Tom Riker
Lieutenant
If Admiral Leonard James Akaar shows up from the future with Picard and Crusher's baby, I'm out.
I love you
Star Trek Into Darkness Synopsis Revealed!!
- Thread starter StarTrek1701
- Start date
- Status
I love you
I hate to say this but this synopsis reminds me a lot of the third season of Enterprise.
Detonate the fleet? It was one thing to wipe out Vulcan but the entire fleet? That's overkill. Then again, just about every Starfleet ship that popped up on the original series was either destroyed or heavily damaged.
I hope we get some classical Trek elements to go with what seems like another action/revenge film. Still, I'll reserve judgment. I loved the last Star Trek film and it seems like this movie will focus more on Kirk with the crew. So we'll see what happens.
Detonate the fleet? It was one thing to wipe out Vulcan but the entire fleet? That's overkill. Then again, just about every Starfleet ship that popped up on the original series was either destroyed or heavily damaged.
I hope we get some classical Trek elements to go with what seems like another action/revenge film. Still, I'll reserve judgment. I loved the last Star Trek film and it seems like this movie will focus more on Kirk with the crew. So we'll see what happens.
It won't. Hollywood is making too much $$$ off empty, dimbulb action flicks to change the formula. Some of them are a bit less dumb that average - Star Trek's at the upper end of that continuum - but this movie is going to be the usual simplistic "our heroes fight the dangerous villain who is easy to explain to the audience" approach that offers the best chance at big box office.
That's why I've been saying it's gonna be Gary Mitchell and not Khan for a while now. Mitchell is easy and quick to explain to the uninitiated, Khan not so much if you have to start from scratch with no revenge plot set up by TV. I don't care which one we see personally and I know why Khan is a non-starter, so I'm not going to stress about any of this.
If you want smart Trek, pray for a return to TV, ideally cable or maybe Netflix if Moonves is feeling adventurous, but the level of intelligence we've seen lately in the movies is as good as its going to get. In fact, I expect less intelligence and more action now that the backstory setup is out of the way.
"Does anyone remember when we used to be explorers?"
For comparison, this is the original paramount plot synopsis for the first film:
Sounds just like Attack of the Clones.
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:
Oh, and despite spending literally years now involved with a studio franchise which has successfully kept the lid on Star Trek secrets and has made it clear to everyone employed that leaking would be a "career-limiting move," Karl Urban decided to blurt out the biggest secret of the upcoming film in a public forum with a laugh and a wink. The fact that he continued to joke publicly about having done so for months afterward is all part of his cunning plan.
- 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?
The motives sound more like Mitchell than Khan....Khan wasn't part of Starfleet and he didn't turn on anyone. Garth of Izar also sounds like a potential villain, or even Ben Finney, but Khan? I see nothing of him in the synopsis at all.
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:
Oh, and despite spending literally years now involved with a studio franchise which has successfully kept the lid on Star Trek secrets and has made it clear to everyone employed that leaking would be a "career-limiting move," Karl Urban decided to blurt out the biggest secret of the upcoming film in a public forum with a laugh and a wink. The fact that he continued to joke publicly about having done so for months afterward is all part of his cunning plan.
- 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?
The motives sound more like Mitchell than Khan....Khan wasn't part of Starfleet and he didn't turn on anyone. Garth of Izar also sounds like a potential villain, or even Ben Finney, but Khan? I see nothing of him in the synopsis at all.
A "one man weapon of mass destruction" could be Khan, especially if you consider that this war zone of a planet is Ceti Alpha V.
This synposis has got me wondering about Peter Weller's character, who early details described as a CEO type with his own starship. Could he be this renegade officer that detonates the fleet? And could that be Starfleet's Chief of Staff (or Commander Starfleet as the title was in Trek III)? That would certainly make him a CEO type and explain why he has his own starship.
Peter Weller would make a helluva Garth of Izar..
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:
Oh, and despite spending literally years now involved with a studio franchise which has successfully kept the lid on Star Trek secrets and has made it clear to everyone employed that leaking would be a "career-limiting move," Karl Urban decided to blurt out the biggest secret of the upcoming film in a public forum with a laugh and a wink. The fact that he continued to joke publicly about having done so for months afterward is all part of his cunning plan.
- 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?
The motives sound more like Mitchell than Khan....Khan wasn't part of Starfleet and he didn't turn on anyone. Garth of Izar also sounds like a potential villain, or even Ben Finney, but Khan? I see nothing of him in the synopsis at all.
A "one man weapon of mass destruction" could be Khan, especially if you consider that this war zone of a planet is Ceti Alpha V.
This synposis has got me wondering about Peter Weller's character, who early details described as a CEO type with his own starship. Could he be this renegade officer that detonates the fleet? And could that be Starfleet's Chief of Staff (or Commander Starfleet as the title was in Trek III)? That would certainly make him a CEO type and explain why he has his own starship.
Khan was tough, but hardly a "weapon". It didn't say one man with weapons of mass destruction.
Weller makes me wonder if Colonel Green hands off his legacy to someone in Starfleet...but I still feel Mitchell makes the best fit so far.
RAMA
It's too bad they never made a ST film called "First Contact".
Khan could be a weapon, if looked at from a certain point of view. If there were one man who could be considered a weapon, that would certainly be a genetically enhanced superman.
See it is just like Star Wars.
Let's merge all the top threads in this forum into one!
But if I do that, it'll create a vacuum. By tomorrow morning, there could be 17 new threads about Abrams' monomaniacal obsession with secrecy being detrimental to the movie's box-office success.
JJ's secrecy creates a vacuum of information and the same vacuum breeds threads about JJ's secrecy.
FOREVER IT SHALL NEVER DIE.
Nooooo! I hope he stays until the end of this movie series to watch over the crew. It's good to have a recurring character in the movies instead of some random Admiral of the year.
As for Weller, I think he'll be the head of Section 31. Cumberbatch could be some S31 experiment gone wronge and rogue.
Drago-Kazov
Fleet Captain
Pike is part of the spaceilluminat( we don't know what the heck it is) according too the ongoing comic.
- Status
Similar threads
