Star Trek: Into Darkness

[Mabus]

Very nice review. However, I'm a bit sadden that Chuck didn't touch on the 3 huge plot holes that I feel they break the film (though given how much stupid shit there was in the film, I can't blame him):

1. So Khan flees Earth using a backpack-sized transwarp beaming device, which was made by the Starfleet after they took Scotty's transwarp beaming tech (in the comics he uses it to go to undercover missions), so no doubt they have/can make more of it. However, in the film, right after they find the device, Kirk tells Marcus that he wants to go after Khan, even though he's, and I quote "he's gone to the one place we... we just can't go", aka Kronos, with the idea that, well, since it's the friggin' Klingon home world, you just can't go there with a ship. So since they have a portable transwarp beaming device, which given the events of the last film, allows you to go to any place undetected, then Kirk will try to use the transwarp device (or at least ask Scotty to modify a standard transporter into a transwarp one, which shouldn't be hard since PrimeSpock did that just by writing a few equations in a shitty outpost transporter system, and there's no way the Starfleet could have just took Scotty's equation completely like he said in the film, unless they erased his mind), or at least ask Marcus to give him more transwarp beaming devices, right? Cause you know, going with a Starfleet ship in enemy space is stupid, so it'd make sense to use the already proven and effective transwarp beaming?
Nope. Instead, they completely forget about it. Even HISHE pointed out how that tech is a worldbreaker, and make most (obviously not all, but still most) of the ST ships obsolete especially since it's something you could make in a portable form, you wouldn't even need large and resource-intensive ships for most activities (makes you wonder why did Marcus even built such a huge ship). Hell, in an episode of Enterprise, which is set 100 years before, the inventor of the transporter has the idea of an interstellar transporter which he claims that it could make most of the Starfleet obsolete! The entire plot of the next part of the film is how they must sneak into no man's land undetected with a ship, the Enterprise, since that's the only possibility... except it's not, cause you know... TRANSWARP BEAMING!
They don't even bother to explain why they can't use transwarp beaming and instead they have to rely on ships. A simple line by Admiral Marcus, or Scotty, or anyone, would have been enough to close this plot hole. Hell, not even Kirk, Spock or hell, even Scotty doesn't point that out, since, you know, he objected to getting those top-secret torpedoes, he could have asked Kirk why not just ask Marcus to use the beaming tech and not bother risking a war with the Klingons, they both used it in the last movie very effectively and Khan did that as well here. In fact everyone just accepts the fact that they have to risk the Federation by going behind enemy lines, like they don't have other alternatives.... you know... like beaming device that could teleport them to another star system... if only they had those... especially if they came in a portable version... pity they don't have anything like that, amrite. But then again, if Marcus would reject that idea, it would appear very suspicious that he would risk a war with the Klingons by sending the Enterprise close to the Klingon space when he has a better and safer alternative. Guess the transwarp beaming tech also breaks the plot of the film.
And if they really wanted to handwave the fact that they couldn't use the transwarp beaming tech and had to rely on ships, we saw in the film that Praxis already exploded, so why not change that, have the Praxis moon explode right after Khan beamed on Kronos (and have it seen exploding in the sky in the scene with Khan on Kronos) and say that the explosion of Praxis is blocking any further transwarp beaming to Kronos, so they have to rely on ships to get there, with the bonus of having the radiation from the explosion masking any ships, so Enterprise could get in planet's orbit undetected (apparently the edge of the Neutral Zone is in Kronos's orbit now), while Klingons are busy repairing their infrastructure, to explain why there was almost no Klingon reinforcements to capture the Enterprise crew... even though they were on their damn home planet!

2. After Marcus knocks them out of warp, they arrive in Earth's orbit, more exactly 237,000 km from Earth, and near the Moon. So if Marcus hadn't shot them down, they would have zipped past Earth? Or does ST warp work on the Achilles and the tortoise principle? Anyway, that's not the problem. The issue happens after Khan attacks the Enterprise and the Enterprise blows up the Vengeance with the 72 torpedoes, while they're still near the Moon. Both ships lose power and fall towards Earth... even though they're still at 237,000 km away from it, and they're near the Moon, meaning that at best they should fall towards the Moon. But no, they fall towards Earth, and 6 minutes later the Enterprise is already entering Earth's atmosphere. Now, back in 2013 when I first watched the film, I saw the camrip version, so apart from the terrible quality, I was under the impression that the guy who recorded the film, somehow skipped some clips during the freefall scene. But later, when I rewatched the film in BluRay, well... turns out nothing was missing, yes, the Enterprise traveled 237,000 km in 6 minutes. Do writers know how far away the Moon is compared to Earth? There's no way in hell the Enterprise could reach low relativistic speeds just by falling towards Earth, and then all of the sudden it slows down when it touches the atmosphere, no matter how ridiculous the science is in Star Trek. This is just absurd. They weren't even accelerating or breaking, they were just falling, cause you know, they lost power. Hell, both the Enterprise and the Vengeance should have slammed into the Earth's atmosphere and explode Holdo-style, especially since the Vengeance's engines were compromised. Everything about that scene is just super contrived.

3. After Bones determines that Khan's blood can resurrect dead organisms, he demands that Kirk be put in a cryotube (I guess they don't have stasis technology during Kirk's), but in order for that to happen, they first have to remove one of the augments from the tube, and place him in a coma, and then put Kirk in the cryotube. He also tells Carol that he used up all of Khan's blood, so they have none. Wait a minute... they know that Khan's blood can do that, because he's genetically engineered, he's an augment... like his crew... since Bones was going to thaw out another augment, and he just got the medical scans of the resurrected tribble (we see it on screen), couldn't he just test that guy's blood while Kirk was kept frozen, to see if it was like Khan's? Federation sensors are very good, so they should know what exactly they need to look in the man's blood to see if it would work. I mean, the only rush there was to get Kirk into a cryotube before his brain degrades too much, and after that the only matter is when they capture Khan. And if they couldn't do that, couldn't they just throw a couple of lines, like Khan is a different breed from his crew and only his blood works, they don't have time to test every single augment to see if anyone else has Khan's superblood thingy? Now this plot hole isn't as serious like he other two, but still, it breaks the suspense of the final scene, since without an explanation, it feels like they could have just use the blood of any other augment, and thus chasing Khan won't have been so important, as they can track him so he's not going anywhere.

P.S. I also remembered another dumb moment from the film that none of the characters even bothered to question it. Marcus ordered Kirk to bomb Khan with 72 high tech torpedoes, essentially big-ass nukes. OK, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that like super overkill? We're talking about 72, SEVENTY-TWO nuclear bombs to kill ONE man... Any sane person would find killing anyone with so many nuclear warheads excessive and odd. I'd like to think that even the most bloodthirsty Kirk would find that a bit excessive. Hell, just 10 torpedoes for one man is a lot. I mean, this is something I'd expect Kylemo Renge to do, not Kirk or any of his crew. I know that Marcus told Kirk to bomb the entire uninhabited area, which is why he wanted to use all the torpedoes, but no one in Starfleet, not even Spock, would consider the idea that maybe Khan would have just left the area to another? He knows they have his transwarp beaming tech, so they can trace him. They have sensors. Why would they just blindly bomb an entire deserted city? More importantly, how would they even confirm they got him? We know that Marcus is lying, but Kirk and Spock don't know that, why don't they question the admiral's plan later on? Nobody has any doubts about anything, everybody just follows orders blindly. They barely even talk about it later in the film. Even after Scotty resigns, nothing changes.

[Jonathan101]

I'm confused by something- Chuck thinks that Kirk is in trouble and falsified the report about saving the indigenous species...but my fuzzy memory says that was he was actually in trouble for was saving Spock and falsifying the report on THAT. As far as I was aware, saving the populace was okay along as they didn't get caught doing so.

EDIT: Never mind. Seen the end.

[Andrew Joshua Talon]

I still remember Chuck's suggestion for an alternate plot for the entire movie, and I must admit I would have much preferred that to a typical Abramsfilm: He's learned how to copy paste the most superficial, memorable elements from a film he's rebooting and put them together in a way that makes no sense.

[Jonathan101]

"..and Scotties from Scotland"

So, Chuck thinks that all Scots are naturally violent and good at hand to hand combat?

As a Scot myself...I'm just glad my reputation proceeds me.

[RobbyB1982]

Wow. I'm two minutes into the review and Chuck's "usual behind the scenes", which is typically a 15-20 minute well researched thoughtful and insightful documentary... is a poop joke.

Wow, this is gonna be a ride.

[ChrisTheLovableJerk]

Into Darkness has a couple of good moments like Sulu's time in the captain's chair and the scene on Enterprise falling into the clouds and then triumphantly rising up. Other than that the movie sucks.

Kirk's negative traits from the first film are amped up to ridiculous degrees.

In an attempt to not be racist Khan is whitewashed (therefore very racist) and no such explanation is given as to why in the film itself. It could have just been Harrison was Khan's right hand man and wanted to save his master, I mean there were 72 people in Kahn's command after all and at the end we could see Khan frozen in the cryo-tube.

Original Khan is such a fantastic and iconic villain and Kirk's shouting of 'KHAN!' is so well known that before I got into Star Trek, I figured Khan must have been a recurring villain the Enterprise crew faced once or twice a season and was stunned to learn he was only in one episode and one movie.

Simon Pegg as Scottie, I as well dislike this casting, though mainly because I dislike Simon Pegg, also remember the time Pegg said 'Fuck You!' to those who hated this movie? And said that Star Trek had to not be Star Trek anymore to survive? And said he has no respect for people who like the Star Wars prequels? And compared George Lucas to a child murderer because he didn't like the prequels? Yeah, seeing Kirk punch him in the face was another highlight for me. Also, is it me or does it feel like Bones and Scottie's roles were switched at some point?

The Carol Marcus scene is dumb, but what bugs me is that she just stands there in a pose to let Kirk see instead of making him wait outside or cover herself up or tell him off.

Also, if Kahn's blood can resurrect the dead... is he immortal? I mean, that's just such a stupid plot development, because if Kahn's blood and resurrect people, then should the same be said for all of his followers with similar conditions?

Also, when did Spock and Kirk fill everyone else in about Spock Prime? 09 made it look like they (and maybe Scottie) were the only ones who knew about him, but here Spock calls him up in front of the whole bridge like everyone knows about it.

J.J. Abrams... what can I say that hasn't been said? Say what you will about Michael Bay, but at least he's honest and up front about just making action movies for fun, and doesn't pretend to be a sophisticated genius. Abrams is a hack, who shamelessly apes and imitates Spielberg and Lucas to get ahead in life while pretending to be smarter than he actually is. His movies entertain for a few hours, but upon further viewing, they fall apart like a house of cards, and that includes TFA.

[bronnt]

I was waiting on the review to post much on this because I didn't want to steal Chuck's thunder, but the list of problems with this film is extensive

1) In media res opening is fine, silly adventure is fine. But how (the fuck) and why (the fuck) is the Enterprise under the (fucking) ocean? In general, I'm fine with them violating the prime directive to save a civilization, but the entire PROBLEM is contrived by the Enterprise being a place it shouldn't be-they have fucking matter transporters.

2) In meeting Pike, we see for the first time the problem is that Kirk hasn't grown as a character, and is in fact childish and pathetic-not a man who should be commanding a starship.

3) Kirk's fight with Spock is telling; Not only is Kirk being a brat who refuses to own up to his own actions, it's clear that he and Spock are very different people. Their supposed friendship is a big part of this film, and yet makes no sense because these are two people who don't even understand each other. The only reason they're even supposed to be friends is that the audience knows that Spock and Kirk are friends in the other timeline.

4) I'm kind of okay with Spock's mindmeld with Pike, as creepy as it is. The problem is that it's such a huge deal that it really should be a major theme for the film, else why bother have Spock do this violating act? It barely matters for the rest of the runtime.

5) How convenient that Starfleet decided that Kirk needs literally ALL 72 torpedoes for this mission. Or the fact that they gave him 72 torpedoes of the hundreds they have.

6) Speaking of these Torpedoes, WHY did Starfleet order them not to scan them or open them? This is literally only here so they don't immediately learn that there's people inside these weapons. If they're just advanced new stealth torpedoes, Starfleet should not care if they're examined...oh why bother, this plot point is so dumb.

7) Uhura and Spock get into a distracting petty bullshit argument on a mission to a hostile planet to pick up a hostile human. Their argument lasts all the way up until they're attacked because nobody was minding sensors or weapons. This is the part where you realize nobody in this film is fucking competent so you can no longer care what happens to them.

8) As Chuck pointed out, our hero is an asshole for an extended, overdone beat-down offered against a surrendering prisoner. This worked for Malcolm Reynolds once, but he repeatedly demonstrates redeeming characteristics, while his assholish behavior gets called out. Kirk is constantly an asshole and nobody seems to care. I fucking hate this character.

9) Massive starship battle takes place in a parallel orbit to the fucking moon. Nobody from Starfleet headquarters is hailing them, no starships asking if the Enterprise requires assistance...These people often have real-time conversations with people who are many lightyears away and the fucking main shipyards of the fucking Federation are on Mars. Yes, this sort of shit happened in both Generations and in The Final Frontier, and it was bullshit in both those films too.

10) The Kobayashi Maru was a theme of the previous film where the "death in the reactor" scene happens. What's the theme of this film that builds up to the death? Uhm...well Spock did do that mind-meld thing, but it doesn't seem to matter, so the death of Kirk in this film is just cheap drama and not part of a larger tale they seem to be telling.

11) They really need to make it clear in the story that Khan's blood doesn't just reverse death. Because that's really what it looks like it does, and that's a technology that makes the entire universe collapse on itself. And somehow they came up with this magic anti-death technology 300 years ago and it's never once been replicated shut up.

12) Kirk makes a speech about how revenge isn't right, when just getting revenge would have fixed every fucking problem they had. He's a hateful asshole and has never once done anything I'd consider peace-loving or even attempting to disarm a situation, so...I'm mostly just angry with him for talking at this point.

[clearspira]

I think we now know Chuck's opinion on STD. Because that ending rant applies equally to that show as this one. I approve.

Also, isn't it ironic that in Carpenter Street Archer threatened to beat an unarmed prisoner and here Kirk is actually beating an unarmed prisoner? Multiple times? Yep, Archer is now more sane than Fake Kirk. Bye bye, Kelvinverse. You had potential that you wasted, you suck, you remind me too much of STD and TLJ, and you all make Enterprise look better by comparison.

Oh, and PS, I find the Carol Marcus in her undies scene disgraceful. It made Fake Kirk look like a pervert and is demeaning to her character, her actress, and the audience. File this up with T'Pol's Pon Farr in the ''why the stereotype of Trekkies all being virgins persists'' cabinet.

[Andrew Joshua Talon]

I think we now know Chuck's opinion on STD. Because that ending rant applies equally to that show as this one. I approve.

Also, isn't it ironic that in Carpenter Street Archer threatened to beat an unarmed prisoner and here Kirk is actually beating an unarmed prisoner? Multiple times? Yep, Archer is now more sane than Fake Kirk. Bye bye, Kelvinverse. You had potential that you wasted, you suck, you remind me too much of STD and TLJ, and you all make Enterprise look better by comparison.

Oh, and PS, I find the Carol Marcus in her undies scene disgraceful. It made Fake Kirk look like a pervert and is demeaning to her character, her actress, and the audience. File this up with T'Pol's Pon Farr in the ''why the stereotype of Trekkies all being virgins persists'' cabinet.

I like sexy women. I do not like sexy women in scenes that play no role in the story and just demonstrate that our main character is a slack jawed perverted idiot.

Says more about Abrams that he left this in than us, I think.

[clearspira]

Ideas that might be compelling for those invested in the Star Trek Universe, but not for general audiences just wanting a good time at the movies. This is why I think Star Trek simply doesn't belong in cinema at all. What Star Trek movies were prior to Abrams were essentially reunion specials for TOS and TNG, and only half of them were good.

Would you hate a talky special effets fest Trek movie about diplomacy that relases in the cinemas in big cities and on streaming at the same time?

The Star Wars Prequels is evidence enough that general audiences do not want long talky scenes. I don't know anyone that liked the senate bits.
I agree, Star Trek is not a cinema property if you do it the way fans want it done.