|
FlamingLiberal posted:I guess those photos could lend some credence to the idea that maybe Cumberbatch is Gary Mitchell. Or Finnegan. He was in Starfleet as well.
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 17:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 16:20 |
|
|
7thBatallion posted:Or Finnegan. He was in Starfleet as well. Haha, I don't think Finnegan would work in a modern movie. Not only is he a douche for no reason (or, at least Kirk's projection of him is), but he talks like a loving leprechaun. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRvEM6zE-X8
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 18:34
|
|
|
How can you have a Khan character without genetic engineering? Have they mentioned this at all?? It's an interesting thing. Here's a superior version of the human race that is kept down and outlawed by all the dummies because the dummies know that they will take over....
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 18:43
|
|
|
So, Karl Urban might have let it slip in a recent interview that the villian Cumberbatch plays is Gary Mitchell. Which is a way better choice than Khan, in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 16:20
|
|
|
MorgaineDax posted:So, Karl Urban might have let it slip in a recent interview that the villian Cumberbatch plays is Gary Mitchell. Which is a way better choice than Khan, in my opinion. Does the character have another name? Something about "Oh no! It's... GARY!" doesn't fill me with much dread.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 16:35
|
|
|
Well, Mitchell was the villain of the second Ongoing comic. If Orci and Kurtzman were right in saying the comics would tie into the movie, they have a decent opening left for themselves.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 23:18
|
|
|
Lobok posted:Does the character have another name? Something about "Oh no! It's... GARY!" doesn't fill me with much dread. What was my grandson's name again?
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 23:19
|
|
|
Lobok posted:Does the character have another name? Something about "Oh no! It's... GARY!" doesn't fill me with much dread. Anyone who's ever played Fallout 3 has a healthy fear of people named Gary. There's a vault full of feral clones of a guy named Gary, who murder other people on sight and can only say their name. "Heh, heh, heh...Gaaaaaarrrrrry..."
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 00:17
|
|
|
Zombie Samurai posted:Anyone who's ever played Fallout 3 has a healthy fear of people named Gary. This is exactly what I was thinking of.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 00:36
|
|
|
What episode is Gary Mitchell featured in?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 06:20
|
|
|
Detective No. 27 posted:What episode is Gary Mitchell featured in? The Second Pilot "Where No Man Has Gone Before"
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 06:22
|
|
|
A lot of things changed when they went into full production (even Kirk's name), but it's funny to see that yes, Shatner's shirt does gets ripped at every opportunity.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 07:12
|
|
|
I wonder if this means Alice Eve is playing Elizabeth Dehner?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 21:50
|
|
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:The Second Pilot "Where No Man Has Gone Before" drat fine episode. I'd be happy enough if Cumberbatch was
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 23:22
|
|
|
James R Kirk
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2012 00:56
|
|
|
NarkyBark posted:James R Kirk Obviously short for James TibERius Kirk.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2012 02:44
|
|
|
I hope the new movie has something about the exciting efforts of Starfleet Dental. Maybe some fire extinguisher..
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2012 04:19
|
|
|
I'd prefer the bridge of death.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2012 04:38
|
|
|
For anyone following the comic series, the end of the Return of the Archons was pretty interesting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2012 16:43
|
|
|
Does Paramount have anything major before the end of the year coming out? If not for the GIJoe delay until next year, I could have honestly thought it would have been the best place for a JJTrek 2 teaser trailer to start pumping up interest for next Summer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 09:19
|
|
|
JediTalentAgent posted:Does Paramount have anything major before the end of the year coming out? If not for the GIJoe delay until next year, I could have honestly thought it would have been the best place for a JJTrek 2 teaser trailer to start pumping up interest for next Summer. They have Paranormal Activity 4 in October, Flight in November, and Jack Reacher on Christmas. They'll probably get a teaser tossed in with a Warner movie like Argo or Gangster Squad - the two studios have a nice working relationship. Although, if Looper tracks well enough, they may stick it to that instead. There'll probably be a more fleshed-out trailer on Jack Reacher, if trends tell me anything.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 09:34
|
|
|
All those movies seem a little too adult-aimed, though. Given the current media reaction to the Cruise divorce, I wonder if Paramount might want to intentionally distance a big film like Trek 2 from getting the first teaser or full trailer attached to it. (Of course, a lot can change in several months) Paramount is distributing "Rise of the Guardians" and Chris Pine does a voice in it, so I'm almost willing to bet that might end up being a likely choice for the first teaser trailer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 09:44
|
|
|
Guardians feels far too late for "premiering" a teaser. At that point you're almost exactly seven months out, and any possible buzz from a teaser would get pretty smashed against the rocks of the dozen gigantic movies that finish the year out. I'm sure there'll be a trailer with it, but it won't be the first time we're seeing it. It'll have played on something before then. That said, Karl Urban's claiming that footage from the new Star Trek will be put on Youtube before Comic Con's over. Hell, they might be doing the smartest thing and tossing a trailer out to get in front of Rises. I think I'm more astounded by the fact that Paramount literally doesn't have another movie out until October. Their last release until then is the Katy Perry concert movie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 11:13
|
|
|
Gary Mitchell as the baddie could be fun, but just rehashing that episode would be kind of lazy. Did they ever explain (in the episode) how they managed to get to the very edge of the galaxy? The brush with the galactic barrier is what made Mitchell a danger to begin with (which, incidentally, was later retconned as a huge galactic shield to keep this thing called the Unity - think subspace nano-Borg - out and was recharged by Kirks half-human/quarter-klingon/quarter-romulan jesus child). Oh yeah, and the thing at the center of the galaxy in ST5 was an exiled Q, for added shits and giggles.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2012 04:41
|
|
|
WarLocke posted:Gary Mitchell as the baddie could be fun, but just rehashing that episode would be kind of lazy. Did they ever explain (in the episode) how they managed to get to the very edge of the galaxy? The brush with the galactic barrier is what made Mitchell a danger to begin with (which, incidentally, was later retconned as a huge galactic shield to keep this thing called the Unity - think subspace nano-Borg - out and was recharged by Kirks half-human/quarter-klingon/quarter-romulan jesus child). Was that all in the books "written" by Shatner?
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2012 13:37
|
|
|
WarLocke posted:(which, incidentally, was later retconned as a huge galactic shield to keep this thing called the Unity - think subspace nano-Borg - out and was recharged by Kirks half-human/quarter-klingon/quarter-romulan jesus child). The hell? When did Kirk get around to fathering a child with a Romulingon? Or did he have sex with a Klingon and a Romulan at the same time and Kirk's just that Kirky?
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2012 14:07
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:The hell? When did Kirk get around to fathering a child with a Romulingon? Or did he have sex with a Klingon and a Romulan at the same time and Kirk's just that Kirky? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2012 14:53
|
|
|
WarLocke posted:Gary Mitchell as the baddie could be fun, but just rehashing that episode would be kind of lazy. Did they ever explain (in the episode) how they managed to get to the very edge of the galaxy? No, the setting was very nebulously defined at that point. For example, in The Squire of Gothos, it's very clearly implied that Star Trek takes place nine hundred years in the future. Later in Space Seed they go with merely 200 years. Then at some point it got pinned down to the 23rd century.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2012 16:31
|
|
|
Senor Tron posted:Was that all in the books "written" by Shatner? Nope, some of it's in the Q Continuum books, which are an interesting idea at least. Essentially, the Galactic Barrier was put up by the Continuum to keep out an entity called 0 who Q accidentally let into our universe and was responsible for the destruction of the T'kon Empire and the current state of the Calamarain. 0 also brought along some buddies who ended up in various TOS episodes including Gorgon, the Vampire Cloud, and also "God" from STV. The central Galactic Barrier was put up to keep his severed head prisoner. Like I said, interesting ideas, but the execution kinda sucked.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2012 03:53
|
|
|
Ensign_Ricky posted:Nope, some of it's in the Q Continuum books, which are an interesting idea at least. Essentially, the Galactic Barrier was put up by the Continuum to keep out an entity called 0 who Q accidentally let into our universe and was responsible for the destruction of the T'kon Empire and the current state of the Calamarain. 0 also brought along some buddies who ended up in various TOS episodes including Gorgon, the Vampire Cloud, and also "God" from STV. The central Galactic Barrier was put up to keep his severed head prisoner. Yeah, the Unity was from the Shatner novels and was a sort of Borg collective type thing that lived/traveled through subspace and the galactic barrier was put in place to keep it out of ours. Gary Mitchell's brush with it started a weakening process, to the point that the Unity could start popping out of subspace in our galaxy and assimilate/replace high ranking admirals and junk. At one point Kirk finds a planet where klingons and romulans are living together in peace, then falls in love with a bones a half/half chick. Then due to some crazy Mirror Universe and Precursos shenanigans it turns out that the collective DNA of all the humanoid races in the galaxy is a sort of master key to the galactic barrier, and Kirk's kid's particular DNA mix is somehow the perfect one and he goes all Jesus and sacrifices himself to recharge the barrier to keep the Unity out. The Shatnerverse trek books are legitly hosed up. Although IMO some of the Borg and Mirror Universe stuff in them is pretty drat cool.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2012 04:18
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:The hell? When did Kirk get around to fathering a child with a Romulingon? Or did he have sex with a Klingon and a Romulan at the same time and Kirk's just that Kirky? Cheesus posted:When wouldn't have Kirk gotten around to do all of that? If it's a species capable of producing females, Kirk slept with it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2012 05:45
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:If it's a species capable of producing females, Kirk slept with it. I'm pretty sure they had to be humanoid as well. Kirk ain't sticking his dick in no spider creature. Of course, The Undiscovered Country pretty much came out and said that it just had to be humanoid and female-looking and Kirk would be all up in that. drat, that shapeshifting Iman.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2012 07:06
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:I'm pretty sure they had to be humanoid as well. Kirk ain't sticking his dick in no spider creature. Kirk knows true beauty isn't only skin deep.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2012 08:19
|
|
|
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that I think the villain is Garth of Izar from "Whom Gods Destroy" ... or some other random superhuman from the Botany Bay who would have otherwise died in his stasis chamber in TOS timeline.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2012 06:54
|
|
|
WarLocke posted:Yeah, the Unity was from the Shatner novels and was a sort of Borg collective type thing that lived/traveled through subspace and the galactic barrier was put in place to keep it out of ours. Gary Mitchell's brush with it started a weakening process, to the point that the Unity could start popping out of subspace in our galaxy and assimilate/replace high ranking admirals and junk.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2012 23:16
|
|
|
Well, they're calling it Star Trek Into Darkness. It kind of sounds like a movie from the 1950s or 1960s which would make sense. Need a trailer before I can decide if it works!
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2012 17:48
|
|
|
I'm not very sold on that title, if that's indeed what they go with. It's very clunky.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2012 23:02
|
|
|
So they won't be trekking into darkness, they'll be star trekking into darkness. I can almost feel the producers winking and nudging me with their elbows.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2012 23:52
|
|
|
Yeah, not feeling that. It sounds clunky even when rendered as "Star Trek: Into Darkness".
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2012 00:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 16:20 |
|
|
It's a little corny but it's pretty cool. Sets a precedent for using the title like that in other ways instead of only ever having a subtitle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2012 00:39
|
|