POLL: What Did You Think Of STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS?

J.J. Abrams' Trek sequel has been out in the US for a few days so we figure the majority of you will have seen it by now. The movie went over very well with critics and fans, while maybe slightly disappointing at the BO so far. Click to give your take, SPOILERS ahead..

Follow Mark "RorMachine":
By Mark "RorMachine" Cassidy - 5/20/2013


Obviously if you clicked in here we're going to assume you've seen the movie, so all SPOILERS are fair game -- the major one being of course: 'ol John Harrison (Bendict Cumberbatch) does indeed turn out to be Khan. It's a reveal I don't think was handled particularly well and I feel that the entire backstory for the character was very rushed, but I'd say that was probably my only major issue with Star Trek Into Darkness, which is easily my favorite movie of the Summer so far. But what about you guys? Did the Khan twist put you off? Was there a bit to much action and not enough depth? Did that end feel like a cop-out? Vote in the poll below and then sound off in the usual place.




DISCLAIMER: This article was submitted by a volunteer contributor who has agreed to our code of conduct. ComicBookMovie.com is protected from liability under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) and "safe harbor" provisions. CBM will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please contact us for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. You may also learn more about our copyright and trademark policies HERE.
1
LIKE!
42 Comments
1 2
ManofSteel79 - 5/20/2013, 6:02 AM
First.
DaenerysTargaryen - 5/20/2013, 6:04 AM
I loved it. The acting was great *Cumberbatch is amazing*, the action was good and there was SOOOO MUCH bromance! I now can't wait for Abrams Star Wars 7 :)
thewonderer - 5/20/2013, 6:06 AM
I got the cumbers bumbers wumbers while watching.

Fantastic film.
JonStarkgaryen - 5/20/2013, 6:10 AM
It was good, not great.
gaikinger - 5/20/2013, 6:11 AM
Nailed it....great film
PLUSH - 5/20/2013, 6:11 AM
Good
marvel72 - 5/20/2013, 6:12 AM
very good,as good as the first? most definitely,i'll have to watch it again to see if i think its better.

star wars is in very safe hands like i've been saying from the start.
Goggles - 5/20/2013, 6:14 AM
Very good flick.
HavocPrime - 5/20/2013, 6:22 AM
Great film, Benedict was the best part about it.
AustinFan4Life - 5/20/2013, 6:22 AM
I loved the movie, probably one of the best this year, however, like so many others I was put off by the copy & past job of The Wrath of Khan. I mean that entire death was all too similar to the Wrath of Khan, hell it was nearly word for freakin' word for the first minute & 1/2 of that scene. To me, it was at that point that the writers got lazy, but I do agree however, that Khan's backstory, the Eugenic Wars, were not even gone into detail, hell it wasn't even mentioned, other than saying "Khan & his crew, were criminals from a time long past", but here, just compare the WOK death scene to Into Darkness Death scene.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntrmRExwS7M

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeKf8_aeR38

Note: Sorry didn't know the video code lol
subzero1077 - 5/20/2013, 6:25 AM
Better than IM3, thats for sure!
NeoBaggins - 5/20/2013, 6:55 AM
STAR WARS is going to be awesome. Developed characters, balanced humor and drama, exciting action sequences. This is how blockbusters used to be. Crowd pleasing entertainment.
TheFable - 5/20/2013, 7:01 AM
Where's J.... I mean Khan
TheFable - 5/20/2013, 7:01 AM
@McGee..... I approve
AlanWarlock - 5/20/2013, 7:05 AM
They should have gone with tribbles.
Kyos - 5/20/2013, 7:16 AM
I really liked it!
brokenexcitement - 5/20/2013, 7:21 AM
I enjoyed the film a lot. I grew up a Star Wars fan and my mom was always a Star Trek fan. I enjoyed watching all of the Star Trek movies and series. I guess I expected too much from this film and was slightly disappointed in it. Don't get me wrong, it was good and I enjoyed it. But, I felt like I was robbed some how of originality. I mean, (SPOILERS?) I knew Harrison was gonna be who we all thought he was gonna be. I understand the alternate timeline that was set-up in the last movie, but this was just an updated remake to me. It was good, but still a simple remake. I enjoyed Nimoy's cameo again in this one. The advice he gave Spock, that sounds weird saying that lol, was a great way to share the stories. I did face palm though when Spock yelled "CENSORED!!!" I thought that was a little over the top. But, the more I thought about the movie afterwards the more I realized it was a perfect fit for the characters. If Benedict Cumberbatch's character existed in both realities, then he would eventually have to turn up and this was a perfect depiction of his character. In some instances, I thought he was a better CENSORED than the former actor. The tribbles were an awesome thing to see. I giggled like a little girl when I saw them lol
brokenexcitement - 5/20/2013, 7:23 AM
Over all, I give it a 7.5 out of 10.

JJ will make a hell of a Star Wars film if this is any indication to what he will do
RadicalDuck - 5/20/2013, 7:35 AM
Didn't like it as much as the first but it still is excellent. Fantastic acting (Cumberbatch), humour and spectacular action. Its the film that I've enjoyed most this year- way more than Iron Man III.
Tainted87 - 5/20/2013, 7:44 AM
My brother and I are usually in complete disagreement over.... well.... pretty much everything. This one's no exception. If he had his way, Kirk would have died (for real), and the movies (in his mind) would have passed on to the crew of the Enterprise D, or even DS9. Heh, good luck with that...

I loved Into Darkness. I saw it in IMAX Dome format, so I really need to see it again so that the Enterprise doesn't look misshapen and distorted. Everything's better in IMAX you know, but not necessarily the BEST. They kept moving the subtitles across the screen, so when Uhura says something, it's on the right or left (I forget), and when the Klingon says anything, it's on the left or right.... which means you have to literally move your head to read it.

Not a criticism though, just a flaw in IMAX.

Yesterday there was the "what's wrong with Into Darkness" review posted on MAIN, and while everyone's entitled to their opinion, it kind of makes us all look like a bunch of nit-picking whiners to visitors.

I'm not posting a retort though - I gave my word that my next article will be my Martian Manhunter movie treatment, and that was like, 900 years ago. Not gonna back out on that now.

I will give my 10 favorite things in no particular order.

10) The homages. Depending on how much of a Star Trek fan you are, some that may pass you by will be glaringly obvious to others.* I liked Sulu's time in the chair, how it wasn't completely forced as Chekhov's also got a promotion to engineering. Scotty sabotaging a more advanced starship was... well, that was a bit expected actually, but it made perfect sense.

9) Klingons! Even though they gave us "Kronos" instead of "Qo'noS", I thought the presentation of the Klingons was right on. The reboot had a deleted scene where Nero manages to break free AND rescue his crew inside a Klingon prison, and the guards didn't put up a good enough fight. This is the species that inspired the Krogan from Mass Effect, even much of the Covenant from Halo. We saw more from the Klingon as warriors than any movie in the series, and just about any Star Trek episode. Bat'leths were used, soldiers rappelled down from warships, and the only force that could take them down was Khan.

8) "Are you giving me attitude?" Spock's response - priceless. I absolutely HATE that question for all the implications it may present, and just the fundamental flaw existing within the open definition of the word "attitude" - it is something of a perversion of the English language. I'm not gonna lie, I GUFFAWED during that scene.

7) Anton Yelchin, as underused as he is, doesn't let that deter him from MASTERING his Chekhov speak. He's pretty awesome.

6) Khan NOT bent on revenge. In Wrath of Khan, as the title would suggest, the character is out for blood. Even his first officer, or the equivalent, doesn't hesitate to point out (although in a very placating manner) that they are free. They have a ship - they can go where they please. Why bother with Kirk? Here, Khan had no real quarrel with Kirk and simply wanted to liberate his crew from Marcus' clandestine possession. Of course, afterwards, we'd see him unleash hell, but he had the right motivation. In addition, we see Khan as a brilliant tactician - not only does he force the highest ranking officers in Starfleet into a one room shooting gallery, but he also cooly analyzes the threats aboard the Enterprise. It doesn't save him, but he gets an E for effort.

5) Bones. It's Karl freakin Urban, but you know, we still have expectations. And he gave it to us. I enjoyed his time alone with Carol, it was a nice change of scenery for him and audiences to see him try to look impressive to a beautiful woman. We also saw quite a bit of characterization between him and Spock, both gaining admiration for one another, however hidden it may or may not be.

4) Zachary Quinto is always going to be Sylar, but I enjoyed his take on Spock in the reboot. Here, we see him channel more of Leonard Nimoy in his mannerisms, his expressions, posture, and voice at times. Very subtle, but it's there, and it didn't go unappreciated.

3) Also appreciated is the resolution, even though I'm sure many people feel it was a cop out. It spared us all a "Search for Spock". The impact from the Wrath of Khan HEAVILY influenced the rest of the Original Series movies, all the way up to Undiscovered Country. Kirk and his crew damn their careers to follow a small chance that Spock may be alive on the Genesis planet; Spock is revived, his mind is mostly restored; the Enterprise is destroyed, the crew is stuck with a Klingon Bird of Prey; and Kirk's son David is killed by the marauding Klingons.
In the Voyage Home, the crew pilots the Bird of Prey (now called the Bounty) back in time (apparently it has the ability to time travel if it goes fast enough....) to bring whales back to the 23rd century in an attempt to prove to this omnipotent-seeming probe that humanity hasn't made these aquatic animals go extinct. By the end, Kirk is demoted to Captain, and is given commission of the newly rebuilt Enterprise-A. Skipping over the HORRIBLE Final Frontier, the Undiscovered Country uses David's death as a means to fuel Kirk's animosity towards the dying Klingon Empire, and is a big selling point in the attempted frame-up.
Basically, we already GOT the everlasting consequences, and we don't need the entire series living in Into Darkness' wake.

2) Marcus is a bastard. Peter Weller is pretty good at the deadpan "I don't give a damn" deliveries, and the truth is, he made the character all that more "evil". Except he's not really evil, he's just doing what he believes is best for the future of Starfleet. He gives a declaration of intent almost immediately, even through all of his cloak and dagger operations. He believes it's only a matter of time before all out war with the Klingons is upon them, and his leadership of Section 31 as well as his consultation of the frozen warlord Khan, is geared towards demoralizing them. In so doing, he's actually a precursor AND a shadow to Khan's full on human superiority, as we can tell he has no problem killing innocent people to achieve his goals. How many have to [die] before it becomes wrong? I like an honest villain.

1) The metaphor - moral of the story. It's a good one, apparently lost on a good many people, but not too many it seems. You respond to violence with violence, and that breeds more violence - and innocent lives have to be sacrificed for the war campaigns to go on. We get a 9/11 bombing in London, and a terrorist takes responsibility for it. We see the high ranking Starfleet personnel meet to go over the next course of action, and they are [bombed]. In order to catch this criminal, Starfleet must violate treaties, cross through the Neutral Zone, and invade the Klingon homeworld. It's an obvious parallel, and I really appreciated the perspective the crew takes on it - Spock is offended at the idea, and Scotty up and quits.

I plan to see it again today.
AC1 - 5/20/2013, 7:56 AM
Just watching JJ Abrams' Star Trek films shows that he not only knows how to make very good blockbuster films, but that he also has a deep understanding of Star Wars - if you look closely enough at these two Star Trek movies, you can see that they actually follow the plot and structure of the original Star Wars trilogy very closely, with some minor deviations or alterations. Even the characters play similar roles (Kirk is Luke, Young Spock is Han, Uhura is Leia, Pike is Obi-Wan, Old Spock is Yoda, etc.)

Star Wars is most certainly in safe hands with JJ Abrams at the helm - he has the knowledge and the skill to make something special. And it helps that Star Wars already hit rock bottom with the prequels, so the only way is up.
hiluxsurf2002 - 5/20/2013, 8:05 AM
Great film. Did anyone else keep thinking of Batman every time Peter Weller had dialogue?
riseofloganX36 - 5/20/2013, 8:58 AM
diden't watch this peace of shit and never will. Tell me when Shatner or Stewart comes back then i'll whatch a star trek.

But i can give a shit about teen star trek.

NUFF said BUB!
AnitaDick - 5/20/2013, 9:10 AM
Abrams ruined my childhood! WAAHHHH!!!

....LOL Just kidding! It was beyond kickass! Star Wars is in safe hands for sure.
Tainted87 - 5/20/2013, 9:12 AM
@riseofLOGANX36
Are you being intentionally ignorant? Shatner's Kirk DIED. Both actors are TOO OLD to play their characters as they did on their respective tv shows. I....
....you're kidding, aren't you?
Tony93 - 5/20/2013, 9:15 AM
it was great I loved it
Thegeekygurl - 5/20/2013, 9:24 AM
It was a very bad film. And this film and IM 3 are proof positive that Hollywood has been released by the majority of the film going public from the standard of making good films.

Once upon a time people had higher expectations and films like Willow, Robocop 2, Batman And Robin, Star Trek 5, Howard The Duck got bad reviews, poor word of mouth and flopped at the box office because people wouldnt waste their time and money on bad movies.

Fast forward to 2013: Add some fancy CGI, some cheap laughs and we buy the shit and applaud the studios for giving it to us.

Anyone who likes those 2 films has no business putting down stuff like Avatar or the Twilight stuff.

Now that studios clearly see that bad films will sell with CGI and adolescent laughs, they will start pumping out more of this crap.

Maybe they already learned from Transformers mega success that the Michael Bay formula works.
Maybe Michael Bay is the guy who saved bad movies and showed Hollywood how to make the public buy them and sell people shit and get applause for it.

Now that Marvel and others have seen this work expect more dumbed down Michael Bay type films like IM3 and Into Darkness. But to those who love those films and like being fed shit by studios thats music to the ears.
SUPERSHADOWBAT - 5/20/2013, 9:31 AM
SPOILER ALERT! IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE FILM PLEASE DON'T READ! Star Trek Into Darkness was excellent, exhilarating and action packed. It wasn't a complete remake of Wrath of Kahn, but rather a combination of TOS episode Space Seed and Wrath of Khan. Acting was excellent, especially Cumberbatch and Weller as the villains. It showed how Spock finally understands the concept of friendship with Kirk. I liked the role reversal of Kirk saving the Enterprise and crew instead of Spock, and dying. The reaction of Spock was something I always wanted to see. Nimoy's cameo was a welcome surprise. Overall a good solid movie. The audience actually applauded at the end. Not something that happens very often in my movie going experience.
Tainted87 - 5/20/2013, 9:35 AM
@1geekygurl
So what exactly did you not like about it?
MrCameron - 5/20/2013, 9:37 AM
Honestly, it felt like a huge missed opportunity. Khan was underused and the way he was defeated was total BS. But most of all, there were no real consequences and it would have been better if Khan killed one of the crew ( preferably Uhura) to show how truly evil he is. Hopefully, since he didn't technically die, they can bring him back for the sequel.
Thegeekygurl - 5/20/2013, 9:52 AM
@Tainted87 The poor usage of the Khan character would be tops.
The totally unnecessary Death And Return of Kirk, which was a throwback to 80's stuff like "Short Circuit" movies and others where the central character seems to die but is revived. If a film has no bite at the end because the ending is weak then filmmakers use that gimmick to try to add something to nothing.
The miracle Jesus-Blood of Khan???? hahahaha! Where did that come from?

It was a bad Trek Voyager episode on roids.
yingyangpalms - 5/20/2013, 9:59 AM
This film is flopping.
Even with 2013 inflated ticket prices VS. 2009 it merely matched Trek 2009. And unlike Trek 2009 its not attracting an audience beyond young males. It fell waaay short of Paramounts expectations and will not match the domestic haul of Trek 2009.
It may surpass Trek 2009's foreign gross but that gross was only 127 million so thats not much to brag about.
SamHell - 5/20/2013, 10:15 AM
Who gives a flying f*ck what logan says.

It was a damn good flick. Needed more Klingons. Other than that, loved it. And the whole USS Vengeance thing really surprised me.
Silentman - 5/20/2013, 10:24 AM
Fantastic. The only thing that brought it down was the last half hour. To much pandering and it was pretty obvious, but the good things definitely out weigh the bad.
A2ron - 5/20/2013, 10:56 AM
So the next Trek movie are they going to redo Search for Spock? Why didn't they do an original story for this one. Not that I'm complaining, I've read the spoilers so there is no reason for me to see it...like I was going to anyway.
blkyank - 5/20/2013, 10:59 AM
@Yingyangpalms

Not really flopping so much as underperforming domestically.If any thing, STITD
played to older males better as opposed to younger ones while leaving women behind.

Maybe it had to do with the fact that the new film appeared to be more of a
disaster film with the London bombing and the big money shot of the Enterprise crashing ad campaign,while the 2009 film was more a first meeting of iconic characters played by young attractive people,done in a fresh,hip manner.

The first film focused on the fact that Star Trek had sexy new people and a sexy new ship. Remember Scotty's "This is exciting" statement in the trailers for the first one?

The new film had almost a military thriller feel to it with the Star Fleet meeting scene looking like it came right out of Dr. Strangelove's "War Room" scene.

The first film was advertised as a fun romp while the new film was deadly serious.
That's why I think it didn't appeal to a lot of women.

At the end of the day the film will likely finish short of the first ones domestic take but still make more overall globally which is kind of a big deal because Star Trek never did that much business overseas.
marantaz - 5/20/2013, 11:25 AM
Pretty much decided to wait for the ppv on this. But it may help MOS that Trek isn't doing as well as it was thought to, and that's a good thing cuz Trek really isn't a CBM, and I want CBMs to rule so that we get more CBMs! Because its more I want more I like more...
TheCaptain - 5/20/2013, 3:19 PM
I really enjoyed this movie a lot
I voted "Very good"
dannybosa - 5/20/2013, 4:21 PM
if only there was a rip off of Wrath of Khan I would have voted.
TheChameleon - 5/20/2013, 4:58 PM
Very good flick. I enjoyed it just as much as the first. I'll definitely be watching this again. Just wondering if JJ is going to direct or produce the third, given he's working on Star Wars 7 next.
1 2

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.