Star Trek Into Darkness

Jack Lynt

Jack Lynt

Oh man, this looks awesome. Really great job on this trailer. Totally psyches me up to see it.

Rousing, that's what it is.

Just what a trailer should be, usually.

iTune Movie Trailers

I mean to direct you to the teaser posted 12/17 with a runtime of 1:57


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdgRx94W5ko
 
Last edited:
JoshL said:
....which is why some of us like them more.... ;)
Click to expand...

hehe. Well, when it comes to being less like the original series, we totally agree.

But I feel like for something to be Star Trek, it has to have at it's core certain tenants, such as the emphasis on peace and equality. And usually they should include a good Holmesian mystery (although I'll grant that's usually more a feature of the tv shows than the films.)

Not to say that they can't be good movies without those things. They just don't have that Star Trek flavor. And for the record I really liked the 2009 Trek. Like, a lot.
 
Recently went to see the Hobbit in IMAX and I believe they showed around 8 minutes of Star Trek Into Darkness. It looked pretty impressive, but had a really unique look to it. I can't quite put my finger on what it was.
 
Yeah, the lens flares. I was thinking about that. But does it look like maybe he's toned those down a bit for this one? Maybe a bit.

I think the nice thing about the JJ Abrams film, and looks like the next one too, is that he's brought them back closer to The Original Series...only with much bigger budgets etc.

TNG and DS9 brought us, as Patrick Stewart likes to say, a little hour long morality play a week. Which is fine. I got into those too. But. They largely forgot about, and it seems more like they eschewed, action & adventure and the like. Which is fine. Because that's just not what they were or what they wanted to be, apparently.

I think that was a reason why Farscape was such a breath of fresh air. It brought back action & adventure to episodic scifi television. It brought back sexy. It brought back fun. TNG and DS9 were positively stuffy by comparison. Instead, they brought us something more like a sermon a week.

So, I would suggest that the Abrams films got themselves a little bit of Farscape in 'em (at least the one we've seen so far), and that's a very welcome thing. For me anyway.
 
Abrams's intention was to bring a Star Wars feel to Star Trek. Which is fine, but they do need some of those "morality plays" because that's what Trek is about. Even the Original Series was that.
 
hehe. Well, when it comes to being less like the original series, we totally agree.
Click to expand...

Actually, I feel the opposite. I feel like Abrams' movies are bringing us back to the adventure and slightly dark tone of the original series - womanizer Kirk, fighting, chasing, phasers, monsters and villians! The updates to the ship and technology don't bother me, because it's not about the future as seen from the 60's, but rather the future of now.


But I feel like for something to be Star Trek, it has to have at it's core certain tenants, such as the emphasis on peace and equality. And usually they should include a good Holmesian mystery
Click to expand...

That reminds me more of NEXT GENERATION, which I found a bit too P.C. I'm okay with that show, but not that attached. Yes, the original series did hit on those points - first interracial TV kiss, women in command positions, multinational crew, etc. But, that was usually a backdrop to the tale and not forced down your throat. They didn't focus on Chekov being Russian; he just was.

The original series was very much a product of the cold war. You would see Kirk infiltrating Romulan and Klingon strongholds. The humanoid races were barbaric, while higher intelligences, like the Metrons and the (cue the Information Society music!) "Da da da, duh da da da...Pure Energy" aliens would occasionally show up and remind us about how far we had to go. Yes, they survived World War III, but the show was about the illogical and flawed human condition. Cue NOMAD's sterilization of imperfect lifeforms.

I really enjoy a good drama, like "The City On The Edge Of Forever," where Kirk travels back in time and falls in love with Joan Collins. The message of that episode was that a pacifist thwarts America's WWII ambitions and we fall to the Nazis. So, they had to let her die! Rather deep and conflicting.

The original series had some reeeeaaally dark moments that I'll never forget. I enjoyed the episodes where the stakes were raised and a lot of security guys got offed, :lol: whether being melted by the Horta ("Devil In The Dark"), disintegrated by Vaal's lightning ("The Apple") or speared by giant ape monsters ("The Galileo 7"). Pretty cool video, here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3cL1Aofy90


But,..........the very best thing about the original series were those moments of conflict and humor generated by Kirk, Spock and McCoy! I so loved that and the 2009 STAR TREK did that the better than any other movie or spin-off series! Kirk cheating and beating Spock's test, using the elder Spock's advanced knowledge to get back on the ship and elicit young Spock's deep emotions to make him "lose it." That was the stuff I most enjoyed. The new plot was a so so rehash, but the character interaction and pacing was brilliant.

For about 20 years, I have imagined doing an updated STAR TREK with the young version of the characters on incredible adventures. I hate that Abrams beat me to it, but I love what he's done, so far.
 
"It's a lot like Star Trek: The Next Generation... in every way it's superior... but will never be as recognized as the original."

- Wayne Campbell
 
It's a trailer. They're not supposed to give you the entire movie. They're supposed to be action-packed, like this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=638S8n2_Ab8

I trust in Abrams. I was skeptical, going into his 2009 Trek, but he delivered in wonderful fashion. Yeah, his version is a tad more Baysian than any other Trek, but I think he makes it work, while being faithful to the original characters that we know and love.

BTW -- what do we make of this?
 
Scoopicman said:
Actually, I feel the opposite. I feel like Abrams' movies are bringing us back to the adventure and slightly dark tone of the original series - womanizer Kirk, fighting, chasing, phasers, monsters and villians! The updates to the ship and technology don't bother me, because it's not about the future as seen from the 60's, but rather the future of now.




That reminds me more of NEXT GENERATION, which I found a bit too P.C. I'm okay with that show, but not that attached. Yes, the original series did hit on those points - first interracial TV kiss, women in command positions, multinational crew, etc. But, that was usually a backdrop to the tale and not forced down your throat. They didn't focus on Chekov being Russian; he just was.

The original series was very much a product of the cold war. You would see Kirk infiltrating Romulan and Klingon strongholds. The humanoid races were barbaric, while higher intelligences, like the Metrons and the (cue the Information Society music!) "Da da da, duh da da da...Pure Energy" aliens would occasionally show up and remind us about how far we had to go. Yes, they survived World War III, but the show was about the illogical and flawed human condition. Cue NOMAD's sterilization of imperfect lifeforms.

I really enjoy a good drama, like "The City On The Edge Of Forever," where Kirk travels back in time and falls in love with Joan Collins. The message of that episode was that a pacifist thwarts America's WWII ambitions and we fall to the Nazis. So, they had to let her die! Rather deep and conflicting.

The original series had some reeeeaaally dark moments that I'll never forget. I enjoyed the episodes where the stakes were raised and a lot of security guys got offed, :lol: whether being melted by the Horta ("Devil In The Dark"), disintegrated by Vaal's lightning ("The Apple") or speared by giant ape monsters ("The Galileo 7"). Pretty cool video, here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3cL1Aofy90


But,..........the very best thing about the original series were those moments of conflict and humor generated by Kirk, Spock and McCoy! I so loved that and the 2009 STAR TREK did that the better than any other movie or spin-off series! Kirk cheating and beating Spock's test, using the elder Spock's advanced knowledge to get back on the ship and elicit young Spock's deep emotions to make him "lose it." That was the stuff I most enjoyed. The new plot was a so so rehash, but the character interaction and pacing was brilliant.

For about 20 years, I have imagined doing an updated STAR TREK with the young version of the characters on incredible adventures. I hate that Abrams beat me to it, but I love what he's done, so far.
Click to expand...

I will defer to your opinion on TOS, since I'm not much of a fan and certainly haven't seen all the episodes. I've tried it from time to time after getting into TNG, and actually, what surprised me most were the similarities. I always thought of TOS as pretty much simple sci-fi action and adventure. But when I've gone back and watched some they really did have those talky (in a good way) scripts and the writing was very thoughtful with interesting dilemmas and puzzles.

Sure, was there more errant killing of redshirts, could you call it darker at times and was Kirk a womanizer? Absolutely.

But at the same time, when I said I felt like the new incarnation was getting farther from Trek, I wasn't really talking about the 'darkness' but just more that flavor of the moral complexity of the storylines. '09 Trek had a little of that, but it could have used more. I feel like if they had really had gone full-on Trek, we would have delved deeper into the mind of the Romulan dude and a more diplomatic or clever way to stop his rampage would have been tried, rather than just 'whoosh we kick ass with our superior military and tactical training.' But maybe you're right and that's more of a Picard-type approach and the Kirk approach was appropriate.

My point? I have no idea.

End rant.
 
Dreadylocks said:
I've tried it from time to time after getting into TNG, and actually, what surprised me most were the similarities. I always thought of TOS as pretty much simple sci-fi action and adventure. But when I've gone back and watched some they really did have those talky (in a good way) scripts and the writing was very thoughtful with interesting dilemmas and puzzles.
Click to expand...

There are definitely some similarities. But, also some huge differences - mainly that the old show was going for adults (high cut uniforms and violence) and the new ones were more family dramas. I don't really want to knock on NEXT GENERATION, but there are things about it that never sat with me (the Holodeck - all the time this crew has to play around!, no money or materialism - the original talked about money in the form of credits - there are families and kids onboard, whereas the original was geared more for battle and the unknown). STAR TREK 2009 reminded me more of the original series - a military vessel in a galaxy full of big threats; characters that are really at odds with each other, as they try to gel. Kirk cheating death. :yes:

I hear from many detractors (on Youtube, other forums, etc.) about how the new movies are getting away from TREK. Well, maybe away from producer, Rick Berman's softer style of TNG and its spin-offs, but, for me, closer to the aggressiveness of the original.

After all that I just said, I do watch NEXT GENERATION, VOYAGER and ENTERPRISE (rarely DEEP SPACE 9 as the wormhole is more of a STARGATE situation). I do like them and some are really great, but I'm casual overall.

There is no right and wrong about this, Dready. I very much respect you and always have. It's a matter of fan preference. My position comes from watching the originals, since the 60's. They imprinted on me as a small boy and I like them better than STAR WARS. I'm a hyperactive freak, :abduct: so I'm drawn to TERMINATOR and ALIEN kind of sci-fi. You can thank old STAR TREK for that! Big scary Ted Cassidy androids, etc.

The show was damn subliminal, too. Hit him with that ... stalagmite, Jim! :lol:

url
 
It's not as though Star Wars or the J.J. Abrams Star Trek films don't have morality melodrama in them. In all of those films, the heros are making decisions about what's right and what's wrong left and right and all of the time. Maybe those films just do more showing than talking.

A good way to put it might be: actions speak louder than words in TOS and the Abrams (and the Star Wars) films. =)


Cracker Funk said:
BTW -- what do we make of this?
Click to expand...

I love that. I mean, if they're messing with us, that's awesome. If there's some kind of irony or multiple levels of drama going on with that, I thinks that freaking awesome. I mean, it would just make the fiction deeper, so to speak, and more clever, and possibly, more satisfying. 'Course it depends upon just what's going on with that and just how clever (or not clever) it turns out to be and where, if anywhere, they take it. Hey, if they're going that "deep," good for us, I suspect. =)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top