Star Trek Into Darkness (Pre-release)

If we could just side track the "a hole" argument for a bit... ;) :lol


About the Enterprise being built in outer space versus on the ground- I used to submit to this notion a lot.

Frankly is seems silly now. It suggests that the Enterprise is "fragile" in something as (relatively) weak as Earth's gravity. The forces at work on the ship while it is rocketing through space at hundreds of times the speed of light are certainly stronger than Earth's gravity.

Oh right I forgot about the structural integrity field, the navigational deflector, the inertia dampeners... I guess without them the Enetrprise would be a flying eggshell.


Oh and about Trek breaking/bending its own rules, there are entire BOOKS written about every changed premise, equipment oddity, break in continuity etc.

For example: You can't transport through a starship's shields... Except they did exactly that at the climax of "Relics" with absolutely no explanation as to why; they just went ahead and did it.


Listen I'm no huge fan of JJ, however even "I" have changed my mind about all the nitpicking. And it is 100% the case that everything "not JJverse" seems to get a free pass.


Kevin
 
Guys, don't let JAbrams cause any heated discussions. The old Trek and new Trek may never be reconciled.

Personally, I'm just going to keep watching the Trek I love.
 
Caveneau said:
I still stick with the Enterprise being built in space.
Click to expand...

And that's fine. :)


I am reminded of another debate about another genre (I don't want to go into great detail as it is unnecessary... let's just say "horror")...

An afficianado on the subject said that a particular (franchise) establishes its own rules that most stories in the franchise follow.

When an author comes along that outright breaks the rules, they are either heralded as being groundbreaking, or considered a heretic. :lol


Kevin
 
Last edited:
So far the closest I can find for the reference I needed:

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Balance_of_Terror_(episode)

Kirk holds a conference and Scotty and Spock show how the outpost's protective shields were reduced to crumbling by the unknown Romulan weapon.

You can see the scene I have in mind at four minutes in here: Balance of Terror Condensed - YouTube

"Cast Rhodium. The hardest material known to our science."

The material is of similar color to the Enterprise exterior. It would make sense that if they built a starship to last and able to handle any sort of unknown that might come it's way they'd made it's hull out of that. After all; they made the outer shields of the Outposts from it. If it's readily available enough to ship out to deep space for listening posts then it should be available for ships of the line. Don't you think?
 
Kerr Avon said:
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. - Arthur C Clark
Click to expand...

Arthur C Clark would slap you silly if he heard the context of the argument that you're using that particular quote. That quote gets used and abused so much it's not even funny. The point he was trying to make is the relation between a person who understands science and technology and one who doesn't - not to pass off poor, lazy writing and saying it's passible because "we just don't understand it".

The whole point of "Science Fiction" is to foster an interest in "Science". Lots of people walk away from the older Treks inspired (to be an engineer, scientist, leadership role, etc.). Nobody is going to walk away from an 'Abrams Trek' inspired by anything.

To add to it, the whole point behind the 'Old' Trek wasn't the space and the technology - that was window dressing for the story of humanity and how we progressed as a species. The central point of Star Trek is to better ourselves, better humanity as a whole, and learn to work together for the betterment of ALL. I just don't see that in the new Trek.
 
I know nothing about Star Trek...but let me just say I love Benedict Cumberbatch and I am looking forward to this movie incredibly.

That is all.
 
That article is maddening:

So that's why I feel like this is more than a nitpick. Sacrificing basic physics for a cool shot is not in the best tradition of Star Trek.
Click to expand...

Who has the power to deem what is the BEST tradition of Star Trek?

All I can say is, if Trek solely clung to the elements which they (any many others, even here) have deemed as the "Best Tradition Star Trek", we wouldn't have a Star Trek to talk about right now. Nobody would have made it, and if they had, it would have no chance of grabbing hold of the souls of the viewers it did, in the way it did.

Trek is a metaphor. Their journey to the depths of space is our journey deeper into the recesses of ourselves.
 
nickytea said:
That article is maddening:



Who has the power to deem what is the BEST tradition of Star Trek?

All I can say is, if Trek solely clung to the elements which they (any many others, even here) have deemed as the "Best Tradition Star Trek", we wouldn't have a Star Trek to talk about right now. Nobody would have made it, and if they had, it would have no chance of grabbing hold of the souls of the viewers it did, in the way it did.
Click to expand...

Well, we'd have the old stuff, and is that such a bad thing?


This is a separate issue, but it's related to the topic folks have been discussing here. I keep seeing discussions about how "but then we wouldn't get any more [franchise] stuff!" when people complain about the new direction a given franchise has taken. And my question is simple:

So what?


More, in my opinion, is not always better. Frequently more is worse. Why not just be content with what we got in the "good old days" and leave it at that? After you've tried to recreate that old magic and failed, maybe it's better to just walk away than to say "Ok, let's try to create NEW magic and simply give it the old title!"


For example, people keep getting short of breath when thinking about Ghostbusters 3. Ghostbusters 2 was....ok. Barely. And it was made only a few years after the original, when everyone was still in pretty good shape, and when everyone was still basically on board with the franchise. Now, we've got a reluctant Bill Murray -- who really anchored the original films -- everyone originally involved is over the hill, and audiences have changed dramatically since the originals came out. And folks expect it'll be like going down memory lane? Wrong. The franchise will change, undoubtedly, in any new incarnation. And for me, I have to ask myself, when the franchise changes what exactly are we really recapturing other than branding?


None of this is to say that the newer stuff can't be entertaining in and of itself. I mean, if Trek '09 had featured different character names and different IP, it would've been reasonably entertaining in a cotton-candy adventure ride kind of way. Nothing wrong with that. But the slapping of the Trek IP overtop of it is just blatant brand abuse and I'm sick to death of that sort of thing.

This film may be interesting and entertaining, but it's really Star Trek in name only. So why bother with the name? The only reason studios do that is because they know there are junkie fans out there who can't walk away even as they rant and rave about how awful the franchise is. Another bad reason to make movies and a REALLY bad reason to go to them.
 
JJ had this to say about the film's villain.

"The whole thing, not just his backstory, but his agenda, his plan, his secret, all that is what, for me at least, makes him such a frightening and cool villain," Abrams said. "Also, the real villains — when they’re not just two-dimensional, angry vengeful types — don’t see themselves as the bad guy. They are the good guy and have complete rationale and motivation. So true to form, the character that Benedict plays has an absolute sense of right and wrong, and he’s on the right side."

Because vengeance has always been looked upon as being right, right? Right...
 
The ship that crashes into the sea in the trailer looks like the Enterprise, but I think it looks much more like a TOS constellation class than the new Enter-prius. Has anyone got any good high res shots of that moment?
 
This thread is more than 10 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.

Similar threads

Captain Dunsel
Star Trek: Discovery Season 5
2 3 4
Replies
65
Views
2,120
Treadwell
Treadwell
JiminSTLouis
Paramount Plans Another New STAR TREK Film, Set ‘Decades’ Before TREK ’09
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
3,299
Riceball
Riceball
TazMan2000
Rare Star Trek TNG SPFX video
Replies
3
Views
503
pengbuzz
P
Captain Dunsel
New Book: The Making Of Star Trek II
Replies
11
Views
1,131
DarkKnight
D
The Terminator
RIP Manny Coto - 24, Star Trek. Writer Producer
Replies
3
Views
487
George
George
Back
Top