Transporter Room 3: The Star Trek Podcast

Beam in to TR3 for fun, incisive, and sometimes deep (space nine) conversations about all things Star Trek -- from the Original Series to the new movies, TV show... and beyond!

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

Episode 43: Star Trek Into Darkness: What Did You Think?

Transporter Room 3 returns with more Into Darkness discussion points -- yours!

Transporter Room 3, Episode 43

Subscribe:

Scott and Phil go mailbag diving to share some of your passionate opinions about J.J. Abrams' sequel -- while passionately defending our own. Tunics. Will. Be. Torn!



Also a Red Shirt from The Original Series pays us a visit, right before he gets shot by a flower. (A classic red shirt move if ever there was one!)

All that and some mouth sounds about Trek's (lack of) box office await you in the bestest podcast this side of Kronos, er, Qo'noS. Listen now!

Don't forget to subscribe to our RSS feed (click the icon) to get all the latest episodes of our podcast automatically. Friend us on Facebook, star-rate us on iTunes, e-mail us at Transporter Room 3 at Gmail dot com, and talk to us on Twitter:

Scott Collura: twitter.com/ScottIGN


Listen to Episode 43 of Transporter Room 3 right here:

Transporter Room 3, Episode 43

Subscribe:

6 comments:

  1. After seeing it a 2nd time, I do admit that the first act sets up all these problems with Kirks personality and command style and the film never comes back to that, which should have been a central theme. Kirk (and the rest of the character for that matter) has no character arc at all, such a basic part of good story telling. There are some plot holes but those are more forgivable then the lack of character development. It was almost as if someone else wrote the first act seperately. That being said the movie was still fun to watch. I just saw 'Gangster Squad'; it was dumb and mindless but still entertaining. I think your just setting higher standards for this film because its Star Trek and I suppose I understand that.
    As far as the poor box office showing--a lot of people I know didn't even realize a new Trek film was out; I partly blame this on the fact it was so heavily advertised as just 'Into Darkness'. I know it sounds dumb that with all the advertising going on people didn't realize they were seeing ads for the sequel to the 2009 film they all enjoyed so much but people are basically stupid. Also so much time has passed most people thought of star trek as that thing for nerds and forgot how they enjoyed the 2009 film. Finally with its focus on action it alienated the female audience, unlike the last film. Here's to hoping the terrible box office showing didn't damage the franchise too badly.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I couldn't agree with you more in your assessment of STID. Khan felt shoehorned into the film. The more interesting foil was Admiral Marcus, and I wished they had focused on him orchestrating a fake terrorist attack in order to push Starfleet from being a scientific organization into a military one.

    For what it's worth, here's how I would have re-written the script:

    - After the destruction of Vulcan, there is a schism in Starfleet. There are some that believe it should focus on exploration (Pike) and those who believe it should become more militaristic (Marcus).

    - The Klingons are identified as a potential threat, even though they had nothing to do with the destruction of Vulcan. However, a series of seemingly Klingon-orchestrated terrorist attacks have been taking place on Earth and other federation planets, giving Marcus' argument more weight. The final straw is drawn when a Klingon terrorist attack hits Starfleet headquarters, killing Admiral Pike. This gives Kirk the motivation to side with Marcus and agree to lead the Enterprise on an attack of the Klingon homeworld. Marcus supplies Kirk with some high end weapons to accomplish this.

    - Upon arrival at Q'onos, the Enterprise malfunctions due to sabotage. On board is John Harrison, a Starfleet weapons expert assigned to the Enterprise to supervise the operation. He is in fact the saboteur planted by Marcus, there to make sure the Enterprise enters into a conflict and is destroyed, giving Starfleet the catalyst to declare war on the Klingons. Eventually Harrison is discovered and the plan is thwarted.

    - Kirk is forced to make contact with the Klingons. They don't trust each other and there is conflict at first, but eventually he is convinced that the so-called Klingon attacks had been orchestrated by Marcus. Kirk heads back to Earth to confront him. Unbeknownst to Kirk, Harrison sends a message warning Marcus of what Kirk has discovered.

    - Marcus declares Kirk a traitor and embarks with a fleet of experimental Dreadnaught-class ships to go against the Enterprise. A major battle ensues and it appears that Kirk, his ship and his crew are done. At the last minute, the Klingons come to Kirk's aid, and together they defeat Marcus. The Klingons board Marcus' ship and execute him.

    - The Klingons return to their homeworld stealing Marcus' experimental technology. Even though Marcus' plan was foiled, the consequences of his actions have put them at greater risk with the Klingons than ever before, and the future with the Klingons is as tenuous as ever.

    I don't know if it makes any sense, but my point is that the story could have been more focused without Kahn being in it.

    Thanks for the podcast. I just recently discovered it and I am thoroughly enjoying your discussions.

    Roberto Suarez
    Portland, OR

    ReplyDelete
  3. Roberto, agreed. Khan was... not needed.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I hated the movie before. However I have a change at hearth after the 3rd viewing.

    My thoughts: Looking back on “Star Trek: Into darkness”, my personal most hated movie of summer 2013.
    http://akoramerica.blogspot.com/2013/08/looking-back-on-star-trek-into-darkness.html

    ReplyDelete