Star Trek Into Darkness ::: May 17, 2013

Quote :

"The whole premise of this is that within an evolutionary construct there is no real problem with speciation and cross-species mating, there’s no problem with that at all, in fact that’s how you evolve, that’s how you get evolution, and so the end result of course is that evolution has no basic problem with bestiality or cross-species mating," said Pastor Swanson.

Has this guy ever picked up a biology text book?

Largo's Shark wrote:

Quote :

"The whole premise of this is that within an evolutionary construct there is no real problem with speciation and cross-species mating, there’s no problem with that at all, in fact that’s how you evolve, that’s how you get evolution, and so the end result of course is that evolution has no basic problem with bestiality or cross-species mating," said Pastor Swanson.

Has this guy ever picked up a biology text book?

It's not on his book list. A book list with one book on it.

Python wrote:

Roberto Orci on why they cast a pasty white guy as Khan.

Hilarious that it got almost the opposite reaction. The Indian community was pissed apparently. One of the most recognizable sci-fi villains is now another white guy. Frankly they just shouldnt have called him by that name. How many white guys named Singh does anyone know??

I mean they had the same concern about the Mandarin in Iron Man and while I hated that twist essentially they got away with it by making him essentially a whole different person entirely.

That is fucking hysterical. So "US" is white?

He is so full of shit. "As we went [through] the casting process" means going down the list because people passed on it. Like Ricky Gervais passed on Scotty, and then they said they envisioned Pegg all along.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

That is fucking hysterical. So "US" is white?

As much as I've never been a big buyer of "The Roddenberry Dream" -- the poor bastard's ashes must be spinning in... outer space or wherever they are.

Point is, it's not even like Tim Burton's BATMAN or Bryan Singer's SUPERMAN RETURNS where every bone-headedly wrong opinion the writer and director could at least defend with an intelligent, if misguided, rationale -- these guys are clearly just obliviously stupid.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

Point is, it's not even like Tim Burton's BATMAN or Bryan Singer's SUPERMAN RETURNS where every bone-headedly wrong opinion

:evil:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

That is fucking hysterical. So "US" is white?

He is so full of shit. "As we went [through] the casting process" means going down the list because people passed on it. Like Ricky Gervais passed on Scotty, and then they said they envisioned Pegg all along.

Yup, and it was also confirmed that Benico Del Toro turned down the rule of Khan, so this sudden concern for not demonizing an ethnic group comes off as total bullshit.

Largo's Shark wrote:

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

Point is, it's not even like Tim Burton's BATMAN or Bryan Singer's SUPERMAN RETURNS where every bone-headedly wrong opinion

:evil:

"I always figured Batman should kill people because... why wouldn't he?" is among the dumbest things Tim Burton has ever said and perhaps the biggest misinterpretation of the character possible. It's like having a decisive, optimistic Hamlet.

To be fair, Sharky does share Tim Burton's sentiment "comics? whatever", hence not having much of a problem with the interpretations presented in Tim Burton's Batman or Bryan Singer's Superman.

I thought that in general his opinion was that the more the movie subverts its audience, hero, and story the better it is.

So, like, if Captain America was driven to the depths of a crack addiction in his next movie, his psyche smashed by the crippling impotency which was an unsuspected side effect of the super soldier serum, and then the movie ended with the villains (American politicians) winning by setting off all the world's nukes and then, like, a big title card in Chinese reading "EVERYTHING YOU LIKE IS CHILDISH" followed by twenty minutes of grass blowing in the wind while a voice-over reads Anais Nin poetry.

Or something.

Meanwhile: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS -- a movie so well-written a dude who saw it thought Khan was an alien.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

Python wrote:

Roberto Orci on why they cast a pasty white guy as Khan.

Hilarious that it got almost the opposite reaction. The Indian community was pissed apparently. One of the most recognizable sci-fi villains is now another white guy. Frankly they just shouldnt have called him by that name. How many white guys named Singh does anyone know??

I mean they had the same concern about the Mandarin in Iron Man and while I hated that twist essentially they got away with it by making him essentially a whole different person entirely.

Common sense dictates that Orci should have said "we cast Cumberbatch in the role because we were really impressed with his audition".

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Who wants to laugh?

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/religion/christianity/star-trek-darkness-promotes-bestiality-says-pastor-kevin-swanson-audio

What an idiot ... better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, rather than open it and remove all doubt.

Blunt Instrument wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Who wants to laugh?

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/religion/christianity/star-trek-darkness-promotes-bestiality-says-pastor-kevin-swanson-audio

What an idiot ... better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, rather than open it and remove all doubt.

Now, there's an idea for this forum's tagline.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

So, like, if Captain America was driven to the depths of a crack addiction in his next movie, his psyche smashed by the crippling impotency which was an unsuspected side effect of the super soldier serum, and then the movie ended with the villains (American politicians) winning by setting off all the world's nukes and then, like, a big title card in Chinese reading "EVERYTHING YOU LIKE IS CHILDISH" followed by twenty minutes of grass blowing in the wind while a voice-over reads Anais Nin poetry.

Yes, yes and yes - with the exception of the 20 minute coda and Anais Nin recital. That would be pretentious.

An honest curious question Sharky -- what's the line for pretentious for you? I mean, I found Tree of Life and Thin Red Line to be really pretentious but I feel you'd disagree.

As far as later day Malick goes, I loved THE THIN RED LINE and the NEW WORLD, but hated THE TREE OF LIFE.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

Largo's Shark wrote:

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

Point is, it's not even like Tim Burton's BATMAN or Bryan Singer's SUPERMAN RETURNS where every bone-headedly wrong opinion

:evil:

"I always figured Batman should kill people because... why wouldn't he?" is among the dumbest things Tim Burton has ever said and perhaps the biggest misinterpretation of the character possible. It's like having a decisive, optimistic Hamlet.

To be fair to Burton, though, Batman *did* kill in the early run of Batman comics.

Harmsway wrote:

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

Largo's Shark wrote:

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

Point is, it's not even like Tim Burton's BATMAN or Bryan Singer's SUPERMAN RETURNS where every bone-headedly wrong opinion

:evil:

"I always figured Batman should kill people because... why wouldn't he?" is among the dumbest things Tim Burton has ever said and perhaps the biggest misinterpretation of the character possible. It's like having a decisive, optimistic Hamlet.

To be fair to Burton, though, Batman *did* kill in the early run of Batman comics.

Extremely early. Within the first year and before they had established his origin and character to any real extent. Back when he was mostly Shadow fan fiction in a cape and cowl.

Largo's Shark wrote:

As far as later day Malick goes, I loved THE THIN RED LINE and the NEW WORLD, but hated THE TREE OF LIFE.

That actually does help draw a distinction. I hated TREE OF LIFE as well, liked NEW WORLD, and mostly disliked THIN RED LINE.

The face of aphasia.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

Harmsway wrote:

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

Largo's Shark wrote:

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

Point is, it's not even like Tim Burton's BATMAN or Bryan Singer's SUPERMAN RETURNS where every bone-headedly wrong opinion

:evil:

"I always figured Batman should kill people because... why wouldn't he?" is among the dumbest things Tim Burton has ever said and perhaps the biggest misinterpretation of the character possible. It's like having a decisive, optimistic Hamlet.

To be fair to Burton, though, Batman *did* kill in the early run of Batman comics.

Extremely early. Within the first year and before they had established his origin and character to any real extent. Back when he was mostly Shadow fan fiction in a cape and cowl.

Sure. But I *like* those early comics, so I'll still defend 'em as being part of the character's history.

A long delayed update:

DOMESTIC

1. STAR TREK (2009):  $279,346,750
2. STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE:  $263,464,670
3. STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME:  $232,770,740
4. STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS:$212,456,669
7. STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT:  $136,387,060
8. STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY:  $127,854,490
9. STAR TREK: GENERATIONS:  $118,730,450
10. STAR TREK: INSURRECTION:  $100,126,710
11. STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER:  $97,906,800
12. STAR TREK: NEMESIS:  $55,908,260


INTERNATIONAL

1. STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS: $201,700,000
2. STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE:  $181,736,110
3. STAR TREK (2009):  $138,681,630
4. STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT:  $80,029,790
5. STAR TREK: GENERATIONS:  $66,527,090
6. STAR TREK: INSURRECTION:  $60,486,590
7. STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME: $49,404,350
8. STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN:  $43,583,300
9. STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY:  $37,560,070
10. STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER:  $33,752,620
11. STAR TREK: NEMESIS:  $31,096,340
12. STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK:  $23,561,950



WORLDWIDE

1. STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE:  $445,203,980
2. STAR TREK (2009):  $418,028,390
3. STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS: $414,156,669
4. STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME:  $282,177,220
5. STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN:  $233,735,820
6. STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT:  $216,416,850
7. STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK:  $194,708,340
8. STAR TREK: GENERATIONS:  $185,257,540
9. STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY:  $165,414,560
10. STAR TREK: INSURRECTION:  $160,613,300
11. STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER:  $131,661,300
12. STAR TREK: NEMESIS:  $87,004,600

Paramount's international marketing efforts yielded the biggest grosses outside the States for any Trek film, but INTO DARKNESS hasn't grown the same in the US.  It's worth noting that this summer is the strongest in ticket sales since 2004 so far, so competition is far stronger than it was in 2009.  It's enough to green light another movie, but I would say not enough to put another $200 million into it.