Star Trek (2009) vs. Star Trek Into Darkness

[Senator Pleasury]

I have seen both movie just once. But I hated the humor in the first one even when the action was good. But I could enjoy this second one very much. All of it.

 

[Raiden]

I enjoyed STID, but there was a sense of a missed opportunity here. I mean, you've got an unstoppable killing machine as your villain and all he does in the second half of the movie is [BLACKOUT]take over a ship and try to blow up the Enterprise? Meh.[/BLACKOUT] It doesn't exactly represent a step up in terms of plot from the first movie.

Well [blackout]Khan's grand plan was to have all his crew on the most powerful warship of the Starfleet navy, then wreck havoc across the galaxy. I don't think his goal was just to destroy the Enterprise.[/blackout]

 

[optimus2861]

The 2009 film AINEC. Into Darkness has left me with sour taste in my mouth, like I was fed a canful of SPAM while being told it was a well-prepared steak, and I was expected to be too dumb to know the difference. I'd be a fool to sit down to another meal prepared by that chef, and I expect I'd be a fool to sit down to watch another JJ Abrams "Star Trek" film.

 

[Daybreak_st]

How can anyone like Into Darkness better? Nothing happens in the film, and there's like two locations in the whole movie.

Pretty much how I felt. I enjoyed the characters and just seeing it all play out but the entire movie felt like setup then it was over. Especially as far as Khan was concerned. Also the film ends with basically the same scene as in the 09 film. Why? Why not just let this film be the beginning of the five year mission or at least keep them exploring. The pacing was just odd and the whole plot seemed unnecessary.

 

[Sardaukar]

The 2009 film - as flawed as it was - reignited my love for the franchise. STID has almost extinguished it. It's hard for me to take the new emoSpock seriously. And this is no longer a Jim Kirk that I respect.

 

[CK17]

STID. Not by much though.

 

[Mr.T]

Loved both JJ films. Give STID the edge, easily.

 

[Autonet]

STID was better to me. Never watched the original series so I have no nitpicks on the plot that other people do since I never knew certain things walking into it. Like watching Watchmen without reading the book.

 

[Slushy]

Both have bad writing, but The Wrath Of Darkness was the better of the two.

 

[Loki882]

Both are quite good, people *****ing about JJ "ruining Star Trek" amuse me, he SAVED Star Trek. STID was the better film. It had themes and ideas, a FANTASTIC villain (two in fact), emotional moments, and Pike's speech was one of the best in the franchise's history. Also, Kirk sacrificing himself to save the Enterprise, yeah he totally doesn't deserve respect, please.

 

[Loki882]

Also, in regards to the "nothing happened" complaint. What ultimately happened in The Voyage Home? Nothing important, yet people love that film. In this movie, Pike dies, Kirk really earns his captaincy, Carol Marcus joins the crew, Section 31 gets introduced and then blown up, there is the potential for all out war with the Klingons, etc. A LOT happened in this movie.

 

[MrMaooz]

STID. I loved the first one too though.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Did people actually argue that "nothing happened" in Star Trek Into Darkness? What a silly thing to say.

The JJ Abrams movies saved Trek. He could have also easily rebooted the franchise, but he chose to make an alternate timeline instead, which is genius IMO. The 2009 movie was technically a sequel, reboot, and prequel all rolled into one. Brilliant!

Its a sequel since we see Spock and Nero come from the original timeline after the events of Nemesis.

Its a prequel since we get to see a younger version of the TOS crew.

Its a reboot because its an alternate timeline.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Loved the first film, but I found Into Darkness to be better. I really preferred the themes they touched on in the film, and basically getting to see Captain Kirk as the Captain.

 

[Elayis]

While I very much dislike both films (and any Abrams, Kurtzman or Orci film in general), I prefer Into Darkness to the first film.

The 2009 did have a better constructed plot - each character had a moment of two where they could shine, whereas I felt Into Darkness mainly focused on Kirk, Spock and Khan - overall how Khan was dealt with in this film was much better handled than Nero, and ultimately I felt there were lest gimmicks and more focus on character.

Most of the reason why I like STID is simply because Cumberbatch is so damn good in the role, no matter how badly the character was treated.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Even after watching STID for a 3rd time i still cant decide which one I prefer, I think the 1st movie stands up to repeat viewings more, but the 2nd movie has a great villain and Kirk and Spock just get brilliantly developed.

I love both and its too tough a decision.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I think it's true, Khan was probably better handled than Nero. Even though I can't say that I think Khan had more screentime, but he did fit in better with the overall theme of the film. Both Nero and Khan had motivations I could empathize with, but man if Khan didn't vocalize better with his heartfelt speech about family.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

^I didnt think Nero was a bad villain at all, i didnt get the criticism of him on these boards, he was a villain I enjoyed a lot, but Khan was just on another level, the acting in that scene you mention was amazing, and generally throughout. Cumberbatch rocked the role, and the writing for the villain was better this time as well.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Oh, I liked Nero too. I thought he was a great villain. But, yeah...Khan was on another level. That 'family' speech scene definitely gave Khan's actions context. It didn't justify them, but seeing the vulnerability was amazing.

And he served a greater purpose to the overall story and messaging of the film. The concept that he's essentially, for the purpose of the story, a terrorist. And how the greater good shouldn't lose sight of the bigger picture when dealing with someone like him. The play on him being from the past, and considered a savage by those around him, and yet how he managed to bring out that base instinct (savage, if you follow the idea they're going with) for blood lust and vengeance from those very people. And that it's a struggle to deal with that part of you. Kirk struggled with it until the Enterprise made it to Qo'noS.

I think that's probably what has me choosing 'Into Darkness' over the '09 film. There's kind of a brave theme and message of morality coming from 'Into Darkness'. If 'Man of Steel' accepts the belief and modern point of view of how the battle between good vs evil that has played out (atleast from my point of view as an American) in the past decade or two decades....then 'Into Darkness' is on the opposite side rejecting that belief and view. It's refusing that as an acceptable solution, I guess. Yeah it's probably an overly optimistic message. But, isn't that what makes Star Trek what it is? 'Into Darkness' is basically calling out the immorality of the belief that some people need to be executed. It kind of plays into the Kirk motto, of not believing in a no win scenario.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

^Oh yeah the themes it explores were great, and Khan played right into that perfectly, thats what made him such a good villain, he made the crew have their own moral dilemma's on the situations presented in the movie and it was a lot of fun to see them play out.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Both are quite good, people *****ing about JJ "ruining Star Trek" amuse me, he SAVED Star Trek. STID was the better film. It had themes and ideas, a FANTASTIC villain (two in fact), emotional moments, and Pike's speech was one of the best in the franchise's history. Also, Kirk sacrificing himself to save the Enterprise, yeah he totally doesn't deserve respect, please.

Also, in regards to the "nothing happened" complaint. What ultimately happened in The Voyage Home? Nothing important, yet people love that film. In this movie, Pike dies, Kirk really earns his captaincy, Carol Marcus joins the crew, Section 31 gets introduced and then blown up, there is the potential for all out war with the Klingons, etc. A LOT happened in this movie.

 

[insideguy]

I still think there is a lot of problems with "Hoth" in that film.

Agreed tons of problems with Hoth lol. I voted a tie I liked them both and probably liked them more since any trek film since the undiscovered country. They are both in the top 5 trek films of all time.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

On first view for each, I love the 2009 movie more

 

[Smegger56]

I enjoyed a good chunk of STITD but from start to finish, ST09 is the better.

I think Cumberbatch is great. But he's not Kahn. If he was an original villain, he would have left a true mark. As it is, I think his Kahn is not as good. They're essentially different characters.

Add to that, the whole 'magic blood' crap just ruined the ending to that film. You have the gaul to rip off the TWOK death (roles reversed) and then, not only do they ruin it with the bloody 'KAHN!!!' shout by Spock, but they give Kirk Kahns blood. I knew that bit at the start would ruin the film at the end.

The whole promotion/demotion stuff was far worse than Kirk quick promotion to Captain in the first. I get that they wanted to address this in the film, and could have really been interesting. But it felt rushed and forced.

I did enjoy the visuals. I loved the scene with Kirk and Pike in the bar. I loved the way they made the Big E move (like the way it left space dock). It was funny. Kirk felt more like Kirk in this film, but Pine gave Kirk a more vulnerable touch, which I did like alot.

For the third, I want them to take their time with the story. Not use easy plot devices to fix everything. Make Kirk more able to fight and out wit his opponent in one on one fist fight and ship battle. No more bad ship bigger and evil looking. Let the Big E kick ass instead of having its ass handed to her.

In the end, I felt STITD stalled a little on what ST09 did. I do put alot of the blame on the writers (especially Lindeloff, who I'm happy is not writing the next one).

Overall ratings are:

ST09 - 9/10
STITD - 7/10

 

[Octoberist]

I think Star Trek 09 was the better film. And I also think the poll above is interesting because I'm convinced 'Into Darkenss' got more votes because it was the newer film. But in retrospect, yeah, 09 was the better film. It was fresh, it was exciting.