"STAR TREK Into Darkness" - 2013

[X]

Style is one thing and it cones down to personal taste. I didn't care much for the changes he made to staple Trek things like warp travel, star dates and phasers in the last movie personally.

Now we gave the origin story out of the way I hope they concentrate on giving us a great story and villain.

I love the changes to stardates since they now make sense. Before it was just conversions of the production numbers or some random string of numbers.

True, especially in TOS. The TNG era is where they became a little more structured and I liked that. You could tell where the in the timeline the episode came across all the TNG era Trek shows. Of course the other problem with the new system is the dates are very Earth centric as they are based on our dates. Would the whole Federation really adopt this?

The answer is a resounding yes. There's nothing that prevents planets from keeping local time and if you look at how we keep time and dates now, we are following standards that have nothing to do with some individual nations or cultures. As Starfleet is based in San Fran, people in the service of it would probably keep time based on the time of the "head office". The Federation has adopted English as the default language and Earth as the home of the Federation, including where the President of the Federation lives. Having days that match only make sense.

[Dangelus]

Style is one thing and it cones down to personal taste. I didn't care much for the changes he made to staple Trek things like warp travel, star dates and phasers in the last movie personally.

Now we gave the origin story out of the way I hope they concentrate on giving us a great story and villain.

I love the changes to stardates since they now make sense. Before it was just conversions of the production numbers or some random string of numbers.

True, especially in TOS. The TNG era is where they became a little more structured and I liked that. You could tell where the in the timeline the episode came across all the TNG era Trek shows. Of course the other problem with the new system is the dates are very Earth centric as they are based on our dates. Would the whole Federation really adopt this?

The answer is a resounding yes. There's nothing that prevents planets from keeping local time and if you look at how we keep time and dates now, we are following standards that have nothing to do with some individual nations or cultures. As Starfleet is based in San Fran, people in the service of it would probably keep time based on the time of the "head office". The Federation has adopted English as the default language and Earth as the home of the Federation, including where the President of the Federation lives. Having days that match only make sense.

Ok fair enough. I suppose what bugged me was although it is only a small change it is a BIG change in Trek universe terms. The warp and phaser changes can be put down to stylistic choice a lot easier.

As the producers didn't want to confirm this was a reboot or re-imagining (which we all know it is) it made it harder to accept in my head. If they'd come out and said it was a reboot ( ala BSG) and Spock was now a girl I wouldnt have a problem with it.

[Rico]

Dan,

The writers, producers, directors, actors, have all said this is a different universe than the "Prime" Trek universe.  This has been said in many interviews, even in the film, comics, etc.  So basically, all bets are off.  They can do anything they want to do in terms of Stardates, looks, ships, aliens, etc.  I find it much, much easier to accept and handle this way rather than if they tried to do some alternate/time/changed main Trek universe.  Anyway, I think the main, familiar elements are still all there.  And certainly the casual movie goer won't know the difference between one set of phasers or stardates from the other.

[turtlesrock]

And certainly the casual movie goer won't know the difference between one set of phasers or stardates from the other.

...but we will :) that's what i find so great about being a trekkie. :) knowing little details like that.

[stonut]

I think the thing with the Stardates is more easily understood from the casual movie goer. But us Trek nuts see things with a different slant. I have said to other Trekkies that the new Stardates make sense from an Earth point of view only. But you have to factor in that Star Fleet head quarters are on Earth.

[ChrisMC]

Looks like JJ wants Benicio Del Toro to be the villain in Star Trek (2?). I think he's a great choice for a villain...I could even see him as Khan, though I doubt that's where they are going.


http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118045646?refCatId=13

[Rico]

Interesting idea.  I could see him as Khan (but PLEASE don't go there) or perhaps a Klingon.  Time will tell.

http://trekmovie.com/2011/11/04/j-j-abrams-wants-benicio-del-toro-as-next-star-trek-villain/

[Dangelus]

Dan,

The writers, producers, directors, actors, have all said this is a different universe than the "Prime" Trek universe.  This has been said in many interviews, even in the film, comics, etc.  So basically, all bets are off.  They can do anything they want to do in terms of Stardates, looks, ships, aliens, etc.  I find it much, much easier to accept and handle this way rather than if they tried to do some alternate/time/changed main Trek universe.  Anyway, I think the main, familiar elements are still all there.  And certainly the casual movie goer won't know the difference between one set of phasers or stardates from the other.

Well that makes a lot more sense. I always thought they were using the events in the 2009 movie to try and explain the changes. How did I miss this?! Lol

[Meds]

Benito was awesome as a Bond villain back in Licence to kill.

[Rico]

Looking even more likely these days that the next Trek film will slip to a 2013 release date.  Nothing is certain yet, but it wouldn't surprise me to see it for the summer of 2013.  :(

http://trekmovie.com/2011/11/14/j-j-abrams-star-trek-sequel-could-be-released-in-2013/#comment-4150328

[Poodyglitz]

Looking even more likely these days that the next Trek film will slip to a 2013 release date.  Nothing is certain yet, but it wouldn't surprise me to see it for the summer of 2013.  :(

http://trekmovie.com/2011/11/14/j-j-abrams-star-trek-sequel-could-be-released-in-2013/#comment-4150328

That's O.K. As long as we get "The (not Steed/Emma) Avengers".

'Nuff said!

[Ktrek]

The farther they push it the less interest I am having. I'm actually more excited about TNG in high def than I am in seeing another movie. That may change in 2013 but I would say my interest in Star Trek in general is about half of what it was two years ago and in another two years it may not matter much to me at all.

Kevin

[Dangelus]

Looking even more likely these days that the next Trek film will slip to a 2013 release date.  Nothing is certain yet, but it wouldn't surprise me to see it for the summer of 2013.  :(

http://trekmovie.com/2011/11/14/j-j-abrams-star-trek-sequel-could-be-released-in-2013/#comment-4150328

There was plenty of time for a new TV series to start up and get cancelled while we waited for the sequel! ;)

[turtlesrock]

aww 2013? that just sounds too distant in the future, but if it really takes that long to make a great movie the new release date is fine with me.

[Poodyglitz]

There was plenty of time for a new TV series to start up and get cancelled while we waited for the sequel! ;)

Ha!  :laugh:

There's a bit of truth to that, my friend.