Check
- Mark movie as favorite
- Dislike this movie
- Add movie to watchlist
- Mark movie as owned
- Check movie
- View the official lists that include Star Trek Into Darkness
- Visit IMDb page
Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)'s comments - page 2
Order by:
- Info
- In lists (360)
- Comments (46)
- Friends
- Activity
- Checks (22952)
- Favorites (1002)
Add your comment
Comments 16 - 30 of 46
fonz
If you saw the original series (TV or movie), you probably think this sucks. If your only exposure to Star Trek is via the JJ Abrams lens-flare extravaganza, then you might think this is totes the greatest thing eva.Personally, I think it is as emotionless and unexpressive as a Vulcan despite the fact that I have seen the original Wrath of Khan of which this is a carbon copy of. I have never watched any of the Star Trek tv series but I am slowly working my way through the entire film series. All that jazz about how this new modern cast is going for something else entirely, something their own. Bullshit. Every character in this turd is exactly the same as their namesake from the older film series. Right down to their mannerisms and catch phrases. But that's more a fault of the writers than the actors. They are doing their best to work with the material provided by the crack Hollywood hack team of Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof.
If you love other bullshit Hollywood effects heavy nonsense then you'll eat this up with a plastic spoon. If you appreciate plot and character development, you'll find this slightly better than the rest of what the dream factory is crapping out.
JackieGigantic
STAR TREK INTO (THE) DARKNESS (OF JJ ABRAMS ASSHOLE IN WHICH HIS HEAD RESIDES)Hey, I'm about to give away incredibly minor spoilers about a really shitty movie, aight? We cool? Kk, so, what the fuck was the point of revealing Benelict Cumberfatch as Khan? Was it that they realized they had what was ultimately a bland, uninteresting movie and decided they wanted to draw parallels to the best movie in the Star Trek series? Why would they do this? Why DID they do this? It held zero weight in the story, Benerdick Cumbersnatch could have been anyone, he didn't really have a character at all aside from "every vague anti-hero trope in a bag, regardless of whether they conflict or not". But hey, the writing team on this movie is pretty much all-star in the "fucking mediocre" category, see one Roberto Orci.
So the new Star Trek movie is an explicit metaphor for the War On Terror, because that's still topical, poignant, and hasn't been done to death. Except, you know, not. "War is morally ambiguous, bro". Oh, gee, thanks, I get that Star Trek Into Darkness. "Sometimes people start a war for their OWN GAIN, dude". Gosh, really? Thanks Star Trek Into Darkness. "Hey, check out this totally unnecessary and completely unsubtle character clearly moulded after Dick Cheney". Wow, Star Treck Into Darkness, how fucking risque. Why do all blockbuster science fiction movies these days have to come with a tired and out-dated message? Maybe it would have been all the things it wanted to be if it was released a decade ago, but the War On Terror has hardly been in the news for years and there hasn't been a single voice in mainstream media who hasn't treaded over the "ulterior motives" discussion - it just isn't relevant any longer. Just give me more Benerdick Cumbersnatch to drool over and less of this script culled from the journal of a beatnik political sciences major.
There are some good things in this movie aside from Bennyback Chumbawumba, don't get me wrong - the action is actually very well shot and choreographed. This isn't some disorienting, unstructured Michael Bay shit, JJ Abrams ACTUALLY knows how to shoot greatm fluid action and those scenes come together really well. Sadly for him, however, his name will never be synonymous with "shoots great action scenes" because it's already too well associated with "massive fucking letdown".
Blennyham Kumquat.
JoyceHeinen
Benedict Cumberbatch is fantastic in this movie, just his voice alone makes me shiver. He's a believable villain and Cumberbatch can make anything sound sinister. And Zachary Quinto's timing and dry humor is also fabulous.IreneAdler
Loved this movie just as much as the first part, or maybe even a bit more. I can only repeat about the cast what I said about them in the first movie - they fit their roles perfectly.Benedict Cumberbatch is amazing as Khan, he really added a very dark component to the movie. The dialogs (especially between Kirk and Spock, but also in general) were really funny. Furthermore some scenes were visually very interesting as well as thrilling, e.g. the very beginning of the movie among others.
Lovely, I really enjoy watching this every time.
Mackmannen
Did not like it. :(Joelston
I really don't understand a lot of the negative reception this film received. It's better than most contemporary blockbusters.contrafugal
Think I'm gonna mark this one as incorrect cover. As I recall, Khan is clearly not white.ThomasFTB
Short version: Dumb dumb dumb dumb DUMB. How is this in so many top lists? How is this a thriller?!dustofempires
less ingenious than the previous one but I loved it nonetheless, especially the crew's dynamic and the parallels and references to the old movies! and the obligatory tribble cameo ♥ =3Maxahlia
I loved it, though it obviously wasn't perfect. Sometimes things didn't really make all that much sense and the ending was pretty anticlimactic, but I still loved it. It was fun and emotional. Maybe J.J. Abrams did go too far with the lense flare this time. He does have a habit of trying a bit too hard sometimes, I think. Anyway, I found the film beautiful, and the acting was truly wonderful.bitchypixels
If you don't like the Star Trek canon, just watch it for the cast alone. Spectacular chemistry and Benedict Cumberbatch's best role yet (although I wish he'd had a bigger role in the film because let's be honest he's incredible).Too much perfection in one movie.
samfenn
While it occasionally whent a bit 'flash flash, bang bang, explosion explosion, pretty lights', it was overall very focused and stuck, to a sufficient extent, to Star Trek parametres. It made this Trekkie very happy.3D is, however, invariably undwhelming.
ianbutter
Hmm. Saw in 3D on largest iMax screen in UK and frankly could have done without the extreme facial closeups. The story line is overly complex and whilst the special effects are up to scratch the really good sci-fi elements that would be good in 3D are not on screen long enough to become properly immersed in them. Cumberbatch is at his usual best and there are some good jokes. Definitely worth a look but not a full 5 out of 5.KPND
Surprised by how much I loved this, and thought it was much better than the previous one. They need to get this back on TV where it belongs, stat!AwesomeRAWR
The graphics were awesome and I really enjoyed Zachary Quinto as Spock, but I wasn't a fan of the camera style and it felt like the plot was very jumpy.Not worthy of being an even-numbered movie, in my opinion. Rather feels like it's trying to be like Wrath of Khan and it just doesn't live up to the standards.
Showing items 16 – 30 of 46