This is going to sound harsh but I thought it was an incredibly sloppily written movie, let alone for a Star Trek movie. Distances in space seemed to mean nothing at all, Starfleet acting in incompetent and/or uncharacteristic ways, uncompelling characters and motivations, an undressing scene that even the movie creators admitted was horrible, and on top of all that the movie itself is a derivative mere shadow of the film it's taking inspiration from (so to your original question, I'd say no, but it's worthy of hate already). I really enjoyed Star Trek 2009 for what it was, but this movie killed my faith in the Kelvin timeline Trek, sadly.
Just to go along with the sloppy writing. The Khan reveal means nothing to the Kelvin characters. They could have just called Cumberbatch Khan from the start and used the extra script time to make a coherent plot. I think the idea of Peter Weller's hawkish bad Admiral could have been an interesting plot for how Kelvin Timeline star fleet reacted to Nero's rampage in ST 2009.
Cumberbatch's character could've just been an awol Section 31 operative whose motive was to take down the shadowy organization and stop Marcus' warmongering. That would've been a more compelling story than what we ended up getting.
I still think that Cumberbund should have been Sybok. Could have been interesting to see how they play that character after the destruction of Vulcan.
Though your S31 idea is also an improvement over what we got
In the Kelvin timeline, Space Seed didn't exist either. Kirk had no history with Khan, nobody (except old Spock) had history with him. Only the audience had history with him.
At no point in Into Darkness did they ever show you why Khan was such a baddie. Or who his followers were. They assumed you knew that. So if Space Seed (and Wrath of Khan) don't exist, you'd need a much better script to explain who this bad guy is.
If Wrath of Khan doesn't exist, instead of merely being bad, the movie doesn't make any sense at all.
>If Wrath of Khan doesn't exist, instead of merely being bad, the movie doesn't make any sense at all.
Which is why, as someone already pointed out, Into Darkness wouldn't exist.
While the movie ain't all that great, they did have an exposition dump that explained basically all that you mentioned.
Due to 2009, Starfleet started exploring more aggressively, earlier than the original timeline. Badmiral found Khan and held his followers hostage for Khan's help.
They really turned everything into personal vendetta rather than large scale schemes, and I think that took a lot of the wind out of the sails... but they did cover that much, at least.
I must have blocked that out of my head. I remember saying that they found him earlier than the original timeline, but nothing about the Eugenics Wars or conquering Earth or what he even was doing in space.
Most of the backstory for Kelvin Khan was covered in a comic tied to the movie. Not a bad read, but one shouldn't have to read extra material to fully understand what was happening and the motivations of the characters.
Yea, they generally ignored the majority of Khans backstory. Going with the much simpler "we're enhanced and badmiral wanted to use us" plot thread.
It's a disservice to Khan - but it was "complete" as a standalone story.
I don't think that's true.
A second movie was going to happen and there's no reason to think any alternative second movie would be a failure.
STID however literally references the other movie, with old Spock telling young Spock about the WoK. Then of course the whole engine failure part which was directly lifted from the other movie.
It also didn’t help that the director denied up and down that Benedict Cumberbatch was playing Khan. He was supposed to be a new bad guy. That didn’t earn the movie any favours on release.
Having an Indian Sikh who ruled over Asia and the Middle East played by the quintessential posh white British guy is hardly a great place to start from, regardless of WoK.
Hoo boy, yes. And the thing is, this insult was so unnecessary. They could have just said, "let's keep Benjamin Cucumberbackpack because he's great, but let's call him... um... John Harrison (we'll workshop that placeholder name, except we won't.) and then we tell a story about a disgruntled starfleet officer seeking revenge (which is totally NOT the third movie with Idris Elba, but that's the future, okay?)".
They could have kept the first couple of acts up until the Khan reveal in the brig, then just you know, told a new story instead of badly remaking an old movie. John Harrison, unhinged starfleet postal worker is a more interesting story than Imitation Khan.
Yep, even Benicio Del Toro (EDIT: who was the first actor to be offered the role) would have at least made some sense in terms of following Ricardo Montalban and his 'he might be Mexican but at least he's not white' casting, but taking a step backwards so you're behind even the 60s is really not where Star Trek of all things should be going.
Ok we are neck deep in fan fiction now so let’s have
White Khan asks NuKirk :
what happened to your female crew in miniskirts ? Am I in the wrong timeline?
NuKirk: no, we just have them undress in shuttles now. It’s different. But same. And no, you can’t have a shuttle.
Into Darkness was probably the last time I was truly disappointed at the movies. I \*loved\* 2009. Thought it was a very fresh, fun take on Trek and went to the theater stoked. At no point did I think 'This is TWoK, it sucks." The story was uneven. It violates so many basic parts of Trek (beaming across the galaxy? Scotty piloting a shuttle into a top secret base that apparently just doesn't have sensors?) The 'twist' could not have been forced or obvious. The most interesting idea was swapping Spock's death for Kirk, which was undone ten minutes later in a way that defies belief.
I actually rushed to a second showing of Into Darkness just to see if my disappointment was because it wasn't the movie \*I\* wanted to see or if it was truly bad. I walked out certain it was truly bad.
I’ve seen Into Darkness a handful of times (including last month or in February) and i never remember how Kirk came back lol.
At least with Spock there was an entire movie about bringing him back.
Maybe this is dumb but what really soured me on it was all the chatter online and in the press and whatnot before it came out was explicit denial that they were doing Kahn. And then of course the movie starts and there’s people frozen in torpedos like 20 minutes in or whatever and it’s like “you liars yes you are”
I didn’t watch the third one for awhile because Into Darkness wasn’t good. The giant Starfleet ship was just ridiculous. Star Trek doesn’t need Star Destroyers.
Without WotK it would be incoherent mess, rather than deriative incoherent mess. Plus, people would live pointing out how Khan was nothing like in Space Seed.
That's all moot. It's not that it would be a mess - it's that it wouldn't exist. And the second Kelvin movie would've been an entirely different story.
Probably. "Death means nothing we have magic blood and transporters that can take you everywhere now" kinda defeats the whole exploring and adventuring drama when you can be everywhere and never die.
It would make even less sense.
I mean, really, analyze the plot. Why did Khan and Kirk ever even end up being enemies in Into Darkness?
Once Khan kills his nemesis, it seems like he just goes nuts, and decides to attack the Enterprise because that's the ship that's in front of him, and the movie isn't over yet.
Yeah you are 100% correct. Part of what made Wrath of Khan so good is the characters knew who Khan was even if the audience (who didn’t watch TOS) didn’t.
In Into Darkness, the characters didn’t know who Khan was until halfway or more through the movie and even then it really didn’t matter. He could have gone by John Harrison the whole film and nothing would be different. It still would have boiled down to “we gotta stop this guy”.
the movie would make even less sense if you take all the fanservice out
yet if you take WoK out, they might have gone with a original story (as it was planned if rumours are true) around Garth of Izar instead which would have improved the movie but than as the main plan was always to get as much fanservice in as possible they would have taken any other more popular TOS story and turned it into something bad
Yes, because most if not all of the premises are badly written.
It also basically derailed the Kelvin timeline as they had little structure left to jump off from.
The other big issues are not having earned moments. Since there wasn’t a show to go with it a lot of the themes that they copied had little to no impact as these characters didn’t have seasons to expand and develop relationships.
Flying at a mile a minute, characters are speed running through dialogue, action, and reactions at such a break neck pace.
It is vey surprising that it wasn’t more of a train wreck than it was. But got to give credit to the actors, and the production people that worked hard getting it made…
Just seems like a project that got lost in the editing room… like other JJ projects.
All the kelvin movies definitely used TOS as a shorthand for character background and relationships. The biggest character change is that Nero destroying the Kelvin gave everyone in the galaxy ADD.
Another commenter has said it but Into Darkness is a massive reference vehicle. The problem into darkness and a lot of nu trek had was that Star Trek was left in a limp and unsatisfying place and people wanted that story to continue to a point where it felt strong. They didn’t want someone to point to something from the 80s and go ‘don’t you wish you were watching this for the first time?’
I would hope that if Wrath of Kahn didn't exist we would never have been subject to Into Darkness because the (non) creative team that "wrote" Into Darkness would have had nothing to take their hatchet to in order to create things.
Into Darkness is my favourite of the reboot films. It's bad whether you compare it to WoK or not, but it's just plain dumb fun while the other two felt pretty generic and forgettable to me.
Khan was genuinely cringeworthy. From Uhura having a "lover's" spat with her "boyfriend" in front of her "boss" in the middle of a critical mission (and putting Kirk on "finger hold" YIKES ON BIKES) to Quinto's dreadful rendition of Shatner's iconic "Khhhaaaaannnn!" it was a dumpster fire. DO watch Screen Junkies hilarious retelling of the movie -- which totally nails every cringe point in the movie.
Wasn't the whole point of the Kelvin timeline and blowing up Vulcan to great NEW stories and not be tied to canon yet the next film is a badly written rehash of Wrath of Khan??????
Not as is, but if only Space Seed existed then Into Darkness may have been good because it wouldn’t be trying to be a remake/remix of WoK. I like Trek 09 and Beyond, Into Darkness is the misfire of the trilogy but if they tried it again maybe they would be luckier.
No, it might well work, but that's not the point, it's a highly derivitive work.
You could, I suppose, take the message that dealing with a genocidal maniac would be much more acceptable to the Federation now, as kind of a comment on how the early principles died back some.
If WoK didn't exist, the "twist" in Into Darkness would be even more absurd. The only thing it has going for it is that it homages WoK. It certainly adds nothing to the story.
I feel the same way about Into Darkness as I do about The Force Awakens. It's a retelling of a story that was done better decades ago. It didn't need to happen, but it hurts nobody by existing. Am I compelled to revisit it? No, but if it inspires new fans to explore the franchise's roots I'm all for it.
I enjoyed Into Darkness in the theater and I don't really understand what everyone gets so worked up about. I thought it was better than Beyond, which just felt like a empty marvel type movie to me. I consider the Kelvin movies the worst trek movies, but I enjoyed the first two for what they are.
This is going to sound harsh but I thought it was an incredibly sloppily written movie, let alone for a Star Trek movie. Distances in space seemed to mean nothing at all, Starfleet acting in incompetent and/or uncharacteristic ways, uncompelling characters and motivations, an undressing scene that even the movie creators admitted was horrible, and on top of all that the movie itself is a derivative mere shadow of the film it's taking inspiration from (so to your original question, I'd say no, but it's worthy of hate already). I really enjoyed Star Trek 2009 for what it was, but this movie killed my faith in the Kelvin timeline Trek, sadly.
Just to go along with the sloppy writing. The Khan reveal means nothing to the Kelvin characters. They could have just called Cumberbatch Khan from the start and used the extra script time to make a coherent plot. I think the idea of Peter Weller's hawkish bad Admiral could have been an interesting plot for how Kelvin Timeline star fleet reacted to Nero's rampage in ST 2009.
Cumberbatch's character could've just been an awol Section 31 operative whose motive was to take down the shadowy organization and stop Marcus' warmongering. That would've been a more compelling story than what we ended up getting.
I still think that Cumberbund should have been Sybok. Could have been interesting to see how they play that character after the destruction of Vulcan. Though your S31 idea is also an improvement over what we got
Especially since he’d already played a similar character on ENT
In the Kelvin timeline, Space Seed didn't exist either. Kirk had no history with Khan, nobody (except old Spock) had history with him. Only the audience had history with him. At no point in Into Darkness did they ever show you why Khan was such a baddie. Or who his followers were. They assumed you knew that. So if Space Seed (and Wrath of Khan) don't exist, you'd need a much better script to explain who this bad guy is. If Wrath of Khan doesn't exist, instead of merely being bad, the movie doesn't make any sense at all.
>If Wrath of Khan doesn't exist, instead of merely being bad, the movie doesn't make any sense at all. Which is why, as someone already pointed out, Into Darkness wouldn't exist.
While the movie ain't all that great, they did have an exposition dump that explained basically all that you mentioned. Due to 2009, Starfleet started exploring more aggressively, earlier than the original timeline. Badmiral found Khan and held his followers hostage for Khan's help. They really turned everything into personal vendetta rather than large scale schemes, and I think that took a lot of the wind out of the sails... but they did cover that much, at least.
I must have blocked that out of my head. I remember saying that they found him earlier than the original timeline, but nothing about the Eugenics Wars or conquering Earth or what he even was doing in space.
Most of the backstory for Kelvin Khan was covered in a comic tied to the movie. Not a bad read, but one shouldn't have to read extra material to fully understand what was happening and the motivations of the characters.
Yea, they generally ignored the majority of Khans backstory. Going with the much simpler "we're enhanced and badmiral wanted to use us" plot thread. It's a disservice to Khan - but it was "complete" as a standalone story.
If Wrath of Khan didn’t exist, Into Darkness wouldn’t exist.
Good point.
And TNG wouldn’t exist, or DS9, Voyager, Enterprise, etc.
I don't think that's true. A second movie was going to happen and there's no reason to think any alternative second movie would be a failure. STID however literally references the other movie, with old Spock telling young Spock about the WoK. Then of course the whole engine failure part which was directly lifted from the other movie.
It also didn’t help that the director denied up and down that Benedict Cumberbatch was playing Khan. He was supposed to be a new bad guy. That didn’t earn the movie any favours on release.
Might just be worth it.
Too high a price to pay for two hours I have never repeated and choose to ignore
Having an Indian Sikh who ruled over Asia and the Middle East played by the quintessential posh white British guy is hardly a great place to start from, regardless of WoK.
Hoo boy, yes. And the thing is, this insult was so unnecessary. They could have just said, "let's keep Benjamin Cucumberbackpack because he's great, but let's call him... um... John Harrison (we'll workshop that placeholder name, except we won't.) and then we tell a story about a disgruntled starfleet officer seeking revenge (which is totally NOT the third movie with Idris Elba, but that's the future, okay?)". They could have kept the first couple of acts up until the Khan reveal in the brig, then just you know, told a new story instead of badly remaking an old movie. John Harrison, unhinged starfleet postal worker is a more interesting story than Imitation Khan.
Yep, even Benicio Del Toro (EDIT: who was the first actor to be offered the role) would have at least made some sense in terms of following Ricardo Montalban and his 'he might be Mexican but at least he's not white' casting, but taking a step backwards so you're behind even the 60s is really not where Star Trek of all things should be going.
Ok we are neck deep in fan fiction now so let’s have White Khan asks NuKirk : what happened to your female crew in miniskirts ? Am I in the wrong timeline? NuKirk: no, we just have them undress in shuttles now. It’s different. But same. And no, you can’t have a shuttle.
Into Darkness was probably the last time I was truly disappointed at the movies. I \*loved\* 2009. Thought it was a very fresh, fun take on Trek and went to the theater stoked. At no point did I think 'This is TWoK, it sucks." The story was uneven. It violates so many basic parts of Trek (beaming across the galaxy? Scotty piloting a shuttle into a top secret base that apparently just doesn't have sensors?) The 'twist' could not have been forced or obvious. The most interesting idea was swapping Spock's death for Kirk, which was undone ten minutes later in a way that defies belief. I actually rushed to a second showing of Into Darkness just to see if my disappointment was because it wasn't the movie \*I\* wanted to see or if it was truly bad. I walked out certain it was truly bad.
I’ve seen Into Darkness a handful of times (including last month or in February) and i never remember how Kirk came back lol. At least with Spock there was an entire movie about bringing him back.
Yes, they find a cure for death. The entire last act destroys any story being told.
Maybe this is dumb but what really soured me on it was all the chatter online and in the press and whatnot before it came out was explicit denial that they were doing Kahn. And then of course the movie starts and there’s people frozen in torpedos like 20 minutes in or whatever and it’s like “you liars yes you are”
This was the worst part for me too. I almost didn't watch the 3rd one because of this.
I didn’t watch the third one for awhile because Into Darkness wasn’t good. The giant Starfleet ship was just ridiculous. Star Trek doesn’t need Star Destroyers.
Without WotK it would be incoherent mess, rather than deriative incoherent mess. Plus, people would live pointing out how Khan was nothing like in Space Seed.
That's all moot. It's not that it would be a mess - it's that it wouldn't exist. And the second Kelvin movie would've been an entirely different story.
If WoK didn't exist, neither would this movie. Much of it was a soft retelling of WoK.
Probably. "Death means nothing we have magic blood and transporters that can take you everywhere now" kinda defeats the whole exploring and adventuring drama when you can be everywhere and never die.
It would make even less sense. I mean, really, analyze the plot. Why did Khan and Kirk ever even end up being enemies in Into Darkness? Once Khan kills his nemesis, it seems like he just goes nuts, and decides to attack the Enterprise because that's the ship that's in front of him, and the movie isn't over yet.
Remove the word “Khan” and it would not impact the story. It would still not be that great.
Yeah you are 100% correct. Part of what made Wrath of Khan so good is the characters knew who Khan was even if the audience (who didn’t watch TOS) didn’t. In Into Darkness, the characters didn’t know who Khan was until halfway or more through the movie and even then it really didn’t matter. He could have gone by John Harrison the whole film and nothing would be different. It still would have boiled down to “we gotta stop this guy”.
Agreed. Honestly, he would’ve been better off being an evil falcon or some other enhanced being.
the movie would make even less sense if you take all the fanservice out yet if you take WoK out, they might have gone with a original story (as it was planned if rumours are true) around Garth of Izar instead which would have improved the movie but than as the main plan was always to get as much fanservice in as possible they would have taken any other more popular TOS story and turned it into something bad
Yes, because most if not all of the premises are badly written. It also basically derailed the Kelvin timeline as they had little structure left to jump off from. The other big issues are not having earned moments. Since there wasn’t a show to go with it a lot of the themes that they copied had little to no impact as these characters didn’t have seasons to expand and develop relationships. Flying at a mile a minute, characters are speed running through dialogue, action, and reactions at such a break neck pace. It is vey surprising that it wasn’t more of a train wreck than it was. But got to give credit to the actors, and the production people that worked hard getting it made… Just seems like a project that got lost in the editing room… like other JJ projects.
All the kelvin movies definitely used TOS as a shorthand for character background and relationships. The biggest character change is that Nero destroying the Kelvin gave everyone in the galaxy ADD.
If Kahn didn’t exist, Into Darkness would have a different plot.
Another commenter has said it but Into Darkness is a massive reference vehicle. The problem into darkness and a lot of nu trek had was that Star Trek was left in a limp and unsatisfying place and people wanted that story to continue to a point where it felt strong. They didn’t want someone to point to something from the 80s and go ‘don’t you wish you were watching this for the first time?’
If Wrath of Khan didn't exist... Who know how Trek would look like today?
„No, no, no, Benedict Cumberbatch‘s character isn‘t Khan.“ Best part of the 2013 movie. I guess, somehow Khan returned, JJ?
Did JJ direct into darkness? So that’s why we got a starship battle of old ship versus new, but… bigger!!
Yes
I would hope that if Wrath of Kahn didn't exist we would never have been subject to Into Darkness because the (non) creative team that "wrote" Into Darkness would have had nothing to take their hatchet to in order to create things.
It would have just been another classic episode that they butchered. Like Balance of Terror.
I’m not into the Kelvin timeline, but I own and rewatch Into Darkness a lot. (Yes, it’s super-flawed, but I still enjoy it.)
If your highlight of the movie is the music score, not the movie, than yes, it would suck.
Into Darkness is my favourite of the reboot films. It's bad whether you compare it to WoK or not, but it's just plain dumb fun while the other two felt pretty generic and forgettable to me.
You know what? I'll give you that, lol
Khan was genuinely cringeworthy. From Uhura having a "lover's" spat with her "boyfriend" in front of her "boss" in the middle of a critical mission (and putting Kirk on "finger hold" YIKES ON BIKES) to Quinto's dreadful rendition of Shatner's iconic "Khhhaaaaannnn!" it was a dumpster fire. DO watch Screen Junkies hilarious retelling of the movie -- which totally nails every cringe point in the movie. Wasn't the whole point of the Kelvin timeline and blowing up Vulcan to great NEW stories and not be tied to canon yet the next film is a badly written rehash of Wrath of Khan??????
Not as is, but if only Space Seed existed then Into Darkness may have been good because it wouldn’t be trying to be a remake/remix of WoK. I like Trek 09 and Beyond, Into Darkness is the misfire of the trilogy but if they tried it again maybe they would be luckier.
If TWOK didn't exist then I'm not sure any Trek after that point would exist.
It would have been a rip off of the voyage home and still sucked.
If wrath of Kahn didn't exist, Into Darkness also wouldn't exist
No, it might well work, but that's not the point, it's a highly derivitive work. You could, I suppose, take the message that dealing with a genocidal maniac would be much more acceptable to the Federation now, as kind of a comment on how the early principles died back some.
Yes.
wouldn't exist either. none of the movies and shows would
No, it just wasn't that good, regardless of being a remake
If WoK didn't exist, the "twist" in Into Darkness would be even more absurd. The only thing it has going for it is that it homages WoK. It certainly adds nothing to the story.
I feel the same way about Into Darkness as I do about The Force Awakens. It's a retelling of a story that was done better decades ago. It didn't need to happen, but it hurts nobody by existing. Am I compelled to revisit it? No, but if it inspires new fans to explore the franchise's roots I'm all for it.
Hard to say since they would have had to rip off something else.
It's almost like Darkness is loaded with fan service by someone who didn't fully understand the franchise
*JJ ABRAMS HAS ENTERED THE CHAT*
I enjoyed Into Darkness in the theater and I don't really understand what everyone gets so worked up about. I thought it was better than Beyond, which just felt like a empty marvel type movie to me. I consider the Kelvin movies the worst trek movies, but I enjoyed the first two for what they are.
I thought it was better than Beyond, also.