millarworld.tv Comics Creators

Just back from Star Trek... (Spoilers Welcome)


#47

It probably got trimmed. Mopey Kirk had shown up at the beginning the film. This was dynamic Kirk.

I think most of the holes or flaws are genuine, but I don’t worry about most of them myself.

Krall forgetting about the ship though, that’s not a small point. If there’s a reason why it slipped his mind over the centuries it was never addressed.


#48

To be fair, he went through that in Into Darkness, where before then he hadn’t lost a single crewmember.


#49

He did find it hard to even construct a sentence in English so perhaps his humanity / human memories were lost as he become more wannabe Jem’Hadar.


#50

He remembered that he hated the Federation though.

It’s not a deal breaker for me, but it’s definitely a plot hole.


#51

We also saw main character chasing villain into the middle of a Federation city and having a fist fight after crashing a space ship in Into Darkness. Didn’t stop them repeating that here.


#52

Now might be a good time to tell you about our other Star Trek thread (if you aren’t already aware).


#53

Hi @Simonjones,

Thanks for the recommendation. I have posted a couple of times on that thread. Just not had the chance to rewatch those episodes yet so feel I’d be a bit of a fraud.

Cheers,

Stuart


#54

Excellent. We’re having some discussion at the moment what should come after Balance of Terror, so if you have any suggestions, please throw them into the pot.


#55

I’m going to do a spin off thread about this because it’s an interesting point. Right now!!!

MM


#56

Okay, so as usual I feel the need to explain away plot holes (I do it myself naturally during any film if the film warrants it, ie. when they aren’t gaping from a script written in crayon

They vary well may have done. Jaylah had traps and jumped in to fight Kralls goons without a second notice so I assume that she was a fly in the ointment they just stayed away from after any contact. If she wasn’t doing any harm why waste time and resources on her. She wasn’t a threat in their eyes, unless attacked, like an animal.

I believe the cloaking was more about protection from those drones chasing Bones and Spock.

Jaylah had most of the work done before Scotty brought Starfleet Academy training and ingenuity to the table. We needed more technobabble to show this which is a big flaw in the script for me.

I think this was already explained by @KandorLives

He’s Captain Kirk. You answered your own question. :smile:

As anyone with chronic SAD will attest, we already have artificial sunlamps. 300 years down the line I imagine they’ll be much more efficient, closer to the real thing and regularly used by the federation in space.

Well, that’s the point really, a Starbase is there as a pit stop in space for Starfleet vessels so the closer to unexplored territory the better as your fleet then has a further range. I imagine civilians were there as they were either connected to Star Fleet personnel, passing through at a federation stop off point or providing a service of some sort (think Quark or Garak on DS9).

That I can’t help with. Why they thought it was good is beyond me. This should have been called into Darkness, the title would have suited it better. Into Darkness should have been called Star Trek: The Flaccid Resentment Of Khan, but then they thought lying to us to try and make Khan a surprise was a good idea. Mind you, that was only the third or fourth worst idea they had making that film.


#57

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

And I say that as someone who liked Star Trek Beyond.


#58

That was my approach. It was far from a perfect film, but it was good fun and I love the characters enough (even dodgy Scotty) that I overlooked the flaws.

That’s a good observation. Trimming most of the jarring special effects would have made the film perfect for me, so maybe it did actually need to be TV length on a TV budget.


#59

Sadly I think the poor box office response might close the curtains on this franchise. It’s a big drop from Into Darkness. Maybe they could continue with smaller budgets, but I’m sure Sony is considering all options right now.


#60

Paramount, not Sony.

They’re going to want to keep flying the flag of the Federation, it’s generated billions for them for decades. They have the new series coming up as well and the films do keep the profile high.

What we might see is scaling back of the, well, scale; they hired a tried and tested, big franchise, action director and they still won’t break into the same club as Marvel, DC and Fast and Furious.

That’s not just my theory; http://deadline.com/2016/07/star-trek-beyond-weekend-box-office-lower-than-star-trek-into-darkness-1201791469/

The studio did a lot right, but they seem to have missed opportunities to let a wider audience know that they had a good film which the general public would enjoy/

The next one (and I think there will be a next one) may be more “grounded”, and they might spread the word better and earlier.


#61

I think Star Trek has a ceiling. It’s about $400 million. I’m sure they wish it was $700 million. It shouldn’t have that ceiling, space action movies should be cracking the $700 million club every outing, but I think this is Star Trek and it can’t escape it’s roots. Everyone has an opinion at this point. I love the Trek movies, the reboot is one of my all time favorites, but they miss the earthiness of Star Wars.

I don’t see how they make a $100 million Trek movie. $150 is probably the basement. And I don’t know if there’s really that much of a market for this continued franchise.

Paramount do suck (as do Sony, that was my confusion). They don’t have a big healthy franchise or two any more. Apart from Transformers of course. If they have $150 million to spend I think a new franchise might be a better gamble than another lukewarm Trek outing. I don’t think you can fix Trek - Beyond did everything more or less right, and audiences don’t care.


#62

I agree.

I think they gave it a shot at the big time over three films and, for whatever reason, the audience just won’t show up in the kind of numbers that other series can attract.

They had a good film this time, and I think they could’ve done better with more aggressive and appropriate advertising, but they can and should pull their horns in a bit and make smarter, leaner movies from now on.

If they strike gold later then they can reconsider.


#63

I really enjoyed Beyond. It was what I was hoping to see after the reboot and I thought it was an awful lot of fun. Obviously there is still a fairly vocal contingent that refuses to acknowledge it as real Star Trek, so maybe something smarter in the mode of something like Moon or Interstellar might be the way to go…Not sure they can go back to doing these movies on the cheap though.

I wonder if Star Trek isn’t really more of a TV conceit that doesn’t sit well on a big screen. By making it all about spectacle and action, they lose what the original series was about.


#64

‘Into Darkness’ made $460m at the box office, plus whatever else Paramount got for the film on other platforms around the world.

There’s no reason to stop making movies, just stop making them for $180m.


#65

Talking heads? :wink:


#66

Oh yes. What I liked most about Beyond were the character scenes. There were a lot of really funny bits in this one and it wasn’t forced in the way that it was in Into Darkness. There’s no reason why you couldn’t have more of that.

Well, I never think it’s really Star Trek unless there’s a meeting where everyone discusses what they’re going to about whatever is the problem this week ( What’s that Doctor Crusher? Introduce a destructive breed of Nanites into the Borg Collective…And it would just take 4 to 6 weeks to resolve everything…while they’re killing us). :wink: