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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bane, Darth Vader, The Emperor, Freddy Kreuger, The Joker. Just a mere utterence of their names conjurs up iconic memories and performances across various medias. Gary Mitchell conjurs up images of a drunk 70s frat boy

Shakespeare disagrees with you on the importance of a name.

Also, have you ever thought that perhaps Gary Mitchell doesn't conjure anything up for you because you don't know who the chracter is?

Darth Vader sounds like a radiator part to my grandmother.
 
*Cut to kirk kneeling over dead spock*

GARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
KHANNNNN.jpg
 
What is people's problem with a normal name?

Why do you need some idiotic thirteen year old's wet dream of a badass called "DARK DOOM KRALOANOXUS THE DESTROYER OF EVERYTHING" to be satisfied by a villain?
 
What is people's problem with a normal name?

Why do you need some idiotic thirteen year old's wet dream of a badass called "DARK DOOM KRALOANOXUS THE DESTROYER OF EVERYTHING" to be satisfied by a villain?

I don't get it either. Anton Chigurh sounds like a male figure skater, or a fashion designer, but anyone who saw No Country For Old Men now knows better.
 
I really hope it isn't Gary Mitchell so we don't end up like the last film where the bad guys motives were shown in a comic on the side and given about 3 minutes in the actual film. The general population probably wont care but I personally think it would be lazy to do it again, here is this bad guy and all his development happened off screen at some point but he is evil so lets get him!

Saying that, they would probably have to do something like that for Kahn I guess, but at least that is how Kahn was originally introduced in TOS and the Films, he had a backstory but his rivalry with Kirk happened all on screen before the movie.
 
What is people's problem with a normal name?

Why do you need some idiotic thirteen year old's wet dream of a badass called "DARK DOOM KRALOANOXUS THE DESTROYER OF EVERYTHING" to be satisfied by a villain?

Hahah, I remember writing a "screenplay" for space tv show when I was in second grade. I never got past the terrifying airlock scenes, but the main character was called Blade McFlex or something equally as stupid.
 
What is people's problem with a normal name?

Why do you need some idiotic thirteen year old's wet dream of a badass called "DARK DOOM KRALOANOXUS THE DESTROYER OF EVERYTHING" to be satisfied by a villain?

Because in real life if you get super powers and go crazy your going to use a cool name not your actual name. That's dumb
 
I really hope it isn't Gary Mitchell so we don't end up like the last film where the bad guys motives were shown in a comic on the side and given about 3 minutes in the actual film. The general population probably wont care but I personally think it would be lazy to do it again, here is this bad guy and all his development happened off screen at some point but he is evil so lets get him!

Saying that, they would probably have to do something like that for Kahn I guess, but at least that is how Kahn was originally introduced in TOS and the Films, he had a backstory but his rivalry with Kirk happened all on screen before the movie.

The problem is people who want Khan don't want Space Seed. They want Wrath of Khan. So if they went that way they'd still probably offload Khan's hatred of Kirk into a 9 minute before-the-title sequence.
 

lmao holy shit


The problem is people who want Khan don't want Space Seed. They want Wrath of Khan. So if they went that way they'd still probably offload Khan's hatred of Kirk into a 9 minute before-the-title sequence.


Space Seed would have been fine. It would have been so perfect to call the movie: "Star Trek II The Rise of Khan"
 
It sounds more foreign, and therefore more sinister.

I just realized I have like three or four friends from completely different backgrounds who have a version of "Kan/Kahn/Khan" in their last, middle or first names.

Seeing "The Wrath of Khan" in a movie title in some countries for some people must have been like, "Oh, Kahn, I know that guy. Shingzehn was kind of an asshole to him at that wedding last year."

[/Russel Peters]
 
Star Trek II was the both the best and the worst thing to happen to Star Trek movies.

Thanks to Wrath of Khan, every single movie has to be about revenge to be popular, even though that's really not what Star Trek is about.
 
Because in real life if you get super powers and go crazy your going to use a cool name not your actual name. That's dumb

Yes, using a kickass handle is a lot less dumb than using your real name. That certainly won't make you look like a complete sperglord.

If it is Gary Mitchell, what does he want revenge for? Dude's like a space god or something, isn't he?

Kirk shot him in the fucking chest point blank with a phaser rifle. That's enough I would think.
 
If it is Gary Mitchell, what does he want revenge for? Dude's like a space god or something, isn't he?

Kirk left him for dead out in space after he started going nuts.

The problem is people who want Khan don't want Space Seed. They want Wrath of Khan. So if they went that way they'd still probably offload Khan's hatred of Kirk into a 9 minute before-the-title sequence.

If they were to do Khan I would hope that they try something new with the character, like having him team up with Kirk against Klingons or something. Make him the antihero instead of the villain.
 
Space Seed would have been fine. It would have been so perfect to call the movie: "Star Trek II The Rise of Khan"

Eh. Space Seed is a good episode and all, but it's no Wrath of Khan. It's a very abstract story by comparison and I don't think it ever would have made a very good film.
 
Kirk left him for dead out in space after he started going nuts.



If they were to do Khan I would hope that they try something new with the character, like having him team up with Kirk against Klingons or something. Make him the antihero instead of the villain.

For Kirk defeating him out at the edge of the galaxy and giving him a space burial (when he wasn't really dead). He's like Dr. Manhattan, except a petty asshole instead of indifferent to humanity.

I kind of find it hard to believe it'd be either Mitchell or Khan. Seems like these characters have quite a bit of history (haven't seen TOS too much). Could it be adequately compressed into the film?
 
Seems like there's a giant line of dudes from every planet and timeline ever lined up to 'take revenge' on us, at least thats what every general plot of a Star Trek movie would have us believe.
 
I kind of find it hard to believe it'd be either Mitchell or Khan. Seems like these characters have quite a bit of history (haven't seen TOS too much). Could it be adequately compressed into the film?

The Mitchell story was done in one episode of TOS. They'd be expanding it here, not compressing it.
 
I kind of find it hard to believe it'd be either Mitchell or Khan. Seems like these characters have quite a bit of history (haven't seen TOS too much). Could it be adequately compressed into the film?

Mitchell's story was told in 1 issue in the comic already. It would take 5-7 min of explanation. The movie would be a GROSS expansion of Mitchell's story.

Mitchell's original story was just a single episode in TOS.
 
Star Trek II was the both the best and the worst thing to happen to Star Trek movies.

Thanks to Wrath of Khan, every single movie has to be about revenge to be popular, even though that's really not what Star Trek is about.

I think there's truth to this, but I don't think Trek is explicitly *not* about the manifestation of revenge. A lot of the best TOS episodes focused around base human emotions like that. I think, for example, Kirk's struggles with his anger at the Klingons, made more personal by the events of STIII, is part of what makes STVI such a fantastic film.

The real problem with the series' continued attempts to redux TWoK is that they always approached it very superficially. Nemesis, as the most extreme example, is almost a ridiculous parody of TWoK because it tries to follow it note for note but misses out on all the subtlety.

Incidentally, I really hope it's Gary Mitchell and not Khan. I don't really think they could do Khan justice, and I don't actually think Benedict Cumberbatch is the right actor for it anyways.
 
Seems like there's a giant line of dudes from every planet and timeline ever lined up to 'take revenge' on us, at least thats what every general plot of a Star Trek movie would have us believe.

So the Federation is America, then?
 
I kind of find it hard to believe it'd be either Mitchell or Khan. Seems like these characters have quite a bit of history (haven't seen TOS too much). Could it be adequately compressed into the film?

The Mitchell "origin story" was already covered in the canonical comics, so they could get that out of the way with a quick flashback or some allusion to what happened. The rest would be new territory.
 
The problem is people who want Khan don't want Space Seed. They want Wrath of Khan. So if they went that way they'd still probably offload Khan's hatred of Kirk into a 9 minute before-the-title sequence.
I will be very happy if they develop Khan somehow in this and then make him the full villain in 3. Even if it's just a tease like with the Joker card at the end of BB. Given the pay-off that result from planting Samuel L. Jackson in the early Marvel films, I will be kind of surprised if they don't develop or at least tease Khan in some way.

Space Seed is definitely one of my favorite OS episodes. I am not at all interested in Khan if that simply means a retelling of Wrath of Khan (which the wouldn't do anyway). The WoK largely glosses over Khan's personal history and the Eugenic Wars and instead focus on the revenge angle. There is a lot they can do with a full Khan story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom