Star Trek: Into Darkness Discussion (spoilers allowed)

[Goldeneye]

The continuation of another franchise reboot, Star Trek 2 Into Darkness what are your thoughts about the reboot and the movies?

Fell free to discuss them here with or without spoilers

[bjmdds]

If spoilers are true, people may not like the re-enactment of what happens to a major character and it's twist.

[FormerBondFan]

Is possible John Harrison the Star Trek equivalent of Gustav Graves? He could be Klingon.

[bjmdds]

I thought you don't want to read spoilers FBF. If you want the inside track on the storyline, feel free to ask.

[FormerBondFan]

I thought you don't want to read spoilers FBF. If you want the inside track on the storyline, feel free to ask.

No, I don't want any spoilers. What I'm asking is just speculation. I'm going to see Into Darkness tonight. BJ, I would watch it this weekend if I were you. GE, do you think you can locked this thread down until the end of this weekend? I don't want any of us to catch spoilers by accident. In fact, this thread should not have been created in the first place. If you want spoilers thread before release, save that for our enemies, which are future corrupted Bonds from DC. Trek is our friend here, and any spoilers thread related to Into Darkness or any future sequels should be save until after the opening weekend.

[Kristatos]

If you don't want to read spoilers, then don't open a spoilers thread. That's kind of the point of them.

[Goldeneye]

GE, do you think you can locked this thread down until the end of this weekend? I don't want any of us to catch spoilers by accident. In fact, this thread should not have been created in the first place.

FBF it's been out elsewhere since May 9th, today and over the next few days it is hitting most of the world. It's timely and open for spoilers.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=3685&p=.htm

Forecast: 'Star Trek' Sequel Targets $100 Million Four-Day Start

Reviews have been solid so far—the movie is hovering around the high-80s on Rotten Tomatoes—and reaction from its overseas debuts have been positive as well. Early ticket sales have been strong as well: Fandango reported that the movie was accounting for 71 percent of ticket sales on Tuesday, while MovieTickets.com reported a 60 percent share.

Just last week, Paramount made the last-minute decision to move the official release date up to Thursday; combined with the Wednesday evening IMAX shows, this makes it difficult to come up with a specific weekend prediction. For the best comparisons, it may be necessary to go all the way back to 2003 and 2004, when anticipated sequels The Matrix Reloaded and Shrek 2 opened on the weekend before Memorial Day. Including their pre-weekend releases (Shrek opened on Wednesday, Matrix on Thursday), the movies earned $134.3 million and $129 million, respectively, by Sunday. With a decade of ticket price inflation and the addition of 3D/IMAX ticket pricing, it's possible that Star Trek Into Darkness winds up at a similar level. Paramount is currently forecasting $20 million on Thursday and $80 million over the weekend for a $100 million four-day tally.

Outside of the U.S., Star Trek adds 33 new territories this weekend (including Russia) for a total of 40, which represent 50 percent of the foreign marketplace. This past weekend, it earned $31.7 million from seven markets, which was up an average of 70 percent ahead of the first Trek movie. Unfortunately, that movie only earned $128 million overseas (Star Trek isn't traditionally a worldwide brand), and the mega-budget sequel is going to need to do better than a 70 percent increase to ultimately be considered a success.

Forecast (May 17-19)
1. Star Trek Into Darkness - $89 million ($117 million 4-day)
2. Iron Man 3 - $33.2 million (-54%)
3. The Great Gatsby - $27.6 million (-45%)

Bar for Success
With goodwill from the first movie and the support of a monster marketing effort, Star Trek Into Darkness needs to noticeably improve on its predecessor's opening—around $100 million for the four-day start is good enough.

[Kristatos]

I have noticed, though, that Tapatalk gives a little preview of the most recent post in each unread thread. I would request, therefore, that people keep major spoilers out of the first line or two of their posts.

Sent from my GT-S7500 using Tapatalk 2

[Omega]

I have noticed, though, that Tapatalk gives a little preview of the most recent post in each unread thread. I would request, therefore, that people keep major spoilers out of the first line or two of their posts.

Sent from my GT-S7500 using Tapatalk 2

I had a hard time finding this thread with tapatalk.

I enjoyed into darkness it a full story and a blast for two hours or whatever it ran. But a lot of the spoilers were on the money even though they denied it (cough, ahem, eon)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

[Kristatos]

Just got back from seeing it. My initial impression is that it was a fun ride, but I suspect that it won't reward repeat viewings as much as the first film in the rebooted series. It was a bit like the old-skool Trek fans accused the first film of being - an empty spectacle with little depth, from the breathless action sequences to the totally gratuitous shot of Alice Eve in her underwear. Seriously, what function did that scene serve, beyond fanservicing?

Sent from my GT-S7500 using Tapatalk 2

[Blowfeld]

If Roddenberry had a gave to roll in he'd be spinning.

Into Darkness will probably be the best reviewed highest grossing Star Trek ever sweeping the Academe Awards and BAFTA, while managing to be an insult to all Star Trek stood for.

Flipping Emo Spock for the love of God!

I'm glad J.J. Abrams is moving on to Star Wars because it is what he is good at, he made a Star War Movie in the guise of Trek!

Found one reviewer so far who I agree with (mostly), I also hope Trek moves back to TV sometime before it is ruined completely.
J.J. Abrams Almost Got Trek Right This Time

[FormerBondFan]

A friend of mine on facebook hates Trek 09 but loves Into Darkness.

[Napoleon Solo]

Anybody notice the homage to Ken Adam?

http://hmssweblog.wordpress.com/2013/05 ... -ken-adam/

[bjmdds]

I just saw it. The spoilers I posted were 100% on the money. We all enjoyed it but the Kirk/Spock switch was not original and while it tried to pay homage to the Wrath Of Khan, it parodied it more. Spock as a playboy with girlfriend issues does not work well either.

[FormerBondFan]

We all enjoyed it but the Kirk/Spock switch was not original and while it tried to pay homage to the Wrath Of Khan, it parodied it more.

I see Into Darkness as more of a loose remake of TWOK.

[FormerBondFan]

The spoilers I posted were 100% on the money.

BJ....you shouldn't look spoilers for Trek before seeing it. Save that for DC's Bonds. Trek is our friend here.

[bjmdds]

Abrams supposedly reboots the franchise and what does he do for his take on originality? He copies TWOK, but switches the death scene at the end. The past is repeating the future storyline. That's NOT original at all. That's a ripoff of the REAL ST 2. This nonsense of Uhura and Spock as a dating couple is also ludicrous and this is why the second film is NOT thriving at the box office. Abrams denied Khan was the villain yet we already knew it six months ago and by denying it, it only angered the Trek loyalists. Next time, should there be another film, they need to get a new director, get off this Spock/Uhura storyline, and find a new Klingon threat to grapple with.

[FormerBondFan]

BJ.....I hope prefer to see Into Darkness over any corrupted Bonds starring DC, and don't tell me Abrams is no different from Babs The B1tch.

Sure ID may be seen as ripoff of TWOK. Khan cannot be ignored since we're in the new timeline. The crew had to face him sooner or later. Looking back at Trek 2009, Nero destroyed Vulcan. The Federation feared the growing threat of the Klingons so they search throughout the galaxy to find suitable weapons to defend itself against the Klingons. They found Khan and had him working for them but realized it was mistake. And about Ben as Khan, most of you know I would be pissed if this happened, but come to think of it, I like it. If Benicio del Toro or any other Latino actors was Khan, it would be too much of a cheap imitation of Ricardo Montalban. The way I see Ben's Khan was to differentiate from Ricardo's portrayal as though that he's different character even though his backstory is identical to the Khan we know. In ID, Khan is white in appearance so I assume that he underwent surgery to conceal to his identity, and that would explain why he adopts the name John Harrison. Changing appearances is nothing new in Trek. One example is Deanna Troi disguising as Romulan. And BJ, please tell that you rather watch Ben's Khan over DC's Bond. Hell, I rather see the rehash of Trek villains over DC's Bond. Give me those things anytime.

Yes, I do agree Klingon should be the next villain in the next one, and I would like to see Shatner returning as an older Kirk.

[bjmdds]

I am surprised Shatner was not used yet but he died in Generations, so how can they?. The Khan portrayal was excellent I enjoyed both ST films but Abrams must keep more to the overall script with Spock's personality and not try to make him emotional over things and not Uhura's boy toy. DC never was, is not, nor will ever be, Bond, so that's not even open for discussion. The dolt must be replaced. FBF, how do you size up TMOS in 3 weeks, about the same box office as ST 2, and nowhere near the ridiculous Iron 3 numbers? What is this fascination with Iron Man over the other Marvel characters? I personally enjoyed the HULK's role in the Avengers MORE than I liked Iron Man's.

[FormerBondFan]

DC never was, is not, nor will ever be, Bond, so that's not even open for discussion. The dolt must be replaced.

And replace him with Sheamus, considering Skyfall made history so it can happen to any Bond no matter what he looks like. Looks don't count anymore so let's give it to them.

FBF, how do you size up TMOS in 3 weeks, about the same box office as ST 2, and nowhere near the ridiculous Iron 3 numbers?

Around $100 million, I think.

What is this fascination with Iron Man over the other Marvel characters? I personally enjoyed the HULK's role in the Avengers MORE than I liked Iron Man's.

[/quote]

Probably because Iron Man is Marvel equivalent of Batman.