In the spirit of our movie threads, I'll start one on the upcoming sequel premiering in May. Anyone wish to talk about this? Benedict Cumberbatch (a-la current Sherlock Holmes fame) plays the villain, whose superpower thus far seems to be standing completely still and threatening people in his booming, characteristic bass voice.
The big question: is he Khan?
Marlow, you're up!
Last edited by JRM on Sun May 19, 2013 7:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
My understanding is that he plays a Khan-like villain named John Harrison, who is definitely not who he seems to be. The key is that he keeps the Enterprise crew and the audience guessing till the end.
Many movies crib from the original Star Trek. I always thought Avatar was an excellent rip-off of the Menagerie. And, the previous Star Trek was full of references (and reverences) to the original -which is probably why it was so well accepted. Khan (Space Seed) was good, but some of my favorites...
City on the Edge of Forever Mirror, Mirror (Uhura bare mid-riff) The Devil in the Dark (mind meld) Shore Leave (Finnegan kicking Kirk's butt) Arena (Though Darmok of "NexGen" was SO much better) The Enemy Within (Kirk has a darkside. Who knew?) Balance of Terror (chess game against the Romulans)
I could go on...and, there also are some NexGen episodes that I thought far exceeded many of the originals (although, often, the were rehashed or better examples of episodes from the original).
Marlow wrote:My understanding is that he plays a Khan-like villain named John Harrison, who is definitely not who he seems to be. The key is that he keeps the Enterprise crew and the audience guessing till the end.
I assume no one here cares, so....
Or *is* it?.....
Last edited by JRM on Fri Apr 26, 2013 8:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Saw the film last night. An incredibly fun ride, full of (sometimes overt) references and homages to the original series, movies, and spin-off series. Pay attention to the models on Admiral Marcus' desk, for example. Marlow, you'll enjoy it, despite the non-secret being given up (which every review has done already anyway).
I went with my daughters Friday night. We loved it! We are notoriously easy to please, however.
As a life-long fan of TOS (among other variations) there were a LOT of goosebump scenes. I liked the call-backs to older material, and I thought they were handled well. We'll buy this one and watch it over and over just like we did with the 2009 movie.
Without spoiling anything, my daughter wore the most appropriate shirt of the evening by wearing this one http://www.fanboytshirts.com/media/2/a2 ... 1ede_l.jpg We were all excited by the turn of events that made her shirt so apropos. Watching Into Darkness inspired a Saturday mini-marathon of Wrath of Khan and The Search for Spock. We ran out of time to watch The Voyage Home, their favorite classic Star Trek movie.
Yes, it was AWESOME!!! The set design was out of this world (bork bork). Zach Quinto stole the show (well, after the incredible CGI). May have to see it again. Certainly worth the extra cost of 3D IMAX.
Marlow wrote:Yes, it was AWESOME!!! The set design was out of this world (bork bork). Zach Quinto stole the show (well, after the incredible CGI). May have to see it again. Certainly worth the extra cost of 3D IMAX.
We went to the IMAX 3D version, and it was an experience -- but to be quite honest, I found it very distracting for the first few scenes (particularly before the title card). There was too much going on and they tried way too hard to put the 3D in your face -- literally. Frequently, only one object was meant to be in focus, so everything else became a frustrating blur.
Also, with 3D you inevitably loose picture quality. The IMAX-3D relies on both left-right color differences and polarization, which affects the sharpness of the image, while Real3D (polarization only) still decreases the intensity of the scene. I think if/when I see it again, I'm going to opt for good ol' 2D, widescreen projection, with nothing between the image and my eyes.
By the way, speaking of set design, I was much happier with Engineering this time. The Budweiser brewery in Van Nuys, CA, just wasn't convincing as "under-the-hood" of a 23rd century starship. The warp core in "Into Darkness" was an actual laser fusion reactor in the Nation Ignition Facility at Lawrence Livermore Labs.
I found it slightly titillating. CGI is...CGI. Now if they could only give us a story! We got Klingons for 5 seconds? No aliens worth watching. A boring British blond, but a super Cumberbatch (natch!) as the only character worth watching, but we had to resurrect Khan....again? I'm sure my 14 year old grandson will enjoy it. The Director is doing Star Wars which is more his line I would think. Good CGI, shallow story line but hopefully better aliens.
I enjoyed it. Maybe not quite as good as the first one, but very different in tone. I'm excited to see now what JJ Abrams can do with Star Wars!
Btw Chris Pine and Benedict Cumberbatch were on the Graham Norton show here in the UK to promote the movie and there were loads of female fans there to see them - apparently they identify themselves as "Pinenuts" and "Cumberbitches", respectively. They were pretty fanatical, some had flown in from the far East just to meet (and hug) their idols!