• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Star Trek Into Darkness: 86% at RT.com (Post reviews here!)

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
the biggest plot hole is how did they end up in front of earth after the admiral's ship shot them out of warp while they were deep in klingon space?
 
Why the heck is this coming so late to the theaters here? 13.6, bah.

I feel betrayed, and lonely, and need a hug.
 
Did anyone catch the little quip when they are about to go on their "undercover" mission?

They said something along the lines of "get the freighter that we impounded after the 'Mudd incident' ready to go."

I wonder if they actually had some interaction planned with Harry but cut it. Or if it was just a little more of the (a bit too much) fan service.
 
I saw it yesterday and thought it was great. Cumberbatch as the villain was very good, and I liked how they referenced the standard timeline and events therein.

There were a few minor plot holes here and there, but it was easy to suspend my disbelief.

Whenever they made an obvious reference to a previous movie/show, I saw it coming and that made it just that much better when they said the line or whatever. The only thing I predicted would happen that didn't was:
I really thought Spock was going to give Khan the patented two handed chop to the back to knock him out in the final fight scene
 
Saw it yesterday. Thought it was great. Basically the 09 Star Trek, but improved.

No, its not a thought-provoking movie, but that's obviously not the point. Its a well-done action movie. I was never into the old Star Treks, so I don't care how faithful it was to those.

A few minor potholes, but meh, I didn't think they were a big deal. Lens flare never bothered me, but I saw it at a normal theater, not 3D.
 
mnewsham said:
They aren't trying to make it like the original, that has already been done. They don't want a remake so much as using the same universe but for a totally different fan base and style of writing.
Click to expand...


Agreed, wholeheartedly.

The old fanbase (with the deep pockets) is discarded, replaced by a new fanbase of fans who weren't even born when STTMP (a real dog) was released. Sir, you have proved my point ... that Americans do not want substance, they want "action" and special effects instead of a soul. This is just another instance of the dumbing down of this society and country.

Why produce quality entertainment when society will slop this crap up?
 
Last edited:
dud said:
Agreed, wholeheartedly.

The old fanbase (with the deep pockets) is discarded, replaced by a new fanbase of fans who weren't even born when STTMP (a real dog) was released. Sir, you have proved my point ... that Americans do not want substance, they want "action" and special effects instead of a soul. This is just another instance of the dumbing down of this society and country.

Why produce quality entertainment when society will slop this crap up?
Click to expand...

Compared to the depth of TOS/TNG, maybe? But do any of the previous ST films really have anything truly thought-provoking? Most people's fave, ST2, was primarily a revenge thriller. And the 'science' has always been pretty wobbly, after all, it's above all fiction.
 
Just saw it, hated the first one but really enjoyed this one. It actually had a decent story, and I liked the new twist on old stories. Not bad at all....4/5 stars for me 🙂

Was actually surprised by a cameo.
Also, Spock yelling KAAAAHHHNNN! was supposed to be sad, but actually made the audience laugh. Not sure that was intended 😀
 
I give it a TERRIBAD rating of 2 or 3 in 10. Barely good enough to record on DVR when it hits TV. Not worth the time investment and much of the movie can be skipped without issue. Still beats the star wars prequel episodes 1-3 at 1-2 points, but not as good as turds like hercules in new york (4/10).
 
EliteRetard said:
I give it a TERRIBAD rating of 2 or 3 in 10. Barely good enough to record on DVR when it hits TV. Not worth the time investment and much of the movie can be skipped without issue. Still beats the star wars prequel episodes 1-3 at 1-2 points, but not as good as turds like hercules in new york (4/10).
Click to expand...

Just curious- how big of a Star Trek fan are you?
 
Wow, just got back from watching it on an XD screen with Dolby Atmos and 3D.

One of the best, if not the best 3D I've ever seen (Avatar was #1 in 3D prior).

Story was awesome. Better than the 2009 film which was really amazing as well.

Music - Superb.

Acting - Excellent.

10/10.
 
Yea, it's kind of interesting the attitude, because..I'm sorry, those original movies were not exactly theories in quantum mechanics either.
 
OlafSicky said:
I haven't seen it but is there time travel involved?
Click to expand...
The whole time travel thing was just a gimmick used to justify a reboot and stay in the "same universe" as the original. There is no time travel in this one but this one exists because of the time travel in the first.
 
This one was definately better than the first one!!!!!

One thumbs up for this movie!

I loved the Admirals daughter and was glad
to see her half naked.
 
Last edited:
hofan41 said:
the biggest plot hole is how did they end up in front of earth after the admiral's ship shot them out of warp while they were deep in klingon space?
Click to expand...

Yeah, they time compressed a few things. That and the whole
falling into the earth's atmosphere from the moon
thing.
 
I really liked it (2D seems sufficient for this movie, btw). There were a few too many sappy moments, but other than that it was really good. I never watched the old Star Trek movies, but I am enjoying this series so far.

I want Alice Eve to have my babies. :wub:

8/10
 
Saw the movie this afternoon and enjoyed it. Like the 2009 film, it's more enjoyable if you just appreciate the movie for what it is rather than relentlessly scrutinizing it against the original Star Trek.
 
hofan41 said:
the biggest plot hole is how did they end up in front of earth after the admiral's ship shot them out of warp while they were deep in klingon space?
Click to expand...

Warp speeds are really screwed up in the new movies (or else they've totally changed the map of the universe).

Vulcan is supposed to be in orbit around the star 40 Eridani A, which is 16 light years from Sol. In the first movie though, the journey from Vulcan to Earth takes less than 5 minutes.

Into Darkness is even worse. If you look at this map you can see that Qo'nos is about 20x farther from Sol than Vulcan, but again the entire trip only takes maybe 6-7 minutes.

The new movies are not bad, but they're just not Star Trek.
 
Merad said:
Warp speeds are really screwed up in the new movies (or else they've totally changed the map of the universe).

Vulcan is supposed to be in orbit around the star 40 Eridani A, which is 16 light years from Sol. In the first movie though, the journey from Vulcan to Earth takes less than 5 minutes.

Into Darkness is even worse. If you look at this map you can see that Qo'nos is about 20x farther from Sol than Vulcan, but again the entire trip only takes maybe 6-7 minutes.

The new movies are not bad, but they're just not Star Trek.
Click to expand...

I think to dumb things down they're treating warp like hyper-space in Star Wars. Just chart a course and go -- no mention of speeds or anything. Few minutes and you're there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top