Star Trek Into Darkness - First Look Featurette

Submitted by: thenedman 4 years ago in Entertainment

I try not to get hyped up by trailers and the such but still.. this looks good
There are 35 comments:
Male 38,468

Mac - 20 years and counting. Happy? errr depends on which year. :) lol
0
Reply
Male 38,468

MacG - Your description of your male coworkers reminds me that it`s better to have a dog than a wife. A dog doesn`t care if you were playing with another dog. A dog is cheeper to feed and is always happy to see you, no matter who`s perfume it smells. And a dog doesn`t mind if you bring another dog home to play with together.
0
Reply
Male 38,468

MacGuffin [quote]"how little you know about straight men!" [/quote]
Oh my, we have been damaged, haven`t we.
0
Reply
Female 2,602
@gerry: my were/was observation was a straight-up compliment. Interesting mistakes spotted there. Though with the observation about Spock being unable to have a relationship with Uhura whilst simultaneously being bonded to T`Pring I suspect you are simultaneously demonstrating how much you know about Vulcans and how little you know about straight men! ;) I don`t see any 3D offerings on at the cinema right now, but when this Trek comes out I might break my duck with the new polarised 3D technology then.
0
Reply
Male 38,468

[quote]"@gerry: nice usage of "were" instead of "was" there." [/quote]
Not sure if I`m being slammed or complimented.



Suspicious Dog is suspicious.
0
Reply
Male 38,468

[quote]"What subtle violations of the Trek Original Series canon did you spot in the JJ Abrams reboot?" [/quote]
Where to start?
Spock {Nimoy} would never violate the temporal prime directive by giving Scotty the equations years before he invented them.
The equations Spock gave Scotty were to beam from one ship to another at warp, NOT from a planet to a ship that is already 3 hours away... way out of range.
Spock would not have a relationship with Uhura because he`s already bonded to T`Pring and he`s not in his 7 year pon far cycle.
etc, etc, ad naseum

But, it`s still a rousing good action picture loosely based on Star Trek, so I liked it.

P.S. Told`ya I was a trek dork
0
Reply
Male 38,468

@ MacGuffin - the new polarized 3D effect is quite good. Not at all like the old red/green glasses that were never quite in focus.

I recommend you try it.
0
Reply
Female 2,602
@gerry: nice usage of "were" instead of "was" there. What subtle violations of the Trek Original Series canon did you spot in the JJ Abrams reboot?
0
Reply
Female 2,602
I`ve not seen any of these 3D films yet. I turned down an extension of my contract in the games industry last week, though, so I am at this time a lady of leisure once again. That being the case, I`m going to indulge in the rare pleasure of going to the cinema during the daytime tomorrow, and getting the whole theatre practically to myself. (I know, I know - it sounds sad as hell. But tbh I don`t get to do it often enough, and I never quite understood how sitting in the dark with another person, ignoring them for the full two hours, was somehow more sociable than going and doing the same thing on your own). Anyways, I`ll be seeing either Cloud Atlas (great book), Zero Dark Thirty (propaganda fest for the Bush Reich - yuck), or indulging in some mindless nonsense like Die Another Day (I`m leaning that way). Unless one of you can recommend some 3D thingamijigger instead?
0
Reply
Male 38,468

Star Trek has the best fan fiction films.
Star Trek New Voyages has done some very good work. The costumes and the sets look as if they really were used on the original show. The plots are Star Trek authentic as well, more story driven, less action.

And the popularity of their fan films is what gave Paramount the idea that people would accept new actors as Kirk & Spock. They`ve gotten some of the original cast to do parts as well. Here`s Walter Koenig as a really old Chekov.

0
Reply
Male 2,850
Boy, they`re doing an awful lot of jumping off things.

I remember the Enterprise saucer section crash in Generations being an incredible "omg whaaaaaat?" moment, as it was so out of character for Trek as a whole.

Trek has never been about violence and action and explosions for me, so when it did happen it stood out and had an impact.

I don`t think it`s going to have the same impact for me now that the entire film seems to be violence action and explosions from title to credits.

At the risk of sounding like Comic Book Guy, I wonder if everything that made Trek stand out as special is just going to be lost in the process of turning it into just another action series.
0
Reply
Male 38,468

MacGuffin - if only that were the only bit that bothered me. But I`m a trek dork so naturally I spot many more violations of Treklore. But, I figure mediocre Trek is better than no Trek. And it was better than the last 3.... first 3? {I-III} star whores films.
0
Reply
Female 2,602
I think the main thing that ruined the last film for me was the way Kirk moved from being some jerk cadet to the captain of a starship in the space of just one mission. I`m all for suspending disbelief, and of course the Kirk character is a self-important jerk anyway, but really that`s just stretching the credulity of the audience a little too far, even for people that might otherwise swallow narratives involving starships capable of faster-than-light travel, utopian ideals, and human co-operation with alien races (when we can`t even achieve peace amongst ourselves).
0
Reply
Male 1,243
Yeah i`ll pass thx.. saw the last one.. totally destroyed star trek... reboots are just another way of saying `we have no ideas. lets redo what we did and just make $`.. actually that`s not true, i won`t pass, i`ll see it when the free internet showing is on, but no way i`ll drop more than 0c on it.
0
Reply
Male 38,468

Maybe they should do a cross-over film. Like Aliens vs Predator.
Starfleet Teenage Mutant Ninja Officers

0
Reply
Male 2,058
I concur with @Tiredofnicks
0
Reply
Male 417
Just once ... can we have Kirk *NOT* destroy his ship?
0
Reply
Male 5,094
NO!

Star Trek is NOT a bloody action genre! Spend less money on 3D masturbation and more on the damn script!
0
Reply
Male 13,624
sourkraut
``Two words:
Benedict Cumberbatch.

For that reason alone, I`ll go to see this...``

Yup, with your there, his Sherlock portrayal
is off the hook Brilliant actor
and the coolest name going
0
Reply
Male 369
Two words:
Benedict Cumberbatch.

For that reason alone, I`ll go to see this...
0
Reply
Male 11,740
I could do without 3D but the movie looks good.
0
Reply
Female 6,381
Rated B for Boys. 8-\
0
Reply
Male 3,310
Michael Bay school of directing?
0
Reply
Male 2,988
why talk up 3D? 3D sucks! oh yeah because the tickets cost more so you get more money from them. unless i see this (or any movie) for free it will NOT be in 3D
0
Reply
Male 1,625
@MacGuffin, nope, I`m with you, I think Abrams is overrated

and I also really liked Phantom Edit, and episodes 2 and 3 weren`t terrible either. in fact, I went back and watched original trilogy not to long ago, and aside from MAJOR plot points, the movies were very blah. Episode 6 was practically unbearable, and ewoks are infinitely worse than JarJar.

people hate phantom menace because it was the first of the new films (people got over themselves and rate return of sith highly), also because they think anakin is `whiny.` go rewatch how whiny a 15 year old Luke is, 10 year old Anakin isn`t nearly as bad, not to mention 5 years less mature.
0
Reply
Male 38,468

JJ Abrams is doing the next Star Wars movie, too.

0
Reply
Male 2,586
I liked the first one, I thought it was pretty awesome actually but this one I think just looks like overkill. I love action and films like Transformers (while not `great`) are built for it.

Star Trek for me is a simple concept... it doesn`t have to be engorged with action, The Wrath of Khan hardly had any but it was by far the best of all the Star Trek movies - simplicity is key for me.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
I don`t like the JJ Abrams Star Trek. And The Phantom Menace is pretty terrible, but Attack of the Clones is WORSE.
0
Reply
Male 2,711
@dm2754, you`re an idiot. The last one had some good and some bad, some pluses and minuses, just like EVERY thing. EVERY thing!
0
Reply
Female 2,602
Am I the only person on the planet that *hates* the JJ Abrams Original Series reboot? I also *liked* The Phantom Menace, FWIW.
0
Reply
Male 38,468

TREKGASM!!!!!!!!


Also, I saw "A Good Day To Die Hard"... another good Die Hard movie! :-)
0
Reply
Male 2,160
lens flare insanity. i want more TNG or DS9 style stuff.
0
Reply
Male 1,793
3d hype but it does look good..
0
Reply
Male 3,612
EVERY thing about the last one sucked! EVERY thing!
0
Reply
Male 307
Link: Star Trek Into Darkness - First Look Featurette [Rate Link] - I try not to get hyped up by trailers and the such but still.. this looks good
0
Reply