Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)

[Alan A]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

The last hour of this movie was awful. Loved the 2009 film and was very disappointed.

awful is a bit extreme but the ending is very disappointing.

[Show spoiler]Kahn has magic blood to save kirk, really???

[AcesAnd8s]

Can someone explain to me the Darkness in the "Into Darkness"? Because I still can't figure out the relevance of the title that relates to the movie.. Other than that I thought the movie was quite good. I definitely liked the first one a lot more though.

[Scorpion Soldier]

Anybody seen this cover around yet?

Found it through a reliable source(same guy who linked me to the supposed Avatar 3D cover, which turned out to be the real thing.) Might not be final cover of course, but Paramount released the G.I. Joe: Retaliation covers a short while after the theatrical release as well. Hoping this is the real thing, I really like it.

Btw its from a PSD, some of the layers says "Best Buy", so my guess is thats their source.

[RandyK]

Looks pretty good. Hopefully it's lenticular. That would make it a lot better.

[WorkShed]

I really liked the film. An easy 4/5 for me, with the previous film being 4.5/5. Sure, the reused moments from Wrath of Khan were not as effective for me (but my wife was crying), although Kirk's fear was very effective.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Randyman94

Looks pretty good. Hopefully it's lenticular. That would make it a lot better.

Seconded. That'd be an awesome lenticular.

[BillieCassin]

Originally Posted by Maxwell Everett

Because they have more years of experience writing film criticism, they generally have a greater breadth of knowledge about cinema and I enjoy reading about films from a well-written, knowledgeable perspective (even if I ultimately disagree)... so yeah, I do tend to give more weight to their opinions.

I certainly don't agree with the proposition that all opinions are equal.

To be honest, that's why I generally don't go by the opinion of professional reviewers. Way too out of touch with what people generally enjoy about films. Most of my favorite movies have middling to poor reviews.

I find them interesting as an academic exercise, but not so much as an indicator of if most people would actually enjoy the film or not. Particularly on new releases - one could name many hundreds of films that were given poor reviews on release that are considered absolute classics now.

[mzupeman]

Just got back from this not too long ago. Enjoyed it a great deal, but definitely prefer the first outing by JJ Abrams.

[Maxwell Everett]

Originally Posted by BillieCassin

To be honest, that's why I generally don't go by the opinion of professional reviewers. Way too out of touch with what people generally enjoy about films. Most of my favorite movies have middling to poor reviews.

I find them interesting as an academic exercise, but not so much as an indicator of if most people would actually enjoy the film or not. Particularly on new releases - one could name many hundreds of films that were given poor reviews on release that are considered absolute classics now.

That is undeniably true, but all I was simply suggesting to Todd is that if he was going to site the current Rotten Tomatoes percentage for the film, he may want to focus on the "top critics" score in order to better gauge the actual critical response to the film (whatever its actual perceived value is).

Once we start including every internet reviewer's appraisal of the film that we can find, no matter who they are, no matter how long they've been around, no matter what their knowledge of cinema is or critical bona fides are, then we're just polling the internet. You might as well cite the IMDB score too (currently 8.4/10 based on 34,441 users).

It's true that critics and general audiences bring two very different sets of expectations to the theater before sitting down and watching a film. The latter group just wants to be entertained for two hours, they're not thinking too much about the level of craft on display, the performances or analyzing the film for substance or subtext or internal logic. The former group do think about those type of things because that's what they're paid to do. And if you're interested at all in cinema and view it as an art form that's worth taking seriously, then those types of perspectives matter to you... or should matter at any rate. Even if you don't agree with them, the professional critic may provide insights that you may not have considered otherwise had you not read the review.

[Falaskan]

I wonder if this one won't go down in price for 4 years as well! lol

[i007spectre]

Originally Posted by Alan A

[Show spoiler]Kahn has magic blood to save kirk, really???

[Show spoiler]His magic blood save the little girl, in return for daddy becoming a terrorist.

[i007spectre]

My local walmart store had the 2009 movie at $5 for a long time. The bluray with the white slipcase even.

[MattW]

Loved the movie. Will buy day one. Hope we have a steel book.

[Todd Smith]

Edit: Double post

[It Never Ends]

Wow this movie just came out and already a release date.This is the reason why i dont go to the movies any more,im better off waitng for the blu!

[Todd Smith]

Originally Posted by Maxwell Everett

That is undeniably true, but all I was simply suggesting to Todd is that if he was going to site the current Rotten Tomatoes percentage for the film, he may want to focus on the "top critics" score in order to better gauge the actual critical response to the film (whatever its actual perceived value is).

Once we start including every internet reviewer's appraisal of the film that we can find, no matter who they are, no matter how long they've been around, no matter what their knowledge of cinema is or critical bona fides are, then we're just polling the internet. You might as well cite the IMDB score too (currently 8.4/10 based on 34,441 users).

It's true that critics and general audiences bring two very different sets of expectations to the theater before sitting down and watching a film. The latter group just wants to be entertained for two hours, they're not thinking too much about the level of craft on display, the performances or analyzing the film for substance or subtext or internal logic. The former group do think about those type of things because that's what they're paid to do. And if you're interested at all in cinema and view it as an art form that's worth taking seriously, then those types of perspectives matter to you... or should matter at any rate. Even if you don't agree with them, the professional critic may provide insights that you may not have considered otherwise had you not read the review.

One reason I cant give any more weight to the so called "pro" film critics is they commonly have set their standards and expectations so rigorously and strict that they don't even know how to enjoy a film that does not come close to conforming to those lofty expectations which I find a shame. Transformers for example is a film critics LOVE to hate, but by them focusing so much on the obvious issues with the film, they miss the whole point of what a film like that is all about which is pure escapist entertainment. I commonly find the "top critics" are so focused on being critical that they simply forget to sit back and enjoy a film for what it is instead of what its not.

A piece of art (movies in this case) can be approached and appreciated from many different angles and perspectives which the stereotypical film critic looses sight of commonly as they become so absorbed in what they deem "good" or "correct" that they forget how subjective a film experience can be for a host of reasons depending on the person, perspective, etc.....


All this is why I can only give even weight to any type of reviewer as you never really know what angle you will come at a film from and which critic from the J6P to the "top critics" you will relate to the best which in the end is why I say each opinion is just that, one opinion.

I know you don't agree which is fine, but I just cant give any more weight to the so called "top critics" in light of this since so many of them approach a film looking for what is wrong instead of what is right and therefore can commonly miss the beauty that is there. Films can be enjoyed for many different reasons from technical, to story based, to acting and so on which critics can commonly miss as they can site in on negative aspects so hard they don't know how to enjoy the film for what it is. This is personally why I feel the most accurate representation of how a film is judged in general should take in ALL opinions from all perspectives.

[ultlife2013]

I hope they use the same card stock for the slipcover that they used for 2009. It's such sturdy quality compared to a lot of my other slipcovers.

[Scottie]

Best Buy exclusive

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Star+Tre...&skuId=8912344

[Outlaw1986]

I want a steelbook to go with the first one I got in the mail today.

Lol u can see the reflection of my iPad in the pic. I just noticed that...

[psychomugs]

I'm almost praying for ugly steelbook art so that I don't have to hunt the first one down for completion, and feel content just sticking with my slipped 3-disc.

That cover art is awesome though. There were a few other visually striking scenes that I thought would have been depicted, but that's really nice. Interested in seeing other exclusive covers.