Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 Posted:   May 23, 2013 - 12:36 PM   
 By:   TM2-Megatron   (Member)

(I am curious, Scotty: If Starfleet is NOT the military, then who is? In TOS and TNG the Enterprise took on military roles regularly.)

Starfleet isn't officially a military, but it can serve in that capacity on behalf of the Federation when called upon to do so.

The idealism of pre-Abrams Trek assumed that there was no actual military, as we know it today, required on Earth, or other Federation worlds, because that kind of conflict no longer exists between humans and their allies.

 
 Posted:   May 23, 2013 - 3:02 PM   
 By:   Warunsun   (Member)

...and no sticker on the top of the case. Other than that, things were normal.

I also noticed the lack of a security sticker. Kind of made me wonder if this is more of a limited edition release.

 
 Posted:   May 23, 2013 - 3:05 PM   
 By:   David (Giacchino-fan)   (Member)

I also noticed the lack of a security sticker. Kind of made me wonder if this is more of a limited edition release.

Doubt it. A Star Trek title is probably one of their best-selling soundtracks - I know the 09 album reached #1 on iTunes when it came out.

 
 
 Posted:   May 24, 2013 - 12:13 AM   
 By:   eggerty31   (Member)

Is this darn CD ever actually going to come into stock at Amazon.co.uk? I'd pay a regular CD price for it, even the new normal inflated price for soundtracks in the UK, but not the ridiculous used price.

I got an email from amozon uk saying they are having trouble getting hold of it. I cancelled it on the spot. Luckily i have it downloaded onto my ipod.

When amazon get round to have it I might decide to buy it then or maybe hold out for the delux. The music is really growing on me.


It would seem Amazon originally listed the Varese version which is what they are having difficulty obtaining. They have also created a listing for the Collesseum version (the European release) which is due for release next week.
I cancelled my original order and reordered the other release.

Then I cancelled that and brought the 24/96 download from HDTracks instead. Listening to it now and liking it a lot.

 
 
 Posted:   May 24, 2013 - 10:20 AM   
 By:   mstanwick856   (Member)

(I am curious, Scotty: If Starfleet is NOT the military, then who is? In TOS and TNG the Enterprise took on military roles regularly.)

Starfleet isn't officially a military, but it can serve in that capacity on behalf of the Federation when called upon to do so.

The idealism of pre-Abrams Trek assumed that there was no actual military, as we know it today, required on Earth, or other Federation worlds, because that kind of conflict no longer exists between humans and their allies.


I suppose it depends on what you define as 'military'. I always considered Starfleet's conflict situations as defensive and this was consistently expounded in post-TOS spin-off series. I am not sure about TOS though but I think Kirk's actions were usually in response to actions 1st taken by an antagonist. Whether his responses were defensive is a matter of debate IMO.

 
 Posted:   May 25, 2013 - 3:53 PM   
 By:   Francis   (Member)

Saw the movie, enjoyed the score a lot! Lots of standout moments easily surpassing 44 minutes.

 
 
 Posted:   May 26, 2013 - 1:41 AM   
 By:   foobsz   (Member)

My guess is an expanded 'Into Darkness' will be released (sans choir).

This would be a commercial decision. Fans would then need to acquire both releases in order to get the full score. Augment/replace the tracks on the expanded 'Into Darkness' with the choir tracks of the now released album.

At least if I was a record producer that would be my strategy to get your money for both ;-)

It makes sense from a production standpoint also.

 
 Posted:   May 26, 2013 - 1:49 AM   
 By:   Francis   (Member)

My guess is an expanded 'Into Darkness' will be released (sans choir).

This would be a commercial decision. Fans would then need to acquire both releases in order to get the full score. Augment/replace the tracks on the expanded 'Into Darkness' with the choir tracks of the now released album.

At least if I was a record producer that would be my strategy to get your money for both ;-)

It makes sense from a production standpoint also.


Also, we need something similar to that blu-ray packaging of the first score's deluxe release to put next to it; it looks weird on its own on my shelve wink

 
 
 Posted:   May 28, 2013 - 9:03 PM   
 By:   Tango Urilla   (Member)

I just saw the new Star Trek and I gotta say I really enjoyed it. I went in kind of guardedly expecting to be let down story-wise and thus finding myself focusing more intently on the music, but the story really drew me in, so I didn't notice the score much beyond Giacchino's and Courage's main Trek themes. That said, I found certain parts of the film to be quite moving, so the music certainly must have been doing its job "behind-the-scenes" so to speak.

I thought the film itself took a little while to find its footing, but once it did, it was nonstop warp speed to the finish. They've definitely upped the stakes from ST '09, offering murkier waters for the characters to wade through while delivering spot-on comedy, intense action, and ample well-plotted twists and turns -- so long as you aren't viewing the plot under a microscope anyway. Cumberbatch's tearful speech was unexpected...and awesome. Sulu and Chekov didn't have much to do this time around, but then again Sulu saw a good amount of action the last time and I kinda like that they didn't overcrowd the film by giving every last character their own arc. The focus on Kirk and Spock's friendship and the shift from playing their differences for comedic effect to getting at the real emotions beneath it all was the right move for this sequel.

And without going into any spoilers, I'll just say that as a non-die hard Trek fan who nonetheless has seen and enjoyed all the earlier films from The Motion Picture to Generations*, I think Into Darkness is actually respectful toward and perhaps even more rewarding for those who are familiar with the original films. I think they did a great job of playing with expectations and providing satisfying twists and payoffs in light of those expectations.

*enjoyed might be a stretch for ST: The Final Frontier, though

In conclusion:

"Stop being so melodramatic. You were BARELY dead." LMAO

 
 
 Posted:   May 28, 2013 - 11:06 PM   
 By:   musicpaladin2007   (Member)

OK a few things now that I have seen the film:

1) I didn't have a majority of the problems most people have with the film. It's a fun flick and if you sit back and enjoy it for what it is, it's totally fine. Don't get your panties in a wad.

2) There were plenty of moments I noticed that were not on the soundtrack, but I think most of the super important ones were. Definitely room for more good stuff that's missing though. And I will say I didn't notice anything with choir that wasn't on the soundtrack; that was probably by design so they don't have to relicense the choir without us yelling and screaming that the choir is missing in key tracks should they release the expanded one.

3) Love the tweaked orchestration and mix of the end credits suite. I don't know if it's a re-orchestration or just different mix, but it just seemed much more to my liking this time around. The music mix in general was fantastic.

4) Speaking of orchestration, I know there have been a lot of comments of Ben Burtt's sound fx versus Giacchino's score competing for aural real estate. I think part of the problem is that there's just not coordination between the two - for example, orchestrate the music as such that the frequencies that the fx are going to be in won't mask the music, and that the music will cut through. I know Bear McCreary does this on purpose a lot - picks instruments that will cut through all of that (like bagpipes... those things will cut through ANYTHING... just watch the barrage in the BSG finale battle). There are several points that are bottom heavy in the score that also include lots of bass and midrange sound effects.

5) I completely do not understand the idiot who said that the plot was just like Nemesis... in what way does it remotely resemble Nemesis? It does not. The central themes are completely different, Harrison is not established as a mirror for Kirk at all, Kirk's actions throughout the movie come out of his cockiness and immaturity as Captain as demonstrated at the beginning (and also in 2009 with the cheating on the Kobyashi Maru... he never learns his lesson in that movie).

In general I just don't understand any of the opposition to this movie... I thought it was very well done. If anything I only thought the super duper mega ship was over the top and gratuitous sexuality (Carol) and Things Blowing Up (TM).

 
 
 Posted:   May 29, 2013 - 7:23 AM   
 By:   Bibliomike   (Member)


5) I completely do not understand the idiot who said that the plot was just like Nemesis... in what way does it remotely resemble Nemesis? It does not. The central themes are completely different, Harrison is not established as a mirror for Kirk at all, Kirk's actions throughout the movie come out of his cockiness and immaturity as Captain as demonstrated at the beginning (and also in 2009 with the cheating on the Kobyashi Maru... he never learns his lesson in that movie).
.


I am not the "idiot" in question, but I don't think it's crazy to think that Kirk and "Harrison" are in some ways meant to mirror each other. Both are rebels, and the devotion of each to his crew is a dominant theme in the film (the difference being, as some blogger as pointed out, what each man is willing to sacrifice). Visually, also, the scenes in the brig (where they are staring at each other through a glass pane, and each man wearing a Starfleet emblem on his chest) and the ship-to-ship jump (where the computer identifies is tracking them side-by-side, name-by-name) establish a kind of mirror duality. Maybe "foil" is a better word than mirror, though.

I hadn't thought of it on my own, but it helps me think there is maybe a bit more to the film than the blow-em-up action you mention. I agree with you, though, that on the whole it is a lot of fun (once I get past my die-hard Trekkie objections!)

 
 
 Posted:   May 29, 2013 - 8:08 AM   
 By:   musicpaladin2007   (Member)


5) I completely do not understand the idiot who said that the plot was just like Nemesis... in what way does it remotely resemble Nemesis? It does not. The central themes are completely different, Harrison is not established as a mirror for Kirk at all, Kirk's actions throughout the movie come out of his cockiness and immaturity as Captain as demonstrated at the beginning (and also in 2009 with the cheating on the Kobyashi Maru... he never learns his lesson in that movie).
.


I am not the "idiot" in question, but I don't think it's crazy to think that Kirk and "Harrison" are in some ways meant to mirror each other. Both are rebels, and the devotion of each to his crew is a dominant theme in the film (the difference being, as some blogger as pointed out, what each man is willing to sacrifice). Visually, also, the scenes in the brig (where they are staring at each other through a glass pane, and each man wearing a Starfleet emblem on his chest) and the ship-to-ship jump (where the computer identifies is tracking them side-by-side, name-by-name) establish a kind of mirror duality. Maybe "foil" is a better word than mirror, though.

I hadn't thought of it on my own, but it helps me think there is maybe a bit more to the film than the blow-em-up action you mention. I agree with you, though, that on the whole it is a lot of fun (once I get past my die-hard Trekkie objections!)


True. I think the point in Nemesis was more the "we're the same blood the same person but our experiences have made us different people" idea. The nature vs. nurture.

But yeah, I actually thought there was a whole lot more to this movie than the simple blow em up movie a lot of reviewers have been accusing it of being.

 
 Posted:   May 29, 2013 - 8:46 AM   
 By:   Other Tallguy   (Member)



But yeah, I actually thought there was a whole lot more to this movie than the simple blow em up movie a lot of reviewers have been accusing it of being.


It has a point. It probably has several. I just either disagree with them or think they were handled badly.

It wants to be serious, it really does. I just don't think this gang is good at it. Throwing in "JJ Plays the Hits of Nick Meyer" doesn't help at all.

 
 Posted:   May 29, 2013 - 2:27 PM   
 By:   Scott McC   (Member)

In the track “Sub-Prime Directive” is the quotation of the Courage theme at the 0:56 point meant to accompany the shot of the Enterprise zooming away from the volcano? Having seen the movie I didn’t notice it during this sequence.

I loved the film and was pleased by the decision to give the JJ Abrams film series some musical continuity by having (essentially) the same music play over the opening logos as was used in Star Trek 2009, with the start of the end credits also revisiting Giacchino’s brilliant take on the Original Series closing credits (as used in Star Trek 2009). As for the “Into Darkness” OST album, I’m enjoying it immensely, although I would have loved if the music which accompanies the final plunge of the Enterprise into the clouds as well as the full version of the End Credits had been included (perhaps we’ll get a Deluxe Edition at some point).

For the record, the OST for Star Trek (2009) is without doubt the soundtrack I’ve played the most in at least the last decade or so. The only rivals (during my now 50 year lifetime), would be the classic John Williams scores from the period 1975-1983, that I played over and over during the same period.

 
 Posted:   Jun 1, 2013 - 8:40 PM   
 By:   Warunsun   (Member)

I decided to go and see this movie one last time on the big screen before the Superman movie pushes it out. Having listened to the new soundtrack several times now I was able to notice much more of the score in the actual movie theater. Locally, they are still showing the movie in IMAX 3D over After Earth (another IMAX movie).

The current 45 minute program on the CD has grown on me. I would like the full end credits but heck not sure if they really need an expanded release. I would probably get it if it was offered however.

 
 Posted:   Jun 1, 2013 - 9:27 PM   
 By:   The Mutant   (Member)

I've seen it twice now and had a lot of fun with it. Good popcorn. Some great little touches and concepts that were new to me as a long time fan of the film series - the idea of mind-melding with someone as they are dying, that was pretty damn cool. Also was great to see Khan in action displaying his abilities we've heard so much about. I also enjoyed watching Khan and Spock have at it - the greatest part of that fight was watching Khan's reaction to the neck pinch. Great stuff.

I snagged the iTunes version cuz it's the cheapest option right now. Woulda been nice to have the end credits and the scene with Scotty sabotaging the enemy ship, but on the whole I'm happy with it - until the complete version is released.

The Amok time quote put a smile on my face.

 
 Posted:   Jun 1, 2013 - 9:35 PM   
 By:   SchiffyM   (Member)

It wants to be serious, it really does. I just don't think this gang is good at it. Throwing in "JJ Plays the Hits of Nick Meyer" doesn't help at all.

I agree with you. I took my son (who's never seen a "Trek" anything before) to see the movie last night. For me, the whole thing had a "Remember this? So do we!" feel to it. But none of it added up to anything. The riffs on events from "Star Trek II" were staged more spectacularly, but given none of the context that gave the original its meaning or made it so iconic. I felt like I was watching the Ice Capades adaptation. When Spock yells out a line so famously uttered by Kirk three decades ago, I thought for a moment I was watching a parody.

My son (he's twelve) enjoyed the spectacle, but didn't understand what any of it was supposed to mean. The Tribble? Huh? Cumberbatch's character? What was his deal? He had no purpose if you hadn't seen the originals he was derived from.

The whole film felt like a cut-and-paste job to me, like going to an all-you-can-eat Star Trek buffet. At the end, you've gorged on everything you think you like, but you feel bloated and unsatisfied.

 
 Posted:   Jun 1, 2013 - 9:44 PM   
 By:   LeHah   (Member)

Old story from Frank Frazetta.

He'd gotten fan letters over the years, where people would like the pose in one painting or the background in another or certain particulars about a particular painting. One day, he decided to take all those elements and paint them into a single picture. He didn't like it, possibly destroyed it - because it didn't work. All it was was an unnatural pastiche.

That's pretty much what Into Darkness is.

 
 Posted:   Jun 2, 2013 - 8:29 AM   
 By:   Shaun Rutherford   (Member)

It wants to be serious, it really does. I just don't think this gang is good at it. Throwing in "JJ Plays the Hits of Nick Meyer" doesn't help at all.

I agree with you. I took my son (who's never seen a "Trek" anything before) to see the movie last night. For me, the whole thing had a "Remember this? So do we!" feel to it. But none of it added up to anything. The riffs on events from "Star Trek II" were staged more spectacularly, but given none of the context that gave the original its meaning or made it so iconic. I felt like I was watching the Ice Capades adaptation. When Spock yells out a line so famously uttered by Kirk three decades ago, I thought for a moment I was watching a parody.

My son (he's twelve) enjoyed the spectacle, but didn't understand what any of it was supposed to mean. The Tribble? Huh? Cumberbatch's character? What was his deal? He had no purpose if you hadn't seen the originals he was derived from.

The whole film felt like a cut-and-paste job to me, like going to an all-you-can-eat Star Trek buffet. At the end, you've gorged on everything you think you like, but you feel bloated and unsatisfied.


That's exactly it. In no way did it earn (or justify) using Cumberbatch as "that" character, and did they really have to do this in another second movie? Couldn't they have waited and maybe at least, I don't know, set up the Harrison character so we understand why he's so angry? It's like the bizarre, 1950's-era horror movie music that accompanies his character's introduction is supposed to be all the backstory we need, even though he's just standing there doing nothing.

 
 Posted:   Jun 2, 2013 - 2:28 PM   
 By:   Warunsun   (Member)

The reason they use Cumberbatch and why they call him John Harrison ought to be pretty obvious. They didn't want folks to find out early who he was. The pseudonym protected the character both in the film and on film sets. Also, if he looked the part it would also be pretty obvious too. While I personally don't like these decisions that the filmmakers used I don't think it ruins the movie. It is an action movie.

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2014 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.