http://thefilmstage.com/news/captai...opsis-for-j-j-abrams-star-trek-into-darkness/
I guess this "official press site" isn't accessable to us mere mortals?
Star Trek Into Darkness Synopsis Revealed!!
- Thread starter StarTrek1701
- Start date
- Status
And Star Trek has never really been summer blockbuster material either. When it tries to be is when it's at its worst. That's why I maintain Star Trek's true home is on television. That's where it has the freedom to tell the stories it wants to tell. And that's where it needs to go back to.
Drago-Kazov
Fleet Captain
This will have more depth then the other one, guaranteed. The theme of Starfleet traitors and conspiracy is heavy stuff compared to some crazy blowing up planets.
It failed on television because the shows told the same stories in the same ways, over and over, for decades. Only a couple of million trekkies continued to care.
It's been said that "home is where, when you go there, they have to take you in." If there's any truth to that aphorism - which is, granted, tongue-in-cheek at best - then television is far from "home" for Star Trek now.
If the reception for Abrams's Star Trek so far is any indication, Trek's "home" is probably the month of May or June, every three or four years, for the foreseeable future.
If a "dumb action flick" makes Star Trek a commercial success on the big screen, that's fine by me. The direction Abrams is taking is not my cup of tea, but I'm not hostile to it if it continues to make Star Trek profitable and gives Paramount confidence in the brand. The more new fans these films create, the more likely it is we'll see ST back on TV.
"From within their own organization", hmm...
...Oh my God, it must be this:
[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_Vr9LnogLM[/yt]
Cumberpatch is a brilliant choice as the villian; it makes me excited that he's (very possibly) Gary Mitchell. If true, a big budget version of his story is, for this fan, a 100 times more interesting than seeing Kahn a 3rd time In trek. Why? well, Khan was predictable in his unpredictableness. Gary is just plain scary.
I'll say this: if it was a version of TNG story above, I'd dig it. If memory serves, TNG conveniently decided to forget about that whole arc they created for themselves....or did I forget of a follow up?
I'll say this: if it was a version of TNG story above, I'd dig it. If memory serves, TNG conveniently decided to forget about that whole arc they created for themselves....or did I forget of a follow up?
Drago-Kazov
Fleet Captain
They would have to make some serious twists in order to make him Mitchell considering the plot. It was probably carefully orchestrated misinformation.
Drago-Kazov
Fleet Captain
There is no followup, not even in the books.
It's never really been summer blockbuster material in the past because its never really been approached seriously [read: done well] in that manner. That being said, every movie after TMP tried to recreate Trek as a summer blockbuster in some fashion even if it wasn't the summer, from TWOK to TFF to FC to NEM.
So, the Mitchell theory hangs now on the notion that instead of being zapped at the edge of the galaxy with god-like powers that manifest themselves fairly quickly as telekinesis and matter transmutation in such a fashion as to unbalance him and fill him with contempt for human beings, Mitchell now:
Uh-huh.
Instead of playing fanboy guessing games based on the notion that TPTB are accidentally letting clues to their Big Secret slip every time they make a statement, try this: what does the synopsis, trivial though it is, suggest about the motives of the villain(s) as they affect the plot of the film and how does that square with any possible precursors in the franchise?
- Acquires "weapon of mass destruction" powers;
- Returns to Earth as part of Starfleet so he can blow up a bunch of spaceships;
- Runs away to hide out on a distant planet, because - SHUT UP!?
- ???
- Victory!
Uh-huh.
Instead of playing fanboy guessing games based on the notion that TPTB are accidentally letting clues to their Big Secret slip every time they make a statement, try this: what does the synopsis, trivial though it is, suggest about the motives of the villain(s) as they affect the plot of the film and how does that square with any possible precursors in the franchise?
Last edited:
I get the impression they are trying as hard as possible to keep the plot under wraps and say detonated as if we can't be sure that the fleet will be destroyed and saving the surprise for the opening 9 minutes.
Worlds of Deep Space Nine, Volume 2: Trill/Bajor covered the "Conspiracy" parasites' origins, and the aftermath of that discovery.
Drago-Kazov
Fleet Captain
Thanks.
Goes to an alien planet (Delta Vega or whatever), acquires "weapon of mass destruction" powers but they don't manifest themselves before...
1. he returns to Earth where he starts metamorphosing into a godlike creature, goes mad and blows up a bunch of spaceships
2. Earth isn't enough for him so he takes off into the unknown to stir some more shit
3. cynical trekkies have no imagination
4. ???
5. Paramount makes shitloads of PROFIT
That's bugging me just a bit. There's nothing on the Paramount site's press releases page and nothing on the startrekmovie.com site. There does appear to be another site, but (as you say) not accessible to mortals without a password.
This is the kind of thing they might do, but they made it out in the last movie that Kirk is kind of a loner and hasn't really formed any close relationships at any point in his life.
I have to wonder if the war-torn planet isn't Tallos Iv in some way shape or form.
Based on the synopsis, and a few other things, I'm going with Garth of Izar. In TOS lore, he was a Fleet Captain and one of Kirk's personal heroes. I can imagine a plot in which he essentially goes rogue and convinces a significant chunk of Starfleet to go with him. Maybe he's insane as he was in the old TOS episode, or maybe he's just disaffected or pissed off about something. Either way, he evidently brings the hammer down on Earth in some way--though I'm not convinced the "detonated" part is to be taken literally--before taking off for this "war zone world" where he presumably intends to cause further trouble.
As for being a one-man weapon of mass destruction, Garth did have special powers taught to him by the Antosians, though they were limited to shape-changing abilities. No reason they can't expand on that, though, to make him more generally superhuman, able to shrug off Vulcan nerve pinches, etc.
As for being a one-man weapon of mass destruction, Garth did have special powers taught to him by the Antosians, though they were limited to shape-changing abilities. No reason they can't expand on that, though, to make him more generally superhuman, able to shrug off Vulcan nerve pinches, etc.
- Status
Similar threads
