[Movies] Star Trek: Into darkness

[Deleted]

Description:
After the crew of the Enterprise find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction.

For me the 2009 Star Trek was best sci-fi movie of 2009.
The first trailer could be released today (4th of december)
10 minutes from the movie will be released before premiere of Hobbit (same as Dark Knight and Dark knight Rises)

Teaser: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=diP-o_JxysA

[Kraenen]

Not sure if I like this new direction, then again trying to remake the old stuff usually doesn't work. It just seems a little too "dark" type.

[Deleted]

Not sure if I like this new direction, then again trying to remake the old stuff usually doesn't work. It just seems a little too "dark" type.

Well it was logical.I mean Nemesis was good but what to do after that? I usually don't like prequels at all but this new way is exciting and fresh.

[Markluzz]

Well it was logical.I mean Nemesis was good but what to do after that? I usually don't like prequels at all but this new way is exciting and fresh.

I agree I loved the last star trek movie and highly anticipate this one

[ujellybrah]

Personally I can't wait! I love how they rebooted the series with the timeline reset, makes for some interesting changes in the Star Trek Universe.

[Foosha]

For me the 2009 Star Trek was best sci-fi movie of 2009.

While I loved the reboot of Star Trek, I....I'm hesitant to really call it sci-fi. Sure there was space and spaceships, with cool red matter or whatever the fuck that was, but it never really...dealt with science fiction like previous Star Treks do. It was more like an action/drama movie set in near future in space, and judging by the poster and what's come out, I doubt it will change.

Moon and District 9 were pretty fantastic though in terms of Sci-Fi goes for 2009

[Clockwork Pinkie]

Can't wait, also doubt the trailer will be released today, this week is most likely, Thursday perhaps. But yea 9 minutes of the movie will be shown in IMAX with The Hobbit, and regular showings will get the 1:03 teaser trailer. Tons of new trailers will also be shown with The Hobbit; Man of Steel, Pacific Rim, After Earth (Will Smith/M.Night movie) The Great Gatsby, and "Turbo".

---------- Post added 2012-12-04 at 05:00 AM ----------

While I loved the reboot of Star Trek, I....I'm hesitant to really call it sci-fi. Sure there was space and spaceships, with cool red matter or whatever the fuck that was, but it never really...dealt with science fiction like previous Star Treks do. It was more like an action/drama movie set in near future in space, and judging by the poster and what's come out, I doubt it will change.

Moon and District 9 were pretty fantastic though in terms of Sci-Fi goes for 2009

Yea, it was an interesting little way of "creating" black holes. Loved how they were just throwing that shit around killing enemies with it. I loved the movie, it was entertaining, but yea, comparing it to the others, it can make it look pretty bad.

[Fuzzzie]

Looks cool. I liked the first one a lot. I hope it's in the same vein.

[Skippy88]

Poster looks cool even though it's a ripoff of other movie posters. It will be interesting where they go with it. I just hope they lose some of the shaky cam stuff where you have no idea what your looking at since it's shaking so much.

[Darsithis]

I don't know what to think about the whole rebooting. Now, I've had my vocal criticism about continuity issues (most caused by Enterprise!), but a reboot never seemed the right option. I know that it's supposed to be an alternate timeline next to the Prime Universe, thus everything that has happened in the future did happen and will happen, but it seems wrong. It's amazing that with the thousands of changes in the galaxy from the event that Kirk, Spock, Scotty, Uhuru, and Scotty still end up together. Not just together, but on the same ship a good dozen+ years earlier than they would have.

Still, I'll go see it and see how it moves the new story along. One thing I can say is that the new Star Trek movies are far more...up-to-date in terms of motivations, action, and story than ever before.

[Deleted]

I have high expectations for this movie, so I hope it's really good.

[Decagon]

I don't know what to think about the whole rebooting. Now, I've had my vocal criticism about continuity issues (most caused by Enterprise!), but a reboot never seemed the right option. I know that it's supposed to be an alternate timeline next to the Prime Universe, thus everything that has happened in the future did happen and will happen, but it seems wrong. It's amazing that with the thousands of changes in the galaxy from the event that Kirk, Spock, Scotty, Uhuru, and Scotty still end up together. Not just together, but on the same ship a good dozen+ years earlier than they would have.

Still, I'll go see it and see how it moves the new story along. One thing I can say is that the new Star Trek movies are far more...up-to-date in terms of motivations, action, and story than ever before.

I agree. Continuity issues always pissed me off, even though I loved Enterprise. I suppose that their reasoning for all of them to be together in alternate timelines is that it's supposed to be very similar with the main universe, but it's still weird.

I'm still way excited for it, I plan on going to the midnight release with two of my friends. \0/

Also, is...that a cape on the poster?

[openair]

While I loved the reboot of Star Trek, I....I'm hesitant to really call it sci-fi. Sure there was space and spaceships, with cool red matter or whatever the fuck that was, but it never really...dealt with science fiction like previous Star Treks do. It was more like an action/drama movie set in near future in space, and judging by the poster and what's come out, I doubt it will change.

Moon and District 9 were pretty fantastic though in terms of Sci-Fi goes for 2009

Science fiction is a genre of fiction dealing with imaginary but more or less plausible content such as future settings, futuristic science and technology, space travel, parallel universes, aliens, and paranormal abilities.

Sounds like sci fi to me. Action and/or drama are a part of more types of movies than not. Movies are an extension of dramatic theatre afterall. Also, other then red matter, what was more sci fi about other Trek movies then the reboot?

Is Red Matter some how less plausible then a god like entity living in a wall at the edge of the galaxy? Or was Nero time travel less plausible then the borgs, or kirks in a patch jobbed BoP?

Also what plausible sci fi theory did Nemesis explore? Oh, one character was cloned, kinda. To me, Nemesis was just as much action/drama as the reboot. There's a reason they're called space operas.

[Fuzzzie]

I don't know what to think about the whole rebooting. Now, I've had my vocal criticism about continuity issues (most caused by Enterprise!), but a reboot never seemed the right option. I know that it's supposed to be an alternate timeline next to the Prime Universe, thus everything that has happened in the future did happen and will happen, but it seems wrong. It's amazing that with the thousands of changes in the galaxy from the event that Kirk, Spock, Scotty, Uhuru, and Scotty still end up together. Not just together, but on the same ship a good dozen+ years earlier than they would have.

Still, I'll go see it and see how it moves the new story along. One thing I can say is that the new Star Trek movies are far more...up-to-date in terms of motivations, action, and story than ever before.

I wouldn't expect any more continuity from the Gene Roddenberry Star Trek any time soon. Ronald Moore stomped on that throughout the 90s and it's done. You can see it as the story telling went from tales or morality to conflict. The re-boot movies are nothing more than a cash grab. There is a little fan service thrown in, but it's really about flashy action now and storytelling is out the window. As good as Star Trek 2009 was, it's story was pretty much 1 note throughout the film.

[Vayshan]

Well it was logical.I mean Nemesis was good but what to do after that? I usually don't like prequels at all but this new way is exciting and fresh.

Deep Space Nine had a pretty open ending... not sure if it would've been movie material though.

Anyways... I'm guessing Khan Noonien Singh is the bad guy in this movie

---------- Post added 2012-12-05 at 05:14 AM ----------

Personally I can't wait! I love how they rebooted the series with the timeline reset, makes for some interesting changes in the Star Trek Universe.

If only they didn't have someone at the helm who knows shit about Trek.

[starkey]

Call it Dark Kirk Arises and bring back William Shatner

[Clockwork Pinkie]

Confirmed that the trailer is this week(Thursday), and it's only 1 minute 3 seconds. Either way, I'm sure I'll enjoy it, I really enjoyed the first star trek teaser. The building of the enterprise, shown before Cloverfield. Was awesome.
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=97723

[Foosha]

Sounds like sci fi to me. Action and/or drama are a part of more types of movies than not. Movies are an extension of dramatic theatre afterall. Also, other then red matter, what was more sci fi about other Trek movies then the reboot?

Is Red Matter some how less plausible then a god like entity living in a wall at the edge of the galaxy? Or was Nero time travel less plausible then the borgs, or kirks in a patch jobbed BoP?

Also what plausible sci fi theory did Nemesis explore? Oh, one character was cloned, kinda. To me, Nemesis was just as much action/drama as the reboot. There's a reason they're called space operas.

I wasn't talking plausible, I was talking how the characters deal with the outside threat/the "new". I mean, would you call Star Wars a hard sci-fi film? No, it's a space opera/western. Which is what the new Star Trek really is. I'm not saying I hated it, I actually liked the movie, but calling it sci-fi is suspect.

Sci-fi doesn't just mean "technology beyond our capabilities". It can be out there wacky stuff that would never in a million years come to fruition. Sci-fi deals with the internal conflicts of dealing with the new...so to speak. It's hard to put together...but for the sake of simplicity, lets take Moon. The whole movie he's basically trying to find out about himself.

[openair]

I wasn't talking plausible, I was talking how the characters deal with the outside threat/the "new". I mean, would you call Star Wars a hard sci-fi film? No, it's a space opera/western. Which is what the new Star Trek really is. I'm not saying I hated it, I actually liked the movie, but calling it sci-fi is suspect.

Sci-fi doesn't just mean "technology beyond our capabilities". It can be out there wacky stuff that would never in a million years come to fruition. Sci-fi deals with the internal conflicts of dealing with the new...so to speak. It's hard to put together...but for the sake of simplicity, lets take Moon. The whole movie he's basically trying to find out about himself.

You trying too hard to add your own meaning to words, that they do not have. Science Fiction encompasses all science fiction and its subgenres. Space opera's/Western are a subgenre of sci fi. Just as hard sci fi is subgenre of science fiction.

Hard science fiction is a category of science fiction characterized by an emphasis on scientific or technical detail, or on scientific accuracy, or on both.

I dont think star trek ever fit that description. Certainly not Kirks Star Trek anyway.

[Haven]

Why, the 2009 movie was actually great, can't wait for this one.