Manchester is my local IMAX, too. Can you confirm if Star Trek IMAX was 2.35:1 throughout, please?
When IMAX projected in 70mm, I was in awe of the images presented with Prometheus (wholly in 16:9 approx), Dark Knight Rises (almost an hour in 1.44:1) and last year's Spiderman (a number of scenes opened up to 1.44:1)
Does digital projection in IMAX spell the end for this? I'll be lodging a strong complaint if that's the case.
Unfortunately I believe digital IMAX cannot display at 1.44:1. The majority of star trek is in 2.35:1, with the screen opening out to 16:9 for the scenes shot with IMAX cameras.
They will have installed the digital projectors so they are able to show digital films. Before they were installed they weren't able to show some of the more recent films, The Avengers probably being the most high profile, as it was digital IMAX only.
It's a sad day if they do indeed no longer show films in 15/70. The Dark Knight was the first IMAX film I saw at Manchester and will always stay with me as one of the best movie experiences I've had.
Just saw this and really enjoyed it at the time, but the more I think about it, the less sense it makes. There were also some sequences which could have been cut down a bit, like
Khan and Kirk repeating the 'jump' scene from the first film; and the overly long sequence of people falling, walking upside down, sideways, etc. while the Enterprise is falling.
The main problem I have with it is that I think they relied a bit too much on people having seen Wrath of Khan, and I haven't. Other than a single line from Spock, conveniently supplied by Old Spock off-screen, it wasn't really shown what Khan wanted or why he was so dangerous, and in any case, he never even came close to achieving anything really. From what I've read, he's basically meant to be SuperHitler, but he seems more like a random terrorist in this.
The Admiral Marcus plot seemed thrown-together too. I mean, is the Federation really structured so weakly that a single man is given enough power to build a starship that powerful, and to plot to start a war, without anybody going 'hang on a minute'?
I'd definitely recommend it though, Cumberbatch's performance is probably the best thing ever seen in anything 'Star Trek'.
Yes, Benedict Cumberbatch makes a most excellent villain in that film and not someone who you would want to ever encounter in real life.
Personally, I'd have forever entombed all the superwarrior popsicles in a cave on -230*C Pluto.
Unfortunately I believe digital IMAX cannot display at 1.44:1. The majority of star trek is in 2.35:1, with the screen opening out to 16:9 for the scenes shot with IMAX cameras.
They will have installed the digital projectors so they are able to show digital films. Before they were installed they weren't able to show some of the more recent films, The Avengers probably being the most high profile, as it was digital IMAX only.
It's a sad day if they do indeed no longer show films in 15/70. The Dark Knight was the first IMAX film I saw at Manchester and will always stay with me as one of the best movie experiences I've had.
I'll ask the Odeon to confirm, but can you confirm how the IMAX scenes were shown in Manchester, please?
According to IMDB (which can be wrong), the IMAX scenes were 1.44:1, but I know the recent Oblivion had its IMAX presentation around 1.9:1.
Southampton is digital IMAX and that looked like 2.35:1 and then full screen for bits. I certainly looked that way.
Yes, that's right, but the full screen ratio in digital IMAXes is 1.89:1. The 15/70 full screen is 1.44:1. But when a digital IMAX projector is retrofitted into a 15/70 theatre it will still only display at 1.89:1. They are going to be some humoungous black bars on a 25m screen!
I think it is the film company only supplying one 15/70 mm IMAX copy for the UK, and hence the reason for that being only shown in the BFI IMAX in Waterloo.
IMAX has gone digital now - so we'll be seeing less and less of the 15/70mm editions in the future.
That is terrible news. Even if it's on the way out, they've made the bloomin' thing so why not show it? Is $50,000 a pop really that much in the grand scheme of things?
Saw it last night, that was some awesome ironing at the very end I never knew you could get creases like that in your trousers. 9/10 for the movie and that's from a non- Trekkie.
I really enjoyed it, it's very fast paced so much so I felt a bit knackered by the end.
My only disappontment was the lack of proper space battle. Yet again the Enterprise is whooped within an inch of it's life only this time I don't think they managed to fire a single shot in retaliation. (Other than the 'torpedo switch')
Doesn't say much for starfleet when their flagship is barely able to defend itself.
I'll ask the Odeon to confirm, but can you confirm how the IMAX scenes were shown in Manchester, please?
According to IMDB (which can be wrong), the IMAX scenes were 1.44:1, but I know the recent Oblivion had its IMAX presentation around 1.9:1.
I went to see Oblivion at Cineworld Birmingham's Digital IMAX and throughout the entire film, apart from the flashback scenes, the screen was filled 1.89:1 aspect ratio and looked great.
That is terrible news. Even if it's on the way out, they've made the bloomin' thing so why not show it? Is $50,000 a pop really that much in the grand scheme of things?
I wonder if Manchester have kept both so they can switch them over if need be? That's another question to put to them.
Anyone else seen Star Trek Into Darkness opened up to anything more than approx 16:9? (given how IMDB states 1.44:1, but may be wrong)
I'm planning to see the film next Monday, but I hear even the retrofitted 3D isn't great, so was going to see the 2D version.
Saw this tonight, have been looking forward to this since i adored the the reboot.
Loved the character development and bond between Spock and Kirk, Benedect Cumberbatch was superb as always (cough sherlock )Even felt slightly Teary Eyed at
Kirk's death (even though it was only brief) and the tears were mainly down to Zachary Quinto's superb acting
I was concerned about the retro 3D but was very impressed with it. Miles better than say Clash of the Titans.
I only saw CotT in 2D, but on a related note, I saw a STID 10-min preview before The Hobbit and, like a lot of 3D trailers I've seen at the Odeon, the quality was appalling, however a 3D film was made. When the 3D film I've come to see, in this case The Hobbit, begins, everything is perfectly fine.
Anyone know why quality goes out the window for the trailers, please?
For me these new films are basically parodies of Star Trek , and I don't just mean in the comic sense , they take classic scenes from the original and subvert them a bit .
But - I don't really see any point or story .
It's very hyper-active , it never manages drama .
And those *ucking lense flares ! Christ , 3D is bad enough , but at least I can avoid that , but now I have to put up with lense flares giving me a headache .
on the plus side - it looks nice , the FX look very good , some terrific shots especially near the end , and it does move along very quickly , and is funny in parts .
I don't really know why people are raving about JJ Abrams , he's made 4 films , 3 of them are sequels to tv shows/movies , and one - Super 8 - the one thats his personal movie was a flop .
I enjoyed the movie. Good to see Scotty and Uhuru get a lot more screen time than the first movie (and in the latter's case not just sitting around her console) although we didn't get enough of Bones's observations.
I wasn't so comfortable with:
the massive loss of life in the movie going completely unremarked upon. The Enterprise comes under attack and large numbers of people get sucked out into space - then a big chunk of San Francisco is taken out by Marcus's crashed vessel presumably killing thousands. Yet no acknowledgement of the consequences at all. This is the sort of faceless mass slaughter I'd expect from a Michael Bay movie rather than a representation of the humanist values of Star Trek
Having said that, I was amused by:
Alcatraz getting wiped out - was this a sneaky nod by JJ to the cancellation of this show?
Some good points in this article regarding the movie' many plot holes, I look forward to RedLetterMedia and Honest Trailers doing their spoofs of Into Darkness as they did with Prometheus
10. Under The Sea
...The thing I don’t understand is why would he go to the trouble of hiding the ship underwater? The inhabitants of the planet are at the stage where they would worship a firework if it went off in front of them, so why not leave it in orbit? It makes zero sense to take the ship down and then go to all the trouble of concealing it under the ocean... the focus of creating great looking effects and action sequences at the expense of a logical structure in the script was clearly evident.
9. Prime Directive.
...Mr Scott claims that if the volcano fully erupts, the Enterprise might not be able to stand the heat. Considering a volcano eruptions generates heat anywhere from 1000C to 1500C, it’s considerably less heat than what would be generated by a ship entering a planet’s atmosphere, and that is even before we bring the Enterprise shields into the equation. But back to the point….
Once Spock is rescued, he still can’t get over that Kirk violated the Prime Directive to save his life. Clearly Starfleet’s rule No.1 is very important to the Vulcan who finds it difficult to bend the rules. But Spock didn’t seem too worry about the Prime Directive as he was cooling the volcano and changing the destiny of the planet. None interference does not mean keeping technology away from primitive species; it also means that you don’t change the natural evolution of planet and its inhabitants, even if by not interfering it causes their death.
8. I Believe In You
The wacky Starfleet promotions are still a common occurrence in ‘Into Darkness.’ You think the writers would have learnt from the criticisms about the last film that field experience appears to count for nothing and you could be promoted to Captain on the whim of any commanding officer.
In this film, the Enterprise has 6 captain changes... Pike also saves Kirk from going back to the Academy by telling the Admirals that he would like him to be his first officer because he ‘’believes in him.’’ Kirk screws up almost everything he is sent to do but Pike keeps telling us that he sees ‘’greatness’’ in him and that he ‘’believes in him.’’
7. Khan
...Fearing for the lives of the 72 people he loves, Khan hides their cryo-tubes in 72 torpedoes he designed. We are not told how he managed to hide them in the torpedoes and how exactly it will save them considering the Admiral is quite aware they are hidden in there, but fair enough, Khan hid them in the torpedoes. However, if Khan was able to gain access to the frozen bodies and go to the trouble of hiding them, then why didn’t he just revive them all? Why bother hiding them? Just bring them out of cryogenic sleep and teach the Admiral a lesson.
6. The Moron
...The issue with this sequence is that Harewood is a Starfleet officer. Once he got the cure and saved his daughter’s life, why didn’t he just report what Khan was planning to do? His daughter was saved; Khan had no more bargaining chips so go inform Starfleet that this guy wants you to commit a terrorist attack. On top of that, your daughter won’t grow up without a father and have to live with the stigma that her dad was responsible for a terrorist attack that killed a lot of people.
5. The Klingons
...Yes Khan transported into an ’’uninhabited’’ area of Kronos but Klingons have the ability to build ships and conquer planets. Would a mysterious long distance transport not be detected? If for some reason they missed that, how did they not spot a mysterious vessel travelling near Kronos, an area that should be full of Klingon ships?
4. The Women
The female characters in this movie are pretty much redundant. I’m not saying that Abrams had to write a beefy role for the lady members of the cast as some sort of positive discrimination, but in ‘Into Darkness,’ Uhura is ‘annoying cliché girlfriend’ and Carol Marcus feels tacked on because the character was in ‘The Wrath Of Khan.’
Apart from where Uhura tries to communicate with the Klingons and a bit in the climax where she bizarrely beams down to fight Khan on her own, she did nothing other than be Mrs Spock... Alice Eve faired no better. Apart from being attractive, she was totally unbelievable as a scientist. She will be Kirk’s love interest at some point and ‘Into Darkness’ was her introduction to the audience, that’s assuming they remember anything about her apart from that we saw her in her bra and panties.
3. Admiral Marcus
...Admiral Marcus takes the USS Vengeance to destroy the Enterprise. After a short fight near the moon, the Enterprise is crippled and Kirk pleads with Marcus to spare the crew’s life. But now that Marcus is the movie’s bad guy, he coldly thanks Kirk for the offer but informs him that he has no intention of sparing the Enterprise or its crew. Has he always been a mass murdering psychopath? There is no regret in his action, he is almost relishing seeing hundreds of innocent people die. Where have his Starfleet ethics gone?
...Also, how exactly has Admiral Marcus managed to hide Khan and build the USS Vengeance within the Solar System without the rest of Starfleet finding out what he is doing? It’s not like his facility around Jupiter has top-notch security, Scotty managed to enter the facility in a Shuttlecraft without being detected. Scotty even managed to disable the USS Vengeance and make unauthorised communications to the Enterprise without the Vengeance internal sensors picking it up.
...And the fight between the Enterprise and the Vengeance that takes place near Earth. Where are the other Starfleet ships? Why is no one concerned that there is a fight going on near the Moon? Why is no one in Starfleet command wondering where the USS Vengeance came from? The fight is taking place near Earth and you don’t even see a Shuttlecraft come up and have a look.
2. Crash
...Khan is tricked into beaming onboard 72 live torpedoes that explode and cripple the Vengeance. The ship slowly falls to Earth and destroys a considerable area of San Francisco ...The death toll must be in the tens of thousands, the Vengeance is a huge ship and it’s impact with San Francisco would have had major consequence for the poor people on the ground.
...so little attention is given to the mass death of innocent civilians, the Enterprise crew make no comment about it and are more concerned that Khan might have survived the crash. Spock and the crew might be upset that Kirk is dead, but screw the tens of thousands who just died because you let off a bunch of torpedoes inside the Vengeance.
1. Conclusion
...Spock worked better as an alien who was embarrassed by his emotions and denied them even though you could see them festering below the surface. Quinto-Spock smirks, smiles, cries and shouts throughout ‘Into Darkness,’ he has lost the thing that made him unique and the only difference between him and the other characters in that he has pointed ears.
...JJ Abrams has succeeded in making Star Trek into nothing but a special effects bonanza. It might make an enjoyable trip to the cinema but by alienating the legion of old school Trekkies in favour of quick ticket sales, this version of Star Trek will not have the legs to create a 50 year legacy like the original Star Trek did.
Watched it today and really enjoyed it. Did like the 'homage' scene with Kirk in the reactor - without spoilering it, if you've seen the original film, you'll know what i mean. If he had delivered the "needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few " line, it would have probably done me in
The scene with future spock did seem somewhat crowbarred in though.
Watched it today and really enjoyed it. Did like the 'homage' scene with Kirk in the reactor - without spoilering it, if you've seen the original film, you'll know what i mean. If he had delivered the "needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few " line, it would have probably done me in
The scene with future spock did seem somewhat crowbarred in though.
If we had had ''you have been and always shall be my friend'' I would have flooded the place lol I still shed a few tears but not as much as I do for the orignal movie. I guess it couldn't be said as prime spock had already said it in the first movie.
the massive loss of life in the movie going completely unremarked upon. The Enterprise comes under attack and large numbers of people get sucked out into space - then a big chunk of San Francisco is taken out by Marcus's crashed vessel presumably killing thousands. Yet no acknowledgement of the consequences at all. This is the sort of faceless mass slaughter I'd expect from a Michael Bay movie rather than a representation of the humanist values of Star Trek
That was always a part of star trek, maybe not in scale of the film, but there are so many cases in the original series where red shirts or entire decks have been wiped out and they are all laughing and having a joke at the end. Always found it a bit unsettling.
I enjoyed the movie. Good to see Scotty and Uhuru get a lot more screen time than the first movie (and in the latter's case not just sitting around her console) although we didn't get enough of Bones's observations.
I wasn't so comfortable with:
the massive loss of life in the movie going completely unremarked upon. The Enterprise comes under attack and large numbers of people get sucked out into space - then a big chunk of San Francisco is taken out by Marcus's crashed vessel presumably killing thousands. Yet no acknowledgement of the consequences at all. This is the sort of faceless mass slaughter I'd expect from a Michael Bay movie rather than a representation of the humanist values of Star Trek
Having said that, I was amused by:
Alcatraz getting wiped out - was this a sneaky nod by JJ to the cancellation of this show?
I just assumed that
the crew didn't show any emotion about the thousands of San Franciscans who were killed because they knew that once they captured Khan they could revive everyone using the magic serum, this is a Damon Lindelof script we are talking about here so anything is possible!
I have finally seen it and I thought it was amazing - well worth the wait. My only gripe is not enough McCoy, as he's my favourite, but since Karl Urban's been busy with Dredd and other things I was expecting that. Still, I was entertained and loved every moment. I'll be seeing it again at least once more in the cinema and I almost never see the same films twice on the big screen.
FWIW: there were several full screen IMAX scenes at Waterloo, dunno if Manchester IMAX has a different set-up though.
But if stripedcat is right, and I have no reason to doubt him/her, that's the only print in the UK! So I don't suppose the other 15/70 theatres (London Science Museum, Manchester, Bradford, Glasgow) are exactly thrilled.
But if stripedcat is right, and I have no reason to doubt him/her, that's the only print in the UK! So I don't suppose the other 15/70 theatres (London Science Museum, Manchester, Bradford, Glasgow) are exactly thrilled.
So only one cinema gets a print that opens up to 1.44:1 and the rest get 16:9? That is illogical, Captain.
Comments
Unfortunately I believe digital IMAX cannot display at 1.44:1. The majority of star trek is in 2.35:1, with the screen opening out to 16:9 for the scenes shot with IMAX cameras.
They will have installed the digital projectors so they are able to show digital films. Before they were installed they weren't able to show some of the more recent films, The Avengers probably being the most high profile, as it was digital IMAX only.
It's a sad day if they do indeed no longer show films in 15/70. The Dark Knight was the first IMAX film I saw at Manchester and will always stay with me as one of the best movie experiences I've had.
Yes, Benedict Cumberbatch makes a most excellent villain in that film and not someone who you would want to ever encounter in real life.
I'll ask the Odeon to confirm, but can you confirm how the IMAX scenes were shown in Manchester, please?
According to IMDB (which can be wrong), the IMAX scenes were 1.44:1, but I know the recent Oblivion had its IMAX presentation around 1.9:1.
Yes, that's right, but the full screen ratio in digital IMAXes is 1.89:1. The 15/70 full screen is 1.44:1. But when a digital IMAX projector is retrofitted into a 15/70 theatre it will still only display at 1.89:1. They are going to be some humoungous black bars on a 25m screen!
That is terrible news. Even if it's on the way out, they've made the bloomin' thing so why not show it? Is $50,000 a pop really that much in the grand scheme of things?
Doesn't say much for starfleet when their flagship is barely able to defend itself.
I went to see Oblivion at Cineworld Birmingham's Digital IMAX and throughout the entire film, apart from the flashback scenes, the screen was filled 1.89:1 aspect ratio and looked great.
I wonder if Manchester have kept both so they can switch them over if need be? That's another question to put to them.
Anyone else seen Star Trek Into Darkness opened up to anything more than approx 16:9? (given how IMDB states 1.44:1, but may be wrong)
I'm planning to see the film next Monday, but I hear even the retrofitted 3D isn't great, so was going to see the 2D version.
I was concerned about the retro 3D but was very impressed with it. Miles better than say Clash of the Titans.
PJ
Loved the character development and bond between Spock and Kirk, Benedect Cumberbatch was superb as always (cough sherlock
I only saw CotT in 2D, but on a related note, I saw a STID 10-min preview before The Hobbit and, like a lot of 3D trailers I've seen at the Odeon, the quality was appalling, however a 3D film was made. When the 3D film I've come to see, in this case The Hobbit, begins, everything is perfectly fine.
Anyone know why quality goes out the window for the trailers, please?
For me these new films are basically parodies of Star Trek , and I don't just mean in the comic sense , they take classic scenes from the original and subvert them a bit .
But - I don't really see any point or story .
It's very hyper-active , it never manages drama .
And those *ucking lense flares ! Christ , 3D is bad enough , but at least I can avoid that , but now I have to put up with lense flares giving me a headache .
on the plus side - it looks nice , the FX look very good , some terrific shots especially near the end , and it does move along very quickly , and is funny in parts .
I don't really know why people are raving about JJ Abrams , he's made 4 films , 3 of them are sequels to tv shows/movies , and one - Super 8 - the one thats his personal movie was a flop .
I wasn't so comfortable with:
Having said that, I was amused by:
Star Trek Into Darkness: 10 Things That Make No Sense
...The thing I don’t understand is why would he go to the trouble of hiding the ship underwater? The inhabitants of the planet are at the stage where they would worship a firework if it went off in front of them, so why not leave it in orbit? It makes zero sense to take the ship down and then go to all the trouble of concealing it under the ocean... the focus of creating great looking effects and action sequences at the expense of a logical structure in the script was clearly evident.
9. Prime Directive.
...Mr Scott claims that if the volcano fully erupts, the Enterprise might not be able to stand the heat. Considering a volcano eruptions generates heat anywhere from 1000C to 1500C, it’s considerably less heat than what would be generated by a ship entering a planet’s atmosphere, and that is even before we bring the Enterprise shields into the equation. But back to the point….
Once Spock is rescued, he still can’t get over that Kirk violated the Prime Directive to save his life. Clearly Starfleet’s rule No.1 is very important to the Vulcan who finds it difficult to bend the rules. But Spock didn’t seem too worry about the Prime Directive as he was cooling the volcano and changing the destiny of the planet. None interference does not mean keeping technology away from primitive species; it also means that you don’t change the natural evolution of planet and its inhabitants, even if by not interfering it causes their death.
8. I Believe In You
The wacky Starfleet promotions are still a common occurrence in ‘Into Darkness.’ You think the writers would have learnt from the criticisms about the last film that field experience appears to count for nothing and you could be promoted to Captain on the whim of any commanding officer.
In this film, the Enterprise has 6 captain changes... Pike also saves Kirk from going back to the Academy by telling the Admirals that he would like him to be his first officer because he ‘’believes in him.’’ Kirk screws up almost everything he is sent to do but Pike keeps telling us that he sees ‘’greatness’’ in him and that he ‘’believes in him.’’
7. Khan
...Fearing for the lives of the 72 people he loves, Khan hides their cryo-tubes in 72 torpedoes he designed. We are not told how he managed to hide them in the torpedoes and how exactly it will save them considering the Admiral is quite aware they are hidden in there, but fair enough, Khan hid them in the torpedoes. However, if Khan was able to gain access to the frozen bodies and go to the trouble of hiding them, then why didn’t he just revive them all? Why bother hiding them? Just bring them out of cryogenic sleep and teach the Admiral a lesson.
6. The Moron
...The issue with this sequence is that Harewood is a Starfleet officer. Once he got the cure and saved his daughter’s life, why didn’t he just report what Khan was planning to do? His daughter was saved; Khan had no more bargaining chips so go inform Starfleet that this guy wants you to commit a terrorist attack. On top of that, your daughter won’t grow up without a father and have to live with the stigma that her dad was responsible for a terrorist attack that killed a lot of people.
5. The Klingons
...Yes Khan transported into an ’’uninhabited’’ area of Kronos but Klingons have the ability to build ships and conquer planets. Would a mysterious long distance transport not be detected? If for some reason they missed that, how did they not spot a mysterious vessel travelling near Kronos, an area that should be full of Klingon ships?
4. The Women
The female characters in this movie are pretty much redundant. I’m not saying that Abrams had to write a beefy role for the lady members of the cast as some sort of positive discrimination, but in ‘Into Darkness,’ Uhura is ‘annoying cliché girlfriend’ and Carol Marcus feels tacked on because the character was in ‘The Wrath Of Khan.’
Apart from where Uhura tries to communicate with the Klingons and a bit in the climax where she bizarrely beams down to fight Khan on her own, she did nothing other than be Mrs Spock... Alice Eve faired no better. Apart from being attractive, she was totally unbelievable as a scientist. She will be Kirk’s love interest at some point and ‘Into Darkness’ was her introduction to the audience, that’s assuming they remember anything about her apart from that we saw her in her bra and panties.
3. Admiral Marcus
...Admiral Marcus takes the USS Vengeance to destroy the Enterprise. After a short fight near the moon, the Enterprise is crippled and Kirk pleads with Marcus to spare the crew’s life. But now that Marcus is the movie’s bad guy, he coldly thanks Kirk for the offer but informs him that he has no intention of sparing the Enterprise or its crew. Has he always been a mass murdering psychopath? There is no regret in his action, he is almost relishing seeing hundreds of innocent people die. Where have his Starfleet ethics gone?
...Also, how exactly has Admiral Marcus managed to hide Khan and build the USS Vengeance within the Solar System without the rest of Starfleet finding out what he is doing? It’s not like his facility around Jupiter has top-notch security, Scotty managed to enter the facility in a Shuttlecraft without being detected. Scotty even managed to disable the USS Vengeance and make unauthorised communications to the Enterprise without the Vengeance internal sensors picking it up.
...And the fight between the Enterprise and the Vengeance that takes place near Earth. Where are the other Starfleet ships? Why is no one concerned that there is a fight going on near the Moon? Why is no one in Starfleet command wondering where the USS Vengeance came from? The fight is taking place near Earth and you don’t even see a Shuttlecraft come up and have a look.
2. Crash
...Khan is tricked into beaming onboard 72 live torpedoes that explode and cripple the Vengeance. The ship slowly falls to Earth and destroys a considerable area of San Francisco ...The death toll must be in the tens of thousands, the Vengeance is a huge ship and it’s impact with San Francisco would have had major consequence for the poor people on the ground.
...so little attention is given to the mass death of innocent civilians, the Enterprise crew make no comment about it and are more concerned that Khan might have survived the crash. Spock and the crew might be upset that Kirk is dead, but screw the tens of thousands who just died because you let off a bunch of torpedoes inside the Vengeance.
1. Conclusion
...Spock worked better as an alien who was embarrassed by his emotions and denied them even though you could see them festering below the surface. Quinto-Spock smirks, smiles, cries and shouts throughout ‘Into Darkness,’ he has lost the thing that made him unique and the only difference between him and the other characters in that he has pointed ears.
The scene with future spock did seem somewhat crowbarred in though.
If we had had ''you have been and always shall be my friend'' I would have flooded the place lol I still shed a few tears but not as much as I do for the orignal movie. I guess it couldn't be said as prime spock had already said it in the first movie.
http://i2.cdnds.net/13/12/618x335/movies_star-trek-into-darkness.jpg
To distract us from her poor acting. It nearly worked...
I just assumed that
10/10 from me.
Yes.
But if stripedcat is right, and I have no reason to doubt him/her, that's the only print in the UK! So I don't suppose the other 15/70 theatres (London Science Museum, Manchester, Bradford, Glasgow) are exactly thrilled.
So only one cinema gets a print that opens up to 1.44:1 and the rest get 16:9? That is illogical, Captain.