or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › Star Trek into Darkness (2013)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Star Trek into Darkness (2013) - Page 10

post #136 of 222
Thread Starter 
Yeah, it was severely damaged in Nenesis. Not destroyed.
post #137 of 222
Which is complete bullshit. The surviving part would have been a few feet shorter after running into something. You can't just slap a new nose on it and keep going.

Also, now that I think about it, the Enterprise was totaled in "The Undiscovered Country," too, though they decided to fly off into the sunset instead of go home to be scrapped. Remember?
post #138 of 222
Thread Starter 
My definition of "destroyed" in battle doesn't include the ability to be flown home. Does yours?
post #139 of 222
Yes. It's in space. Real ships sink or get towed back to port. Space ships can't sink. Everything makes it home. Why would you expect a space ship blow up into a million pieces, anyway?

In the epilogue I wrote for myself after Nemesis, the all the air leaked out on the way home and everyone died but the retarded robot.
post #140 of 222
Thread Starter 
This got me thinking about the whole narrative about "remember when Star Trek was about exploring and making peace?" Except for the first and perhapts fourth didn't all the movies end up being about a one kind of fight or another? Certainly the Next Generation films went full down that road. JJ's just doing it better.

Action, rinse, repeat does better in the box off when it comes to sci fi.
post #141 of 222
Huh?

Wrath of Khan and Search for Spock had the genesis device, which was a metaphor for nuclear energy (or just technology in general). In The Final Frontier they went looking for God, blindly sailing into the center of the galaxy, analogizing it to Columbus's voyage. The Undiscovered Country was the end of the cold war...in space. None of this was particularly subtle.

All the original Star Trek movies had action or fighting to some degree, but at least they tried.
post #142 of 222
Thread Starter 
Ok, I concede you make good points here. What about the Next Generation films?
post #143 of 222
"Generations" and "Insurrection" had decent sci-fi elements. They were just terrible movies, full of plot holes and bizarre deviations from the characters in the tv show. "Nemesis" had a start--hey, here's your evil clone, but they didn't do anything with it. "First Contact" was the worst of the bunch; the people who made it apparently had no idea what the Borg were supposed to be, so they turned them into space zombies. It had all the plot holes and character problems of the others, but people seem to like it because it was a competent action movie. Not me.
post #144 of 222
Thread Starter 
Interesting. I found First Contact to easily be the most watchable of the Next Generation films. Maybe for the reason you list, but it's the only one out of the bunch I would care to see again.
post #145 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jr Mouse View Post

Interesting. I found First Contact to easily be the most watchable of the Next Generation films. Maybe for the reason you list, but it's the only one out of the bunch I would care to see again.

Really? It makes no sense at all.

There's no continuity from the series. In the show, Picard had already confronted the Borg again and was able to deal with it without turning into a pscyhopath. Remember? The whole movie made no sense, the Borg queen idea was ridiculous, etc.

But the biggest plot hole was the whole idea of the Borg going back in time in the first place. Remember why they wanted to take over the Earth--to assimilate the people and their technology. So they go back in time to destroy the Earth to prevent the thing they want from ever existing? What sense does that make? The Borg weren't supposed to be malevolent or needlessly destructive. Remember the show? They wanted the Enterprise so bad they passed on numerous opportunities to destroy it.
post #146 of 222
Thread Starter 
They didn't go back in time to destroy the earth. They went back in time to prevent "first contact" and the humans' ability to take a stand against them. Seems like a good strategy to stop a foe who has defeated them in the past.
post #147 of 222
You don't understand. The Borg were only interested in the Earth because it was able to stand up to them. If they changed history they could never get all the technology and know-how they wanted. It's self-defeating.

It was strongly implied in the TV show that the Borg didn't really care whether they got the Earth the first go-round anyway. Like with the drones--they'd send one in just to see what response it got. They weren't "adapting" each time one got killed because they'd never been in a fight before; they were doing it to see what our heroes could come up with next.
post #148 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jr Mouse View Post

Yeah, it was severely damaged in Nenesis. Not destroyed.


Damaged "severely" at all was my point.

IMO that's a trick you can use once. I realize it was never indestructible... I just feel it's "tired".
post #149 of 222
Thread Starter 



I'm surprised they are so willing to spoil this happening in the marketing material for the movie.
post #150 of 222
Thread Starter 
Interesting. The ship crashing into the water in the clip above? Not the Enterprise.

http://trekmovie.com/2013/04/15/mtv-star-trek-into-darkness-clip-gives-best-glimpse-yet-of-the-other-starship/
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Entertainment and Culture
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › Star Trek into Darkness (2013)