"STAR TREK Into Darkness" - 2013

[WillEagle]

I loved the movie. Sure there were things that could have been better but when it comes down to it I didn't care. I jumped on the ride and I didn't want it to end. As far as nitpicking Trek movies the biggest one has to be from what most consider the best Trek film 'The Wrath of Khan'. Khan didn't know Chekov from a hole in the ground. And come to think of it he never saw Chekov in the new movie either. But to me 'The Wrath of Khan' and 'Into Darkness' were awesome!!
And please quit using words on here that I need to look up in the dictionary!  ;D

[ChrisMC]

LeVar Burton liked Into Darkness but he says he was 'missing Gene Roddenberry'. Since he knew him personally I'll let him have it!

http://www.treknews.net/2013/06/16/levar-burton-star-trek-into-darkness-is-missing-gene-roddenberry/

[Dangelus]

That's funny because I was missing the Next Generation! :-)

[Jobydrone]

That's funny because I was missing the Next Generation! :-)

I'm constantly missing TNG!!!  Man what I would give for another TNG crewed full feature.  Never gonna happen I suppose. :( :( :(

I just recently saw ST:ID again and loved it even more the second time.  I agree with Tim on one point: about the overall velocity of the film, and I actually had the same issue with the new Superman movie.  It goes at such a fast pace that there's little time to even catch your breath.  Contrast this with the action sequences in a movie like Star Trek 6, where the action sequences are much briefer but still very powerful.  Can you think of an iconic image from the new Star Trek movie that even comes close to comparing to the scene of the Excelcior and the Enterprise blowing away Chang's Bird of Prey at the end of TUD?  I submit that the anticipation that is built up over an entire film of plot and character driven intrigue makes the action scenes that much more effective.  As much as I enjoyed ID, it's more like an amusement park roller coaster ride and less like the Star Trek I'm used to.  I still love it and will see it over and over again but I do worry about the future of the medium, and the feeling that something has been lost.

[Dangelus]

Seems to be a trend that they have to make these movies so fast paced these days. It's almost an insult life they think we don't have the attention span to handle a little more fleshing out of the story. :(

[ChrisMC]

Seems to be a trend that they have to make these movies so fast paced these days. It's almost an insult life they think we don't have the attention span to handle a little more fleshing out of the story. :(

Some people don't, I truly believe that. I love a low burn, it's what got me into the show Mad Men...and my older son seems to be OK with slower paced stuff, but most younger people aren't. Sign O' the Times, I guess.

[Geekyfanboy]

Here's a link to Wil Wheaton's thoughts on Star Trek Into Darkness

http://wilwheaton.net/2013/06/my-review-of-star-trek-into-darkness/

[ChrisMC]

A look at the adjusted grosses for all of the Trek movies. 2009 is still tops, TMP CLOSE behind! Shows what starving your audience does. Nemesis is the only one which doesn't get above 100 mill.

1.Star Trek ( $274,311,200)   
2.Star Trek: The Motion Picture ($260,212,000)   
3.Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home ($229,227,500)   
4.Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan ($213,118,700)   
5.Star Trek Into Darkness ($213,088,100)   
6.Star Trek III: The Search for Spock ($180,708,400)
7.Star Trek: First Contact  ($164,686,600)      
8.Star Trek: Generations ($143,280,100}   
9.Star Trek VI: Undisc. Country ($142,092,200)   
10.Star Trek: Insurrection ($116,707,600   )
11.Star Trek V: The Final Frontier ($104,420,100)   
12.Star Trek: Nemesis ($58,440,700)   

[Dangelus]

Never thought about it that way.

[Bryancd]

A look at the adjusted grosses for all of the Trek movies. 2009 is still tops, TMP CLOSE behind! Shows what starving your audience does. Nemesis is the only one which doesn't get above 100 mill.

1.Star Trek ( $274,311,200)   
2.Star Trek: The Motion Picture ($260,212,000)   
3.Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home ($229,227,500)   
4.Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan ($213,118,700)   
5.Star Trek Into Darkness ($213,088,100)   
6.Star Trek III: The Search for Spock ($180,708,400)
7.Star Trek: First Contact  ($164,686,600)      
8.Star Trek: Generations ($143,280,100}   
9.Star Trek VI: Undisc. Country ($142,092,200)   
10.Star Trek: Insurrection ($116,707,600   )
11.Star Trek V: The Final Frontier ($104,420,100)   
12.Star Trek: Nemesis ($58,440,700)   

You should include international as well.

[ChrisMC]

Many of the early ones do tv have the int. figures. I thought this was a fair comparison, since wide foreign releases weren't as massive as they are now.

[Bryancd]

Many of the early ones do tv have the int. figures. I thought this was a fair comparison, since wide foreign releases weren't as massive as they are now.

Yeah, it would be more supportive to the actual financial success of the later films, that's why this is a bit misleading as to the question which films were the biggest financial winners.

[ChrisMC]

Well, it's a great representation of the US film market. I was actually very impressed that ST09 still wins. That sucker sold tickets.

[Rico]

Well, it's a great representation of the US film market. I was actually very impressed that ST09 still wins. That sucker sold tickets.

People were pretty hungry for a Trek film at that point and it had the mass appeal that really only the Voyage Home had.  One thing I find interesting with Into Darkness is that the 3d option doesn't seem to be bumping the box office up that much. Makes me wonder if they will bother with 3d next time.

[Bryancd]

People were pretty hungry for a Trek film at that point and it had the mass appeal that really only the Voyage Home had.  One thing I find interesting with Into Darkness is that the 3d option doesn't seem to be bumping the box office up that much. Makes me wonder if they will bother with 3d next time.

Or that it's box office would have been worse without the supportiuve effect of higher priced 3D tickets, which I think is the case.