It has a name: Star Trek: Into Darkness.

Gatefan1976

Well Known GateFan

Bluce Ree

Tech Admin / Council Member
I was hoping we would see something like this, so I would not feel that I was just lamenting the Star trek I know and love. This new Trek is shedding it's original fanbase because it is no longer science fiction, but more science fantasy like Star Wars. I think he will be PERFECT for Star Wars. Either him or Michael Bay could do something spectacular with Star wars. But neither one of them has the intellectual brainpower to do Trek right. Not without help. There would be far more discussion about why there can be no such thing as Red Matter, and why you cant introduce things like transwarp beaming without ruining the tech timeline in Star Trek. There would be less discussion about where to put lens flares, how to create tension in scenes using devices that ruin the overall impact. Like the scene where Kirk's helmet starts cracking whilst he is hurtling towards the other ship. :facepalm:.

If Abrams stays at the helm, Trek will die much quicker in this incarnation that it has the past two times.

You know, this whole transwarp-beaming thing pretty much destroys any believable obstacle a writer can throw into a story. For instance, why didn't Khan just beam the admiral to Kronos? Or to the moon? Or in orbit? Or into the floor or the conference room wall. His proximity to the conference room in that stupid airship he was in just outside the window negates any dampening field that would disrupt unauthorized transport from orbit.

Abrams introduced a concept that has far too much reach with transwarp beaming and renders most of what Starfleet does with their ships moot. If one can beam themselves from Earth to Kronos with a portable device using transwarp technology, what's left to write about? The only thing transwarp beaming can't solve is teen angst.
 

Overmind One

GateFans Gatemaster
Staff member
You know, this whole transwarp-beaming thing pretty much destroys any believable obstacle a writer can throw into a story. For instance, why didn't Khan just beam the admiral to Kronos? Or to the moon? Or in orbit? Or into the floor or the conference room wall. His proximity to the conference room in that stupid airship he was in just outside the window negates any dampening field that would disrupt unauthorized transport from orbit.

Abrams introduced a concept that has far too much reach with transwarp beaming and renders most of what Starfleet does with their ships moot. If one can beam themselves from Earth to Kronos with a portable device using transwarp technology, what's left to write about? The only thing transwarp beaming can't solve is teen angst.

The only deus ex machina that was totally "out there" to me before this was the Doctor's mobile emitter from the 26th century. It was created only to allow the Doctor to go on aweigh missions. It's tech was never fully explained. But in Abram's trek, we have "Red Matter" which came from nowhere in science and cannot really exist. And his temperamental black holes which can decide on a whim whether to destroy a ship or send it into another timeline. All of the dumb storytelling from Spock Prime about Nero waiting for 20 some odd years for him is just stupid. And that is just the first movie. In this one, we get nothing of the Botany Bay. We get a plot from within Starfleet to use genetically enhanced humans to build a super starship with advanced capabilities and HIDE IT. :facepalm:

Transwarp beaming eliminates the need for a shuttle. EVER, In fact, couldnt a starship park on the outskirts of a solar system and just beam onto any planet within it? And what is with the phasers with MOVING PARTS? I dont get why the phaser head has to twirl to fire the next shot. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Why did they beam Uhura onto that moving platform thingie when Spock was fighting with Kahn? Why not Sulu or that big security officer who was called "cupcake" by Kirk? The existence of that new ship ruins the timeline's future permanently.

The way I see this, there will be two Trek timelines, and the other one is still intact. Perhaps CBS can make something happen in the other timeline on a TV show? :)
 

Bluce Ree

Tech Admin / Council Member
The only deus ex machina that was totally "out there" to me before this was the Doctor's mobile emitter from the 26th century. It was created only to allow the Doctor to go on aweigh missions. It's tech was never fully explained. But in Abram's trek, we have "Red Matter" which came from nowhere in science and cannot really exist. And his temperamental black holes which can decide on a whim whether to destroy a ship or send it into another timeline. All of the dumb storytelling from Spock Prime about Nero waiting for 20 some odd years for him is just stupid. And that is just the first movie. In this one, we get nothing of the Botany Bay. We get a plot from within Starfleet to use genetically enhanced humans to build a super starship with advanced capabilities and HIDE IT. :facepalm:

Fortunately, all the red matter is gone. Otherwise, the Federation would have no enemies and no worthy adversaries, including the Borg. If a Borg cube appears, just beam a dot of red matter and a lit match to their ship.

I never understood why the doctor had to "transfer" to and from that stupid mobile emitter. It got on my nerves when they would cry that they almost lost the doctor when the emitter was stolen, broken, whatever. All I got from Voyager is that, in the 24th century, they completely lose all concept of backups and copies.

Transwarp beaming eliminates the need for a shuttle. EVER, In fact, couldnt a starship park on the outskirts of a solar system and just beam onto any planet within it?

They don't even need that. They can beam to and from planets while they're in warp passing star systems. Once mapped, they can beam directly between the planets and Earth, no need for a ship anymore. Transwarp is technically hyperspace, as explained in Voyager (occupying all points in space at once). That means there is no limit to transwarp beaming. In essence, they can just beam entire ships to other galaxies, or anywhere across the universe, for that matter, and back.

And what is with the phasers with MOVING PARTS? I dont get why the phaser head has to twirl to fire the next shot. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Why did they beam Uhura onto that moving platform thingie when Spock was fighting with Kahn? Why not Sulu or that big security officer who was called "cupcake" by Kirk? The existence of that new ship ruins the timeline's future permanently.

The way I see this, there will be two Trek timelines, and the other one is still intact. Perhaps CBS can make something happen in the other timeline on a TV show? :)

Why didn't they just beam Spock and Khan up to the ship?
 

shavedape

Well Known GateFan
Dude, we just have the stones to say it and not care if a million people are reading what we write, or how we could "youtube it" and monetize it.
Call it "tough love" if you want, we only bother because we care however.

Funny how so many SGU fanbois claimed that us folks just wanted "pew pew" space battles and explosions when here we prove that is exactly not what we seek. If it was then we'd all be in love with the new Trek.
 

ParagonPie

Well Known GateFan
Actually you guys have reminded me of the DS9 episode were Jem'Hadar rebels use an old gate way system Iconion empire( From the episode 'To the Death') to strike anywhere in the known galaxy and every one feared it. Imagine it, it doesn't matter how big, well equipped or even well trained your army is, if the enemy can transport soldiers in anywhere anytime, then no where is safe, you can't stop that. This could of actually been great idea for the movie, just focusing in on the problems of such powerful technology presents especially when weaponized (imagine a race to find the technology stolen from the rogue starfleet agents by the Klingons, Romulans etc), there was absolutely no need for a giant space ship other than simple eye candy shooting.

Obviously JJ Abrams completely forgets that once you implement technology it has to suit a practical and plausible place in the world you have created (or recreated in this case).
 

YJ02

Well Known GateFan
Well, I say they (Paramount) pull the plug on this "re-imagined" Trek and get back to the staples of what got Trek where it is now (before a non fan money grubber like Abrams got a hold of it) before it is ruined completely

Just think of what an amazing film could have been made using the trek we know, with the tech and budget put into these two films
 

Overmind One

GateFans Gatemaster
Staff member
Well, I say they (Paramount) pull the plug on this "re-imagined" Trek and get back to the staples of what got Trek where it is now (before a non fan money grubber like Abrams got a hold of it) before it is ruined completely

Just think of what an amazing film could have been made using the trek we know, with the tech and budget put into these two films

I hope this is the last one by Abrams. I really do not want him writing the next movie. But this crew is PERFECT. The next guy should trash the Enterprise GT and create a new one. Dump Abram's Trek into an alternate timeline like he did the last Trek, and restore Vulcan. Dump the lens flares and even the new theme he is using for his Trek. I thought Planet of the Apes was a goner when Tim Burton did his abomination. But later it came back strong (cant wait for the next one :)). Batman got silly in the first few movies, and then came back strong later. It could happen with Trek. :)

Why is Stargate being ignored? :(
 

YJ02

Well Known GateFan
I hope this is the last one by Abrams. I really do not want him writing the next movie. But this crew is PERFECT. The next guy should trash the Enterprise GT and create a new one. Dump Abram's Trek into an alternate timeline like he did the last Trek, and restore Vulcan. Dump the lens flares and even the new theme he is using for his Trek. I thought Planet of the Apes was a goner when Tim Burton did his abomination. But later it came back strong (cant wait for the next one :)). Batman got silly in the first few movies, and then came back strong later. It could happen with Trek. :)

Why is Stargate being ignored? :(

Don't know the specifics, but about 2yrs ago (or so) I read an interview with one of the guys on the TPTB of the orig SG movie. The interviewer asked him about the legacy of the film-tv series and such. When a question of a new film came up-guy said that Russell and Spader had serious issues with the tv shows and that they were trying to craft a new movie along with others from the original crew of writers, etc.

It is to totally ignore everything that happens in the series'. Something about the gate being used to travel through space and time on Earth only.

I don't now the name of the guy or interviewer, and don't have enough info to pull up in search.

Just remember that most of the inter. took place in the guys convertible while rolling down the road

IMO- with all that has been established in the shows, either a long movie or a new series should be made that is "in tune" with SGA and SG1 (of course SGU did "happen" using main characters we all know at times so they can't completely ignore it)

I'd like to see them do stuff past and present with the gate. Like go back to when the 'snakes' get a foothold on Earth. See how the ancients dealt with the Go'auld (or their lack of doing so).

Also looking fwd to the new Planet of Apes movies as well. Liked how they have the virus killing humans and the tie in of a Mars mission--is that where humanity goes to escape the virus leaving the planet to apes?
 

Bluce Ree

Tech Admin / Council Member
I hope this is the last one by Abrams. I really do not want him writing the next movie. But this crew is PERFECT. The next guy should trash the Enterprise GT and create a new one. Dump Abram's Trek into an alternate timeline like he did the last Trek, and restore Vulcan. Dump the lens flares and even the new theme he is using for his Trek. I thought Planet of the Apes was a goner when Tim Burton did his abomination. But later it came back strong (cant wait for the next one :)). Batman got silly in the first few movies, and then came back strong later. It could happen with Trek. :)

Why is Stargate being ignored? :(

Sweeten the pot with some lens flares and a sweet aerodynamic spoiler set with wings for the Stargate and Abrams will get right on it.
--- merged: May 20, 2013 at 8:12 PM ---
(of course SGU did "happen" using main characters we all know at times so they can't completely ignore it)

They can easily pull a Victoria Principle in Dallas and make the entire 2 season run of SGU one big nasty dream O'Neill had after downing a few bad burritos the night before.
 

mzzz

Well Known GateFan
First of all, I truly dislike time travel stories. Ok, with that said...I don't think the timeline that Spock is from is obliterated. He still has those memories and stuff that has happened after the stuff happening in Abrahms trek(call it AT). Those memories of future events that has not happened in AT are still present in Spock's minds. So either that timeline still exists but is separate from this one or he has memories of future events that are future events in AT. I don't think it's the latter one because of the brief cameo and the dialogue exchanged made it seem like he has memories of the other timeline. So that timeline still exists but just is a separate timeline. Also, they need to stop with the brief cameos, trying to superficially fanservice here and there and seeking validation somehow but including those cameos.

Ok, lemme just tear it up for a second. Transwarp means that they could warp a bomb anywhere they want, a missile anywhere they want. Khan could have leveled the entire building considering his expertise from the 'ring' bomb he made earlier. He could have easily just fired a bomb into that building instead of the lengthy firefight that went on. Could have just gone on a cruise and dropped a car size 'ring' bomb into the ocean next to it, would have sufficed.

Volcanos are not that active, all those fireworks and stuff but I'm guessing it was more for theatrics, and cataclysmic planet-wide extinction level volcanoes are usually not cinder cone type volcanoes but ones more like in that SGA episode. The volcanic activity is a result of internal pressure buildup and magma flow, essentially a pent up pressure ready to burst. Cooling it in one location wouldn't relieve the pressure at all, it'd just cause the pressure to build up even more and vent out in a more catastrophic way elsewhere. Unless that device is able to relieve the pressure pent up somehow but seemed more like a cooling thing instead.

They were able to maneuver a shuttle somehow without the indigenous population noticing and transport Spock and like people have said, they could have just transported the device. But again, I'll just chalk it up to theatrics and some plot point they were developing between Kirk and Spock, they obviously could have written it better.

Their speed capabilities means their computers are able to map out things. So that whole maneuvering through the debris between the two ships should have just been a trivial matter for them with their computing ability and mapping capacity. Hell, they could have just sent a missile with automatic guidance or something even. But then again, Scotty and that chick were still there. So brownie moral points for them. I never understood the whole genetically superiority results in megalomaniac and evil mastermind tendencies, usually. Would have preferred the brief humanizing they did when Khan explained his motivations and why he did what he did.

All the alien races are bipedal, only difference are skin pigmentation and light superficial touches here and there.

Ok, with all that said, I still liked the movie somewhat. Mind you, it's not great sci-fi as there really haven't been much great sci-fi these days, but it was still kinda entertaining, mindless but entertaining. Cumberbatch played a good villain and was pretty menacing. Even though they went with the post 9/11-type storyline, it was still pretty decent. The ship jumping into warp and the airlock suits torpedo scenes were pretty damn cool. There were a few nods here and there if some people caught em. I think they somewhat captured the chemistry that the original three had, but definitely not all the way of course, just a smidgeon here and there. The humour bits were kinda funny. Honestly I think they made a 'play it safe' kinda movie and didn't wanna venture out and make something new. And honestly, I can't blame em for playing it safe cause let's face it, Trek fans are probably the worst with their overcritical nature. And compared to most of the other Trek movies, this was pretty decent even though they ripped off the Wrath of Khan movie but modernized, was still a decent movie experience and a better one than iron man 3.

They seemed to hint towards a Klignon war. Maybe they might not play it safe next movie if they make one and venture out onto something of their own and making it more sci-fi rather than sci-fi fantasy, but I doubt it, seemed to go more for 'human' stories and have to appeal to the 'add'/video game crowd. And also, can't really complain about the science-y aspects cause the older series had pretty bad science too, you can't really deny that. But I would not mind a sci-fi movie at all of course. I just don't expect much these days though, not these days anyways. Also, is that albino that was on the bridge the same guy from Banshee?

Overall, to me, it was somewhat mindless but entertaining enough in 3d with little bits of fanservice here and there; Cumberbatch was pretty good as a villain.
 

YJ02

Well Known GateFan
Star Wars has wider appeal because it is not science fiction. Nothing surprising here. :)

What!? Some kind of new posting requirement? Has to be surprising...well sooorrie!
:SmileyLaughingTears:

I wasn't surprised either. I am thinking SW has a greater fanbase (with of course ST overlap-me included) because it has more of a "pedestrian" appeal--the fantasy-whereas ST is (or was) more thoughtful and geeky and therefore-less fans--all IMO of course
 

shavedape

Well Known GateFan
images
 

Overmind One

GateFans Gatemaster
Staff member
What!? Some kind of new posting requirement? Has to be surprising...well sooorrie!
:SmileyLaughingTears:

I wasn't surprised either. I am thinking SW has a greater fanbase (with of course ST overlap-me included) because it has more of a "pedestrian" appeal--the fantasy-whereas ST is (or was) more thoughtful and geeky and therefore-less fans--all IMO of course

:) Me too on the bolded, and yes the Star Wars fanbase is much MUCH larger.
 

Overmind One

GateFans Gatemaster
Staff member
Well, it seems there was a video game designed alongside this second Trek movie, and it failed. Also, this movie has not done as well as the first (not surprised). Forbes stops short of calling it a flop...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngau...ic-opening-follows-paramount-video-game-flop/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottme...rek-into-darkness-opens-with-just-84-million/

EXCERPT:

There is no way around it, Star Trek Into Darkness pulled in fewer ticket buyers than the 2009 Star Trek. For the record, I do not want to scream “FLOP” over a $84 million four-day gross and potentially lucrative overseas final results, but this is indeed a case where a rather large opening can be considered a ‘disappointment’ in relation to realistic expectations and/or budgetary demands. Four years ago, we all thought that Star Trek 2 was a lock for one of the bigger opening weekends on record. Today, we’re wondering if it will even top $200 million domestic.

Something else strange....I saw the movie not that long ago, and I have largely forgotten most of it. Not because my memory is failing, but because there was not much in this movie that was memorable.
 
Top