Please log in to participate in this forum.
I'm sorry, but I laughed when Spock yelled "KHAAANNNN!!" No, JJ Abrams. Only Kirk can do that. And then I was just shaking my head when Spock was fighting CumberKahn.
Oct 6 - 05:42 PM
Aside from a few throwbacks, the two movies are completely different.
Sep 20 - 08:33 PM
Haven't see Wrath of Khan. Really liked Into Darkness, though.
Jun 2 - 03:36 PM
Actually- no. It's not. Yes it retreads certain plot points- like the reactor scene. But it's hard to call it Wrath of Khan. A better way to put it is that Into Darkness is much more like the first Khan story- Space Seed, more than anything. It is familiar yes, and while i wish they would have tried to break the mold a little bit more, I think the film has enough characterization and new takes to make it stand on its own.
May 28 - 07:23 AM
In the original canon, the Enterprise finds Kahn's people adrift during their five-year mission. In this canon, Admiral Marcus finds them. I'm wondering why the difference? Did the destruction of Vulcan motivate Marcus to find Kahn? Just the Klingon threat by itself would not have as it would have been exactly the same in both canons.
May 28 - 12:22 PM
I think part it could be an excuse for Abrams to have his more militarized Starfleet- to use and show all the fancy explosions. Hopefully now that they are actually ON the five year mission, they will begin to act more like the explorers Scotty thought they were.
May 28 - 09:51 PM
Which leads to the question: will the third movie be about a world the Enterprise finds during it's new five-year mission, or are they going to fight Klingons? Or both?
May 29 - 10:57 AM
If you see it again, yes, the destruction of Vulcan motivated Starfleet to massively expand their exploration, which resulted in another ship discovering Khan's ship and frozen crew adrift instead of the Enterprise as depicted in "Space Seed". Khan explains all this to Kirk while being held in the Enterprise brig after McCoy and Carol Marcus discover the frozen crewman inside the torpedo.
Jul 10 - 11:45 AM
I agree, the blatant ripoff of Wrath of Khan is disgusting and just shows how bad Hollywood writing has become.
May 27 - 02:12 PM
Need a tissue?
May 27 - 03:20 PM
I think it worked out just fine with the exception of duplicating the reactor scene. I facepalmed at that point.
May 28 - 12:23 PM
i was laughing out loud at that point
Oct 2 - 03:40 PM
Especially when Spock yelled KAAAAAHHHHHN! Unintentional comedy.
May 28 - 12:25 PM
Diego John Tutweiller
Agreed, it's a direct rip-off. Wrath of Khan was WAAY better, but this is still pretty damn good sci-fi.
Jun 2 - 01:17 PM
i liked both movies, but i can like even the bad trek movies like stV. i have to admit that using parts of wok in stid and twisting is not inventive.
May 27 - 12:55 PM
Liam Neeson Trollfighter
"I haven't seen all of WRATH OF KHAN" AAAAAAaaaaand that's where your point fails.
May 27 - 11:38 AM
Well shit me a cupcake there Tommy, you actually made a valid point.
May 27 - 03:59 PM
Look I made another one!
Jun 10 - 03:18 PM
I thought the movie was fine, it was more of a homage to Wrath of Khan than a ripoff. For me it was a rousing and often inventive summer blockbuster. I think people usually tend to overstate their criticims for recent films and judge them to harshly.
May 26 - 10:23 PM
"Rip off" = "homage" now. OK thanks for clearing that up.
May 27 - 05:20 PM
I agree, (and include some other old ST movies) and it was hugely disappointing for that reason. So sick of remakes pretending to be new movies.
May 26 - 08:46 PM
If by complete remake you mean different in almost every way, except for a few reimagined characters from Khan, then yes. I would however say that it is more of a companion to WOK, as the two universes (old series/films and new) are meant to coexist in Trek lore. Either way, Into Darkness is an awesome film... it blew me away. I would recommend seeing WOK first, if you haven't already.
May 26 - 03:11 PM
How can you possibly say this was an awesome film? From the b.s. 'relationship' they try to hint at with Spock and the Uhura, along with the blatant ripoffs of scenes from WOK, to the totally unrealistic science aspect of things that were done - I walked out 3/4 of the way through laughing at how stupid I was to pay $10.50 for this drivel. And I LOVE Star Trek. Very disappointing.
May 27 - 02:14 PM
"totally unrealistic" Do you not understand that movies are supposed to help us escape from realism?
May 27 - 02:33 PM
John, no he does not. He is one of the libtard trolls out there that need to ruin everything for others. The whole movie in today's terms is 100% unrealistic, that is why we go to see it. You want a realistic movie Dave, get a cam corder and walk around town for 90 min. Then go home and put the dvd in your player and watch wtf you just recorded. OMFG REALISM AT IT"S FINEST/GREATEST! Fucktard.
May 27 - 03:57 PM
johnny cam that was good point haha. And ya Iron Man is "realistic" too with his super impervious flying suit. And people are cool with that.
May 27 - 05:51 PM
By "unrealistic" I believe he means the parts that really stretched it, like the jump from the Enterprise onto the other ship, Spock jumping from one ship onto another 1,000 feet up and at over 100 miles per hour, and the worst one - the Enterprise being caught in the Earth's gravity...from the MOON. I still enjoyed the movie but honestly, there was some really awful science in it.
May 28 - 12:28 PM
I'm really not getting all the bitterness about this movie and all the people getting their panties in a wad incorrectly misrepresenting it as a "remake" and a "rip-off". In the previous movie, when Nero came back in time from the future and destroyed Vulcan, EVERYTHING CHANGED! It's tricky now because you have to forget everything that came before because events that we have all come to know as Trek History have been/are going to be irrevocably altered. At the same time, it *helps* to a degree, to be familiar with what came before so you can spot the differences and see how they've been manipulated by the events that took place in "Star Trek" (2009). This film was VERY imaginative in the fact that it shows us the repercussions of someone ELSE finding Khan's ship and the decisions they made in regard to him and it... while at the same time playing with the things we already knew from the original history of the imaginary time period (just as Kirk still cheated on the Kobayashi Maru test in the Academy and eventually became Captain of the Enterprise through different means in the prior film). Was Spock's scream of "Khaaaaaaan!" ridiculous? Of course it was, but that's part of the "fun" of Trek, especially in this new timeline. They get to play with the things that those familiar with the series already know, and we as audience members get to laugh with the joke. For those NOT familiar with "WoK" (1982), the moment makes perfect sense, so it works on both levels. That it seems the characters themselves know something is amiss after the warp core has been realigned and Kirk is dying is even better: Spock saying to Kirk, "It is what you would have done", and Kirk right back to him in response.
Seriously, people. Like it or hate it, it's really just simple entertainment, so do us all a favor and get over yourselves. The negativity over something as silly as a movie is about as ridiculous as imagining the reaction of Christian Fundamentalists if the suggestion were made that Jesus was a BARBER instead of a carpenter. Star Trek is entertainment, not religion. And for those who would take it as such, I advise you to heed to the memorable words of the original Kirk himself, William Shatner, and "Get a life!"
Jul 10 - 12:51 PM
Very well said.
Sep 19 - 11:15 PM
Well, hey there, little buddy! Hows about you come on down off of that high horse you're sitting on? This is the internet, for fuck's sake! What else is it good for if not bitching and whining about things like this? Second to porn, I'm pretty sure this is the internet's primary objective.
Let them complain online about a movie - if you're not into that discussion, you may want to avoid forums on websites dedicated to movies and, more specifically, RATING movies.
Nov 13 - 09:13 PM