Star Trek Into Darkness ::: May 17, 2013

We'll see if it's Mitchell, because wasn't Benecio up for it? I can't see him as Gary Mitchell.

I frakkin hate this movie because its existence means it will be harder to pretend that NuTrek never happened.

Sykes, don't you know it's not okay to not like this movie. You only don't like it because it's not EXACTLY like that old boring show for nerds that was never any good anywayjust shut up and watch the movie and have fun stop thinking about things so much.

Well, that was my stab at the general feeling I get when I say I don't like nuTrek.

Though sadly a lot of the criticism I have seen dwells on the timeline being altered and Vulcan being destroyed. Ya know, instead of focusing on the script that is an incoherent tornado of broad stereotypes of the old characters spouting their best-known lines amidst a flurry of meaningless explosions.

Lots of Trek nerds nitpick on stupid things that are inconsequential.

Gives a bad impression of the overall fandom. Reminds me of how hardly anyone remarks on the actual things that are wrong with the scripts for SUPERMAN RETURNS and instead focus on the aethetics of the costumes or the direction of his spitcurl and so on (for the record, it is wrong in that movie)

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Well, that was my stab at the general feeling I get when I say I don't like nuTrek.

I'm thinking the best way I have to put across my thoughts about AbramsTrek would be an animated image of dopily grinning post-op McMurphy in CUCKOO'S NEST and the words "I like it!"

Not sure what to make of this ... I posted something on trekmovie more than a week back, throwing out a possible, very farfetched scenario for the new movie that took into account all the back&forthing from writers and cast about who is and isn't who in the movie ... and it didn't post. Well, that wasn't the first time a post of mine didn't show up (they usually stay for awhile and then get deleted, though a few weeks back they deleted one, they put it back up after I complained downthread about its removal.)

Anyway, the only reason I could think that they deleted it was that I was somehow too close to the actual movie storyline ... so I reposted it using similar language ... and again, it didn't show up at all.

I don't know if my posts are flagged for certain key words or not, but if anybody else here reads that board, try posting on some Abrams13 thread and use words like MirrorGary or MirrorKhan and see if it goes through, OK?
In this one instance, I'd hate to think I was right.

They delete posts critical of nuTrek?

I remember it being a pretty rare thing a few years ago, but when i check in there (I read three or four stories a week maybe), there seems to be at least one or two people every few threads complaining about their posts being deleted. And those are cases where at least the complaints themselves aren't deleted!

I gotta say, as much as I scorn trekbbs for its bias & politics, I don't remember them ever censoring a post. They might ban you for calling one of their venerable untouchables on something, but they wouldn't erase what you wrote.

The worst was TheForce.net. I'm a nice guy, right? A good poster. Intelligent, thoughtful, with a little taste. I got banned endlessly from TF.n ten years ago for no reason.

Oh yeah, I hear they've asked fans to come up with a name for the new film because they can't think one up. How the frak are we supposed to name a film we don't know the story of? Hell, I still don't know the story of the last one!

The Rise of Star Trek
Star Trek Rises
Star Trek Continues
Star Trek First Adventure
Star Trek...

Hilly wrote:

The Rise of Star Trek
Star Trek Rises
.

Even as a TDKR reference, when I read this, it gave me an idea. The SUPERMAN films had that recurring visual signoff, with Reeve in orbit then waving as he passes camera.

The shot of the Abramsprise rising up out of ... what was it, Saturn's rings, or from inside a gas giant? That could be a signature image they reprise each film, even if they have something like the original voiceover. Plus the ship looks least bad from that angle as I recall.

Oh God, the Enterprise.

You mean the jungle gym hangar bay and the brewery engineering and the brewery supplemental communications and the weird tubes with big metal things that slice up the water sluicing through ... all the well-thought out stuff that proves Matt Jeffries didn't get anything right on the original series.

trevanian wrote:

You mean the jungle gym hangar bay and the brewery engineering and the brewery supplemental communications and the weird tubes with big metal things that slice up the water sluicing through ... all the well-thought out stuff that proves Matt Jeffries didn't get anything right on the original series.

yes, that. The Budweiser Factory in space.

Nothing about it makes sense size wise and angles don't really do her any good. Maybe the only time was...nope.



"No, A, B, C or bloody D"

if only it had been a little like this. Perhaps.

Very cool.

I like the NASA-like gantry. Retro, but effective.

I've been looking on youtube and haven't been able to find it, but there was a homemade video before Abrams09 came out, and it climaxed with the Enterprise falling out of the sky and impaling itself in the ground. I think the whole thing was a riff on the silly notion of building on Earth instead of in space, but the main thing was, IT WAS FUNNY. I have no idea what it was called, but some of you folks seem really good at finding stuff like this (thanks again for the PHANTOM OF THE OPEN HEARTH spotting.)

I like the gantry idea, but I'd like it with the sky elevator notion (it was in Clarke's FOUNTAINS OF PARADISE, and I remember reading Robert Abel wanted to do this effect in the worst way 30 odd years back.) So you see them walk into it on the ground, then pull back as they go up and you realize this lift goes ALL the way up, to orbit.

That'd be one heck of a turbolift from Earth to orbit. Imagine the ears would pop like the blazes :)

Sounds at least semi-official that the movie's title (no colon) is STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS.
http://trekmovie.com/2012/09/07/exclusive-star-trek-sequel-title-confirmed/


Must be a commentary on some of the 'quite honestly inferior' digital projection systems.

Given the domain names being bought, I'm guessing it's really the title. My thoughts? Meh.

I love the the Trekmovie poll shows support. STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS?

Jesus Fucking Christ.

If they had to go with that title I would have it as STAR TREK: INTO THE DARKNESS (actually, that sounds like a porno. Spock gets into Uhura)

Otherwise this sounds just like TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON

For some reason, I can't see that title and not think of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkMuXhHd4ak#t=1m9s

If that's the title, I'm calling this STAR TREK: FART OF DARKNESS.