The SuperHeroHype Forums

The SuperHeroHype Forums (http://forums.superherohype.com/index.php)
-   Misc. Films (http://forums.superherohype.com/forumdisplay.php?f=31)
-   -   Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4 (http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=451975)

Thread Manager 01-24-2013 11:13 PM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 3
 
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is Here

Thread Manager 01-24-2013 11:13 PM

Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 3
 
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is Here

redhawk23 01-24-2013 11:13 PM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 3
 
Its kind of sad that basically all media appearances for this film will now be hijacked by star wars questions .

New Thread!
http://www.forevergeek.com/wp-conten...45-930x381.jpg

psylockolussus 01-26-2013 01:55 AM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Well at least this movie would get more hype now the director of Star Trek 2 is directing Star Wars 7.

The Squirrel 01-26-2013 02:05 AM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Star Trek 12. :o

redhawk23 01-26-2013 11:51 AM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by The Squirrel (Post 25065809)
Star Trek 12. :o

Damn straight.

Picard Sisko 01-26-2013 11:54 AM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
What I love about the 2009 film is that its both a sequel, prequel, and reboot all rolled into one.

Its a sequel because Spock and Nero come from the original timeline AFTER the events of Nemesis.

Its a prequel because it has younger versions of the original cast members, and shows how they come together in this version.

Its a reboot because its now an alternate timeline and they could go in any direction they want to go in. Total freedom.

So in a way, the 2009 film was Star Trek 11, and we are now waiting for Star Trek 12.

Soapy 01-26-2013 02:54 PM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Picard Sisko (Post 25067055)
What I love about the 2009 film is that its both a sequel, prequel, and reboot all rolled into one.

Its a sequel because Spock and Nero come from the original timeline AFTER the events of Nemesis.

Its a prequel because it has younger versions of the original cast members, and shows how they come together in this version.

Its a reboot because its now an alternate timeline and they could go in any direction they want to go in. Total freedom.

So in a way, the 2009 film was Star Trek 11, and we are now waiting for Star Trek 12.

While I'm not crazy about the reboot, I do think it's awesome, borderline genius even, how they were able to to do all of that stuff with one story in one movie.

redhawk23 01-27-2013 02:18 AM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
So as I posted in the comic thread, there is some kind of crazy stuff in the lead in comic for this film.

Possible spoilers.

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:
In the comic, Robert April, who non cannon sources have long listed as the first captain of the Enterprise shows up. The comic book rendering of April has more than just a passing resemblance to actor Nolan North who has an unspecified role in the film.
http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/b...ps6753cb16.jpghttp://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...bGrE4zN1RQJX6w

Doc Ock 01-27-2013 08:29 PM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by The Squirrel (Post 25065809)
Star Trek 12. :o

Yeah, I can't stand the idea of it being called Star Trek 2. Its not really Star Trek 2. Although I say Doctor Who Series 7 all the time...

Iceman 01-27-2013 08:55 PM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by psylockolussus (Post 25065773)
Well at least this movie would get more hype now the director of Star Trek 2 is directing Star Wars 7.

Yeah, Star Trek needs more awareness outside US & this will help it get that.

wobbly 01-27-2013 10:35 PM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by redhawk23 (Post 25071447)
So as I posted in the comic thread, there is some kind of crazy stuff in the lead in comic for this film.

Possible spoilers.

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:
In the comic, Robert April, who non cannon sources have long listed as the first captain of the Enterprise shows up. The comic book rendering of April has more than just a passing resemblance to actor Nolan North who has an unspecified role in the film.
http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/b...ps6753cb16.jpghttp://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...bGrE4zN1RQJX6w

Interesting. ...Since April was the 1st captain of the original TOS era Enterprise, and he was Captain for it's first decade of service before Pike took over, they may be using that to explain why the Abrams ship was built later and made it's maiden voyage under Pike (and is obviously different in size & design).

Perhaps the TOS era ship we all know did still exist in this new timeline (though it would still have been built after Kirk's birth), but it was destroyed while under April's command. With that and other ripples from Nero's interference with the past the original 'Constitution Class' design was discarded in favour of the Abram's one (maybe).

DarkKnight88 01-27-2013 10:49 PM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
It's funny that they call this Star Trek 2 and the next one Star Trek 3 when in reality they're still part of the same timeline but the next James Bond is called Bond 24 and Skyfall was known as Bond 23 before it got its name when it probably should've been called Bond 3 since it was a new timeline. My head just exploded. :oldrazz:

redhawk23 01-28-2013 01:59 AM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by wobbly (Post 25076609)
Interesting. ...Since April was the 1st captain of the original TOS era Enterprise, and he was Captain for it's first decade of service before Pike took over, they may be using that to explain why the Abrams ship was built later and made it's maiden voyage under Pike (and is obviously different in size & design).

Perhaps the TOS era ship we all know did still exist in this new timeline (though it would still have been built after Kirk's birth), but it was destroyed while under April's command. With that and other ripples from Nero's interference with the past the original 'Constitution Class' design was discarded in favour of the Abram's one (maybe).

From what I've heard around the Star Trek BBS boards, originally the Kelvin destruction in the first film was originally pitched as the destruction of the classic enterprise we all know and love but the studio put a hard smackdown on that idea.

Dark Raven 01-28-2013 08:50 AM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by redhawk23 (Post 25077919)
From what I've heard around the Star Trek BBS boards, originally the Kelvin destruction in the first film was originally pitched as the destruction of the classic enterprise we all know and love but the studio put a hard smackdown on that idea.

And a good thing too. That could've been perceived as a slap in the face or giving the middle finger by fans.

RetrogradeOrbit 01-28-2013 09:14 AM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
If that`s true, then I think that was the best call by any studio ever in the history of Mankind... :)

Chris B 01-28-2013 05:15 PM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by wobbly (Post 25076609)
Interesting. ...Since April was the 1st captain of the original TOS era Enterprise, and he was Captain for it's first decade of service before Pike took over, they may be using that to explain why the Abrams ship was built later and made it's maiden voyage under Pike (and is obviously different in size & design).

Perhaps the TOS era ship we all know did still exist in this new timeline (though it would still have been built after Kirk's birth), but it was destroyed while under April's command. With that and other ripples from Nero's interference with the past the original 'Constitution Class' design was discarded in favour of the Abram's one (maybe).

Was the original canon ever clear on whether another Enterprise was ever in service between the NX-01 and NCC-1701? Maybe that could be the case here, and even if there wasn't, this being an alternate timeline could allow them to establish there having been one in this universe.

wobbly 01-28-2013 10:11 PM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris B (Post 25081643)
Was the original canon ever clear on whether another Enterprise was ever in service between the NX-01 and NCC-1701? Maybe that could be the case here, and even if there wasn't, this being an alternate timeline could allow them to establish there having been one in this universe.

I don't think there's any in canon reference to an inbetween ship from the NX-01 to the NCC-1701, though there's a lot of time there (about 80 years or so) so there could well have been.

However, the constitution class (original 1701 design) was said to have been in service for 40 years before the TOS 5 year mission. I don't think it was ever stated on film though, so that's up in the air as far as canon goes, however if we were to assume that is correct then that design of ship would have existed at the time Nero came back.

And afaik the only references for Robert April came from the animated series, which confirmed he was the 1st captain of the original 1701 before Pike (not a different ship, the same one)

I think Roddenbury stated he accepted that bit of the cartoon was canon himself (Robert April was the original name he wanted to use for the Pilot episode before changing it to Christopher Pike), but from memory I can't I recall if the April name was ever used in any series or film, so they can play that one as they wish I guess.

Anyways, with the comic confirming April did command a ship called Enterprise, that does give them the opportunity to explain why the Abrams 1701 is rather different than the TOS one. Would actually be neat if they showed us the original design in action, if only briefly.

Chris B 01-29-2013 12:30 AM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by wobbly (Post 25083725)
I don't think there's any in canon reference to an inbetween ship from the NX-01 to the NCC-1701, though there's a lot of time there (about 80 years or so) so there could well have been.

However, the constitution class (original 1701 design) was said to have been in service for 40 years before the TOS 5 year mission. I don't think it was ever stated on film though, so that's up in the air as far as canon goes, however if we were to assume that is correct then that design of ship would have existed at the time Nero came back.

And afaik the only references for Robert April came from the animated series, which confirmed he was the 1st captain of the original 1701 before Pike (not a different ship, the same one)

I think Roddenbury stated he accepted that bit of the cartoon was canon himself (Robert April was the original name he wanted to use for the Pilot episode before changing it to Christopher Pike), but from memory I can't I recall if the April name was ever used in any series or film, so they can play that one as they wish I guess.

Anyways, with the comic confirming April did command a ship called Enterprise, that does give them the opportunity to explain why the Abrams 1701 is rather different than the TOS one. Would actually be neat if they showed us the original design in action, if only briefly.

This would be a bit of a retcon, but maybe they could say that the ship was actually undergoing a major refitting during Kirk's years at the Academy instead of being built for the first time as the film suggested?

Though I'll admit it would be a tall order to pull that off convicingly.

wobbly 01-29-2013 07:30 AM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris B (Post 25084811)
This would be a bit of a retcon, but maybe they could say that the ship was actually undergoing a major refitting during Kirk's years at the Academy instead of being built for the first time as the film suggested?

Though I'll admit it would be a tall order to pull that off convicingly.

Yeah, I don't think they can get away with having the new ship as a 're-fit' of the old one. It's more than twice the size for starters (it's about the same length as TNG's Enterprise E).

Maybe it will be that the original TOS NCC-1701 was lost/destroyed while under April's command, and when they built the new one they simply kept the same registry number.

Dark Raven 01-29-2013 08:13 AM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
I don't think there will be any "original" TOS NCC-1701 in this continuity. The one we're seeing which is a lot bigger IS the same "original" Enterprise. It's just that, in this altered timeline, things have developed differently because Nero travelled back and upset things. When the Kelvin was destroyed, that changed continuity. The Enterprise was therefore constructed on a larger scale and with a different interior design than it would have been had the Nero incident not occurred.

wobbly 01-29-2013 09:44 AM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dark Raven (Post 25086067)
I don't think there will be any "original" TOS NCC-1701 in this continuity. The one we're seeing which is a lot bigger IS the same "original" Enterprise. It's just that, in this altered timeline, things have developed differently because Nero travelled back and upset things. When the Kelvin was destroyed, that changed continuity. The Enterprise was therefore constructed on a larger scale and with a different interior design than it would have been had the Nero incident not occurred.

Maybe, but I wonder why they'd throw Robert April into the mix now as that only convolutes matters for the reasons I noted: The TOS 'Constitution Class' design was already in service before Nero came back in time (in the original timeline the Enterprise itself that used that design, that April was first to captain, I think would have been built when Kirk was in his teens).

The new Enterprise was being built when he enrols at the academy, which is presumably later than he did in the original timeline due to not having his Dad around (so while he took a shortcut to the Captain's seat in the new timeline, he is not vastly younger than when took the chair in the original one). This would place the new ships construction a good few years after the TOS one was built, which we now know did have a predecessor in this new timeline.

So just what Enterprise did Robert April Captain in this new timeline? We know it was called Enterprise, the TOS design was in service prior to Nero's interference, but that's it atm.

So I dunno. It seems a bit redundant to use him at all if not to fill in the questions as to what changed things to make the new ship so different. His ship might end up being different than anything we know, or it might be the one we know very well.

Will have to wait & see atm.

Kane52630 01-29-2013 10:51 AM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Inside Look at J.J. Abrams' Star Trek Into Darkness

Quote:

Esurance, one of the sponsors of 2009's Star Trek, are continuing the tradition by offering a fans an inside look at the upcoming Star Trek Into Darkness. Starting today, the company will be offering a variety of things for fans, such as:

An exclusive behind-the-scenes look into the making of the next thrilling adventure for Captain Kirk, Spock and the Enterprise crew on the Esurance Facebook page.
Embrace the Darkness Sweepstakes – Esurance will send one lucky winner and a guest to the U.S. premiere of "Star Trek Into Darkness." The winner will also receive $2,500 in travel expenses.
"The Vulcanizer" – Fans can upload and share photos of themselves magically "transformed" into Vulcans.
Downloads – Exclusive movie-themed content such as wallpaper for screensavers, icons and movie posters are available to download and share with friends.

You can access all of these things at the Esurance Facebook page.

Star Trek Into Darkness stars John Cho, Bruce Greenwood, Simon Pegg, Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, Karl Urban, Anton Yelchin, Benedict Cumberbatch, Alice Eve and Peter Weller. It will be released in 3D, 2D and IMAX 3D theaters on May 17.

In the wake of a shocking act of terror from within their own organization, the crew of The Enterprise is called back home to Earth. In defiance of regulations and with a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads his crew on a manhunt to capture an unstoppable force of destruction and bring those responsible to justice.

As our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew.
https://www.facebook.com/Esurance/app_131772983653777

(SUPERMAN) 01-29-2013 10:43 PM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Ok let’s get the Timeline straight, so here it goes

Prime Timeline Enterprise NX-01 Launch - 2151 - Decommissioned - 2161
Alternative Timeline Enterprise NX-01 Launch - 2151 - Decommissioned - 2161

Alternative Timeline James T Kirk DOB - 2233
Prime Timeline James T Kirk DOB - 2233

Alternative Timeline Enterprise 1701 Launch - 2258
Prime Timeline Enterprise 1701 Launch - 2245

The prime timeline Enterprise 1701 was launched 12 years after Kirk’s birth so was not in service when Nero appeared and the NX-01 Enterprise was Decommissioned 72 years before Kirk was born and at this time we don’t know of any other ship named Enterprise that was in service between the dates above, so what Enterprise April claims to have commanded is still a mystery and it will be interesting to find out what they’re doing with this story line and how much it plays into the movie.

wobbly 01-30-2013 07:26 AM

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by (SUPERMAN) (Post 25091003)
Ok let’s get the Timeline straight, so here it goes

Prime Timeline Enterprise NX-01 Launch - 2151 - Decommissioned - 2161
Alternative Timeline Enterprise NX-01 Launch - 2151 - Decommissioned - 2161

Alternative Timeline James T Kirk DOB - 2233
Prime Timeline James T Kirk DOB - 2233

Alternative Timeline Enterprise 1701 Launch - 2258
Prime Timeline Enterprise 1701 Launch - 2245

The prime timeline Enterprise 1701 was launched 12 years after Kirk’s birth so was not in service when Nero appeared and the NX-01 Enterprise was Decommissioned 72 years before Kirk was born and at this time we don’t know of any other ship named Enterprise that was in service between the dates above, so what Enterprise April claims to have commanded is still a mystery and it will be interesting to find out what they’re doing with this story line and how much it plays into the movie.

Those dates seem correct to me, and as you say the Enterprise April captained in the new timeline, and when he commanded it, is a mystery atm, however what I'm saying is the TOS design (not the NCC-1701 Enterprise, but it's design) was in service when Nero arrived: Starfleet was using that design for about 40 years or so before the TOS 5 year mission (not sure if this ever was stated on film though), which dates it back to around 2220-2225, so it is possible Aprils ship did use that same design.

If they do use it I would guess they will change the number though.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com, A property of CraveOnline, a divison of AtomicOnline, LLC © 2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.