COUNTDOWN TO DARKNESS 5-page preview

[Saul]

Christopher wrote:

---

Yes, but I don't trust them. They've been wrong before. The Internet is full of "reliably sourced" movie rumors that turn out to be total BS. And yet people keep forgetting all the false ones and bizarrely assuming they can trust the next one.

They've been wrong but they've been right about things like Vulcan going bye bye and the plans for an alternate timeline. I don't forget the false ones. But neither do I forget the real ones.

That's an invalid rebuttal, because it doesn't fit the facts in this case.

Says the guy who brought up the pink elephant behind him.

And people run and scream from a lot of things without good sense. Last week I saw a lot of posts from people panicking about the risk of asteroids hitting the Earth, even though we know that large impactors are very rare. And yet those same people are probably not at all worried about things that are far more likely to kill them, like traffic accidents. The reactions and beliefs of the crowd are not reliable indicators of probability.

Totally agree but i'd rather be safe than sorry.

But Khan wasn't the only Augment. To me, the most likely prospect at this point is that Harrison is a different Augment, that they're approaching the story of the Eugenics Wars and the Augments from a different perspective. It's possible that Khan will be involved in the background as a mastermind, or that maybe this story about Harrison will be setting up Khan as the big bad in the third film, the way The Avengers set up Thanos. There are a lot of possibilities here.

That's a cool idea and it's just as awesome if it's so cos it still means we'll see Khan even if it's just the back of his head. However I don't think the term Augments will be even brought up here. I think it's a reference less people would know about generally. Doesn't mean they won't use it but I don't believe they'll be taking pointers from 'Enterprise'.

But we have the Internet now, and there's bound to be plenty of spoiler discussion once the film is out.

I think i'll need to take a sabbatical around that time. The internet's going to be a freakin minefield!

[Christopher]

Saul wrote:

---

However I don't think the term Augments will be even brought up here. I think it's a reference less people would know about generally. Doesn't mean they won't use it but I don't believe they'll be taking pointers from 'Enterprise'.

"I told him that I could not only beam a grapefruit from one planet to the adjacent planet in the same system, which is easy by the way, I could do it with a lifeform. So, I tested it on Admiral Archer's prized beagle." -- Montgomery Scott, Star Trek (2009)

Besides, "Augments" is a handy word. It's distinctive, it's memorable, and it's more convenient than "eugenics supermen" or whatever terms were around previously. So who cares where it comes from? I use it because it works.

[Mirror Sulu]

Saul wrote:

---

Seriously though, how do you know that?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_3XfCFSjNnU...ata-holmes.JPG

[Image converted to link. Images posted inline must be hosted on your own web space, not hotlinked from someone else's. - M']

Now let me see...there is literally no evidence to suggest Cumberbatch is playing Khan. He's English, he doesn't look anything like him, he's a member of Starfleet and he seems to have some sort of connection to Robert April. A few red herrings on websites isn't any sort of proof. Abrams and co. aren't idiots, they know the expectations fans have and that they're heavily debating everything.

Everything related to Khan is pure assumption, even the claims that Paramount and Abrams can't keep the villains identity under wraps. The fact is most of you want it to be Khan so much, you're willing to overlook the plain facts, which is a classic example of clutching at straws. I've therefore deduced after looking at all the evidence, that Cumberbatch isn't Khan.

[The Wormhole]

SalvorHardin wrote:

---

We do not use any of that caveman nonsense in the 23rd century, sir.
We have a more evolved sensibility.

Speak for yourself. According to TOS schools of the 23rd century still have ink wells, which Kirk teased Spock about dipping girls' ponytails into. If they're still doing that in the 23rd century, they must have razor blades and shaving cream. Canon is on my side.

[SalvorHardin]

The Wormhole wrote:

---

Speak for yourself. According to TOS schools of the 23rd century still have ink wells, which Kirk teased Spock about dipping girls' ponytails into. If they're still doing that in the 23rd century, they must have razor blades and shaving cream. Canon is on my side.

I reject this so called official canon.
My personal canon is more Pure and faithful to the Great Bird's true vision.

[Therin of Andor]

The Wormhole wrote:

---

we're supposed to believe that everyone in Starfleet shaves in this manner

Mr Mot's great great grandfather.

[Saul]

Mirror Sulu wrote:

---

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_3XfCFSjNnU...ata-holmes.JPG

[Image converted to link. Images posted inline must be hosted on your own web space, not hotlinked from someone else's. - M']

Now let me see...there is literally no evidence to suggest Cumberbatch is playing Khan. He's English,

The actor is. We don't know if the character is.

he doesn't look anything like him

Plastic surgery.

, he's a member of Starfleet

He's wearing a starfleet Uniform. But so did Khan in Space Seed.

and he seems to have some sort of connection to Robert April.

Pure assumption.

I've therefore deduced after looking at all the evidence, that Cumberbatch isn't Khan.

and yet you haven't actually proven he isn't. Deduction needs to lead to a confirmation of facts.

Christopher wrote:

---

"I told him that I could not only beam a grapefruit from one planet to the adjacent planet in the same system, which is easy by the way, I could do it with a lifeform. So, I tested it on Admiral Archer's prized beagle." -- Montgomery Scott, Star Trek (2009)

General Audience:

"Archer" - "Oh yeah that captain that got his ass kicked on that cancelled show".

"Augments" - "wtf is an augmert?"

[The Wormhole]

SalvorHardin wrote:

---

I reject this so called official canon.
My personal canon is more Pure and faithful to the Great Bird's true vision.

I've met with Gene himself, he appears to me while I smoke a bong. I think I know what is pure and faithful to his vision.

[Christopher]

Saul wrote:

---

General Audience:
...
"Augments" - "wtf is an augmert?"

Oh, don't be ridiculous. Nobody knew what a Jedi was in 1977, but the movie defined the term. It's a fallacy that an audience can only understand a reference if they've seen some earlier work that used it. As long as the term is defined within the film itself, it can be understood, regardless of prior familiarity.

[Saul]

Nobody will care what an augment is. They will care what JJ and Co call it, I don't think JJ and co will take pointers from 'Enterprise'. I think it's more likely to take something from Space Seed and TWOK.

[BillJ]

Saul wrote:

---

Nobody will care what an augment is. They will care what JJ and Co call it, I don't think JJ and co will take pointers from 'Enterprise'. I think it's more likely to take something from Space Seed and TWOK.

I don't.

Isn't 'eugenics' a bit of an outdated concept?

[King Daniel into Darkness]

The whole reason they renamed them "Augments" was probably to prevent DC comics getting grumpy over use of "Supermen."

They used Archer and beagle from ENT. Their word for genetically-enhanced humans is as good as any, and it has the virtue of being unique to Trek, AFAIK.

[Christopher]

King Daniel wrote:

---

Their word for genetically-enhanced humans is as good as any, and it has the virtue of being unique to Trek, AFAIK.

There was a time, back in the '90s, I think, when I considered the possibility of "Augmen" (as in "augmented" plus "-men") as a name for a group of genetically enhanced superhumans in an SF or comic-book context. I gave up on it because I realized it was a pretty ugly and awkward word. (And what would the singular have been? An Augman? And what about Augwomen? It wasn't a very good wordplay because it only worked in one possible form of the word.) But "Augments" actually works pretty well, and I like it partly because of its similarity to (and improvement on) one of my ideas.

[Therin of Andor]

Saul wrote:

---

"Augments" - "wtf is an augmert?"

Something that is... augmented?

[JarodRussell]

It's also a buzz word. Augmented Reality anyone?