star trek:into darkness (WARNING: SPOILERS as of 4/23/13)

Re: star trek:into darkness

But I think a god-like being like Mitchell would come back to Earth to RULE, not merely to wreck Starfleet.

The plot summary suggests a manhunt and one would have to ask the question: why would Mitchell need to flee?

Re: star trek:into darkness

Gary 7

Re: star trek:into darkness

Yeah, if you or I wrote it, we'd ask these questions.

But remember...Damon Lindelof.

Re: star trek:into darkness

Same team that wrote the last one. While their set pieces are great, their plotting is ca-ca.

Re: star trek:into darkness

I like that idea!

Re: star trek:into darkness

Wait, so they turned Kirk into Janeway?

Re: star trek:into darkness

Gary 7 was sent here to stop an accident with an orbiting nuclear bomb. That might be consistent with the poster we've seen.

Re: star trek:into darkness

Well, he was in TWOK, and TFF....they're just jumping the gun a bit.

Re: star trek:into darkness

It's clear now, who the villain will be!

Re: star trek:into darkness

"To rule! FINALLY, to rule!".

Re: star trek:into darkness

Different strokes for different folks, but Kirk always seemed to think of the Enterprise crew as his family as far as I'm concerned, and he seemed to just hide his emotional needs well for the most part.

There are different ways the story could go.

Really, from on-screen TOS, we don't know a ton about Gary Mitchell prior to the episode. Basically just that Kirk and he were friends and that Kirk taught him at Starfleet Academy, prompting Gary to try to distract Kirk with a hot blonde, and that Gary has a rep as a ladies' man himself.

Even assuming that Abrams and co. stick within the boundaries of that characterization (and there's no need for that to be the case), there are a lot of different motivations a hypothetical godlike being might have.

He might see humans as beneath him like ants and have no desire to rule them.

He might still have petty human desires that he wants to fulfill and may want to go various places to fulfill them.

You're assuming he left because he was fleeing.

He could have left because he accomplished his objective, because he was bored with Earth, because he wanted to go elsewhere to create his race of pure Espers, or any number of motivations other than "fleeing."

Even if he was "fleeing," his power was never infinite in TOS. It could be taxed and then he would have to recover. In a big screen version, instead of recovering in just a short period, he could need more time to recover, or Starfleet could have developed an Esper inhibitor device or something similar.

Re: star trek:into darkness

I honestly don't see how they could stick to that continuity for the relationship between Kirk and Mitchell. This Kirk never taught at the Academy, and he sure as hell wasn't the by-the-book martinet Mitchell made him out to be in WNMHGB.

Re: star trek:into darkness

This has always bothered me quite a bit, since it seems to contradict what is revealed about Kirk in TWOK.

Re: star trek:into darkness

I was always able to reconcile the two as Kirk's cheating on the KM having been either something he didn't get caught for or that the Academy kept hush-hush. That can't work in the alternate reality, of course, since they made a big public deal out of it.

EDIT: He might also have changed his ways pretty significantly between the time when he took the test and when he started teaching at the Academy, although the "he couldn't be proven to have cheated" idea still makes more sense, since someone who got caught cheating probably would never get a position teaching there.

Re: star trek:into darkness

It's not contradictory in the old continuity.

He was an uptight, by the books, bookworm in his first couple of years at the academy. After he and Mitchell became friends and Kirk went through some adventures, he changed a great deal.

It isn't canon, but there is a trilogy that covers a lot of it:

My Brother's Keeper Trilogy by Micheal Jan Friedman

Book 1: Republic

Book 2: Constitution

Book 3: Enterprise

A really good set of books...I enjoyed them immensely.

Re: star trek:into darkness

So the short trailer is out...and there is a Japanese one with an extra scene which heavily implies who the villian probably is and what this new movie is probably a remake of:

http://www.giantfreakinrobot.com/sc...iler-confirms-movies-villain-worst-fears.html

Re: star trek:into darkness

Hmmm.

A few thoughts on the trailer.

1. Looks positively epic. Stuff happens on a grand scale.

2. Finally! An alien planet that looks like an alien planet!

3. Whatever role she's playing, Alice Eye is

4. I'm not sure the scene shown in the Japanese trailer spoils the identity of the villain, although it does kinda point you in that direction.

5. Underwater spaceships (or spaceships underwater at any rate)! Cool!

6. Looks very actiony!

7. As for the villain,

Re: star trek:into darkness

Spoilers ahead, fuckers, if any of you have not yet seen the trailer then you might not want to read this until you have.

What follows is my second-by-second reaction to the trailer - the Japanese one since it has the extra scene:

0:04 - Suspension bridge, presumably San Francisco
0:06 - apparently a speech in progress, uniformed folk in audience wearing HATS! WTF?
0:08 - villain speaking, refers to "your world" which might imply non-human, but not necessarily
0:12 - Kirk, in what appears to be a dress uniform, has epelets, much more military style than TOS
0:18 - a blonde appears who looks VEEEEEERY much like this:


0:21 - "I have returned to have my vengeance" - so he's been there before, either in connection to Kirk specifically or Starfleet in general, and he's obsessed with payback moreso than conquering (damn, wasn't that pretty much the plot of the LAST movie?) - Again, couldeasily be Mitchell whom kirk THOUGHT was dead, could be Khan with some massive retconing...BUT it could also be Charlie Evans if you completely ignore the fact that Evans would probably actually be about 12 at this pint in Kirk's life (they certainly had no issue completely fucking with Checkov's age, after all)
0:25 - outfit antagonist is wearing looks very much like outfit Kirk and McCoy were wearing when they did the cliff jump a few seconds ago
0:28 - Spock (I think) gets subterranean
0:33 - with this, heads explode across the known geek universe, but physics aside, it's a cool looking shot
0:41 - the blonde again; I was open to the idea it might have been Janice Rand but she's wearing blue...
0:42 - Scotty (I think?) consuls weeping Uhura (possible "Something has happened to Spock" moment?)
0:52 - Enterprise arrives in San Francisco Bay (?)
1:02 - straight rip of the death scene from TWOK, which there is NO WAY they'd have the balls to actually replay that scene so it's clearly a red herring.

entire narriaration - antagonist speaks with a much more refined and urbane voice than one might associate with any incarnation one can easily assume for Mitchell, however, they were very liberal in altering the look of core characters (Chekov and Scotty) and had no problem making Chekov several years younger than he should have been so that alone might notmean much. OTOH, the accent and the "death scene" would argue for Khan, but on the first hand, the blone almost certainly hasto be Elizabeth Denher and it makes no sense for herto appear unless it's Mitchell.

So I'm still going to say that the strongest odds at the moment go to Mitchell.

Re: star trek:into darkness

The thing is...the hints in the trailer seem to be an attraction between the blonde and Kirk...and there was zero amount of that in WNMHGB between Dehner and Kirk.

Re: star trek:into darkness

About the implied death scene, it looks to me (from the movement of Kirk's[?] hand) that the situations are reversed, thus suggesting that it is Kirk who will provide the answer to the question "Is there anything you would not do for your family?"

(It's been mentioned that an ongoing theme in the comics has been Kirk seeing his crew as his "family.")

Re: star trek:into darkness

Assuming Khan - it's not actually Khan, but somehow they have a different augment superman in the JJ verse, also, they cannot actually kill Spock because no one on the face of the planet wants the next JJ film to be a re-tooling of "The Search for Spock"

I'll concede the blonde could in theory be Carol Marcus (ignoring they old-canon reality that Marcus was never in Starfleet) but other key elements seem to be missing (notably, Dayton's favorite subject - the epic space battle)

Of course, we are speaking of the FIRST appearance of Khan (i.e. Space Seed, not TWOK) in terms of any reasonable approach to the time line so there would be almost no parallel between events.


Still, ultimately, I have an easier time supposing a not-really-dead Mitchell, having evolved into a would-be Q being fitting what we saw than i do Khan.

like I said pages ago, the closest we might get on Khan is a"Khan-like character who's not ACTUALLY Khan"

The hand-wringing at Tamar's link notwithstanding.

Re: star trek:into darkness

Looked to be a lot of natural disaster porn happening. Between connecting that to a single character who wants revenge on Kirk, and the blonde who looks a whole lot like Dehner, the odds that it isn't Mitchell (however seriously reworked) approach absolute zero.

Also bear this in mind: Mitchell has appeared in the comic between movies -- and whoever this guy is wants revenge on Kirk. It isn't for something Kirk did in the last movie, and they've used the comics to "fill in the blanks" once already.

It's Mitchell.

Re: star trek:into darkness

Thoughts:-

1) Yet another TWOK rehash, ugh
2) The standard teaser stinks of being the usual summer blackbuster "clone-a-movie"
3) It's tiresome that everything has to be "dark" these days. Star Trek is about hope. I notice that the general colour scheme seems to be dull and grey and the TOS inspired duty uniforms reduce in appearance.

To be honest, it's only really the added scene in the Japanese one that talks of family (which is a reference to the crew, not literal family or just Spock) that suggests to me that there is anything remotely Roddenberryish about it and leaves me with any shred of hope.

I'll reserve judgment until I've seen the picture, but that advertising so far leaves me with a sour taste that Star Trek has moved too far away from what it originally was. Here's hoping I am wrong.

btw, I notice the Klingons still have those helmets on. I wouldn't mind better that's because they've taken iberties, redesigned them and don't want the redesign revealed during the picture.

Re: star trek:into darkness

Can't be sure, but I still don't think it's Mitchell. That just doesn't seem to fit at all.

A thought occurs to me. Could it possibly be...

Re: star trek:into darkness

Well, the trailer is here: http://www.startrek.com/article/first-look-star-trek-into-darkness-trailer

And I can't watch it from work so... *grrrr*

EDIT// OK, never mind, I do have my own WIFI after all #securitybreach

This really doesn't have much to do with the cosy little movies that came before it. Makes 'em look like cute little attempts from people used to making TV episodes.

The trailer screams already Mitchell. The Blonde is a ringer for Dehner, which seals it in my opinion. I'm thoroughly convinced the enemy is Mitchell.

Re: star trek:into darkness

Honestly don't care if it is Khan, Mitchell, whoever. Just interested to see what they do with it.
Enjoyed the first one, with its flaws, and do have hopes for this one.

Re: star trek:into darkness

Exactly! The first movie rocked and was a fun adventure. This one looks more "Empire Strikes Back" and is much more dark and epic in scope.

I don't know who the villain is supposed to be, and quite frankly I don't give a shit. All this speculation about Khan or Mitchell is irrelevant. I just want to see a good movie that entertains me.

And all the naysayers should be happy about one thing -- there were no lens flares in the trailer. That's gotta count for something.

Re: star trek:into darkness

I'm pretty sure the diehard fans just want the baddie to be someone from TOS so they can whine on and on and on how much he's not like in 1966.

I'd find it quite funny if it was that temporal cold war guy we never saw clearly on ENT. You know, just to see a few heads explode. That would be good for the gene pool.