WorstPreviews.com Logo Join the community [Login / Register]
Follow WorstPreviews.com on Twitter
What\ News Coming Soon In Theaters On DVD Trailer,Posters,Pictures,Wallpapers, Screensavers PeliBlog.com Trivia/Quizzes
News/Headlines
Trailer for "Midnight Special" Sci-Fi Film, with Michael Shannon and Joel Edgerton
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Melissa McCarthy's "The Boss" Comedy
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Juan Antonio Bayona's "A Monster Calls"
Nov 23rd, 2015
First Look at "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for "Zoolander 2" Arrives Online
Nov 19th, 2015
Official Trailer for "Now You See Me" Sequel
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Chris Hemsworth's "The Huntsman: Winter's War"
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Keanu Reeves' "Exposed" Thriller
Nov 19th, 2015
First Look at Chris Pine on "Wonder Woman" Set
Nov 16th, 2015
Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel
Nov 16th, 2015
Gerard Butler is a God in "Gods of Egypt" Posters
Nov 16th, 2015
First Look at Liam Neeson in Martin Scorsese's "Silence"
Nov 16th, 2015
New Trailer for "The Divergent Series: Allegiant"
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for "Moonwalkers" Comedy, with Ron Perlman and Rupert Grint
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for Charlie Kaufman's "Anomalisa" Stop-Motion Film
Nov 3rd, 2015
Poster for "Warcraft" Arrives Online, Trailer Coming on Friday
Nov 3rd, 2015
There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster
Nov 2nd, 2015
First Trailer for Sacha Baron Cohen's "The Brothers Grimsby" Comedy
Nov 2nd, 2015
"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas
Nov 2nd, 2015
Final Trailer for Ron Howard's "In the Heart of the Sea," with Chris Hemsworth
Nov 2nd, 2015
New Photos From "Warcraft" Video Game Movie
Nov 2nd, 2015
Lots of New Photos From "Suicide Squad"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for "Dirty Grandpa" Comedy, with Robert De Niro and Zac Efron
Oct 30th, 2015
Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for Jared Hess' "Don Verdean" Comedy, with Sam Rockwell
Oct 30th, 2015
"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast
Oct 28th, 2015
Trailer for Adam Sandler's "The Ridiculous 6" Comedy
Oct 28th, 2015
"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie
Oct 28th, 2015
Another "Monopoly" Movie in the Works
Oct 28th, 2015
"Jumanji" Remake Hires "Con Air" Writer
Oct 26th, 2015
Disney's "Tower of Terror" Park Ride Movie Moving Forward
Oct 26th, 2015
Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"
Oct 26th, 2015
Previous News Stories Next News Stories

"Star Trek Into Darkness" - What Did You Think?

Posted: May 16th, 2013 by WorstPreviews.com Staff
"Star Trek Into Darkness" - What Did You Think?Submit Comment
"Star Trek Into Darkness," a second installment in JJ Abrams' reboot, is now playing in theaters. If you already had the chance to see it, we want to know what you thought. Write your mini-reviews in the comments section below.

On RottenTomatoes, "Star Trek Into Darkness" has an impressive 87% fresh rating, with most critics agreeing that its a fun film worth going to the movies to see. Some believe that its actually the best "Star Trek" film in the entire series.

The new movie cost $190 million to make, but Paramount Pictures believes that it will earn $20 million on Thursday and another $80 million over the weekend. That's a $100 million debut, not counting international box office.

Click here to read our "Star Trek Into Darkness" review.

Source: WorstPreviews.com


Bookmark and Share
You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register.
Displaying 136 comment(s) Profanity: Turn On
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 7:34:35 AM

Dunno. I'll let you know as soon as my Pirate Bay download finishes. Should be soon.
pornfly writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 7:37:07 AM

I think there would be alot less lense flares if JJ wore contacts during production
film now writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 7:38:44 AM

It was great! On par with the first movie. A must see at the movies!
pornfly writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 7:40:57 AM

http://content.internetvideoarchive.com/content/photos/067/002828_17.jpg
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 7:46:11 AM

Basically the reviews all say the very same thing: visually exciting and full of great action scenes. They said the same thing about Fast Five and MI3 and 4, too. Don't forget that. But there was more to the original ten films than action set pieces and blinding CGI, but who the f*ck cares anymore? It's all reduced mindless spectacle. As long as it supports the Western notion of hedonism, who cares if it's hollow cinema?



There's absolutely nothing wrong with "Star Trek Into Darkness" -- once you understand it as a generic comic-book-style summer flick faintly inspired by some half-forgotten boomer culture thing.

Andrew O'Hehir
Salon.com
Top Critic IconTop Critic
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 7:49:27 AM

to.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 7:52:55 AM

Can't wait for SacDaddy's over-enthusiastic, orgasmic child rants on how great he thought this one was and how much he hated the old films. He's the poster child for post-modern pop-cultural fail. Him and Dustin Catman.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 7:55:52 AM

I apologize.

I'm just a little bitter science fiction cinema has been reduced to Fast and Furious in space set to the CGI equivalent of a 1970s disco glitter ball, and like people's love of disco back then, people's love for the sh*t that passes for cinema these days frustrates, angers and confuses me.

I hope the more intelligent people can try to understand, if you care, which I'm sure you do not.
pornfly writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:02:04 AM

Dont apologize for bein yourself
its humanizing
Cinemaisdead writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:05:01 AM

Posted this in a thread before when it came out and cant be agged to write a new one.

Disappointing film, terrible writing, couldn't care less about any of the characters and was laughing at the "serious" sections of the film

Simon Pegg was even more annoying as Scotty and the guy with the over the top russian accent was equally irritating. Benedict c*mberthatch is the strongest performance as the villain but with the terrible script he didn't have much to work with.

The best part of the film was the CGI which is to be expected but JJ Abrahams really took the lens flare to a new level. I don't remember a shot in the Enterprise that didn't have a light shining down the camera. I thought he'd try to have less lens flare considering the amount of abuse he gets over it.

Also why the film is called Into Darkness is beyond me? There's nothing that explains the title in the whole film.

6/10 would not bang.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:07:01 AM

@Pornfly: thanks, wacky dude.
Taco writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:07:11 AM

Dustin gave it a 9 out of 10. Mainly cause the men wear skin tight clothes.
Cinemaisdead writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:09:08 AM

and of course Dustin c*ntman would give it a 9/10. THE GUY HAS ASBURGERS!
Taco writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:10:19 AM

"On par with the first movie" So it will contain character motivation contrivances, flawed logic story telling and fundamental plot holes and unnecessarily added lens flare.
pornfly writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:11:06 AM

9 out of 10!
Cream me up, Scotty
I just 'lense flared' all over the cat box
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:11:10 AM

Dustin wants Quinto to perform the Vulcan d*ck-meld on him.

That's why he gave it 9 out of 10.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:17:43 AM

Catman says:

"the picture all but makes its 2009 predecessor look like a low-budget indie and the earlier series installments seem like quaint student films in comparison."

Looks, people, it's all about LOOKS! f*ck story or character development, if isn't "visually stunning", who the f*ck cares? It's why The Great Catsby didn't bomb.
pornfly writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:18:23 AM

"Looks like kitty's been a bad Tribble againnn!"
BadChadB33 writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:19:18 AM

" Vulcan d*ck meld" lol nice one Mink.

DP giving it that high of a score scares me and um not afraid of anything.
pornfly writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:22:00 AM

Homosexual men are naturally attracted to flare,MINK
Im not surprised one bit

If it was a musical
He wouldve given the movie a 10
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:31:12 AM

Star Trek The Musical? Dear GOD don't give them any ideas, pornfly!
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:37:00 AM

http://www.dustinputman.com/v5_images/tmb_header875x100.jpg
Cinemaisdead writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:41:19 AM

I'm not sure if Dustin understands the other meaning behind the letters DP, but I'm sure he'd enjoy his balls rubbing against someone elses d*ck.
pornfly writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:44:48 AM

^^
Looks like the emblem from gay Green Lanterns new costume
pornfly writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:46:36 AM

With 'dp' for an eye mask
SACdaddy writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 9:25:15 AM

Lol Mink, good to see I have a "fan" of my reviews. Hate to disappoint you though as you will never hear me hate on the old films. I liked/loved them all. How can you not love anything starring Shatner? I (like yourself) was also a big fan growing up of TNG, so I really enjoyed most of those films too. I am truly excited to see the new film tonight even though a 9/10 review from Putzman is like a kiss on the lips from a Corleone. I can't say I looking forward to another negative, hatefilled review from our resident party pooper Mink though :-)
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 9:25:58 AM

I think folks are now afraid to share their Into Darkness thoughts, which is just all colors of the sad rainbow.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 9:31:18 AM

"I can't say I looking forward to another negative, hatefilled review from our resident party pooper Mink though :-)"


I speak my mind Sac, and say what exactly what I'm thinking. No apologies. Call 'em like I see em. Maybe you should grow a nut and try it for once, because nobody ever respects a pansy, even if in your delusions you believe otherwise.

Oh, and welcome to the party, pal.
markoz writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 11:09:43 AM

Seeing it on Sunday.
Deaft0ne writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 11:27:19 AM

Ditto, but only because it's $6 and you can BYOL
Biz Malarkey writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 11:28:46 AM

Do I even want to know what pussman gave Star Trek ITD?
Biz Malarkey writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 11:32:57 AM

I think I'll wait til it's on tv
Džeko writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 1:12:54 PM

I was eager to see it but after finding out who's the main villain not so much.
Kill-the-director writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 1:20:07 PM

i thought it was awesome. my favourite movie of the year so far. action packed all the way through.
Deaft0ne writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 2:11:01 PM

http://io9.com/star-trek-into-dumbness-507058729
velocityknown writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 2:45:40 PM

I enjoyed it quite a bit, c*mberbatch stole the show as was expected. I wouldn't call it one of the best sci fi films ever made and can't see it making any top 10 list I'd have this year, but I had a lot of fun with it and all of the emotional moments paid off really well for me.

I feel like I'm more inclined to enjoy these because I have no other relationship with any other part of the Star Trek canon. I'm 23, I didn't grow up with it and never really sought it out. Therefore I can't say certain plot elements of this film felt contrived to me since it was my first experience with certain characters.

I will say that I found Leonard Nimoy's cameo this time around pretty forced, but hardly something that took away from my overall enjoyment.
Ip_man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:06:13 PM

Cinemaisdead's review nailed it,I couldn't agree more.

6/10
Deaft0ne writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:07:48 PM

Honestly if the only iterations of Star Trek you have seen are the 2 jj abrams movies then your opinion is bullsh*t and irrelevant.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:09:32 PM

Much of the acting and dialogue delivery is pretty hammy. Lots of over-acting.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:14:34 PM

I "love" the scene wherein they rescue Spock, who is inside an erupting volcano on his knees arms spread, and Uhuru breathlessly asks is Spock onboard?!" When told yes, she slides back in her seat with this expression I cannot describe, really, but her eyes and her closed and her mouth is...puffed.

So far, about eleven minutes in, I want to f*cking puke.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:19:12 PM

and her=are. f*cking trackpad.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:21:32 PM

Would you believe they have ordinary alarm clocks in the 23rd century? Seriously.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:23:14 PM

They've obviously mastered anti-gravity, but the alarm clocks are still digital LED that go beep beep beep. Uh. huh.
Ip_man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:24:49 PM

this is going to be a long thread...lol...
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:26:57 PM

In this movie, cold fusion turns hot sh*t to ice, and isn't the act of fusing two particles together at room temperature.


Bawhahahahaha! Who wrote this Bad Boys in Space trash?
codeman_1216 writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:28:58 PM

I thought it was great, perhaps better than the first. Of course, this is coming from someone who only enjoyed "Wrath of Khan" as a child. I was never a fan of anything else Star Trek until the reboot (I love action films, can't help it).

*****MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD*****

What made me love this one most was that the main antagonist, John Harrison (Benedict c*mberbatch) turned out to be Khan. I didn't want to think this would eventually be the plot twist, but c*mberbatch was so devilish and evil I couldn't help but learn to love it. And Abram's alternate timeline still serves as a nice sub plot, eventually leading to the recreated scene of Spock dying from exposure to radiation, except Kirk was on the other side of the glass this time.

*****NO MORE SPOILERS*****

STID is a solid action film with surprisingly good performances and visuals will satisfy and plenty of nods to the original Star Trek that should make most Trekkies happy.

8.5/10
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:29:38 PM

A few centuries from now people still say "throwing under the bus".
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:33:33 PM

Ooooohhhhh, magical blood!
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:36:20 PM

In the future, Starfleet allows immature adult children, who blatantly failed training, to pilot their premier trillion-dollar flagship, and when said immature adult child f*cks up, they take said flagship away. Which begs the question: when do I get to helm the USS Nimitz?
codeman_1216 writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:37:27 PM

*****More Spoilers Ahead*****

The only thing that got to me was Khan was supposedly frozen for the past 300 years along with his crew. But the Year, or Star Date, was 2259. So wouldn't that mean he was frozen around 1959, before there was even a launch to the Moon?

I don't know if either:

1. I heard it wrong (bootleg)

2. I don't know as much about Star Trek as I thought and this is a different Earth entirely

3. This is a huge plot hole.

Are there any hard core Trekkies that could enlighten me?
Deaft0ne writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:43:56 PM

@codeman

I haven't sewn STID yet but it doesn't matter. Using Khan again is just lazy and unoriginal.
Deaft0ne writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:44:37 PM

seen^
Ip_man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:46:39 PM

STID sounds a lot like STD
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:48:50 PM

Same scene from Die hard 5 here. Helicopter ship thingie shooting up a room. Yawn.

@Codeman: Molecular biology wasn't even born until 1958. Sputnik 1 was launched the year before. Make what you will of those facts.
codeman_1216 writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:53:41 PM

@deaftone

I disagree. The way they presented the bad guy, they could have kept his name as John Harrison, or they could have given him ANY other name, but I think the fact that they reintroduced Khan as played by c*mberbatch was a real treat. He acts the part brilliantly, although he's not really anything like the original Khan. Like Heath Ledger's Joker wasn't anything like Jack Nicholson's, but it turned out to be awesome.
codeman_1216 writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:56:03 PM

DAMMIT, MINK, I'M A DOCTOR, NOT A MOLECULAR BIOLOGIST!
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 3:58:08 PM

So. Kirk has his command taken away because he's a f*ck up, but not lonf thereafter at the moment it's revealed the Federation is on the verge of all out war with the Klingons, Starfleet reinstates Kirk and sends him to the edge of Klingon space to fire a missile at the Klingon homeworld.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:00:19 PM

Ah. Drone bombings. Taking shots at Obama's remote bombing of terrorists in an attempt to make a social statement, because that's the definition of "good science fiction".
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:03:07 PM

Alice Eve has heterochromia; her left eye is blue, and her right eye is green.

Popup video!
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:04:48 PM

Doohans was never ever this annoying as Scotty.
Ip_man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:10:07 PM

Scotty is this franchise jar jar binks
codeman_1216 writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:11:39 PM

Minks on a roll lol
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:14:26 PM

Sulu is now acting captain. His first command? Everybody get naked!
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:17:37 PM

Uh oh! Two red-shirted extras, and one of them is black! Gee, I wonder if they'll make it to Star Trek 3: Uhuru's Love Child.

And Kirk has to ask if Spock and Uhuru can "get along". Right. Momentous mission that could spell disaster for a fourth of the galaxy and you bring along the PMSing black chick.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:19:55 PM

Harrison has the ability beam himself from Earth to Chronos, so the first thing you do is let him know you're about to bomb his position, but you give him enough time to do the dishes first.
codeman_1216 writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:22:26 PM

Can't wait for the sequel. This is for you, Mink.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiQ9piVgtWM
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:24:44 PM

Spock takes the time to calculate the odds of Harrison killing them even though they're StarFleet officers there to arrest him for killing a bunch of high-ranking StarFleet offices. Surprisingly, Spock's calculation isn't 100%, so maybe make the Tribble science officer instead.

And then Urban says to Sulu "remind me never to piss you off" to Sulu after the Asian makes some tough talk inside a shielded spaceship loaded with highly-advanced weaponry aimed at a guy who's sitting out in the open on Chronos.

We got us a bad ass over here!
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:29:23 PM

Dear god, it's a Saved By The Bell love triangle scene on the way to Chronos. Screech, I mean Spock needs his little love bug Lisa, I mean Uhuru, to make kissy noises on the way to capture the bad man.

Was this necessary?
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:30:27 PM

@Codeman: thanks!
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:33:01 PM

Uh oh, Spock is Jewing guilt from Kirk and the black chick by recounting the day his race nearly went extinct. Maybe they'll give him a museum or something.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:36:49 PM

Wow. They did the Death Star run scene combined with the ship turning sideways to slide through a narrow crack. Never see that one before. Except in like a hundred other movies.

At least a space-truck didn't pull out at the last minute and force them down a side alley. You know, the old "truck in the way" Hollywood cliche during chase scenes.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:42:12 PM

Brilliant move. They go into this sector on Chronos looking for Harrison, but run into a horde of Klingon ships. Ooops. Maybe they should have scanned first.

What's that you say? Cloaking? Sure. They know enough about the Klingon homeworld to waltz right in like they own the joint, but they don't know the Klingons have cloaking capabilities? That's like walking into Japan and not knowing they sell girl's panties out of vending machines.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:47:42 PM

Clip of Khan/Harrison taking out the cops, I mean Klingons.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RbL4PwTDsQ
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:49:47 PM

72 torpedoes target Harrison/Khan, which is precisely the same number as virgins Islamic terrorists are promised in the afterlife when they blow themselves up.
Ip_man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:49:53 PM

^ youtube blocked this clip for my country
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:55:07 PM

Khan can leap tall buildings like Superman and is invincible to Kirk's repeated blows. Then they bring on board in cuffs just like that scene in Man of Steel. Then Dem Bones Dem Bones says "looks like we have a Superman on board".

Wow.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:57:06 PM

@Rambo:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Kz4nPh8dR8
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:57:59 PM

c*mberbatch is totally wasted on this film. He should be running the show. Instead, he's just a disposable plot device. Sad. Really really saaaaad.
Ip_man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 4:58:40 PM

nope.still blocked.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:07:14 PM

Yes! 23rd Century London looks like Prague 1991!

EDIT: It actually WAS Prague. I think. And Kirk can call from Klingon space to Earth on his cellphone. The monthly plan must be a bitch.

Can you hear me now?
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:07:47 PM

@Rambo: It's the Terminator 2 Minigun scene. Benedict did a good rendition.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:09:16 PM

Gratuitous shot of Alice Eve in lingerie.

I do not mind.
Ip_man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:10:23 PM

so what's the rating so far between 1 to 10 ?
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:12:02 PM

Why does Alice Eve sound like a child version of Marina Sirtis?
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:14:04 PM

Rambo: not a terrible movie, so far, but way too much story convolution and slack, and a fifteen year old Trekkie wrote the script. So far the film is average imo. 5. Excellent visuals, really inane writing. Poor character development, average plot development.
Ip_man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:16:24 PM

sounds about right.probably you'd give it a 6 if it was in good quality.
SACdaddy writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:22:39 PM

@mink: Lol "welcome to the party pal" ? Let me get this straight, you can't handle a little of your own medicine and all of a sudden you're some cyber John McClain kicking ass and taking names? Lol!!! Takes a real big man swell up in cyberspace looking for a fight he knows will never happen. You're a predictably boring coward who
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:23:08 PM

Probably, but the poor quality allows me to judge it on every merit but visuals, which is like wearing sunglasses in a way. Blocks out the blinding light and lets me see the film's true form better. It's why I like cams. An honest appraisal.

Still trying to figure out how Khan guy could be 300+ years old. I think they meant 200 but some nitwit didn't understand the 21st century really means the years between 2000 and 2099 and not 2100 and 2199.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:27:44 PM

"you can't handle a little of your own medicine"

LOL! A little? f*ck you. I've handled far more on here than I've ever dished out, and you don't know sh*t about me, jack off. You're the p*ssy afraid of a f*cking holstered gun but you run to the cinema to see people tortured while you jack off. You're the sick twisted f*ck on here, not me. You're the p*ssy. Afraid of a holstered gun. What kind of limp-wristed pantywaist are you?
SACdaddy writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:27:52 PM

...really has very little love for film. I still haven't figured out why someone who hates the subject of film so much spends so much time on a film site, but really who gives a sh*t. Keep crowning yourself in your own little box of a world and I'll keep talking film.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:29:13 PM

Why the f*ck does Khan have such tearful feelings for 72 people he claims were criminals, like him? They were frozen for 300 years, so how could he even know them?
SACdaddy writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:29:51 PM

Lol!!!! Stalking me again I see.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:30:01 PM

@Sacdday: whatever. Go beat off to Eli Roth why don't you and stop wasting my motherf*cking time.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:31:22 PM

@Sacdaddy: oh yes, stalking you. Sure am, nutjob. I'm talking about Into Darkness, not you, but here you are demanding attention.

Go shove a cabin in the woods poster up your ass while you salute Malcolm X.
SACdaddy writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:33:05 PM

So this is how you spend your time when you actually watch a movie? Play by play blogging your critiques as the film goes is probably the lamest thing I've seen since....well your last post. You truly are worthless.
Ip_man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:34:01 PM

new 'pacific rim' trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5guMumPFBag
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:34:36 PM

@SadDaddy: No, you simpleton, I have no love for GARBAGE film. And hell, Into Darkness is barely cinema. It's more like a motion picture comic book.

You, an the other hand, like a good little piggy, will eat whatever your pop-cultural masters put in your trough.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:36:21 PM

@Sacdaddy: wah. I do what I choose, unlike you who do what you're told. Go cry to someone who gives a f*ck, but you might have too look for a long while though, Texas trash.
Meh-ga Man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:38:13 PM

Meh.
Mr. Meh-ow writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:39:17 PM

Meh-ow.
Porky Pig writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:40:41 PM

M-m-m-m-m-m-I express indifference.
SACdaddy writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:41:43 PM

Seriously dude I haven't had a conversation this remedial since grade school. Call me a few more names, its reeeeeeeeally killing me.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:44:49 PM

"I haven't had a conversation this remedial since grade school."

So when do you graduate?
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 5:47:00 PM

"Khan and his crew were condemned to death as war criminals".

72 of them, apparently, and Khan cries for them like he would his mother? I know Benedict can cry on demand, but this is too much even if he's playing Kirk. And what war? World War 2? Khan's not German, and he doesn't SPEAK German. Whatever.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 6:07:29 PM

Whoa, forced Spock Prime cameo! And rehabilitating Khan was cool if predictable.

You still there, SacBuddy?
Ip_man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 6:07:50 PM

Khan needed a better background story - like he did in the original tv show - of course,there they had the time to explore it while in this movie they just throw it into your face in the short version - and that's why we end not caring at all about khan,kirk's 'death' or spock's rage.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 6:23:00 PM

Meh. The entire film is all meh. And none of it makes any sense. The Klingons are just thrown in there too and then discarded.

The entire film is a beautifully rendered disjointed mess which makes me wonder just what the f*ck all these critics are seeing that I am not.

Fun? Yeah, but fun alone does not a film make.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 6:25:50 PM

@Rambo: I don't understand. If no one is supposed to access the radiation room, why does it have an access code/pad and a door meant for entering? You don't build like that unless it's designed to accommodate a person, right? Shouldn't there be a suit or something you can wear? But Kirk goes in wearing just his uniform.
Ip_man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 6:27:45 PM

the suit didn't help spock much in 1982 version so i guess they decided to skip that part.
Ip_man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 6:28:48 PM

oh,wait,he didn't wear a suit...

must get some sleep.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 6:32:33 PM

He wore gloves, IIRC, which DID help some. Guess someone had to die for the gut-clenching finale.

And you asked why they subtitled it Into Darkness...because Wrath of Khan would have spoiled the "secret", a secret kept to void angering the purists and boring the new-comers. Marketing, man, pure marketing.

Ip_man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 6:45:59 PM

into darkness also rings a bell to 'the dark knight'.

actually the first half of the movie was better imo,lots of humor and benedict was the evil terrorist - but then robocop turned out to be the main bad guy and that's when they lost me.
sedibus writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 6:50:28 PM

I thought it was better than Star Wars 7, and then I realize something, this is not better than The Wrath of Khan in any way, although I haven´t seen any of this flicks, at all.

So there you have, of course except the first J.J. version of Star Trek.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 6:51:47 PM

You're probably right, Rambo. Ever since The Dark Knight movie-makers have assumed "darkness" resonates with the crowd.

What happened to the big brouhaha with the Klingons? What happened to the repercussions from what Kirk did on Chronos?


Can't believe this movie is basically a 9 out of 10 with most people. f*cking BIZARRE!

Deaft0ne writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 7:07:26 PM

@mink

I'm watching season 4 of 24 again and I noticed that Logan Marshall-Green, the douche from Prometheus that was f*cking Noomi Rapace, played Sec. Of Defense Heller/William Devane's long hair hippy son.

lol
Ip_man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 7:13:17 PM

season 4 had the best casting - heller,bill buchanan,chloe,almeida and habib marwan.

only negative thing was bauer's girlfriend - skinny and annoying.
Ip_man writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 7:16:59 PM

oh and the subplot of the retarded girl at CTU was completely pointless
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 7:21:03 PM



To whom it may concern: I wish to sincerely apologize. I didn't intend to monopolize this thread with my errant thoughts on so clearly an inferior film, thus those of you who wish to post your reviews may do so at this time without concern I'll unduly and undeservedly malign your words.

Again, my apologies. I do what I do out of love for truly good cinema and not the kiddie trash passing for it currently.

Good day.

Deaft0ne writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 7:29:55 PM

@rambo

Yeah and that's why season 9 won't have any of that extraneous bullsh*t with only 12 episodes.

It was hilarious in season 4 when Audrey's british p*ssy husband got killed when he was helping Bauer during that crates shootout with Marwan's henchmen.
Phoenix Fire writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 7:47:13 PM

Ending was too long. Was like they finished the movie then found $10 million in a mattress so they decided to add two more endings onto it. Got really corny too.
BlackDynamite writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:10:08 PM

I miss the good, quality science fiction films, where the fantasy and pseudoscience mumbo jumbo served as an entertaining metaphor for the human condition, not as a segway into pretty light shows.
pornfly writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:41:29 PM

BANDO
watchin Vengeance from 2009
so far interesting
Kurskij writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 8:46:50 PM

After reading the reviews, lemme get this straight.

Like part uno was Star Trek by way of Michael Bay (TF 1), part deux is basically Revenge of the Fallen?

But since it has "Darkness" in the title and is directed by JarJar, critics lovez it?
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 9:15:26 PM

J.J. Abrams May Have Taken 'Star Wars' Because of William Shatner Merchandise


http://news.yahoo.com/j-j-abrams-may-taken-star-wars-because-190541029.html


J.J. Abrams always says he's never been a Trekkie, but, according to a new report in The Wrap, it was Abrams' inability to fully control the Star Trek franchise—and wipe out merchandise connected with the original 1960s series—that may have been an impetus to switch franchises in favor of Star Wars. What's more, Abrams' lack of passion for the Trek source material—and his lasting desire to commercialize it—may say something about the movies he's made.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 9:20:28 PM

But this new look at Abrams' relationship with this weekend's biggest blockbuster says something about his relationship to the Star Trek lore. In an interview this week with Jon Stewart, Abrams talked about how he "never liked" Star Trek as a kid. That shows in the films, our Richard Lawson wrote in reviewing Into Darkness, which are sleek and fun but ultimately forgettable. Exactly what the original series wasn't. The original series was loaded with moral issues that had far more weight than the flimsy scenery or Shatner's line delivery. Abrams knows this, for sure, but his willingness to try to get CBS to erase that past so he could create an empire makes it seem like he didn't much respect it. Perhaps he and Disney deserve each other.
Buzz_ The Avenger writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 9:25:50 PM

-SPOILERS-
To everyone confused. In the there was a world war three that took place in the 90's, Kahn was a dictator at the time. He was defeated, with his army, banned and frozen and shot off into space. They say in the film approx. 300 years, not 300 years to the day. Meaning more likely around 270 years, which would put that in the 90's when his whole reign took place.
Buzz_ The Avenger writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 9:30:42 PM

Needless to say, I thought this film was great. I don't understand the negative hate on every movie ever made on this site.
minkowski writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 9:50:30 PM

^^^They didn't say APPROXIMATELY 300 years old, they said 300 years old period. Exactly.

I have the movie in front of me, and if you want to argue, I can prove you entirely wrong.





"I don't understand the negative hate on every movie ever made on this site."

You greatly exaggerate.
BlackDynamite writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 10:13:36 PM

"I don't understand the negative hate on every movie ever made on this site."

We loved Dredd.

SACdaddy writes:
on May 16th, 2013 at 11:16:44 PM

I'm curious, with the differing expectations and trains of thought of the WPers out there, I'd love to know what people think makes a good sci-fi movie and hear a few examples of certain films that hit the mark. We tend to get all the complaints out there but we rarely hear alternatives or examples of what actually works well. Now I'm talking film, not literature.For example, most here know I'm a big Alien(s) fan but I hated Prometheus. From a sci-fi standpoint I loved how realistic the set pieces and players were in the original's version of the future. Scientists were intelligent, team leaders were decisive, and grunts were grunts. Everything was very industrial and practical eventhough it was in the distant future which made it all more believable. Prometheus on the other hand lacked any realism whatsoever. Smart people were extremely stupid, the futuristc equipment didn't make sense, and the plot concentrates way more on the fiction than the science that drives its premise.

So let's have it WP, what's the last great sci-fi film you've seen and why did you like it? Did the science have anything to do with why you liked it or was it just backdrop for the narrative?
scotty7471 writes:
on May 17th, 2013 at 10:47:46 PM

this movie is EPIC!!!!!!!!! taken as a whole, this movie is pure greatness. I Loved the nods to the original series/movies. I do not like the television series, but have loved all of the movies (ok V - not so much, but the rest of them, including Nemesis (ahhhh Tom Hardy!)). I think this movie made enough of its own mark that the next one (which hopefully will be a klingon based one) will be its own story completely.
10 out of 10 from me!
LearJet writes:
on May 18th, 2013 at 3:41:43 AM

I freaking loved it!
MattJ writes:
on May 18th, 2013 at 9:48:11 PM

Really minkowski? You call it like you see em? So you just hate everything you see then? You must be a freakin' joy to watch things with. Might be the reason nobody in your real life likes you
shinwillow writes:
on May 19th, 2013 at 8:59:20 AM

==Spoilers===


It was mindless, and not even stupid in a fun way, either.

Okay, so Khan's first terrorist attack was supposed to lead to all the captains and first officers conferencing in one place (they couldn't have done it by teleconference?). Fine. But even today if so many important people gathered in one place there would have been a no fly zone for miles and Khan shouldn't have gotten that close unseen. And why would they hold the conference in a room with so many windows that weren't at least phaser resistant? Why didn't Khan use missiles or torpedoes?

A bunch of stupid stuff later, including a brutal space battle next to the moon that no one sees, we come to the really dumb part: ships the size of small cities comes hurtling through the atmosphere and nobody notices? They can't detect something even technology today can pick up? Really?
Džeko writes:
on May 19th, 2013 at 5:12:52 PM

Just watched it:
1)Visually very impressive
2)Recycled story
3)Not nearly enough screen time for c*mberbatch
4)Da fuq is up with the new Klingons look!?They wear masks now!?!?REALLY?!?They have low self-esteem so they are hiding their ugly faces?!f*ck THIS GENERATION!!

Overall 7/10.
python6 writes:
on May 21st, 2013 at 6:52:41 AM

Could this New Star Trek be the Mirror,Mirror universe.Hints the title Into Darkness. The beginning of what to come.The angry Kirk who lost his father the angry Mr. Spock who lost his planet.Star Fleet building super ship of mass destruction.

There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster

"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie

Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel

"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast

Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"

"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas

Paul Bettany Responds to Jason Statham's "Avengers" Insult

"Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Demolishes Pre-Sale Records

Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"

Daniel Craig Would Rather Commit Suicide Than Return as James Bond
Lace Wedding Dresses from ViViDress UK online shop, buy with confidence and cheap price.
WorstPreviews.com hosted by pair Networks WorstPreviews.com
Hosted by pair Networks
News Feeds | Box Office | Movie Reviews | Buzz: Top 100 | Popularity: Top 100
Poster Store | About Us | Advertising | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Web Tools | Site Map
Copyright © 2009 WorstPreviews.com. All rights reserved