Triaxiansilk.com

That's more like Trek, actually. A little agonizing over geeky moral codes! Yay. Though I'd like to know how they developed the Prime Directive already at this point.

God, those blue suits are AWFUL. Those poor actors.

It was already in existence during TOS. I will give them, this, though, at least they seem to be sticking closer to the original intent of it than pretty much everything since TNG.

Interesting discussion of the Prime Directive here.

That was interesting, although I nearly clicked out when he leaped from fate to God (and for no particular reason that I could see). I had completely forgotten the Prime Directive in the original series.

And am I missing something? Why is the Abrams movie already premiering in Australia and Russia if we have to wait until May 17?

Alelou wrote:And am I missing something? Why is the Abrams movie already premiering in Australia and Russia if we have to wait until May 17?

Good question! I think it's just the premiere (that is, it's not playing in theaters there yet) but why Australia? Did they shoot a lot of the movie there?

So, everyone hear who the villain really is?

^ Yup!

New Promotional Stills for STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS

This movie already premièred here today, and I'll probably go see it tomorrow (for a write up in Monday's paper).

I have just seen Star Trek Into Darkness, and it was marginally less nonsensical as the first Abrams Trek movie. That's not high praise, mind you. I still didn't care much for it, and I can't for the life of me get into this version of Star Trek. It just doesn't feel like Star Trek. It's soulless.


And no, this literally wasn't a "shut up and take my money" film, since I flashed my press ID and got to see it for free.

Kevin Thomas Riley wrote:I have just seen Star Trek Into Darkness, and it was marginally less nonsensical as the first Abrams Trek movie. That's not high praise, mind you. I still didn't care much for it, and I can't for the life of me get into this version of Star Trek. It just doesn't feel like Star Trek. It's soulless.

Amazing special effects, no doubt, uh? It seems that this is what counts nowadays.
I remember that poor giant puppet, which smacked so of fake, King Kong (the first movie, the one in black and white). And I remember the atmospheres.
That was not soulless.

Asso wrote:Amazing special effects, no doubt, uh? It seems that this is what counts nowadays.
I remember that poor giant puppet, which smacked so of fake, King Kong (the first movie, the one in black and white). And I remember the atmospheres.
That was not soulless.

Exactly! Story and characters matter. The rest is just gravy.

Absolutely agree Kevin, all you have to do is watch some older movies like "Arsenic and Old Lace" admittedly a stage play converted to the big screen. Almost the entire movie was played in one room of an old house and the acting was marvelous. I tend to avoid movies unless I see that there is a good actor or two involved.

Just this evening I was watching a documentary about the history of the Trek franchise, and how they canceled the series and then three years later it became popular around the world, and the suits decided to resurrect it and make the first movie. Leonard Nimoy was describing the special effects, and how he was trying to make sense of the plot. As he put it: Whoosh, a space ship zooms from left to right. Whoosh, it comes back from right to left. Whoosh, it's coming straight for us and barely misses. Superb special effects, really superb. But where's the story?

Even the people on the inside realised it, even before it was finished. I'm sure it happens with the new films too, although it would probably be professional suicide to say so, but it must be very depressing for the people involved when it happens. Are there ever going to be any good Star Trek films / TV series in future?