Star Trek Into Darkness - Official poster revealed, teaser trailer now online

Status
Not open for further replies.
BlackGoku03 said:
I don't understand why people keep saying this. We truely don't know what he would think.

IF this was true though, he'd kill whoever made the TNG movies too.
Click to expand...

Roddenberry hates militaristic and "actiony" star trek stories. He publicly stated how much he disliked Wrath of Khan.

Which of course means that G.Rod couldn't be trusted with his own creation as Wrath of Khan is the greatest thing to ever have the Star Trek name attached to it.
 
Sinatar said:
Roddenberry hates militaristic and "actiony" star trek stories. He publicly stated how much he disliked Wrath of Khan.

Which of course means that G.Rod couldn't be trusted with his own creation as Wrath of Khan is the greatest thing to ever have the Star Trek name attached to it.
Click to expand...

Of course he would dislike Wrath of Khan. They kicked him off the production of the movies after the first motion picture under-performed. I bet he was salty!
 
Sinatar said:
Roddenberry hates militaristic and "actiony" star trek stories. He publicly stated how much he disliked Wrath of Khan.

Which of course means that G.Rod couldn't be trusted with his own creation as Wrath of Khan is the greatest thing to ever have the Star Trek name attached to it.
Click to expand...

I think you meant to say Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country.

Although, I completely understand the sentiment about Wrath of Khan. Undiscovered Country is just my personal favorite.
 
Sinatar said:
Roddenberry hates militaristic and "actiony" star trek stories. He publicly stated how much he disliked Wrath of Khan.

Which of course means that G.Rod couldn't be trusted with his own creation as Wrath of Khan is the greatest thing to ever have the Star Trek name attached to it.
Click to expand...

Didn't know he said that. I guess he was not in touch with what the fans wanted to see, which for some mediums is ok.

I don't know... I'd guess the same arguement could be made with the Sherlock Holmes movies. I liked those too while liking the older, slower movies and TV series.
 
PhoncipleBone said:
I think you meant to say Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country.

Although, I completely understand the sentiment about Wrath of Khan. Undiscovered Country is just my personal favorite.
Click to expand...

7c97743c-8e0a-4f11-9ac0-4943221689c2.gif
 
Maybe I'm just in a pissy mood, but blurgh on this trailer. F the 1000 modern blockbuster cliches on display here. And I thought the first reboot movie was terrific.
 
Nero was forgetabble/undercooked but it doesn't really matter - ST2009 soared on the impeccable casting and their chemistry rather than memorable villains or
good writing
. I expect the same from the sequel.
 
Wrath of Khan works as a science fiction story. Without the Genesis plot, Wrath of Khan would be closer to average for me. Bridging the TV/movie series was a great touch.

I'm conflicted on seeing the entirety of Starfleet centered around one villain. Nero had an army, albeit an undeveloped army. Looking forward to it though.
 
Solo said:
Nero was forgetabble/undercooked but it doesn't really matter - ST2009 soared on the impeccable casting and their chemistry rather than memorable villains or
good writing
. I expect the same from the sequel.
Click to expand...

Nero's mannerisms were hilarious.

WAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT! THE HULL! MAGNIFY!

That was about it though.
 
You can't make a two hour film that revolves around the crew finding a new fascinating nebula that is giving off electromagnetic fluctuations which cause the replicators to only manufacture Raktajino forcing Kirk & Co. to figure out the solution while getting hyper caffeinated from all the Raktajino they have to drink.

Not to mention that since this is a totally new timeline, I'm 100% ok with them doing whatever the fuck they want with this vision of Star Trek because quite frankly, so far, it's been awesome.
 
Most of the good or interesting Star Trek beyond the first two seasons of TOS was made in opposition to Roddenberry's increasingly out of touch vision of his own work.

Nearly all the TOS movies after the first one started out with crazy concepts from Roddenberry (like going back in time and having Spock shoot JFK) that most of the people around him rejected in favor of simpler adventure stories, which gave us the trilogy and ST VI.

TNG didn't get interesting (i.e. when it stopped ripping off old TOS plots) until Roddenberry's health started failing and he couldn't actively work on it as much. He had no input on DS9 really at all.

I wouldn't really put too much stock in "what would Roddenberry do?"
 
BrokenEchelon said:
You can't make a two hour film that revolves around the crew finding a new fascinating nebula that is giving off electromagnetic fluctuations which cause the replicators to only manufacture Raktajino forcing Kirk & Co. to figure out the solution while getting hyper caffeinated from all the Raktajino they have to drink.

Not to mention that since this is a totally new timeline, I'm 100% ok with them doing whatever the fuck they want with this vision of Star Trek because quite frankly, so far, it's been awesome.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a good episode though.
 
TangoAlphaLima said:
Seriously, be more open-minded people. I love Trek. I watched TNG religiously as a kid, and watched more than my fair share of the movies, TOS, DS9, & Voyager (never have tackled Enterprise). There's nothing wrong with Abrams making Trek more of an action movie. His first film was freakin' awesome, and this one will be as well. You don't need to have the same cookie cutter approach to every vision of this franchise.
Click to expand...


Oh, I'm pretty open-minded. The thing is that what Abrams has done with the last Star Trek movie already had little to do with what Roddenberry thought Star Trek is about and this new one apparently completes that process. The last Star Trek movie was all about action, the story was confusing, to say the least, and Abrams apparently wiped out the whole Star Trek timeline by introducing a new one and from now on using that one.
It was still a fun movie to watch, but it wasn't Star Trek as I understand the idea and message behind it. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe that "old" Star Trek is just dead or whatever, but I'll be damned before I call this a new approach or whatever. It's not even remotely close to the Star Trek that I have watched and enjoyed the last 20 years.
 
BrokenEchelon said:
You can't make a two hour film that revolves around the crew finding a new fascinating nebula that is giving off electromagnetic fluctuations which cause the replicators to only manufacture Raktajino forcing Kirk & Co. to figure out the solution while getting hyper caffeinated from all the Raktajino they have to drink.

Not to mention that since this is a totally new timeline, I'm 100% ok with them doing whatever the fuck they want with this vision of Star Trek because quite frankly, so far, it's been awesome.
Click to expand...

Can we still have Sulu run around shirtless and trying to swordfight people?

Anyway I liked the trailer, I'm really hoping I get the 9-minute cut when I go and see Hobbit in Imax next week. Are all IMAX showings getting it? Excited to step back into the universe, I rewatched ST09 last night and it was great fun.
 
PhoncipleBone said:
I think you meant to say Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country.

Although, I completely understand the sentiment about Wrath of Khan. Undiscovered Country is just my personal favorite.
Click to expand...

I can't argue with this, it's a very close second for me.

Also directed by the same guy who did Khan. They should have kept throwing money at him to direct them all.
 
WyndhamPrice said:
Most of the good or interesting Star Trek beyond the first two seasons of TOS was made in opposition to Roddenberry's increasingly out of touch vision of his own work.

Nearly all the TOS movies after the first one started out with crazy concepts from Roddenberry (like going back in time and having Spock shoot JFK) that most of the people around him rejected in favor of simpler adventure stories, which gave us the trilogy and ST VI.

TNG didn't get interesting (i.e. when it stopped ripping off old TOS plots) until Roddenberry's health started failing and he couldn't actively work on it as much. He had no input on DS9 really at all.

I wouldn't really put too much stock in "what would Roddenberry do?"
Click to expand...

Sometimes it is best to take a creator off his own creation before he drives it into the ground, if only there was some other big well known universe that had a creator that shouldn't have been allowed to continue and thankfully no longer will be the driving force behind it.
 
Frankfurter said:
Oh, I'm pretty open-minded. The thing is that what Abrams has done with the last Star Trek movie already had little to do with what Roddenberry thought Star Trek is about and this new one apparently completes that process. The last Star Trek movie was all about action, the story was confusing, to say the least, and Abrams apparently wiped out the whole Star Trek timeline by introducing a new one and from now on using that one.
It was still a fun movie to watch, but it wasn't Star Trek as I understand the idea and message behind it. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe that "old" Star Trek is just dead or whatever, but I'll be damned before I call this a new approach or whatever. It's not even remotely close to the Star Trek that I have watched and enjoyed the last 20 years.
Click to expand...

Whoa wait a minute. You can call the story anything but confusing.

Simple? Yes.

Confusing? No way Hose.

And from what people are saying in this thread, a lot of the good things about Star Trek didn't involve Roddenberry.
 
Sinatar said:
Roddenberry hates militaristic and "actiony" star trek stories. He publicly stated how much he disliked Wrath of Khan.

Which of course means that G.Rod couldn't be trusted with his own creation as Wrath of Khan is the greatest thing to ever have the Star Trek name attached to it.
Click to expand...

The worst season of TNG (Season 1) was the one he was most hands-on with. We also would not have gotten DS9 if he had a say in it.
 
Roddenberry wouldn't kill Abrams. He'd form a multinational coalition to attempt a peace treaty with Abrams by pontificating about humanity's place in the galaxy.
 
Completely forgot that the footage will only be shown in front of IMAX showings of The Hobbit. Looks like it's IMAX for me.
 
Solo said:
You know, its pretty fucking awesome that we're only now getting a teaser 5 months away from release. I hate the trend nowadays where we are seeing teasers 10 and 12 months out. STIT is doing it right. Teaser in December, full trailer in March, and done.
Click to expand...

I agree sooooooo much.
 
WyndhamPrice said:
Most of the good or interesting Star Trek beyond the first two seasons of TOS was made in opposition to Roddenberry's increasingly out of touch vision of his own work.

Nearly all the TOS movies after the first one started out with crazy concepts from Roddenberry (like going back in time and having Spock shoot JFK) that most of the people around him rejected in favor of simpler adventure stories, which gave us the trilogy and ST VI.

TNG didn't get interesting (i.e. when it stopped ripping off old TOS plots) until Roddenberry's health started failing and he couldn't actively work on it as much. He had no input on DS9 really at all.

I wouldn't really put too much stock in "what would Roddenberry do?"
Click to expand...

That's interesting because my main gripe with TNG was how there were so many episodes that seemingly went no where or were as you stated rehashed plots. DS9 was awesome to me because it always seemed to stay on a main plot even if it had a few episodes that had nothing to with it. I always thought it was because they were on a stationary space station and not a starship, but it was actually because Roddenberry had nothing to do with it. Amazing.

Never knew Roddenberry=Lucas.
 
Frankfurter said:
It was still a fun movie to watch, but it wasn't Star Trek as I understand the idea and message behind it. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe that "old" Star Trek is just dead or whatever, but I'll be damned before I call this a new approach or whatever. It's not even remotely close to the Star Trek that I have watched and enjoyed the last 20 years.
Click to expand...

Let's just talk about the Trek films for a minute. Were very many even good? #2 is the pinnacle achievement according to most. #4 was kinda cute, but ultimately pretty unsubstantial. #6 was very good. And First Contact was the only great TNG film.

The bad Trek films outweigh the good. #1 was mostly junk. #3 was okay, but clearly suffered in the limelight of its predecessor. #5 is utter garbage. Generations was not good. Insurrection was not good. Nemesis was okay-ish.

In comparison, ST09 was great. Was it different? Sure, but that's okay. The films had become stale. The 4 film TNG run really only spawned one quality movie. The franchise needed a breath of fresh air, and Abrams delivered.
 
Sinatar said:
I just hope the bridge of the Enterprise doesn't look like an Apple Store this time.
Click to expand...

The bridge was fine.

The engine room was atrocious. They filmed it inside a brewery and made no actual effort to disguise it as a brewery. Concrete floors, giant stainless steel tanks, water pipes going everywhere. That was the only part of the movie I had a serious problem with.
 
Choke on the Magic said:
That's interesting because my main gripe with TNG was how there were so many episodes that seemingly went no where or were as you stated rehashed plots. DS9 was awesome to me because it always seemed to stay on a main plot even if it had a few episodes that had nothing to with it.
Click to expand...

I bailed on DS9 before it became good, unfortunately, and I've never gone back to watch the later seasons. Regardless, although there are some people who dislike the "star system of the week" approach TOS and TNG took, I thought it provided some amazing standalone and multi-part episodes (i.e. The Inner Light, Yesterday's Enterprise, The Best of Both Worlds I & II).
 
Solo said:
Can't wait to see more of this hotness:

Loved the visuals of ST2009 so much.
Click to expand...

The Enterprise emerging from one of the Saturn rings was pure sex. Also, the whole final battle had an outstanding audiovisual presentation, even the dialogue was great,
Nero's last words couldnt be more epic: "I would rather suffer the end of Romulus a thousand times. I would rather die in agony than accept assistance from you."
 
Jesus, this will be Giacchino's first score since John Carter, or his first score since MI4 if we're talking about movies people actually saw.

That is 14 months (or 17 months, lolz) between scores. STIT's should be pretty amazing with all that time.
 
I just saw Wrath of Khan last night but am in class so I can't watch the JP version. Anyone wanna spoiler the obvious reference for me? :P
 
Solo said:
Jesus, this will be Giacchino's first score since John Carter, or his first score since MI4 if we're talking about movies people actually saw.

That is 14 months (or 17 months, lolz) between scores. STIT's should be pretty amazing with all that time.
Click to expand...

:LOL
 
TangoAlphaLima said:
I bailed on DS9 before it became good, unfortunately, and I've never gone back to watch the later seasons. Regardless, although there are some people who dislike the "star system of the week" approach TOS and TNG took, I thought it provided some amazing standalone and multi-part episodes (i.e. The Inner Light, Yesterday's Enterprise, The Best of Both Worlds I & II).
Click to expand...

If you have Netflix streaming I highly recommend it. Has a good deal of TNG cameos and it gets pretty action packed at times. I'm biased though as I love DS9.
 
TangoAlphaLima said:
Let's just talk about the Trek films for a minute. Were very many even good? #2 is the pinnacle achievement according to most. #4 was kinda cute, but ultimately pretty unsubstantial. #6 was very good. And First Contact was the only great TNG film.

The bad Trek films outweigh the good. #1 was mostly junk. #3 was okay, but clearly suffered in the limelight of its predecessor. #5 is utter garbage. Generations was not good. Insurrection was not good. Nemesis was okay-ish.

In comparison, ST09 was great. Was it different? Sure, but that's okay. The films had become stale. The 4 film TNG run really only spawned one quality movie. The franchise needed a breath of fresh air, and Abrams delivered.
Click to expand...

I may be in the minority here, but the only two films I didn't enjoy all that much were 1 and 5. 2, 6, 7, 8 and 9 (the latter is actually one of my favorites) were all really good, 3, 4 and 10 still enjoyable (with the latter probably being the worst one of those three). 5, atleast from the POV of today, is actually pretty funny :D But yeah I agree that it's a bad film all things considered. 1.. yeah, that really wasn't good and destroys my point about Roddenberry to be honest :/
I enjoyed ST09, but it didn't leave me with any memorable moments like the other films and actually tons of episodes from the series. Just for example thought about that amazing scene where Quark tells Garak that he shall try a drink that the Federation calls Root Beer...
 
kaching said:
When you really boil it down, weren't most of the original timeline Trek movies basically about revenge too?

ST1 - V'ger comes back to take revenge on Earth
ST2 - Khan takes revenge
ST3 - Klingons want Genesis to take revenge on everyone, Kirk wants revenge on Klingons for killing David
ST4 - Space whales want revenge on Earth
ST5 - Not about revenge, but not about much else
ST6 - Klingons want revenge again
ST7 - Malcom McDowell wants revenge for surviving Space Ribbon
ST8 - Borg want revenge on Earth AGAIN for thwarting all their previous plans
ST9 - Too lame to remember because not about revenge
ST10 - A noun a verb, Tom Hardy and REVENGE

(somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but you get the point)
Click to expand...

ST9 is actually about revenge too. The messed up skin guys wanted revenge for being exiled.
 
demosthenes said:
Watched it again, the last 15 seconds of the JP trailer. It looks like Spock is the one that is safe.
Click to expand...

The hand of the guy dying isn't wearing a Starfleet uniform. It appears to be some kind of dark clothing. Maybe it's Khan/Mitchell, or maybe it's a retired Pike.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Astartes II – Official Teaser Trailer
1
485
Apocryphon replied
HIM | Official Teaser Trailer (Sports Horror Film)
5
474
StueyDuck replied
Star Trek: Section 31 Trailer
2
86
4K
Captain Zyrain replied
Now You See Me: Now You Don’t (2025) Official Trailer
32
486
Come On Tars replied
Section 31 Rottenwatch: Kurtzman makes a worse Star Trek movie than Into Darkness, Nemesis, and Final Frontier combined
2
93
5K
Fluffytheterrible replied
Top Bottom