|
NarkyBark posted:I just don't get why he's blaming spock for a natural supernova, which (as far as I know) no one caused, and he lashes out at the person who was actually trying to help. Because hey, everyone can stop what's probably the most primal powerful force in creation, right? drat YOU SPOCK! The implication I always got was that Spock was a respected personality on Romulus due to his decades of work for unification. Furthering that, based on the mind-meld with Kirk, I always got the idea that Spock arrogantly told the Romulans that though the sun was going to go nova, he would -- not could -- stop it, and they put their faith in him. Imagine the propaganda from the Romulan government: "Ambassador Spock is developing technology of blah blah blah to prevent the blah blah blah and it will protect our planet." Then, boom, sun goes nova, Romulus goes boom, and you have one really pissed-off Romulan captain, who first moves to destroy Spock's ship and then gets caught in the black hole in the process.
|
#
¿
May 11, 2012 22:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 17:23 |
|
|
Well, we know that Cumberbatch's character has some connection to Starfleet, because there are set photos of him having a fistfight with Spock, and Cumberbatch is wearing the same black cadet shirt that Kirk wore in the first film. Also, the original Khan report came from TrekMovie.com, not AICN, and TrekMovie broke several huge pieces of news during the buildup to Trek '09 and is not generally known for making poo poo up, which is why the report gained some traction.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2012 19:46
|
|
|
"Star Trek Into Darkness" feels like they looked at Live Free or Die Hard and A Good Day to Die Hard and did their best to mimic that style of title.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2012 15:52
|
|
|
FoneBone posted:Real answer is that Paramount doesn't give a drat about the comic. Although I would've thought their approval process would have nixed anything they were considering for the movie. Kurtzman and Orci oversee the comics; they're considered to be canon in the JJTrek universe. Everything done in the comics happens with the full approval and endorsement of them.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2012 00:49
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:Does anyone know why the Japanese trailer had the additional shot with the reference to Wrath of Khan at the end? This was just an announcement teaser (  ), I'm guessing that'll be in the full teaser that comes out next week.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2012 02:52
|
|
|
DFu4ever posted:How could the writers have looked at the destruction of the D in Generations, then looked back at how awesome the destruction of the original was handled in 3, and not thrown their script into the nearest fire? The crashing of the saucer was amazing and I'll hear no words to the contrary. The battle itself was so lame because ILM had no money whatsoever to spend outside of the crash. The film was budgeted at $35 million, only $5 million more than The Undiscovered Country, yet they had to afford the entire cast of TNG (all of whom were making pretty nice money after seven years on the show) plus the paychecks for Shatner, Koenig and Doohan (it was a studio mandate that the movie "bridge the gap" between the generations). Plus the location shooting and the rushed schedule -- the TNG cast started shooting the movie something like a week after they wrapped on All Good Things... in April, when the movie had to make its November release date -- something had to give in the budget, and it wound up being the script. It didn't help that Moore and Braga were outright exhausted after working on TNG for years, and then after writing such an amazing series finale they then had to find a way to unite Kirk and Picard. 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 01:03
|
|
|
Acid Jerk posted:and to think Nicholas Meyer was almost going to direct Nemesis. Not quite "almost." Berman went to him and asked if he'd be willing to direct; Meyer said that he'd love to consider it, but the script needed a major rewrite. Berman had already told Logan that he wouldn't be rewritten, so Meyer walked away. Similar thing happened on Generations. Once the script called for Kirk, Spock and McCoy on the Enterprise-B, Berman approached Nimoy about starring and directing. Nimoy took a look at the script and said he would need to have significant changes made to it, and Berman told him that he'd be directing the script as written, so Nimoy walked. Honestly, that was probably for the better; Generations' problems were with its script, but David Carson and John Alonzo did their best to make that movie look great.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 03:00
|
|
|
A 12-foot saucer was built for the crash.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 05:50
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:There were also some conflicting priorities, one was Shatner wanting to make a big action movie, and the other was "Star Trek IV was the biggest movie yet so we need more comedy", and those two collide a lot. The comedy is most about the ship not working, which gets silly quickly. Unfortunately, the comedy elements were a mandate from the studio. quote:It also looks cheaper and faker than the other movies, partly due to the director's inexperience, partly due to a lot of foul-ups with a new FX company (Cinefex had a good article on this, with the firm in question explaining all the problems they had.) The action doesn't work as well as it should either. See, I don't get this. Show me one camera setup that Nimoy did on III or IV that beats the amazing dolly shot that moves from everyone on the bridge of the Enterprise agape at the appearance of "God," only to show that no one has seen that the Bird of Prey is moving in to attack (with an excellent little Goldsmith cue to go with it). Star Trek V's problems are due to its script (Harve Bennett managing David "Dreamscape" Loughery was a mistake) and its rushed schedule. The writers guild strike ended in August 1988, and filming needed to begin no later than October to meet Paramount's summer release date. The schedule was nothing short of insane. Yeah, the effects blow, but they were really between a rock and a hard place, there -- ILM was tied up with Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade and Ghostbusters II, and there weren't many other options. Douglas Trumbull had bailed from Hollywood work and John Dykstra didn't have the bandwidth to take on the project; there weren't really many agencies around with experience doing high-quality motion control work for science fiction films, especially since Robert Abel & Associates (which did the work on The Motion Picture) had folded a year or two earlier. But Shatner did an amazing job directing that movie -- I would have loved to see what he could do with a better script. Timby fucked around with this message at 00:13 on Dec 16, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2012 00:09
|
|
|
Cellophane S posted:Honestly his score is the best thing about the whole production. Goldsmith's score, Shatner's direction, Andy Laszlo's cinematography. That is a beautiful movie.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2012 02:14
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2012 02:46
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:I think he was supposed to give a cameo in the form of a recorded message given to Pine-Kirk by Spock. God that would have been awesome Actually, Old Spock was going to give New Spock a recording of a happy birthday message from Shatner-Kirk. The scene was written and Abrams wanted to shoot it, but Shatner demanded that his role be as big as Nimoy's, so it got scrapped.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2012 02:30
|
|
|
epitasis posted:They should've just let Shatner do the "these are the voyages" voiceover. It's a little sad that he's not included at all. I believe Orci or Kurtzman confirmed that the recording of Shatner-Kirk was actually supposed to transition into him doing the "these are the voyages" narration. But, again, after Shatner refused to do the gig, they switched it to Nimoy.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2012 03:23
|
|
|
Echo Chamber posted:A part of wished they had a silent Patrick Stewart cameo in the Spock-Prime's mindmeld in the last movie. But at this point, there's no need for more cameos. Having Nimoy back for Into Darkness is already a questionable move. I thought Nimoy said he wasn't appearing in Into Darkness?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2012 04:24
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:So did I, this is the first I'd heard of him being in it. I know that TrekMovie.com reported him being in it like a year and a half ago, but that was also around the time that they said the villain was Khan and the Klingons were going to be major bad guys.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2012 04:41
|
|
|
Payndz posted:It wasn't until ILM took over for ST2 that they really went to town with the dulling spray, because their bluescreen setup couldn't cope with shiny surfaces at all. For ST3 they used yellow light on the model and filtered it out later in an attempt to deal with the blue spill problem, but the Enterprise still looked battleship grey rather than polished t(r)itanium. It will always amaze me that a key element behind the decision to blow up the Enterprise in ST3 is because the ILM crew hated working with the giant eight-foot model that Magicam built for The Motion Picture. (And Ken Ralston felt that Probert's refit design was ugly. How anyone can think that ... I don't know.)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2013 00:43
|
|
|
Gatts posted:I think I was told there were some script issues due to a strike or something Kurtzman and Orci turned in their script a few weeks before the strike, and Lindelof and Abrams worked on it up until the day the strike began. Abrams said he was frustrated during filming, however, because he wanted to change lines and add new scenes, but because he's a WGA member, he was prohibited from actually changing the scrpt.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2013 03:15
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:That's why the villain is the personification of canonicity ("I saw it happen! Don't tell me it didn't happen!"). "James T. Kirk was considered to be a great man. He went on to captain the USS Enterprise ... but that was another life."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
Throwdown posted:He mentions in the movie that hes his nephew. Only in the Director's Edition, actually. The theatrical version omits everything from Preston telling Kirk he'll find everything in ship-shape to Scotty telling Kirk that Preston is his sister's youngest.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2013 03:12
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:We've got "punch it" before going to warp, and a ship that reminds me an awful lot of the Millennium Falcon. I don't know what to think about it's a callback to Pike saying it in the 2009 movie.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2013 23:55
|
|
|
It's a valid concern, though. I mean, we're supposed to be seeing the adventures of Captain Kirk ... and these movies go out of their way to keep the Captain out of command gold. It's frustrating, too, because I go just a little gay for Chris Pine when I see him wearing the gold tunic.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2013 03:07
|
|
|
Evil Sagan posted:My absolute favorite part of the '09 Star Trek film was the end when Pine strides onto set with the command gold uniform on and kind of belches out "Bones!" He was just so drat Kirk! That was the one and only moment in the movie when I felt like Pine said "gently caress it" and went for his best Shatner impression, and it worked perfectly.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2013 21:36
|
|
|
McDowell posted:Wasn't Gene Roddenberry a WW2 pilot, where the culture was to have a very personal connection with your aircraft? Correct, whereas Harve Bennett was a Korea-era veteran, where if you crashed your helicopter, you just walked away and got a new one. Bennett's plan to destroy the Enterprise and move the crew to Excelsior was the breaking point in the relationship between Roddenberry and Bennett (which was already rocky, as Roddenberry viewed Bennett as the man who took Star Trek away from him); Roddenberry was never more than tersely civil towards him after that. Timby fucked around with this message at 01:33 on Mar 24, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2013 01:29
|
|
|
Parachute posted:Is that Jeffrey Combs in the sweet smoking jacket? Nah. L-R: Max Grodenchik, Armin Shimerman, Aron Eisenberg.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2013 23:15
|
|
|
It's worth noting, though, that while the Director's Edition is generally pretty good, there are some inexcusable edits, notably the removal of Kirk's second "viewer off" and the butchering / general warming up of the sound mix. They dubbed over the awesome computer voice, for gently caress's sake.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2013 00:02
|
|
|
Also, Eaves did design work on ST09. Not sure if he was involved in Into Darkness.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2013 23:34
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Actually I'm thinking a big fight between Enterprise and not-Enterprise happens, the Enterprise crashes, Scotty is all "the ship's dead, cap'n!", and Kirk is like NO loving WAY and they find a way to raise it out of the sea. It has been confirmed since December (when the first several minutes were screened in front of The Hobbit's IMAX showings) that the sequence of the Enterprise rising from the sea takes place during the opening segment of the film; Kirk orders the Enterprise to surface and reveals its presence to the natives of the planet, which is what gets him in hot water and has Pike lecturing him about what a pain in the rear end he is.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2013 22:18
|
|
|
Just as a heads-up in case you're trying to remain in the dark: Into Darkness has its Australian premiere tomorrow, so we can safely expect spoilers to be hitting the Internet in about 24 - 48 hours.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2013 22:56
|
|
|
Pops Mgee posted:The Borg thing comes from the prequel comics which are fanwank and aren't canon from what I've heard. They aren't "canon," per se, but they're written under the auspices of Roberto Orci. I believe IDW has to run its storylines / character uses past Orci to give him the opportunity to say, "No, wait, you can't do that, we're doing XYZ in the next movie."
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2013 05:06
|
|
|
Piedmon Sama posted:Based solely upon Into Darkness I'm not even sure why Kirk and Spock are friends. See, go back to any of the old movies and you'll notice that while Bones and Spock give each other tons of poo poo, Spock actually behaved like a genuine if reserved friend to the rest of the crew. Quinto's Spock just seems to be barely restraining his genuine disgust for everyone around him most of the movie, then suddenly because it's the third act he cares about Kirk. That spoils the "death" scene more than anything--it wasn't emotionally earned, because it's not established that Kirk and Spock even like each other all that much! They're just friends because "Kirk and Spock are friends" is a Star Trek Rule. Yeah, Into Darkness absolutely tries to leverage achievements that it hasn't earned yet. The reason that Spock's death is so emotional in The Wrath of Khan is because these guys went on a five-year mission together, potentially another five-year-mission after the first movie, and the audience has been watching these characters for almost two decades. That friendship fire has been built, stoked and nurtured in the audience's mind by that point. Orci and Kurtzman, on the other hand, are basically at the point, timeline wise, of halfway through the first season of TOS, but they're trying to act as though Kirk and Spock's decades-long friendship has already blossomed, while at the same time having them be massive assholes to one another. It's the same problem in the Star Wars prequels. All along we were told that Anakin and Obi-Wan were the best of friends and that's why Obi-Wan was so crushed by his heel turn, but Episodes II / III just show them being huge dicks to each other, so we never actually see anything resembling a friendship. On that note, how the hell was the writing process on this movie so broken? The first film came out in 2009, everyone knew a sequel was coming, a June 2012 release date was originally locked, and Orci / Kurtzman / Lindelof didn't even have a treatment or an outline until halfway through 2011.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2013 23:40
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The filmmakers didn't forget that their main characters aren't 50 years old. You're writing a fanfiction and attributing it to JJ Abrams' soul. Pro tip: I never mentioned Abrams once in my post.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2013 01:55
|
|
|
JediTalentAgent posted:Did Into Darkness even have a toy line? I didn't even notice one this time around, but to be fair I'm sure there's still plenty of leftover stuff from 2009 Trek still on the shelves. Not to say there wasn't a ton of promotional tie-ins, but I just didn't seem to notice the fast-food or toy presence for STID like I did about 4 years ago. The toy line from ST2009 sold like dog poo poo, so Paramount didn't even bother with one for Into Darkness.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2013 23:26
|
|
|
I think the better post-9/11 allegory about Into Darkness is the fetishism for the military, and military action, that has really cropped up over the last twelve years -- and Marcus' scheme is what happens when some "ARE COUNTRY" goober actually gets into a position of real power. Marcus' role in Into Darkness is kind of like a better version of Admiral Tolwyn suddenly going all crazy and trying to manufacture a war by way of secret programs (because he felt mankind was never better than when it was facing extinction by the Kilrathi) in Wing Commander IV.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2013 04:27
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:I thought Admiral Marcus didn't know the bodies were in the tubes, but it's been a while since I saw it. No, that was Marcus' whole plan. He got what he needed out of Khan (the design for the Vengeance, the design of the super-torpedoes), but then when he realized that Khan put his people in his new torpedoes, he knew that Khan intended to one day unfreeze them, and he realized that one Khan was dangerous enough, he didn't need 72 more running around and raising hell. That's why he was so explicit about ordering the Enterprise to just launch at Kronos -- it would kill Khan and his people, and he wouldn't need to worry about them anymore (and he'd get the war he was itching for).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2013 23:52
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:
Kirk: "And what exactly would you like me to do with the rest of his crew, sir? Fire them at the Klingons, end 72 lives, start a war in the process?" Marcus: "He put those people in those torpedoes, and I simply didn't want to burden you with knowing what was inside of them. You saw what this man can do all by himself, can you imagine what would happen if we woke up the rest of his crew?" Sir Kodiak posted:Seriously? Why couldn't he have just had one of his minions kill the 72 unconscious people and used weapons with actual fuel in them to kill Khan? What am I missing here? He could have. Once he realized what a threat Khan could be, Marcus decided to try to kill two birds with one stone. No one ever accused Starfleet admirals of being particularly smart. (In fact, that's kind of a running theme throughout all of Star Trek -- very few admirals are effective or intelligent.) Timby fucked around with this message at 04:26 on Sep 26, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2013 04:22
|
|
|
1st AD posted:I still hate the production design of that film though, the uniforms are cool and the Enterprise sets (TMP sets) look very nice, but everything else looks like they squeezed every last inch of whatever sound stage they were shooting at. That's because they did. Despite The Motion Picture making a ton of money (relatively speaking), Paramount's accountants still charged the costs of the previous aborted attempts at a film and Star Trek Phase II to its $45 million budget, so it was seen as a financial disappointment -- as a result, The Wrath of Khan was handed over to Paramount's television division. So the Reliant bridge was just a re-dress of the Enterprise bridge, with the pie slices rearranged; I think the torpedo room was actually a modification of the Klingon D-7 bridge from TMP, and the Genesis cave was a matte / soundstage getup. Star Trek II is quite literally an $11 million television movie that was made for theatrical release.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2013 05:13
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I'm pretty sure it was actually lower rated closer to when the film released, but yeah it's actually gotten about the same critical reception as stuff like Inception. I won't be surprised if we have another one in summer of 2016 (to catch the renewed Sci-fi craze brought about by the new Star Wars movie). That's not exactly a bold prediction; the whole reason they're searching for a new director (Joe Cornish turned them down, so they're back to square one) is because Abrams is tied up with Star Wars and they want to get a movie in theaters in 2016 to coincide with the 50th anniversary.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2013 23:52
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:Both Wikipedia and Memory Alpha say that Scotty resigns because he was not allowed to examine the torpedoes or determine the safety of their fuel source. The way I remember it he is more concerned by that as one sign of Section 31's attitude influencing Starfleet than by the torpedoes themselves. At that point, Kirk and Spock are the only people who know of Section 31's existence. The dialogue as it plays out in the film: quote:Kirk: I need you to approve those weapons. So Scotty's definitely bothered by the parameters of their mission, but it's pretty clear that he simply refuses to let weapons that he knows nothing about, and can't scan, and is told are of a classified nature, aboard the Enterprise.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2013 15:51
|
|
|
korusan posted:Leonard Nimoy didn't have any directing experience prior to Star Trek 3 and that turned out fine. Star Trek 4 was even better. Nimoy had done some television episodes (TJ Hooker and a few other shows). In any event, Nimoy's direction of those movies is in no way a strength. His compositions are terribly pedestrian and boring (imagine that, a television director made movies that ... looked like television shows), and I have no idea what the gently caress he was thinking when he hired Charles Correll as the DP on Trek III. Handing over the art direction to ILM was just a huge mistake coming on the heels of Joe Jennings, too -- they were designing stuff that was way outside their purview, like tricorders, and it shows. He also had no ability to rein in Shatner, unlike Meyer.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 17:23 |
|
|
penismightier posted:There's aping and there's aping well, though. By that I mean remaking Search for Spock with Kirk would be as lame and lazy as remaking Wrath of Khan with a guy who's only famous because 14 year olds want to see him bang the guy from The Office. I asked you this on Twitter ages ago, but have you re-watched Into Darkness? It's still clunky but I find it works a lot better on a small screen ... not sure why. Edit: Now that I think about it, I think it's because Cumberbatch doesn't know "subtle." Works better at home than it does in a theater, when he's just bellowing "KIRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRK" Timby fucked around with this message at 23:16 on May 20, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 20, 2014 23:12
|
|