Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4

[roach]

So because its Star Trek everything has to be about space?

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

If it's about Khan and/or Kirk possibly dying, I think a lot of guessed that on our own.

Spoiler

You don't know how he would come back...

 

[roach]

Spoiler

You don't know how he would come back...

Spoiler

volcanoe diving

 

[Compi716]

Spoiler

You don't know how he would come back...

Spoiler

Heh. Is it something from classic Trek?

 

[roach]

Spoiler

force ghost

 

[MrMaooz]

So....do you guys know what time the trailer is coming tmrw?

 

[Solidus]

http://badassdigest.com/2013/04/15/its-khan-vs-the-blur-tool-in-new-star-trek-into-darkness-poster/

Speaking to Hollywood Reporter, a rep from Paramount straight up admits that they are trying to "get away from the Trekness of it all" in the marketing and emphasize how earthbound the film is.


100% of the reason why I'd rather see Trek return to the small screens rather than getting a film every half decade or so.

First off...if you read this.....it's saying the "marketing" is trying to stay away from the Trekiness....not the film itself. Re-read the article. They seem to be talking mainly about the posters and oversees marketing.

I will say this as some one that is a big Trek fan.

I think some have a what I call "TNG skewed" vision of Trek. Now I have been a Trek fan since a little kid, own all the DVD's and what Blu-Ray's there are for all the films TNG, TOS, and DS9. So I'm not saying this as just a general fan. But many do seem to think that the universe of Trek just revolves around Picard and the way he viewed everything. Including the Prime Directive the mission of the Enterprise and the Federation itself.

I've recently in the past year gone through all of DS9, all of TNG, and recently am half way through TOS and came to quite a realization. Each of the Captains really represented the heart of the show, and a different view point of the universe that Trek is set in. But most do find (including myself) TNG to be our favorite, therefore Picard's point of view. But the reality of it is there was many other points of view. Picard was the best, but did have massive flaws, even in his philosphy which they never really got into as much. I mean at times the Prime Directive was great in TNG, at other times it was so far up it's own butt it was just cruel and made no sense as Spock would say "That is not logical." Picard was a by the book man, his view of everything was following the rules no matter what, even at the expense of innocents and his crew. Though lots of times he would find a way, or some one else would get in trouble (Like Data in Penpals) to end up saving many. But many seem to think this is what Trek is at it's core. I say...no. It is a perspective of one in the Trek world. And to me when many scream "We want more Trek like stuff i these films" it's more along the lines of they want the people to think like Picard and his crew.

Clearly from the other series, not everyone was like Picard...and far from it. Gene even wanted Picard to be very different than Kirk, and later when (Rick) made DS9 it went to even a different place. Unveiling that a lot of things happen out there that Picard's way of thinking would not fix no matter what. What Sisko did to ensure peace with Romulus comes to mind (with what Garak did). Sisko did some other things that I know Picard would have been completely against.

Having said that it's interesting what many consider to "make something Trek". After watching a lot of TOS, really even Gene's son said one time that his dad would have loved to do more action heavy pieces it was just the fact that it was TV the technology and budget were just not there. But in TOS there were many episodes that were adventurous, and action filled (for it's day). I mean there are many scenes where Kirk spends 15 minutes in (today's standards) a boring pointless brawl. That could have been done in a fraction of the time. But back then a lot of the slowness was not really just because it was the style, it was also the limitations of what they could do. They could not have big scenes and a lot of stuff re-watching these things they could cut out 20 minutes in lot of episodes. Many scenes and parts really did not add to characters/story just some of the slowness I've noticed is really just trying to fill time. Now this is not all the time, but there are many times I've noticed this.

However this does not take away my love for it, I knew the limitations. But I think some see these things as crucial to making something Trek. I remember a friend who was not into Trek (and very intelligent) just said it was boring. And many see it that way, and sometimes there is a lot of truth to that. Not with some of the stories but just a lot of filler to make up for lack of budget ect.

Now having said that I think some forget Kirk in a lot of TOS episodes disregards orders, does his own thing and gets in a lot of adventures (for the days times) there are also many episodes Earth bound throughout the multiple series. And honestly STID's trailers show a lot of "space" and other worlds. So I don't think many have to worry about it being all Earth bound.

There are many things that make Trek Trek, but some get certain view points of what makes it that. To me a lot put on the TNG skew of philosophic and how they dealt with problems. Kirk usually fought his way out, Picard would "talk" his way out. But nothing was wrong with both.

In conclusion these films are for sure Star Trek "light" but they are still fundamentally Trek. Just not as much so due to the limitations of film and what you can do with it. But to me they are still Trek through and through. really watching the TOS recently again has re-affirmed that to me. I do want a new TV show. But that's why I think many should watch STID. Because the better this does BO wise it will allow for a new series I bet. That's how TNG really got off the ground was because of the successful past few TOS movies.

So I too want a new Trek series, but I figure even a modern one will take some ides from recent stuff give it a little more thickness but still give it a modern feel of today's TV. Which there is nothing wrong with that. But I thinking Paramount is waiting to see how this film does. Because Trek has lost viewers for the past 15 years, it's lost a lot of it's spark. ST09 really helped re-ignite it and I'm hoping STID does more.

To me ST09 is a superb film, that really gets the broad strokes of TOS down and I love it for that. And to me STID looks like a continuation of that and I think there may be more surprises.

Now I'm not saying people cannot dislike these films but as a Trek fan I enjoy them and these are the reason I see them as Trek.

Go ahead Jamie spoil it for me!

 

[The Squirrel]

So because its Star Trek everything has to be about space?

Is Star Wars any good without there being some type of Wars invovled?

Star Trek should be about trekking the stars and getting into adventures.

This is movie is going to be good, but hopefully we can spread the wings of the franchise a little in the future.

 

[roach]

First off...if you read this.....it's saying the "marketing" is trying to stay away from the Trekiness....not the film itself. Re-read the article. They seem to be talking mainly about the posters and oversees marketing.

I will say this as some one that is a big Trek fan.

I think some have a what I call "TNG skewed" vision of Trek. Now I have been a Trek fan since a little kid, own all the DVD's and what Blu-Ray's there are for all the films TNG, TOS, and DS9. So I'm not saying this as just a general fan. But many do seem to think that the universe of Trek just revolves around Picard and the way he viewed everything. Including the Prime Directive the mission of the Enterprise and the Federation itself.

I've recently in the past year gone through all of DS9, all of TNG, and recently am half way through TOS and came to quite a realization. Each of the Captains really represented the heart of the show, and a different view point of the universe that Trek is set in. But most do find (including myself) TNG to be our favorite, therefore Picard's point of view. But the reality of it is there was many other points of view. Picard was the best, but did have massive flaws, even in his philosphy which they never really got into as much. I mean at times the Prime Directive was great in TNG, at other times it was so far up it's own butt it was just cruel and made no sense as Spock would say "That is not logical." Picard was a by the book man, his view of everything was following the rules no matter what, even at the expense of innocents and his crew. Though lots of times he would find a way, or some one else would get in trouble (Like Data in Penpals) to end up saving many. But many seem to think this is what Trek is at it's core. I say...no. It is a perspective of one in the Trek world. And to me when many scream "We want more Trek like stuff i these films" it's more along the lines of they want the people to think like Picard and his crew.

Clearly from the other series, not everyone was like Picard...and far from it. Gene even wanted Picard to be very different than Kirk, and later when (Rick) made DS9 it went to even a different place. Unveiling that a lot of things happen out there that Picard's way of thinking would not fix no matter what. What Sisko did to ensure peace with Romulus comes to mind (with what Garak did). Sisko did some other things that I know Picard would have been completely against.

Having said that it's interesting what many consider to "make something Trek". After watching a lot of TOS, really even Gene's son said one time that his dad would have loved to do more action heavy pieces it was just the fact that it was TV the technology and budget were just not there. But in TOS there were many episodes that were adventurous, and action filled (for it's day). I mean there are many scenes where Kirk spends 15 minutes in (today's standards) a boring pointless brawl. That could have been done in a fraction of the time. But back then a lot of the slowness was not really just because it was the style, it was also the limitations of what they could do. They could not have big scenes and a lot of stuff re-watching these things they could cut out 20 minutes in lot of episodes. Many scenes and parts really did not add to characters/story just some of the slowness I've noticed is really just trying to fill time. Now this is not all the time, but there are many times I've noticed this.

However this does not take away my love for it, I knew the limitations. But I think some see these things as crucial to making something Trek. I remember a friend who was not into Trek (and very intelligent) just said it was boring. And many see it that way, and sometimes there is a lot of truth to that. Not with some of the stories but just a lot of filler to make up for lack of budget ect.

Now having said that I think some forget Kirk in a lot of TOS episodes disregards orders, does his own thing and gets in a lot of adventures (for the days times) there are also many episodes Earth bound throughout the multiple series. And honestly STID's trailers show a lot of "space" and other worlds. So I don't think many have to worry about it being all Earth bound.

There are many things that make Trek Trek, but some get certain view points of what makes it that. To me a lot put on the TNG skew of philosophic and how they dealt with problems. Kirk usually fought his way out, Picard would "talk" his way out. But nothing was wrong with both.

In conclusion these films are for sure Star Trek "light" but they are still fundamentally Trek. Just not as much so due to the limitations of film and what you can do with it. But to me they are still Trek through and through. really watching the TOS recently again has re-affirmed that to me. I do want a new TV show. But that's why I think many should watch STID. Because the better this does BO wise it will allow for a new series I bet. That's how TNG really got off the ground was because of the successful past few TOS movies.

So I too want a new Trek series, but I figure even a modern one will take some ides from recent stuff give it a little more thickness but still give it a modern feel of today's TV. Which there is nothing wrong with that. But I thinking Paramount is waiting to see how this film does. Because Trek has lost viewers for the past 15 years, it's lost a lot of it's spark. ST09 really helped re-ignite it and I'm hoping STID does more.

To me ST09 is a superb film, that really gets the broad strokes of TOS down and I love it for that. And to me STID looks like a continuation of that and I think there may be more surprises.

Now I'm not saying people cannot dislike these films but as a Trek fan I enjoy them and these are the reason I see them as Trek.

Go ahead Jamie spoil it for me!

I agree 100%

 

[Solidus]

Is Star Wars any good without there being some type of Wars invovled?

Star Trek should be about trekking the stars and getting into adventures.

This is movie is going to be good, but hopefully we can spread the wings of the franchise a little in the future.

I agree that I want to see more of a full Trek turn in the third or more hopefully the "possible" new TV series. I will agree these films are Trek light no doubt about it. But still Trek, just....lol light. But I do agree. But to me what matters most is at least for these films is the broad strokes, and mainly that they are just well executed films.

 

[roach]

Is Star Wars any good without there being some type of Wars invovled?

Star Trek should be about trekking the stars and getting into adventures.

This is movie is going to be good, but hopefully we can spread the wings of the franchise a little in the future.

As I mentioned before Voyage Home has very little space trekking in it and its one of the better films.

 

[The Squirrel]

As I mentioned before Voyage Home has very little space trekking in it and its one of the better films.

Yes, and no argument here. But that was after three seasons and a few other movies that had a ton of space travel in it.

 

[roach]

Yes, and no argument here. But that was after three seasons and a few other movies that had a ton of space travel in it.

There were quite a few TOS episodes that weren't spacey....episodes that primarily took place on planets.

 

[redhawk23]

Yet Star Trek 4 is one of the more popular movies and its earthbound.

That doesn't mean that that is in any way ideal.

Star Trek 4 is enjoyable but when we're only getting any kind of Trek at all every half decade or so, a series of revenge plots and earthbound settings are a waste of potential.

And alien planets are not Earth.

 

[The Squirrel]

There were quite a few TOS episodes that weren't spacey....episodes that primarily took place on planets.

Other planets. In SPAAAACE.

 

[roach]

Other planets. In SPAAAACE.

Ok we'll judging by the trailer we know they go to other planets.

 

[redhawk23]

They do, but the whole main plot is about a threat to earth. That is in fact their selling point for non-American audiences.

 

[Octoberist]

They do, but the whole main plot is about a threat to earth. That is in fact their selling point for non-American audiences.

It does suck that compromises have to met with international audiences, since now it plays a huge role in the Box Office. But sometimes studies and big data aren't that 100% right and you'll end up not taking risks - marketing or not - as a studio.

 

[Octoberist]

NEW FOOTAGE SCREENED

Damon Lindelof then welcomed Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Alice Eve and John Cho to the stage to introduce 18 minutes of Star Trek Into Darkness, the first half of which was the previously-revealed IMAX prologue, screened at select theaters last December. (If you missed it, check out our writeup here). There have been a few alternations since then, most notably the removal of the Noel Clarke and Kayla Hassan Earthbound hospital scene that introduces Benedict Cumberbatch's John Harrison.

The footage continued slightly beyond what was shown in the prologue version and we see the Enterprise rise from the water of Nibiru so that it can position itself above the volcano and beam out Mr. Spock. He's met on the transporter pad by Kirk and McCoy and, while everyone else is relieved that he has survived, Spock sternly reminds Kirk that, by letting the Nibiru people see the Enterprise, he's broken the Prime Directive. Kirk tells him that everything's fine, but we cut to the planet where the Nibiru villagers have already drawn the starship in the sand and have begun to pray to it.

Jumping ahead what one assumes is quite a bit, we're on the Enterprise and Harrison is being held in sickbay. Kirk comes to him and says that he needs his help. Harrison sneers and asks what Kirk could possibly offer him.

"You said you'd do anything for your crew," Kirk says, though it's unclear exactly what crew he's referring to. "I can promise they'll be safe."

"Captain," Harrison smiles. "You can't even guarantee the safety of your own crew."

Still, Harrison agrees to go along with Kirk's plan. It seems that the Enterprise is left recuperating from a fight with another Dreadnought-class Starfleet vessel. It's noted that whatever ship this is, it's specifically built for combat. It and the Enterprise are rushing to repair themselves a la "Balance of Terror" and it's noted that the Dreadnought ship will have weapons back online soon.

Scotty, for some reason, is already over on the Dreadnought ship, keeping hidden. The plan is for Kirk and Harrison to eject themselves from a trash chute on the Enterprise, shoot through space debris and then have Scotty open an airlock just as they arrive at the other ship.

"That's like jumping from a moving car and trying to land in a shotglass," Scotty whispers into his communicator, not wanting to be overheard by whoever is in control of the other ship. He also refers to Harrison as "whoever you are," making it appear that whatever the true identity of Cumberbatch's character is, we're not going to learn it early on and that the mystery will even play as a minor joke within the film.

Kirk and Harrison wind up shooting out across the debris field, but Kirk's spacesuit is hit by wreckage and his faceplate begins to crack. Scotty, meanwhile, is apprehended by a massive security guard (a hugely muscular Starfleet officer) who demands to know what he's doing. Scotty tries to stall, but ultimately just apologizes to the guard, blasting open the hatch and sucking the guard into space just as Kirk and Harrison enter and skid across the airlock floor.

Read more at http://www.comingsoon.net/news/cinemaconnews.php?id=103036#qZ6d8SSXMA7htyx0.99

 

[georgec]

I still feel like Harrison isn't the main villain. I don't mean Cumberbatch's role will be small, but I think we're getting a Benicio del Toro Khan.

 

[Octoberist]

It feels like...his character will have redemption of some sort. I don't know..I still have a theory [BLACKOUT]that Benedict's character, whoever he is, will sacrifice himself at the end during to save the crew. Remember that reversal shot of that iconic scene from 'Star Trek 2'? People think Spock and Kirk swap places, but me thinks it's actually Benedict in the glass chamber.[/BLACKOUT]

 

[Octoberist]

I still feel like Harrison isn't the main villain. I don't mean Cumberbatch's role will be small, but I think we're getting a Benicio del Toro Khan.

It would be just insane if that was the case. The ole switch and bait..fooled even the nerdiest of bloggers.

 

[roach]

Masda just had a tie in commercial

 

[georgec]

It feels like...his character will have redemption of some sort. I don't know..I still have a theory [BLACKOUT]that Benedict's character, whoever he is, will sacrifice himself at the end during to save the crew. Remember that reversal shot of that iconic scene from 'Star Trek 2'? People think Spock and Kirk swap places, but me thinks it's actually Benedict in the glass chamber.[/BLACKOUT]

That's a pretty good theory. I like it. Whatever happens I think this film is going to have some major surprises in store, and I respect JJ for wanting to not tease too many aspects of the plot.

That said, while people have been wondering about TMOS marketing, I can't help feel that STID is riding a good wave of low key publicity. I don't know when this movie is going to screen, but if it gets early positive buzz it might do gangbusters.

 

[Octoberist]

Personally, I don't like the marketing for STID thus far, which includes the generic posters. After hearing what Paramont had to say about 'avoiding the Trekiness for the international crowd', now it makes sense.

The first film had a much better, more poetic (if that makes sense) marketing campaign.