Re: Rate the last movie you saw
Star Trek: Into Darkness.
I received this as a birthday pressie on DVD. It was rather disappointing, so it's just as well I didn't go to the cinema.
The original Khan was a way better villain than the new, bland version, though Spock's description of him as the most dangerous threat they ever faced was exaggerated. I'd say the Doomsday Machine and that energy-eating space bacterium were worse.
Reversing the roles of who died of radiation poisoning and was restored to life is not an original touch. Carol Marcus' brief dishabille was appreciated (she is gorgeous, after all) but gratuitous.
I still can't accept Uhura gettin' it on with Spock. That's just wrong. So is Kirk being promoted from Ensign (and technically he didn't even graduate from Starfleet Academy!) straight to Captain. Even the original James T. Kirk couldn't have coped with that.
On the other hand, Scotty and Bones are dead on; both the actors have thoroughly nailed it. Even Chekov has his moments (though I can't accept that Kirk would've placed a green ensign in charge of Engineering - where was Scotty's deputy?)
But the worst mistake was simply throwing away the whole Section 31 mythos. In the original canon, Section 31 was in fact created as part of the Starfleet Charter. The name is a reference to the thirty-first section of that Charter, which in somewhat vague wording talks about the creation of an autonomous agency (see the novel Section 31: Cloak). In other words, even though Section 31 was a perversion of everything the Federation stood for, it was, nonetheless, a legitimately created agency. That was what was so intriguing about it; it was so cool for the Trek universe to acquire a dark corner or two.
And here's J.J. Adams just throwing it all away! I shudder to think what he's going to do to Star Wars...!
__________________
"People tend to confuse the words 'new' and 'improved'."
- Agent Phil Coulson, S.H.I.E.L.D.
WINDOWS 11, ANYONE?!
|