Jump to content
  • entries
    1,479
  • comments
    7,269
  • views
    276,638

Star Trek Into Darkness


Laughing Man

588 views

saw it, it was pretty great, much better than Iron Man 3 and probably my favorite film of the year so far.

 

 

that said, there was one thing that disappointed me, and it’s the same exact problem I had with The Dark Knight Rises last year: the ending felt rushed.

 

there was no real climax, no epic finish, nothing - and the worst part of it is that they did the same thing to Khan that TDKR did to Bane, having spent the whole movie building the character up only to give him a really disappointing, anticlimactic finish.

 

seriously.

 

he gets punched in the face and then we fast forward several months and that’s it. we do see him in stasis briefly, but.. seriously? that’s the way the big epic villain is handled? by getting punched in the face?

 

oh well. I suppose it’s better than having him turn out to be an actor decoy and revealing that the real Khan was the tribble Dr. McCoy had been testing on about halfway through the film.

 

still, despite these gripes, it was a great film. I’m not sure whether I’d rank it above the previous Star Trek film, but I’d definitely say it’s equal at least.

 

(as a side note, I can’t talk about the movie without mentioning the inclusion of the famous “KHAAAAAAN!” and the different spin they put on it. that was well-handled and very satisfying to see.)

2 Comments


Recommended Comments

 

:kaukau: I'm okay with what they did with Khan assuming that this is merely their introduction to the character. Certainly, this is more epic than the modest appearance he had in the Original Series. There's no way that this measures of to Wrath of Khan, since that film was far more personal and dealt with more permanent character developments, but I'm assuming that this could potentially lead up to another film down the road with an epic confrontation between Khan and the Enterprise where he goes all out and truly does prove himself their most worthy adversary.

 

My main quarrel with him was that they cast a white actor for him. I mean, the original actor was Mexican and more closely resembled what the character should have looked like. If the name wasn't a dead giveaway, his writers considered him a Sikh from Northern India. His empire on Earth covered basically all of Asia. Elements of his personality were similar, although he wasn't as philosophical as Ricardo Montalban's Khan, and overall I feel that this didn't necessarily have to be Khan, which is why I still often refer to him as John Harrison. I appreciate the attempt to avoid imitation, but to me, he's a different character.

 

Link to comment
Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...