timeline did anything like the shady business he committed in STID.
And yes, you bring up a very good point about it possibly giving her impetus to resent Starfleet in the future (though, by STID’s end, she’s still wearing the uniform... ONE YEAR LATER :P).

Quote

Overall though - I don't think ID is a tremendous film by any stretch, but I honestly think it' held up to standards higher than most of Star Trek. TWOK was based on plotholes that it made no effort to fill. It's always struck me as peculier.


I agree that many of the ST movies (most of them, in fact) have MAJOR plot holes (and none of them are as good as the best of the TV shows), and I also agree that TWOK (while a very good movie) is also a bit overrated to be honest.

Personally I like TUC a little better. :D
0

#16 User is offline   I Voted Baltar Icon

  • Were I unwed, I would take you in a manly fashion
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5,469
  • Joined: 29-January 10
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Raxicoricophalopotorious
  • Interests:Me, beer and Grace Park.

Posted 17 July 2017 - 06:46 AM

View Postobsolete toaster, on 14 July 2017 - 05:50 PM, said:

I agree that many of the ST movies (most of them, in fact) have MAJOR plot holes (and none of them are as good as the best of the TV shows), and I also agree that TWOK (while a very good movie) is also a bit overrated to be honest.

Personally I like TUC a little better. :D/>


That's all that needs said, and I'm good with that as it's completely right :P

Though... the Kirk thing STILL bugs me. Him facing death should have been a far bigger issue, considering what happened to Thor. But that gets more of a highlight over drinks in one quick scene in Beyond.

Grr argh. Honestly I think ID's biggest issue wasn't laziness or rushing as a lot of people suggest, but being overproduced. Sometimes those extra revisions rent needed, but it feels like there were a few too many for that one.
Posted Image
James St James | Serious stuff. Sexy spandex.
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1


Fast Reply

  

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


- Battlestar Galactica, Caprica and Blood & Chrome are registered trademarks of Universal Studios. Copyright ©2006 - 2016. All Rights Reserved -
- GalacticaBBS.com and its subsidiary sites are in no way affiliated with Universal Studios or The SyFy Channel -
- The SyFy Channel & Syfy.com are owned and operated by Comcast/NBC/Universal Television.-
Website and forum designed by Thomas Moore. Site and content created and owned by Thomas Moore and Zipper.