'Star Trek Beyond' - July 22, 2016

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by warrian

No, but there were a lot of literary references, alluding to themes of aging and rebirth. There was a frank discussion about the Genesis wave and the ethical and moral dilemma's it presents. The consequences of Kirk's cheating death in his simulation as a student making it far more difficult for him to accept loss as an adult... It's a much smarter and more philosophical (if not political, as you say) film. Much more in keeping with the original series, which was equal parts thrills and big ideas.

The Genesis argument between Spock and Bones lasts all of 30 seconds, before being interrupted for sneak attack/shooty-shoot.


You have the hero's journey in Star Trek 2009 (and the actual Kobayashi Maru test and Kirk's called on the carpet publicly for breaking the rules), what it means to grow up without a parent, etc. Many current political issues in Into Darkness, not to mention Spock learning the true meaning of friendship. Both of those films were very much into the spirit of TOS, minus the space hippies, Lincoln floating in space, and tricking computers into blowing themselves up.

[Agent Bond]

But why is he [Show spoiler]

Because the writers wanted to rip off another Star Trek movie.

[Show spoiler]Nemesis

in this case.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

The Genesis argument between Spock and Bones lasts all of 30 seconds, before being interrupted for sneak attack/shooty-shoot.


You have the hero's journey in Star Trek 2009 (and the actual Kobayashi Maru test and Kirk's called on the carpet publicly for breaking the rules), what it means to grow up without a parent, etc. Many current political issues in Into Darkness, not to mention Spock learning the true meaning of friendship. Both of those films were very much into the spirit of TOS, minus the space hippies, Lincoln floating in space, and tricking computers into blowing themselves up.

If ST '09 (which you know I love) addresses what it means to really grow up then Khan is all about growing old. Door swings both ways.

I do miss Kirk logic-looping a mad computer though, seemed to happen every other week on TOS.

[warrian]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

You have the hero's journey in Star Trek 2009 (and the actual Kobayashi Maru test and Kirk's called on the carpet publicly for breaking the rules), what it means to grow up without a parent, etc. Many current political issues in Into Darkness, not to mention Spock learning the true meaning of friendship. Both of those films were very much into the spirit of TOS, minus the space hippies, Lincoln floating in space, and tricking computers into blowing themselves up.

Sure. The new movies definitely make attempts at including the stuff that was at the heart and soul of the originals (and particularly Next Gen TV Episodes) and those attempts are genuinely welcome. It shows that they know that stuff is important. Their films would be quite empty without them. Their versions of that kind of content is just so much more... juvenile? Maybe that's because we jump in with the old crew when they are much younger, but I suspect it is because the writer's involved aren't capable of any better, as their other work suggests.

Anyway, I've never been one to object to a straight up action in space movie so this distinction isn't really a deal breaker for me.

[Geoff D]

^ Maybe it really is because we just haven't spent enough time with the nuTrek crew that the events of STID ring so utterly hollow for me. It's all well and good talking about Spock "learning the meaning of friendship" in STID, but when we've had less than two films' worth of him and Kirk actually getting along I'm just not feeling it all.

Then again, I think the opening to ST '09 is one of the most poignant scenes in all of Trekdom and I'd never clapped eyes on Kirk's mum and dad before that point, so maybe then it doesn't matter about how long we've been exposed to whom, just as long as we buy the story that we're being presented with...and that connection simply didn't happen with me and STID.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

...and that connection simply didn't happen with me and STID.

You didn't feel anything when Pike died?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

You didn't feel anything when Pike died?

Pike? Sure, although I was getting tired of his constant 'chewing Kirk out, demoting him, promoting him' cycle that carries on into STID. The big 'death' at the end? Not so much.

[Arawn]

I love Spock mind-melding with Pike as he dies. Because that is totally a thing that someone with mind-melding ability would eventually do.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Pike? Sure, although I was getting tired of his constant 'chewing Kirk out, demoting him, promoting him' cycle that carries on into STID. The big 'death' at the end? Not so much.

?


He kind of grills Kirk in the first film - deservedly after seeing him drunk and getting the s--- kicked out of him, but it does motivate Kirk to join Starfleet.
Not exactly demoting him there. Not to mention he believes Kirk and takes his advice before they encounter Nero for the first time.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Arawn

I love Spock mind-melding with Pike as he dies. Because that is totally a thing that someone with mind-melding ability would eventually do.

What is that supposed to mean?


Spock is easing Pike's agony, it was to help him.
Pain control is something Vulcans do.

[Arawn]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

What is that supposed to mean?

Exactly what it says. It's not a riddle or puzzle. There's no hidden meaning.

[Dreamliner330]

I was planning to go to the AMC IMAX Star Trek marathon but now I'm not so sure.

They are going to play all 3 Star Trek movies in IMAX but I just found out that Into Darkness will be presented in 2D without the IMAX scenes. So the only 3D movie will be Beyond.

Additionally, the projectors at the IMAX near me are only 2K and I have different seating positions for 2D/3D. (I sit very close for 3D). Obviously I'd sit further back but I'm not sure if $32 is worth it.

Thoughts?

[StingingVelvet]

Hey guys, Star Trek has always been a mix of social commentary, true sci-fi and action. The mixture levels varied story by story, but they were all always there. That mix is what makes it so great.

[dvdmike]

Well the only local Atmos screen near me is all BFG, bawls

[Scarriere]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner330

I was planning to go to the AMC IMAX Star Trek marathon but now I'm not so sure.

They are going to play all 3 Star Trek movies in IMAX but I just found out that Into Darkness will be presented in 2D without the IMAX scenes. So the only 3D movie will be Beyond.

Additionally, the projectors at the IMAX near me are only 2K and I have different seating positions for 2D/3D. (I sit very close for 3D). Obviously I'd sit further back but I'm not sure if $32 is worth it.

Thoughts?

I'd go if I had that option.
Killer theatre, killer movies, not a lot to think about there!
Try to compromise on where you sit. Split the difference.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner330

I was planning to go to the AMC IMAX Star Trek marathon but now I'm not so sure.

They are going to play all 3 Star Trek movies in IMAX but I just found out that Into Darkness will be presented in 2D without the IMAX scenes. So the only 3D movie will be Beyond.

Additionally, the projectors at the IMAX near me are only 2K and I have different seating positions for 2D/3D. (I sit very close for 3D). Obviously I'd sit further back but I'm not sure if $32 is worth it.

Thoughts?

Oh I'm going to the AMC marathon tomorrow and I thought ID would be in 3D -- sucks if it's not but honestly I'm still going, it's not a dealbreaker with or without 3D/IMAX scenes.

[borgmatrix]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

^ Maybe it really is because we just haven't spent enough time with the nuTrek crew that the events of STID ring so utterly hollow for me. It's all well and good talking about Spock "learning the meaning of friendship" in STID, but when we've had less than two films' worth of him and Kirk actually getting along I'm just not feeling it all.

I would have preferred them to not mirror TWOK's death scene, but I appreciated that both were about something different. TWOK on the end of a long, meaningful friendship, and STID about a new, burgeoning one being cut short as Spock finally recognizes the significance of it. For me, ST09 and STID were more connected and nicely presented this growing friendship, whereas TMP - TWOK had a serious disconnect with Kirk & Spock definitely not on the same page in the first movie, but then a celebration and exploration of a deep friendship in II.

Then again, I think the opening to ST '09 is one of the most poignant scenes in all of Trekdom and I'd never clapped eyes on Kirk's mum and dad before that point, so maybe then it doesn't matter about how long we've been exposed to whom, just as long as we buy the story that we're being presented with...and that connection simply didn't happen with me and STID.

Loved the opening of ST09. STID's opening wasn't as memorable, and the movie overall was more flawed, but I found a lot that was meaningful and that I enjoyed a lot.

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Pike? Sure, although I was getting tired of his constant 'chewing Kirk out, demoting him, promoting him' cycle that carries on into STID. The big 'death' at the end? Not so much.

I'm not sure if that cycle was really there. Kirk being in trouble for cheating on Kobayashi Maru didn't have anything to do with Pike. However, Pike was involved with getting Kirk to enlist, motivating him to try to top his father, and in giving him the field promotion to first officer and later to captain (with Starfleet's backing). I don't see any cycle in the first movie.

In the second, I loved the sense of consequence to the breaking of the Prime Directive in contrast to, for instance, TNG when it happened a lot and we'd hear Picard talk about something noted in a crewmember's record (which meant nothing to us and certainly didn't seem to chance anything for said crew member), or if Picard himself did something, no scene with any Admiral chewing him out or holding him responsible in a meaningful way. Probably same for Kirk in TOS.

So I loved the forcefulness of Pike's anger, and the payoff in Kirk's reaction when he realizes he's facing a serious consequence: Enterprise being taken from him. I wouldn't put this on Pike, but on Kirk. And there was certainly the impression that Marcus and SF were behind really wanting to come down on him with Pike being the one who fought behind closed doors in Kirk's defense.

When Kirk was given back command of Enterprise, it had nothing to do with Pike, and everything with Marcus seeing an opportunity to cover himself and with an expectation that Kirk would be meeting his end.

[segagamer12]

Originally Posted by borgmatrix

I would have preferred them to not mirror TWOK's death scene, but I appreciated that both were about something different. TWOK on the end of a long, meaningful friendship, and STID about a new, burgeoning one being cut short as Spock finally recognizes the significance of it. For me, ST09 and STID were more connected and nicely presented this growing friendship, whereas TMP - TWOK had a serious disconnect with Kirk & Spock definitely not on the same page in the first movie, but then a celebration and exploration of a deep friendship in II.


Loved the opening of ST09. STID's opening wasn't as memorable, and the movie overall was more flawed, but I found a lot that was meaningful and that I enjoyed a lot.


I'm not sure if that cycle was really there. Kirk being in trouble for cheating on Kobayashi Maru didn't have anything to do with Pike. However, Pike was involved with getting Kirk to enlist, motivating him to try to top his father, and in giving him the field promotion to first officer and later to captain (with Starfleet's backing). I don't see any cycle in the first movie.

In the second, I loved the sense of consequence to the breaking of the Prime Directive in contrast to, for instance, TNG when it happened a lot and we'd hear Picard talk about something noted in a crewmember's record (which meant nothing to us and certainly didn't seem to chance anything for said crew member), or if Picard himself did something, no scene with any Admiral chewing him out or holding him responsible in a meaningful way. Probably same for Kirk in TOS.

So I loved the forcefulness of Pike's anger, and the payoff in Kirk's reaction when he realizes he's facing a serious consequence: Enterprise being taken from him. I wouldn't put this on Pike, but on Kirk. And there was certainly the impression that Marcus and SF were behind really wanting to come down on him with Pike being the one who fought behind closed doors in Kirk's defense.

When Kirk was given back command of Enterprise, it had nothing to do with Pike, and everything with Marcus seeing an opportunity to cover himself and with an expectation that Kirk would be meeting his end.

I liked both movies but I have to admit I think the first one was more memorable, I can recall plenty of scenes from that movie pretty good but the second one I am having a hard time remembering what took place, I admit I only saw each movie the one time but I still remember more from the first than the second.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Spock is easing Pike's agony, it was to help him.
Pain control is something Vulcans do.

Originally Posted by Arawn

Exactly what it says. It's not a riddle or puzzle. There's no hidden meaning.

I haven't see Into Darkness in a while but I thought Spock was either trying to learn something about Khan or actually experience Pike's emotions during death? To me the look on Pike's face was one of "Thanks, Spock. Dying was painful and you made it weird ..."

I didn't get - Spock was shooting morphine through his fingertips.

[Arawn]

Originally Posted by chip75

I haven't see Into Darkness in a while but I thought Spock was either trying to learn something about Khan

At that point, what would Pike know about Khan ( known at that point only as "John Harrison" ) that Spock didn't know?