John Crichton

Star Trek Into Darkness (The Big Bad Star Trek (X)II Thread)

Recommended Posts

I don't want anything we've seen before. New life, new civilisations - I want this, not simply going back to TOS again. I'd like something that escapes the TWOK mode as I'm a little tired of that in Trek. Not that I trust Orci and Kurtzman to come up with something particularly good and original, but I just want to see something different.

not trusting Orci and Kurtzman is wise as they are two of the biggest hack writers in Hollywood, the wouldn't know a coherent story line if it swam up and bit them on the ass. They are clearly the swiss cheese writers in favor these days (though Michael Bay didn't want them back).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want anything we've seen before. New life, new civilisations - I want this, not simply going back to TOS again. I'd like something that escapes the TWOK mode as I'm a little tired of that in Trek. Not that I trust Orci and Kurtzman to come up with something particularly good and original, but I just want to see something different.

not trusting Orci and Kurtzman is wise as they are two of the biggest hack writers in Hollywood, the wouldn't know a coherent story line if it swam up and bit them on the ass. They are clearly the swiss cheese writers in favor these days (though Michael Bay didn't want them back).

I kinda agree with Joe.

I loved Star Trek (2009), but the script is lazy, obvious, at times condescending and simply not original at all.

I would love for Star Trek to go were no man...no one has gone before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's awesome. I didn't have a Haynes manual for my first car, and I don't have one for my current car, but I have referred to them before for other cars, and they're pretty informative. You still have to have a very good working knowledge of what you're looking at because they're not idiot-proof (I'm qualified to say that).

I'm just not sure that this manual can live up to Haynes' practice of completely disassembling the vehicle to its components, and then putting it back together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You must be seeing something different to me, because I could have it delivered Oct 29th, in the UK.

Know how I know that's considerably cheaper than the RRP? This website is where I found it. THE best shopping site on the UK web. If it gets rated "hot" there, it's a good deal. Trust me, that bloody place costs me a LOT of money! Scary how moorish it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Gorn would be interesting. There's a new book where the Hegemony comes into play during the time of Sisko and Riker, so nobody's forgotten about them as adversaries.

How about a "villain" that's more of a non-humanoid threat, like a disease that transcends worlds and jeopardizes entire species?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Haynes Manual does not include the 2009 Abrams Enterprise.

You're right even though you don't say why.

"Why isn’t the Enterprise from the J.J. Abrams movie included?

That's because at the moment the real pleasure of that ship is that we don't know anything about it. I want to go into those movies full of excitement because I'm going to find things out. There will come a time for a manual that covers that Enterprise, but for now it's best for it to stay a mystery."

http://www.startrek.com/article/haynes-enterprise-manual-co-author-ben-robinson-interview

The info at TrekMovie.com simply stated "NCC-1701 (Original TV series plus Star Trek: The Motion Picture, The Wrath of Khan and The Search for Spock, in which it was destroyed. A reinterpreted version of this Enterprise featured in the 2009 film)." I misinterpreted that last sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Haynes Manual does not include the 2009 Abrams Enterprise.

You're right even though you don't say why.

Because I'm always right. :)

I didn't have the link handy nor the time to dig it up before I had to scoot, sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's because at the moment the real pleasure of that ship is that we don't know anything about it. I want to go into those movies full of excitement because I'm going to find things out. There will come a time for a manual that covers that Enterprise, but for now it's best for it to stay a mystery."

We know it was ridiculously scaled up. And that it's not much different, outside of an Budweiser sponsorship on its lower decks.

That interview also has a comment by the most enthusiastic Trekkie ever. Unfortunately he's not the most attentive Trekkie ever, as he clearly hasn't heard of the TNG technical manual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Gorn would be interesting. There's a new book where the Hegemony comes into play during the time of Sisko and Riker, so nobody's forgotten about them as adversaries.

They get name dropped a couple of times on the show during the Dominion War too IIRC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why people want to see Klingons so much. Personally, they were already the villains in two of the eleven movies, and featured in nearly all of them in some capacity or another. I'd like to see someone else get a chance and show their menace. Gary Mitchell could be really good, but personally I'd save that for a third film as I'd prefer the second to just be a straight Trek adventure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least Rick Berman's no longer in charge and we don't have to worry about them dragging in the boring, out of place Borg.

better than a STUPID nero whose ear is there then it isn't then it's back again.

The stupid idiot goes back in time and in his retarded vengence desides to destroy vulcan when he had to means to destroy the sun which destroy romulus. He could have saved his wife, but that is too damned obvious so why bother when a bad revenge is best.

Hey how bout this they redo the Eden episode, sadly it was smarter than 2009.

Headin out to Eden Yeah brother, Herbert Herbert.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this film still supposed to come out next summer? Haven't heard any news about it in a long time. Surely filming would have started by now if it was on track for next summer.

Maybe Super 8 took longer to wrap up than anticipated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe its not coming out till 2013 then?

Weird, usually these kind of movies don't go more than 3 years between sequels

This one will kinda be 5 since the first one was originally planned to be released in Dec of 2008, and I think post-production was still finished by then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yep sfx need about to years.

but putting revenge of the fallen as example of rushed sfx... i dont know if they were but the movie, if it was worth something, it was for the sfx, regardless of the eye-twisting aspect of them the looked by the least as good as the 1st movie....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno, there've been more Star Trek films than TV series that I've enjoyed...I guess more hours of TV, though. [shrug] I don't care which, just make it good either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yep sfx need about to years.

First class FX houses like ILM and Digital Domain should be able to pump out 2000+ shots in less than 6 months.*

Pre-production is the most important part of a film. If that stage is done well, production should take a couple of months, and post should take half a year or less.

For reference. Star Trek (2009) had ~1000 shots. And it took ILM and DD 6 months to handle the bulk of those, while juggling multiple other projects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. The basic premise of Star Trek has been made into several successful TV shows, that were both very similar and different from the original version. No reason why that can't be done again.

Unlike Joe I'm not sure if the time is right though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. The basic premise of Star Trek has been made into several successful TV shows, that were both very similar and different from the original version. No reason why that can't be done again.

Unlike Joe I'm not sure if the time is right though...

I'm not sure there's room for a sci-fi "bottle series" (a series which basically consists of strong characters in the same set for most of the duration of an episode as TOS used to be -- and since Abrams is based on the TOS universe, that is my reference) in today's television.

So, if we are dumping the bottle approach and meeting the demands of spectacle and pizzazz of today's show business, we might as well get cinematographic production values.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no doubt that tv can accomodate Star Trek and write episodes that are far superior to the hack writing of Star Trek the movie.

At least they wouldn't make the same retarded mistakes as Abrams made. And God knows he made several bad ones.

still laughing at Spock watching Vulcan implode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Careful. "Mirror universe" meant different things in Star Trek. Originally, it meant the one evil alternate reality designated by mustaches in TOS' "Mirror Mirror," which DS9 (and later Enterprise) revisited several times. It really looked like Nana Visitor was having fun in those episodes.

TNG split that idea wide open with "Parallels," in which every single choice spawns an infinite number of possibile universes, and Worf was slipsliding through them until they converged. That blew the lid off the idea of one special, mirror universe, and was never revisited again.

Abrams' 2009 movie was as if they took the central concept of Yesterday's Enterprise -- the main characters realize they're in an alternate reality that should not exist -- but unlike that episode, they can't do anything to 100% rectify it.

Without Abrams' movie, Star Trek would still be as dead as it was the day Enterprise ended. Which should have ended with the next-to-last episode, but that's neither here nor there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably not a discussion we need to have all over again, though that IS what the Internet's for, soooo...I applaud the way Abrams and friends handled the film. I totally see why it would bother some people, and it certainly has some plot holes (though not as many as some suggest), and it never makes the slightest attempt at capturing the cerebral, philosophical tone that the franchise had in the beginning...but it was exactly what was needed to rejuvenate Star Trek at this point. And it did a very nice job of rebooting the franchise in a way that didn't pave over the original timeline or pretend it didn't exist...and most importantly to me, it focused on the friendships. Star Trek only interests me when I like the people involved, and I like watching them interact and seeing how their relationships unfold. TOS and the good original cast films do this quite nicely, so I really enjoy them...most of the rest of Star Trek doesn't really get me interested in the characters, so I don't bother. The 2009 Star Trek doesn't have that problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TNG split that idea wide open with "Parallels," in which every single choice spawns an infinite number of possibile universes, and Worf was slipsliding through them until they converged. That blew the lid off the idea of one special, mirror universe, and was never revisited again.

This is incorrect. The Mirror Universe has always and consistently been the same one that Kirk and co visited in the 60's TOS episode. Parallels used a similar concept, but I always considered it a separate idea from the mirror universe.

Star Trek (2009) plays in an alternate reality, but it has nothing to do with the Mirror Universe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now