http://gamingtrend.com
July 31, 2014, 07:50:00 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: [movie] Star Trek 2, AKA Star Trek Into Darkness  (Read 17905 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
metallicorphan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 16378



View Profile
« Reply #440 on: May 19, 2013, 09:31:28 AM »

@BlackJack

its still very surprising that Star Trek 2009 only made $385,680,446 worldwide(with the $150million budget you mentioned makes it sound worse)...STID will still at least piss on that,whether it has a good/great opening weekend or not
Logged

Manchester United Premier League Champions 2013!!

Xbox LIVE:Metallicorphan
Wii:8565 1513 0206 1960
PSN:Metallicorphan
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9146


I'M the one that knocks! Now...burp me!


View Profile
« Reply #441 on: May 19, 2013, 02:19:47 PM »

Saw it yesterday and loved it.  I dug all the little shout outs to the original series.

Thoughts:

Spoiler for Hiden:
The first half was a bit slow, but once the "reveal" happened, the movie was just non-stop action for the rest of its run.  The woman sitting next to me had her mouth covered for the last hour of the film I think.   icon_lol

I liked the tribbles, the call back to Harry Mudd, the reverse Wrath of Kahn ending, and the amount of time they gave Scotty and Chekov.  

I'm not fond of the trans-warp deus ex machina device.  It needs to go away in future films.  I also really wish they'd stuck with the Klingon design from the movies and next gen.  The design they use now makes them look too much like a Ferenghi in a fetish dungeon in my opinion.  

Also, personal aside, but Spock was enraged during that final fight with Kahn.  I know he's half human, but Vulcans are notoriously strong and I would've liked to see him put up more of a fight for the first two thirds of that fistfight.  They've alluded to the fact that Vulcans pre-Surak would've made Kahn look like a Teletubby.  But that's entirely me being a giant nerd.   icon_biggrin


So, two thumbs way up.  A hell of a fun matinee ride.

Logged

Warning:  You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.
Bullwinkle
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15489


Watch me pull a rabbit outta my hat.


View Profile
« Reply #442 on: May 19, 2013, 03:25:59 PM »

As far as word of mouth on this thing, a group of friends were recently emailing around trying to get a dinner out happening.  It didn't.  However, one of them said that if the one couple who is going is looking for something to do after dinner, she heard that Star Trek was really good.  This group is about as non-geeky as you can get.  The recommendation was basically from a soccer mom (although she does have a good knowledge of film).

Logged

That's like blaming owls because I suck at making analogies.
The Grue
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8138


You are likely to be eaten by a grue.


View Profile
« Reply #443 on: May 19, 2013, 05:08:36 PM »

One thing I liked about this movie was:

Spoiler for Hiden:
The fact I had no idea Khan was the villain in it.  I don't read about movies and so while I knew I wanted to see this, I knew nothing about it going in.  When the guy said his name is Kahn, I literally said "oh shit."  Was very nice.

Between this and the surprise in Iron Man 3, I feel like a kid again, which was kind of the last period in my life I could go to a movie and be surprised at a summer blockbuster type movie.
Logged

XBox Live ID: The Grue
Playstation Network Name: TheGrue
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #444 on: May 19, 2013, 05:09:37 PM »

Quote from: Blackjack on May 18, 2013, 11:56:33 PM

Somebody stop him! 4 times in 4 days will break the space time continuum!

jeebus, I haven't even had a chance to see the movie once.
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11267


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #445 on: May 19, 2013, 05:34:08 PM »

Quote from: The Grue on May 19, 2013, 05:08:36 PM

One thing I liked about this movie was:

Spoiler for Hiden:
The fact I had no idea Khan was the villain in it.  I don't read about movies and so while I knew I wanted to see this, I knew nothing about it going in.  When the guy said his name is Kahn, I literally said "oh shit."  Was very nice.



Between this and the surprise in Iron Man 3, I feel like a kid again, which was kind of the last period in my life I could go to a movie and be surprised at a summer blockbuster type movie.

I'm right with you on that one. I did an actual cartoon-like jaw drop at that moment. I'm simply amazed I was able to make it to see the movie without the Internet spoiling that.

I think it's...

Spoiler for Hiden:
The closest I'm going to get to experiencing the Star Wars "I am your father" surprise. I had even seen some Star Trek speculation about how the Into Darkness villain was going to be expanding on some obscure character from an Original Series episode, so I was thrown off the scent of the surprise as much as I possibly could have been.
Logged
metallicorphan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 16378



View Profile
« Reply #446 on: May 19, 2013, 07:26:53 PM »

I am really glad you guys are saying that

Spoiler for Hiden:
It was same for me and made the film so much better because i thought the Khan rumour had been dismissed ages ago,i honestly thought he was Harrison,it was so far from my mind that i was  icon_eek when he said he was Khan

I am more glad that yeah you managed not to get that spoiled


I said above somewhere not to read sites like IMDb,because honestly it was minutes after getting in from the cinema a week and half ago i saw the spoilers start to appear and i knew it would be a big deal if it was spoilt
Logged

Manchester United Premier League Champions 2013!!

Xbox LIVE:Metallicorphan
Wii:8565 1513 0206 1960
PSN:Metallicorphan
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9146


I'M the one that knocks! Now...burp me!


View Profile
« Reply #447 on: May 19, 2013, 08:34:13 PM »

i had the same jaw dropping experience as you folks, so you're definitely not alone. 
Logged

Warning:  You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.
Bullwinkle
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15489


Watch me pull a rabbit outta my hat.


View Profile
« Reply #448 on: May 19, 2013, 09:16:49 PM »

For me it wasn't jaw-dropping, but still incredibly enjoyable.

Spoiler for Hiden:
The evidence kept mounting, and when they finally had him in the brig, and he went on and on about his origin, my grin and grin got bigger and bigger.  In fact, right before that scene is when Scotty goes into the space dock.  I didn't know it was a scace dock at first and I was frantically scanning the ship, looking for the words "Botany Bay."

But during Cumberbatch's reveal speech, I actually started muttering, "Say it...say it..."  Thankfully there was only one other guy in the theater, and he wasn't close to me.
Logged

That's like blaming owls because I suck at making analogies.
disarm
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4178


my moral standing is lying down...


View Profile
« Reply #449 on: May 19, 2013, 11:12:21 PM »

I  saw it in IMAX 3D this afternoon and loved it...great movie from start to finish that had just the right combination of humor, action, and nods to long-time Trek fans. I had my suspicions about where the story was going as all the twists began to unfold, but there were still a lot of unexpected parts, and it was really cool to see exactly how it all plays out.

Anyone who has any interest in seeing this definitely needs to make sure they avoid spoiling the plot early if they want to enjoy it to the fullest though...
Logged

*Gamertag - disarm78*
Now Playing: Grand Theft Auto V
Blackjack
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10808



View Profile
« Reply #450 on: May 20, 2013, 02:57:06 PM »

I did see it a ridiculous 4th time Sunday at a Rave Xtreme (Crave Theaters) screen. Although I love its plush, wide seats, the format still doesn't hold a candle to the other formats I saw it on (Regal RPX, AMC ETX & IMAX). It is at $14.75, maybe $2-3 cheaper though. The IMAX show with my mom was the bomb, even if I totally got the seating diagram backwards. My mom was a good sport about it although she kept complaining the deafening sound was giving her heart attacks.   icon_smile

As far as addressing some mechanical differences from the 2009 film:
-Yes, engineering still looks like the USS Budweiser brewery, but I think only in one scene.  icon_razz
-I swear lthe first half of the film is relatively low on lense-flare, but right at the point where - the first time I saw it last Thursday - I was going to note "Wow, not too much lense flare" - JJ let himself get carried away again. icon_razz Though I think at least he seems to have positioned the flare a bit so it doesn't blind the actor's face. There's one scene where Carol is speaking, and the blue lenses flare goes beserk, but it seems purposefully kept away from her face, lower on the screen. Baby steps, JJ.  icon_smile

-When I saw the 2009 film on FX last night, I remembered how the phasers had this weird mechanical "pop" effect. Like Kirk would put his finger on the trigger, and what seemed like a red Tootsie Pop head emerged from the phaser barrel. I think they went with a simpler design for Darkness. I think that's good - the mechanical "Tootsie Pop" effect seemed too Flash Gordon to me.  icon_smile

As far as a third film goes, I'm sure that's still in the cards. It's not under performing so badly that Paramount will want to reboot it again. Thought perhaps having seen how much better the Brad Bird-helmed MI3: Ghost Protocol did at the box office, compared to JJ's MI3 (which I quite liked, but which was definitely perceived as the "underperformer" in the MI franchise), Paramount probably won't blanche at JJ picking someone else to direct an ST3. Supposedly they really want one by May 2016, and just can't see JJ doing that while he's tied up with Star Wars.

Although JJ has raved about Rian Johnson (Looper) in interviews, it's unclear if Johnson has any interest in doing big budget/ST stuff (Looper had a $30M budget; Darkness $190M), or directing something where he hasn't totally written the script himself. JJ would presumably need to pick someone who's comfortable working in a team with Kurtzman, Orci, Lindelof, and JJ himself as a producer, etc.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2013, 03:02:44 PM by Blackjack » Logged

Playing
PC
-Marvel Heroes
Soulchilde
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5101


You and I have unfinished business


View Profile
« Reply #451 on: May 20, 2013, 03:07:19 PM »

Okay, it seems like I am the only one who knew the big reveal

Spoiler for Hiden:
Harrison was Khan. My buddy and I were walking into the theater and I remarked after looking at the poster that we already know the Enterprise is going down in flames.  I remarked the only thing they didn't spoil was Khan being the villain which caught him by surprise
Logged

Quote from: Devil on January 12, 2007, 01:14:38 AM

NiM$
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9146


I'M the one that knocks! Now...burp me!


View Profile
« Reply #452 on: May 20, 2013, 03:24:56 PM »

for the reveal:

Spoiler for Hiden:
The only reason I was really surprised is because they went out of their way to all but deny it was Khan in so many interviews and articles that I believed them.  That folks moved onto other theories (my favorite being that it was Gary Mitchell, although I was intrigued by the theory that it might be Gary Seven) only served to reinforce my belief that it wasn't Khan.  By not revealing his identity until later in the film like they did, they pulled it off very well, imho. 

And  icon_lol to the joke about the engine room looking like a brewery.  I had the same thought, although I thought it looked more like a dairy factory.
Logged

Warning:  You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.
Roguetad
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1976


View Profile
« Reply #453 on: May 20, 2013, 04:21:14 PM »

Great movie...even for people not passionate about Star Trek. 
Spoiler for Hiden:
I had a hunch about the reveal, and was very happy when it was confirmed.
  The casting is just perfect.  All of the characters do a great job in their roles. 

Regarding the ending...
Spoiler for Hiden:
I loved the role switch with Kirk and Spock.  So good.  Kirk's re-stating of the mission of the Enterprise in the end, with the 5 year jounrey added, gave me chills.  Major nostalgic flashback to watching tv with my dad at dinner time catching another episode of Star Trek.

Did anyone else notice what looked to be the space shuttle enterprise in the collection of models behind the admiral?  I thought that was a nice touch.   
Logged
Blackjack
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10808



View Profile
« Reply #454 on: May 20, 2013, 04:52:32 PM »

Quote from: Soulchilde on May 20, 2013, 03:07:19 PM

Okay, it seems like I am the only one who knew the big reveal

Spoiler for Hiden:
Harrison was Khan. My buddy and I were walking into the theater and I remarked after looking at the poster that we already know the Enterprise is going down in flames.  I remarked the only thing they didn't spoil was Khan being the villain which caught him by surprise

I picked up Star Trek magazines' official movie mag yesterday. It's overpriced ($14.99), but has tons of cool interviews/features, including about the tie-in novels over the years. imho it's far "meatier" in content than most movie mag tie-ins I've read.

I remember being flabbergasted seeing Heather Langenkamp (actress in Nightmare on Elm Street, some of its sequels) in the closing credits. Turns out she and her husband co-own a successful makeup FX studio that worked on MI: Ghost Protocol and now this for the alien costumes/makeup. And she portrayed one of the aliens (Muoto, something like that?).

The magazine has a section (I assume the issue was completed around maybe March?) with the "odds" on what character Harrison is. A couple of the "lower %" predictions are kinda interesting and might suggest future directions...>>>>>
Spoiler for Hiden:
Khan was 90%. Gary Mitchell from the second classic ST pilot was second. (Karl Urban is actually a dead ringer for the actor who played that). Other guesses were much lower %.

I think it was kind of a red herring when Eve was cast, because her hair style in the publicity stills seemed similar to Sally Kellerman's in "Where No Man Has Gone Before." JJ and co. probably enjoyed the Internet taking that rumor and running with it.

While that could certainly make an interesting ST film, I don't think you introduce Klingons and warbirds in Darkness and then not use them in a third film.  icon_cool Who knows? Maybe they could weave a "Where No Man Has Gone Before" story into a Klingon vs. Federation battle story.

Maybe the Klingons and a power mad Gary Mitchell would force Kirk to open Pandora's Box (Khan-sicle) and plead, "Help us!"  icon_smile
« Last Edit: May 20, 2013, 04:57:15 PM by Blackjack » Logged

Playing
PC
-Marvel Heroes
TheEgoWhip
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 189


View Profile
« Reply #455 on: May 20, 2013, 10:43:18 PM »

Saw it over the weekend, and loved it.  I was much happier coming out of the theater than I was for IM3.
Logged
Knightshade Dragon
Administrator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 21050



View Profile WWW
« Reply #456 on: May 21, 2013, 04:01:08 AM »

When that thing happened my wife and I literally turned to each other, jaws agape.   I absolutely LOVED this movie.  smile
Logged

Ron Burke
EiC, Director of Gaming Trend
Gamertag:
Gaming Trend
PS3 Tag: GamingTrend
PR_GMR
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3412



View Profile
« Reply #457 on: May 21, 2013, 06:15:22 AM »

Watched it tonight, and thought it was mostly well-done, except for the last 5 minutes. I didn't like the resolution much. I felt like the film ended by just falling off a cliff.

Spoiler for Hiden:
John Harrison being revealed as Khan didn't bother me. I thought it was neat--Benedict Cumberbatch is a very good actor. The death switcheroos between Kirk and Spock were a welcome twist here. What I didn't like is how the movie just ends with Spock and Khan fighting out on a flying barge over San Francisco.. Kirk being expediently resurrected with Khan's blood.. and Khan shown being stashed away in cryosleep. The whole ending felt rushed. And I know that the Star Trek universe is all about right moralities and such, but I really wanted to see Kahn die. I didn't get a sense that he was defeated at all. Just subdued. You don't make a two hour film as adrelanine-driven and threatening as this one just to have your main villain subdued and stashed away in cryosleep.

Meh. The ending sucked.
Logged
metallicorphan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 16378



View Profile
« Reply #458 on: May 21, 2013, 12:53:07 PM »

Quote
Total Lifetime Grosses
Domestic:    $83,701,981      51.0%
+ Foreign:    $80,500,000      49.0%
= Worldwide:    $164,201,981   

In Release:    4 days / 0.6 weeks(Domestic)

Quote from: PR_GMR on May 21, 2013, 06:15:22 AM

Watched it tonight, and thought it was mostly well-done, except for the last 5 minutes. I didn't like the resolution much. I felt like the film ended by just falling off a cliff.

Spoiler for Hiden:
John Harrison being revealed as Khan didn't bother me. I thought it was neat--Benedict Cumberbatch is a very good actor. The death switcheroos between Kirk and Spock were a welcome twist here. What I didn't like is how the movie just ends with Spock and Khan fighting out on a flying barge over San Francisco.. Kirk being expediently resurrected with Khan's blood.. and Khan shown being stashed away in cryosleep. The whole ending felt rushed. And I know that the Star Trek universe is all about right moralities and such, but I really wanted to see Kahn die. I didn't get a sense that he was defeated at all. Just subdued. You don't make a two hour film as adrelanine-driven and threatening as this one just to have your main villain subdued and stashed away in cryosleep.

Meh. The ending sucked.

about the end
Spoiler for Hiden:
I think we still have to have this timelines 'Wrath' from Khan,i am guessing they will all be dumped on some deserted planet now

why did Kirk not look all scabby like Spock Prime did in WoK?

I know its their own universe and timeline now,but the Kirk Death was not as powerful as Spock Prime's death because Kirk was back on his feet in no time,while Spock Prime had a whole movie getting him back

and has someone mentioned why they needed Khan's blood in the end(needed to keep him alive),when they had 72 other 'supermen'?


my hope for Star trek 3,4 and 5
Spoiler for Hiden:
Star Trek 3-Exploration movie-have whatever story

Star Trek 4-Klingon War movie-get called back or get distress signal on way home from movie 3 events

Star Trek 5-Khan's Wrath-after war embark on another 5 year exploration mission,but discover deserted planet where Botany Bay is


As much as i enjoyed Cumberbatch i don't want him to return too soon,make it really feel as though he has been abandoned for a long time
Logged

Manchester United Premier League Champions 2013!!

Xbox LIVE:Metallicorphan
Wii:8565 1513 0206 1960
PSN:Metallicorphan
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #459 on: May 21, 2013, 01:58:57 PM »

Quote
Total Lifetime Grosses
Domestic:    $83,701,981      51.0%
+ Foreign:    $80,500,000      49.0%
= Worldwide:    $164,201,981   

In Release:    4 days / 0.6 weeks(Domestic)

 Headbanging!
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
PR_GMR
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3412



View Profile
« Reply #460 on: May 21, 2013, 02:04:58 PM »

Quote from: CeeKay on May 21, 2013, 01:58:57 PM

Quote
Total Lifetime Grosses
Domestic:    $83,701,981      51.0%
+ Foreign:    $80,500,000      49.0%
= Worldwide:    $164,201,981   

In Release:    4 days / 0.6 weeks(Domestic)

 Headbanging!

Those box office numbers are ok, but I'm sure the studio expected the movie to perform better. It took them too long to make a sequel, imo.
Logged
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #461 on: May 21, 2013, 02:09:25 PM »

Quote from: PR_GMR on May 21, 2013, 02:04:58 PM

Quote from: CeeKay on May 21, 2013, 01:58:57 PM

Quote
Total Lifetime Grosses
Domestic:    $83,701,981      51.0%
+ Foreign:    $80,500,000      49.0%
= Worldwide:    $164,201,981   

In Release:    4 days / 0.6 weeks(Domestic)

 Headbanging!

Those box office numbers are ok, but I'm sure the studio expected the movie to perform better. It took them too long to make a sequel, imo.

I wonder how much of a bump the good word of mouth the movie is getting will help it next weekend.
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9146


I'M the one that knocks! Now...burp me!


View Profile
« Reply #462 on: May 21, 2013, 02:11:24 PM »

I would be surprised if it doesn't get a healthy upswing over the holiday weekend. 
Logged

Warning:  You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.
Bullwinkle
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15489


Watch me pull a rabbit outta my hat.


View Profile
« Reply #463 on: May 21, 2013, 03:51:40 PM »

Quote from: metallicorphan on May 21, 2013, 12:53:07 PM

Quote
Total Lifetime Grosses
Domestic:    $83,701,981      51.0%
+ Foreign:    $80,500,000      49.0%
= Worldwide:    $164,201,981   

In Release:    4 days / 0.6 weeks(Domestic)

Quote from: PR_GMR on May 21, 2013, 06:15:22 AM

Watched it tonight, and thought it was mostly well-done, except for the last 5 minutes. I didn't like the resolution much. I felt like the film ended by just falling off a cliff.

Spoiler for Hiden:
John Harrison being revealed as Khan didn't bother me. I thought it was neat--Benedict Cumberbatch is a very good actor. The death switcheroos between Kirk and Spock were a welcome twist here. What I didn't like is how the movie just ends with Spock and Khan fighting out on a flying barge over San Francisco.. Kirk being expediently resurrected with Khan's blood.. and Khan shown being stashed away in cryosleep. The whole ending felt rushed. And I know that the Star Trek universe is all about right moralities and such, but I really wanted to see Kahn die. I didn't get a sense that he was defeated at all. Just subdued. You don't make a two hour film as adrelanine-driven and threatening as this one just to have your main villain subdued and stashed away in cryosleep.

Meh. The ending sucked.

about the end
Spoiler for Hiden:
I think we still have to have this timelines 'Wrath' from Khan,i am guessing they will all be dumped on some deserted planet now

why did Kirk not look all scabby like Spock Prime did in WoK?

I know its their own universe and timeline now,but the Kirk Death was not as powerful as Spock Prime's death because Kirk was back on his feet in no time,while Spock Prime had a whole movie getting him back

and has someone mentioned why they needed Khan's blood in the end(needed to keep him alive),when they had 72 other 'supermen'?


my hope for Star trek 3,4 and 5
Spoiler for Hiden:
Star Trek 3-Exploration movie-have whatever story

Star Trek 4-Klingon War movie-get called back or get distress signal on way home from movie 3 events

Star Trek 5-Khan's Wrath-after war embark on another 5 year exploration mission,but discover deserted planet where Botany Bay is


As much as i enjoyed Cumberbatch i don't want him to return too soon,make it really feel as though he has been abandoned for a long time

I wondered the same thing about the solution, mo.

Spoiler for Hiden:
I imagine you'd have to dethaw them to get the blood, and I'm sure they didn't want another one of those dudes running around. 

Should have been mentioned, though, as it seemed fairly obvious.
Logged

That's like blaming owls because I suck at making analogies.
Blackjack
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10808



View Profile
« Reply #464 on: May 21, 2013, 05:11:28 PM »

Quote from: hepcat on May 21, 2013, 02:11:24 PM

I would be surprised if it doesn't get a healthy upswing over the holiday weekend.  
Does this mean I have to see it three more times over the Memorial Day weekend? Because I love it, but maybe not that much.  Bring your own!

As far as navel gazing on the Internet about box office, I tend to agree that:
-4 years is too long to wait between movies 1 and 2 in a new franchise. Given what a multitasker JJ was, there was just no way he was gonna direct a film in time for 2012 though, and who'd want that film to have gone against The Avengers in May 2012, or The Hobbit in the Thanksgiving/Xmas time frame in late 2012? I really don't feel there was a 2012 release date that would've given Into Darkness breathing room at the box office (they seem to only want to release them in May or in Thanksgiving-Xmas). And yet I do agree 4 years is just a bit too long for a fledgling franchise reboot.

-Chris Pine, for all the movies Hollywood is cramming him into, is not quite yet A Movie Star. He's great as Kirk, imho, just he's not at the point in his career where his name on the poster draws hordes into the theater.

While comparing him to Harrison Ford perhaps is unfair, you can look at Ford's post Star Wars-Pre Raiders output and generally it reminds me of Pine's choices since 2009's Star Trek. It's like Hollywood's trying to figure out if Pine's a romantic comedy guy, or an action guy, or a drama guy. Same with Ford back then (Force 10 from Navarone, Hanover Street, etc.). I liked Pine in Unstoppable, but have been lukewarm on him otherwise outside of the two ST films.

Hopefully the Kenneth Branagh-directed Jack Ryan reboot gives Pine a solid second franchise, and then maybe he takes that box office appeal with him into a 3rd Trek film. And guess how old Pine is now? 32, just a little younger than Ford was when they were filming Star Wars in 1975 (33).  icon_smile

-Maybe the whole "keep the villain a mystery" scheme hurt the movie instead of helped it. I've started to come around to that idea, because you know, some Bond movies were named after the villain. And it's not like I wandered into TDK wandering what the villain's identity was. The pleasure was the villain's performance, not the "reveal."

Maybe if they could've promoted Into Darkness' villain (which is a great one I think), rather than "Hey here's BBC's Sherlock as some Federation turncoat named John Harrison!", it would've been better for its box office chances.

JJ's brain trusts' justification in interviews and that official movie magazine I bought is, "Oh we don't want the audience to figure it out before the characters do." But look up Hitchcock's definition of suspense (from a filmed interview in 1962):
Quote
Crucial to the Hitchcockian thriller is the difference between suspense and surprise. To put it simply, the director said that if you have a scene where two characters are conversing in a cafe, and a bomb suddenly goes off under the table, the audience experiences surprise.

On the other hand, if the audience sees the saboteur place the bomb, is told that it will go off at one o'clock, and can see a clock in the scene, the mundane conversation between two cafe patrons now becomes one of intense suspense, as the audience holds its collective breath waiting for the explosion. Fifteen minutes of suspense, as opposed to fifteen seconds of surprise. It was therefore necessary, to Alfred Hitchcock, that the audience be as fully informed as possible.
To my tiny mind, perhaps it would've been more interesting for us to all go in knowing who the bad guy was, and the suspense would be watching and rooting for our heroes to figure that out. The Big Reveal to me was, "huh," a perhaps .067 second little thrill.  icon_smile I found Cumberbatch's performance a thrill to watch, and if I'd known who he was beforehand, I really don't think it would've affected my enjoyment of his performance.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2013, 05:16:24 PM by Blackjack » Logged

Playing
PC
-Marvel Heroes
Blackjack
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10808



View Profile
« Reply #465 on: May 22, 2013, 12:37:01 PM »

For what it's worth, had a strong Monday at box office ($7.98M). Still playing on about 500 fewer screens than IM3.
Logged

Playing
PC
-Marvel Heroes
Blackjack
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10808



View Profile
« Reply #466 on: May 23, 2013, 09:23:30 PM »

Per updates at Box Office Mojo:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/search/?q=star%20trek

fwiw, Darkness pulled in about $20.1 million Mon.-Wed., to top the $103M mark domestically, and about $184.3M worldwide. It will lose some screens to Hangover III starting tonight, and then Fast & Furious 6 Friday. The 2009 film had some really strong second ($43M) and third/memorial day weekend ($29.4M) numbers, and I'd be skeptical Darkness matches that with these other big releases moving in -- even if Hangover III is getting atrociously negative reviews (it didn't stop Hangover II from big box office numbers). I would love to be wrong.  icon_smile

The 2009 ST had really good box office legs, remaining in more than 1,800 theaters by late June. So it'll be ... fascinating to see if theaters stick with it, or quickly move Darkness out in favor of other flicks in June. otoh, the 2009 ST made less than $128M internationally; Darkness has already made $80M+ internationally in limited release so far, so that suggests it could end up doing way better internationally then the 2009 film.

I'll put away my box office analyst nerd glasses now.  icon_smile

If you missed it, JJ was on Conan, apologized for the scene where Eve is in her skivvies (which to me was unnecessary but just another chance for Kirk to be the ogler he has always been icon_razz), and then to "make up for it," showed a supposedly deleted scene of Cumberbatch showering.  icon_lol
« Last Edit: May 23, 2013, 09:27:25 PM by Blackjack » Logged

Playing
PC
-Marvel Heroes
metallicorphan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 16378



View Profile
« Reply #467 on: May 23, 2013, 09:49:13 PM »

this is interesting from box office mojo again

Star Trek(2009) 7 day total=$104,610,837
Stat Trek Into Darkness 7 day Total=$103,773,288
Logged

Manchester United Premier League Champions 2013!!

Xbox LIVE:Metallicorphan
Wii:8565 1513 0206 1960
PSN:Metallicorphan
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #468 on: May 23, 2013, 10:04:08 PM »

that's it, Abrams had better pack up and find some other franchise to ruin slywink
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
Blackjack
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10808



View Profile
« Reply #469 on: May 24, 2013, 09:24:08 PM »

So despite seeing the film four times in four days, apparently I missed nearly ALL the more subtle classic Star Trek easter eggs.

If you've seen it, you might check out this TrekMovie.com feature on it:
http://trekmovie.com/2013/05/23/the-easter-eggs-of-star-trek-into-darkness/

Box office wise, B.O. Mojo indicated Hangover III led Thursday ($11.8M), though it opened weaker than Darkness did on its "stealth" Thursday opening last week ($13.5M), albeit on a couple hundred or so fewer screens. I'm not really convinced these "soft" Thursday starts are really boosting summer movies much -- money is money of course, you just wonder if it almost waters down the Friday opening excitement. Darkness chipped in another $5.1M to reach $108.8M domestically/$189.3M globally.

So at the very least, the film has about recouped its $190M production cost. And there are definitely many, many countries it hasn't opened in yet (BOmojo also doesn't update international figures as often as domestic stuff).
Logged

Playing
PC
-Marvel Heroes
sgoldj
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 359


View Profile
« Reply #470 on: May 26, 2013, 07:01:51 PM »

So despite things that have been mentioned in spoilers, I did enjoy watching STID.  Today I watched "Pilgrim Of Eternity" from the Star Trek Continues people. Now, it is pure and simple TOS, but if felt more Star Trek to me, so I am going to suggest...time to shut down the big movies and go back to small screen stories for a while?
Logged
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #471 on: May 26, 2013, 10:22:17 PM »

just saw it.  liked it but it felt predictable, and I agree with PR_GMR about the ending.  wasn't sure if there was anything after the credits, so I googled it while they started to roll.

this was officially my first 3D movie.  the 3D was decent, although what they showed in the Man of Steel trailer blew it away. definitely felt my eyes getting tired by the time it was ending, so I'm guessing anything over 2 to 2 1/2 hours long may be 2D only movies for me.
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
ravenvii
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2016



View Profile
« Reply #472 on: May 27, 2013, 02:40:41 PM »

Quote from: Blackjack on May 24, 2013, 09:24:08 PM

So despite seeing the film four times in four days, apparently I missed nearly ALL the more subtle classic Star Trek easter eggs.

If you've seen it, you might check out this TrekMovie.com feature on it:
http://trekmovie.com/2013/05/23/the-easter-eggs-of-star-trek-into-darkness/

Box office wise, B.O. Mojo indicated Hangover III led Thursday ($11.8M), though it opened weaker than Darkness did on its "stealth" Thursday opening last week ($13.5M), albeit on a couple hundred or so fewer screens. I'm not really convinced these "soft" Thursday starts are really boosting summer movies much -- money is money of course, you just wonder if it almost waters down the Friday opening excitement. Darkness chipped in another $5.1M to reach $108.8M domestically/$189.3M globally.

So at the very least, the film has about recouped its $190M production cost. And there are definitely many, many countries it hasn't opened in yet (BOmojo also doesn't update international figures as often as domestic stuff).

I know it's not just me that read that as "body odor mojo".

Carry on.
Logged
Roman
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1236


XboxLive: RomyBolognaPony


View Profile
« Reply #473 on: May 27, 2013, 05:45:12 PM »

saw it Saturday and really enjoyed it. I am far from an avid fan by the way - I just never got into the Trekky universe.

It was way better than Iron Man 3 by a warp factor of 10!  icon_lol

Great story, acting and action. Highly recommended.
Logged

Xbox Live Gamertag: RomyBolognaPony
Blackjack
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10808



View Profile
« Reply #474 on: May 29, 2013, 06:52:50 PM »

Another body odor Mojo update  icon_smile
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=main&id=startrek12.htm

Darkness enjoyed a solid 2nd weekend ($37.3M Fri.-Sun.) and 4-day holiday weekend ($47.2M Fri.-Memorial Day), nearly outgrossing Hangover III, although Fast & Furious 6 clearly blew away everything at the B.O. Darkness' 2nd weekend only dropped maybe 30% or so, which for summer blockbusters is generally a very low number (40-50-60% dropoffs from huge opening weekends are more typical). So that does sound like a good word of mouth thing.

Darkness' 12-day take has finally exceeded the 2009 ST by a little bit ($156M to $155.5M), though keep in mind Darkness has a $40M larger budget ($190M).

BOMojo still hasn't updated foreign numbers since May 19 (still listing $102.1M, and only a modest number of foreign markets). So Darkness' total global take is $258.1M with the numbers available so far.

Reaching Star Trek's $257.7M domestic take might be a bit tough (needs to make $101.7M more to get there), but it seems like the foreign box office will almost certainly top the 2009 film's (nearly $128M) by a wide margin.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2013, 06:56:19 PM by Blackjack » Logged

Playing
PC
-Marvel Heroes
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7903



View Profile
« Reply #475 on: June 03, 2013, 02:26:07 PM »

I finally got around to seeing it with my kids this weekend. I enjoyed it overall, but I was a bit surprised at just how "pulpy" an approach it took for a Star Trek film. Not a bad thing because the action was very good (although a lot of it seemed over the top) but it was far more action heavy than I expected and a real departure from the last gen films. I own the reboot and it doesn't seem nearly as action focused. I did like their casting choices when I watched the reboot and this confirmed how good they are. I hope in the next film they give Karl Urban (Bones) more lines, IMO he's wasted as a good actor with so few.
Logged
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9146


I'M the one that knocks! Now...burp me!


View Profile
« Reply #476 on: June 03, 2013, 02:29:23 PM »

Hmmm...I felt the reboot was just as action oriented as the sequel.  I also think (from interviews with the director) that that was Abram's intent when rebooting the franchise.
Logged

Warning:  You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.
Bullwinkle
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15489


Watch me pull a rabbit outta my hat.


View Profile
« Reply #477 on: June 03, 2013, 02:43:33 PM »

Agree with Bones being underused, though.  I felt that way in the first film, too.

While I think Zoe Saldana is fantastic as Uhura, and I like the fact that a female character has moved into the forefront, probably my least liked aspect of the reboot is that the classic trio of Kirk, Spock and Bones is no longer present.
Logged

That's like blaming owls because I suck at making analogies.
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9146


I'M the one that knocks! Now...burp me!


View Profile
« Reply #478 on: June 03, 2013, 02:51:50 PM »

Couldn't agree more.  I'm all for stronger female characters, but Bones needs to be as strong a character in the current incarnation of the ensemble as Uhura has become.  Probably more so as Urban is just nailing that role to perfection.
Logged

Warning:  You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7903



View Profile
« Reply #479 on: June 03, 2013, 03:02:28 PM »

Quote from: hepcat on June 03, 2013, 02:29:23 PM

Hmmm...I felt the reboot was just as action oriented as the sequel.  I also think (from interviews with the director) that that was Abram's intent when rebooting the franchise.

Yep I realize it's Abrams intent to do that and I can't blame him, since unlike the other gen ST films he's competing against a constant stream of big budget super hero films. I guess my sentiments are that I liked that the original movies championed the more hard-science side of the SciFi genre and I wish these new films had a bit more of that. I do like the better action, but I'd prefer a bit more of a balance between the 2. Oh - and Ricardo Montalban was a much better Kahn IMO.  slywink
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.183 seconds with 103 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.047s, 2q)