dunebat wrote: ↑Sat Aug 24, 2019 9:02 am
I notice Chuck didn't score this film in his review, let alone provide an "Annoying Character" or list any other awards for the movie (like "Lazarus of the Week", which would certainly fit Kirk, who I would submit, should also be the "Annoying Character" of the film).
My question is then...
"Damn. I knew the film was bad, but was it that bad?"
He only gives one 0 per franchise. The issue here is movies 5 and 10 were both rated 1. The catch? As he said in the review (I forget if it was 5 or 10) One of them would have been rated a 0 for nearly ending the franchise, while the other DID end the franchise for a while, so those two factors cancelled each other out. Darkness is much the same in that it would also be a 1 or 0 but where do you put that distinguishing mark. It might be the worst film but its a different kind of bad? And not exactly franchise ending? But you can't rank it *better* that those others, and having 3 out of 12 movies ranked a 1 completely screws up the averages so...
(In all honesty: I'm making a chart of the ratings of Trek episodes in Chuck's Opinionated Review guides, and the missing data there is making my OCD flare up. Somebody please ease my mental torment here!)
TV tropes has already taken care of that.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Recap/SFDebris
dunebat wrote: ↑Sat Aug 24, 2019 9:02 am
I notice Chuck didn't score this film in his review, let alone provide an "Annoying Character" or list any other awards for the movie (like "Lazarus of the Week", which would certainly fit Kirk, who I would submit, should also be the "Annoying Character" of the film).
My question is then...
"Damn. I knew the film was bad, but was it that bad?"
He only gives one 0 per franchise. The issue here is movies 5 and 10 were both rated 1. The catch? As he said in the review (I forget if it was 5 or 10) One of them would have been rated a 0 for nearly ending the franchise, while the other DID end the franchise for a while, so those two factors cancelled each other out. Darkness is much the same in that it would also be a 1 or 0 but where do you put that distinguishing mark. It might be the worst film but its a different kind of bad? And not exactly franchise ending? But you can't rank it *better* that those others, and having 3 out of 12 movies ranked a 1 completely screws up the averages so...
I don't recall him saying anything about them canceling each other out. He talks about how Nemesis tripped up the franchise into being ended, but he never talks at that time about ever giving these movies a 0.
BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2019 4:29 pm
I don't recall him saying anything about them canceling each other out. He talks about how Nemesis tripped up the franchise into being ended, but he never talks at that time about ever giving these movies a 0.
I just rewatched the ending of both reviews, and you're right. He was talking about what justified them both being a 1, he didn't actually say one or the other would be a 0. I just always sort of assumed that was implied I guess.
BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2019 4:29 pm
I don't recall him saying anything about them canceling each other out. He talks about how Nemesis tripped up the franchise into being ended, but he never talks at that time about ever giving these movies a 0.
Though maybe now Darkness is the defacto 0 so...
If not then it's reasonably the most distinctly bad.
We talked about it in the original thread. Most possible reason being because of how the movie tried ti recapture Khan. He complains about Kirk being a brat, also, though it's not really clear how much that puts him off about the movie.
First I feel this story was so negatively reviewed because it disappointed and could have been used as an example of ripoff in the Ripoff/Homage video.
The movie was a letdown of unused bits and forgotten plot threads. As though they had a brainstorming session and pinned a bunch of ideas to a board, then called it a story board and filmed that with no script.
Part I liked in the movie? The Enterprise rising from the sea like an angry sea goddess, to quench the rage of the erupting fire mountain for the natives. I kind of wish to revisit that world in a thousand or so years to see what became of them from that.
But the bits that felt broken and unexplored?
The family with the sick girl. Why did Khan know of them and that he could cure her? Why not find he had infected her in the first place?
Khan should have been angry at losing his perfect face. And it would have been fun to have Benedict Cumberbatch trying to do Ricardo Mantalban’s accent.
Or show that Kirk deserves the center seat because he is intelligent. The part where he questions the explosion and points out that it would cause everyone to be in that building and room. It should have been him giving enough warning for some to escape that convinced them to send him after the rogue agent.
The plan to start the war by having Kirk fire on the klingons then killing Kirk should have been dropped. If they wanted a truther message. Khan has seen where the klingons will try a strike on the Federation. Marcus will allow it to start his war. Khan is opposed because his people will be hit in the attack as well. You get an enemy mine situation versus Marcus. Then Khan can still betray the heroes because obviously only a genetically superior man like him could have prevented this waste.
Nice and neat and would have been a homage instead of a ripoff.
So low score because it was disappointing.
BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 8:06 pm
Well if you felt so strongly about it then why didn't you write that in the original thread?
Uhm this is my original post.
My thoughts. So many missed opportunities.
I don't need to go into why this movie disappointed me. Others including Chuck have gone over so many of them they don't need repeating.
Points I liked. Someone violating the prime directive for moral reasons. Kirk calling out Pike that his attitude is why he got the Enterprise in the first place. It kinda was. And Kirk examining the evidence and following the villain's plot moments before the ambush. This was Kirk showing the tactical genius he is supposed to have. Let his brief foresight allow him to save Marcus. Let him reason out why the villain went to Qonos. (Steal a ship to fake an attack on the Federation to begin a war.)
Sorry I got off on a disappointment there.
Other thing I liked. SEATBELTS!
So some of what I said here was in the original and I expanded on the missed opportunities.
Also I have watched it or at least seen the opening again a few times since then. (My father will watch the beginning of something till he identifies what it is. Then change the channel)
One small thing that always annoyed me. I know it's hard to give a communications officer something to do in an action movie, but that scene with Uhura and Klingons was such a rare, tailor-made opportunity for her to use her unique skill to save the day and have natural impact on the plot. Instead, she fails and we get another action scene, 3 minutes after the last one. I've heard they had to cut it for time, but why not at least have her succeed and then have Khan show up anyway 2 minutes later (also, since the situation with Klingons is never resolved, why aren't they and Federation at war again). As it is, all she does is shoot Khan in the back at the climax, which could be done by literally anyone, even freaking Keenser. Maybe you could argue Spock wouldn't listen to anybody else, but that just leaves you with her whole role just being Spock's girlfriend. Which is worsened by the fact I genuinely don't get why are they even together. Okay, I kind of get Spock's side of it, but what does she get from the relationship exactly? Except the one scene in 2009 where she provides emotional support and here when she stops him from beating Khan to death, all they ever do is argue.
