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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Still hope Botany Bay is in this movie. If Cumberbatch isn't Khan, I hope this movie sets up a Khan or other tyrant confrontation in nuTrek 3.
 
Wonder what John Harrison's motivation will be for becoming a terrorist. They keep saying that he thinks he's doing the right thing and that people should be able to understand why he feels justified in his actions.
 
And in this final video Quinto and Pine contrasted the villains in the 2009 Star Trek film and Into Darkness, and in doing so at one point Quinto accidentally says "Khan" instead of Nero. That should fuel some more speculation even in light of what Cumberbatch says below. Both talk about how Cumberbatch’s character has a big psychological impact on the crew.

http://bcove.me/h5300hy8

Another potential hint or misdirection pointing at Khan.

"Khan, ugh, ugh, ugh, ugh, Nero..."
 
I'm becoming more convinced that Cumberbatch is Khan and that his plan is to start a war between the Klingons and the Federation, possibly to toughen up humanity and make the idea of genetic augmentation attractive again.
 
What happened to going where no man has gone before? Exploring? Fucking earth war on terrorism shit.
You think Abrams cares about that?

I don't think the general masses care about that, the Star Trek name will pull in the fanbase for good or bad, it is the general population the film is aimed at bringing in which is where they make they aim to make their money.

And personally as a Star Trek fan it doesn't bother me, if I'm going to have to sit next to some stranger that might have never seen any Star Trek before the last film and pay ticket prices that continue to go up, I don't need to see a story that has no doubt been played out in one of the many Star Trek episodes that already exist.
 
You think Abrams cares about that?
Yeah, not one jot.
I don't think the general masses care about that, the Star Trek name will pull in the fanbase for good or bad, it is the general population the film is aimed at bringing in which is where they make they aim to make their money.

And personally as a Star Trek fan it doesn't bother me, if I'm going to have to sit next to some stranger that might have never seen any Star Trek before the last film and pay ticket prices that continue to go up, I don't need to see a story that has no doubt been played out in one of the many Star Trek episodes that already exist.

As opposed to rehashing a canon charcter? Exploration does not mean rehashing TOS, it means making something we haven't seen before.
 
I don't get why people are against revisiting a canon villain. It will play out very different now because circumstances will be totally different if they go with Khan. He won't have loved and lost after 15 years of exile by Kirk. He would have different motivations and ambitions.
 
Yeah, it's sounding like it's not Khan anymore, but it's not Mitchell either.

That said, this tidbit is interesting:



So we know they are indeed changing her character, she's not just wearing the blue uniform at some point. This is a change to canon that can't be easily explained by Nero. Unless you go with a ripple in the pond chaos theory. Either way, all bets are off.

http://www.slashfilm.com/star-trek-2-bad-robot/

Eh, it's... reasonable... I mean who knows, some of the people that died on the Kelvin... there might have been some 6 degrees of separation and he career ended up taking her into Starfleet proper.
 
More speculation:

Peter Weller is supposed to be a human C.E.O. who has his own ship who has a substantial role in the movie. He has said so himself in interviews. He hasn't appeared in any marketing materials so they're keeping a tight lid on how he fits into the movie.

Maybe he runs a pharmaceutical company that found the Botany Bay and studied Khan's people to create a new gene therapy that he tests on John Harrison.

Alternatively, maybe a human corporate ship finds the Botany Bay, Peter Weller is Khan and steals the ship, and tries to rule the world as a C.E.O. instead of as a dictator. Perhaps John Harrison is one of his men who he sends to set events in motion to allow his company to get richer and more influential.
 
Since when has ANY good trek movie been about that? That's trek tv show material. Trek the film franchise has always been blockbuster action material.

To varying degrees of unsuccess. This is what I never understood about the ST09 haters before that movie came out. Afterwards, sure, pick apart the plot holes. But purely on the principle of it "not being trek", where the fuck were they to the same extent when turds like Generations and Nemesis came out?
 
More speculation:

Peter Weller is supposed to be a human C.E.O. who has his own ship who has a substantial role in the movie. He has said so himself in interviews. He hasn't appeared in any marketing materials so they're keeping a tight lid on how he fits into the movie.

Maybe he runs a pharmaceutical company that found the Botany Bay and studied Khan's people to create a new gene therapy that he tests on John Harrison.

Alternatively, maybe a human corporate ship finds the Botany Bay, Peter Weller is Khan and steals the ship, and tries to rule the world as a C.E.O. instead of as a dictator. Perhaps John Harrison is one of his men who he sends to set events in motion to allow his company to get richer and more influential.

The "CEO" bit is thought to possibly be a mistranslation. Possibly he meant CO.

Eh, it's... reasonable... I mean who knows, some of the people that died on the Kelvin... there might have been some 6 degrees of separation and he career ended up taking her into Starfleet proper.

That's what I getting at by "ripple in the pond". The point is, they're altering canon. This is important because it throws a few of the "it can't be him, it must be him" arguments based on canon out the window.
 
Apparently Peter Weller was involved in a lot of the filming, he is a major character. It is really odd he has not came up in any revealed pictures/footage.
 
The "CEO" bit is thought to possibly be a mistranslation. Possibly he meant CO.

The return of John Frederick Paxton?

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/John_Frederick_Paxton

The geek in me demands to see him back!

"I am returning Earth to its rightful owners. I am giving Earth back to humanity, back to Human beings. It is my life's work, it's what I was born to do, and there is no one – not an alien, not a Human – that will stop me from achieving it."
- John Frederick Paxton, 2155
 
So is the composer coming back for this film? I can't remember his name to save my life right now due to this killer headache.

Edit: Giacchino.
 
Here's the quote again:

TrekMovie.com: OK, I want to try and get something out of you that is actually new about the movie. Kind of like you did on the radio show but I will name a guest actor in the sequel and you will say if they are playing a new character you created or one from the original Star Trek canon.

Roberto Orci: OK, I’ll play.

TrekMovie.com: OK let’s start with Alice Eve. Canon or new?

Roberto Orci: Canon

TrekMovie.com: Noel Clarke?

Roberto Orci: New

TrekMovie.com: I assume that also goes for Nanzeen Contractor, who plays his wife?

Roberto Orci: Yes, new.

TrekMovie.com: Peter Weller

Roberto Orci: New.

TrekMovie.com: Joseph Gatt

Roberto Orci: New.

TrekMovie.com: OK and the big one, Benedict Cumberbatch.

Roberto Orci: Canon.

We know he wasn't lying about Eve or Gatt.
 
I saw the same trailer available online with The Hobbit. I think its the only trailer we'll get.

The 3D in this movie sux.
 
I liked in the first movie how it was a team effort, every character contributed towards the story. If this just becomes the Captain Kirk and friends, well that will suck.
 
Is the preview in front of the 48fps Imax only? My theater has both regular and the 48fps Imax, and the regular is playing at a more convenient time.
 
I thought the full trailer for this shown before The Hobbit was fantastic! The teaser was pretty good, but this blew it away in my opinion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom