Don’t know how I missed this news from last year, but it seems that Star Trek: Into Darkness was voted by fans as the worst movie in the Star Trek canon. Seriously? I’m floored by that.
I get that we hardcore trekkie’s like the hard stuff — hard science, hard social commentary, hard relevancy. I understand that we prefer slower-paced, thinking-man’s Sci-Fi flicks.
But this movie, although it was action-packed and fast-paced, was true to the spirit of original TV show. It took a a solid message about terrorism and wrapped it in a tasty nougat of action. So what if it wasn’t “hard science fiction?” Was Space Seed, the original episode on which it was based, hard science fiction? Was Spock’s Brain? Was it that you didn’t like the message? Well, did you like the anti-feminist message of the episode Turnabout Intruder?
I know, I know, many of us didn’t like the scene in which Alice Eve’s character strips down. I liked it. Shows that Kirk is a horny womanizer like in the original series. And as for the alleged whitewashing (casting Cumberbatch in the role of Khan), I approve of the fact that the producers didn’t want to demonize a non-white person.
Pine, Quinto, Saldana, Pegg and Urban have captured the essence of the characters beautifully in these reboots. And, like the original TV series, these new movies are a mix of action, humor, pathos, and relevancy. I just don’t understand why my fellow hardcore trekkies are nitpicking them to pieces!
If you’re a hardcore trekkie who can’t stand the new movies, please fess up. What’s the real reason you don’t like them? There has to be something you’re not telling me.
I enjoyed the first reboot movie. I’ll have to go back and watch Into Darkness again, but I do recall having a number of moments where I looked at my friends in the theater to see if they were having the same negative reaction that I was. Knowing in advance that this film was a remake of Space Seed/Wrath of Khan probably biased me at some level, but I didn’t connect with Cumberbatch as Khan the way I did with Montalbon. And I vaguely recall a few places where the plot felt really forced. But I can barely recall the film as a whole, so I would need a rewatch to make cogent notes.
Well, being unable to recall the film that well speaks volumes – it says that it neither repulsed nor thrilled you – which implies that it may not have taken enough risks in terms of plot, message, action, etc. Actually, that has been a fairly consistent complaint with the movie, that it was a watered down version of the Khan concept. So maybe I’m just easily amused? Off topic: Interested to hear what you think about Interstellar. Saw it Sunday and I was blown away. Best Sci-Fi film since 2001 in my opinion.
I have the same mug. My daughter uses it frequently.
Where I felt Into Darkness fell down was in the history of the characters. Khan hated Kirk for years after Space Seed and after his wife and many of his crew died. In the new movie that motivation is missing. It didn’t ring true for me. It would have probably improved my reaction to the story if he had stayed as Harrison.
And it wasn’t the worst. At least for its story problems it still looked great. Final Frontier still takes the cake for worst.
The same mug? Outstanding! Yes, I see your point. Into Darkness is kind of a mishmash of Space Seed and Wrath of Khan, and therefore missing a little of each. And, as I recall, your choice for worst Star Trek film was that poll’s second or third choice. Thanks for visiting!
I used to have a Star Trek Technical Manual purchased at one of the small ST cons in Richmond (late 1970s, hotel on W Broad next to Willow Lawn Shopping Center). Sadly, I lent it to Gary Braswell’s friend Oliver, who died while serving the Navy in the Med, so I never saw it again.
Eager to see Interstellar, excited that they consulted with an astrophysicist on the science, have been purposely avoiding too much info as not to spoil it.
Ah, the memories…I lost my ST tech manual in one of my moves, dadgummit! I think you’ll dig Interstellar.