Warning: Function split() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_bootstrap.php(561) : eval()'d code on line 1
Star Trek: Into Darkness - Page 3

This message board is only an archive. Click here to go to the current message board.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: Star Trek: Into Darkness

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,366

    Default Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Lepplady View Post
    One more that I didn't think of before:

    If the Enterprise was supposed to survey the planet in the beginning, and the mission was to cap off the volcano, why were Kirk and McCoy on the surface, stealing stuff? What did that have to do with the volcano..?
    It was their choice to

    interfere by capping the volcano. Pike gave Kirk a dressing down for altering the timeline. The document Kirk was carrying seemed to be something they revered and he used it to slow them down. After the Enterprise rose from the water (hey, wait, it did what? The Enterprise can't land but suddenly it's a submarine?), I knew they were going to start praying to a new god.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    5

    Default Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Bev Vincent View Post
    It was their choice to

    interfere by capping the volcano. Pike gave Kirk a dressing down for altering the timeline. The document Kirk was carrying seemed to be something they revered and he used it to slow them down. After the Enterprise rose from the water (hey, wait, it did what? The Enterprise can't land but suddenly it's a submarine?), I knew they were going to start praying to a new god.

    Its a spaceship. If it can keep the air in and the vacuum of space out why wouldn't it be able to go underwater and keep the air in while keeping the water out?

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Red Stick
    Posts
    1,641

    Default Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

    Okay, I got that

    Kirk stole the scroll in order to lure the villagers away from the village, away from the volcano.


    And I'm trying to wrap my brain around the fact that

    Captain Pike could have recovered in this alternate universe where he was stuck in the wheelchair for life in the previous timeline. He was walking with a cane so at least they didn't expect us to swallow a miraculous total recovery.


    One other thing I thought was curious was that

    Scotty's little friend didn't go with him in the shuttle to check out those coordinates with him and subsequently end up on the bigger ship. Those two were inseparable through the whole movie. I think in order to explain that, they should have shown the little sidekick passing out drunk after their bender at the bar. That would have explained his absence and would have been funny.


    I think it's a shame that

    The little guy didn't have a speaking part this time. Last movie he at least got to say one word.


    Question I can't resolve:

    There were 72 cryo tubes with Khan's crew in them. They took one guy out and kept him in a drug induced coma so they could put Kirk in until he got an infusion. Then, at the end, they showed Khan in the cryo tube. So... what happened to the guy in the drug induced coma?


    At the end,

    A year after all the events with Khan, Kirk welcomes Carol Marcus to the crew of the Enterprise by saying "Welcome to the family." and she replies "It's nice to have a family." Since she and Kirk had a son, David, in the original timeline, does anybody think that her response might hint that They might already have a child? It's a year later, and kids only take 9 months.


    Quote Originally Posted by homer_sapien View Post

    Its a spaceship. If it can keep the air in and the vacuum of space out why wouldn't it be able to go underwater and keep the air in while keeping the water out?
    My daughter and I had this conversation today. We decided that

    the airtight aspect would be the same for space and underwater, but had a nice little debate about pressure. Space is a void, so the structure would be geared toward holding the ship together from flying apart outward. Under the ocean, the pressure would be the opposite, pressing IN on the ship. But we agreed that it would work for both purposes because the void of space is much greater than the ocean, so the ship would be sturdy enough to hold together in both. Scotty did complain about what the salt water would do to his ship, though.


    Yes. Yes, I am a geek.
    Last edited by Lepplady; May 21st, 2013 at 12:36 AM.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,366

    Default Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by homer_sapien View Post

    Its a spaceship. If it can keep the air in and the vacuum of space out why wouldn't it be able to go underwater and keep the air in while keeping the water out?
    The transporter was "created" for the original show because they couldn't afford to show the ship landing and taking off week to week. Therefore, the Enterprise historically cannot land on planets. It's not exactly aerodynamic.

    And yet, all of a sudden it can do this.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Kent, Englandshire, United KINGdom.
    Posts
    174

    Default Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

    Must....stop...................clicking on the spoiler tags. I feel like I have seen the whole film now.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Red Stick
    Posts
    1,641

    Default Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

    We haven't told you everything, by far. My daughter informs me that there's a Doctor Who reference in the early stages of the film. But I'm not saying what. Whovians will get it.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Kent, Englandshire, United KINGdom.
    Posts
    174

    Default Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

    Tell me, tell me please!

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Red Stick
    Posts
    1,641

    Default Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

    Okay. I won't tease you like that.

    Doctor Who's Mickey Smith actor Noel Clarke starts things off with a bang.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Kent, Englandshire, United KINGdom.
    Posts
    174

    Default Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

    Hee hee, oh how I love to spoil myself by spoiling things by peeking at spoilers

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    453

    Default Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Lepplady View Post
    Okay, I got that

    Kirk stole the scroll in order to lure the villagers away from the village, away from the volcano.


    And I'm trying to wrap my brain around the fact that

    Captain Pike could have recovered in this alternate universe where he was stuck in the wheelchair for life in the previous timeline. He was walking with a cane so at least they didn't expect us to swallow a miraculous total recovery.


    One other thing I thought was curious was that

    Scotty's little friend didn't go with him in the shuttle to check out those coordinates with him and subsequently end up on the bigger ship. Those two were inseparable through the whole movie. I think in order to explain that, they should have shown the little sidekick passing out drunk after their bender at the bar. That would have explained his absence and would have been funny.


    I think it's a shame that

    The little guy didn't have a speaking part this time. Last movie he at least got to say one word.


    Question I can't resolve:

    There were 72 cryo tubes with Khan's crew in them. They took one guy out and kept him in a drug induced coma so they could put Kirk in until he got an infusion. Then, at the end, they showed Khan in the cryo tube. So... what happened to the guy in the drug induced coma?


    At the end,

    A year after all the events with Khan, Kirk welcomes Carol Marcus to the crew of the Enterprise by saying "Welcome to the family." and she replies "It's nice to have a family." Since she and Kirk had a son, David, in the original timeline, does anybody think that her response might hint that They might already have a child? It's a year later, and kids only take 9 months.


    My daughter and I had this conversation today. We decided that

    the airtight aspect would be the same for space and underwater, but had a nice little debate about pressure. Space is a void, so the structure would be geared toward holding the ship together from flying apart outward. Under the ocean, the pressure would be the opposite, pressing IN on the ship. But we agreed that it would work for both purposes because the void of space is much greater than the ocean, so the ship would be sturdy enough to hold together in both. Scotty did complain about what the salt water would do to his ship, though.


    Yes. Yes, I am a geek.
    Space is not a void otherwise there would be no galaxies in a space that is void.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •