Ok if you have seen the Japanese full version of the trailer there is a little bit afterward that is interesting but would piss me off.

You have no idea what that is.

Oh, I know I have no clue. It just gave me that flashback vibe to the movie I mentioned. I am just hoping they don't go that route again is all.

Well, the hand thing does seem to imply "Khan".....But it could just be JJ screwing with us.

Carol Marcus?

Good call.

It's not Carol Marcus.

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Dehner

http://images.wikia.com/memoryalpha/...hner_After.jpg

Good call as well. But you never know.

So the story is that Nero wasn't the only thing to come through the tear in time/space, that other persons/things could have just randomly popped up at various locations through the quadrant?


And they sure as hell make it look like Spock dies in this one. Not buying it for a second, for that would just be way too predictable.

The official comic isn't about Mitchell. My mistake.

And FYI, there is a Gary Mitchell in both timelines...so the movie could still be about Gary Mitchell.

Amazing trailer. The thing I love about Bad Robot is the way they market. They show a ton of cool shots but give away absolutely nothing.

Maybe its Matt Decker with the Doomsday machine?


http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Matt_Decker

Going from the ad, it makes me believe its Garth of Izar.

Going to call it, it's Kirk on the other side of the window this time.

That would be an interesting twist. Don't see it happening, though.

One rumor going around is that the Federation finds Khans ship the 'Botany Bay'. Spock 'prime' already knows what could happen and it is decided that Khan must die. Cumberbatch is Khan's second in command and seeks vengeance.

Again... just a theory.

That would suck, as it would reduce Khan to nothing more than a quick blip in this particular Star Trek universe. Would rather just have Cumberbatch be Khan. Will be interesting to see.

Khan has had his show.

I have no issue with him taking a back burner for the reboot universe.

In fact, it would be INFINITELY preferable and far more original.

As long as the movie is awesome, I don't care who the villain is at this point. It has taken too damn long for the movie to hit the screen!

You people are spoiled rotten.

There's no reason a movie can't take this long to come out. It used to happen all the time before studios felt some stupid need to pump crap out as fast as possible.

I'm all for it. Get it right. Get it perfect.

That first ad certainly looked promising.

I loved the reboot, thought most of it was pretty spectacular, namely the cast. This one looks to continue the formula so you can bet that I'll be there opening day.

fyi: Carol Marcus was not a member of starfleet.

It's Dehner.

List of which IMAX theaters will be showing the opening 9 minutes:


http://www.startrekmovie.com/imax/

The more and more I read speculation...the more I'm convinced that Khan bites it early in this one, and one of his Eugenics supermen buds is Cumberpatch's character.

Really wanted it to be Gary Mitchell but it's not.

I watched the Gary Mitchell TOS episode last night - hadn't seen it in years. God the uniforms were awful.

When it was being shown, they had the equivalent of half a movie done every week.

That was actually the 2nd pilot right? The first episode with Shatner if i remember right?

IM guessing this 9 minute preview will reveal who it is.

Yeah, The Cage was the original pilot.

Yep. In some ways it was rougher than the Jeffrey Hunter pilot, and they made wholesale changes afterward. Uniforms were awful, weapons looked like they were straight out of a 50's sci-fi movie, there was a different doctor, no Uhura, Sulu was a department head instead of the helmsman, there were clearly typewritten reports on the view screens, they had a regular pillow and blanket on Mitchell's bed in sick bay, main view screen was tiny. Kudos to whoever changed all that crap once the show got picked up.

I'm sure you're right.

Honestly, I loved what these guys did with the first one. I'm all in. I don't really care where they take it because I trust them.

I don't care if it's Khan or Mitchell or someone completely new. Looks like it's going to be a great ride no matter what.

I can't say I loved the Star Wars-ish dumbing down, but I realize it was necessary to keep the franchise alive.

Heh, its been fun to go back and rewatch some of those old episodes on Netflix in HD. You can clearly make out mistakes such as makeup lines and cheesy plastic made props. Stuff we never picked up on as kids growing up watching them on old fuzzy UHF stations.
Posted via Mobile Device

Understood. It's clearly been updated for the "Michael Bay" audience, but JJ managed to keep it somewhat thought provoking but still and stayed true to the characters. Mostly he made it cool and relevant again.
Posted via Mobile Device

I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

There is a segment of traditional trekkies who hate that J.J. removed the focus on plot development through extended conversations and opted for more of emphasis on action driven scenes.

Still, imo, it was an engaging story and had a number of moving elements throughout its entirety.

Uhh, Scotty going through the Enterprise's wash cycle and bringing his little teddy bear alien aboard the enterprise, Kirk running through the ship waving his Mickey Mouse hands around...Don't ever make me watch Spock and Uhura making out again...

And Kirk being named Captain of the Enterprise at the end of it all?...Kinda like the USN naming some 19 year old the captain of their largest nuclear aircraft carrier...

This, and more. And worst of all, the entire motive for the villain was horribly flawed, and while I know from the deleted scenes why the Romulans vanished for 25 years, and know the backstory from the preview graphic novel, the whole thing was just ****tarded.

However, I understand that they had to reboot the whole thing and not be constrained in the future by traditional ST canon. I'm pretty much an end-justifies-the-means guy anyway, so I get it. But the means had plot holes you could fly a starship through.

Well we could argue back and forth all day about how flawed or stupid some of the sequences might have been.

But I still don't understand the Star Wars comparison, nor how it was dumbed down. Whether it was flawed or not, the film was fairly complex and emotionally mature.

People are just pissed it was louder and more flash-bangy than the average Star Trek film.

It wasn't necessarily a bad thing, it was just different.

The core of Star Trek has always been the relationship between the characters. I am still somewhat concerned that's going to be lost. I guess we'll see.

I still would like to see a Star Trek film with a great plot like VI. That has always been my favorite. I don't know if Abrams is that kind of guy though.

The pace, fighting and explosion factor were upped significantly for today's modern younger audience. I don't care, they made Trek entertaining again. It had grown stale.

This is interesting to me because you seem to be implying that Abrams abandoned a more character driven story, but also that he didn't deliver a great plot. Those ideas seem like they could be in conflict. They aren't necessarily, but they could be.

Did you like the reboot? And what do you think Abrams & Co did well if not plot and character?

Would you say spectacle was his number one priority? Or at least, that he made a film where the spectacle was better executed than plot and character?

Because I don't think anyone could argue that the spectacle of the film was outstanding. The visuals are phenomenal.

I thought the plot was well executed, if a little straight forward. Unless we're considering the nature of the reboot as part of the plot. In which case, I'd say the plot was genius.

This is the first franchise reboot that I've ever seen that is a genuine reboot.

But, at it's core, it's the characters that elevated the movie, for me. If it had just been an action extravaganza with no substance, I wouldn't own it and watch it over and over again.

I completely agree.

But I would add that I think they did a great job with the character development. Especially since they were essentially reintroducing characters we already know and care about.

Interesting conversation about the first one (the reboot).

I saw it in theaters and liked it a lot. This week, I rewatched it for the first time, on TV, and found I liked it a lot less. I was wincing at several scenes.

The story was pretty basic other than the time travel stuff.....but they absolutely nailed the characters and casting. It would never have worked without getting the characters and the right actors. Chris Pine was a major find.

That's a bummer.

I seem to like it more and more each time I watch it. I've seen it well over a dozen times now and I just smile ear to ear. It hits all the right notes for me.

Hoping this next one continues the standards set in terms of spectacle and imagination, but with, perhaps, a darker bend.

Abrams & Co keep talking about TDK as a major influence, as a paradigm for what a franchise sequel should look/feel like. I hope they are able to achieve their version of The Dark Knight.

If you want to get picky from things I didn't like about the reboot there are many. There are no cliffs like that in Iowa. If he had maybe driven to Dubuque he could have driven over the bluffs.

The really big thing was the way they got away from the black hole at the end. They ejected all the warp engine cores and blew them up so that the explosion would give them a push to get going. First off any explosion would have been swallowed by the black hole. Second, you've just expended the power cells that fuels your engines. How would they get away?

It's Star Trek, dude. Star Trek science is always full of bullshit.

I liked the reboot but it was different than traditional Star Trek.

The characters were fine, but they still lacked the chemistry that the old cast had built up.

Plotwise it fell short...it was mostly about spectacle and building up a few key characters.

It'll be interesting to see how they proceed.

It actually was a quarry, so that's semi-plausible. However, the area looked way too flat and barren to be eastern Iowa.

And the impulse engines aren't powered by the warp core. But yeah, the black hole would have swallowed the explosion. That was lame.

Didn't they go to warp, though?

No, the explosion blasted them clear (I assume they had the impulse engines on full).

They gave it all she had.

I figured that was due to the nuclear war in the early 21st century?

It's a quarry.

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__...owa_quarry.jpg

It's a story device for the scene, nothing more. LMAO

Full STAR TREK trailer indicates hands against glass scene is actually Spock and Cumberbatch. If he’s Sybok… Well, kudos.

That said, Cumberbatch does NOT have Vulcan ears. Hands against glass scene seems to be Cumby in the brig.

Trailer opens with Pike VO, telling Kirk he has courage but no humility, and someday that will get him and his crew killed.

Oh yeah: there’s space stuff in the full TREK trailer. Space combat. Guy in a space suit zooming around.

In addition friend (and sometimes contributor to) TrekMovie Jordan Hoffman confirmed a few more details via Twitter DM:

Cumberbatch was definitely shown in some sort of brig

Chekov (Anton Yelchin) appears in a red tunic (instead of his regular gold tunic)

Someone wears a EVA space suit with similar design to the one used in Star Trek: The Motion Picture

Well, it was Abrams, after all.

About 50% of movies in the genre have utilized this Plot Device (Imprisoning the antagonist) since the release of The Dark Knight (The Avengers and Skyfall come to mind.)

Completely random thought -

Does Lucas ever sell the rights to Star Wars to Disney had Abrams' Star Trek reboot fallen on its face? I mean, 4 billion is 4 billion, but still..... Lucas seems to be (read: is incredibly) hyper defensive of his baby, and you wouldn't think he'd just sell it off to the highest bidder because he could. He'd want the story to live and be prosperous in future showings, so would he have ever gotten to that place without Star Trek v 2.0 (and Avatar, just to be fair)?

Abrams well knows the mantle he's inherited, this will be a somewhat darker chapter, his ESB, in some way.

All the news about Into Darkness has me Trekking out. I re-watched Wrath of Khan last night. Then watched Where No Man Has Gone Before (TOS episode), then watched like four hours of DS9.

Star Trek is awesome.

But if anyone thinks that JJ's version is more flawed or full of holes or ludicrous or eye roll worthy than any previous incarnation, I'm not sure they're seeing/remembering clearly.

Still, I love it all. I don't care how flawed or unrealistic any of it is. It's just so much fun. I can't wait for Into Darkness.

Also, why are we so sure Cumberbatch is playing a character we've seen before? Isn't it possible that he's a new character?

Absolutely.

JFC, they just gave away one of the iconic scenes in Star Trek history. :facepalm:

Which means it's a red herring.

Supposedly it's actually Cumberbatch in the brig, with Spock outside. But who knows.

My thoughts exactly.

But is it really giving anything away? If you've seen Wrath, you get the reference and it's super cool. If you haven't see it, then you don't get it and it doesn't mean anything nor ruin anything.

Have you even seen Star Trek VI?

It's a very good film with great performances and one of the best plots in any Science Fiction film I've ever seen.

It's the berlin wall coming down in outer space.

JJ has never made a film that could compare.

It would have been even better if they'd stuck with the original idea of having Saavik be the betrayer, but sadly Roddenberry shot it down.

I love Star Trek VI. It's always been my favorite in the series. I saw it in the theater like four times. My dad and I started a tradition of seeing the ST movies together. The tradition started with Star Trek V: The Final Frontier. The new reboot in 09 was the first one since then that we didn't see together in the theater.

Star Trek VI will always hold a special place in my heart.

My personal top 5:

1. The Undiscovered Country
2. First Contact
3. Star Trek (2009)
4. The Wrath of Khan
5. Generations

But it's really close between 2 & 3. Star Trek might over take First Contact in a couple of years. I really love it.

The Undiscovered Country was awesome.

The version I've heard of that story is that Kirstie Alley refused to return.

I dunno, because Kim Cattral nailed that role.

I don't think the other actresses could have.

Robin Curtis wasn't very notable all things considered.

Now that would have been cool...would have held more weight.

The undiscovered Country is definitely right up there as one of the top Trek films.

It's a perfectly written allegory for the fall of the Cold War.

Nicholas Myer really "got" Trek as well as anyone ever did.

Abrams is too smart to do that, just a tease to get everyone thinking.

That trailer is perfect, it feels like theres an actual story behind it.

She refused to return to Star Trek III, for sure. I hadn't heard that she was asked to return for Star Trek VI.

Wasn't she uber heavy at that point?

I agree. I think it was in there as a homage for die hard Trek fans.

They're like poetry, they rhyme.

Yeah. They couldn't hide her giant ass behind a bar in Star Trek.